### Tampa Bay Estuary Program Technical Report#08-00



# A SUMMARY OF EMERGENT VEGETATION HABITAT COVERAGE DATA FOR TAMPA BAY

FINAL 

# REPORT

August 2000

# A SUMMARY OF EMERGENT VEGETATION HABITAT COVERAGE DATA FOR

# TAMPA BAY

Prepared for: 

# Tampa Bay Estuary Program Mail Station I-1/NEP

100 

## 8 th 

## Avenue 

## SE St

. 

## Petersburg, 

## FL 33701
Prepared 

## by:

11 

## 55 Eden Isle Drive 

## NE St. Petersburg, 

## FL 33704
August 

## 2000

## ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was prepared by Janicki Environmental, Inc. under Contract No. T
-98
-06 for the Tampa Bay Estuary Program. Mr. Dick Eckenrod and Ms. 

### Holly Greening of the 

### TBEP provided helpful comments. We thank Ms. 

### Diana Burdick and Ms. Lela Clark of the Southwest Florida Water Management District for their responsiveness and helpfulness in obtaining necessary data for the completion of 

### this report. Mr. Doug Robison, PBS&J, assisted in delineation and field survey of the 1995 Salt Barren habitats and reviewed this report. The Emergent and Submerged Habitat Subcommittee of the TBEP has been most helpful in its 

### comments and direction for this effort, including review comments from Dr. Tom Cuba, Dr. Robin Lewis, and Dr. David Tomasko.

## TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objectives 1.2 Importance 

### of EmergentVegetation Habitat 

### inTampa Bay 1.3 Establishing the EmergentVegetation Habitat Goal for Tampa Bay 2 METHODS 3 RESULTS 3.1 Bay
-wide Summary 

### of Trends 

### 3.2 3.3 Bay Segment Summary of HistoricalTrends Additional Methods for Tracking Emergent Vegetation Habitat Restoration 4 CONCLUSIONS
5 REFERENCES i i 1-1 1-1 1-1 1
-2 2
-1 3
-1 3
-1 3
-2 3
-21 4
-1 5
-1

## 1 

## INTRODUCTION
The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) of 

### the Tampa Bay National Estuary Program (TBNEP) established the plan to restore the bay
-wide proportions of emergent vegetation habitat types to that present in the 1950’s. Emergent vegetation habitats are critical for many of the bay’s important biological resources, are important components of the nutrient cycle, and play a role in shoreline stabilization. 

### The TBNEP plan includes restoration of the ratio of emergent vegetation habitat types and preservation of existing salt marshes and mangroves. Emergentvegetation habitat losses since 1950 are due to a variety of factors, including dredge and 

### fill projects (Lewis, 1977; Estevez and Mosura, 1985; Lewis et al., 1985; Haddad, 1989). To address the issue of emergent vegetation habitat 

### loss, an emergent habitat protection and restoration plan was developed (Lewis Environmentaland Coastal Environmental, 1996). The target was to re-establish

### the relative proportions of the various emergent vegetation habitat types to those proportions observed in 1950. A secondary goal was to minimize the 

### loss of 1990 emergent vegetation habitat. 1.1 

### Objectives 

### This report 

### is an element of the data review and analysis performed by the Estuary Program to determine the status of emergent vegetation restoration as a result of management activities in Tampa Bay. 

### This report examines the areal extents of emergent vegetation habitat types in Tampa Bay for 1990 and 1995, and compares these extents to those found in 1950. 

### The specific objectives of this report are to provide an analysis of changes in emergent vegetation habitat areal extent, both bay
-wide and by bay segment, and to assess progress towards the TBNEP emergent vegetation habitat goals. Figure 1 displays a location map for the bay, includingthe bay segments. 1.2 

### Importanceof 

### EmergentVegetation Habitat in Tampa Bay Emergentvegetation habitats are critical for recreationally and commercially important fish, shrimp, and shellfish, including pink shrimp, menhaden, blue crabs, mullet, red drum, tarpon, and snook (Haddad, 1989). These habitats are also important as feeding, nesting, and roosting areas for many avian species, including pelicans, cormorants, herons, ibises, roseate spoonbills, and reddish egrets. Emergentvegetation habitats also serve to improve water quality by filtering runoff and stabilizing shorelines, and are important components of the energy and nutrient cycling in coastal environments. There are three functional emergent vegetation habitat types inTampa Bay:

0 Mangrove-Spartina Marsh,

0 Juncus Marsh, and
0 Salt Barrens.

1
-1Mangrove-Spartina Marshes contain a mix of mangrove species, including Rhizophora mangle L. (red mangrove), Avicennia germinans L. (black mangrove), Laguncularia racemosa Gaertn. f. (white mangrove), and Conocarpus erecta L. (buttonwood). This emergent vegetation habitat type includes the fringe 

### of Spartina alterniflora (cordgrass) often found 

### in association with mangroves. Juncus Marshes are dominated by Juncus roemerianus Scheele (black needlerush). Salt Barrens are normally found at higher elevations than Mangrove-Spartina Marshes and Juncus Marshes, and contain highly saline substrate. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes 

### inTampa Bay are normally found within the 15
-28 ppt salinity zone, classified as the polyhaline zone by Bulger et al. (1990). Spartina alterniflora often acts as the pioneer species of newly available substrates. The cordgrass reduces wave energy and encourages settling of sediments. The accumulation of sediments allows the establishment 

### of mangroves, which eventually dominate the substrate (Davis 1940; Lewis and Dunstan, 1976; Lewis 1982a, 1982b). Functionally, Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes stabilize shorelines, providefisheries habitat, and are a source of detritus for estuarine food chains. Juncus Marshes are found within the 2
-19 ppt salinity zone in Tampa Bay, classified as oligohaline and mesohaline by Bulger et al. (1990). 

### Juncus roemerianus 

### is the major emergent vegetation component 

### in 

### this salinity zone. Juncus Marshes are in the transition zone between freshwater and high
-salinity environments, and provide input to estuarine food chains and function as nursery areas for estuarine species (Haddad, 1989). Salt Barrens are found at the upper limits of the tidal reach, and are only inundated during very high tidal events. When the tide recedes, salt water remains trapped in the barren. The water eventually evaporates, resulting in highly saline substrate. Salt Barrens are sparsely vegetated, but do provide habitat suitable for salt tolerant plants, such as glasswort 

### (Salicornia virginica), saltwort 

### (Batis 

### maritima), keygrass (Monanthocloe 

### littoralis), saltgrass 

### (Distichlis spicata), sea purslane (Sesuviurn 

### portulacastrum), sea oxeye daisy (Borrichia frutescens), and sea lavender 

### (Limoniurn 

### carolinianum) (Schomer et al., 1990; Carlton, 1975). 1.3 Establishingthe Emergent Vegetation Habitat Goal for Tampa Bay The Tampa Bay Master Plan for Habitat Protection and Restoration seeks to restore habitats important to the health 

### of the Tampa Bay ecosystem, including emergent vegetation habitats (TBNEP, 1996). The Master Plan goals are based 

### on the needs 

### of key faunal guilds, each guild representing a group 

### of animals with similar habitat requirements. Three 

### of the habitats addressed 

### in the plan are saltwater emergent wetland vegetation habitats: Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes, 

### Juncus Marshes, and Salt Barrens. To restorethe historical balance 

### of the emergent wetland vegetation habitats 

### inTampa Bay, it was necessary to define a desirable, yet attainable, quantitative goal. Specifically, a benchmark condition was needed to define this goal. After review 

### of a number of

1
-2alternatives, the 1950time period was identified as representing a set of habitat conditions that were both desirable and attainable. The areal coverage of the 1950 emergent vegetation habitats was developed using data collected by the Florida Department of Natural Resources 

### (FDNR) and the 

### U.S. 

### Fish and Wildlife Service 

### (USFWS). Land cover, including emergent vegetation habitat, was mapped from 1:24,000-scale color photography, and obtained 

### in digital form from the 

### FDNR. Seagrass meadows were mapped from 1:24,000-scale color photography, and obtained in digital form from the 

### FDNR. A 

### GIS coverage of the data was created, and horizontally rectified to geographically coincide with mapped data for the time period (Janicki et al., 1995). The 1950 land use coverage included several emergent habitat types, including:

a mangrove, marsh/mangrove, saltmarsh, flats/beach, and vegetated flats. Three emergent vegetation types were defined from the 19 

### 0 habitat coverage: MangroveSpartina Marsh, Juncus Marsh, and Salt Barren. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh was defined as the 1950 mangrove emergent vegetation type. Juncus Marsh was defined as the sum of the marsh/mangrove and saltmarsh emergent vegetation types from the 1950 coverage. Salt Barren was defined as the sum of the flats/beach and vegetated flats emergent vegetation types from the 1950 coverage, with modifications to remove those areas not considered to be representative 

### of Salt Barrens (Lewis Environmental and Coastal Environmental, 1996). The historical proportions 

### of Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh :Juncus Marsh : Salt Barren were 67:28:5 (Lewis Environmental and Coastal Environmental, 1996).

1
-3McMullenCreek RA CEIA 

### BAY

Ulna Maria Island RIVER

Figure 1. Tampa Bay segments and locations.

## 2 

## METHODS The assessment of progress towards the emergent habitat goal for Tampa Bay requires coverages for the benchmark time period and for succeeding time periods. 

### The 1950 emergent habitat coverage provides 

### the benchmark against which comparisons are made (Lewis Environmental and Coastal Environmental, 1996), as described above. Aerial photography of land cover in the bay has been gathered every five years since 1990, resulting in land use coverages for 1990 and 1995. To develop GIS coverages from the aerial photography, the SWFWMD analyzed the photos using zoom transfer methodology registered to 

### U.S. Geological Survey 

### (USGS) 7.5
-minute quadrangles. The minimum mapping unit for uplands was 5 meters, and for wetlands 0.5 meters. For the 1990 time period, the Salt Barren habitat coverage was delineated using 1:24,000- scale color aerial photography produced under contract to SWFWMD for use in their biannual seagrass survey (lanicki et al., 1995). Hard

-copy contact prints were interpreted and polygons representing possible Salt Barren habitat were manually drawn on velum overlays. Groundtruthing of a subset of the delineated polygons was conducted in February of 1993, and the velum overlays were subsequently amended, as appropriate (lanicki et 

### al., 1995). 

### A GIS coverage of the Salt Barren polygons was created by scanning the velum overlay produced for each contact print, and then electronically merging the scanned images (Janicki et 

### al., 1995). At least three match points were marked on each velum overlay and, once scanned, the match points were digitally aligned. The aligned images were then electronically merged into a single file resulting in a rectified composite of the numerous scanned velum overlays. 

### This coverage was subsequently used to calculate acreage totals of Salt Barren habitat for the 1990time period (lanicki et al., 1995). The 1995 Salt Barren coverage was created using rectified digital photo ortho
-quads for Tampa Bay obtained from the 1995 SWFWMD aerial photography used for development of the SWFWMD land use coverages. The 1995 land use coveragedoes not contain a land use category correspondingto Salt Barrens. The 1995 Salt Barren coverage was delineated by interpretation of signatures corresponding to Salt Barrens. The coverage was then field checked for accuracy, with modifications made to the coverage as a result of the field survey. It should be noted that the method used to delineate the 1990 Salt Barren habitat had several limitations with regard to accuracy and precision. First, the 1990 aerial photographywas only available in hard copy contact print format. Secondly, the 1:24,000- scale resolution was barely adequate to discern Salt Barren habitat polygons, given that the areas containing Salt Barrens are typically small and discontinuous. In addition, at this scale the manual delineation of polygonson velum overlays typically involvedthe lumping of numerous small polygons into a single larger polygon due to limitations of the line width of the pen used for the delineation. Thirdly, the scanned polygons typically needed to 

### be

2-1electronically “smoothed” to remove the irregularitiesassociated with the pen line. Finally, the electronic merging of the numerous scanned images likely introduced some distortion to the composite file, resulting in a relatively crude horizontal rectification. For these reasons, the method employed for the 1995 Salt Barren habitat delineation is considered to 

### be superior to the 1990 method. Due to the difference in methods used to delineate Salt Barrensfor 1990and 1995, the Salt Barren coverages are not strictly comparable. This difference in methods also results inthe other emergent wetland categories not being strictly comparable, since the Salt Barren polygonswere normally found included as part of other emergentwetland categories. 

### The 1950, 1990, and 1995 coverages containingthe emergent vegetation habitattypes can be found on the CD accompanying 

### this report. For the 1990 and 1995 coverages, the SWFWMD land use codes used to identify the emergent vegetation habitat types are 6120 for Mangrove-Spartina Marsh and 6420 for 

### Juncus Marsh, corresponding to the SWFWMD designations for Mangrove Swamps and Saltwater Marshes, respectively. Salt Barrens delineated as part of this project are identified by the attribute “Saltb type”, which has a value of 651

### 2 for Salt Barrens. Salt Barrens were delineated in some areas identified by the SWFWMD coverages by land use codes 6120 and 6420; where this occurs, the emergent vegetation habitat type 

### is Salt Barrens. Groundtruthing of emergent vegetation habitat types was only performed for Salt Barrens delineated for the 1990 and 1995 emergent vegetative habitat coverages.

2-2

## 3 RESULTS

Year Emergent Habitat Acreage Net Change Since 1950 23,890 1995 19,520 

### -4,370 1950 1990 1 8,760
-5,130 

## - As described above, different methods were used to arrive at the 1950, 1990, and 1995 emergent vegetation habitat datasets. These differences can influence the comparability of the habitats among years. However, with 

### this caveat expressed, comparisons are made among total bay
-wide emergent vegetation habitat acreages for 1950, 1990, and 1995.

Net Change Since 1990



### - - 

## +760 3.1 Bay-wide Summary 

### of Trends Emergent vegetation habitats covered approximately 23,890 acres 

### inTampa Bay during the 1950 baseline period. Of

### this total, approximately half was found in 

### Old Tampa Bay and Middle Tampa Bay (5,280 acres and 7,740 acres, respectively). The remainder was found in Lower Tampa Bay (3,360 acres), Boca Ciega Bay (2,430 acres), the Manatee River (2,210 acres), Hillsborough Bay (1,910 acres), and Terra Ceia Bay (950 acres). The following figures present maps of the emergent habitat areas: Figure 2 

### - 1950, Figure 3 

### - 1990, and Figure 4 - 1995. ArcView coverages of emergent vegetation habitat for 1950, 1990, and 1995 are available on the accompanying CD. The estimated emergent vegetation habitat acreage in Tampa Bay 

### in 1990 was approximately 18,760 acres (Table 1). In 1995, emergent habitats covered approximately 19,520 acres (Table 1). The acreages presented intabular format in 

### this report are rounded to the nearest 10acres.

The bay
-wide acreages for each emergent vegetation type are 

### shown by year 

### in Table 2. The estimated proportions

### of Mangrove-Spartina Marsh :

### Juncus Marsh :Salt Barren are: 1950

## - 67:28:5 1990

### - 73:22:5 1995

### - 76:22:2.Year 1950 1990 1995



### 3.2 Bay Segment Summary of HistoricalTrends Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh Juncus Marsh Salt Barren (Net Change Since 1990) (NetChange Since 1990) 15,890 6,620 1,370 13,760 4,120 880 14,730 4,340 450 (NetChange Since 1990)

(+970) (+220) (-4 3

### 0)

The greatest net declines in emergent vegetation habitat acreage between 1950 and 1990 occurred in Middle Tampa Bay (approximately 1,410 acres) and Boca Ciega Bay (approximately 1,220 acres). Emergent vegetation habitat acreage also experienced a net decline in all other bay segments, with estimated net decreases of 650 acres in Hillsborough Bay, 630 acres in Lower Tampa Bay, 530 acres in 

### Old Tampa Bay, 450 acres in the Manatee River, and 230 acres inTerra Ceia Bay (Table 3). Table 3. Bay segment total emergent vegetation habitat acreage estimatesfor each

Between 1990 and 1995, there was an estimated net increase 

### in emergent vegetation habitat acreage 

### in Tampa Bay (Table 3). Some of this net increase may be due to habitat restoration efforts, and some to natural increases 

### in habitat extents. At the time 

### of this report, the 

### GIS coverages of existing and proposed habitat restoration sites are being revised and updated. The existing projects database 

### is displayed in Appendix A and the proposed projects database 

### in Appendix B. At this time, however, these data are not finalized for use 

### in estimation 

### of emergent vegetation habitat restoration acreage. Many 

### of the differences found between the 1990 and 1995 emergent vegetation habitat acreages may be due to the different measurement methods employed 

### in the 1990 and 1995 emergent vegetation habitat estimations, as described above. However, as these data are the best available, they are utilized here to describe the trends 

### in emergent vegetation habitat coverage by bay segment.

3-2

### Old Tampa Bay 1950

1990 

### - Emergent habitat coverage in the 

### Old Tampa Bay segment during the 1950 baseline period was extensive, covering the entire shoreline with the exception of some parts of the northwestern portions of the segment. Only small areas of emergent habitat were found in Safety Harbor, and along the shoreline betweenthe mouth of Safety Harbor and 

### the western end of the Courtney Campbell Causeway. The total emergent habitat acreage for the segment was approximately 5,280 acres in 1950. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh - Most of this habitat type in the 

### Old Tampa Bay segment was found along the southwestern shoreline of the bay, from Allen Creek southward to Riviera Bay. Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes were almost continuous along the eastern side of 

### Old Tampa Bay from Rocky Creek south to the eastern end of the Candy Bridge. 

### This habitat type covered approximately 3,320 acres in Old Tampa Bay. 

### Juncus Marsh - Most of the 

### Juncus Marshes in Old Tampa Bay were found in the northeastern portion of the bay, from Double Branch to Rocky Creek. Smaller Juncus Marshes were found at the head of Safety Harbor, in Allen Creek, and south of the Candy Bridge. Juncus Marsh acreage in 

### Old Tampa Bay totaled approximately 1,450 acres. Salt Barren - Most of the Salt Barrens in this segment were located inshore of 

### the Mangrove-Spartina Marshes along the southwestern shore of the 

### Old Tampa Bay, and inshore of the Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes and Juncus Marshes along 

### the northern and northeastern portions of 

### Old Tampa Bay. Smaller Salt Barrens were found along the eastern shoreline, from the Courtney Campbell Causeway south to the mouth of 

### Old Tampa Bay. Salt Barrens covered approximately 520 acres in the segment.



### - By 1990, estimated net decreases in emergent habitat areal extent of approximately 530 acres had occurred in 

### Old Tampa Bay, leaving only 4,750 acres in the segment. Some of the areas showing the greatest net declines included the eastern shoreline of 

### Old Tampa Bay, where dredging and filling had occurred. For similar reasons, emergent habitat areal extent had also decreased along the western shoreline of the segment, especially north of the Howard Frankland Bridge. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### - The southwestern shore of 

### Old Tampa Bay contained the majority of the 1990 Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh habitat inthe segment, although some 1950 habitat had been lost to filling for housing and for the Howard Frankland Bridge. North of the eastern end of the Courtney Campbell Causeway, the landward extent of the 1950 Mangrove-Spartina Marsh had been reduced due to filling as well. The 1950 Mangrove-Spartina Marsh habitat along the eastern shore of 

### Old Tampa Bay, between the eastern end of the Courtney Campbell

3-3Causeway and the Gandy Bridge, was almost entirely absent by 1990, probably as a result of fill activities. In 1990, Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh covered an estimated 3,450 acres 

### in 

### Old Tampa Bay, a net decrease of 130acres since 1950. 

### Juncus Marsh 

### - As in 1950, the 1990

### Juncus Marsh habitat 

### in 

### Old Tampa Bay was found primarily along the northeastern shoreline of the segment, between Double Branch and Rocky Creek. Since 1950, however, a large portion of the 

### Juncus Marsh habitat between Cabbagehead Bayou and Rocky Creek had been converted to Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh habitat. 

### Juncus Marsh habitat covered an estimated 1,150 acres 

### in 1990, a net decrease of 300 acres from the 1950coverage. Salt Barren - In 1990, areas of Salt Barren habitat were found in the northern portion of the 

### Old Tampa Bay segment, landward of the Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh habitat and Juncus Marsh habitat of Mobbly Bay and Double Branch Bay. There were no longer any Salt Barrens inshore of the large areas of Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh in the southwestern part of the segment, or along the eastern shore. Salt Barren acreage had declined from an estimated 520 acres in 1950 to an estimated 150acres by 1990. 1995 

### - Between 1990 and 1995, emergent habitat coverage 

### in 

### Old Tampa Bay showed a net increase of an estimated 40 acres, to a total of approximately 4,790 acres. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh - Mangrove
-Spartina marsh habitat acreage in the 

### Old Tampa Bay segment experienced a net increase of an estimated 130 acres between 1990and 1995. This net increase 

### in acreage was most evident south of the eastern end 

### of the Gandy Bridge, near the mouth 

### of 

### Old Tampa Bay. Mangrove
-Spartina marsh habitat covered approximately 3,580 acres 

### inthe 

### Old Tampa Bay segment. 

### Juncus Marsh 

### - An estimated net decrease 

### of 30 acres 

### in

### Juncus Marsh habitat areal extent 

### in the 

### Old Tampa Bay segment occurred between 1990 and 1995. Some of the Juncus Marsh habitat between the eastern ends 

### of the Courtney Campbell Causeway and the Howard Frankland Bridge had been converted to Mangrove

### Spartina Marsh habitat. Along the eastern shore 

### of Double Branch Bay, some 1990 Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh habitat areas were classified as 

### Juncus Marsh habitat 

### in 1995. 

### Juncus Marsh habitats covered an estimated 1,120 acres 

### in 1995 in the 

### Old Tampa Bay segment. Salt Barren 

### - In 1995, Salt Barrens as delineated from the 

### SWFWMD photo orthoquads covered an estimated 

### 60 acres less than those delineated from the 1990aerial photography. Salt Barrens in 1995 were found inshore of the Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh habitats between the western end of the Gandy Bridge and the Cross Bayou Canal, where 

### no Salt Barrens were delineated in 1990. The Salt Barrens delineated for 1990around Mobbly Bay and Double Branch Bay were also delineated from the 1995 

### photo orthoquads, but were greatly reduced 

### in size compared to the 1990 Salt Barrens. 

### In 1995, additional small Salt Barrens were found north and south of

3-4the eastern end of the Courtney Campbell Causeway, and south of the eastern end of the Gandy Bridge.

Year Emergent Habitat Acreage Net Change Since
1950 5,280 

### - 1990 4,750
-530 1950

1995 4.790
-490 Table 4 summarizes the emergent vegetation habitat acreage data for 

### Old Tampa Bay. From 1950to 1990, emergent habitat acreage in 

### Old Tampa Bay experienced a net decline of approximately 530 acres. From 1990 to 1995, emergent habitat acreage in 

### Old Tampa Bay showed a net increase of approximately 40 acres.

Net Change Since 1990



### - - 

## +40

Year Mangrove-spartina Marsh (Net Change Since 1990) 1950 3,320 1990 3,450 1995 3,580 (+130) The 

### Old Tampa Bay emergent habitat acreages for each category are shown by year in Table 5. The estimated proportions of Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh : Juncus Marsh : Salt Barren inthe segment are:

Juncus Marsh Salt Barren 1,450 520 1,150 150 (Net Change Since 1990) (NetChange Since 1990)

1,120 90 (-30) (-60) 0 1950

### - 63:27:10
0 1990

### - 73:24:3
0 1995

### - 75:23:2.

Hillsborough Bay 1950 - Emergent vegetation habitats in the Hillsborough Bay segment during the 1950 baseline period were found primarily along the eastern shoreline, from McKay Bay southward to the mouth of Hillsborough Bay, includingthe estuarine portions of the Alafia River and the Palm River. Only a few emergent vegetation habitat areas were found along the western shore of Hillsborough Bay. The total emergent vegetation habitat acreage for the segmentwas approximately 1,910 acres 

### in 1950. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove-Spartina marshes were found around the northern and eastern shoreline of McKay Bay, along the shoreline north and south of Delaney Creek, around the mouth of Archie Creek, and south 

### of the Alafia River

3-5

### to the mouth of the bay. Mangrove
-Spartina marshes covered approximately 1,110 

### acres in Hillsborough Bay in 

### 1950. luncus Marsh 

### - Juncus Marshes in Hillsborough Bay were likewise found mainly along the northern and eastern shoreline of the bay. Juncus Marsh in McKay Bay were primarily found in the northern reaches of McKay Bay, and extended to the Palm River. Smaller luncus Marsh areas were found associated with Delaney Creek and Archie Creek. luncus Marshes were also found along the shores of the Alafia River, and south of the mouth of the river and into Bullfrog Creek. Some small areas were found along the shore of The Kitchen, associated with Dug Creek and Kitchen Branch. Juncus Marshes covered approximately 

### 600 acres in Hillsborough Bay in 

### 1950. Salt Barren 

### - Salt Barrens were located near the mouth of the Palm River, north and south of the mouth of Delaney Creek, and on the peninsula that is now the Port Sutton peninsula. A small Salt Barren was found north of the mouth of Archie Creek, and also inshore of the Mangrove-Spartina Marshes along the shoreline that has since been filled in the Big Bend area. Salt Barrens totaled approximately 

### 200 acres in Hillsborough Bay in 

### 1950. 1990 

### - By 

### 1990, emergent vegetation habitat net declines of approximately 

### 650 acres had occurred in Hillsborough Bay, leavingonly 

### 1,260acres of emergent habitat. Almost all the shoreline of the northeastern portion of Hillsborough Bay had been filled, as well as 

### the southern shoreline inthe Big Bend area. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### - In McKay Bay, Mangrove-Spartina Marshes were found along the shoreline of the northernmost embayment, along the northern shoreline of the lower Palm River near its mouth, and along the southeastern shoreline of McKay Bay. Mangrove-Spartina marshes were also found just south of the Port Sutton peninsula. Small areas were found around the mouth of Archie Creek. From the mouth of the Alafia River, Mangrove-Spartina Marshes extended south to the northern portion of The Kitchen. In 

### 1990, Mangrove-Spartina Marshes covered approximately 

### 750 acres in Hillsborough Bay, a net decrease of 

### 360 acres since 

### 1950



### . Juncus Marsh 

### -The 

### 1990 Juncus

### Marshes in Hillsborough Bay were found primarily along the eastern shoreline of the segment. Juncus Marshes were found in the northern embayment of McKay Bay, along the lower Palm River near its 

### mouth, and along the southeastern shoreline of McKay Bay. South of the Port Sutton peninsula, inland of the Mangrove-Spartina Marshes present, were Juncus Marshes. Emergent habitat near the mouth of Archie Creek was dominated by 

### Juncus Marshes, and Juncus Marshes were found in the Alafia River upstream of its 

### mouth. luncus Marshes were also found in Bullfrog Creek, and in the southern portions of The Kitchen. 

### Juncus Marshes in Hillsborough Bay covered approximately 500 acres in 

### 1990, a net decrease 

### of 

### 100acres from the 

### 1950coverage.
3-6Salt Barren 

### - In 1990, Salt Barrens were found only between the mouths of the Alafia River and Bullfrog Creek, and between Big Bend and Apollo Beach. Salt Barren acreage showed a net decline from 

### 200 acres in 1950 to 10acres by 1990. 1995 

### - Between 1990 and 1995, emergent habitat coverage in Hillsborough Bay showed a net increase of approximately 100 acres, to a total of approximately 1,360 acres. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh - Mangrove-Spartina marsh acreage in 

### Hi

### Ilsborough Bay showed only small changes between 1990 and 1995, with a net increase of approximately 10 acres. Changes were found in the location of the habitat, however. Mangrove
-Spartina marshes covered more area along the southern shore of McKay Bay in 1995 than in 1990. Mangrove-Spartina marshes were also found near the tip of 

### the Port Sutton peninsula, and on the eastern shore of 

### the northernmost spoil island in Hillsborough Bay. Mangrove
-Spartina marshes covered approximately 760 acres in Hillsborough Bay. Juncus Marsh - Juncus Marsh acreage experienced a net increase in Hillsborough Bay by approximately 90 acres between 1990 and 1995. Juncus Marshes expanded in the southeastern corner of McKay Bay, and along the shoreline between the Port Sutton peninsula and the mouth of Archie Creek. Additional 

### Juncus Marshes were found inland of the Mangrove-Spartina Marshes south of the mouth of the Alafia River, and along the northeastern shore of Davis Island. Juncus Marshes covered approximately 590 acres in Hillsborough Bay. Salt Barren - In 1995, Salt Barrens as delineated from the SWFWMD photo orthoquads covered approximately the same acreage as those delineated directly from the 1990 aerial photography. However, the locations 

### of the Salt Barrens were not all the same as those found in 1990. Salt Barrens were found near the mouth of Bullfrog Creek and just south 

### of Big Bend, as in 1990, but were smaller than those delineated for 1990. Additional Salt Barrens were found near the northern embayment of McKay Bay, along the southeastern shore of McKay Bay, and between the Port Sutton peninsulaand Archie Creek. 

### Table 6 summarizes the emergent vegetation habitat acreage data for Hillsborough Bay. From 1950to 1990, emergent vegetation habitat acreage in Hillsborough Bay experienced a net decline of approximately 650 acres. From 1990to 1995, emergent habitat acreage in Hillsborough Bay showed a net increase of approximately 100acres.

3-7

### Table 6. 

### Hillsborough Bay total emergent vegetation habitatacreage estimates. Year 

# I Emergent Habitat Acreage 

# I Net Change Since 

# 1 Net Change Since 

### 1950 1950 1990 1,910 

## - - L 

### 1990 1,260

-650 

## - 1995 1,360

-550 +l00 

### The Hillsborough Bay emergent vegetation habitat acreages for each category are shown by year inTable 

### 7. The estimated proportions of Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh :

### Juncus Marsh : 

### Salt Barren inthe segment are:

Year 

# I Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

# I Juncus Marsh 

### 1950

### - 58:32:10 1990

### - 59:40:1 1995

### - 55:44:1.

Salt Barren 

### 1950 (NetChange Since 

### 1990) (Net Change Since 

### 1990) 1,110 600 200 (Net Change Since 

### 1990)

Middle Tampa Bay 

### 1950 

### - Emergent vegetation habitats in the Middle Tampa Bay segment during the 

### 1950 baseline period were found primarily along the northern and southeastern shoreline, with most of the western shoreline already developed as part of the St. 

### Petersburg urban area. The total emergent vegetation habitat acreage for the segment was approximately 

### 7,740 acres in 

### 1950. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove
-SpartinaMarshes in Middle Tampa Bay were found along almost the entire southeastern shore 

### of the segment, from the area currently developed as Apollo Beach to Piney Point. The southern shore of the lnterbay Peninsula was also almost completely lined with Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes. Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes were found along the western shore of Middle Tampa Bay in the Riviera Bay and Bayou Grande region, and in the Smack’s Bayou area. Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes also extended along most of the shoreline of Coquina Key. Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes covered approximately 

### 5,230 acres in MiddleTampa Bay in 1950. 

### Juncus Marsh 

## - Juncus Marshes in Middle Tampa Bay were found inshore of the Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes in the segment, and in the Little Manatee River. Most of the 

### Juncus Marshes were found along the southeastern shoreline, with some

3-81990

1995 found on the lnterbay Peninsula and others around Riviera Bay and Bayou Grande. Juncus Marshes covered approximately 2,080 acres in MiddleTampa Bay in 1950. Salt Barren 

### - Salt Barrens were located along the southeastern shore of the segment and on the lnterbay Peninsula. The majority of the barrens were found from Cockroach Bay southwardto the segment boundary at Piney Point. The Salt Barrens in MiddleTampa Bay covered approximately 440 acres in 1950.



### - By 1990, emergent vegetation habitat net decreases of approximately 1,410 acres 

### had occurred in Middle Tampa Bay, leaving 6,330 acres of emergent habitat. The shoreline around Apollo Beach and north of the mouth of the Little Manatee River had been filled, as had the shoreline for Venetian Isles. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### - In the northwestern part of the segment, MangroveSpartina Marshes around Riviera Bay and Bayou Grande had been reduced by development. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh acreage on the lnterbay Peninsula portion of the segment had not varied significantly since 1950. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh acreage along the southeastern shore of the segment had been reduced in the area of Apollo Beach and north of the mouth of the Little Manatee River, but was relatively unchanged from Cockroach Bay southward. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh covered 5,060 acres in 

### Middle Tampa Bay in 1990, a net decrease of 360 acres since 1950. 

### Juncus Marsh - The 1990 

### Juncus Marshes in Middle Tampa Bay were primarily found associated with the Little Manatee River. Small areas of 

### Juncus Marsh were found around Riviera Bay, and the acreage of 

### Juncus Marshes on the lnterbay Peninsula portion of the segment had increased since 1950. Small Juncus Marshes were found north of Apollo Beach, from Apollo Beach southward to the mouth of the Little Manatee River, and from the mouth of the river southward to the bay segment boundary. 

### Juncus Marshes were the predominant emergent vegetation habitat in the Little Manatee River. 

### Juncus Marshes covered 740 acres inthe Middle Tampa Bay segment in 1990, a net decrease of 1,340 acres from 1950. Salt Barren - In 1990, Salt Barrens were found inshore of the Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes between Apollo Beach and the mouth of the Little Manatee River, and inshore of the Mangrove-Spartina Marshes around Cockroach Bay southward to the segment boundary. Small patches of Salt Barren habitat were also found just south of the mouth 

### of the Little Manatee River. Salt Barren acreage in the Middle Tampa Bay segment showed a net increase of 100 acres from 1950 to 1990, totaling 530 acres in 1990.



## - Between 1990 and 1995, emergent vegetation habitat coverage in Middle Tampa Bay experienced a net increase of approximately 400 acres, to a total of approximately 6,730 acres.

3-9Mangrove-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove-Spartina Marsh acreage in Middle Tampa Bay showed a net increase of 400 acres between 1990 and 1995. This increase occurred primarily along 

### the southeastern shore of the segment, south of the mouth of the Little Manatee River. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh covered several small islands near the mouth of Cockroach Bay that were not classified as containing emergent vegetation habitat in 1990. From the 1990 SWFWMD land use coverage, land uses were not assigned for these small islands. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes also extended inland south of Cockroach Bay, into areas that were classified as Salt Barrens in 1990. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes covered 5,460 acres in the Middle Tampa Bay segment in 1995.

Year Emergent Habitat Acreage Net Change Since 1950 7,740 1995 6,730
-1,010 1950 1990 6,330
-1,410 

## - Juncus Marsh 

### - Juncus Marsh acreage experienced a net increase in Middle Tampa Bay of approximately 300 acres between 1990 and 1995. 

### Juncus Marshes were found primarily in association with the Little Manatee River. Expansion of Juncus Marshes was found between Apollo Beach and the mouth 

### of the Little Manatee River, and south of Cockroach Bay. Approximately 90 acres of the increase were in areas classified as Salt Barrens in 1990, possibly as a result of the higher resolution of the 1995 Salt Barren delineation. 

### Juncus Marshes covered 1,040 acres in 1995 in MiddleTampa Bay.

Net Change Since 1990



### - 

## - 

# +400 Salt Barren - In 1995, Salt Barrens as delineated from the SWFWMD photo orthoquads covered approximately 230 acres in Middle Tampa Bay, 300 acres less than 

### the Salt Barren coverage delineated directly from the 1990 aerial photography. 

### The 1995 Salt Barrens were found in the same areas as those found in 1990, but were reduced in size. This reduction in the extent of the Salt Barrens from 1990 to 1995 was most evident south of Cockroach Bay. Table 8 summarizes the emergent vegetation habitat acreage data for Middle Tampa Bay. From 1950 to 1990, emergent vegetation habitat acreage in Middle Tampa Bay experienced a net decrease of approximately 1,410 acres. From 1990 to 1995, emergent habitat acreage in MiddleTampa Bay showed a net increase of approximately 400 acres.

3-10

### The MiddleTampa Bay emergent vegetation habitat acreages for each category are shown by year inTable 9. 

### The estimated proportions of Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh :

### Juncus Marsh : 

### Salt Barren in

### the segment are:

Year 1950 1990 1995 0 1950

### - 67:27:6
0 1990

## - 80:12:8
0 1995 -81:15:4.


### Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh Juncus Marsh Salt Barren (Net Change Since 1990) 

### (Net Change Since 1990) 5,230 2,080 440 5,060 740 530 5,460 1,040 230 

### (NetChange Since 1990)



### (

## +400) 

### (+ 300) (

-300) lowerTampa Bay 1950 - 

### Emergent vegetation habitats in 

### the Lower Tampa Bay segment during the 1950 

### baseline period were associated with 

### Bishop Harbor, Miguel Bay, and Anna Maria Sound. The total emergent habitat acreage for the segment was approximately 3,360 

### acres in 1950. 

### Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh - 

### Mangrove-Spartina Marshes in 

### Lower Tampa Bay were found along almost the entire shoreline of the segment. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes were found along almost the entire shoreline of Bishop Harbor, most of the shoreline of Miguel Bay, and from the mouth of the Manatee River westward into Perico Bayou to Mead Point. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes were also found along the eastern shoreline of Anna Maria Island, and small areas were found on Egmont Key. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes covered approximately 2,560 

### acres in Lower Tampa Bay 

### in 1950. 

### Juncus Marsh 

### - The largest expanses of Juncus Marsh 

### in Lower Tampa Bay were found inshore of the Mangrove-Spartina Marshes along the northern shore of Bishop Harbor and north 

### of the mouth 

### of Terra Ceia Bay. Smaller areas were also found south of Bishop Harbor, north and east of Miguel Bay, and on Anna Maria Island. Juncus Marshes covered approximately 61

### 0 acres in Lower Tampa Bay in 1950. 

### Salt Barren 

### - Salt Barrens were found in association with the Juncus 

### Marshes north of Bishop Harbor, and between Bishop Harbor and the mouth of Terra Ceia Bay. The Salt Barrens 

### in Lower Tampa Bay covered approximately 190 

### acres 

### in 1950. 1990 

### - By 1990, 

### emergent vegetation habitat acreage had experienced a net decline of approximately 630 

### acres in Lower Tampa Bay, leaving 2,730 

### acres of emergent

3-11vegetation habitat. The shoreline near Piney Point and along the eastern shore of Anna Maria Island had been filled. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh 

### - In the Piney Point area, Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### had been lost to fillingfor the Port Manatee facilities. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh had also been lost to filling for residential development along the eastern shoreline of Anna Maria Sound. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh acreage had declined along the northern shore of Bishop Harbor as well. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes covered 2,170 acres in Lower Tampa Bay 

### in 1990, a net decrease of 390 acres since 1950. 

### Juncus Marsh 

### - The 1990 

### Juncus Marshes in Lower Tampa Bay were primarily found along the northern shoreline 

### of Bishop Harbor, inshore of the Mangrove

### Spartina Marshes. Additional small areas of 

### Juncus Marsh were found from south of Bishop Harbor to the Skyway Bridge. The luncus Marshes found 

### in 1950 on Anna Maria Island had been lost to 

### fill activities, as had some of the 

### JuncusMarshes near Port Manatee. The Juncus Marshes found between Miguel Bay and Terra Ceia Bay in 1950 were not delineated in the 1990 SWFWMD landuse coverage. Juncus Marshes covered 390 acres in the Lower Tampa Bay segment 

### in 1990, a net decreaseof 220 acres from 1950. Salt Barren - In 1990, most Salt Barrens were found inthe same areas in which they had been delineated for 1950. Salt Barrens were found from east of Bishop Harbor to 

### north of Terra Ceia Bay. A relatively large new Salt Barren was found between the Skyway Bridge and Miguel Harbor, in an area that had been classified as 

### Juncus Marsh and Mangrove-Spartina Marsh 

### in 1950. Salt Barren acreage 

### in the Lower Tampa Bay segment experienced a net decrease of 20 acres from 1950 to 1990, totaling 170acres in 1990. 1995 

### - Between 1990 and 1995, emergent vegetation habitat coverage 

### in Lower Tampa Bay 

### did not change significantly, with a total 

### of 2,730 acres 

### inthe segment in 1995. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove-Spartina Marsh acreage 

### in Lower Tampa Bay showed a net increase by 280 acres between 1990 and 1995. This increase occurred primarily along the northern shoreline of Bishop Harbor, where MangroveSpartina Marsh extended into areas that had been classified as 

### Juncus Marsh in 1990. 

### On Anna Maria Island, Mangrove-Spartina Marsh acreage increased as well. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes covered 2,450 acres 

### in the Lower Tampa Bay segment 

### in 1995. 

### luncus Marsh 

### - Juncus Marsh acreage experienced a net decrease 

### in Lower Tampa Bay of approximately 21

### 0 acres between 1990and 1995. The greatest decrease 

### in acreage was found north of Bishop Harbor, where the 1995 

### SWFWMD land use coverage showed Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes expanding into the 1990 J

### uncus Marsh areas. 

### JuncusMarsh covered 180acres 

### in 1995 

### in MiddleTampa Bay.

3-12Salt Barren - In 1995, Salt Barrens as delineated from the SWFWMD photo orthoquads covered approximately 100acres in Lower Tampa Bay, 70 acres less than the Salt Barren coverage delineated directly from the 1990 aerial photography. Most of the 1995 Salt Barrens were found 

### in the same areas as those found in 1990, but were reduced in size. This reduction in the extent of the Salt Barrens from 1990 to 1995 was most evident north of Bishop Harbor. Additional Salt Barrens were found in 1995 between the mouth of the Manatee River and Perico Bayou, where no 

### Salt Barrens had been delineated for the 1950or 1990 time periods.

Year 1950 Table 10 summarizes the emergent vegetation habitat acreage data for Lower Tampa Bay. From 1950to 1990, emergent vegetation habitat acreage in Lower Tampa Bay experienced a net decrease of approximately 630 acres. From 1990to 1995, emergent habitat acreage in Lower Tampa Bay 

### did not change.
Emergent Habitat Acreage Net Change Since Net Change Since 1950 1990



### - - 3.360

Year Mangrove-Spartina Marsh JuncusMarsh 1950 2,560 61

### 0 1990 2,170 390 1995 2,450 180 (Net Change Since 1990) (Net Change Since 1990)

(+280) (-210) 

## I - 1990 

## I 2,730 

## I

-630 

## I

Salt Barren (Net Change Since 1990) 190 170 100 (-70) 1995 

## I 2,730 

## I

-630 

## I 0 

## I
The Lower Tampa Bay emergent vegetation habitat acreages for each category are shown by year inTable 11. The estimated proportions of Mangrove-Spartina Marsh :Juncus 

### Marsh : Salt Barren in the segment are: 1950

### - 76:18:6
0 1990

### - 80:14:6
0 1995 

### - 90:6:4.

Boca Ciega Bay 1950 - Emergent vegetation habitats in Boca Ciega Bay during the 1950 baseline period were found from Mullet Key 

### in the south to Conch Key 

### in the north along both the eastern and western shores 

### of Boca Ciega Bay. The total emergent vegetation habitat acreage for the segment was approximately 2,430 acres 

### in 1950.

### Mangrove-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove-Spartina Marshes in Boca Ciega Bay were found along the western shoreline of the segment from Mullet Key to Crystal island, and from Conch Key to the northern limit of the segment. Onthe eastern shore of the segment, Mangrove-Spartina Marshes were found from Maximo Point to Clam Bayou, inthejungle area, and from the western shore of Long Bayouto the northern limit of the segment. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes were also found on Tarpon Key and Indian Key inthe southern part of Boca Ciega Bay. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes covered approximately 

### 2,140 acres in Boca Ciega Bay in 

### 1950. Juncus Marsh 

### - Juncus Marshes in Boca Ciega Bay were found on St. 

### Christopher Key, St. 

### Joan Key, Bonne Fortune Key, Tarpon Key, Cunningham Key, and Pine Key in the southern portions of the segment. 

### Juncus Marshes were also found on Long Key, in the 

### 1950embayment where Maximo Moorings now exists, and inthejungle area in the central portion of the segment. In the northern part of Boca Ciega Bay, only small areas were found. Juncus Marsh covered approximately 

### 270 acres in Boca Ciega Bay in 

### 1950. Salt Barren - 

### Salt Barrens were found only along the eastern side of Cross Bayou, near the mouth of St. 

### Joe’s Creek. These Salt Barrens covered approximately 

### 10 acres in 

### 1950. 1990 

### - By 

### 1990, emergent vegetation habitat acreage net declines of approximately 

### 1,230 acres had occurred in Boca Ciega Bay, leaving 

### 1,210 acres of emergent habitat. The western shoreline of Boca Ciega Bay had been filled from Cabbage Key inthe south to the northern limit of the segment. Alongthe eastern shoreline, Maximo Moorings had been filled, the shoreline of the jungle area had been filled, and some of the shoreline south of Conch Key had been filled. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes had been lost to fill activities throughout most of central Boca Ciega Bay. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes were found on Mullet Key, Tarpon Key, Indian Key, and many smaller keys in 

### the southern portion of the segment, around Cat’s Point and in Clam Bayou in the central portion alongthe eastern shore, and in Long Bayou and Cross Bayou. Small areas extended from the mouth of Long Bayou to the northern extent of the segment along the eastern shore. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes covered 

### 1

### ,120 acres in Boca Ciega Bay in 

### 1990, a net decrease of 

### 1,020acres since 

### 1950. Juncus Marsh 

### - The 

### 1990Juncus Marshes in Boca Ciega Bay were found on Mullet Key and in Clam Bayou in the southern and central portions of the segment. Additional 

### Juncus Marshes were found in Long Bayou near the Lake Seminole outfall, and in Cross Bayou around the mouth of St. 

### Joe’s Creek, in the northern portion of the segment. 

### Juncus Marsh covered 80 acres in the Boca Ciega Bay segment in 

### 1990,a net decrease 

### of 190acres from 

### 1950.

3
-14Salt Barren 

### - No Salt Barrens were delineated from the 1990 aerial photography in Boca Ciega Bay, resulting in a net decrease of approximately 10acres of 

### this habitat type from 1950to 1990.

Year Emergent HabitatAcreage Net Change Since 1950 2,430
1995 1,270
-1,160 1950



## - 1990 1,210
-1,230 1995 - Between 1990and 1995, emergent vegetation habitat coverage 

### in Boca Ciega Bay experienced a net increase of approximately 70 acres, to a total of 1,270 acres in the segment in 1995.

Net Change Since 1990



### - - 

# + 70 Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh acreage 

### in Boca Ciega Bay showed a net increase of 40 acres between 1990 and 1995. This relatively small increase resulted from expansion 

### of Mangrove-Spartina Marsh extent throughout the segment, with most of the increases occurring in the Mullet Key and Cross Bayou areas. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh covered 1,160 acres in the Boca Ciega Bay segment in 1995. 

### Juncus Marsh - Juncus Marsh acreage showed a net increase in Boca Ciega Bay of approximately 

### 20 acres between 1990 and 1995. This small acreage increase was for the most part confined to the Cross Bayou area, near the mouth of St. Joe’s Creek. 

### Juncus Marshes covered 100acres in 1995 

### in Boca Ciega Bay. Salt Barren - In 1995, Salt Barrens as delineated from the 

### SWFWMD photo orthoquads covered approximately 10 acres in Boca Ciega Bay. No Salt Barrens were found in the Salt Barren coverage delineated directly from the 1990 aerial photography. In 1995, Salt Barrens were found on Mullet Key, along the shoreline of Cross Bayou, and on Conch Key. Table 12 summarizes the emergent vegetation habitat acreage data for Boca Ciega Bay. From 1950to 1990, emergent vegetation habitat acreage in Boca Ciega Bay experienced a net decrease of approximately 1,230 acres. From 1990to 1995, emergent habitat acreage in Boca Ciega Bay showed a net increase

### of 70 acres.

### The Boca Ciega Bay emergent vegetation habitat acreages for each category are shown by year in Table 

### 13. The estimated proportions of Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh :Juncus 

### Marsh : 

### Salt Barren inthe segment are:

Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh (Net

### Change Since 

### 1990) 2,140 1,120 1

### , 1

### 60 (

## +40) 0 

### 1950

### - 88:ll:l
0 

### 1990

## - 93:7:0
0 

### 1995

### - 91 :8:1.

Juncus Marsh Salt Barren 

### 270 10 80 

### 0 100 10 (+20) (+l0) (NetChange Since 

### 1990) (Net Change Since 

### 1990) 

## ITable



# k

1995

Terra Ceia Bay 

### 1950

1990 

### - Emergent vegetation habitats in the Terra Ceia Bay segment during the 

### 1950 baseline period were found along almost the entire shoreline of Terra Ceia Bay. Emergent habitats covered Rattlesnake Key and the southern shoreline of Terra Ceia Bay, and were associated with McMullen Creek and Frog Creek near the northern extent of the bay, as well as scattered along the eastern shore. The total emergent habitat acreage for the segment was approximately 

### 950 acres in 

### 1950. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh 

## - Mangrove-Spartina Marshes in Terra Ceia Bay were found on Rattlesnake Key, at the southern end of Terra Ceia Island, alongthe shores of Frog Creek and McMuIlen Creek, and south of what is now Palmetto Point to the southern shore of Peterson Bayou. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes were also found along the southern shore of Terra Ceia Bay from the mouth of the bay to the northern shore of Snead Island. Mangrove-Spartina Marshes covered approximately 

### 940 acres inTerra Ceia Bay in 

### 1950. Juncus Marsh 

### - Juncus Marshes in the Terra Ceia Bay segment were only found north of the mouth of the bay on Rattlesnake Key, as part of the Juncus Marshes that extend into the Lower Tampa Bay segment. 

### Juncus Marshes covered approximately 

### 10acres inTerra Ceia Bay in 

### 1950. Salt Barren 

### - Less than 

### 10 acres of Salt Barrens were found in the Terra Ceia Bay segment in 

### 1950. The only Salt Barrens were on Rattlesnake Key, associated with the Mangrove-Spartina Marsh and

### Juncus Marsh habitat coveringthe key.



### - By 

### 1990, emergent vegetation habitat net decreases of approximately 

### 230 acres had occurred in Terra Ceia Bay, leaving 720 acres 

### of emergent habitat. The area of

3-16Palmetto Point had been filled, and reductions in emergent vegetation habitat acreage were found along the shoreline of Peterson Bayou. Emergent vegetation habitat had also been lost to fill activities on Snead Island south of Champlain Bayou, and east of the Snead Island Cutoff along the southern shore of Terra Ceia Bay. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove-Spartina Marshes had been lost to fill activities in the Palmetto Point area, on Snead Island south of Champlain Bayou, and east 

### of the Snead Island Cutoff. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh acreage had also declined along the shores of Peterson Bayou, McMullen Creek, and Frog Creek. Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes covered 710 acres in Terra Ceia Bay in 1990, a net decrease of 230 acres since 1950. Juncus Marsh - There were no changes in Juncus Marsh acreage 

### in Terra Ceia Bay between 1950 and 1990, with the only Juncus Marshes found on Rattlesnake Key. luncus Marshes covered less than 10acres 

### inthe Terra Ceia Bay segment in 1990. Salt Barren - There were no changes in Salt Barren acreage in Terra Ceia Bay between 1950and 1990, with the only Salt Barrens found on Rattlesnake Key. Salt Barrens covered less than 10acres 

### inthe Terra Ceia Bay segment 

### in 1990. 1995 

### - Between 1990 and 1995, emergent vegetation habitat coverage in Terra Ceia Bay showed a net increase of approximately 130 acres, to a total of 850 acres in the segment in 1995. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh acreage in Terra Ceia Bay experienced a net increase 

### of 120 acres between 1990 and 1995. This increase resulted from expansion 

### of 1990 Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes along Frog Creek and McMullen Creek, and new Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes along the southeastern shore of Terra Ceia Bay from Peterson Bayou southward. Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes covered 830 acres inthe Terra Ceia Bay segment in 1995. Juncus Marsh - Juncus Marsh acreage experienced a net increase 

### in Terra Ceia Bay 

### of less than 10 acres between 1990 and 1995. This small acreage increase was found in two areas, just south 

### of Peterson Bayou, and 

### on Snead Island. Juncus Marshes covered approximately 10acres in 1995 inTerra Ceia Bay. Salt Barren - Salt Barren acreage 

### did not change 

### in Terra Ceia Bay between 1990 and 1995. The only Salt Barrens were on Rattlesnake Key. Table 14 summarizes the emergent vegetation habitat acreage data for Terra Ceia Bay. From 1950 to 1990, emergent vegetation habitat acreage 

### in Terra Ceia Bay showed a net decrease 

### of approximately 230 acres. From 1990 to 1995, emergent vegetation habitat acreage 

### inTerra Ceia Bay experienced a net increase of 130acres.

3-17Table 14. Terra Ceia Bav emergent veeetation habitat acreages. 

### Year 

### 1950 Emergent HabitatAcreage Net Change Since Net Change Since 

### 1950 1990



### - 

## - 950


### -
-1990 

## I 720 

## I

-230 

## I

Year Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh JuncusMarsh 

### 1950 940 10 1990 71

### 0 <10 1995 830 10 (+120) (+l0) 

### (Net Change Since 

### 1990) (Net Change Since 

### 1990) 1995 

## I 850 

## I

-1

### 00 

## I +130

Salt Barren (Net Change Since 

### 1990) <10 <10 <10

(0) 

### The Terra Ceia Bay emergent vegetation habitat acreages for each category are shown by year in Table 

### 14. The estimated proportions of Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh :

### Juncus 

### Marsh : 

### Salt Barren inthe segment are: 

### 1950

## - 99:l 

### :O
0 

### 1990-98:l:l
0 

### 1995

### - 97:2:1.

Manatee River 

### 1950 

### - Emergent vegetation habitats in the Manatee River segment during the 

### 1950 baseline period were found from near the mouth of the river to the upstream boundary of the segment. More emergent vegetation habitat acreage was found along the northern shoreline than along the southern shoreline from the mouth 

### of the Manatee River to the Braden River. Emergent vegetation habitat was found on the islands and along both shores of the river upstream of the Braden River. The total emergent vegetation habitat acreage for the segment was approximately 

### 2,210 acres in 

### 1950. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove-Spartina Marshes in the Manatee River segment were found from the mouth of the river to just past the mouth of the Braden River. The largest expanse of Mangrove-Spartina Marsh was found on the northern shore of the river, from near the US 

### 41 Bridge to where 

### 1

- 75 now crosses the Manatee River. Mangrove-Spartina Marsh covered approximately 

### 590 acres in the Manatee River Segment in 

### 1950. Juncus 

### Marsh 

### -Juncus 

### Marshes inthe Manatee River segment were primarily found upstream 

### of the mouth of the Braden River. Juncus 

### Marshes covered the islands inthe Manatee River, and were found along both shorelines of the river. Juncus Marshes covered approximately 1,600 acres inTerra Ceia Bay in 1950. Salt Barren 

### - Approximately 20 acres of Salt Barrens were found 

### in the Manatee River segment in 1950. The Salt Barrens were found near the eastern limit of the segment, in association with the Juncus Marshes upstream 

### of the mouth of the Braden River mouth. 1990 

### - By 1990, emergent vegetation habitat net declines of approximately 460 acres 

### had occurred in the Manatee River segment, leaving 1,760 acres of emergent vegetation habitat. From the mouth of the Manatee River to just upstream of the mouth of the Braden River, fill activities had reduced the acreage of emergent vegetation habitat significantly. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh - Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes had been lost to fill activities along both the southern and northern shorelines of the Manatee River from near the mouth of the river to the mouth of the Braden River. Along the southern shoreline, much of this decline was due to 

### fill activities for the expansion of Bradenton. Along the northern shoreline, decreases 

### in acreage occurred near the 

### US 41 bridges and in Ellenton. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh coverage increased on the islands in the Manatee River upstream of the mouth of the Braden River. MangroveSpartina Marshes covered 490 acres in the Manatee River segment in 1990, a net decrease of 100acres since 1950. 

### Juncus Marsh - 

### Juncus Marsh acreage experienced a net decline in the Manatee River segment between 1950 and 1990 of 350 acres, with 1,250 acres present in the segment in 1990. 

### Juncus Marsh habitat was lost just east of the mouth of the Braden River. Some of the Juncus Marshes on the islands 

### in the Manatee River upstream of the Braden River mouth 

### in 1950 were identified as Mangrove
-Spartina Marshes in 1990. Salt Barren 

### - Salt Barren acreage showed a net decrease 

### of approximately 10 acres in the Manatee River segment between 1950 and 1990, with 10acres found in the segment 

### in 1990. Salt Barren habitat was found associated with the islands 

### in the Manatee River upstream of the mouth 

### of the Braden River. 1995 - Between 1990 and 1995, emergent vegetation habitat coverage in the Manatee River segment experienced a net increase 

### of approximately 30 acres, to a total of 1,790 acres 

### in 1995. Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh 

### - Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh acreage 

### in the Manatee River segment showed a net decrease of less than 10 acres between 1990 and 1995, leaving approximately 490 acres 

### in the segment. The largest Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh acreage decline occurred along the southern shore 

### of the Manatee River near

3-19the eastern segment boundary, with smaller losses and gains scattered throughout the emergent wetland habitats.

Year 

### 1950 1990 1995

Juncus Marsh -Juncus Marsh acreage showed a net increase of 

### 50 acres in the Manatee River segment between 

### 1990 and 

### 1995, with approximately 

### 1,300 acres found in 

### 1995. The acreage increase was primarily found near the eastern boundary of the segment, where Mangrove-Spartina Marsh habitat was converted to JuncusMarsh habitat.

Emergent Habitat Acreage Net Change Since Net Change Since 

### 1950 1990 2,210 

### - - 1,760

-450 1,790

-420 

# +30 Salt Barren 

## - Salt Barren acreage experienced a net decrease of approximately 

### 10 acres between 

### 1990 and 

### 1995 in the Manatee River segment, leaving less than 

### 10 acres of Salt Barren habitat in the segment. The 

### 1995 Salt Barrenswere found along the northern shoreline of the Manatee River, between the 

### US 41/301 Bridge and 

### Ellenton.

Year Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh juncus Marsh 

### 1950 590 1,600 1990 490 1,250 1995 490 1,300 (0) 

### (+50) (NetChange Since 

### 1990) (Net Change Since 

### 1990) Table 

### 16 summarizes the emergent vegetation habitat acreage data for the Manatee River segment. From 

### 1950 to 

### 1990, emergent vegetation habitat acreage in the segment experienced a net decrease of approximately 

### 450 acres. From 

### 1990 to 

### 1995, emergent habitat acreage inthe Manatee River segment showed a net increaseof 

### 30 acres.

Salt Barren (Net Change Since 

### 1990) 

### 20 10 <l0



### (0) Table 16. Manatee River emergent vegetation habitat acreages. 

## I

The Manatee River segment emergent vegetation habitat acreages for each category are shown by year 

### in Table 

### 17. The estimated proportions of Mangrove
-Spartina Marsh : Juncus Marsh :Salt Barren inthe segment are:

0 

### 1950

### - 27:72:1
0 

### 1990

### - 28:71:1

0 

### 1995

### - 27:73:0.

3-20

### 3.3 Additional Methods for Tracking Emergent Vegetation Habitat Restoration 

### The tracking of progress toward the TBEP target 

### is hindered by the problem of data comparability. The delineation of 1990 Salt Barrens involved manual delineation of very small polygons from hard
-copy photographic prints, and creation of a Salt Barren polygon coverage from the drawings. The 1995 Salt Barrens were delineated directly from rectified digital photo ortho
-quads of the land use photography. The coverages resultingfrom these two methodsdiffer substantially in resolution and accuracy, as discussed previously. To improve data comparability, the Emergent and Submerged Habitat Subcommittee of the 

### TBEP has recommendedthat 

### the same methodologies for developing estimates 

### of emergent vegetation habitat acreages be applied to the aerial photography for each time period. The Subcommittee recommendedthat the feasibility of utilizingelectronic files of the 1950 and 1990 aerial photography be examined for more accurate delineation of habitats, as had already been done for the 1995 photography. The recommended region of the bay for initial examination has been selected as the area around the mouth of the Little Manatee River, which contains a high proportion of emergent vegetation habitats along the shorel

### ine. An additional method of tracking progress toward the 

### TBEP target makes use of a "Habitat Loss/Gain Tracking Form"

. This tracking form can provide estimates of emergent and submerged habitat changes due to restoration and/or mitigation activities. The form allows estimation of changes in emergent and submerged habitat acreage at a greater frequency and at smaller spatial scales than does examination of the five

-year land use updates. A draft "Habitat Loss/Gain Tracking Form" 

### is presented

### on the following page. As part of 

### the Tampa Bay Master Plan for Habitat Restoration and Protection, specific strategies and goals were set to increase certain habitats. The plan seeks to restore lowsalinity tidal streams, salt barrens, upland forests, and mud flats (TBNEP, 1996). Tampa Baywatch 

### is currently revising and updating the 

### GIS coverages of existing and proposed habitat restoration sites, including emergent vegetation restoration sites. The coverages, 

### still being revised, are shown in Figure 5, 

### with the locations of existing and proposed emergent and submerged habitat restoration projects shown. The existing projects database 

### isdisplayed inAppendix A, and the proposed projectsdatabase inAppendix 

### B.

3-21

## Tampa Bay Estuary Program

-Habitat Loss/GainTracking FormThe purpose of this form 

### is to allow for the quantitative tracking of gains and losses in emergent and submerged tidal wetland habitats occurring specifically within the Tampa Bay watershed. The information obtained with this form will be entered into a database and used to produce an annual summary of tidal wetland gains and losses. Your cooperation inthis effort 

### isgreatly appreciated. Permit No: Permit Type: Project Name: ProjectType: Project Lat/Long: Bay Segment: Completion Date: Success Acknowledged by Agency: Wetland Loss/Gain Table:



## * ** Permitted lossesthrough dredge and/or fill activities. Gainsthrough required mitigation or habitat restoration activities.

# -- -2

i

. .-' 1 

### 7- .>.

_-

I
'< Boca Ciega Bay --7-

,.'" lower Tampa Bay


### . 

## '. f:- 

# - I
2

Tampa Bay

/ 1' r

Map legend Mangrove

### - Spartina Marsh JuncusMarsh Salt Barren

Manatee River



### Figure 2. 

### 1950emergent habitat (Florida Departmentof Natural Resources and U.S. 

### Fish and Wildlife Service 

### [TBRPC, 1986]).ti j--- !

Map Legend Boca Ciega Bay

., f f Terra Ceia Bay 

### ,.- .' Mangrove -Spartina

Salt Barren

Figure 

### 3. 1990emergent habitat 

### (SWFWMDand 

### TBNEP).

3-24I



# \

' 

### :- Boca Ciega Bay A ,'. Middle Tampa Bay

I

f ,'

H 

# '

illsborough.

3. Terra Ceia Bay 

# $* - Map Legend Mangrove

## - Spartina Marsh Juncus Marsh 

# I Salt Barren

Figure 4. 1995 emergent habitat 

### (SWFWMDand 

### TBEP).

3-251 AA



### Figure 5. 

### Existing and proposed habitat restoration sites.

3-26

## CONCLUSIONS
Losses of emergent vegetation habitat have occurred in Tampa Bay since 1950. These losses have totaled 4,370 acres from 1950 to 1995. Much of these losses have been caused by shoreline development, 

### with filling of emergent habitat. These losses have occurred at disproportionate rates for the different emergent habitat types. The bay
-wide emergent habitat proportions of Mangrove-Spartina Marsh : Juncus Marsh : Salt Barren have changed from 67:28:5 in 1950to 76:22:2 in 1995. Emergent habitat losses were not spatially similar among the bay segments. The greatest absolute losses from 1950to 1995 were found in Boca Ciega Bay (1,160 acres) and Middle Tampa Bay (1,010 acres). The greatest relative losses were found in Boca Ciega Bay (48% of 1950 acreage lost) and Hillsborough Bay (29% of 1950 acreage lost). In contrast, there was relatively little change in emergent vegetation acreage in 

### Old Tampa Bay (490 acres lost, 9% of 1950acreage) and Terra Ceia Bay (100 acres lost, 11% ' of 1950 acreage). It is noted in the text, and reiterated here, that the emergent vegetation habitat 

### GIS coverages used for this analysis were not created using the same methods. Other sources of errors exist as well in the estimate of emergent vegetation habitat acreage. The assumption was made for the purposes of this study that the 

### SWFWMD land use categories for Mangrove Swamps and Saltwater Marshes correspond to the emergent vegetation habitat types of Mangrove-Spartina Marsh and 

### Juncus Marsh, respectively, utilized in the 1950 coverage. Groundtruthing of emergent vegetation habitat types was only performed for Salt Barrens delineated for the 1990 and 1995 emergent vegetative habitat coverages, so that errors may well exist in the classification of emergent vegetation habitat types. However, these data are currently the best available for use in

### this analysis. The TBEP has stated that restoration 

### of an optimum balance of emergent vegetation habitats 

### is 

### of great importance 

### in achieving the program's habitat restoration goal. 

### In addition, the TBEP seeks to protect and enhance existing habitats. Further effort may be necessary to eliminate sources of error in emergent vegetation habitat acreage estimates, such as applying the same method to estimates for 1950, 1990, and 1995, to more accurately reflectthe changes 

### in emergent vegetation habitat occurring 

### inTampa Bay.

4- 1

## 5 

## REFERENCES Bulger, A.J.', B.P. 

### Hayden, M.G. McCormick

-Ray, M.E. Monaco, and D.M. Nelson. 1990. A proposed estuarine classification: Analysis of species salinity ranges. ELMR Report No. 5. 

### Strategic Assessment Branch, NOS/NOAA. Rockville, Md. 28 pp. Carlton, J.M. 

### 1975. A quide to common Florida salt marsh and mangrove vegetation. Florida Department of Natural Resources Marine Research Publication Number 6. FDNR Marine Research Laboratory, St. 

### Petersburg, 

### FL. 30 

### p. Davis, 

### J.H. 1940. The Ecology and Geologic Role of Mangroves in Florida. Pps. from the Tortugas Lab., Vol. 32. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. NN517. Estevez, 

### E.D. and 

### E.L. Mosura. 1985. EmergentVegetation, pp.248
-278. In: 

### S.F. Treat, 

### J.L Simon, 

### R.R. Lewis 

### Ill, and R.L. 

### Whitman, Jr. (eds.), Proceeding, Tampa Bay Area Scientific Information Symposium, May 1982. Bellweather Press. Haddad, 

### K.D. 1989. Habitat trends and fisheries in Tampa and Sarasota Bays, pp. 11 3- 

### 128. In: Estevez, 

### E.D. (ed.), Tampa and Sarasota Bays: Issues, Resources, Status and Management. NOAA, Washington, D.C. janicki, A.J., 

### D.L. Wade, and 

### D.E. Robison. 1995. Habitat protection and restoration targets for Tampa Bay. Tech. Pub #07-93, Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. Prepared by Coastal Environmental, Inc. Lewis Environmental Services, Inc., and Coastal Environmental, Inc. 1996. Setting priorities for Tampa Bay habitat protection and restoration: Restoringthe balance. Tampa Bay National Estuary ProgramTechnical Publication #09-95. Lewis, 

### R.R. III. 1977. Impacts of dredging in the Tampa Bay estuary, 1876
-1976, pp. 31- 

### 55. In: 

### E. Pruit (ed.), Proc. 

### 2nd 

### Ann. Conf. Coastal Soc.: Time
-Stressed Coastal Environments. Coastal Society, Arlington, Va. Lewis, 

### R.R. 1982a. Low marshes, peninsular Florida. Ch. 7, pp. 147
-152 in Lewis, R.R. 

### (ed.), Creation and Restoration of Coastal Plant Communites. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Lewis, 

### R.R. 1982b. Mangrove forests. Ch. 8, pp. 154
-171 in Lewis, R.R. (ed.), Creation and Restoration of Coastal Plant Communites. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 

### FL. Lewis, 

### R.R., and 

### F.M. Dunstan. 1976. Possible role 

### of Spartina alterniflora Loise. in establishment 

### of mangroves in Florida. Pp. 81
-100 in Lewis 

### R.R. (ed.) Proc. 2nd

### Ann. Conf. Restoration of Coastal Vegetation in Florida. Hillsborough Community College, Tampa.

5-1Lewis, 

### R.R. Ill, R.G. Gilmore, Jr., D.W. Crewz, and W.E. Odum. 1985. Mangrove habitat and fishery resources of Florida. in: W. Seaman, Jr. (Ed.). Florida Aquatic Habitat and Fishery Resources. Florida Chapter of the American Fisheries Society. Schomer, N.S., 

### R.D. Drew, and 

### P. Johnson. 1990. Vegetation communities (habitats). Ch. 5, pp. 134
-215, in Wolfe, 

### S.H., and 

### R.D. Drew 

### (eds.), An Ecological Characterization of 

### the Tampa Bay Watershed. Biological Report 90(20), 

### Fish and Wildlife Service and Minerals Management Service, 

### U.S. Department of the interior. Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. 1996. Charting the Course for Tampa Bay. Tampa Bay National Estuary Program in cooperation with the 

### U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV. 263 pp. Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (TBRPC). 1986. Habitat restoration study for 

### the Tampa Bay Region. Prepared by TBRPC, St. Petersburg, Florida. 283 p.

## APPENDIX A Existing Restoration Projects Database

1PJT_NAME
L. MANATEE RIVER CORRIDOR SAFFOLD SITE UPPER L.MANATEE RIVER DUG CREEK L.M.R. STATE PARK LITTLE MANATEE RIVER LITTLEMANATEE RIVER WILDCAT CREEK PARK DOMINO BOAT RAMP SUNCITY HERITAGE PARK FULKERSON ROAD TECO ROCK PONDS TECO PORT MANATEE PPTY PINEY POINT/COCKROACH BAY COCKROACH BAY COCKROACH BAYADDITION SIMONS PARK PHASE II E.G.SIMMONS PARK E.G. SIMMONS PARK SIMMONS PARK WOLF BRANCH WOLF BRANCH SITE APOLLO BEACH APOLLO BEACH WHISKEY STUMP KEY FISHHOOKSPOIL RIVERVIEW CENTER ALAFIA RIVER BOAT RAMP LlTHlA SPRINGS PARK KITCHEN AREA PROPERTY PORT REDWING BORROW SITE PORT REDWING BORROW SITE GREEN KEY GREEN KEY BULLFROG CREEK SUNKEN ISLAND SUNKEN ISLAND ALAFIA RIVER SOUTH PARCEL 22NDST CAUSEWAY SITE ALAFIA BANKS BAY-SEC OWNER LOCATION
MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB PRIVATE H.CNTY ELAPP PRIVATE STATE OF FLORIDA HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY H.CNTY ELAPP HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PRIVATE TECO TECO TAMPA ELECTRICCOMPANY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY ELAPP HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PARKS HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY,ELAP ELAPP FRANDORSON TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY NATIONALAUDUBON SOCIETY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BIRD PROPERTY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY NATIONALAUDUBON SOCIETY TAMPA PORT AUTHORITY DAVIS PROPERTY CARGILL, INC. CARGILL, INC. CARGILL, INC. PRIVATE CARGILL,INC. L.M.RIV. E OF 301 TRIBUTARY TOLITTLE MANATEE RI DOWNSTREAM FROM USHWY 301 E. 1
-75 UPRIVER S L. MAN RIV,E.US41 N L. MANRIV,E. US41 S L. MANRIV,E. US41 NORTHOF PORT MANATEE PINEY POINT NORTHTO COCKROACH S. HILLS COUNTY S. HILLS COUNTY 19THST. NW. RUSKIN 19 th AVE., RUSKIN,NORTH OF LIT

S. OFAPOLLO BEACH SHORELINE SOUTH OF APOLLO BEAC S.E. HILLS. BAY SPOIL ISLANDSOUTH OFTHE BIG PARK DR.,RUVERVUEW BRANDON LlTHlA SPS RD. N. PORT REDWING E & W OFWHISKEY STUMP KE E & W OF WHISKEY STUMP KE S.E. HILLS. BAY SUB

-TIDAL AREA WEST OF GREEN K N. PORT REDWING WESTERN ISLANDOFTHE ALAFIA B WESTERN ISLANDOFTHE ALAFIA B SOUTH SIDE OF ALAFIA RIVER AT NE.22ND STCAUSEWAY SPOIL DISOSAL ISLANDS ON THE S FLUCS

_

CURR

741 741 741 185 741 184 184 184

8311

0 163 185 185 0

163 612

0 191 0 184 184 185 254 651 65 1 191 0 835

0 0 193 0 FLUCS

_

POTE 642 642 642 185 642 184 184 184

642 642 185

642

191

184 184 185 642 911 911 191

642

642 TOT AREA
300.0 500.0

2.0 1

### .0 1. 0

0.0 700.0 469.0 14.0 0.0

980.0 270.0

0.0 6.0 0.0 10.0 1. 0 160.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 0.0 320.0

0.0 0.0 300.0 45.0 0.0 UPL AREA
250.0

500.0

2.0 1

### .o 1

### .o

450.0

5.0

10.0 1

### .o 40.0 0.0 0.0 6.0

90.0

44.0 WET PURPOSE AREA

50.0
to make OLIGOHA
to make ESTUARI 600.0

to make ESTUARI

100.0 RESTORATION
to make RESTORATION RESTORATION to make 530.0 MITIGATION RESTORATION 1

### .o EXPERIMENTAL

20.0 20.0 2.0 EXPERIMENTATION RESTORATION RESTORATION to make RIVER C RESTORATION 230.0

1

### .o

1SPOIL DISOSAL ISLANDSONTHE S S. MOUTHOF ALAFIA S. MOUTHOF ALAFIA N ALAFIA R. AT US41 EAST SHORE OF HILLSBOROUGH BAY BETWEENARCHIE CREEK AND PORT NORTH OF DELANEY POP

-OFF CANAL US HWY 41 AND PENDOLA PT. RD. S,POP-OFF,E. USHWY 41

SUB

-TIDALAREAS ALONG THE PER1 SUB

-TIDALAREAS ALONG THE PER1 S.CAUSWAY BLVD,E US41 NE.22ND ST CAUSEWAY ALAFIA BANKS ALAFIA BANKS ALAFIA BANKS WILLIAMS PARK DELANEY CREEK,POPOFF SITE ARCHIE CREEK HB HB HB HB HB HB CARGILL,INC. CARGILL, INC CARGILL, INC HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY csx GARDlNlER 0 191 191 184 74 1 642 1 0.0 15.0 15.0 10.0 RESTORATION 10.0 5.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 184 642 4.5 MITIGATION DELANEY POP

-OFFCANAL CARGILL NORTH PARCEL HB HB CARGILL INC. CARGILL, INC. 642 0.0 200.0 MITIGATION to make EXOTIC HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY PRIVATE PRIVATE CITY OFTAMPA TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY 0.0 0.0 0.0 PENDOLA POINT MITIGATION HILLSBOROUGHBAY HILLSBOROUGHBAY DELANEY CREEK SITE 22ND ST CAUSEWAY SITE S.E. McKAY BAY McCAY BAY SPOIL SITE PALM RIVER DESOTO PARK DESOTO PARKADDITION DAVIS ISLAND BEACH MARJORIEPARK YACHT BASIN BAYSHORE BOAT DOCKS SR 60 MARSH MCKAY BAY 0 645 645 74 1 193 EXPERIMENTATION EXPERIMENTATION 642 642 45.0 44.0 1.0 to make RESTORATION E OF C.O.T. INCINERATOR 743 0 1851 193 184 184 184 642 50.0 0.0 9.0 18.0 8.0 6.0 0.5 25.0 25.0 TAMPA csx TAMPA TAMPA TAMPA PRIVATE CITY OF TAMPA NWMCKAY BAY E. DESOTO PARK SDAVIS ISLAND E DAVIS ISLAND MOUTH HILLS RIVER 1851 642 184 184 184 9.0 8.0 10.0 8.0

to make RESTORATION NORTH EASTCORNER OF McKAY BAY 185 0.0 NE MCKAY BAY NORTH EAST McKAY BAY HB HB H. CNTY ELAPP HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY NORTH EAST CORNER OF McKAY BAY N MCKAY BAY 4.0 RESTORATION 642 MCKAY BAY NATURE PARK NCNB PARK PLAZA PLANT PARK RIVERFRONT PARK RIVER GARDEN HILLSBOROUGHBAY HILLSBOROUGHBAY BAYSHORE BLVD. BALLAST POINT PARK HILLSBOROUGHBAY MACDILL AFB SOUTH BAYSHORE DR. HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB HB TAMPA TAMPA TAMPA TAMPA TAMPA TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY TAMPA TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY CITY OF TAMPA/TPA 1851 1851 1851 1851 1851 1851 1851 1851 36.0 UNIV. TAMPA 11 11 NORTH BLVD 7.0 7.0 22.0 22.0 EXPERIMENTATION EXPERIMENTATION RESTORATION SUB

-TIDAL AREAS ALONG THE PER1 SUB

-TIDALAREAS ALONG THE PER1 645 645

0 1851 645 9111 642 0.0 0.0 1.1 7.0 0.0 0.0 1.o E MCDILL PENINSULA SUB

-TIDALAREA OFF

-SHORE OF TH SUBTIDALAREA OFF

-SHORE OF EAS WEST SHORE OF HILLSBOROUGH BAY SOUTH EAST CORNER OF MacDlLL P ENDOF McDlLL PENNINSULA NW& SE OF END OF RUNWAY NW & SE OF END OF RUNWAY PENNINSULAOF LAND AT THE soou 1851 EXPERIMENTATION EXPERIMENTAL RESTORATION
MacDlLLAIR FORCE BASE U.S. AIR FORCE TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY CITY OF TAMPA 642 17.0 RESTORATION to make MacDlLL AIR FORCE BASE I MACDILL AFB II MacDlLL BORROW SITE MacDlLL BORROW SITE PICNIC ISLAND HB MTB MTB MTB OTB 651 651 743 911 91 1 40.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 40.0 0.0 40.0 RESTORATION

2PICNIC ISLAND PARK CANDY PARK GANDY PARK HOWARD FRANKLIN EAST BRACKINSTRACT CYPRESS ST. REST. PARK OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB TAMPA TAMPA TAMPA FDOT ELAPP ELAPP,H.CNTY AV. AU TH 0R IT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY,ELAP FDIC TAMPA ELAPP SW MCDILL PENINSULA E GANDY BRIDGE E CANDY BRIDGE SOUTH EAST SIDE OFAPPROACH TO NE. GANDY BRIDGE NE. CANDY BRIDGE 1851 1851 1851 1851 1851 1851 86.0 25.0 25.0 3.0 11.0 65.0 to make MARSH,M 10.0 5.0 746 743 1851 1851 1.o 60.0 CYPRESS ST. OTB to make MARSH, OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB PEPPERMOUNDCREEK BEN T. DAVIS BEACH TROYDALE ROAD ROCKY CREEK MARINA POINT CHANNEL A CABBAGEHEAD BAYOU W. OFSWATR CREEK SE C.C.CAUSEWAY BET. SWATR & ROC CRK 140.0 20.0 300.0 50.0 300.0 90.0 1851 191 1851 185 to make PRIVATE SWFWMD SWFWMD HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TAMPA RIVER BLVD TAMPA CITY OFTAMPA HILLSBOROUGH RIVER TAMPA N RIVER BLVD & LAMB TAMPA 7525NORTH BLVD CITY OFTAMPA SPRING RUNTOHILLSBOROUGH RIV CITY OFTAMPA HILLSBOROUGH RIVER SHORELINE I TAMPA PARKS DEPARTMENT 8108N NEBRASKA TAMPA RIVERCOVE ST TAMPA PATTERSON ST TAMPA PARKS DEPARTMENT 2401 E. YUKON ST. TAMPA PARKS DEPARTMENT 2401 E. YUKON ST. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SR 39 S OFSR 60 P. CNTY/CLEARWATER NW COURTNEY CAMPBEL ELAPP,H.CNTY AV. NE. CANDY BRIDGE AUTHORIT PRIVATE MOUTHSAFETY HARBOR TAMPA PORT AUTHORITY EASTERN SHORE OF DISPOSAL ISLA TAMPA PORT AUTHORITY EASTERN SHORE OF DISPOSAL ISLA TAMPA PORTAUTHORITY N HILLS BAY, W OFCHANNEL TAMPA PORT AUTHORITY S HILLS BAY, W OF CHANNEL MANATEE PORT AUTHORITY EAST LOWERTAMPA BAY MANATEE PORT AUTHORITY EAST LOWERTAMPA BAY STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF EAST LOWER TAMPA BAY T.I.I.F. DISPOSAL ISLAND SOUTHOF PORT MANATEE PORTAUTHORITY EAST LOWERTAMPA BAY PINELLAS COUNTY ST. PETERSBURG LONG BAYOU,S38 AVE N ST. PETERSBURG E. BCB,S. JOHNSPASS CHANNELA, NORTHOLDTAMPA BAY 8001 DBLE. BR. RD. 642 23.0 0.1 RESTORATION to makeCHANGE UPPER TAMPA BAY PARK HIXON MEMORIAL PARK RIVER BLVD PARK EPPS PARK EPPS PARK LOWRY PARK HAMILTONCREEK

-LOWRY PARK OTB HB HB HB HB HB HB 185 1851 185 1851 6.0 6.0
to make 1851 1851 1851 1851 2.0 117.0 2.0 110.0 to make FRESH W LOWRY PARK SHORELINE SULFER SPRINGS PARK RIVERCOVE PARK PATTERSON ST PARK ROWLETT PARK ROWLETT PARK ALDERMAN'S FORD PARK COOPERS POINT CYPRESS ST. REST. PARK HB HB HB HB HB HB HB OTB OTB 652 1851 1851 1851 1851 1851 185 191 743 1.o 5.0 0.5 1.o 67.0 67.0 596.0 136.0 65.0 EROSION/REST 2.0 1851 1851 1851 1851 1851 185 185 1851 3.0 0.5 1.o 67.0 67.0 0.0 0.0

60.0 5.0 OTB HB HB HB HB LTB LTB LTB MTB LTB BCB BCB BCB MOBLEY BAY TRACT FANTASY ISLAND/CMDA-2D FANTASY ISLAND/CMDA-2D SPOIL ISLANDCMDA-2D SPOIL ISLAND CMDA

-3D PORT MANATEE PORT MANATEE PORT MANATEE SPOIL PORT MANATEE ISLE PORT MANATEE CROSS BAYOU ABERCROMBIE PARK JUNGLE PRADA PARK 191 6421 6421 743 743 815 815 743 185 309.0 0.0 0.0 550.0 400.0 200.0 550.0 75.0 MITIGATION MITIGATION 743 743 815 815 642 500.0 400.0 200.0 550.0 75.0 to make MARSH,
to make ESTUARI 815 815 200.0 200.0 1851 185 1851 185 3.0

3OSGOOD POINT CLAMBAYOU MAXIM0 PARK BAY VISTA LITTLE BAYOU COQUINA KEY PARK GRANDVIEW PARK LASSING PARK LASSING PARK LASSING PARK DEMENS LANDING NORTHSHORE PARK COFFEEPOT BAYOU COFFEEPOT BAYOU COFFEEPOT BAYOU COFFEEPOT BAYOUPARK SHORE ACRES CRISP PARK SHORE ACRES MINIPARK WEEDON ISLANDSTATE PARK MANGROVE BAY MANGROVE BAY III HOWARDFRANKLIN WEST BOCA CElGA TRACT, PHASE I BOCACEIGA TRACT BOCACIEGA II BOCACElGA TRACT TRAVATINE ISLAND LARGO NARROWS NATURE PARK JOESCREEK JOESCREEK JOESCREEK JOESCREEK JOESCREEK JOESCREEK LONG BAYOU VETRANS MEMORIAL PARK FT. DESOTO PARK PINELLAS NTL. WL. REFUGE PINELLAS NTL. WL. REFUGE PINELLAS NTL. WL. REFUGE PINELLAS NTL. WL. REFUGE PINELLAS NTL. WL. REFUGE PINELLAS NTL. WL. REFUGE MAXIM0 PARK MAXIM0 PARK BCB BCB BCB LTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB OTB MTB MTB OTB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB BCB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB BCB BCB CITY OF GULF PORT ST. PETERSBURG,GULF PORT ST. PETERSBURG ST. PETERSBURG CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG ST. PETERSBURG ST. PETERSBURG STATE OFFLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG ST. PETERSBURG ST. PETERSBURG STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF ST. PETERSBURG STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF ST. PETERSBURG ST. PETERSBURG STATE OF FLORIDA CITY OFST. PETERSBURG ST. PETERSBURG FDOT PINELLASCOUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLASCOUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY U.S.DEPT.OF INTERIOR U.S.DEPT.OF INTERIOR U.S.DEPT.OF INTERIOR U.S.DEPT.OF INTERIOR U.S.DEPT.OF INTERIOR U.S.DEPT.OF INTERIOR CITY OFST. PETERSBURG CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG E.FRENCHMAN'S CREEK S.E. PINELLAS PT.DR. SOUTH EAST END OF PINELLAS PEN S.E. BIG BAYOU S.W. BIG BAYOU SUB

-TIDAL AREA OFF

-SHORE OF LA SUB

-TIDAL AREA OFF

-SHORE OF LA DREDGED HOLES OFF

-SHORE OF LAS N. OFALBERT WHITTED E. OF BAYSHORE DR. SUB

-TIDAL AREA OFF

-SHORE THE S SUB

-TIDAL AREA OFF

-SHORE THE S SUB

-TIDAL AREA OFF

-SHORETHE S N.W. COFFEEPOT BAYOU W. PLACID0 BAYOU S. PAPYS BAYOU S GANDY BLVD. W OTB EAST SHORE OFOLDTAMPA BAY, S MANGROVE BAY GOLFCOURSE NORTHWEST SIDE OFAPPROACH TO NORTH EAST SHORE OF BOCA CElGA SUB

-TIDAL AREA OFF

-SHORE NORTH

S. PARK BLVD. E. OF THE NARROWS LARGO NARROWS TIDAL CREEK ENTERING N.E. CROS TIDAL CREEK ENTERING N.E. CROS TIDAL CREEK ENTERING N.E. CROS TIDAL CREEK ENTERING N.E. CROS TIDALCREEK ENTERING N.E. CROS TIDALCREEK ENTERING N.E. CROS W MOUTHCROSS BAYOU N MOUTHOF T BAY N MOUTHOF TAMPA BAY N MOUTHOFTAMPA BAY N MOUTHOFTAMPA BAY N MOUTHOFTAMPA BAY N MOUTHOFTAMPA BAY N MOUTHOFTAMPA BAY SOUTH OF FRENCHMAN'SCREEK ON SOUTH OF FRENCHMAN'S CREEK ON 185 1851 642 1851 1851 9111 9111

0 1851 1851 9111 9111 9111 1851 9111 1851 1851 185 182

743 0 185 743 185 0 0 0 0 0 0 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 6421 6421 185 1851 1851 1851

1851 1851

1851 1851 1851 185

185 185 185

185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 65.0 4.4 3.0 18.0 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.1 29.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 4.0 1.6 680.0 14.0 8.0 3.5 0.0 188.0 38.0 19.0 19.0 33.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 122.0 900.0

10.0 10.0 to make ESTUARI to make ESTUARI

RESTORRATION

RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION

RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION

RESTORATION to make ESTUARI to makeMARSH, RESTORATION RESTORATION to make ESTUARI

RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION to make ESTUARI

RESTORATION RESTORATION

4SKYWAY JACKS SKYWAY JACKS ANNA MARIA BAYFRONT BAY VISTA EGMONT KEY EMERSON POINT GATEWAY TRACT FEATHER COVE ST. PETERSBURGAIRPORT ST. PETERSBURG AIRPORT COOPERS POINT DEL OROTRACT MOBLEY BAY TRACT PHlLlPE PARK LAKETARPON HARBOR PALMS MOCCASINCREEK MOBBLY BAY ANNA MARIA BAYFRONT PASSAGE KEY NTL.WL.REFUGE EGMONT KEY HEN DRY DELTA HENDRY DELTA HENDRY DELTA HENDRY DELTA HENDRY DELTA HENDRY DELTA HENDRY DELTA HENDRY DELTA PEANUT LAKE PEANUT LAKE II TERRA CElA CAUSEWAY TERRA CElA CAUSEWAY TERRA CEIA BIRD KEY TERRIA CElA BIRD KEY DESOTO PARK EMERSON POINT EMERSON POINT BCB BCB LTB LTB LTB LTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB OTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB MTB LTB LTB LTB LTB LTB MR LTB STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF MANATEE COUNTY ST. PETERSBURG U.S.DEPT.OF INTERIOR MANATEE COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY TllTF STATE OF FLORIDA TllTF STATE OF FLORIDATllTF P. CNTY/CLEARWATER CITY OFCLEARWATER PRIVATE PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY CITY OF OLDSMAR CITY OF OLDSMAR MANATEE COUNTY U.S.DEPT.OF INTERIOR U.S.DEPT.OF INTERIOR STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OFFLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA HENDRY FDOT FDOT STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF NATIONALAUDUBON SOCIETY MANATEE COUNTY MANATEE COUNTY MANATEE COUNTY BAY BLVD., ANNA MAR1 S.E. PINELLAS PT.DR. MOUTHOF TAMPA BAY 1OTH ST. PALMETTO WEST SHORE OF OLDTAMPA BAY, N NW & E OF ENDOF RUNWAY NW & E OF END OF RUNWAY NW COURTNEY CAMPBEL MOUTHSAFETY HARBOR SAFETY HARBOR,OTB CANALCONNECTING LAKETARPON A

BAY BLVD., ANNA MAR1 S MOUTHOFTAMPA BAY MOUTHOF TAMPA BAY IMMEDIATLYSOUTH OF PORT MANAT IMMEDIATLY SOUTH OFPORT MANAT IMMEDIATLY SOUTH OF PORT MANAT IMMEDIATLYSOUTH OF PORT MANAT IMMEDIATLY SOUTHOF PORT MANAT IMMEDIATLY SOUTH OF PORT MANAT IMMEDIATLY SOUTH OF PORT MANAT IMMEDIATLY SOUTH OF PORT MANAT SOUTH OF PORT MANATEE SOUTH OF PORT MANATEE, EAST SI APPROACHES OF US HWY 19 CROSS1 APPROACHES OF US HWY 19 CROSS1 TERRA CEIA BAY

1OTH ST. PALMETTO 0 0 185 1851 185 193 191 0 651 651 191 0 191 185 6421

185 185 185 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 651

0 743

193 185 1851 185 642 191 91 1 91 1 185 185 185

185 185 185

193

642 0.0 0.0 4.4 400.0 360.0 205.0

9.9 25.0 25.0 136.0 0.5 309.0 122.0

1

### .o

2.0

20.0 400.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0

0.0 16.0

360.0 RESTORATION RESTORATION

350.0 50.0

MITIGATION

0.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 RESTORATION

RESTORATION
to make OLIGOHA to make MARSH, to make 20.0 350.0 50.0 RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION RESTORATION to make ESTUARI to make HIGHSA to make HIGHSA RESTORATION 15.0 1.0
to make ESTUARI to make ESTUARI

5REGATTA POINT REGATTA POINT REGATTA POINT 7TH ST EAST PROPERTY ANTHONY T. ROSSI PARK RIVERSIDE PARK EAST RIVERSIDE PARK WEST RATTLESNAKE KEY MR MR MR MR MR MR MR LTB STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF CITY OF BRADENTON CITY OF BRADENTON CITY OF PALMETTO CITY OF PALMETTO STATE OF FLORIDA,TIITF 7TH ST E AT MAN.RIV. 9THST W & 1STST. E. US41 AT MAN. RIV. W.US41 AT MANRIV. 0 0 0 835 1851 1851 184 0 RESTORATION 0.0 0.0 RESTORATION RESTORATION 0.0 1851 3.0 1851 10.0 1851 1.o 1.o 184 3.0 3.0 0.0 RESTORATION

6

## APPENDIX 

# B
Proposed Restoration Projects Database

1SITE KAUL FISH SITE AT OLDTAMPA BAY PEANUT LAKE II & TERRA CElA ISLES FT. HAMMER BOAT RAMPAND PARK JOE'SCREEK NORTH (58TH ST AT WHITNEY ROAD) PINE ST. AT BAY ST. (COUNTRYSIDE AREA) BIOLOGY CREEK ON HILLSBOROUGH RIVER AT UT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PARKS, TAMPA BAYWATCH CSX PARCEL HABITAT RESTORATION SULFUR SPRINGS LINEAR PARK SUNSHINE SKYWAY CAUSEWAY ANDAPPROACHES DOT& DASH KEYS BRODERICK TRACT CROSS BAYOU CANAL HARBOR ISLES LONG BRANCH BASIN LONG BRANCH NORTH (58TH ST. AT WHITNEY RD.) ST. PETERSBURGAIRPORT (OLDTAMPA BAY) TRAVETINE ISLAND CARGILL PROPERTY COCKROACH BAY 1C, 1D CRACKER ROAD FISH FARM BOWLERTRACT LITTLE MANATEE RIVER DICKCREEK UPPER DELANEY CREEK POP

-OFFCANAL US 41 FISH FARM ALLEN'S CREEK I I CLAM BAYOU II TAMPA POLICEACADEMY IN NW MCKAY BAY DESOTO PARK ANDTRAILER PARK IN NW MCKAY BAY RIVERCREST HABITAT RESTORATIONPROJECT DESOTO PARK ON MANATEE RIVER EPPS PARK SHORELINE RESTORATION MCKAY BAYGREENWAY HABITAT RESTORATION(GLOVER) NEWMANS BRANCH PICNIC ISLAND CREEK ANDCANAL STREET CORRIDOR HABITAT RESTORATION PINE ISLAND SPOIL ISLANDS 1 - 2D AND 3D SPOIL ISLANDS 1 

### - 2DAND3D TAPPAN HABITAT RESTORATIONPROJECT PALM RIVER TIDAL TRIBUTARIES TOTHE LOWER PALM RIVER TOWER AND KEY BANK HABITAT RESTORATION ALLEN'S CREEK AND LANCASTER DR. E BAYSIDE BRIDGE SITE (49TH ST. AT 182ND AVE.) CHATEAU TOWER LAGOON RESTORATION PROJECT PARCEL - ACR PRO JECT-AC 10 10 1610 535

7 2 100 10

-20 8.4 8.4 1

-2 1

-2 54 54

100 100 80 20.6 9.3 5

-10 38.5 230 600 40 1200 50 290 10 7 23 <

- 5 <

- 15

9 <

- 10

2 34 50

### + 171 706 706 61

### +- < = 100

1

-3

15+- 4.8 9.3 5 100 100 50 20.6 9.3 5

-10 60 200 40 200-4 10

-20

40 10 5 15 < = 5 < = 15

4-5 0.70 50

### + 25 18

-22

1

-3

17+- <=l00

15 4.8 9.3 2 SPONSOR SWFWMDSWIM MANATEE COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY

SWFWMD

-SWIM CITY OF TAMPA GFC TBNEP PINELLASCOUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY TAMPA BAYWATCH PINELLASCOUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY

SWFWMD

-SWIM PINELLASCOUNTY

SWFWMD

-SWIM

FDEP OWNERSHIP PRIVATE FEDERAL
?

PRIVATE FDOT ? PRIVATE/PUBLIC PRIVATE/PUBLIC ? ?

SWFWMD

-SWIM SWFWMD

-SWIM CITY OF TAMPA FEDERAL STEVE GRAHAM CITY OF TAMPA PRIVATE SWFWMD

-SWIM

CITY OF TAMPA PRIVATE SWFWMD

-SWIM PRIVATE SWFWMDSWIM CITY OF TAMPA EPC OF HC TAMPA BAYWATCH, EPC OF HC CITY OF TAMPA PINELLASCOUNTY PINELLASCOUNTY CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA SWFWMD

-SWIM
TAMPA BAYWATCH, SWFWMD

-SWIM,

1MACDILLAFB III DICK CREEK SE MCKAY BAY FISH CREEK SWEETWATER CREEK 15 30 10 <=10 6 10-25 5-6 <=1 0 <=l0 SWFWMD-SWIM SWFWMD-SWIM

2