[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]








                             STA TEWDE ASSESSMENT
                                          OF
                    PROPELLER DAMAGE TO SEAGRASS



















                                                           At






                          M
                            tn


       A Report't Ith; Florida Department of Conamunity Affairs Pursuant to National
                      'd Atmospheric Administration Award No. NA176ZO.301
            Oceanic an



































































                              @-OVER PHOTO:
                                           ars acroaa A
                                      IlarL,or, Plorlda
                                n d 1 ey
                                       Of














            STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT OF PROPELLER DAMAGE TO SEAGRASS








                                       FINAL REPORT





                      Frank J. Sargent, William B. Sargent, Curtis R. Kruer,
                     Henry A. Norris, James H. Poehlman, Timothy J. Leary,
                                    and Kenneth D. Haddad





                                         March, 1993
         Ile)



                                Department of Natural Resources
                                 Division of Marine Resources
                                Florida Marine Research Institute







           A report to the Florida Department of Community Affairs pursuant to National
           Oceanic 'and Atmospheric Administration Award No. NA170ZO501.







                                                                                     1993
                                                                            March
     State-wide Assessment of Propeller Damage to Seagrass (Florida)
            F. Sargent, B. Sargent, C. Kruer, H. Norris, J. Poehlman,      
                                                                          
               T. Leary, and K.HaddAd                                     CM-

                                                                            cm 315
            Florida Department of Natural Resources                       11. 
            Florida Marine Research Institute                              
            100 8th Avenue SE                                              () NA170ZO501
            St. Petersburg, FL 33701

   12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address                                          
   U  S. Dept. of Commerce/NOAA             FL Dept. of Community Affairs
   OCRM                                                                       Final
                                            2740 Centerview Drive
   1825   Connecticut A., N.W.              Tallahassee, FL32399
   Washington D.C. 20235






  
       Abstract(Limit 200 words)
   
       Seagrasses are  a vital component of Florida's coastal ecology And economy. The uninformed
   and negligent operation of powerboats in waters much shallower than they were designed to operAte
   is severely damaging seagrass beds throughout the state. The negative impacts of this threat are
   increasing as Florida's population of coastal residents and seasonal visitors increases.
       This project identifies and quantifies areas of' damaged seagrass beds throughout the state,
   For the first time, the state-wide magnitude of this problem is scientifically documented. High
   damage site were identified and specific actions needed for corrective measures were suggested.
   T   information acquired from this survey has been incorporated into the Marine Resources
   Geographic Information System for analyses and effective dissemination of information to resource,
   managers and appropriate regional and county goverments.
        Recognizing the value of having the extent and spatial distribution of propeller damage
   information, the Florida Department of Natural Resources has committed to develop, test, and
   implement a state-wide management plan for propeller damage to seagrass during the next two
   years. This Coastal Zone Management Program funded study is serving as the foundation for
   development of the state-wide management plan and is guiding implementation of the management
   plan. The management effort involves heavy interaction with local governments.







       CoaStal zone management/ marine resource management             seagrass  boating activity
                                       boat propeller damage




     
   
                                                               Unclassified










                                   State-wide Assessment of Propeller Damage to Seagrass




                                  A report to the Florida Department of Community Affairs
                                                           pursuant to
                                      National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                                                   Award No. NA170ZO501




                                                          Submitted by
                                           Florida Department of Natural Resources
                                               Florida Marine Research Institute


                                                        March 31, 1993



               EXECUTIVE SUNEWARY

                       Seagrasses are a vital component of Florida's coastal ecology and economy. The
               uninformed and negligent operation of powerboats in waters much shallower than they were
               designed to operate is severely damaging seagrass beds throughout the state. The negative
               impacts of this threat are increasing at an alarming rate as Florida's population of coastal
               residents and seasonal visitors increases. The needless destruction of shallow seagrass beds
               through boating activities can be avoided without imposing undue hardships on the boating
               public.

                       This project identifies and quantifies areas of damaged seagrass beds throughout the entire
               state. For the first time, the state-wide magnitude of this problem is scientifically documented.
               High damage sites were identified and specific actions needed for corrective measures were
               recommended. The information acquired from this survey has been incorporated into a
               geographic information system for analyses and effective dissemination to DNR resource
               managers and appropriate regional and county governments.

                       Recognizing the value of having the extent and spatial distribution of propeller damage
               information, the Department of Natural Resources has committed resources to develop, test, and
               implement a state-wide management plan for propeller damage to seagrass during the next two
               years. The Coastal Zone Management Program funded, study) is serving as the foundation for
               development of a state-wide management plan and is guiding the implementation of the,
               management plan. Site specific corrective measures have been identified by this study and are
               currently being put into action. The management effort involves heavy interaction with local
               governments.













                @INTRODUCTION


                        Seagrasses are a vital component of Florida's coastal ecology and economy. As the
                population of the state grows, threats to the health and existence of these priceless ecological
                communities also increase. Several of these threats (dredge and fill, construction of docks in
                shallow waters, water pollution) are now being brought under control by an organized network
                of federal, state, and local resource management programs. However there still exists one major
                threat which is poorly understood by resource managers and public planners and as such is not
                being regulated on a consistent basis throughout the state.

                         Nearly all seagrass beds in Florida show some signs of needless damage caused by boat
                propellers digging trenches across these submerged wetlands. Many seagrass beds contain areas
                which are completely denuded of all vegetation by intense and repeated boating activity in
                inappropriate locations. Although this threat has existed since the introduction of motorized
                boats, the negative impacts of this threat are increasing at an alarming rate as Florida's
                population of coastal residents and seasonal visitors increases.

                        The needless destruction of shaflow seagrass beds through boating activities can be
                avoided without imposing undue hardships on the boating public. Several preliminary
                management practices targeted at alleviating unnecessary boating damage to seagrass beds have
                been implemented in isolated cases. This project identifies and quantifies damaged seagrass beds
                throughout the entire state. Specific types of boating activities or navigational circumstances
                leading to seagrass damage are identified and discussed. For the first time, the state-wide
                magnitude of this problem is scientifically documented.

                        A general assessment to obtain an idea of how prevalent and substantial the impact of
                boat propeller scar damage is throughout the state of Florida was initiated by the Florida Marine
                Research Institute's (FMRI) Coastal and Marine Resource Assessment (CAMRA) section. Using
                a combination of aerial photography and aerial surveys, propeller scar damage in seagrass beds
                was mapped on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) nautical charts. The
                resultant information was stored in a digital format in the Marine Resources. Geographic
                Information System (MRGIS) of the FMRI for data analysis and distribution to appropriate
                federal, state, and local agencies.

                        Due to both the complexity and the expansiveness of seagrass communities in the Florida
                Keys, a local consultant with extensive experience was subcontracted to conduct the Monroe
                County portion of this project. The contractor's data and findings are incorporated into this
                report as appropriate. The contractors full report is included as Appendix A.






                                                                2










                DISCUSSION OF THE PROBLEM


                        The importance of seagrasses as a natural resource is well documented from extensive
                research in the last thirty plus years (Dur@ako, et al., 1987). Seagrass communities are
                recognized as a vital link in near shore benthic resources and are also considered to be one the
                most productive ecosystems in existence (Dawes, 1987; Zieman and Zieman, 1989). Zieman
                and Zieman (1989) produced a conceptual framework which appropriately illustrate the
                importance of seagrasses:      1. High production and growth - Seagrasses yield high net
                productivity. 2.. Food and feeding pathways - Grazing of the seagrasses and detrital material
                both in place and in movement to other locations. 3. Shelter - Seagrasses are a primary nursery
                for finfish and shellfish. 4. Habitat Stabilization - The stabilization of sediment with the root
                systems and reduction of particle suspension near substrate water interface. 5. Nutrient effect -
                The provision of organic matter by decay and the uptake and release of nutrients into the water
                column.


                        The recovery of seagrasses from impacts such as propeller scar damage has been studied
                in recent years (Godcharles, 1971; Zieman 1976) and research continues to take place as the
                problem of propeller scar damage to seagrasses appears to be growing eg. Durako et al., 1992
                and currently Clinton Dawes Ph.D. According to Dawes (pers. comm.) of the University of
                .South Florida, the program at the Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserve began in January of 1993
                and is a two year study involving the recovery of seagrasses in old scar and new scars created
                for the study. This type of research enables us to better understand the ramifications of
                propeller scar damage to the seagrasses and time frames for recovery.

                        Initial research by Zieman (1976) indicated Thallasia_ testudinm may require at least two
                years before recolonization begins. Even after five years some propeller scars had not recovered
                from being damaged. His study also stated that Halodule wrightii recovers much quicker than
                does the T. testudinum. Durako's (et. al. 1992) research documented that H. wrighti would only
                require 0.9 - 1.8 years to regain their natural densities and T. testudinum would take
                approximately 3.6 - 6.4 years to achieve' natural short shoot densities. Some research has
                indicated, that dependent on the size of a seagrass bed complete recovery may take ten years
                (Lewis and Estevez, 1988).

                        Seagrass recovery is dependent on several factors for regrowth; sediment composition
                (eg. Florida Bay vs. Tampa Bay), position of the propeller scar with regard to water current
                (flow) and depth (Godcharles, 1971; Zieman, 1976; Durako, et al. 1992). Zieman (1976)
                indicated that propeller scars may not fill in with sediment if located in areas of extreme current.
                From this condition, the severed rhizomes may grow up or down the side of the propeller scar
                but were not seen to cross over it. Durako (et al., 1992) explains, how the sediment environment
                of south Florida with predominately carbonate sediments, would exhibit a different regrowth
                period for the'seagrasses in propeller scars than the prop damaged seagrasses, of Tampa Bay,
                which inhabit a quartz-sand sediment environment. The depth of the scar is also a contributing
                factor to regrowth of propeller scar damaged seagrass, bed. Studies involving trenches or
                excavations cut into seagrass beds of 6 inches to 18 inches deep were very slow to recovery


                                                                 3








                 (Zieman, 1976 and Godcharles, 1971). The trenches-excavations filled in readily, although
                 regrowth was slow even after two years.

                        Over the years there have been various impacts have reduced the areal extent of
                 seagrasses of Florida including dredge and fill, water pollution, and boat propeller damage. A
                 dominant benthic ecosystem in the state, seagrasses offers a wide variety of benefits ranging
                 from habitat, nursery and its link in the food chain (Zieman and Zieman, 1989). Damage to
                 seagrass beds by boat propell ers was noted as early as the 1950's and 1960's (Woodburn, 1957;
                 Phillips, 1960) and has steadily become a significant impact. Damage to seagrasses from boat
                 propellers results from one or more of the following combinations; boaters misjudging water
                 depth, taking short cuts, commercial fishing, recreational boating, recreational fishing, and
                 intentional propeller dredging to create a channel (Woodburn, et al., 1957; . Godcharles, 1971;
                 Zieman and Zieman, 1989; The Wilderness Society et al. 1990). Damage may consist of an
                 isolated boat propeller scar or a series of boat propeller scars which have defoliated portions of
                 the seagrass beds leaving an area which may be completely void of seagrasses or other plants.

                        In addition to the current research of damaged seagrass beds, resource managers have
                 already established management programs for Weedon Island Sate Preserve, Cockroach Bay
                 Aquatic Preserve (TBRPC, 1993), and John Pennecarnp Coral Reef State Park. Other counties
                 and state agencies are also adopting similar programs. Any combination of the management
                 programs may be implemented; monitoring of propeller scar damage using aerial photography,
                 better channel marking to aid boaters, closure of specific areas to combustion engines and/or
                 boater education as a means of reducing the amount of propeller scarring in seagrass beds.



                 REPORT DEFICIEENCY

                        At the time this report was produced two areas in Florida had not been mapped due to
                 poor water clarity, poor weather conditions, and scheduling and logistics problems. A small
                 portion. of Monroe county and a majority of the Florida panhandle remain to be surveyed.
                 Ancillary information for these areas have been collected and reviewed and contracts are in place
                 to complete the aerial surveys. These two areas represent a small percentage of the seagrass
                 regions in the state and do not detract from the' immediate application of the information
                 contained in this document,


                        All maps, tables, and findings published in this report are preliminary. The information
                 contained in this report is in draft status and must be used accordingly. A refined and completed
                 survey result is currently being developed as part of a follow through management effort being
                 developed by DNR as a result of this Coastal Management Program funded project. The DNR
                 management initiative is a logical expansion of Task 3 of this Coastal Management Program
                 funded project and is explained in detail in that section of this report.




                                                                 4









                Task I Statewide assessment of propeller damage.

                       Aerial photographs were utilized to reconnoiter the distribution and magnitude of
                propeller damage to seagrass throughout, Florida's shallow coastal waters. The most recent
                photographs of sufficient quality to identify propeller scars were used. Due to the fact that no
                comprehensive state-wide effort exists to inventory and assess benthic resources, the photographs
                were of various quality, scales, and media types. Photographs for localities not covered by
                FMRI's aerial photograph library were obtained or borrowed from the water management
                districts. Although a few gaps in coverage did exist, for the most part the photography was
                extremely useful in conducting a preliminary assessment and planning an efficient ground
                truthing strategy.

                       For most regions of the state 9 inch by 9 inch color infrared (CIR) transparencies at a
                scale of 1:24,000 were used. The best photographs available were 1: 12,000 CIR transparencies
                taken in December 1991 for the Florida Marine Research Institute's Florida Keys benthic
                mapping project. Southwest Florida Water Management District supplied 1:24,000 CIR
                photographs for Tampa Bay and south to Charlotte Harbor. St. Johns River Water Management
                District supplied 1:24,000 CIR photographs for Mosquito Lagoon and Indian River Lagoon. The
                South Florida Water Management allowed use of 1:40,000 CIR transparencies for Hobe Sound,
                southeast Florida, Biscayne Bay, parts of the Keys and Florida Bay, southwest Florida, and
                portions of Charlotte Harbor. Photography of submerged aquatic vegetation for the panhandle
                and Big Bend regions was to have been taken as part of the EPA/USFWS Gulf of Mexico
                seagrass mapping project, but bad weather and poor water clarity had delayed'this effort and no
                photographs were available.

                       Interpretation of the 1:40,000 scale photographs did not pose any major difficulties due
                to excellent through the water visibility of these regions and the fine quality of the photographs.
                A previous Florida Marine Research Institute study (Durako, et al, 1992) suggested that the
                smallest scale (least detailed) aerial photography appropriate for interpreting propeller scars for
                general assessment was 1:24,000. This was found to be true for regions of the state with less
                than optimum water clarity. Fortunately 1:24,000 scale photographs were available for most of
                those areas.


                       The oldest photographs utilized were taken in Novemb     er 1990. Although two year old
                photographs did not represent current conditions, they did document patterns of past propeller
                damage and indicated hot spots which required closer examination. Even the most recent
                photographs were used only for preliminary assessment.

                       Magnifying scopes and stereoscopes designed for interpretation of aerial photographs
                were used to.identify and delineate propeller scars observed in the photographs,. This allowed
                the extraction of as much data as possible from the photographs. Delineations and registration
                marks were drawn on acetate overlays which were then used to transfer the information to
                nautical charts.




                                                                5








                        Damage was de   'fined as scars across the seagrass bed from which shoots and rhizomes
                had been removed and the bottom sediment was visible. These scars were visible in photographs
                and from the air as sharp lines with a distinct contrast in shade tone from the seagrass. Scars
                typically appeared similar to those visible in the cover photograph of this report. Mapping of
                individual scars was beyond the scope of this state-wide survey and perhaps impossible at any
                level of detail. There were just too many scars and at most locations the scars were so numerous
                that they could not be distinguished individually. Where several scars were observed within
                close proximity a polygon was'drawn around the scarred area. Mapping of areas less than one
                acre was not appropriate due to the scales involved.

                        An estimate of the degree of damage was then assigned to the polygon. Light impact
                indicated that.damage was present but that less than 5% of the seagrass within the delineated
                area was directly impacted. Moderate impact indicated 5-20% of the seagrass was impacted and
                severe impact indicated more than 20% of the seagrass within the area was impacted. For
                example, 100 acres of seagrass classified as moderately impacted could contain between 5 and
                20 acres of actual propeller scars. A "Comparison Chart for Visual Estimation of Percentage
                Composition" (Terry and Challenger, 1966) was used to guide estimation of damage. Figure I
                presents a graphical representation of the three levels of estimated damage. The seagrass bed in
                the cover photograph was assigned a damage level of severe.

                        In many instances a wide variety of damage levels occurred within close proximity,   The
                area was then assigned an average value of estimated damage level. A graphical example of this
                situation is provided as Figure 2.

                        The assignment of damage levels was subjective and should only be considered in the
                context of this project. For a more definitive assessment of damage, each site must be reviewed
                individuAlly. Only general areas of impact were defined. This study was not designed to provide
                Accurate assessments of seagrass loss on a detailed basis.



















                                                                6










               Light Damage Level         Each 100 acres of seagrass contains
                                          scars amounting to less than 5
                                          acres.







                      A                            B






               Moderate Damage Level      Each 100 acres of seagrass contains
                                          between 5 and 20 acres of scars.



                                                       I-J
                      C                            D






                Severe Damage Level       Each 100 acres of seagrass contains
                                          over 20 acres of scars.






                                                   F





          Figure 1. Graphical representation of the three levels of estimated
          propeller damage identified in this project. White space within
          each block represents seagrass while the black marks represent
          scars. Light damage level ranges between blocks A and B, moderate
          damage level ranges between blocks C and D, while severe damage
          level ranges between blocks E and F.























































           Figure 2. An example of a polygon delineation which includes all
           three types of damage; Light, moderate, and severe and categorized
           (mapped) as severe.










                       Polygons drawn on the overlays were transferred to nautical charts with a zoom transfer
               scope. The zoom transfer scope super-imposed images from a drawing onto a basemap of another
               8cale. This allowed for precise transfer of the hand drawn damage polygons from the photograph
               overlays onto a base map even when their scales differed. Charts of the most appropriate scale
               and most recent date for each region were used. In most cases 1:40,000 charts and their
               1: 10,000 insets were used. Use of charts with a smaller scale would have been too cumbersome
               and required an unreasonable number of individual charts to provide state-wide coverage. In
               most regions larger scale (more detailed) charts were not available for these same reasons.

                        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) navigational charts were
               chosen as the base media for, drafting propeller damage polygons because they are suitably
               accurate, appropriately detailed, provide geographical references for positioning in offshore
               areas, readily available at low cost, and are used by most agencies conducting natural resource
               work in coastal waters. The shorelines depicted on these charts were compatible with the Marine
               Resources Geographic Information System (MRGIS) shoreline data which aided incorporation
               of damage data into the MRGIS. Transfer of information from the charts into the MRGIS was
               also facilitated by accurate and well distributed graticules, used for registration of geographic
               position, on the charts. The individual NOAA charts used are listed in Table 1.




























                                                               9








                Table 1. NOAA nautical charts and USGS topographic maps used as base maps for the drafting
                of polygons depicting propeller damage to seagrass.


                Numbe                                 Official Title

                Chart 11378     1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway      Santa Rosa Sound to Dauphin
                                                      Island
                Chart  11393    1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway - Lake Wimico to East Bay
                Chart 11402     1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway - Apalachiacola to Lake Wimico
                Chart  11404    1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway - Carrabelle to Apalachicola Bay
                Chart  11405    1:80,000              Apalachee Bay
                Chart  11407    1:80,000              Horeshoe Point to Rocks Islands
                Chart  11408    1:80,000              Crystal River to Horseshoe Point
                Chart, 11409    1:80,000              Anclote Keys to Crystal River
                Chart  11412    1:80,000              Tampa Bay and St. Joeseph Sound
                Chart  11413    1:40,000              Tampa Bay - northern part
                Chart  11414    1:40,000              Tampa Bay - southern part
                Chart 11425     1-:40,000             Intracoastal Waterway - Charlotte. Harbor to Tampa Bay
                Chart  11427    1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway - Fort Myers to Charlotte Harbor
                Chart  11430    1:40,000              Everglades National Park - Lostmans River to Wiggins
                                                      Pass
                Chart  11432    1:50,000              Everglades National Park - Shark River to Lostmans River
                Chart  11433    1:50,000              Everglades National Park - Whitewater Bay
                Chart  11441    1:30,000              Key West Harbor and approaches
                Chart  11442    1:80,000              Sombrero Key to Sand Key
                Chart  11445.   1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway - Bahia Honda to Key West
                Chart  11448    1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway - Big Spanish Channel to Johnson
                                                      Key
                Chart  11449,   1:40,000              Matecumbe to Bahia Honda Key
                Chart  11451    1:80,000              Miami to Marathon and Florida Bay
                Chart  11463    1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway - Elliot Key to Matecumbe
                Chart  11465    1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway - Miami to Elliot Key
                Chart  11467    1:40,000              Intracoastal Waterway - West Palm Beach to Miami
                Chart  11485    1:40,000              Intracoastal, Waterway - Tolomato River to Palm Shores
                USGS map         1:24,000             Marquesas Keys West
                USGS map         1:24,000             Marquesas Keys East
                USGS map         1:24,000             Cottrell Key
                USGS map         1:24,000             Key West







                                                                10










                       After charts were preliminarily marked with damage polygons, aerial surveys were
               conducted for groundtruthing and, refinement of the delineations and damage classifications. In
               some cases where seagrass beds or shorelines had complicated geometry the original aerial
               photographs were brought along as ancillary data and also edited in-flight. Aerial surveys were
               critical to accurate data collection since not all scarring was visible in even the best photographs.
               Numerous areas of damage were added to the charts during the overflights and a more accurate
               assignment of damage levels was possible.

                       Florida Marine Patrol aircraft and pilots were used for the aerial surveys when possible.
               The local knowledge these pilots had of each region, the natural resources present, and common
               boating patterns was invaluable to the project. Light fixed-wing aircraft (Cessna 172) were flown
               in regions wheri'seagrass was distributed along straight and continuous shorelines. The Indian
               River Lagoon and the southeast Intracoastal Waterway were surveyed from a plane. The Cessna
               was found to be very economical. Regions with convoluted shorelines and numerous islands
               were surveyed by helicopter (Hughes 500). Tampa Bay, Biscayne Bay, Wacassasa Bay, and
               parts of Florida Bay were surveyed with a helicopter. The ability of the helicopter to maneuver
               and hover improved the accuracy of the survey and also reduced time spent circling and
               returning to spots of interest.

                       Survey altitudes between 300 and 500 feet provided the best observation perspective. At
               higher altitudes scars were usually not visible and at lower altitudes too much flight time was
               required to cover large areas. In a few locations were. conditions permitted, higher altitudes were
               flown. Flight speeds between 80 and 100 knots were used depending on the complexity of
               scarring and clarity of the water.

                       Good. weather and water clarity were essential for aerial surveys. Optimum conditions
               were clear sldes, calm sea state, winds less than 10 mph, a high sun angle, and clear water. Rain
               and high winds made seeing through the surface of the water impossible. Sun glare reflecting
               off thewater in late afternoon and early morning-also hampered observations. Turbidity caused
               by rough water during storms usually persisted for several days afterward. Dark colored water
               discharged from organically stained rivers during and after rain storms was the major
               impediment for aerial surveys. River discharge continued for many days after the large frontal
               systems passed through the panhandle and Big Bend regions. Surveys were attempted during
               poor conditions but it proved to be impossible to observe seagrass and scars when weather and
               water conditions deteriorated past certain limits.

                       Photo-documentation in the form of 35mm. slides and Hi8 video was collected during the
               aerial surveys. One such photograph was placed on the cover of this report. These photographic
               records were placed in a photo library at the Florida Marine Research Institute and made
               available to all interested parties. In a few instances this information was referred to when
               drafting the final version of the propeller scar damage charts. Slides depicting damage were
               provided to newspapers and a Hi8 video of damage in the Keys was provided to a local public
               television station for inclusion in a documentary. Local resource managers have requested copies


                                                                 11









                 of some of this photo-documentation. A marina expansion permit review and the development
                 of an aquatic preserve management plan have been facilitated with the use of this'photography.

                         During the aerial surveys, it was quite common to observe boats in the process of
                 creating propeller scars in shallow seagrass beds. A wide variety of examples of this activity
                 were captured with both the still photography and the video.

                         After aerial surveys for a region were completed, the damage information was edited and
                 recompiled onto a clean set of charts. The clean set of charts was then used in the transfer of
                 damage information into the Marine Resources Geographic Information System. All charts and
                 photograph overlays have been archived for future reference.


                 Task 2 Implement the resultant information on the Marine Resources Geographic
                 Wormation System.

                         Inform ation from the finalized charts was transferred into the MRGIS through manual
                 digitization. Plots were produced and checked against the original charts to ensure an accurate
                 transfer had been conducted. All positional accuracies of the final data layer fell within accepted
                 standards for work of this type.

                         ARC/INFO is the geographic information system software used by the MRGIS. This
                 software is used by numerous county governments, the water management districts, the
                 Department of Environmental Regulation, several divisions of the Department of Natural
                 Resources, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                 Administration, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Regional Planning
                 councils, several state universities, many private consulting companies, and utilities. The
                 seagrass damage information is in a digital format which can easily be shared with other
                 agencies which need it. The MRGIS can also incorporate various types of data generated by
                 ,these agencies and use it for spatial analyses with the damage data. The propeller damage data
                 is now in a format which is extremely accessible to those who need.it and in this format it is
                 also ready for use in powerful spatial analyses and map production.

                         A great wealth of information such as boat ramps, marinas, boating traffic and densities,
                 navigation channels, artificial reefs, fishing grounds, manatee occurrences, coastal wetlands,
                 population and housing densities, and transportation networks can also'be displayed on maps
                 produced by the MRGIS. Relationships of propeller damage to any type of geographic
                 phenomena can be analyzed, displayed and turned into paper maps by the MRGIS.

                         Examples of paper maps which can be produced by the MRGIS are presented as Figures
                 3 and 4. Examples of larger maps accompany this report. All of these maps are preliminary and
                 are to be used as examples only. These maps were generated on a Calcomp 68436 Electrostatic
                 Plotter. A wide variety of sizes and formats of maps can be produced by the MRGIS.
                 Customized maps can be produced in only a few hours if they are not too complicated. The

                                                                  12









               ability to produce customized paper maps makes the data and results of complex analyses readily
               available to anyon e who needs the information.

                      The estimates of damaged areas presented in Table 2 were calculated by the MRGIS.
               These estimates can be instantly recalculated for the entire state or any portion thereof as new
               data become available.




















































                                                            13

















                Figure 3. (refer to facing page) Detailed map depicting areas of seagrass containing propeller
                scars at Pine Island, Charlotte county, an area nominated for management action. Note the
                damaged area to the southwest (lower left) of the marina. South bound boats leaving the marina
                take a short cut across the shallow seagrass beds and cut scars through the seagrass. A marked
                deepwater boat channel (narrow band of blue) extends due west from the marina to open water
                and the Intracoastal Waterway. This information was supplied to the regional aquatic preserve
                manager and is being incorporated into a regional aquatic preserve management plan.

































                                                              14



                                 DETAILED PROPELLER SCAR DAMAGE
                     TO THE SEAGRASS AREAS OF PINE ISLAND

                                                                    ..........

                                                   ...........







                                  jV

                               .........
                                       . ....  ... . .......





                                                                                                                                                                SCALE 1:40,000
                                                                        . ...........

               ET
                                                                                                                                                                     ZILOMMRS
                ..........
                                                                                      ........ ..

                                                                                                                                                                0                           1


                                                                                                                                                                Seagms Community
                                                                                Ao                                                                              Light Damage
                                                                                                                                                                Moderate Damage
                                                                                                                                                                Severe Damage
                                                                                                                                         Numbers represent the acreage
               ...........                                                                                                               of seagrass areas impacted
                                                                                                                                         southwest of the marina.                                      Note,
                                                                                                                                         the channel extends east to west
                                                                                                                                         from the

                                                                             . . .......... . ............




                                                                                                                                                             Marina






                                                                                                                                                                                        Fkd& I
                                                                                                                                                                                            HW& Mh. R.-* balft
                                                                                                                                                                                     M@ R- G.Vqhw td-fi. 9"-
                                                                                                                                                     Ir





                                                                                                                                                                             _JL



                   . . . .......












                                                                          -t7
















                Figure 4. (refer to facing page) Areas of propeller scar damage at Windley Key, Monroe
                county, an area targeted for implementation of management action to protect shallow water
                seagrass habitats.




































                                                           16



                                                                                                                                                                                                            DETAILED PROPELLER SCAR DAMAGE
                                                                                                 TO THE SEAGRASS AREAS OF WINDLEY HARBOR, FLORIDA BAY


                                                                                                                     . . .... ......








                                                                                                                        INP           1111
                                                                        Jlii@i...!@
                                                         .. . ..... . .. ..
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         . .........
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ..........


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ..........


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        TIEN"


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Ilp]

                                                                            1INT 1"
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               4!N




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ....... ...




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            A110

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             . . ...... ..



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              4'



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           .. ... . . ...
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ............
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ............
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ...........




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ..........
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ..........



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   IT


















                                                                                                                                                                                        n    iiE
                                                                                                                                    V':::I1i.'-_1:t 4                                  :!IIAl
                                                                                                        Coral Community                                                                                                                         15                                                                                                                                                                                                                               =Light Damage                                                                                                    50
                                                                                   =Bare Bottom Community                                                                                                                                  120                                     Area Calculations m* Acres                                                                                                                                                                    01MIKE Moderate Damage 181
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 r"27-79
                                                                                                        Hardbottom Community                                                                                                        1,785                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        LL@j Severe Damage                                                                                          2-32
                                                                                                         Seagrass Community                                                                                                    12,552














               Table 2. Areas of seagrass identified to have been impacted by boating activities in Florida
               counties. Unit of measurement is acres. Light damage is defined as scars occurring in up to
               5% of the identified area; moderate damage is scars occurring in 5% to 20% of the identified
               area; heavy damage is scars occurring in more than 20% of the identified area. Counties west
               of Dixie County and a small portion of Monroe County were not yet surveyed at the date this
               report was compiled. These data are preliminary and subject to refinement.




                       COUNTY                 AREAS OF SEAGRASS IDENTIFIED
                                              LIGHT          MODERATE SEVERE



                       Brevard                4,878            2,300           15
                       Broward                      1              0           0
                       Charlotte              2,251            6,117           239
                       Citrus                5,676             1,480           0
                       Collier                2,182            1,603           110
                       Dade                   3,587            4,466        4,053
                       Dixie                  2,605            1,105           0
                       Hernando                 793              759        4,194
                       Hillsborough           3,068            7,457           453
                       Indian River              332              61           0
                       Lee                    7,467            7,907        1,492
                       Levy                   3,327              109           0
                       Manatee                4,485            2,719           475
                       Martin                    22                5           0
                       Monroe                 9,164            6,493        2,455
                       Palm Beach                 89              36           0
                       Pasco                  1,042            1,645           169
                       Pinellas               6,746            6,554        3,087
                       Sarasota                  913             439           42
                       St. Lucie                 45               46           0
                       Volusia,               1,492            1,104           382






                                                                18











              Task 3 Develop a final report and provide the results to resources managers with site
              specific recommendations for implementation of corrective measures.

                      The preliminary findings of this project were provided to several agencies during the
              actual course of the project. Many agencies were contacted in the beginning stages of this work
              and awareness of the issue created a demand for information as it was being collected. Several
              newspapers have written articles on the project and the issue of propeller damage. One article
              is presented in Appendix B. Miami public television station WLRM channel 2 requested some
              of the aerial video for inclusion in a documentary about environmental problems in the Florida
              Keys. Efforts aimed at educating the public through the news media will continue.

                      Specific management actions to protect the shallow water seagrasses of Windley Key,
              Monroe county, have been proposed and are discussed in detail in Appendix C. A map depicting
              the propeller damage around of Windley Key is provide as Figure 2. The southwest Florida
              Aquatic Preserves office utilized data from this study to develop an aquatic preserve management
              plan which incorporates measures to protect  .seagrass from propeller damage. An area of heavy
              damage in Pine Island Sound has been targeted for implementation of a management action
              (Refer to Figure 1). Assistance was provided to Pinellas County, Hillsborough County, and the
              Florida Park Service in the refinement of management plans for specific localities.

                      All these management activities are being incorporated in the Department's newly funded
              initiative on seagrass propeller scar damage management and education which is discussed
              below. A list of agencies which have expressed an interest in actively participating in this
              initiative is provided as Appendix D.


              DNR Seagrass Propeller Damage Management and Education Efforts

                      Through the Coastal Zone Management Program a survey of propeller damage to
              seagrass has been conducted. It has taken almost 3 years from our perception that this was a
              growing and state-wide problem to receiving funding and conducting the survey. During this
              time-frame propeller damage to seagrass has become a state-wide issue. As a result of this
              survey, propeller damage to seagrass is one of the. few coastal management issues that now
              actually has information available to assess the magnitude and distribution of a problem in order
              to develop sound management actions.

                      Recognizing the value of having the extent and spatial distribution of prop damage
              information, the Department of Natural Resources has committed resources to develop, test, and
              implement a state-wide management plan for propeller damage to seagrass during the next two
              years. This effort involves heavy interaction with local governments. A discussion of the
              Department's currently funded seagrass propeller damage management and education project as
              it was proposed is provided below. The DNR project builds upon the Coastal Zone Management


                                                              19








                Program study and some critical portions have already been fulfilled by completing this study.
                Several other portions are already well underway.



                A. Need


                        Seagrass meadows are one of Florida's most important submerged marine habitats and
                are critically important to productivity in shallow water areas of the State.

                        As Florida's population grows, the number of boats on the water increases. Propeller
                damage to seagrass beds has recently been recognized as a significant problem in Florida's
                shallow waters (we estimate tens of thousands of impacted acres). Concerns are being expressed,
                statewide, as public awareness to the problem grows. There exists no state-wide plan for
                managing propeller damage or for educating the public on the issues. A comprehensive state to
                local approach to management needs to be action oriented and tested.

                B. Objective

                        To reduce impact of boat propellers to seagrass, thus reducing wetlands loss, through the
                development and implementation of a state-wide propeller damage to seagrass management plan
                that targets high resource impact areas. To develop a prototype public education instrument that
                focuses on educating boaters on how to minimize propeller damage to seagrass and brings
                awareness of the Management Plan to the public.

                C. Expected Results or Benefits

                        Seagrasses are critical wetlands components of Florida's natural resources. Seagrass
                meadows provide a direct food source to herbivores, such as sea turtles and manatees, and to
                numerous organisms dependent on the detrital.matter they produce. Because this habitat is
                subtidal and extensive in distribution, it provides a constant and expansive structural shelter for
                fish and shellfish important to -the fishery and ecosystem. In addition, the complex food 'web and
                tremendous organism diversity and quality provide a major, food source to all stages of many
                coastal species including the endangered manatee and several sea turtles. Seagrass meadows
                improve water quality by removing nutrients and by providing a baffle effect on waves and
                currents, which causes settling of suspended particles in the water column.

                        Florida has documented losses of seagrass ranging from 81 % in Tampa Bay to 30 % in
                Indian River Lagoon. These losses have been impacting estuarine. dependent species and the
                overall quality of the affected ecosystems. Large scale losses have been attributed to@ dredge and
                fill activities and decreases in water quality. However while these issues are being addressed,
                propeller damage has been increasing due to the growing boating population and lack of a
                comprehensive approach to addressing the issue and educating the boating public. It is possible
                that loss of seagrasses due to propeller damage far exceeds the losses due to other factors.


                                                                20









                      This project will provide a comprehensive       state-wide Management Plan, test the
               implementation of the Management Plan, monitor the results of the test implementation, and
               develop the consensus for state-wide implementation of the Management Plan. The results will
               be a reduction in loss of seagrass habitat due to boat propeller damage. In many areas regrowth
               of seagrass can be expected thus increasing the contribution of this important habitat.

               D. Approach

                      A six step approach to accomplishing the objective is proposed.

                      1. Determine the magnitude and locations of propeller damage state-wide. Schedule:
                      This has been accomplished with completion of the Coastal Zone Management Program
                      funded survey.

                      2.    Develop a comprehensive state-wide management plan that incorporates the
                      knowledge from the state-wide seagrass propeller damage mapping efforts (see F). The
                      Management Plan will include locator maps specifying the locations of,impact, and
                      evaluation and determination of the likely cause of impact (e.g. improperly marked or
                      spaced channel markers, unmarked channels, negligence by boaters.), an evaluation and
                      recommendation for management policy or remedial actions on either state-wide or local
                      levels, and an evaluation and recommendation of the agency(s) that should implement
                      policy (if needed) and remedial actions (e.g. increased channel marking, boater
                      education). This management plan will be developed in consultation with the Department
                      of Natural resources (Divisions of Law Enforcement, Marine Resources, Recreation and
                      Parks, State Lands, and General Counsel), the Office of the Governor (Office of
                      Planning and Budget), the Department of Environmental Regulation (Office of
                      Intergovernmental Affairs), the Department of Community Affairs (Coastal Zone
                      Management Office), and Pinellas, Dade, Sarasota and Monroe Counties (offices of
                      marine resources and environmental management). Schedule: A draft plan will be fully
                      developed by the 12th month of the project.

                      3. Test implementation of Management Plan recommendations in Pinellas, Dade,
                      Sarasota, and Monroe Counties. A management plan has no demonstrable merit without
                      commitment and accomplishment of actions. It will be very difficult to implement a state-
                      wide comprehensive plan for reducing propeller damage to seagrass without a
                      demonstration that recommendations can be implemented at the local level and that the
                      net result is a reduction of impact. The Department will contract the proper county or
                      other appropriate agency to facilitate implementation. Schedule: We propose to complete
                      the components of the Plan for the regions that include the aforementioned counties
                      within the first 4 months of the project and implement recommendations that cross the
                      spectrum of impact reduction measures included within the Plan during the first year of
                      the project.

                      4. Monitor results of the test implementation of recommendations. In order to determine


                                                              21








                          the effectiveness of the Plan, implementation sites must be monitored to determine if
                          propeller damage is reduced. Aerial photography and videography will be used to
                          document the status of propeller scars for selected sites in each county. Scars will be
                          documented prior to a remedial action and will be documented 12 months after that
                          rediedial action. This will not be a controlled experiment but a simple measure of change
                          in propeller scars. The Department has already conducted research to assess the methods
                          for monitoring propeller scar damage in a separate project. The general effectiveness of
                          remedial action can be determined by this cost efficient approach. Schedule: 12 months
                          after remedial action at a selected site. This would extend to the end of Year 2.


                          5.   State-Wide Plan Implementation: The success of the project is dependent on
                          implementation of a state-wide plan that acknowledges the distributed roles and
                          authorities of carrying out the plan. A consensus building process will be enacted during
                          Year 2 to fully develop the action items of the Plan and establish the roles and authorities
                          of the agencies. The Interagency Management Committee (a committee that addresses
                          coastal management issues) will be used to provide the forum for consensus building at
                          the federal, state, and local level and the forum for executive implementation of the
                          Management Plan. Three workshops will be held to accomplish the goals. Schedule:
                          Completion of Year 2.

                          6. A certain component of the Management Plan will be education and information
                          distribution. We propose to develop a map series for distribution in the five test
                          implementation counties. Information distribution concerning boating and habitat
                          protection is an important factor in managing boaters for the reduction of impact to
                          seagrasses. Using Geographic Information System (GIS@) technologies the Department will
                          produce accurate and informative maps that act as a pictorial magnet for getting
                          information to the boater. Befits include boater access information, resource protection,
                          and boater education. Seagrass propeller damage and other resource cautions (e.g.
                          manatees) will be incorporated into the maps. We are currently producing a similar type
                          of informational map for Tampa Bay in cooperation with the National Estuary Program
                          and that would be a model for a propeller damage informational series. The opened color
                          brochure would be an approximate 24"x36" map on one side and information and insets
                          on habitat and species on the other. We also propose the prototype development of signs
                          that would contain the same information. Sign placement would need to be determined.
                          Schedule: The development and printing, the establishment of a targeted distribution
                          method, and distribution of the informational series would occur during Year 1.

                  E. Location:

                          The plan will be state-wide while implementation testing and development of an
                 informational series will occur in Pinellas, Sarasota, Dade, and Monroe Counties.

                 F. Relation to other projects



                                                                  22









                      The Department is currently developing a state-wide assessment of propeller damage.
               Using aerial photography, aerial observations, and local expert knowledge, a delineation of low
               to moderate and moderate to high seagrass damage areas is being determined. The resultant
               information is being implemented on the Marine Resources Geographic Information System.
               Using GIS and cartographic techniques, the delineated areas of damage will be transferred from
               nautical charts into the Marine Resources Geographic Information System nautical chart map
               base. This provides a significant step in the development of the Management Plan. Interim
               propeller damage management actions have been instituted by the Department to minimize
               seagrass propeller damage in several small state managed areas in Pinellas and Monroe Counties.
               The National Estuary Program has facilitated some education and signage. Pinellas County has
               enacted some management actions in targeted areas. Numerous other federal, state, and local
               entities have been exploring enacting various forms of propeller damage management. This
               proposed project will comprehensively identify the areas to target for management and provide
               the forum to manage the effort state-wide in an interagency network that currently does not
               exist.


               G. Flublic involvement


                      Public involvement is currently   expressed, through concern to government agencies.
               Development and distribution of the informational series will involve the public. The entire
               project is based on interagency coordination and cooperation from federal to local levels as
               outlined in the previous sections.
























                                                             23









                                       References

                 Baker, V. and G. Garret. 1992. Boating impacts management plan, final report. DNR contract
                 #C - 7442. Key West, FL

                 Dawes, C.J. 1987. The dynamic seagrasses of the Gulf of Mexico and the Florida coasts. Pp.
                 25-38 in M.J. Durako, R.C. Phillips, and R.R. Lewis III (eds.). Proceedings of the Symposium
                 on Subtropical-Tropical Seagrasses of the Southeastern United States. Florida Marine Research
                 Publication No. 42.


                 Durako, M.J.,  M.O. Hall, F   Sargent, and S. Peck. 1992, In Press. Propeller scars in seagrass
                 beds: As assessment and experimental study of recolonization in Weedon Island State Preserve,
                 Florida.
                 in F. Webb, Proceedings from the 19th Annual Conference of Wetlands Restoration and
                 Creation.


                 Eleuterius, L. 1987. Seagrass ecology along the coasts of Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
                 Pp. 11-24. in M.J. Durako, R.C. Phillips, and R.R. Lewis III (eds.). Proceedings of the
                 Symposium on Subtropical-Tropical Seagrasses of the Southeastern United States. Florida
                 Marine Research Publication No. 42.


                 Folit, R. and J. Morris. 1992. Beds, boats, and buoys: A study in protecting seagrass beds
                 from motorboat propeller damage. Environmental Studies Program Publications #39. New
                 College of University of South Florida. 101 p.

                 Godcharles, 1971. A study of the effects of a commercial clam hydraulic clam dredge on benthic
                 communities in estuarine areas. Florida Marine Research Laboratory, Technical Series No. 64.
                 51 p.

                 Kenworthy, W.J., S. Fonseca, and G.W. Thayer. 1988 A comparison of wind-wave and boat
                 wake-wave energy in Hobe Sound: Implications for seagrass growth. Ann. Rep. to U.S. Fish
                 and Wildlife Service Sirenia Project, Gainesville, FL. 21p.

                 Lewis, R.R.,111 and E. Estevez. 1988. The ecology of Tampa Bay, Florida: An estuarine
                 profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biol. Rep.85(7.18). 132 p.

                 Livingston, R.J. 1987. Historic trends of human impacts on seagrass; meadows-in Florida. Pp.
                 139-151 in M.J. Durako, R.C. Phillips, and R.R. Lewis III (eds.). Proceedings of the
                 Symposium on Subtropical-Tropical Seagrasses of the Southeastern United States. Florida
                 Marine Research Publication No. 42.


                 Phillips, R.C. 1960. Observations on the ecology and distribution of the Florida seagrasses.
                 Florida State Board of Conservation Marine Laboratory, Professional Papers Series, Number
                 Two. 72 p.


                                                               24









              Matthews, T.R., A.C. I.Am, and J.H. Hunt. 1991. Aerial observations of boating impacts to
              shallow water grass beds in the Florida Keys. Rep. to Fla. Dep. Nat. Resour., Office of Marine
              Programs and Planning. I I p.

              Richard, J. 1992. Texas seagrass beds and boat propellers. Pp. 11-12. in Tide, Coastal
              Conservation Association. Houston, TX.
              Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (TBRPC). 1993. State of Tampa Bay 1992-1993.
              Agency on Bay Management. 63 p.

              Terry, R.D. and G.V. Challenger. 1966. Comparison charts for visual estimation of percent
              composition. Allen Hancock Foundation. L.A. Calif. Reprinted from Journal of Sedimentary
              Petrology 23:8 pp. 226-234.

              The Wilderness Society, Florida Keys Audubon Society, and Lewis Environmental Services, Inc.
              1990. Is uncontrolled boating damaging thousands of acres of Florida's submerged seagrass
              meadows? Marathon, FL. 33 p.

              Woodburn K.D., B. Eldred, E. Clark, F. Hutton, and R.M.Ingle. 1957. The live bait shrimp
              fishery of the west coast of Florida (Cedar Key to Nap)es).. Florida State Board of Conservation
              Marine Laboratory, Technical Series No. 21: 33 pp.

              Zieman, J. C. 1976. The ecological effects of physical damage from motor boats on turtle grass
              beds in southern Florida. Aquat. Bot. 2: 127-139.

              Zieman, J.C. and R. T. Zieman. 1989. The ecology of the seagrass meadows of the west coast
              of Florida: A community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biol. Rep. 85(7.25). 155 pp.




















                                                             25
















              Appendix A.    Subcontractors report for the Florida Keys
                             region.















                                           DRAFT FINAL REPORT




                                  MAPPING ASSESSMENT OF VESSEL DAMAGE


                        TO SHALLOW SEAGRASSES IN THE FLORIDA KEYS, MONROE COUNTY



             Submitted to:     Florida Department of Natural Resources (DNR) - Frank

                               Sargent, Project Manager, and the University of South

                               Florida/Florida Institute of Oceanography, St. Petersburg,

                               Florida


             F.I.O. Contract    47-10-123-L3
             Submitted by:     Curtis Kruer, Consulting Biologist, Summerland Key, Florida

             Date: March 23, 1993




             Introduction

                   This project involved aerial mapping and assessment Of vessel propeller

             dredging and scarring damage to mainly shallow seagrass habitats in the

             Florida Keys. The effort is part of an assessment by the Florida DNR Marine

             Research Institute of boat propeller damage to seagrass meadows around the

             coast of Florida. Rapid waterfront and recreational development in the Keys

             during the 1970s and 80s, a dramatic increase in the number and power of

             watercraft in the region, and the proliferation of liveaboards and jet-powered

             thril1c.raft resulted in widespread impacts to shallow BeagraBs habitats

             (mostly less than 5 feet low water  depth), especially in areas of soft

             substrates. The importance of healthy seagrasse,s in maintaining coastal water

             quality, stabilizing bottom sediments, recycling nutrients, and providing

             habitat for a variety of valuable finfish and shellfish is well documented.

             Disturbance of large fish and wildlife (especially wading birds) that utilize

             shallow seagrass flats by routine boating activity

             appears widespread but is little studied.

                   The area surveyed in the Keys extends from North Key Largo (Dade-Monroe

             County line) south and west to and including the Marquesas Keys, excluding










              Everglades National Park (Figure 1). The Intracoastal Waterway forms the

              boundary between waters of Everglades National Park and the Keys for purposes

              of this assessment. The area of vessel damage was determined visually from the

              air and mapped onto the largest scale map or chart available utilizing the

              best fit polygon method of delineation. The degree of damage in each area was

              estimated and categorized as light, moderate, or severe. For a subset of sites

              additional information geared towards problem management was prepared.



              Methods and Materials

                     Initial delineations were made onto navigational charts and topographic

              maps in the airplane as impacted seagraBB areas were observed. Surveys were

              conducted from a Cessna 152 or 172 and began west of Key West, later

              proceeding east and up the Keys. Altitude was maintained at abo  ut 6001 at

              speeds of around 80 - 90 mph. In the Lower Keys, transects were flown on a

              north-south orientation approximately 1,0001 apart traversing the shallow

              water area between the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico. In the Middle

              and Upper Keys, due to a narrower shallow zone, mapping was conducted as the

              plane flew along the perimeter of shallow water flats and banks and over

              shorelines. An effort was made to map midday during optimum conditions of

              clear.skies, low winds, and clear water.

                     Two or more prop scare or grounding sites in close proximity (within

              about  50') were deemed to represent a pattern and were enclosed in a polygon.

              About  I acre was considered a minimum size for a polygon based on the scale of

              charts and maps used. Individual scars not enclosed in a polygon were drawn as

              a line and an.chored on each end with an "x". The severity of impact within an

              area was based on a visually estimated degree of impact from prop dredging and

              displacement of sediment from 'the scars onto adjacent vegetated areas. A

              "Comparison Chart for Visual Estimation of Percentage Composition" provided by

              DNR was used to refine estimation of damage. Light impact (L) indicated that

              less than 5% of the polygon was impacted, moderate impact (M) indicated 5-20%

              of the area was impacted, and severe impact (S) meant more than 20% of the



                                                      2











             area was impacted.

                  Collateral information used for mapping included 1991 color-infrared

             vertical aerial film (91, x 9" images, 1:12,000) of the Keys provided by DNR,

             35 mm oblique aerials shot in recent years, and personal knowledge of the
             contractor. Ground-truthing by boat was used in a few locations to document

             the accuracy of delineations made and measure the width of representative

             scars.

                  In an effort to document why boatin g impacts were occurring a subset of

             sites were assessed for the probable cause based on observed boating activity,

             history of the area, and personal knowledge of the contractor. In addition,

             management recommendations were considered that would reduce or eliminate

             impacts at these sites.




             Results and Discussion

                  As of the drafting of this final report a total of 18.9 hours of

             airplane time had been committed to mapping, from October, 1992 to February,

             1993. All but the area from Islamorada south to Seven-Mile Channel had been

             mapped as of this draft, with the remaining area to be mapped as soon as

             weather and water conditions allow. Draft delineations and levels of impact

             recorded in the air were transferred onto clean cha rts and maps in the office

             and provided to the Florida *Marine Research Institute. In addition to the

            .area delineated and level of severity for each site, an identifying number in

             sequence from west to east was provided for inclusion in the computer mapping

             data base. Representative aerial photographs (35 mm slides) were taken of many

             impacted areas.

                   Nautical charts and topographic maps onto which delineations were placed

             were:


             Marquesas Keys West topographic map (1:24,000, 1971)

             Marquesas Keys East topographic map (1:24,000, 1971)

             Cottrell Key topographic map (1:24,000, 1972)

             Key West topographic map (1:24,000, 1971)



                                                    3










               Chart 1144.1 (1:30,000, 1991) - Key West Harbor and Approaches
               Chart 11445  (1:40,000, 1991)                k                                         0

                            side A - Bahia Honda Key to Sugarloaf

                            side B - Sugarloaf to Key West

               Chart 11448  (1:40,000, 1990) Big Spanish Channel    to Johnston Key

               Chart 11442  (part, 1:80,000, 1981) - Sombrero Key   to Sand Key

               Chart 11449  (1:40,000, 1990)

                            side A - Matecumbe to Grassy Key

                            side B - Grassy Key to Bahia Honda Key

               Chart 11463  (1:40,000, 1987)

                            side A - Elliott Key to Tarpon Basin

                            side B - Tarpon Basin to Matecumbe

               Flight records for mapping follow:

               Date         Area                     Hours        Comments


               10/08/92     west of Key West         2.0

               10/18/92     west of Key West         2.0

               11/19/92     Key West-Boca Chica      2.3

               12/12/92     Boca Chica-Sugarloaf     1.8          turbid water

               1.2/13/92    Sugarloaf-Big Pine       3.0

                            near Big Pine            3.8          with F. Sargent/DNR

               02/11/93     N. Key Largo-Matecumbe   4.0          with F. Sargent/DNR



                     Approximately 700 individual impacted areas have been delineated to date

               along with a number of individual scars. Impacted areas range in severity from

               those with only a couple Of scars to severely impacted areas with numerous

               scars and grounding sites and sizeable, previously vegetated areas filled by

               displaced sediment. In addition, storm generated wavewash and surge was

               documented, particularly in exposed locations, to erode old scarred areas

               further impacting adjacent seagrasses by burial. As noted by Matthews et      al.

               (1991). virtually all seagras. s banks and flats in the Keys have some prop   scars

               with density generally greatest near developed islands and.in areas of high



                                                        4











            boating activity. All user groups are responsible to some degree with large

            commercial and recreational vessels (>25') responsible for the largest impacts

            and groundings and smaller vessels (<25') and personal watercraft responsible

            for numerous small scars and recently prop dredged channels in shoreline

            areas. Water depth of seagraSBeS impacted ranged from the high intertidal zone

            to about 5-6 feet deep at low tide. The deeper impacts were near commercial

            ports at Key West and Stock Island, northeast of Big Pine where trap boats

            shortcut through shallow channels, near Marathon and Islamorada where both

            large commercial and recreational vessels dock, and in and along the

            Intracoastal Waterway on the bayside of the Upper Keys.

                  Sediments in shallow seagrass beds subject to these impacts in the Keys

            are extremely variable. Conditions range from very fine, silt size material

            found on the edge of Florida Bay and in shallow embayments of the Lower Keys

            to coarse, well sorted material in open water banks. Fine materials are easily

            resuspended, emphasizing the value of bottom stabilization by healthy

            seagrasses. But even banks with deep, coarse sediments, includ ing Porites

            finger coral banks like those found around Rodriguez Key in the Upper Keys and

            Pye Key and Key Lois in the Lower Keys, are heavily impacted with poor chance

            of recovery. Wave and current scour now prevents or retards the accumulation

            of fine sediments in these scars. Many prop dredged channels (i.e. north Niles

            Channel) now funnel currents altering sheet flow (and possibly animal

            movement) across flats and scouring bottom sediments, often to bedrock.

            Turbulence and sediment resuspension from regular, often near continuous, use

            of some prop dredged channels prevents revegetation and increases turbidity in

            the surrounding area. Sediment characteristics, usage, location, and energy

            regime appear to be factors that determine the speed of natural revegetation.

            Kenworthy et al. (1988) concluded that boat wake waves substantially elevate

            the bottom shear stress along shallow seagrass beds with possible implication

            for Beagrass health. This wearing away of shallow Beagrasses can be noticed'

            along the edges of the open water oceanside access channels for the large

            sportfishing fleet in the Upper Keys, such as at Whale Harbor and Teatable



                                                   5










              Relief Channels. In addition, surge and sediment resuspension on the bottom

              often occurs to a depth of 7 to.8 feet or more when commercial vessels hauling

              heavy traps ply local waters.

                    Most of the impacted areas mapped were defined as light impact but many,

              especially near developed islands, were assessed as moderately to severely

              impacted. Acreage figures of these areas are to be generated by the DNR once

              mapping is completed. Table 1 lists by site number the moderately impacted

              areas from a subset of sites (Lower Keys, Marquesas Keys to about Snipe Key,

              sites 1-255) for which additional information was collected. Table 2 lists the

              severely impacted sites from this same subset. This information is provided as

              an possible approach to closely examine the site specific basis of shallow

              water impacts for the purpose of management of the problem. Considered also

              for each Bite could be the history of traffic in the area and the type of

              craft responsible. Assessment of the probable causes of different impacts

              revealed the following (often more than one cause) reasons:

                    1. Vessels attempt to take shortcuts even,though water of an adequate

              depth is available nearby or vessels simply pass through water too shallow for

              the draft of the vessel. These actions may be either accidental or purposeful.

              with the average size, draft, and power of vessels increasing in the KeYB,
              locations where oversized vessels routinely plow through waters too shallow*

              are becoming more widespread. The recent proliferation of "flats" boats, in the

              Keys and competitive promotions by manufacturers of their vessels ability to

              run through very shallow or "skinny" water has resulted in an increasing in

              detrimental boating on shallow flats.

                    2. Vessels travel through marked channels with an inadequate number of

             .markers or where the markers are poorly located, i.e. not as shown on charts

              or in or immediately adjacent to shallow water. If a boater passes on the

              wrong Bide of a marker located on the edge of a flat as opposed to further in

              the deep part of the channel, the boater may run aground. Most KeYB boaters

              are not familiar with the Coast Guard required day marker symbols and

              numbering system and hence a single marker presents a problem if the boater is



                                                     6











             unable to read the water. Many heavily impacted areas are in or near marked

             channels.

                  3. Illegal aids to navigation (i.e. PVC markers, reinforcing steel

             lengths, marker buoys) are widespread in Keys waters and proliferating

             rapidly. Only the individuals placing these markers know what is intended

             resulting in many boaters passing unexpectedly through shallows, often in an

             unsafe fashion. Many illegal aids are placed in very restricted passageways
             and some are still being placed to allow or encourage channel creation.

                  4. There is extensive shoreline development in the Keys adjacent to

             shallow seagrass flats. Much prop scarring is a result of boaters attempting
             to access shoreline residences that may or may not have a dock or from boat@rs

             recreating in shallows near residences. Although current rules limit- new docks

             to waters greater than 4 feet in depth at low tide, there are many existing

             docks located in shallow water with poorly defined, if any, access channels.

             Many old channels in open water areas are subject to filling and are now

             maintained by prop dredging. Although docks cannot now be permitted in shallow

             water, illegal docks are often built leading to seagraBS impacts. Many dredged

             canals leading from old Bubdivisions terminate in relatively shallow water

             causing access problems as population density and vessel Bize increases. High

             powered Bpeed boats from residential areas race across very soft shallow flats

             with little regard for depth.

                   5. Hundreds of commercial marinas, boat and personal watercraft rentals,

             and public boat ramps are in close proximity to shallow seagraBses where few

             channel markers exist. The result is that boats are concentrated in and near

             shallow areas, with usage by large fish and wildlife probably decreased. The

             U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1992) determined that boating activity was

             adversely affecting wildlife resources (especially birds) in Keys wildlife

             refuges. It seems likely that most large, shallow water animals (i.e. tarpon,

             bonefish, permit, sharks, barracuda, snappers, stingray, eagle ray, COWfiBh,

             sawfish, bottlenose dolphin, small Bea turtles, and manatee) view fast boats

             as predators, with the expected reaction. Although most information is



                                                    7










              anecdotal, many commercial and recreational fishermen believe that boating

              activity affects the,habits and abundance of fish in heavily traveled areas.

              Some of the worse prop dredged areas are.near marinas catering to fishermen,

              where ample justification exists for providing safe, low impact boating.

                    6. Numbers of liveaboard vessels, both residential and commercial, have

              increased rapidly in recent years. Documented were problems of anchor and

              chain damage as vessels continually swing on anchor, keel andoutdrive damage

              when vessels anchor in waters too shallow, and severe prop dredging by

              commercial liveaboards (principally spongers) when passing from one shallow

              bay or channel to another.

                    A review of Keys aerial photographs from the 1950s revealed that prop

              dredging has occurred here for a considerable period of time. But with an

              increasing and more affluent residential population, the increasing popularity

              ,of boating, fishing, and diving, and a vastly increased tourist population the

              problem has become much more widespread. Based on extensive experience of the

              contractor with the problem in the Keys it is obvious that just in the last

              .few years impacts have spread and become a much more serious cumulative

              problem. New prop dredged channels continue to appear, some thousands of feet

              long, and now provide larger boat access into areas not previously heavily

              travelled. Many shallow flats and banks are now heavily eroded due to numerous

              scars and grounding events.(i.e. large bank north of the east end of the

              Seven-Mile Bridge and banks north of Long Key Bridge).



              Management Recommendations

                    The first step of identifying and managing this resource problem is now

              being taken by the Florida DNR and very timely considering the level of impact

              to these important public resources. Surprisingly, few if any new channel

              markers have been placed in Keys waters in recent years even though public

              sentiment has been strong in recent years that this effort is an. important

              component of safe, low impact boating. New programs are currently underway    in

              both John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park and Lignum Vitae Key State Botanical



                                                     8











            Site to prohibit motorized access onto shallow flats and treat prop dredging

            as damage to protected resources. Monitoring of the effectiveness of these and

            other management strategies, both from the air and on the water, is critical

            to their success. The Monroe County Department of Marine Resources is about to

            release a draft Boating Impact Management Plan that may be incorporated into

            the draft management plan for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary.

            Ample opportunity and justification now exists to manage boating impacts in

            the Keys. Based on observations incorporated here a multi-faceted approach is

            necessary to deal with the wide range of user groups, activities, and physical
            impacts. Recommended is a 4-point approach that can form the basis for

            management to eliminate or significantly reduce theimpacts at the moderately

            and severely impacted sites identified here and prevent an increase at those

            site only lightly impacted now.




            1. Education

                  The Keys are one of the most popular diving and fishing destinations in

            the world with millions of visitors each year. The value of education about

            resource impacts is obvious but in an area where there is a continual influx

            of new visitors, and seasonal and permanent residents, there must be other

            mechanisms to insure compliance and accomplishment of resource management

            goals. Graphic aerial photography of vessel damage to seagrasses has proven

            useful in the past to educate managers, decision makers, and the public about

            the issue. Acknowledging the.need to limit increases in vessel size, draft,

            and power in shallow areas, and reduce these in some areas should be an

            important educational goal.

            2. Channel Markina

                  It is imperative that deviation be allowed from the Coast Guard

            requirements Of Bignage and symbols that might preclude or discourage simple,
            easily installed and maintained markers with directional arrows. Conventional

            day markers are very useful in deep, open water channels and programs should

            proceed to relocate markers to the center of channels providing buffers along



                                                   9










              the edges of adjacent seagrass flats. Day markers should be gated in most

              locations and extend well beyond the entrances to channels. In impacted,areas

              where public funds are expended to protect seagrasses, mechanisms must be

              developed to require the use of channels. In sensitive areas marking should be

              designed to solve problems, not create new ones by improving or facilitating

              boater access. Illegal aids to navigation should be removed as criteria are

              established and new markers put in place. The resource benefits of an

              expensive marker system are negated if illegal markers continue to be

              widespread with ever increasing prop scarring around them. Benefits are also

              negated if extensive prop dredging and turbidity are allowed within marked

              channels.




              3. Enforcement

                    Prop dredging and physical damage to seagrasses by vessels must be

              regarded as physical destruction of protected public resources. Considerable

              prop dredging in the Keys is Willful, particularly where repetitive activities

              occur, and much of the rest is due to simple negligence. Interpretive

              education, warnings, and citations are requirements of a successful

              enforcement.program. Voluntary compliance has not p.roven adequate in the past

              in the'Florida Keys to solve resource problems.



              4. Restricted Boating Areas

                    Programs currently being put in place by the Florida DNR (Pennekamp Park

              and Lignum Vitate Botanical Site) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

              (Lower Keys refuges) are good examples of moderate restrictions to protect

              sensitive resources from physical impacts while allowing compatible public

              access. Other shallow areas are being considered for management by the Florida

              Keys National Marine Sanctuary. other very shallow channels, flats...and

              embayments in the Keys where there are little, if any, boating activityand

              seagrass impacts should be considered for access restrictions such as idle

              speed or no motor zones before problems develop. Monitoring of the success or



                                                    10










            failure of these efforts is critical to future management of other seagrass-

            areas where physical impacts and unacceptable levels of disturbance of shallow

           water fish and wildlife are occurring.
















                                               References




             Kenworthy, W. J., M. S. Fonseca, and G.W. Thayer. 1988. A comparison of wind-
             wave and boat wake-wave energy in Hobe Sound: implications for seagrass
             growth. Ann. Rep@ to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sirenia Project,
             Gainesville, FL , 21 pp.
             Matthews. T.R., A.C. Lazar, and J.H. Hunt. 1991. Aerial observations of
             boating impacts to shallow water grass beds in the Florida Keys. Report to the
             Florda DNR Off. Mar. Progs. and Plan. 12 pp.

             U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Management Agreement and Environmental
             Assessement for submerged lands within
             boundaries of the Key West and Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuges.
             U.S.F.W.S. Regional office, Atlanta, Ga. 76 pp. plus appends.









































                                                   12














                                                                                                               Al;



                                                                                                                                                                'S
                                                                                                        !.R
                                      'n- z
                                                                               E,
                                                                               5,
                                                                      C




                                                                                                                                                             @4
                                                               -12C
                                                                                                                     j




                                                                                                                                                    p!-T


                                                                                                                                                     V I.,


                                                                                                           ,IS
                                                                                                   @i gG


                                                                                                                     ï¿½r

                                                                F1

                                                                                                                 K     W,
                                                                                                                                                        G
                                                                                                                                                           N; ATI NA

                                                                                                                                   EP,
                                                                                                                                          D             10 DO E'@REFUG.E
                                                      AxeA                                                      _aj&2rqh@                               - - - ---
                                                                                                                                      V
                                                                                                            7-        Key    I  - I       \0     oi .
                                                                                            johnstg4lKeyt7                    F(9G
                                                                            G                                                          ) I -       ffe e
                                                                              OjAT  )t"- t UE-RONI ttAT!qAAL-
                                                                                               Sn' el
                                                                                                y                                              N
                                                                                                 9                                  E
                                                                                mud K ysg      KO                                    Mg Pi e
                                                                                                                                                             31
                                                                                W4LDLI
                                                                                       E  RE F lj@@ I F
                                                    .;.Z-                                                                          29
                                                                                           26
                                                                                                       , .4) -@ Ugj
                                                                -44           ;5   V@                  @j)    U9                            Bi
                         21
                                      KEY WIIST, NA44tNAI-i                           r,                           Sugarlod
                                                          Cdttrell Key
                                                                                                                    Key


                                        WILDLIFE REFUGE
                                                                                               0
                       M-
                           K..
                                                       KEY   YLEï¿½7
                                                                 j S L A_T_p
                                                               acouta                              t
                                              Boca Grande E arr
                                              Key       C) K:eys,
                                                        D'
                                                                                                     8

                                        rn


                                   - - - - - --- - - - - -
                                                                                Figure 1 (cont.). Prop dredging and boating
                                                                                impact survey survey mapping area in the Florida Keys.
                                                                                         approx. 7.6 miles





                                                  AWK           -d@
                                                                                                                          4@


                                                                              --di-L




                                                                                                                               -d@

                                                                                                                                                     OE



                                     7a
                                                                              -dI                                                                                        -',w q@





                                                                                                                                                                             4-
                                                                                                                                                         Ika  IM
                                                                                                                                                          ,W

                                                                                                                                                     bound,W -r@








                        T


                                                                                                                                                                           XV
                                                                                  T           t
                                                                                                      -..dLecqT7! ley
                                                                                                                  64
                                                                         wata Key-               61urnbe Key
                                                                 -r-ong Ke




                                             Colony
                                             Beac            U@cl,
                                                      rp
                                              "Oc'          Key
                     bm-'awt6on   hor



                                      __-  33__j



                                                                                   I,         FJgure              Prop dredging and boating
                                                                                                                                                             L
                                                                                              im,pact survey mapping arev in the Florida Keys.
                                                                           0                  1" = approx. 7.6 miles












           Table 1. Prop dredging survey summary information for moderately impacted
           sites mapped from the Marquesas Keys to Snipe Key in late 1992 and early
           1993 (draft).

                                  Adjacent      Probable         2
           Site # Severity        island          cause   Recomms.             Comments

           ------ -------- ----------------- -------- -------- -------------------------------
              13        M     Marquesas Keys       S,A        E     Shallow channel-between
                                                                    islands with popular beaches
              15        M     Marquesas Keys       S,A        E     Shallow channel between 2
                                                                    islands
              32        M     Marquesas Keys       S,I        E     Entrance to natural channel
              46        M     Boca Grande Key      S,CH       CH    At entrance to main channel,
                                                                    existing markers (#s 17 and
                                                                    18) reflected on chart 11441
                                                                    too far apart, marker 18 in
                                                                    shallow zone, vessels pass on
                                                                    shallow side. 
              50        M     Boca Grande Key      S,CH       CH    Markers #s 13 and 14 not
                                                                    located as shown on chart
                                                                    11441
              75        M     Archer Key           S,CH     EN,CH   Adjacent to single marker # 8
                                                                    shown on chart 11441, oversize
                                                                    vessels; need gated markers.
              105       M     Mule Key             S,CH     CH,EN   Confined area between channel
                                                                    markers, used by oversized
                                                                    vessels
              113       M     Mule.Key             S,CH       E     Area of concentrated traffic
                                                                    near channel markers
              121       M     Key West             S          E     Isolated bank (Middle Grounds)
                                                                    in center of Northwest Channel
              123       M     Wisteria Island      S,CH,L E,EN,CH   Heavily traveled anchorage on
                                                                    west edge of Key West Channel
              127       M     Fleming Key          S,CH       E,CH  Inadequately marked channel
                                                                    through large bank
              142       M     Fleming Key          S          E,EN  on inside of several markers
              145       M     Fleming Key          S          E,CH  On edge of main channel near
                                                                    marker
              150       M     Key West             S,P      E,EN,CH  Outside of markers in access
                                                                    to-Garrison Bight
              151       M     Key West             S,CH,P     E,CH  Inside Garrison Bight, outside
                                                                    of partly marked dredged
                                                                    channel
              152       M     Key West             S,CH,P     E,CH  Inside Garrison Bight, outside
                                                                    of partly marked dredged
                                                                    channel
              155       M     Sigsbee Park         S          E,CH  At end of dredged area
              156       M     Key West             S,A        E,CH  Boats accessing dredged
                                                                    channel
              157       M     Key West             S,CH,P E,EN,CH   Cow Key Channel, part marked,
                                                                    part not marked, high speed


              1. S=shortcut, CH=markers, I=illegal aids, A=access, P=proximity, L=Iiveabor.
              2. E=education, CH=new or improved markers, EN=enforcement, R=restricted area
 










                Table 1. Prop dredging survey summary information for moderately impacted
                sites mapped from the Marquesas Keys to Snipe Key in late 1992 and early
                1993 (draft).
                                      Adjacent       Probable'        2
                Site # Severity       island          cause    Recomms.              Comments

                ------ -------- ----------------- -------- -------- -------------------------------
                                                                         traffic
                 163        M    Stock Island          S,p     E,EN,CH   Adjacent to Safe Harbor
                                                                         Channel
                 165        M    Stock Island         S,P,L    E,EN,CH   Anchorage east of Stock island
                                                                         in Boca Chica Channel
                 166        M    Stock Island          P,L       E,EN    Anchorage east of Stock Island
                                                                         in Boca Chica Channel and near
                                                                         ramp
                 174        M    Boca Chica             S        E,EN    At entrance to dredged part of
                                                                         Boca Chica Channel
                 181        M    Bay Keys              S,I       E,EN    Commercial tour boats and
                                                                         recreational boats accessing
                                                                         Bay Keys from the south
                 201        M    Lower Harbor Keys     S,I       E,EN    Long, illegally marked channel
                 204        M    Channel Key           S,I        E      Part of old Backcountry
                                                                         Waterway
                 207        M    Channel Key           S,I       E,CH    Cut through bank between
                                                                         islands
                 223        M    Fish Hawk Key         S,I       E,CH    Cut through long linear bank
                 232        M    Geiger Key           S,I,A      E,EN    Shallow channel leaving
                                                                         residential canal
                 236        M    Saddlebunch Key       S,CH      E,CH    On bank near marked channel
                 238        M    Big Coppitt Key       CH,A      E,EN    Marked access to canal trailer
                                                                         park
                 245        M    Halfmoon Key         S,A,I      E,EN    Access to shallow embayment
                 251        M    Mud Keys               S        E,CH    Channel leaving Waltz Key
                                                                         Basin
























                 1. S=shortcut, CH=markers, I=illegal aids, A=access, P=proximity, L=liveabor.
                 2. E=education, CH=new or improved markers, EN=enforcement, R=restricted area
  











           Table 2. Prop dredging survey summary information for severely impacted
           sites mapped from the Marquesas Keys to Snipe Key    in late 1992 and early
           1993 (draft).
                               Adjacent      Probable         2
           Site # Severity      island        cause    Recomms.              Comments

           ------ -------- --------------- -   ------ --------- --------------------------------
             7        S     Marquesas Keys      S        E,EN   From large vessel in early
                                                                1980s, now enlarged
            129       S     Wisteria Island S,CH,L      E,EN,CH heavily traveled anchorage on
                                                                east side of Key West Channel
            138       S     Fleming Key        s,i       E,CH   At shallow end of a natural
                                                                channel
            158       S     Stock Island        A        E,EN   Boats accessing residential area
                                                                in shallow water
            160       S     Key West           A,L       E,EN   Cow Key Channel liveaboard
                                                                anchorage and Cow Key Channel
                                                                south of bridge
            170       S     Stock Island        S       E,EN,CH Large vessels shortcutting into
                                                                Boca Chica Channel
            231       S     Geiger Key       S,I,A,P E,CH,EN    Access to Geiger Key Marina and
                                                                area





































            1. S=shortcut, CH=markers, I=illegal aids, A=access, P=proximity, L=liveabor.
            2. E=education, CH=new or improved markers, EN=enforcement, R=restricted area
  

















               Appendix B.    Copy of a newspaper article discussing the
                              problem of propeller scars in shallow seagrass.
                              beds. Kevin Lollar, Fort Myers New-Press,
                              January.2, 1993.


					
Boaters				
'cutting
their own
throats'
Props rip sea grasses

By KEVIN LOLLAR
News-Press staff writer

   From the boat on the 
clear water off
Pineland, it doesn't look
like much to worry
about.
   Just a long white, sandy strip
where the turtle grass doesn't grow
- a prop scar from a power boat
   "Boaters who go out and cut up
sea-grass beds are really cutting
their own throats," said Robert
Repenning, manager of the
Southwest Florida Aquatic
Preserves. "Most of those boaters
are out here to fish, and without sea
grasses, you won't have nearly as
many fish."
   It's the old food-chain thing.  Sea

			See GRASS/
		back page this section
					


GRASS:
Provide
food and 
shelter
From Page 1A

grasses provide habitat for many
small creatures, which are eaten by
larger creatures, which are, in turn,
eaten by even larger creatures, such
as snook, sea trout and redfish.

   One square meter of sea grass
for example, can contain 3,000
polychates (small marine worms)
and 1,500 amphipods (small
crustaceans), important food
sources on the lower end of the
chain.

   Besides that, two dozen species of
shrimp, 148 species of algae, many
species of crab (including blue and
stone crabs), snails and other
mollusks, sponges, and plenty more,
live in sea-grass beds.

   "We're talking a lot of
productivity here," Repenning said.
"If you follow it up the food chain, it
eventually becomes valuable to us.

   "For fish, sea-grass beds are a 
supermarket and a home.  They
provide food and shelter-little fish
can hide to keep from being eaten by 
big fish.  Sea-grass beds provide all
the stuff fish need to get going."

   Now, think about this: 70 percent
of Florida's commercially valuable
fish spend all or part of their lives in
sea grasses.

   Sea grasses also help keep water
clear by trapping fine sediments and
particles; they stabilize the bottom
with their roots, much as land
grasses prevent soil erosion; and
floating sea-grass leaves carry
nutrients to other areas.

   Obviously, sea grasses are a vital
part of Florida's ecosystem, but on
both coasts, sea-grass beds are being
cut to pieces by boaters.  The Keys
have the most seriously scarred
grass beds-estimates go as high as
10,000 acres of prop damage.

   Any heavily traveled shallow
waterway, though, including the
beds off Pineland, will be
crisscrossed with scars.

   Prop scarring is not just clipping
 the tops of sea grass with a propeller.
It's plowing through the sediment,
hacking up roots and all.

   And when you talk prop scarring,
you're talking almost exclusively
about recreational boaters.

  "A lot of people blame
commercial fisherman because they
see the commercial guystaking their
boats into places recreational boats
can't go." Repenning said, "But
commercial boats can run in six


																			Florida Marine Institute
PATHS OF DESTRUCTION:  Propelller scars slice like claw marks across sea-grass beds near Pine Island in this photograph taken from
a Florida Marine Patrol plane. Most prop damage in grass beds is done by recreational boaters.

"We're talking a lot
of productivity here.
If you follow it up the
food chain, it eventually
becomes valuable to
us."
	ROBERT REPENNING
	 Southwest Florida
	 Aquatic Preserves
________________________

inches of water and not scar the
bottom.  The commercial fisherman
know where they can go without
getting into trouble."

   A small prop scar can take up to
five years to heal; large scars can
take 10 years.

   In many cases, prop scarring
arises from boater ignorance.

   "A lot of people move down here
from the Midwest, where they're
used to boating on the Great Lakes in
hundreds of feet of water with deep-
draft boats." Repenning said. "They


put those boats in Charlotte Harbor
and start running aground every turn
they take.

   "Unfortunately, to run a boat in
Florida, all you need is money to buy
or rent a boat.  There's no skill
required."

   Many boaters don't know how to
read the water.  Many don't know,
until too late, that water levels can
change from a safe six feet to an
unsafe six inches in an instant.  Some
areas aren't well marked, and even
in marked areas, some people don't
understand the markers.

   Then, again, some people just
don't care, said Jud Kenworthy, a 
research biologist for the National
Marine Fisheries Service.

   "There's just kind of an
unlimited-access attitude that goes
with being on the water," he said.
"It's a big open space; you're free to 
go where you want to go out there.
These people lack an understanding
of the value of the resource."

   Certainly, some boaters will say,
"Hey, so what if I run my boat
through a sea-grass bed? What
harm's a little scar going to do?"

   Lots, said Frank Sargent, a


remote sensing analyst at the Marine
Research Institute in St. Petersburg.

   "It's really a major problem in
Florida," he said.  "Granted, your're
going to have some areas that get
scars and won't really be harmed.
but it's the repeated scarring that
does the damage.  It takes a lot of time
for sea grasses to get re-established, 
and some never do."

   Sea grasses are constantly
threatened by human activities-
dredging and filling, oil spills,
temperature changes from power


plant discharge, various kinds of
pollution.

   Although the individual resident
really can't do much about these
threats, he or she can help sea
grasses by simply not chopping up 
the grass beds with his boat.

   "If you can't convince people
with arguments about resource
management, ask them how much
the paid for their boat," Repenning
said. "Sucking up a bunch of mud can
just burn a motor up. And running
aground can sure bang up your hull."


TIPS
________________________________________________________________________

 Read the water. Grass				grass is shown as light
 beds look like dark areas			green or "Grs."
 in the water.  Polarized			Stay in deep water. If near
 sunglasses help you see			shallow water, drive
 grass beds.					cautiously and slowly.
 Pay attention to channel			If you do run aground,
 markers.						stop engine and tilt the
 Use navigation charts: Sea			motor up; pole or walk the
							boat back to deep water.



 

















              Appendix C.     Site specific actions to manage and protect
                              shallow water seagrass habitats in the Windley
                              Key area. Proposed by Curtis R. Kruer, the
                              subcontractor for the Florida Keys portion of
                              this project.











         DRAFT PROPOSAL TO MANGE AND PROTECT SHALLOW WATER SEAGRASS HABITATS
         IN THE WHALE HARBOR CHANNEL/WINDLEY KEY AREA

         Background

         The area proposed to be managed is in the upper Florida Keys
         (fig.1) and encompasses a variety of shallow marine habitat types
         as a result.of the change form exposed ocean conditions to more
         protected waters of Florida Bay (Fig. 2).      It also includes the
         most heavily prop scarred shallow seagrass area in the Florida Keys
         (Hunt et. al. 1991, pers. observs.). Recent comparison of aerial
         photographs of the area in the md 1980s to current conditions
         revealed substantial increases in prop dredging and the loss of
         seagrass cover on shallow flats and the edges of channels.
         Additional channels have been cut through very shallow water and
         mangroves by personal watercraft and small outboards.         Intense
         boating and personal watercraft activity results form 4 commercial
         marinas, including the large sportf ishing vessel fleet at the
         Holiday Isle and Whale Harbor marinas, located on either side of
         Whale Harbor Channel. Unregulated thrillcraft use from rentals at
         these and other marina occur virtually nonstop during daylight
         hours. Racing power boats are a common sight and powerboat races
         are routinely run in the area. Numerous illegal aids to navigation
         have been placed with some markers and signage evidently recently
         pla@ed as a result of requirements on submerged lands leases.

         The seriousness of physical impacts, the extent of sovereign lands,
         and the diversity of boating activity here all combine to create a
         management opportunity that, if successful, can be used as a
         prototype for management of other impacted areas.     The fact that
         the area is outside of an otherwise protected park or preserve
         lends significance to a local, state, and federal effort to design
         and implement management.

         Proposal to Manage Boating Impacts

         1. The area (see attached NOAA chart) extending from beyond the
         seaward edge of the Atlantic Ocean seagrass flats north to the
         boundary of Everglades National Park should be managed as a unit.
         This area is about 5 square miles, including land area .            A
         computer mapping data base would be necessary to define natural
         habitats, water depths, channels, and land based and marina
         facilities. Only one facility exists on the Florida Bay side of
         U.S. 1 here, the rest are on the Atlantic Ocean side.           With
         available aerial photography (early 1971, 1983, and 1992), a
         historical perspective could be put on prop dredging and wave
         energy scour of seagrasses.

         2. Management needs to be designed and implemented a sa collective
         "special area" effort by local, state, and federal agencies with
         responsibilities to protect and manage submerged natural resources.
         Specific goals need to be established at the onset, such as a
         reduction by 90% of new prop scars over a given time frame,
         eliminated boating accidents, and management without precluding








          traditional uses of these waterways (transit, fishing, swimming).
          Monitoring of the effectiveness of the plan after implementation is
          critical to its success and its value as a precedent.

          3.   Requirements of state submerged lands leases       need to be
          incorporated into this management plan and possibly     modified to
          meet the needs of resource protection. Existing legal  authority to
          protect public resources in these waters need to be clearly
          established an shortfalls identified.

          4. The following four point plan needs to be incorporated into the
          overall management of the area. Seagrass protection programs being
          implemented at the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State park and
          Lignumvitae Key State Botanical Site, as well as elsewhere in
          Florida, should be reviewed.

          a. Edu cation

          The management plan and its requirements need to be widely
          publicized in the vicinity with land based signage and literature
          provided at marinas and rental facilities.     Conditions of state
          lands leases to the marinas could include a responsibility to
          insure future production and distribution of materials. Promoted
          has to be a recognition of the severe and worsening impacts
          currently resulting from manfs activities. Promoted also must be
          the concept of the need for a radical change in the way shallow
          waters of the Keys are used. Individually, the activities may be
          relatively harmless, but the cumulative impact of numerous, often
          constant activities, and the productive habitats in which they
          occur are the root of the problem.

          b. Channel Marking

          critical to the success of any plan is the marking of    passageways
          for vessels to transit from marina facilities and docks to open
          waters of the Atlantic or'Florida Bay.      Virtually every access
          point through.shallow waters (< - 41 MLW) could be managed with
          markers.   A minimum number of markers should be placed but this
          depends.on implementation of other points in the plan. A review of
          aerial photographs and navigational charts for the area show that
          the marking of 2-3 transit channels on each side of U.S.,1 could
          provide access to open waters (Fig. 2).         Mark access, where
          adequate depths exist, f rom marina and other dock facilities along
          shorelines would be necessary to lead to the  transit channels. It
          appears that additional conventional large    day markers would be
          appropriate in the main oceanside channel     while stout PVC with
          distinctive arrows would best for the other channels. Only the
          main channel into the ocean and the entrance to the marina basin at
          Holiday Isle currently has Coast Guard approved day markers.

          c. Enforcement

          Necessary to insure compliance with the plan and critical to
          meeting established resource protection and improved safety goals.








          Increased attention t6 the area initially may be necessary.
          Simplified management would make for efficient and effective
          enforcement.

          d. Restricted Boating. Zones

          Consistent with resource protection plans for similar stateowned
          bottoms in waters of the Pennekamp and Lignumvitae areas is the
          concept of no combustion engine zones in water shallower than 3
          f eet deep at low tide (tops and edges of banks) and idle speed
          zones near shorelines and offshore from bank edges. In combination
          with marking, these management tools provide the means to stop prop
          scarring in specific areas and provide safe access to an from
          marked channels (Hunt et. al., 1991).    The Florida Keys National
          Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council has recently approved a
          resolution recommending setting idle speed zones within 600f of
          shorelines and the edges of seagrass flats in the Keys. Recent use
          of shallow areas as commercial watersports zones would be
          eliminated as incompatible with resource protection. Consideration
          should be given to making the main offshore channel to the ocean
          (about one mile long) an idle-speed zone to enhance safety and
          protect the bank edges from continued erosion and destabilization
          by large vessel wakes.












               Appendix D.        Agencies which have expressed an interest in actively participating in the
               Department of Natural Resources seagrass propeller scar damage management and education
               project.



               Lee County - Department of Natural Resources
                       Chuck Litowski


               Collier County - Department of Natural Resources
                       Mack Hatcher or Maura Kraus


               Sarasota County - Department of Natural Resources
                       John McCarthy, Ed Freeman, Belinda Perry and George Tatge.

               Monroe County Division of Marine Resources
                       George Garret and Doug Gregory

               Pinellas County - Department of Environmental Management
                       Will Davis and Eric Fehrman


               Florida Inland Navigation District.
                       David Roach and Brent Waddel


               Jupiter Inlet District
                       Mike Rella


               Brevard County Office of Natural Resource Management
                       Conrad White


               Indian River County
                       Roland Deblois, Environmental Planner

               Martin County
                       Mark Tamblyn, Environmental Planner











                                                                                                                       NOAA COASTAL SMICES CTR LIBRARY
                                                                                                                                                     ll ......
                                                                                                                  -'-j @[email protected] 1