Integrating science and resource management in Tampa Bay, Florida

Edited by Kimberly K. Yates, Holly Greening, and Gerold Morrison

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011 Tampa Bay is recognized internationally for its remarkable progress towards recovery since it was pronounced “dead” in the late 1970s. Due to significant efforts by local governments, industries and private citizens throughout the watershed, water clarity in Tampa Bay is now equal to what it was in 1950, when population in the watershed was less than one-quarter of what it is today. Seagrass extent has increased by more than 8,000 acres since the mid-1980s, and fish and wildlife populations are increasing.

Central to this successful turn-around has been the Tampa Bay resource management community’s long-term commitment to development and implementation of strong science-based management strategies. Research institutions and agencies, including Eckerd College, the Florida Wildlife Commission Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Mote Marine Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Southwest Florida Water Management District, University of South Florida, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Geological Survey, local and State governments, and private companies contribute significantly to the scientific basis of our understanding of Tampa Bay’s structure and ecological function. Resource management agencies, including the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council’s Agency on Bay Management, the Southwest Florida Water Management District’s Surface Water Improvement and Management Program, and the Tampa Bay Estuary Program, depend upon this scientific basis to develop and implement regional adaptive management programs.

The importance of integrating science with management has become fully recognized by scientists and managers throughout the region, State and Nation. Scientific studies conducted in Tampa Bay over the past 10–15 years are increasingly diverse and complex, and resource management programs reflect our increased knowledge of geology, hydrology and hydrodynamics, ecology and restoration techniques. However, a synthesis of this research and its integration into resource management has not been prepared for Tampa Bay since the mid-1980s.

The need for an up-to-date synthesis of Tampa Bay science and management has resulted in the production of this document. The U.S. Geological Survey recently completed a 5-year Tampa Bay Integrated Science Study, and the Tampa Bay Estuary Program updated the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan for Tampa Bay in 2006. These efforts build upon results of the many research and management studies and programs summarized here.

Holly Greening Executive Director Tampa Bay Estuary Program

A dedicated group of scientists and resource managers from the Tampa Bay area provided documentation (published and unpublished), original graphics, and helpful reviews of earlier drafts of this document. We appreciate the comments provided by Mike Beach, Gregg Brooks, Tom Cronin, Tony D’Aquila, Dick Eckenrod, Ernie Estevez, Sid Flannery, Steve Grabe, Cliff Hearn, Al Hine, Mary Hoppe, Tony Janicki, Roger Johansson, Dave Karlen, Justin Krebs, Robin Lewis, Carole McIvor, Bob McConnell, Ed Proffitt, Tom Ries, Doug Robison, Marc Russell, Ed Sherwood, Thomas J. Smith III, Andy Squires, Beau C. Suthard, Peter Swarzenski, Dave Tomasko, and Hans Zarbock. Thanks to Betsy Boynton and Laurinda Travers for their help with graphics and figures.

The following U.S. Geological Survey employees contributed to the preparation of this report: Jane Eggleston, geologist, for technical editing; Ronald S. Spencer, scientific illustrator, for the final preparation of illustrations; and Twila Darden Wilson, writer-editor, for the report’s design, layout, and coverwork.

Chapter 1. An Introduction to Tampa Bay 1

Tampa Bay Study – Integrating Science and Management 8 References Cited 15

Chapter 2. Environmental Setting 17

Land Use 18 Climate and Weather 19 Tributaries and Freshwater Inflow 25 Tides 26 Circulation 26 Coming Challenges — Climate Change and Sea-Level Rise 31 References Cited 33

Chapter 3. Origin and Evolution of Tampa Bay 37

Geologic History 50 Stratigraphy 52 Paleoenvironments 52 Anthropogenic Changes to the Bay and its Watershed 56 References Cited 61

Chapter 4. Seagrass 63

Seagrass Species Found in Tampa Bay 65 Seagrass Habitat Requirements 65 Types of Seagrass Beds in Tampa Bay 70 Factors Affecting Seagrass Cover in Tampa Bay 77 Water and Sediment Quality 77 Dredge and Fill 79 Currents and Wave Energy 81 Propeller Scarring 86 Planting and Transplanting 87 Sea-Level Rise and Other Components of Global Climate Change 90 Status and Trends in Seagrass Cover 91 Seagrass Management Strategy 92 Anticipated Challenges 94 References Cited 96 vi

Chapter 5. Water Quality 105

Connectivity between the Bay and its Watershed and Airshed 106 Eutrophication in Tampa Bay—Past Problems, Recent Successes, and Ongoing Challenges 107 Water-Quality Monitoring 114 Estimating Pollutant Loads and Bay Responses 120 Adaptive Management 121 Current and Anticipated Water-Quality Management Issues 121

Toxins and Harmful Algal Blooms 139 Mercury in Fish Tissue 139 Harmful Algal Blooms 141

Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Products, and other Emerging Contaminants 144 Pathogen-Related Water-Quality Impairments 145 Anticipated Future Challenges from Ongoing Population Growth 146 References Cited 148

Chapter 6. Freshwater Inflows 157

Anthropogenic Hydrologic Modifications 161 Urban Development and Increased Imperviousness 163 Changes to Surface-Water Conveyance Systems 164

Changes in Groundwater Systems 175

Rainfall and Streamflow Patterns 182 Long-Term Trends in Spring Discharge and Instream Flows 184 Management Responses to Anthropogenic Alterations 187

Future Challenges 191 References Cited 194 Nutrient Inputs and Eutrophication 121 Factors Affecting Phytoplankton Productivity in Tampa Bay 125 External Nitrogen Sources and Estimated Annual Loadings 126 Internal Nutrient Cycling and its Implications for Bay Management 128 Setting Water-Quality Goals and Nitrogen Loading Goals Based on the Light Requirements of Seagrasses 129 Tampa Bay Nitrogen Management Consortium 138

Florida Red Tide 141 Other Harmful Algal Blooms 143

Coastal Old Tampa Bay Basin 164 Hillsborough River Basin 166 Coastal Hillsborough Bay Basin 168 Alafia River Basin 169 Coastal Middle Tampa Bay Basin 174 Little Manatee River Basin 174 Coastal Lower Tampa Bay and Terra Ceia Bay Basins 174 Manatee River Basin 175 Boca Ciega Bay Basin 175

Northern Groundwater Basins 176 Southern Groundwater Basin 178

Stormwater Management 187 Water Withdrawals for Human Use 188 Discharges of Treated Effluent and Irrigation Water 190

Chapter 7. Sediment Contaminants and Benthic Habitat Quality 203

Contaminant Concentrations and Disbribution 212 Identification of Contaminants of Concern 214 Risk-Based Assessment of Contaminant Concentrations 216 Contaminants of Concern Sources and Estimated Inputs 218 The Tampa Bay Sediment Quality Management Strategy 222 Benthic Diversity and Abundance 225 Next Steps and Future Challenges 229 References Cited 234

Chapter 8. Habitat Protection and Restoration 239

Emergent Tidal Wetlands 240 Mangrove Forest 241 Salt Marsh 248 Salt Barrens 249 Oyster Bars 251 Hard Bottom 252 Tidal Rivers and Tributaries 253 Artificial Habitats 258 Coastal Uplands 260 Freshwater Wetlands 261 Hatitat Threats 263 Dredge and Fill 263 Urbanization 266 Water and Sediment Quality 266 Consumptive Water Use 266 Climate Change 267

Paradigms for Habitat Restoration and Protection 270 “Restoring the Balance” 271 The “Habitat Mosaic” Approach 272 Habitat Restoration and Protection Targets 273 Emergent Tidal Wetlands 273 Other Habitat Types 274 References Cited 278 vii

Sea-Level Rise 268 Increasing Temperature 269 Increasing Acidification of Coastal Waters 270 Management Responses 270 viii

Figures

Figure 1–1. Figure 1–2.

Figure 1–3.

Figure 1–4. Figure 1–5.

Figure 1–6.

Figure 1–7.

Figure 1–8.

Figure 2–1. Figure 2–2.

Figure 2–3.

Figure 2–4.

Figure 2–5. Figure 2–6.

Figure 2–7.

Figure 2–8.

Figure 3–1. Figure 3–2.

Figure 3–3.

Figure 3–4.

Figure 3–5. Figure 3–6. Figure 3–7. Figure 3–8.

Figure 3–9. Satellite image of Tampa Bay located on the west-central coast of Florida 2 Map showing interconnected lagoons and bays of Tampa Bay, grouped into seven named segments and the tidal reach of the Manatee River 3 Map showing watershed and drainage basins of Tampa Bay, showing the geographic extent of land from which the bay receives freshwater runoff 4 Photograph of the mouth of the Hillsborough River in downtown Tampa 5 Graph showing population growth in the three-county area (Hillsborough, Manatee, and Pinellas Counties) surrounding Tampa Bay, 1940–2008 6 Photograph showing Port of Tampa located on the northern shoreline of the Hillsborough Bay segment of Tampa Bay 6 Photographs showing an undeveloped area of shoreline located along the southeastern shoreline of Lower Tampa Bay, and the urbanized shoreline of Bayboro Harbor located along the western coastline of Middle Tampa Bay depicting increased urban structures and seawalls 7 Photograph showing scientists, managers, and congressional liaisons at the southeast shoreline of Tampa Bay 9 Map of Tampa Bay area, showing locations of dredged and filled areas 18 Aerial photograph of Boca Ciega Bay shoreline development and land use, 2002 20 Graphs showing mean daily rainfall for available periods of record at four sites in the Tampa Bay watershed 21 Satellite image of Hurricane Frances as it approached the east coast of Florida on July 24, 2004 24 Map showing locations of Tampa Bay tidal tributaries 25 Graph showing example of tide data for a semidiurnal tide in Tampa Bay near St. Petersburg 26 Photograph of a Physical Oceanographic Real-Time System station located in Tampa Bay 28 Maps showing potential changes in shoreline habitat in Tampa Bay by 2100, assuming a 15-inch increase in sea level 32 Map showing the Florida Peninsula and the Florida Platform 38 Diagrams showing seismic line, showing layers of sediment beneath the bay floor, and locations of the cores that penetrated and recovered sediment from these layers 39 Diagrams depicting the theoretical development of the inner shelf, Tampa Bay estuary, and ebb-tidal delta system from 11,000 to 3,000 years ago 40 Core logs showing Holocene stratigraphy and calibrated radiocarbon dates from cores VC-75, 77, and 78 in the Hillsborough Bay region of Tampa Bay 42–43 Cross-section of the Florida Platform 50 Map showing the Tampa Bay area in a regional context 51 Stratigraphic column for central and south Florida 53 Photomicrographs of pollen from two plant species commonly found in Tampa Bay sediments (Amaranthus australis and Pinus taeda) 55 Maps showing estimated impervious surface levels in the Tampa Bay watershed for 1991, 1995, 2000, and 2002 57 Figure 4–1. Figure 4–2.

Figure 4–3.

Figure 4–4. Figure 4–5.

Figure 4–6. Figure 4–7.

Figure 4–8. Figure 4–9.

Figure 4–10. Locations of 62 fixed seagrass transects in Tampa Bay 72 Figure 4–11. Photograph showing how randomly placed quadrants are used to monitor

Figure 4–12. Maps showing urban development and seagrass distribution from

Figure 4–13. Graph showing comparison of urban growth and seagrass coverage in

Figure 4–14. Aerial photo showing residential development and finger canals along

Figure 4–15. Photograph showing dredge operation in Tampa Bay port area 80 Figure 4–16. Map showing location of longshore bars in 2004 in Tampa Bay 83 Figure 4–17. Aerial photographs showing longshore-bar degradation on the eastern

Figure 4–18. Images showing relative exposure index value and bar locations at

Figure 4–19. Photograph showing rogue wave observed offshore of MacDill

Figure 4–20. Aerial photo showing propeller scarring in seagrass beds from

Figure 4–21. Photograph showing mechanical seagrass planting boat 88 Figure 4–22. Photograph showing syringodium transplant plug, MacDill Peninsula, 2007 89 Figure 4–23. Photograph showing seagrass sod being excavated prior to transplanting 89 Figure 4–24. Graph showing estimated long-term changes in Tampa Bay seagrass

Figure 4–25. Graph showing seagrass-cover trend from 1982 through 2008 92 Figure 5–1.

Figure 5–2. Figure 5–3. Figure 5–4.

Figure 5–5. Figure 5–6. Figure 5–7. ix

Aerial photo showing seagrass habitat at Pinellas Point in Middle Tampa Bay 63 Map showing estimated changes in seagrass cover in Tampa Bay between 1950 and 2006 64 Sketches and photographs of common seagrass species found in Tampa Bay 66–67 Photograph showing Ruppia maritime 68 Cross section showing typical depth zonation patterns of Gulf Coast seagrass species 68 Diagram showing why sunlight is important to seagrass 68 Photograph showing the measuring of photosynthetically active radiation using quantum sensors 68 Photograph showing water clarity measurement using a Secchi disk 68 Diagrams showing the classification system for the seagrass beds of Tampa Bay 71

1879 to 1999 78

Boca Ciega Bay 80

shore of Tampa Bay near Apollo Beach on March 23, 1957, January 21, 1968, and December 10, 1990 84

four Tampa Bay sites 85

cover and target cover established in living-resource strategy 91

Photograph of Terra Ceia Bay and Skyway Bridge from Emerson Point in Lower Tampa Bay 105 Photograph of bay scallop in seagrass meadow 106 Map showing principal oxidized nitrogen airshed for Tampa Bay 107 Photograph showing fish kill associated with a bloom of microalgae and very low dissolved oxygen readings in Old Tampa Bay, 2008 108 Photograph showing residential lawn fertilization 109 Photograph showing macroalgae mat in Hillsborough Bay 109 Aerial photo of H.F. Curren wastewater-treatment plant 110 x

Figure 5–8.

Figure 5–9.

Figure 5–10. Graphs showing average annual mid-depth dissolved oxygen concentrations,

Figure 5–11. Map showing impaired waterbodies within the Tampa Bay watershed, 2009 113 Figure 5–12. Map of Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County

Figure 5–13. Flow chart showing key decision points for developing and implementing

Figure 5–14. Map showing the central Florida/Bone Valley phosphate district 124 Figure 5–15. Photographs showing nutrient pollution sources 126 Figure 5–16. Graph showing estimated annual nitrogen loads to Tampa Bay during

Figure 5–17. Schematic showing fish consumption advisories due to mercury

Figure 5–18. Map showing mercury wet deposition in the United States, 2007 140 Figure 5–19. Photograph showing red tide bloom along Florida’s west coast 141 Figure 5–20. Photograph showing red tide organism 141 Figure 5–21. Pie chart showing sources of total nitrogen to Tampa Bay, 2003–2007 147 Figure 6–1.

Figure 6–2.

Figure 6–3.

Figure 6–4. Figure 6–5. Figure 6–6.

Figure 6–7. Figure 6–8.

Figure 6–9.

Figure 6–10. Graph showing number of “zero flow” days per year recorded at the

Figure 6–11. Photograph showing Sulphur Springs which eventually discharges into the

Figure 6–12. Map showing groundwater basins in west-central Florida 176 Figure 6–13. Graph showing estimated groundwater use in the Southern Water Use

Figure 6–14. Map showing Upper Floridan aquifer potentiometric surface, May 2009 180 Graphs showing water clarity as measured by average annual Secchi disk depth, 1974–2008, for Hillsborough Bay, Old Tampa Bay, Middle Tampa Bay and Lower Tampa Bay 111 Graphs showing chlorophyll a annual average concentrations, 1974–2008, for Hillsborough Bay, Old Tampa Bay, Middle Tampa Bay, and Lower Tampa Bay 111

1974–2008, for Hillsborough Bay, Old Tampa Bay, Middle Tampa Bay and Lower Tampa Bay 112

water-quality stations in Tampa Bay 115

an adaptive, site-specific nutrient management strategy 122

various time periods (1938–2003) 128

contamination for Tampa Bay 139

Photograph showing summer thunderstorm forming over the Tampa Bay watershed 158 Schematic showing conceptual overview of effects of freshwater inflow on estuaries 159 Schematic showing suggested relationship of freshwater inflow to fisheries production through effects on areas of overlap of dynamic and stationary habitats in tidal tributaries 159 Photograph of oligohaline habitat in Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserve 160 Map showing gaged and ungaged areas of the Tampa Bay watershed 162 Photograph showing example of a hardened streambank which increases the delivery rate of stormwater to the bay 163 Photograph showing Lake Manatee and Manatee River Dam, 2003 163 Aerial photograph of northern Old Tampa Bay, 2002, showing various means by which water enters the tidal area 165 Photograph showing Crystal Springs, a second magnitude spring, which eventually discharges into the upper Hillsborough River 166

Hillsborough River dam, October 1938 through July 2009 167

lower Hillsborough River 168

Caution Area, 1950–2008 179 Figure 6–15. Map showing location of Water Use Caution Areas and groundwater basins

Figure 6–16. Graph showing average monthly rainfall measured at seven rainfall

Figure 6–17. Map showing areas of Floridan aquifer discharge and recharge 184 Figure 6–18. Graph showing average monthly streamflow of several Tampa Bay

Figure 7–1.

Figure 7–2.

Figure 7–3.

Figure 7–4.

Figure 7–5.

Figure 7–6.

Figure 7–7. Figure 7–8.

Figure 7–9.

Figure 7–10. Maps showing inverse distance weighting for the Tampa Bay Benthic Index for

Figure 7–11. Map showing late-summer distribution of Branchiostoma floridae in

Figure 7–12. Map showing late-summer distribution of Monticellina cf. dorsobranchialis in

Figure 7–13. Map showing late-summer distribution of Glottidia pyramidata in Tampa

Figure 7–14. Map showing late-summer distribution of Caecum strigosum in Tampa

Figure 7–15. Map showing nine priority areas in Tampa Bay that have been identified for

Figure 8–1.

Figure 8–2.

Figure 8–3.

within the Southwest Florida Water Management District 181

recording stations over specified periods of record 183

tributaries 185 Photograph showing industrial facility located at the Port of Tampa in Hillsborough Bay, in the northeastern segment of Tampa Bay 203 Photographs showing two common species of ghost shrimp from Tampa Bay 204 Maps showing estimated distribution of sediments in Tampa Bay over three time periods, based on information from benthic monitoring program 205 Map showing sampling sites designated as “hot spots” when chemical concentrations exceeded at least one threshold effects level or probable effects level guideline value 213 Map showing concentrations of most organic toxins were highest among resident oysters collected in northern Hillsborough Bay and lowest in oysters from Old Tampa Bay and Lower Tampa Bay 215 Map showing threshold effects level and probable effects level exceedances in Tampa Bay sediments 219 Graph showing estimated sources of metal loadings to Tampa Bay 220 Graphs showing distribution of “healthy” and “degraded” benthic habitats across salinity and sediment grain size in Tampa Bay 223 Graph showing cumulative distribution frequency plot showing the relation between percentage of sites identified correctly as degraded, false negatives and false positives, and the relation between the Tampa Bay Benthic Index score 224

three time periods: 1993–1996, 1997–2000, and 2001–2007 225

Tampa Bay, 1993–2004 228

Tampa Bay, 1993–2004 229

restoration plan development 233 Photograph showing coastal mangrove forest typical of the southeastern shoreline of Tampa Bay 239 Photograph showing emergent tidal wetlands in Tampa Bay, characterized by mangrove forests, salt marshes, and salt barrens 240 Photograph showing mangrove forest located along the southwest shoreline of Lower Tampa Bay 241 Photographs showing four tree species that dominate the mangrove forests of Tampa Bay: red mangrove, black mangrove, buttonwood, and white mangrove 241 xii

Figure 8–5. Figure 8–6.

Figure 8–7. Figure 8–8.

Figure 8–9. Figure 8–10. Photograph showing natural hard bottom occurs in the Terra Ceia Aquatic

Figure 8–11. Photograph showing oligohaline stretch of Frog Creek, a tidal tributary of

Figure 8–12. Photographs showing inhabitants of the Egmont Key and Fort Dade

Figure 8–13. Map showing location of artificial reefs in Tampa Bay 259 Figure 8–14. Photograph showing coastal uplands can include slash pines and palmetto 260 Figure 8–15. Photograph showing shallow pond within a flatwoods marsh 261 Figure 8–16. Map showing areas within the estimated foraging ranges of four major coastal

Figure 8–17. Photograph showing dredging activity using a clamshell dredge 263 Figure 8–18. Graph showing mean sea-level trend for St. Petersburg, Florida, 1948–2009 269 Figure 8–19. Map showing manatee protection zones in Tampa Bay 277

Tables

Table 2–1. Summary of 1995 land use in the Tampa Bay watershed, by bay segment 19 Table 2–2. Tampa Bay circulation models and representative applications 29 Table 3–1. Seismic sequences in strata at the mouth of Tampa Bay 54 Table 5–1. Total nitrogen load reductions, 1995–2009 138 Table 7–1. Chronology of Tampa Bay sediment assessment and management activities 212 Table 7–2. Potential biological and human health effects of Tampa Bay contamination

Table 7–3. Benthic community summary statistics by year 226 Table 7–4. Benthic community summary statistics by segment 227 Table 7–5. Summary of Tampa Bay Benthic Index benthic habitat quality

Table 8–1. General salinity classification scheme for Tampa Bay 240 Table 8–2. Faunal guilds for habitat restoration and land acquisition master plan

Table 8–3. Summary of recommended protection and restoration targets Photograph showing red mangrove propagules 248 Photograph showing salt marsh located along the eastern shoreline of Tampa Bay 249 Photograph showing oligohaline marsh with sawgrass and blackrush 250 Photograph showing typical salt barren in Tampa Bay fringed by mangrove forest 250 Photograph showing exposed oyster bar at low tide 251

Preserve in Lower Tampa Bay 252

artificial reefs located in Lower Tampa Bay 258

nesting colonies of white ibis and other wading birds in Tampa Bay 262

classifications of sites monitored during 1993–2004 232

for Tampa Bay 271

for Tampa Bay habitats 274

Highlight Boxes

Box 1–1. Integrated Science 10

Box 1–1, Figure 1. Integrated science logo for the U.S. Geological Survey Tampa Bay study 10

Box 1–2. The U.S. Geological Survey Tampa Bay Study 12–14

Box 1–2, Figure 1. Image showing U.S. Geological Survey Tampa Bay Study tasks listed

Box 2–1. Digital Elevation Model of Tampa Bay 22–23

Box 2–1, Figure 1. Image showing digital elevation model of Tampa Bay developed

Box 3–1. Coring to Reconstruct the Past in Tampa Bay 44–49

Box 3–1, Figure 1. Photograph showing vibracore apparatus used to take sediment cores

Box 3–1, Figure 2. Map showing locations of sediment cores and seismic track-lines

Box 3–1, Figure 3. Photograph showing research vessel Marion Dufresne from which

Box 3–1, Figure 4. Photograph showing core apparatus located on the Marion Dufresne,

Box 3–1, Figure 5. Photograph showing bent core pipe retrieved from Middle Tampa Bay

Box 3–1, Figure 6. Core log describing the 11.5-meter core collected from the

Box 3–2. Sedimentary Indicators of Human Effects on Tampa Bay 58–60

Box 3–2, Figure 1. Graphs showing weight percent total organic carbon and total organic xiii

under the four critical science gaps, corresponding to ecosystem components in the integrated science logo 13

from topographic and bathymetric data 23

in Tampa Bay 44

throughout Tampa Bay 45

sediment cores were taken in Middle Tampa Bay 46

used to take cores from Middle Tampa Bay 46

while coring from the French research vessel Marion Dufresne 46

nitrogen, elemental atomic carbon to nitrogen ratio, and δN composition of sedimentary organic matter in three sediment cores from Hillsborough Bay, Terra Ceia, and Feather Sound 59 xiv

Box 4–1. Community Metabolism, Primary Production, and Irradiance

Box 4–1, Table 1. Summary of community production and respiration observations

Box 4–1, Figure 1. Photograph showing the Submersible Habitat for Analyzing Reef Quality

Box 4–1, Figure 2. Map showing Submersible Habitat for Analyzing Reef Quality deployment

Box 4–1, Figure 3. Graphs showing diurnal net primary productivity, and primary production

Box 5–1. Coastal Groundwater Exchange in Tampa Bay 116–117

Box 5–1, Figure 1. Aerial photo of sinkhole feature located near the coastline of

Box 5–1, Figure 2. Diagram showing three dimensional resistivity profile taken

Box 5–2. Bay Region Atmospheric-Chemistry Experiment 118–119

Box 5–2, Figure 1. Photograph showing the Bay Region Atmospheric Chemistry

Box 5–2, Figure 2. Photograph showing meteorological data and physical data from

Box 5–3. Tracking Progress Toward Water-Quality Goals—

Box 5–3, Figure 1. Image showing management responses to decision matrix outcomes 134 Box 5–3, Figure 2. Image showing decision matrix outcomes for the years 1975

Box 5–4. Tampa Bay Nitrogen Management Consortium —

Box 5–4, Figure 1. Image showing compliance with Florida Department of

Box 5–4, Table 1. Participants of the Tampa Bay Nitrogen Management Consortium 137

Relations in Tampa Bay Seagrass Beds 74–76

collected during Submersible Habitat for Analyzing Reef Quality deployments during 2001–2003 76

benthic incubation chamber 74

and irradiance relations, observed within a Submersible Habitat for Analyzing Reef Quality incubation chamber during a 24-hour deployment within a Halodule bed in the Feather Sound part of Old Tampa Bay, May 4–6, 2002 76

Feather Sound in Old Tampa Bay 116

near the Little Manatee River located on the eastern shoreline of Middle Tampa Bay 117

Experiment data-collection station, located at the east end of the Gandy Bridge 118

Tampa Bay collected at several stations within Tampa Bay 119

A Collaborative Approach to Meet Water-Quality Targets and Support Seagrass Recovery in Tampa Bay 136–137

Environmental Protection approved annual average chlorophyll a thresholds for each major bay segment, 1974–2008 136

Box 6–1. Regional Drinking-Water Supply—Groundwater,

Box 6–1, Figure 1. Map showingTampa Bay Water regional drinking-water

Box 7–1. Albino Mutation in Red Mangroves 207

Box 7–1, Figure 1. Photograph showing red mangrove tree, showing the mutagenic

Box 7–1, Figure 2. Map showing location of study sites in Tampa Bay, Florida 207

Box 7–2. Bioaccumulation of Select Metals in Seagrass Tissues 208–211

Box 7–2, Figure 1. Map showing location of sampling sites in Tampa Bay 209 Box 7–2, Table 1. Analysis of six trace elements of seagrass tissue and corresponding

Box 7–2, Figure 2. Graph showing concentrations of selected trace metals in seagrass

Box 8–1. Historic Records Shed Light on Marsh to Mangrove Conversion

Box 8–1, Table 1. Acres of nonmangrove, mangrove, and intertidal area in the 1870s and 1999 242 Box 8–1, Figure 1. Image showing example of original Public Land Survey notes

Box 8–1, Figure 2. Maps showing changes in percent cover of terrestrial, open water,

Box 8–2. Mosquito Ditching of Mangrove Forests 246–247

Box 8–2, Figure 1. Photographs showing mangrove forest habitat near Feather Sound in

Box 8–2, Figure 2. Photograph showing example of mosquito ditch adjacent to Tampa Bay 246 Box 8–2, Figure 3. Graph showing transition in mangrove tree species along a

Box 8–2, Figure 4. Photograph showing sampling of fish in mangrove forest creeks in

Box 8–2, Figure 5. Photograph showing hydroleveling of spoil mounds created by xv

Surface Water, and Desalination 170–173

effect of propagule albinism resulting from contamination by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons 206

sediments, Tampa Bay, Florida, July, 2003 210

tissues and their corresponding sediments from 15 different sites throughout Tampa Bay 211

In Tidal Wetlands 242–245

and interpretation and overlay of Public Land Survey data on 1999 aerial photography 243

mangrove, and tidal marsh habitat from the 1870s to 1999 for Terra Ceia Bay, Feather Sound, Alafia River, and Old Tampa Bay 244–245

Old Tampa Bay in 1952, prior to mosquito ditching, and in 2002, showing the checkerboard pattern created by mosquito ditching 246

transect perpendicular to a mosquito ditch at Weedon Island in Old Tampa Bay 247

mosquito ditching of mangrove forests in Tampa Bay 247 xvi

Box 8–3. Tampa Bay Tidal Tributaries Initiative 254–257

Box 8–3, Figure 1. Map showing locations of study sites used in tidal tributaries

Box 8–3, Figure 2. Schematic showing four nitrogen pathway scenarios for

Box 8–4. Avifuanal Populations in Tampa Bay 264–265

Box 8–4, Figure 1. Photographs showing waterbirds that nest in the Tampa

Conversion Factors

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F)can be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows: °C = (°F - 32)/1.8 Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). Tide and water depth measurements are given in metric units (meters). assessment project 255

tidally influenced systems in Tampa Bay 256

Bay area 264–265 xvii

Where this page came from

This page was imported from U.S. Geological Survey. Published by the U.S. Geological Survey and, as a work of the United States government, in the public domain.

Nobody has written it yet — it is the source material at a new address, which is why search engines are asked to skip it and why no one earns from it. It is up for grabs: take it on, and it is yours to rewrite and to earn from.