Southwest Florida 

Water Management 

District 

Sarasota Bay 

Surface Water Improvement 

and Management (SWIM) Plan 

December 2002 

SWIM SECTION 

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 

SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 

7601 U.S. HIGHWAY 301 NORTH 

TAMPA, FLORIDA 33637 

(813) 985-7481 
Sarasota Bay 

Surface Water Improvement and 

Management (SWIM) Plan Update 

December 2002 

Southwest Florida Water Management District 

SWIM Section 

Resource Management Department 

7601 U.S. Highway 301 North 

Tampa, Florida 33637 

(81 3) 985-7481 

The Southwest Florida Water Management District (District) does not discriminate upon the basis of 

any individual's disability status. This nondiscrimination policy involves every aspect of the District's 

functions, including one's access to, participation, employment, or treatment in its programs or 

activities. Anyone requiring reasonable accommodation as provided for in the Americans With 

Disabilities Act should contact the District at 81 3-985-7481, or 1-800-423-1 476 (Florida), extension 

2201 ; TDD ONLY 1-800-231 -6103 (Florida); FAX 81 3-987-6747 / SunCom FAX 577-6747. 1 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................... i 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 1 

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 3 

The SWIM Act ........................................................................................ 3 

Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan Evolution .............................................................. 3 

Background ........................................................................................... 3 

Historic Land Use .............................................................................. 5 

Recent (1 990) Land Use ..................................................................... 5 

Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan Process .............................................................. 6 

Sarasota Bay Management Strategies ......................................................... 7 

Linkages to Other Water Resource Management Activities ..................... 9 

Internal Linkages .................................................................. 9 

External Linkages ................................................................ 11 

PRIORITY PROJECTS ..................................................................................... 12 

Various Habitat Restoration Projects .......................................................... 13 

Seagrass Mapping Efforts ........................................................................ 14 

Status and Trends in Water Quality ............................................................ 15 

Deployment of Artificial Reefs ................................................................... 16 

Construction of Oyster Reefs .................................................................... 1 7 

Determination of Nitrogen Sources in Urban Runoff ....................................... 18 

Water Quality Monitoring in Phillippi Creek ................................................... 19 

Integrated Water Resource Evaluation ....................................................... 20 

Evaluation and Implementation of Urban Stormwater Retrofits ......................... 21 

Update of the Pollutant Loading Model ....................................................... 22 

APPENDIX A . STATUS OF THE 1997 SARASOTA BAY SWIM PLAN ...................... 23 

Develop a Reuse Master Plan .................................................................. 23 

Promote Florida Yards and Neighborhoods ................................................. 23 

Incorporate Water Quality Improvements Into Stormwater Master Plans ............. 23 

Habitat Restoration ................................................................................ 24 

Seagrass Mapping ................................................................................. 24 

Further Assessment of Atmospheric Deposition ........................................... 24 

Identification of Toxic Load Sources ........................................................... 25 

Data Management .................................................................................. 25 

APPENDIX B . STATUS AND TRENDS IN THE HEALTH OF SARASOTA BAY ......... 26 

Status and Trends ........................................................... in Water Quality 26 

Contaminant Levels ....................................................... in Bay Sediments 28 

Status and Trends in Wetlands ................................................................ 29 

Status and Trends in Fisheries ................................................................ 30 

Status and Trends in Nitrogen Loads and Seagrass Coverage ......................... 31 
APPENDIX C . LITERATURE CITED ............................................................ 34 

APPENDIX D . GOVERNANCE WITHIN THE SARASOTA BAY BASIN ............... 36 

APPENDIX E . PERMITTED POINT AND NON-POINT (NPDES) 

DISCHARGES IN THE SARASOTA BAY BASIN ...................... 42 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Sarasota Bay has a surface water area of approximately 52 square miles, and a 

contributing watershed of approximately 150 square miles. The watershed is split between 

Manatee County and Sarasota County, and encompasses the City of Sarasota, as well as 

the island communities of Anna Maria, Holmes Beach, Bradenton Beach, and Longboat 

Key. 

Numerous inlets allow for the exchange of water between the bay and the Gulf of Mexico, 

including Anna Maria Sound, Longboat Pass, New Pass, Big Pass, and Venice Inlet. Until 

its closure in 1983, Midnight Pass also was an area of tidal mixing. 

Due in part to its remarkable natural beauty, Sarasota Bay is an often-cited reason for 

visitors drawn to the area. Visitors are a vital part of the local economy, as tourism is the 

number one source of employment in Sarasota County, and the number two source in 

Manatee County. 

While the Sarasota Bay region has been inhabited for thousands of years, human 

degradation of the bay accelerated during the post-World War II years. Between 1950 and 

1990, approximately 39 percent of the tidal wetlands were lost to development. Also during 

this time period, approximately 30 percent of Sarasota Bay's seagrass meadows were lost 

due to the combined impacts of direct losses due to shoreline development, and indirect 

losses due to degraded water quality. 

However, much progress has been made to restore Sarasota Bay in the years since its 

designation as an "estuary of national significance" by the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency in 1987. With the formation of the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program 

(Sarasota Bay NEP) in that year, much attention was focused on developing and 

implementing a series of projects aimed at restoring and protecting the natural resources of 

Sarasota Bay. 

Associated with upgrades to private and public wastewater treatment plants, point-source 

nitrogen loads to Sarasota Bay have been reduced from 569 tons per year in 1988 to 1 10 

tons per year in 1999, an 81 percent decline. In response, water clarity improved in 7 of 13 

bay segments between 1983 and 1998, and only degraded in 1 of 13 bay segments. As 

water clarity improved, seagrass coverage increased as well, with 596 additional acres 

found in 1999, as opposed to 1988. 

In addition to treatment plant upgrades, the Sarasota Bay region now reclaims 

approximately 46 percent of it wastewater treatment plant effluent for various reuse 

projects, and numerous stormwater treatment systems have been put in place to further 

reduce nutrient and toxin loads to the bay. 

In combination with various local, regional, state and federal agencies, habitat restoration 

projects in the Sarasota Bay region have enhanced or created approximately 200 acres of 

fisheries habitat through wetland restoration and removal of exotic vegetation. Additional 

habitat has been created through the deployment of various types and sizes of artificial 

1 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
reefs, ranging from large, complex systems such as that in place offshore of Leffis Key, to 

small concrete structures designed to fit at the base of various channel markers. 

An accurate depiction of Sarasota Bay is that of a system that is recovering from its most 

degraded condition, experienced in the late 19801s, to one that is approaching a much 

healthier condition. A potential problem, however, is that of continued population growth 

and development of the bay's watershed. If future growth is not adequately planned for, 

recent improvements in the health of Sarasota Bay could be offset by the impacts of 

increased stormwater and wastewater loads, as well as direct human impacts, as more 

people move to the region. While much progress has been made to improve water quality 

in both Sarasota Bay and Tampa Bay, most of these improvements have been brought 

about through the successful management of point sources of pollution. It remains to be 

seen how effective urban communities can be when attempting to reduce non-point source 

pollution on a watershed level. The continued implementation of stormwater retrofits of 

priority tributaries, as well as continued efforts to educate homeowners on the need for 

creating "bay friendly" landscapes will be required. Additional measures, such as the 

adoption, by local governments, of more stringent stormwater regulations for new 

development might be worth considering. 

The goal, therefore, of this update to the Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan, is to outline a series of 

research and/or restoration projects that will allow for the preservation and continued 

restoration of the health of Sarasota Bay, in spite of an increased population in the 

contributing watershed. 

Strategies to accomplish this task focus on improving and protecting water quality through 

continued efforts to treat wastewater and stormwater, as well as continued efforts focusing 

on the restoration of wetlands and creation of artificial reefs. Additional research efforts 

are needed, as well, to better understand the relationship between air quality and water 

quality, as well as to better understand the impacts to the bay's health that may have been 

caused by various alterations to the patterns of freshwater inflow into the bay. 

This revised Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan provides details for projects that implement the 

above-described strategies for protecting and improving the bay's health. This Plan will 

serve as the guidance document that coordinates the efforts of the District with those of the 

various local, regional, state and federal agencies, as well as private interests, to restore 

and protect Sarasota Bay. 

2 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
The SWIM Act 

In recognition of the need to place additional emphasis on the restoration, protection and 

management of the surface water resources of the State, the Florida Legislature, through 

the Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Act of 1987, directed the 

State's water management districts to "design and implement plans and programs for the 

improvement and management of surface water" (Section 373.451, Florida Statutes). The 

SWIM legislation requires the water management districts to protect the ecological, 

aesthetic, recreational, and economic value of the State's surface water bodies, keeping in 

mind that water quality degradation is frequently caused by point and non-point source 

pollution, and that degraded water quality can cause both direct and indirect losses of 

habitats. 

Under the SWIM Act, water management districts prioritize water bodies based on their 

need for protection and/or restoration. This prioritization process is carried out in 

cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), the Fish and 

Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC, formerly known as the Florida Game and 

Freshwater Fish Commission), the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 

(DACS), the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and local governments. Sarasota 

Bay was added to the list of priority water bodies by the Southwest Florida Water 

Management District (District) in 1995. 

Following the selection of the priority water bodies and in accordance with the SWIM Act, a 

SWIM Plan must be drafted, reviewed and approved before State SWIM funds can be 

spent on restoration, protection or management activities. The purpose of this revision of 

the Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan is to set forth a realistic course of action, identifying the 

projects and the effort needed to accomplish them, consistent with the levels and trends of 

SWIM funding. The evolution of the SWIM Plan for Sarasota Bay is discussed in the 

following section. 

Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan Evolution 

The original Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan, approved in 1997, was focused on projects 

designed to meet the District's obligations, as outlined in the Sarasota Bay NEP's 

"Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan" (SBNEP, 1995). The projects 

outlined within the 1997 SWIM Plan have either been completed or they are ongoing, as 

shown in Appendix A, "Status of the 1997 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan." A detailed 

examination of the status and trends in pollutant loads, water quality and fish and wildlife 

habitat is included in Appendix 9, "Status and Trends of Sarasota Bay." 

Background 

In 1995, The Southwest Florida Water Management District (District) named Sarasota Bay 

as a SWIM priority water body. Sarasota Bay thus joined the eight other priority water 

bodies previously listed. These water bodies are: 1) Tampa Bay, 2) Rainbow River, 3) 

3 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Banana Lake, 4) Crystal River, 5) Lake Panasoffkee, 6) Charlotte Harbor, 7) Lake Tarpon, 

8) Lake Thonotosassa, and 9) Winter Haven Chain of Lakes. 

The boundaries of the Sarasota Bay SWIM water body and its corresponding watershed 

(Figure 1) correspond to those used by the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program 

(SBNEP). The water body here after referred to as "Sarasota Bay" extends from Anna 

Maria Sound and Palma Sola Bay, in the north, to Venice Inlet, in the so,uth, a total of 52 

square miles of open water. The contributing watershed is approximately 150 square miles 

in size (Heyl, 1992). 

1 Fiaure 1 - Sarasota Bay Watershed 1 The watershed is split between 

Manatee County and Sarasota 

County, and encompasses the 

City of Sarasota, as well as the 

island communities of Anna 

Maria, Holmes Beach, 

Bradenton Beach, and Longboat 

Key. 

The largest tributary to Sarasota 

Bay is Phillippi Creek, which 

drains a watershed of 57 square 

miles, or 38 percent of the entire 

watershed. Other major 

tributaries include South Creek, 

with a watershed of 20 square 

miles (14 percent of the total 

watershed), the Bowlees Creek 

system, which drains 13 square 

miles (8 percent of the total), 

and Whitaker Bayou, which 

drains 8 square miles (5 percent 

of the total). 

The Sarasota Bay watershed is 

within the boundaries of the 

Southern Water Use Caution 

Area (SWUCA). Increased 

demand for groundwater resources has increased the concentration of chlorides in the 

western boundary of the SWUCA, an indication of saltwater contamination. In response, 

the SWFWMD proposed setting minimum groundwater levels in the SWUCA. These 

levels, and other actions taken by SWFWMD, are designed to protect both the resource 

and water users, and result in greater water-use efficiency. 

4 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Historic Land Use 

Sarasota Bay first took shape approximately 5,000 years ago (Estevez, 1992), as a result 

of the formation and development of offshore barrier islands during a period of continuing 

sea level rise. These barrier islands, in turn, appear to be associated with previously 

subtidal bars originally formed on top of elevated portions of Miocene bedrock (Kuhn, 

1983). 

The Sarasota Bay watershed contains a number of archeological sites, including shell 

middens, sand mounds, and cemeteries (Deming et al., 1990). These structures are the 

sole remaining artifacts of a number of prehistoric cultures, which date back to 10,000 B.C. 

The demise of the Native American presence in Sarasota Bay roughly coincides with initial 

contact with Spanish Conquistadors and settlers (Deming et al., 1990). 

During the 18703, a resort hotel in Osprey was one of the first business ventures to take 

advantage of Sarasota Bay's wealth of natural beauty, although commercial fishing had 

occurred since the late 1700's (Whelan, 1992). During the period of 1895 to 1903, the first 

large-scale channel alteration activities took place in Sarasota Bay, as the dredge 

'Suwanee" enlarged and/or created channels at Palma Sola Pass, at Longbar, and in the 

area between Little Sarasota Bay and Venice (W helan, 1992). 

During the years 1910 and 191 1, the City Commission of Sarasota mandated the 

seawalling of the City waterfront, while the citizens of the City of Sarasota voted for a 

combination water and sewage treatment system (Whelan, 1992). Ten years later, 

Sarasota County was officially formed by the partitioning in two of the old Manatee County. 

Population growth in the watershed has been dramatic, especially in the post-World War II 

years. During this period of rapid growth, much environmental damage occurred, as a 

result of large-scale dredge and fill projects, such as the conversion of Bird Key into a 

finger fill canal community, and the dredging (in the 1960's) of the Intracoastal Waterway. 

The dredging of the Intracoastal Waterway may have increased the hydraulic instability of 

Midnight Pass, the movement of which precipitated its permitted closure and subsequent 

failed re-opening in the winter of 1983 (Sheng and Peene, 1992; Sheng, personal 

communication). 

Recent (1 990) Land Use 

Water quality in Sarasota Bay is influenced by the amount of watershed that drains into 

different parts of the Bay. In northern and central portions of the bay (i.e. those areas north 

of Roberts Bay), 59 square miles of watershed drain into 45 square miles of open water. In 

the area of Roberts Bay south to Venice Inlet, 91 square miles of watershed drain into 7 

square miles of open water. Thus, the watershed : open water ratio in the northern and 

central parts of Sarasota Bay is 1.3, while in the southern part of Sarasota Bay, this ratio 

climbs to 13.4, a roughly ten-fold increase. 

Using results from the most recent pollutant load modeling effort for Sarasota Bay (Heyl, 

1992), residential land-use accounted for approximately 42 percent of the total watershed, 

5 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
while 36 percent is a combination of forested upland, rangeland, and openlrecreational 

uses. Commercial and industrial land-uses account for 10 percent of the watershed, and 

cropland and citrus account for 9 percent of the land. The remainder of the watershed (4 

percent) is comprised of both wetlands and open water bodies (lakes and streams). 

In Manatee County's portion of the watershed, approximately 64 percent of the land is 

urbanized, with 72 percent of the urbanized land (46 percent of the total) being residential 

(Heyl, 1992). In the City of Sarasota, 87 percent of the watershed is urbanized, with 70 

percent of the urbanized land (61 percent of the total) being residential. Sarasota County's 

portion of the watershed is 42 percent urbanized, with 87 percent of the urbanized land (36 

percent of the total) being residential. Consequently, residential land uses account for less 

than 50 percent of the watershed in the northern and southern regions, and more than 50 

percent of the watershed in the central region. As residential land uses comprise 64 to 87 

percent of the urban land use category, the water quality characteristics of stormwater 

runoff from residential land uses (e.g. elevated nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations) 

have the potential to have a large impact on water quality in the bay itself. 

Sarasota Bay SWIM Process 

Concern for the overall health of Sarasota Bay resulted in its designation by the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency as an "estuary of national significance" in 1987. In 1989, 

the SBNEP was formed to oversee the protection and restoration of Sarasota Bay and its 

natural resources. In 1992, the results of a bay-wide assessment were published in the 

document "Sarasota Bay Framework for Action." In this report, principal investigators for 

the various studies proposed various activities that would be needed to better protect and 

restore Sarasota Bay. After numerous public meetings and much debate, these activities 

were developed into "Action Plans" that were focused on issues such as stormwater, 

wastewater, habitat loss, and recreational use conflicts. In turn, responsibility for 

implementing each of the Action Plans was determined, and the collection of Action Plans, 

in addition to responsible parties for each item, was summarized in the document 

"Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan" (SBNEP, 1995). This Plan, 

commonly referred to as the CCMP, was the basis for the projects outlined within the 

previous SWIM Plan for Sarasota Bay, which was adopted by the Governing Board in 

1997. 

Sarasota Bay Priority Management Issues 

Both the 1995 Sarasota Bay NEP's CCMP and the 1997 Sarasota Bay SWIM identified the 

following as priority management issues: 

Declines in sediment and water quality; 

a Loss of wetlands and other coastal habitats; 

Loss of seagrasses; 

Declines in finfish and shellfish populations; and 

6 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Recreational impacts 1 overuse 

Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan Goals 

The goals of the Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan are consistent with the goals identified by the 

Sarasota Bay NEP. These goals are: 

Improve water transparency in Sarasota Bay; 

Decrease the quantity, and increase the quality of stormwater runoff to 

Sarasota Bay; 

Restore shoreline habitats in Sarasota Bay; 

Restore and sustain fish and other living resources in Sarasota Bay; and 

Continue monitoring programs and applied research projects in Sarasota 

Bay 

Sarasota Bay Management Strategies 

The management strategies for protecting and restoring Sarasota Bay are based on the 

Sarasota Bay NEP's CCMP (1995). Within this document, there are numerous activities 

listed which require coordination between local governments and the District, or direct 

action by the District. These activities are intended to protect and restore Sarasota Bay, by 

devising action plans to achieve the above-mentioned goals. More specifically, each 

''Action Plan" in the CCMP lists those cooperating organizations whose efforts are needed 

to carry out the identified activities. In addition, The Sarasota Bay NEP's Technical 

Advisory Committee (TAG) recently (Fall 2001) held a series of discussion on the value of 

continued and additional research and/or restoration projects. Of a total of 15 potential 

projects, the top 7 were widely supported by TAG members. The remaining 8 projects 

received marginal or no support from the TAC. The top 7 projects are summarized in 

Table 1, as well as ongoing projects to map seagrass coverage and continue ongoing 

wetlands habitat restoration. Ongoing SWIM projects, and the above-mentioned priority 

projects identified by the TAC, are the basis for the course of action outlined in this SWIM 

Plan update, by continuing the ongoing efforts to implement the Sarasota Bay NEP's 

CCMP. 

Additionally, the SBNEP's TAG recently (August 9,2002) endorsed the concept of revising 

the existing nutrient loading model for Sarasota Bay and its watershed. The existing model 

(Heyl 1992) is based on land use data from 1990, and modifications to wastewater and 

stormwater treatment practices during the past decade may have significantly altered the 

sources and quantities of various pollutant loads. This project is also listed in both Table 1 

and the section on Priority Projects. 

7 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Table 1. Estimated Budget for Priority Projects for Implementation of the Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan 

("page" refers to location in text where further explanation of the project is contained). 

Project FY 2005 FY 2006 Page 

Various Habitat 

Restoration 

Projects 

Continue 

Seagrass 

Mapping Efforts 

Determine 

Status and 

Trends (if any) in 

Water Quality 

Continued 

Deployment of 

Artificial Reefs 

Construction of 

Oyster Reefs 

Determine NLoading Sources 

from Urban Land 

Use 

Water Quality 

Monitoring in 

Phillippi Creek - 

Integrated Water 

Resource 

Evaluation 

Update Pollutant 

Loading Model 

Total Budget 

Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Linkage to Other Water Resource Management Activities 

In addition to projects that are initiated by SWIM, the SWIM Program is able to accomplish 

its objectives more effectively and efficiently by coordinating internally with other District 

programs and externally through partnerships with local governments and other State and 

federal agencies. 

Internal Linkages 

The District has many tools available to implement the legislative intent of the SWIM 

Program, including but not limited to, integrated planning and coordination, regulatory 

authority, land acquisition programs and the SWIM program itself. Each of these areas 

provides opportunities to assist in the management of Sarasota Bay. 

The SWFWMD's Water Management Plan - As required in Chapter 373, Florida Statutes, 

the District prepared its Water Management Plan (DWMP). Within this plan, the District 

organized its mission into four areas of responsibilities; water supply, flood protection, 

water quality management and natural systems management. The DWMP recognizes that 

the integration of all these areas is essential to effective planning and management of the 

resource. The DWMP has policies that relate to the protection, restoration, and 

management of Sarasota Bay 

Comprehensive Watershed Management (CWM) - The District has recognized the need to 

take a unified approach to surface water management and has created an initiative that 

prioritizes resource management needs by watershed throughout the District. For Sarasota 

Bay, the Southern Coastal Watershed Management Initiative is the relevant entity. These 

management plans combine information on water quantity (i.e., flood) management with 

water quality and natural systems objectives, as well as water supply when applicable. 

Information on regulatory, land acquisition, and land-use matters is combined into a 

comprehensive surface water management strategy, including appropriate policies, on a 

watershed-specific basis. Local governments, as the parties responsible for land planning 

and development are key players in this integrated management approach. In the 

Sarasota Bay region, existing linkages between the District and the Sarasota Bay National 

Estuary Program make the need for CWM coordination somewhat less pressing than in 

other areas. Implementation of restoration projects and technical assessments will 

continue to be coordinated with CWM, but will continue to be implemented mainly through 

the joint participation and funding of the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program and the 

District's SWIM Section. 

Regulation 

Wetlands Protection Through Regulatorv Programs - One way that the District 

achieves wetlands protection is through regulatory programs. Wetlands protection 

is addressed under Chapters 40D-2, 40D-3, 40D-4, 40D-40 and 40D-45, F.A.C. 

The District's surface water permitting rules (40D-4,40 and 45, F.A.C.) require that 

any impact to wetlands not specifically exempted must either be avoided or 

compensated. Compensation for impacts includes as a minimum, type-for-type 

mitigation at a one-to-one ratio. Other types of compensation may be required, 

9 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
including preservation of associated upland areas, alternate types of wetland 

creation, protection of exempt wetlands, and restoration for previously impacted 

wetlands. The intent is to ensure that the habitat necessary for the survival of fish 

and wildlife is maintained. 

Mitigation Banking - Mitigation banking allows developers to compensate for 

wetland losses in one place by preserving, restoring or creating wetlands in another 

to prevent a net loss of wetlands. The rule allows mitigation banking in some 

instances, although it remains a controversial issue. The SW FW MD coordinates 

with the Florida Department of Transportation to take advantage of mitigation bank 

opportunities on District lands and within SWIM priority water bodies. 

Land Acquisition - Land acquisition at the District was recently guided and funded by two 

major statewide initiatives: The Water Management Lands Trust Fund (a.k.a. Save our 

Rivers Program or SOR), and Preservation 2000 (P-2000). In 2000, the P-2000 Program 

for land acquisition came to an end. Funds for land acquisition and management was 

available through Save our Rivers through 2000, however, the SORfunds may not be used 

for land acquisition after 2001. The Florida Forever Act, passed by the Florida Legislature 

in 1999, made funds available, beginning in 2001, to the water management districts for 

both land acquisition and restoration, including funding for SWIM projects. 

The District's land acquisition programs target the protection of natural resources at the 

regional level. Lands of importance to water resources and water management are 

acquired along with lands of unique environmental values endangered by development 

activities. The District owns more than 200,000 acres, the majority of which were 

purchased through the SOR and P2000 programs. Many recent purchases have been a 

joint acquisition between the District and a local government or with other State agencies. 

Leveraging District land acquisition funds with those of local governments and other 

agencies can and has resulted in significant acquisitions that might not have been made 

otherwise. These programs have been coordinated with SWIM Plans by focusing on 

critical habitats, such as wetlands and their interconnected upland communities that are 

part of the Sarasota Bay ecosystem, and that should be acquired for preservation and/or 

restoration. 

Basin Board Activities - The basin boards of the SWFWMD have specific functions and 

duties that are consistent with Chapter 373, F.S., and the programs of the Governing 

Board. Their purpose is to identify and evaluate key water resource management issues in 

order to develop and fund management strategies to address them. The basin boards are 

facilitators in the resolution of non-regulatory water management issues for a number of 

other governments. It is at the basin level that intergovernmental water resource programs 

are implemented, monitored and evaluated for improvement. The basin boards also 

provide a means of obtaining feedback from local governments and citizens. Basin boards 

also serve as funding partners for local governments and others in addressing mutually 

beneficial water resource solutions. The basin boards also provide the District's SWIM 

funding match for approved SWIM projects within their basins. For Sarasota Bay, the 

relevant basin board is the Manasota Basin Board. 

1 0 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
The District, through the eight basin boards, has an established Cooperative Funding 

Program that provides financial assistance on a cost-share basis primarily to local 

governments for regional water resource projects. Projects can also be funded through 

''basin initiatives" where a basin decides to provide the impetus for a water management 

solution, with or without a local partner. Many of the basin boards have in place a five-year 

plan which outlines the types of activities it expects to undertake in the next five years and 

provides an estimate of the funding required to support these projects. The basin plans 

were prepared in close coordination with local governments, demonstrating another 

opportunity for integration with local governments and ensuring the most efficient and costeffective approach to addressing mutual water resource management goals and objectives. 

External Linkages 

FDEP - Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program - Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean 

Water Act requires states to submit lists of waters that fail to meet applicable water quality 

standards (i.e., "impaired waters") and to establish and implement TMDL's for these waters 

on a prioritized schedule. The TMDL program is part of FDEP's Watershed Approach 

Initiative, which provides the framework for implementing Section 303(d) of the Federal 

Clean Water Act, as well as the 1999 Florida Watershed Restoration Act. Listing 

requirements include the identification of pollutants causing impairment (e.g., nutrients, 

sediments, bacteria, etc.). Impaired waters are primarily those listed as having either 

'poor" or "fair" water quality in the FDEP 1996 305(b) report. In response to various legal 

proceedings, Chapter 99-223 created 403.067 (Florida Statutes), wherein it was 

established that the initial list of water bodies in the 303(d) list was to be used for planning 

purposes only, and that FDEP would be required to adopt by rule a methodology for 

determining impaired waters. Also, FDEP is now required to validate the impairment of 

listed water bodies, and to evaluate whether proposed pollution control programs are 

sufficient to help impaired water bodies to meet their appropriate water quality standards. 

Once impairment has been verified and TMDL's have been adopted, 403.067 (F.S.) 

requires FDEP to allocate TMDL's, by rule, to the level of major categories of nonpoint 

sources. FDEP is then required to develop specific Basin Plans to implement TMDL's. In 

all these activities, the SWIM Plan's efforts at implementing the PLRG for Sarasota Bay 

will be carefully integrated with FDEP's efforts at developing and implementing TMDL's. 

Local / Federal Government Coordination and Partnerinq - The District has prepared 

county-level Integrated Plans for the local governments within its jurisdiction, as part of the 

District's Water Management Plan. The purpose of the Integrated Plan is to identify and 

evaluate key water resource management issues with the local government's jurisdiction, 

and to develop and coordinate common District and local government strategies to address 

these issues. Greater detail is available in Appendix D, "Governance within the Sarasota 

Bay Basin." 

1 1 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
PRIORITY PROJECTS 

The Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan Update is focused on implementing those projects viewed 

as priorities by the Sarasota Bay NEP's Technical Advisory Committee. The following 

project summaries identify the current status of active and proposed projects, and provide 

project timelines and estimated budgets for implementation. Project descriptions are 

shown on separate pages for each effort. 

Approval of the Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan does not constitute approval of any specific 

habitat restoration project, as the SWIM Plan is meant to serve as a general outline of the 

need for various types of restoration projects. 

1 2 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project Title: Various Habitat Restoration Projects 

Summary: 

The Sarasota Bay NEP's "Framework for Action" (SBNEP, 1992) documented an 

approximate 39 percent decline in wetlands habitat throughout the bay's watershed. As 

these areas played significant roles in flood retention, water quality improvement, and as 

habitats for feeding and shelter for a variety of fish, birds and other wildlife, the CCMP 

(SBNEP, 1995) lists wetlands habitat enhancement and/or creation projects as a priority for 

bay restoration. This budget category would allow flexibility for carrying out design, 

permitting and construction of habitat restoration projects throughout the Sarasota Bay 

watershed, including projects not yet identified. As has been the practice for past habitat 

restoration projects, the geographic location, conceptual design and general scope of work 

for all habitat restoration projects will be reviewed by the SBNEP's Technical Advisory 

Committee. 

Annual Budget Estimates: 

1 Salaries 1 $2,000 1 $5,000 1 $5,500 1 $5,000 1 

Contracts 1 $0 1 $105,000 1 $1 10,000 1 $1 15,000 1 

1 Expenses 1 so 1 la 1 so 1 so 1 

Agency or Local Government Partnering: 

As various habitat restoration projects are identified, designed and permitted, the following 

entities could become involved with funding these projects: FDEP, FFWCC, Manatee 

County, Sarasota County, FDOT, and the Sarasota Bay NEP. 

1 3 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project Title: Continue Seagrass Mapping Efforts 

Summary: 

The Sarasota Bay NEP's "A Decade of Progress" (SBNEP, 2000) documented an 

approximate 30 percent decline in seagrass coverage throughout the bay between 1950 

and 1988. Seagrass meadows are not only useful "bio-indicators" of water quality in 

Sarasota Bay, they serve vital roles as habitats for a variety of recreationally and 

commercially important species of finfish and shellfish (SBNEP, 1992). The District has 

coordinated and carried out a bay-wide seagrass mapping effort to determine the status 

and trends (if any) in seagrass acreage throughout Sarasota Bay. Seagrass distribution 

has been quantified for the years 1988, 1994, 1996 and 1999. Efforts are underway to 

map seagrass distribution in 2001, as well. This project should be continued on a roughly 

biannual basis, to detect changes, if any, in the extent of these important fisheries habitats. 

Annual Budget Estimates: 

Contracts 1 $15,000 1 $0 

Salaries 

Expenses 1 $0 1 $0 

Total 1 $20,000 1 $5,000 

$5,000 

Agency or Local Government Partnerina: 

$5,000 

This project is carried out in coordination with the FDEP, the FFWCC, and the Sarasota 

Bay NEP. 

1 4 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project Title: Determine Status and Trends in Water Quality 

Summary: 

In order to determine the rate of progress toward meeting the goal of improving water 

quality in Sarasota Bay, water quality must be assessed on a regular basis. This effort 

would continue to assess the status and trends (if any) in water quality in Sarasota Bay, 

and would update recent effort that examined water quality data up to the year 1998. 

Annual Budget Estimates: 

1 Salaries 1 $2,000 1 $5,000 1 $2,000 1 $5,000 1 

1 contracts 1 $50,000 1 $0 1 $55,000 

1 Total 1 $55,000 1 $2,000 1 $60,000 1 

Agency or Local Government Partnerinq: 

This project will be carried out in coordination with the Manatee County, Sarasota County, 

the City of Sarasota, FDEP, and the Sarasota Bay NEP. 

Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project Title: Continued Deployment of Artificial Reefs 

Summary: 

The Sarasota Bay NEP's "Framework for Action" and CCMP documented the decline in 

recreational and commercial fisheries landings in Sarasota Bay, and attributed most of this 

decline to reductions in habitat forjuveniles. In response, the Sarasota Bay NEP has been 

involved with numerous efforts to increase habitat for juvenile and adult stages of fish and 

other marine life through the deployment of various forms of artificial reefs. As of 2000,20 

artificial reef projects have been permitted, with 7 already constructed. This project would 

involve partnering with local, state and federal agencies to continue artificial reef monitoring 

and deployment efforts both within the Bay and for shoreline enhancement. 

Annual Budaet Estimates: 

1 Salaries 1 $2,000 1 $2,000 1 $2,000 1 $2,000 I 

1 contracts 1 $50,000 1 $50,000 1 $55,000 1 $60,000 

1 Total 1 $52,000 1 $52,000 1 $57,000 1 $62,000 

Agency or Local Government Partnering: 

This project will be carried out in coordination with the Manatee County, Sarasota County, 

FDEP, the University of Florida Sea Grant Program, and the Sarasota Bay NEP. 

1 6 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project Title: Construction of Oyster Reefs 

Summary: 

The Sarasota Bay NEP's "Framework for Action" and CCMP documented the decline in 

recreational and commercial fisheries landings in Sarasota Bay, and attributed most of this 

decline to reductions in habitat for juveniles. In particular, oyster reef habitat was thought to 

have declined significantly, both in terms of acreage and also the health of remaining reefs. 

At their November 2001, meeting, TAC members ranked the construction of oyster reefs as 

a priority restoration project for upcoming years. In addition to acting as a physical 

structure for shelter and/or feeding for various species of fish and other marine life, oyster 

reefs have the potential to actively improve water clarity in Sarasota Bay, through the 

filtering action of the oysters themselves. This project would involve partnering with local 

state and federal agencies to develop an initial assessment of the effectiveness of larger 

scale oyster reef construction efforts and addressing permitting questions. Reefs would 

have to be constructed keeping in mind the importance of their placement in the 

appropriate salinity regime. Further involvement will be dependent upon review of these 

preliminary efforts. 

Annual Budget Estimates: 

Salaries 

Contracts 

Agency or Local Government Partnering: 

- 

Expenses 

Total 

This project will be carried out in coordination with the Manatee County, Sarasota County, 

FDEP, the Florida Marine Research Institute, and the Sarasota Bay NEP. 

$2,000 

$0 

1 7 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 

$0 

$2,000 

$2,000 

$15,000 

$0 

$1 7,000 

$2,000 

$0 

$2,000 

$20,000 

$0 

$2,000 

$0 

$22,000 
Project Title: Determination of Nitrogen Loading Sources from Urban Land 

Use Categories 

Summary: 

As documented in the Sarasota Bay NEP's "Framework for Action," urban stormwater 

runoff is the single major source of nitrogen loading to Sarasota Bay. While much effort 

has, and will be, expended on stormwater retrofits to reduce these impacts, there is, at 

present, an incomplete knowledge about the sources of nitrogen that are found in urban 

and residential stormwater runoff. It is not known, for example, if the relatively high 

concentration of nitrogen in this runoff is due to atmospheric deposition onto the 

watershed, landscaping practices, fecal pollution from pets, or any other sources. Without 

knowing the ultimate sources of nitrogen in urban runoff, it remains difficult to devise 

strategies to reduce nutrient loads at their source. This project would involve an 

assessment of the relative roles of atmospheric deposition, landscaping practices, pet 

waste, etc. on producing elevated concentrations of nitrogen in urban runoff. 

Annual Budget Estimates: 

1 Salaries 1 $2,000 1 $5,000 1 $2,000 1 $2,000 1 

1 Total 1 $2,000 1 $50,000 1 $22,000 1 $2,000 

Contracts 

Expenses 

Agency or Local Government Partnering: 

This project will be carried out in coordination with the Manatee County, Sarasota County, 

the City of Sarasota, FDEP, and the Sarasota Bay NEP. 

$0 

$0 

Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 

$45,000 

$0 

$20,000 

$0 

$0 

$0 
Project Title: Water Quality Monitoring in Phillippi Creek 

Summary: 

In many of the coastal regions of Sarasota County, septic tank systems cannot adequately 

treat wastewater, mostly due to issues of higher than appropriate densities, as well as high 

water tables. Previously, the Sarasota Bay NEP played a critical role documenting the 

widespread pollution associated with this problem. In response, Sarasota County is 

presently undertaking a multi-year effort to replace failed septic tank systems, with the 

initial priority placed on Phillippi Creek. Documentation of changes, if any, in the status of 

Phillippi Creek's water quality is an important part of monitoring the effectiveness of these 

efforts, with particular emphasis placed on detecting trends (if any) in nitrogen 

concentrations and pathogen levels. This project, which was ranked as a priority effort by 

the Sarasota Bay NEP's Technical Advisory Committee (TAG), is currently being 

conducted by Sarasota County. The proposed budget would allow for the District to remain 

involved in assessing results from the monitoring effort, and could allow the District to aid in 

more sophisticated monitoring efforts, if deemed appropriate by the TAC. 

Annual Budget Estimates: 

1 Salaries 1 $2,000 

1 Contracts I $0 

1 Expenses 1 so 

1 Total 1 $2,000 

Agency or Local Government Partnering: 

This project will be carried out in coordination with Sarasota County, the City of Sarasota, 

FDEP, and the Sarasota Bay NEP. 

1 9 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project Title: Integrated Water Resource Evaluation 

Summary: 

In much of Southwest Florida, population growth and urbanization of the landscape has 

been associated with modifications to the timing and quantity of freshwater inflow into 

adjacent streams and estuaries. Although alterations in the timing and quantity of 

freshwater inflow have not been identified as a problem in Sarasota Bay (SBNEP, 1992 & 

1995) the potential exists that this has been a previously unrecognized issue. The 

proposed budget would allow the District to stay involved in various efforts to determine the 

impacts (if any) to Sarasota Bay associated with altered freshwater inflow, it does not 

involve the support of any particular investigations. Staff time to develop inflow estimates 

and participate in various advisory meetings is included. Other expenses are not yet 

anticipated. 

Annual Budget Estimates: 

1 Salaries 1 $2,000 1 $2,000 I 

1 Total 1 $2,000 1 $2,000 1 $2,000 1 

Aqency or Local Government Partnering: 

This project will be carried out in coordination with Sarasota County, Manatee County, the 

City of Sarasota, and the Sarasota Bay NEP. 

20 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project Title: Evaluation and Implementation of Urban Stormwater Retrofit 

Projects 

Summary: 

Stormwater runoff is the largest source of both nitrogen loads, as well as toxin loads, into 

Sarasota Bay (SBNEP, 1992). Consequently, the identification of stormwater pollution "hot 

spots" was undertaken to allow the Sarasota Bay NEP to focus its efforts on the primary 

sources of toxin and nutrient loading to the bay. Priority watersheds are Cedar Hammock 

Creek, Bowlees Creek, Whitaker Bayou, Hudson Bayou, and Phillippi Creek. This project 

would involve the District partnering with various local, state and federal agencies to 

design, permit and construct the most cost-effective techniques to treat stormwater runoff 

in priority watersheds. This project will be coordinated with the District's ongoing 

Cooperative Funding Program, ensuring that the costs of pursuing these efforts will be 

borne by local governments as well as the District and other funding sources. 

Annual Budget Estimates: 

Salaries 1 $2,000 

Contracts 

Expenses 

Total 1 $2,000 

Aqency or Local Government Partnering: 

This project will be carried out in coordination with Sarasota County, Manatee County, the 

City of Sarasota, and the Sarasota Bay NEP. 

2 1 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project Title: Update the Pollutant Loading Model for Sarasota Bay 

Summary: 

The existing pollutant loading model for Sarasota Bay and its watersehed (SBNEP, 7 992) 

is based on land use data from 1990. Stormwater pollution loads priority tributaries are 

based, in part, on land use data that is now more than a decade old. While this past effort 

predicted pollutant loads expected to occur in future years, recent patterns of population 

growth might not be quite what was predicted in the existing effort, and sources and 

quantities of various pollutant might be different than what was expected. In addition, 

various efforts to reduce point source loads via upgrading wastewater treatment plant 

operations and increased reuse of wastewater treatment effluent should be examined to 

determine their actual, rather than expected, nutrient load reduction impact. Finally, the 

previous pollutant loading model used wet deposition nitrogen concentration data from 

Tampa Bay that probably overestimated this loading source, while not including the 

potentially significant source of "dry deposition" of nitrogen. An udeated pollutant loading 

model would involve the District partnering with the SBNEP, as well as various local, state 

and federal agencies to design a scope of work for this effort that would update and refine 

the amounts and sources of various pollutant loads to the bay. 

Annual Budget Estimates: 

1 Salaries 1 $2,000 

1 Contracts I $0 

1 Expenses 1 $0 

1 Total 1 $2,000 

Aqencv or Local Government Partnering: 

This project will be carried out in coordination with FDEP, Sarasota County, Manatee 

County, the City of Sarasota, and the Sarasota Bay NEP. 

22 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
APPENDIXA - STATUS OF THE 1997 SARASOTA BAY SWIM PLAN 

Within the 1997 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan, a number of priority projects were outlined, and 

the basis for undertaking these activities was described. Generally, activities involved 

starting a number of projects aimed at reducing pollutant loads coming from stormwater 

and wastewater, as well as habitat restoration projects, seagrass mapping efforts, and 

various other technical studies. This section discusses the results of these completed and 

ongoing efforts. Although considered in some detail, much more information is contained 

in the technical reports referenced. These reports are available from the District's SWIM 

Section, at (81 3) 985-7481, ext. 2206. 

Project: 

Status: 

Project: 

Status: 

Proiect: 

Status: 

Develop a reuse master plan for Sarasota Bay's watershed. 

A final report was for this project was completed in 1998. The report was a 

summary of efforts by local governments to reuse wastewater and 

stormwater, and outlined a course of action to be followed to ensure greater 

coordination of future efforts. At present, the Sarasota Bay region reclaims 

46 percent of its wastewater treatment plant effluent, which has resulted in 

reduced demand for groundwater resource for non-drinking water purposes, 

and reduced nutrient loading from wastewater discharges. 

Promote the Florida Yards and Neighborhoods program. 

The District has continued to support the Florida Yards and Neighborhoods 

program as a resident-oriented education program designed to reduce water 

demand, as well as a means to potentially reduce urban non-point source 

nitrogen runoff. Continued support is expected to come directly from the 

Basin Board, at least until FY 2005. 

Incorporating water quality improvements into stormwater master plans. 

The SWIM program has worked with Manatee and Sarasota Counties to 

develop conceptual and/or detailed stormwater master plans for various 

tributaries to Sarasota Bay. These master plans all are designed to 

incorporate, to the maximum extent practical, improvement of water quality, 

as well as flood protection. Tributaries that have existing stormwater master 

plans, or that are expected to have completed master plans by FY 2005 

include the following: Arlington/Euclid Canal, Phillippi Creek, Catfish Creek, 

and Whitaker Bayou. 

23 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project: Habitat restoration. 

Status: As of 2001, approximately 200 acres of wetlands and adjacent uplands have 

been restored in the Sarasota Bay watershed (SBNEP, 2001). This amount 

of habitat restoration is higher than the proposed rate of 18 acres per year 

agreed to in the Sarasota Bay NEP's Comprehensive Conservation and 

Management Plan (1 995). Completed projects include the following: City 

Island, Leffis Key, Sixth Street Canal, Quick Point Preserve, Caples 

Shoreline, Selby Gardens, Sister Keys, Durante Park, and Hog Creek. 

Proposed projects include: Bird Colony Islands, 191 2 Cortez Schoolhouse 

site, Perico Bayou, Crossley Estate, Palmer Point, and the Jim Neville 

Preserve. 

Project: Seagrass mapping. 

Status: Seagrass meadows, which have been shown to be sensitive bio-indicators of 

human alterations to water quality, are an important habitat for a number of 

recreationally and commercially important species of finfish and shellfish. As 

part of an effort to determine the status and trends of seagrass meadows in 

Sarasota Bay, the SWIM Program agreed to map seagrass distribution in 

Sarasota Bay on a regular basis (SBNEP, 1995). At present, seagrass 

coverage has been quantified for the years 1988, 1994, 1996, and 1999. 

Information on seagrass coverage is presented to the Sarasota Bay NEP on 

a regular basis, and is included in the most recent assessment of the bay 

(SBNEP, 2000). 

Project: Further assessment of atmospheric deposition in Sarasota Bay. 

Status: In the Sarasota Bay NEP's CCMP (1995), two technical projects were 

identified as needing further investigation. The first of these projects was to 

further investigate the sources and impacts of atmospheric deposition on the 

health of Sarasota Bay. This effort has been completed, and involved a 

number of tasks. Construction and maintenance of an atmospheric 

deposition monitoring site allows for the refinement of previous estimates of 

nitrogen loads. This more recent estimate suggests that nitrogen loads to 

the bay are lower than previously thought. The second project involved the 

development of a source model for atmospheric loads, which suggested that 

nitrogen loads from Sarasota Bay could come from areas as far away as the 

Cities of Tampa and Lakeland. The third project involved determining the 

biological impacts of atmospheric deposition of nitrogen. Results from this 

project suggest that direct loads of atmospherically-derived nitrogen may not 

beas biologically important a source of nitrogen loading as are stormwater 

and wastewater. 

24 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
Project: Identification of toxic load sources in Sarasota Bay. 

Status: In the Sarasota Bay NEP's CCMP (1995), two technical projects were 

identified as needing further investigation. The first task involved (described 

above) involved an assessment of the sources and impacts associated with 

atmospheric deposition of pollutant loads into Sarasota Bay. The second 

identified project was designed to further identify, on a sub-basin level, the 

sources of toxin loads in priority watersheds. As identified in the CCMP 

(1995), these priority watersheds are Cedar Hammock Creek, Bowlees 

Creek, Whitaker Bayou, Hudson Bayou, and Phillippi Creek. This project 

has been completed, and results have been communicated to both Sarasota 

and Manatee Counties, as well as the City of Sarasota. This information is 

being used to help these local governments better prioritize sub-basins within 

priority watersheds for stormwater treatment retrofits. 

Project: Data management. 

Status: This element, identified as a need in the Sarasota Bay NEP's CCMP (1 995), 

involved aiding the Sarasota Bay NEP in several tasks. These tasks 

involved the following: 1) uploading all relevant water quality data sets into 

STORET, 2) purchase of hardware and software to allow for various data 

analysis efforts, and 3) updating the status and trends of water quality 

previously conducted in 1992 (SBNEP, 1992). All these tasks have been 

accomplished, with the SBNEP's data collection efforts being fully loaded 

into STORET. Ongoing water quality monitoring efforts are conducted by 

both Sarasota and Manatee Counties, which are the responsible parties for 

uploading data into STORET. Additionally, Mote Marine Laboratory 

completed an update of water quality status and trends, with data sets that 

extended up to 1998. 

25 Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan December 2002 
APPENDIX B - STATUS AND TRENDS IN THE HEALTH OF SARASOTA BAY 

Status and Trends in Water Quality 

Status 

When comparing bay segments against each 

other in terms of water clarity, a general pattern 

emerges (Figure B-1). Areas closest to flushing 

passes tend to have the greatest water clarity, 

and areas such as eastern Palma Sola Bay (just 

west of Bradenton, between Manatee Avenue 

and Cortez Road) and Little Sarasota Bay (east 

of Casey Key), which are "null zones" for 

circulation (Sheng and Peene, 1992) tend to 

have the lowest water clarity. However, Roberts 

Bay (just east of Siesta Key) also has relatively 

low water clarity, despite it's proximity to Big 

Pass (between Lido Key and Siesta Key), and 

the waters just east of central Longboat Key 

have good water clarity, despite being located in 

a null zone for circulation (Sheng and Peene, 

1 992). 

Using FDEP's methodology for determining 

"trophic state indices - TSI" (i.e. Hand et al., 

1996), and excluding stations located in 

tributaries, Lowrey (1992) found that all bay 

segments had TSI values in the "good" range, 

except for Midnight Pass, which had a TSI value 

Trends 

in the "fair" range (Lowrey, 1992). A past comparison of TSI values suggested that 

water quality in Sarasota Bay was better than upper and middle portions of Tampa 

and about the same as lower Tampa Bay 

A more recent assessment of water quality in Sarasota Bay was completed by Dixon 

and Heyl (1999). This effort examined trends in nutrients, salinity, water clarity, etc. for 

12 bay segments, 4 pass segments (including the area of the former Midnight Pass) 

and an offshore segment. Table 2 summarizes the number of bay segments (not 

including passes) that showed trends of improvement, degradation, or no trend for 

three different time periods (1 968 to 1998, 1983 to 1998, and 1989 to 1998). 

Figure B-1. Relative Water Clarity Index. 

These time periods refer to the period of record for water quality data (1 968 to 19981, 

the time period after the closure of Midnight Pass (1983 to 1998), and the time period 

after implementation of numerous wastewater treatment plant upgrades (1 989 to 1998). 

(Lowrey, 1992). 
Table 2 - Trends in Water Quality. Number of bay segments (out of 12 total) with 

significant (p < 0.05) trends over time for total nitrogen, total phosphorus, chlorophyll A, 

secchi disk depth, and salinity (data summarized from Dixon and Heyl, 1999). 

Chlorophyll A 

Total Nitrogen 

Total Phosphorus 

Improve - 4 

Degrade - 1 

No trend - 7 

Improve -10 

Degrade - 0 

No trend - 2 

Improve -1 0 

Degrade - 0 

No trend - 2 

Salinity 

Secchi Disk Depth 

Increase -2 

Decrease - 5 

No trend - 5 

Improve -7 

Degrade - 2 

No trend - 3 

Improve - 5 

Degrade - 0 

No trend - 7 

1983-1 998 

Improve - 10 

Degrade - 0 

No trend - 2 

Improve - 10 

Degrade - 0 

No trend - 2 

Improve - 0 

Degrade - 1 

No trend - 11 

1989-1 998 

Improve - 9 

Degrade - 0 

No trend - 3 

Improve - 9 

Degrade - 0 

No trend - 3 

Improve - 7 

Degrade - 1 

No trend - 4 

Increase - 2 

Decrease - 2 

No trend - 8 

Improve - 2 

Degrade - 2 ' 

No trend - 8 

Increase - 2 

Decrease - 3 

No trend - 7 

Since 1968, 10 of 12 bay segments show a pattern of decreasing concentrations of 

total nitrogen and total phosphorus. During this same time period, chlorophyll A 

concentrations improved in 4 of 12 segments, but actually degraded in 1 bay segment 

(western Anna Maria Sound just east of Holmes Beach). Water clarity, as measured in 

secchi disk depths, improved in 7 segments, but degraded in 2 bay segments (along 

the barrier islands just east of Bradenton Beach and northern Longboat Key, and in 

Little Sarasota Bay). Salinity increased at 2 segments (eastern and western portions of 

Palma Sola Bay), but decreased in 5 other bay segments, including Little Sarasota Bay. 

In general, areas with improved water clarity were also areas with improving trends for 

both nutrients and chlorophyll A. Improvements in water clarity do not seem to be 

driven by reduced volumes of stormwater runoff due to changes in rainfall, as most bay 

segments that showed evidence of increased secchi disk depths did not also have 

trends of increasing salinity. 

The greatest relevance for testing for trends in water quality from 1983 to 1998 is for 

Little Sarasota Bay. This time period represents conditions after the closure of Midnight 

Pass, which occurred in 1983. According to Sheng and Peene (1992) the closure of 

Midnight Pass caused circulation and flushing to decrease in Little Sarasota Bay, 

although flushing rates increased in Roberts Bay (just east of Siesta Key) and 

Blackburn Bay (just east of Casey Key). All three bay segments (Roberts Bay, Little 

Sarasota Bay, and Blackburn Bay) show evidence of decreased concentrations of total 

nitrogen and total phosphorus during this time period. In contrast, none of these three 
bay segments shows a trend in chlorophyll A. Roberts Bay exhibits a trend of improved 

water clarity between 1983 and 1998, but no trend is evident for either Little Sarasota 

Bay or Blackburn Bay. 

Since 1989, 9 of 12 bay segments show patterns of decreasing concentrations of both 

total nitrogen and total phosphorus. In contrast, no bay segments show a pattern of 

decreasing chlorophyll A concentrations, although one bay segment (eastern Palma 

Sola Bay) exhibits a pattern of increasing algal abundance. Water clarity has 

apparently increased during this time period in 2 bay segments (along the mainland 

east of Lido Key, and in Roberts Bay) but has decreased in 2 other bay segments 

(eastern Palma Sola Bay, and along the barrier islands just north and south of 

Longboat Pass). It seems unlikely that increased runoff from the 1997 to 1998 El Nino 

event was the basis for the increased chlorophyll A concentrations and decreased 

water clarity in eastern Palma Sola Bay during this time period, as there was no 

concurrent trend in salinity. However, the trend of decreased water clarity between 

1989 and 1998 along the barrier islands just north and south of Longboat Pass is 

concurrent with a trend of declining salinities. 

In summary, recent (1 989 to 1998) trends of declining concentrations of total nitrogen 

and total phosphorus (9 of 12 bay segments) do not seem to be accompanied by 

continued decreases in phytoplankton abundance, as no bay segments showed trends 

of decreasing chlorophyll A concentrations during that same time period. Also, while 2 

bay segments show evidence of improved water clarity between 1989 and 1998,2 bay 

segments also seem to have experienced declines in water clarity during that same 

time period. The basis for this potential disconnect between declining nutrient 

concentrations and further decreases in phytoplankton abundance and improvements 

in water clarity (between 1989 and 1998) merits further investigation. 

Finally, additional efforts are required to determine the basis for the apparent trends of 

decreasing water clarity in eastern Palma Sola Bay and that portion of Sarasota Bay 

adjacent to the barrier islands just north and south of Longboat Pass in recent years. 

Contaminant Levels in Bay 

Sediments 

Using aluminum content as a means 

to "normalize" data sets, sediment 

enrichment ratios for copper, lead, 

and zinc were determined for 35 

transects located throughout 

Sarasota Bay (Figure B-2). In this 

figure, enrichment ratios greater than 

1 are indicative of ratios higher than 

the upper limit to the 95 percent 

confidence interval created from a 

statewide data base. This 

relationship was calculated using 

ratios for Cu, Pb, and 

Zn in various tributaries. 
data from locations throughout Florida where toxin loads are absent or minimal 

(Lowery, 1992). In Sarasota Bay, several "hot spots" for toxin contamination are 

apparent, specifically, Hudson Bayou, Bowlees Creek, Phillippi Creek, W hitaker Bayou, 

and Cedar Hammock Creek. 

Areas with elevated enrichment ratios are indicative of anthropogenic impacts. Such 

areas typically show multiple contamination from metals, pesticides, and hydrocarbon 

residues (Lowrey, 1992). Additionally, areas with elevated levels of toxins in the 

sediment are typically areas with elevated levels of toxins in shellfish (Dixon, 1992). 

These watersheds have been the focus of more detailed assessments in recent years, 

to try and determine which sub-basins, if any, contribute disproportionately high toxin 

loads (Dixon et al. 1999 a & b). With this information, stormwater retrofit projects can 

be placed for optimal benefit. 

Status and Trends in Wetlands 

Accompanying the post-World War I I population boom, tidal wetlands throughout the 

watershed decreased from approximately 4,104 acres in 1950 to 2,495 acres in 1990 

(Estevez, 1992). Forested freshwater wetlands in the Sarasota Bay watershed 

decreased by 35 percent during the period 1975-1 991 (Beaman, 1992). 

In Manatee County, much of the original tidal wetland coverage remains intact, although 

much of the freshwater wetlands have been lost. In Sarasota County, vast stretches of 

freshwater wetlands remain intact, but the mangrove shoreline has nearly disappeared 

in most areas (Estevez, 1992). The pattern of wetland loss appears to be related to 

how development occurred in different parts of the watershed, with Manatee County 

mostly expanding into the interior regions south of Bradenton, and with Sarasota 

County mostly expanding parallel to its shoreline with the Bay. 

The rate of loss of tidal wetlands during the period of 1975-1990 was about 20 acres 

per year, which is less than one half the rate experienced during the period of 1950- 

1975 (52 acres per year; Estevez, 1992). Wetlands loss in Sarasota Bay has typically 

involved two phenomena: the loss of areal coverage itself, and the fragmentation of 

remaining wetlands into smaller pieces. As fragmentation alone can have a significant 

negative impact on wetland processes, regardless of declines in acreage, wetland 

productivity, habitat value and stability are therefore dually impacted (Reid and Trexler, 

1991). 

For freshwater wetlands, the rate of loss from 1975-1 990 equals 1 19 acres per year, 

nearly six times the rate of loss for tidal wetlands. Forested wetlands account for 23 

percent of the remaining 1,388 freshwater wetlands in the watershed (by number, not 

acreage), with marshland accounting for 39 percent and wet prairies accounting for 27 

percent of all freshwater wetlands (Beaman, 1992). More than 75 percent of all 

freshwater wetlands have either been dredged or filled to some degree, with only 21 

percent exhibiting no signs of human impact (Beaman, 1992). Additionally, up to 95 

percent of freshwater wetlands, depending on location in the watershed, have some 
degree of invasive species problems, with the severity of such problems being greatest 

in the northern and central portions of the watershed, and least in the southern portions 

(Seaman, 1992). Recent habitat restoration projects are estimated to have created 

approximately 200 acres of tidal wetlands and adjacent upland communities (SBNEP, 

200 1 ). 

Status and Trends in Fisheries 

Sarasota Bay includes a variety of habitats that are important in sustaining larval, 

juvenile, and adult stages of many recreationally and commercially important species of 

fish. Open water habitats, hard bottom communities, and artificial reefs support large 

numbers of baitfish such as menhaden (Brevoortia SJ.) and thread-herring 

(Opisthonema oglinum), as well as occasional schools of pompano (Trachinotus 

carolinus), and large numbers of black sea bass (Centropristis striata) and sheepshead 

(Archosargus ~robatoce~halus). Seagrass meadows provide vital habitat for two of the 

most sought-after species, spotted seatrout (Cvnoscion nebulosus) and redfish 

(Sciaenops ocellatus), as well as the commercially valuable striped mullet (Mugil 

cephalus). Mangrove fringes support large numbers of juvenile fish, and also provide 

critical habitat for various species of grunts (Haemulon spp.) and snappers (Lutianus 

SPPJ 

As is the case in many parts of Florida, the available fisheries data suggest declines in 

abundance of recreationally and commercially important species have occurred 

throughout Sarasota Bay. Edwards (1992) used two different figures to graphically 

illustrate the relative impacts of harvesting versus habitat loss on fisheries productivity. 

Figure B-3, from Edwards (1992), 

illustrates the decline in striped 

mullet (Mugil cephalus) landings from 

both Manatee and Sarasota 

Counties from 1950 to 1990. 

Because the vast majority of mullet 

are caught by commercial fishermen, 

declines in landings are thought to 

be related to the combined impacts 

of commercial fishing pressure and 

habitat loss. As mullet harvests were 

maintained at a consistently higher 

level during a prolonged period of 

time (the years 1955-1 970), as 

compared to landings during 1975- 

1990, the decline in mullet landings 

Since 1993, commercial harvests of striped mullet have declined substantially, as the 

use of gill nets for entanglement has been outlawed after Florida voters passed a 

Figure B-3. Stiped Mullet Landinas in Sarasota Bay. is not thought to be related to 

overfishing alone (Edwards, 1992). 
Constitutional Amendment to prevent such gear from being used. Commercial 

harvesting of striped mullet now requires the use of cast nets, rather than gill nets. 

In contrast, spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus) show a more significant decline in 

recent years (Figure B-4), which may reflect increased harvest pressure from 

recreational anglers, in addition to impacts associated with habitat loss. 

When comparing fisheries data 

with data on status and trends in 

wetlands and seagrass coverage, 

Edwards (1 992) concluded that 

I... alteration and degradation of the 

Sarasota Bay system is the most 

likely cause of the spotted seatrout 

fishery decline, with the fishery 

declines paralleling, in timing and 

magnitude, the declines of 

important fishery habitats such as 

seagrasses, mangroves and 

natural shorelines." 

Fiaure B-4. Spotted Seatrout Landinqs in Sarasota Bav 

Status and Trends in Nitrogen Loads and Seagrass Coverage 

Seagrass coverage has been used as a "bio-indicator" of water quality in Tampa Bay 

(Johannson, 1991) and Lemon Bay (Tomasko et al., 2001). In these two estuaries, the 

link between human activities and seagrass coverage is mostly mediated through 

changes in the abundance of phytoplankton. That is, changes in nutrient loads cause 

changes in phytoplankton populations, which in turn bring about modifications to water 

clarity. Increases or decreases in water clarity can cause, in turn, changes in seagrass 

coverage, by controlling the depth to which seagrasses can grow. 

Based in part on this negative 20 ! I I 0 I 1 I 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 

In Sarasota Bay, water quality 140 

correlation between the biomass TN Load (kg TN I day) 

parameters (e.g., nutrient 

concentrations, chlorophyll A - E 120- 

. levels, etc.) have been shown to 3 

of seagrass meadows and the 1 Fiqure B-5. Nitroaen Loads vs. Seaarass Biomass 

me Â 

be poor indicators of modeled -0 100- 

nitrogen loads (Tomasko et al., 

1996). However, and as shown 

in Figure B-5, seagrass biomass 

varies inversely with modeled 

nitrogen loads in Sarasota Bay. a 40 - 8 

0 Â 
modeled nitrogen loads that they are exposed to, it was anticipated that reductions in 

nitrogen loads into Sarasota Bay would bring about increased seagrass coverage 

(Tomasko et al., 1992). Fortunately, that appears to be correct. 

Sarasota Bay Nitrogen Loads 

1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 

Year 

Fiaure B-6. Bay-wide Nitroaen Loads. 

As shown in Figure B-6, nitrogen loads 

into Sarasota Bay were estimated to have 

increased substantially between predevelopment times (i.e., 1890 ) and 1988. 

In response to significant reductions in 

nitrogen loads from both public and 

private wastewater treatment plants, point 

source nitrogen loads to Sarasota Bay are 

thought to have declined by perhaps as 

much as 90 percent. For all nitrogen 

sources combined, loads are believed to 

have declined by nearly 50 percent 

between 1988 and 1998 (SBNEP, 2001). 

Additionally, it appears that the role of atmospheric deposition of nitrogen to the open 

waters of Sarasota Bay is apparently less than was previously estimated. The previous 

nitrogen loading model for Sarasota Bay used rainfall nitrogen concentrations from the 

Tampa Bay region to determine this portion of the nitrogen budget. However, recently 

collected data on rainfall chemistry suggest that the nitrogen concentration in rainfall in 

Sarasota Bay is substantially lower than that found in Tampa Bay (Dixon et al. 1999c; 

Heyl, 1992). With rainfall contributing a smaller percentage of nitrogen loads than was 

previously thought, the reduction in bay-wide nitrogen loads associated with wastewater 

treatment plant upgrades is higher than was previously estimated (e.g., SBNEP, 1995). 

Sarasota Bay Seagrass Acreage As nitrogen loads to Sarasota Bay 

have decreased in recent years, the 

amount of seagrass coverage appears GOAL ....... 

to have increased somewhat 

concurrently (Figure B-7). 

Overall, seagass coverage in Sarasota 1988 

Bay expanded by 1,614 acres between 

1988 and 1996, a 19 percent increase. 

However, seagrass coverage o -1 

apparently declined by 685 acres 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 

Year 

between 1996 and 1999, probably due h I 

to the elevated rainfall and non-point Figure B-7. Seagrass Acreage in Sarasota Bay. 

source pollutant loads associated with 

the 1997 to 1998 El Nino event. The increased rainfall associated with this climatic 

phenomenon is also thought to be responsible for declines in seagrass coverage in 

Tampa Bay, Lemon Bay and Charlotte Harbor, as well (Tomasko, 2002). 
Overall, there is reason to believe that future nitrogen load reductions would be able to 

bring about further increases in seagrass acreage in Sarasota Bay. However, climatic 

phenomena such as El Nino events could bring about occasional short-term reductions. 
APPENDIX C - LITERATURE CITED 

Beaman, R. 1992. Freshwater wetlands. Pp. 6.21-6.32. In: (P. Roat, C. Ciccolella, 

~.~'mith, andD. Tomasko, eds.). Sarasota Bay: Framework for Action. Sarasota Bay 

National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Deming, J., R.S. Schwarz, P. Carender, D. Delahaye, and J.R. Williams. 1990. An 

historic resources survey of the coastal zone of Sarasota County, Florida. Report to the 

Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners, Sarasota, FL. 

Dixon, L.K. 1992. Bivalved shellfish of Sarasota Bay. Pp. 11 .I-1 1.18. In: (P. Roat, C. 

Ciccolella, H.Smith, and D. Tomasko, eds.). Sarasota Bay: Framework for Action. 

Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Dixon, L.K. and M.G. Heyl. 1999. Trend analysis of water quality data for the Sarasota 

Bay National Estuary Program. Final Report for: Sarasota Bay National Estuary 

Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Dixon, L.K., Kirkpatrick, G.J. and J.R. Leverone. 1999. Biological effects of atmospheric 

deposition on algal assemblages. Final Report for: Sarasota Bay National Estuary 

Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Edwards, R.E. 1992. Fishery resource assessment. Pp. 10.1-10.28. In: (P. Roat, C. 

Ciccolella, H.Smith, and D. Tomasko, eds.). Sarasota Bay: Framework for Action. 

Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Estevez, E.D. 1992. Tidal wetlands. Pp. 6.1-6.20. In: (P. Roat, C. Ciccolella, H.Smith, 

and D. Tomasko, eds.). Sarasota Bay: Framework for Action. Sarasota Bay National 

Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Hand, J., Col, J., and L. Lord. 1996. Southwest Florida district water quality: 1996 

305(b) technical appendix. FDEP, Bureau of Surface Water Management. Tallahassee, 

FL. 

Heyl, M.G. 1992. Point- and nonpoint-source pollutant-loading assessment. Pp. 12.1 - 

12.1 9. In: (P. Roat, C. Ciccolella, H.Smith, and D. Tomasko, eds.). Sarasota Bay: 

Framework for Action. Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Johansson, J.O.R. 1991. Long-term trends of nitrogen loading, water quality and 

biological indicators in Hillsborough Bay, Florida. Pp. 157-176. In: Treat, S.F., Clark, 

P.A., eds. Proceedings, Tampa Bay Area Scientific Information Symposium 2. February 

27-March 1, 1991 : Tampa, FL. 

Lowrey, S. 1992. Physical and chemical properties - bay water and sediment quality. 

Pp. 4.2-4.20. In: (P. Roat, C. Ciccolella, H.Smith, and D. Tomasko, eds.). Sarasota Bay: 

Framework for Action. Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 
Reid, W.V. and M.C. Trexler. 1991. Drowning the national heritage: climate change and 

U.S. coastal biodiversity. World Resources Institute. Washington, D.C. 

Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. 1995. Comprehensive Conservation and 

Management Plan. Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. 2001. Sarasota Bay 2000 - A Decade of 

Progress. Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Sheng, Y.P., and S. Peene. 1992. Circulation and its effect on water quality. Pp. 5.1 - 

5.18. In: (P. Roat, C. Ciccolella, H.Smith, and D. Tomasko, eds.). Sarasota Bay: 

Framework for Action. Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Tomasko, D.A., M. Alderson, P. Clark, J. Culter, K. Dixon, R.Edwards, E. Estevez, M. 

Heyl, S. Lowrey, Y.P. Sheng, J. Stevely. 1992. Technical synthesis of Sarasota Bay. 

Pp. 14.1-14.16. In: (P. Roat, C. Ciccolella, H.Smith, and D. Tomasko, eds.). Sarasota 

Bay: Framework for Action. Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 

Tomasko, D.A., Dawes, C.J., and M.O. Hall. (1996). The effects of anthropogenic 

nutrient enrichment on turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum) in Sarasota Bay, Florida 

(USA). Estuaries 19: 448-456. 

Tomasko, D.A., Bristol, D.L. and J.A. Ott. 2001. Assessment of present and future 

nitrogen loads, water quality, and seagrass (Thalassia testudinum) depth distribution in 

Lemon Bay, Florida. Estuaries 24: 926-938. 

Tomasko, D.A. (2002). Status and trends in seagrass coverage in Tampa Bay, with 

reference to other Southwest Florida Estuaries. Pp. 11 -20. In: H.S. Greening (ed.). 

Seagrass Management: It's Not Just Nutrients! 2000 Aug. 22-24; St. Petersburg, FL. 

Tampa Bay Estuary Program. 246 p. 

Whelan, J.J. 1992. Recreational access and use assessment. Pp. 13.1-13.20. In: (P. 

Roat, C. Ciccolella, H.Smith, and D. Tomasko, eds.). Sarasota Bay: Framework for 

Action. Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Sarasota, FL. 
APPENDIX D - GOVERNANCE WITHIN THE SARASOTA BAY BASIN 

A. Overview 

Five levels of government are involved in resource management and regulatory 

activities within the Sarasota Bay Basin. These include single purpose local 

governments (i.e. independent taxing districts), general purpose local governments (i.e. 

cities and counties), regional agencies (i.e. SWFWMD and the Southwest Florida 

Regional Planning Council), as well as state and federal agencies. 

B. Agencies 

1. Local Governments 

a. Sarasota County 

Sarasota County, established in 1921, has an estimated (1 988) population of 257,667 

and a land area of 573 square miles. It contains five general purpose local 

governments [the Board of County Commissioners, the City of Sarasota (population 

51,442), the City of Venice (population 15,252), the City of North Port (population 

9,145), and the Town of Longboat Key (population 6,595), which is shared with 

Manatee County]. With the exception of the City of North Port, the above-mentioned 

entities have jurisdiction within the Sarasota Bay SWIM Plan area. Ninety-four special 

districts have been formed, of which 52 are operative arms of County government. 

b. Manatee County 

Manatee County has an estimated (1990) population of 21 1,700 and a surface area of 

747 square miles. It is served by a Board of County Commissioners and contains the 

city of Bradenton (population 43,779) and several smaller towns and municipalities. At 

this time, the city of Bradenton-proper does not appear to be located within the 

immediate watershed of Sarasota Bay, although out-parcels located along the Palma 

Sola Causeway are within the watershed of Palma Sola Bay. 

2. Sub-state Agencies 

Three sub-state agencies exist that would be involved in the implementation of the 

SWIM plan. These are the West Coast Inland Navigation District, the Southwest 

Florida Regional Planning Council (for Sarasota County), the Tampa Bay Regional 

Planning Council (for Manatee County), and the Southwest Florida Water Management 

District. 

The West Coast Inland Navigation District includes the intracoastal waterway of 

Sarasota and Manatee County. It is the local sponsor for the maintenance activities of 

the waterways, and has been the local sponsor for inlet and pass maintenance 

programs for navigation purposes. 
The Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council is the Regional Planning Agency 

designated in Section 186.505 of the Florida Statutes. It performs the responsibilities 

described in that section and the Regional Planning Agency roles assigned in Section 

380.05, F.S. (Resource Planning Committees, DRI reviews and Ch. 163, Local Plan 

Reviews), for Sarasota County and its municipalities. 

The Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council performs these duties for Manatee County. 

The Southwest Florida Water Management District is responsible for performing duties 

assigned under Ch. 373, F.S., as well as duties delegated through DEP for Chs. 253 

and 403, F.S., and for local plan review (Ch. 163, F.S.). It performs those duties for an 

area that includes Sarasota County and Manatee County, as well as those cities 

contained within these two counties. 

3. State Agencies 

Many state agencies are involved in environmental regulation and resource 

management in the Sarasota Bay watershed and estuary. The Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection (FDEP) is the leading agency in the protection and 

management of Sarasota Bay. Other relevant entities include the Florida Department 

of Community Affairs, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the 

Marine Fisheries Commission, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer 

Services, Florida Department of Health, Florida Sea Grant Program, and the Florida 

Department of Transportation. 

a. Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 

This department regulates the purchase and use of restricted pesticides and assists in 

resource management through the activities of the Soil and Water Conservation 

Districts and the Division of Forestry. The Division of Aquaculture's Shellfish 

Environmental Assessment Section (SEAS) program classifies and determines the 

opening and closure of shellfish harvesting areas. 

b. Department of Community Affairs 

This department is responsible for reviewing local comprehensive plans and has review 

authority over developments of regional impact (DRI's). DRI investigations are 

concerned with proposed developments, which have the potential to affect the health, 

safety, or welfare of citizens of more than one county. 

The Comprehensive Plans of both Sarasota and Manatee counties have been reviewed 

by the DCA. All have come into compliance with the Local Comprehensive Planning 

Act, either through a final review action, a stipulation agreement, or a settlement 

agreement. 
c. Department of Environmental Protection 

The Department of Environmental Protection, itself a result of the merger of the old 

Department of Environmental Regulation and the Department of Natural Resources, is 

the lead state agency involved in water quality, pollution control, and resource recovery 

programs. The department sets state water quality standards and has permit 

jurisdiction over point and nonpoint source discharges, certain dredge and fill activities, 

drinking water systems, power plant siting, and many construction activities conducted 

within waters of the state. The Office of Water Policy, Bureau of Watershed 

Management, and Everglades Technical Support Section are key program areas 

involved in waterbody restoration, in conjunction with the U.S. EPA. These offices also 

interact closely with other federal and state agencies on water-related matters. 

The department is the primary reviewer of SWIM plans and is responsible for the 

disbursement of monies from the SWIM Trust Fund to the water management districts. 

The Department is also highly involved in the management of estuarine resources, 

primarily through the Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas. 

The Division of State Lands, Division of Recreation and Parks, and Office of Coastal 

and Aquatic Managed Areas oversee the management of state lands, including 

sovereign submerged lands, state parks such as Oscar Scherer, and aquatic preserves 

such as Lemon Ba and Terra Ceia. 

The Department's Florida Geological Survey office reviews oil and gas leasing requests 

involving nearshore and state waters. The Bureau of Beaches and Wetland Resources 

oversees the Environmental Resource Permitting Program and beach renourishment 

activities. 

d. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 

The purpose of the Commission is to manage, protect, and conserve wild animal life 

and freshwater and marine aquatic life. Its efforts within the SWIM plan area primarily 

involve freshwater and salt water sport and commercial fishing, fisheries and habitat 

management, fish stocking, fisheries research, wildlife monitoring, enforcement of 

fisherieslwildlife regulations, listed species protection, wildlife research, development 

review, and regional planning. 

The Commission is directed to review SWIM plans to determine if the plan has adverse 

effects on wild animal life and fresh water aquatic life and their habitats. 

The Florida Marine Research Institute (FMRI) conducts studies throughout Sarasota 

Bay with respect to habitat quality (e.g. marsh and seagrass habitats), habitat utilization 

and value with respect to important fisheries, and fish population dynamics and stock 

assessment. However, at present, the Juvenile Fish Monitoring Program does not 

include sample sites in Sarasota Bay. 
e. Marine Fisheries Commission 

The Marine Fisheries Commission manages marine fish species (excluding endangered 

or threatened species) by regulating their harvesting. The Commission's jurisdiction 

covers the following areas: a) gear specifications, b) prohibited gear, c) bag limits, d) 

size limits, e) species that may not be sold, f) protected species, g) closed areas, h) 

quality control codes, i) harvesting seasons, j) special considerations related to eggbearing females, and k) oyster and clam relaying. The MFC is required to make annual 

recommendations to the Governor and Cabinet regarding marine fisheries research 

priorities. 

f. Department of Health 

The Department of Health is responsible for the permitting of septic systems and other 

on-site disposal systems (OSDS's) through its county health departments. It also 

coordinates mosquito control programs. 

g. Department of Transportation 

The Department of Transportation's Project Development and Environmental Offices in 

Bartow assist in the design, review, and permitting of road and right-of-way projects in 

the Sarasota Bay region, and would play an important role in the enhancement of 

circulation in northeaster Palma Sola Bay during the reconstruction of the Palma Sola 

Causeway. 

h. Florida Sea Grant Program 

The Florida Sea Grant Program is supported by awards from the Office of Sea Grant 

(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) under provisions of the National 

Sea Grant College and Programs Act of 1966. The Florida Sea Grant Program has 

three major components: applied marine research, education, and advisory services 

(through local marine extension agents). 

Florida Sea Grant provides scientific research and habitat-related information that is 

useful in the management of Sarasota Bay's natural resources. 

4. Federal Agencies 

Federal jurisdiction in Sarasota Bay involves the regulatory responsibilities of the US. 

Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Coast 

Guard, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Department of Interior. Their 

main regulatory functions include overseeing dredge and fill activities, maintaining 

navigability of the waters of the United States, overseeing cleanups following pollution 

spills, protecting endangered species, protecting overall environmental quality, and 

managing offshore activities. These agencies, in conjunction with the U.S. Geological 
Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, also contribute to 

the collection of technical data concerning Sarasota Bay and its watershed. 

a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is the primary federal agency responsible 

for water quality protection. The agency oversees hazardous waste cleanups, 

protection of public drinking water systems, all point source pollutant discharges into 

waters of the United States (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits), 

and the protection and restoration of surface and groundwater. The agency also 

reviews Corps of Engineers permit activities, sets minimum quality standards, and sets 

guidelines for state environmental programs. EPA also funds sewerage facilities 

studies through the SWFRPC and the TBRPC, and system improvements through the 

Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 

The EPA's greatest presence in Sarasota Bay is through its National Estuary Program, 

established under Section 320 of the Clean Water Act. Sarasota Bay was selected for 

inclusion in the National Estuary Program in July 1988. The Sarasota Bay National 

Estuary Program (SBNEP) officially began with the signing of a five-year agreement 

among local, regional, state and federal agencies on June 26, 1989. 

The SBNEP has produced three documents needed for the preservation and 

restoration of Sarasota Bay. These documents include: State of the Bay Report (SOB - 

1990), Framework for Action (FFA - 1992), and the Comprehensive Conservation and 

Management Plan (CCMP - 1995). The SOB was designed to be a primer on general 

bay problems, as well as a blueprint for establishing the research and restoration goals 

for the SBNEP. Upon completion of the necessary technical projects, the principle 

investigators and SBNEP staff produced the FFA. The FFA included preliminary 

management options, identified by principal investigators, that were designed to 

improve the quality of Sarasota Bay. After reviewing the proposed management 

options through a series of more than 30 public workshops and committee hearings, a 

course of action was finalized for the restoration and preservation of Sarasota Bay. 

This document, the CCMP, is the final work product specified by the original five-year 

agreement. At present, the SBNEP is actively involved in the process of implementing 

the actions called for in the CCMP, as well as fostering relationships between various 

governmental bodies for facilitating restoration and protection projects. 

b. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is concerned with all activities which affect 

navigable waters of the United States, particularly those involving construction of 

structures and dredging and filling in navigable waters. The Corps is also involved in 

permitting the placement of dredge and fill material into navigable waters and adjacent 

wetlands, and in funding aquatic plant control in navigable and public waters. 
c. U.S. Coast Guard 

The U.S. Coast Guard is the primary federal agency entrusted with marine law 

enforcement. The Guard's mission also includes hazardous materials cleanups, search 

and rescue, buoy replacement, vessel safety inspection, and right-of-way clearance on 

navigable waterways. 

d. U.S. Department of Commerce 

Within the department, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which 

includes the National Weather Service and the National Hurricane Center, is a scientific 

and data collection agency which assimilates oceanographic and meteorological 

information in the form of maps, charts, interpretive reports, and other documents. The 

National Marine Fisheries Service administers NOAA's program to manage living 

marine resources for commercial and recreational use. It supports fisheries 

management operations, international fisheries affairs, fishery development, trade, and 

industry assistance activities, habitat conservation activities, and scientific and technical 

aspects of NOAA's marine fisheries resources programs. 

f. U.S. Department of Interior 

The primary water-related functions performed by this agency involve the review of 

proposed activities which may impact threatened or endangered species, review of U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers permits for potential effects on fish and wildlife, and 

management of all federally-owned public lands. Within the department, the U.S. 

Geological Survey conducts investigations concerning hydrology, hydrogeology, water 

use, and ground and surface water quality. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

manages and restores fish and wildlife populations and conducts research on the 

effects of pollution on those resources. The National Park Service maintains federal 

parks and sanctuaries, regulating multiple uses on these lands to achieve a balance of 

benefits for both man and wildlife. The department also oversees those requests and 

offshore activities associated with exploration and development on the outer continental 

shelf. 
APPENDIX E - POINT AND NON-POINT (NPDES) DISCHARGES WITHIN THE 

SARASOTA BAY BASIN 

The attached spreadsheet is a list of FDEP-permitted point and non-point (NPDES) 

discharges within the watershed of Sarasota Bay. This list was compiled by staff of 

FDEP's Southwest District Office in Tampa, and special thanks are given to Mr. Charles 

Kovach, for coordinating this assessment. 
13409 FLA013409 PETERSON MANUFACTURING 

13414 FLA013414 TRI-STATE MOBILE HOME PARK 

13416 FLA013416 FIELD CLUB 

13419 FLA013419 OAKWOOD GARDEN WWTP 

13420 FLA013420 FAIR WINDS CONDOMINIUM 

13421 FLA013421 YODER'S TOO RESTAURANT 

13422 FLA013422 SPANISH LAKES MHP 

13426 FLA013426 HOUGHTON WAGMAN PARTNERSHIP. LTD. 

13427 FLA013427 DOLOMITE UTILITIES TRI-PAR WWTP 

13428 FLA013428 MANASOTA BEACH GARDENS WWTP 

13429 FLA013429 POLYNESIAN VILLAGE MHP WWTP 

13436 FLA013436 KING'S GATE RVP WWTP 

13441 FUW13441 TERVIS TUMBLER WWTP 

13443 FLA013443 ENGLEWOOO UTILITIES WWTP 

13447 FLA013447 PROCTOR ROAD WWTP 

13449 FLA013449 HEALTH SOUTH OF SARASOTA 

13450 FLA013450 MEDICAL CENTER OF SARASOTA WWTP 

13451 FLA013451 BEEKMAN PLACE UTILITY WWTP 

13453 FLA013453 LAKE FOREST CONDOMINIUM 

13454 FLA013454 LONGWOOD RUN UTILITIES WWTP 

13456 FLA013456 KENSINGTON PARK UTILITIES 27TH STREET 

13457 FLA013457 OAK HAMMOCK PROF.CTR.(BENEVA CREEK) 

13458 FL0134589 FRUITVILLE WWTP 

13459 FLA013459 WOODBRIDGE ESTATES 

13463 FlA013463 CARD10 RESEARCH, INC. 

13464 M013464 VENETIAN MHP 

13477 FLA013477 SARASOTA BAY MHP - R/0 PLANT 

13479 FIA013479 FLORIDA MINING & MATERIALS/LITTRELL 

13481 FLA013481 DARBY BUICK. INC. 

13483 FLA013483 SINGELTARY CONCRETE 

13484 FLG110080 FLORIDA ROCK INDUSTRIES. INC. (VENICE READY MIX BATCH PLANT) 

13485 FLA013485 ALBRITTON FRUIT COMPANY, INC. 

13486 FLG110291 CEMEX, INC. - SARASOTA CBP 

13487 FL0134872 LAKE VILLAGE MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY 

13491 FLA013491 OSCAR SCHERER STATE PARK 

14053 FLA014053 SANDALHAVEN UTILITIES STP 

14064 FLA014064 LANDINGS ON LEMON BAY 

155 CATTLEMAN ROAD 

24 EAST BAY ST 

1400 FIELD RD 

4035 SOUTH SCHOOL AVENUE 

ALBEE ROAD 

3434 BAHIA VISTA 

1340 N TAMIAMI TRAIL 

7839 FRUITVILLE ROAD 

1450 BLIND BROOK DRIVE 

1730 MANASOTA BEACH ROAD 

1495 ALAMANDER AVENUE 

1500 KING'S WAY 

HWY 41 AT HAPPY HAVEN DR. 

555 FOXWOOD BLVD. 

WORCESTER ROAD SOUTH OF 

SARASOTA 

OSPREY 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

NOKOMIS 

SARASOTA 

NOKOMIS 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

ENGLEWOOD 

ENGLEWOOD 

NOKOMIS 

OSPREY 

ENGLEWOOD 

W1LKlNSON SARASOTA 

3251 PROCTOR ROAD 

3920 BEE RIDGE ROAD 

290 COCOANUT AVENUE 

4062 LAKE FOREST DRIVE 

6250 LONGWOOD RUN BOULEVARD 

2461 DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. WAY 

3845 BEE RIDGE ROAD 

1616 WENDEL KENT ROAD 

N OF WILKINSON W SWIFT ROAD 

803 SOUTH TAMIAMI TRAIL 

8885 TAMIAMI TR 

42 WEST OAK 

200 N. SEABOARD AVENUE 

5170 S. TAMIAMI TRAIL 

435 SEABOARD AVENUE 

252 SEABOARD AVENUE . 

5947 CLARK CENTER AVE. 

1100 CENTUM. AVENUE 

400 LAKE DR 

1843 S TAMIAMI TRAIL 

6800 PLACIDA RD @FIDDLERS GREEN 

2424 PLACIDA ROAD 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

OSPREY 

SARASOTA 

OSPREY 

VENICE 

SARASOTA 

VENICE 

VENICE 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

NOKOMIS 

OSPREY 

ENGLEWOOD 

ENGLEWOOD 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58SWD DW 

58SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWD DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWD DW 

58SWD DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWD DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA OW 

58 SWD IW . 

58 SWD 1W 

58 SWD IW 

58 SWD 1W 

58 SWD CBP 

58 SWD IW 

58 SWD CBP 

58 SWD IW 

58 SWSA DW 

8SD DW 

BSD DW 

0.0033 Front Gate 

0.0100 Front Gate 

0.0080 Front Gate 

0.0090 Front Gate 

0.0170 Front Gate 

0.0050 Front Gale 

0.0600 Front Gate 

0.0033 Front Gate 

0.3000 Front Gate 

0.0090 Front Gate 

0.0400 Front Gate 

0.0400 Front Gate 

0.0078 Front Gate 

0.1550 Front Gate 

0.0250 Front Gale 

0.0100 Front Gate 

0.0150 Front Gate 

0.0900 Front Gate 

0.0306 Front Gate 

0.2150 Front Gate 

0.1750 Front Gate 

0.0100 Front Gate 

1.5000 Front Gate 

0.0150 Front Gate 

0.0075 Front Gate 

0.0300 Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Center of Plant 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

0.0150 Front Gate 

Front Gale 

0.0099 Center of Plant 
^RJA FACILITY-I 

13472 FLA013472 

14066 FLA014066 

14081 PLA014081 

16274 FLG040008 

16774 FLA016774 

16901 FLA016901 

14091 FLA014091 

14052 FLA014052 

12728 FLAl27281 

18885 FL0188859 

18886 FIA188867 

18891 FL0188913 

18894 FL0188948 

18897 FIAl88972 

18898 FL0188981 

18899 FLOl88999 

18906 FLA189065 

12619 FLA012619 

13433 FLA134333 

13370 FLA133701 

13372 FLA013372 

13375 FLA013375 

13376 FLA013376 

13379 FL0041441 

13382 FLA013382 

13383 FLA013383 

13384 FLA013384 

13385 FLA013385 

13389 FLA013389 

NAME 

POLY COATINGS OF THE SOUTH 

SEASIDE SERVICE SYSTEM INC 

WATERS EDGE CON DO 

MOBIL S/S # 02-F3F 

COLE. DOROTHY - MARINE BIVALVE 

WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SARASOTA 

PARK POINTE VILLAS WWTP 

LITTLE GASPARILLA UTILITY INC 

CENTRAL PASCO REUSE SYSTEM 

KINGS GATE CLUB. INC.. RO WTP . 

SPANISH LAKES MHP R/0 WTP 

ARBORS MOBILE HOME PARK RO WTP 

KINGS GATE R.V. PARK RO WTP 

PETERSON MANUFACTURING CO.. INC. RO WTP 

LAKE TIPPECANOE RO WTP 

CAMELOT LAKES (ELL CAP 66) 

VENICE RANCH MHE RO PLANT 

MANATEE COUNTY SOUTHWEST REGIONAL WWTP 

ATLANTIC BRENTWOOD WRF 

SARASOTA COUNTY EDR D1W 

BEE RIDGE WRF 

SARASOTA COUNTY SEPTAGE TREATMENT RESIDUALS MANAGEMENT FACIY 

VENICE. CITY OF - ISLAND BEACH WWTP 

VENICE EASTSIDE WWTP 

KENSINGTON PARK UTILITIES MONICA PARKWAY WWTP 

SYLVAN LEA S/D 

BAHIA VISTA ESTATES 

MEADOWOOD WWTP 

KING'S GATE CLUB WWTP 

13392 FLA013392 HERON BAY CLUB WWTP 

13395 FLAO-13395 LAKE VILLAGE MHP 

13396 FLA013396 HAPPY HAVEN MHP 

13397 FLA043494 VENICE GARDENS WWTP 

13398 FLA013398 FLORIDA PINES MHC 

13404 FL0025755 SIESTA KEY UTILITIES AUTHORITY 

13405 FLA013405 VENICE RANCH MHP WWTP 

ADDRESS 

5944 SANDPHIL RD 

LITTLE GASPARILLA ISLAND 

SAN CASA DRIVE 

1700 LOCKWOOD RIDGE RD 

12390 PLACIDA ROAD 

5750 PINKNEY AVENUE 

WYOMING STREET 

LITTLE GASPARILIA ISLAND 

CENTRAL SECTOR OF PASCO COUNTY 

CASTLE DR. BETWEEN-CAMELOT DR. AND 

1340 NORTH TAMIAMI TRAIL 

515 S. TAMIAMI TRAIL 

1500 KINGS WAY 

155 CATTLEMEN ROAD 

4636 TIPPECANOE TRAIL 

5580 AXMINSTER DR. 

2496 SYLVIA LANE 

5101 65TH STREET WEST 

441 1 BAHIA VISTA STREET 

CENTER RD. @ FIRE STATION 

4001 10NA ROAD 

8350 BEE RIDGE ROAD 

1800 SOUTH HARBOR DRIVE 

351 0 LAUREL ROAD EAST 

3700 MONICA PARKWAY 

1730 SUGARBERRY LANE 

CITY 

SARASOTA 

PLACIDA 

ENGLEWOOD 

SARASOTA 

PLACIDA 

SARASOTA 

ENGLEWOOD 

GROVE CITY 

NIA 

NOKOMIS 

NOKOMIS 

OSPREY 

NOKOMIS 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

VENICE 

BRADENTON 

SARASOTA 

VENICE . 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

VENICE 

NOKOMIS 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

ZIP5 COUNTY OFFICE FACILITYT STATUS NPDES DESIGN-MP FEATURE 

58 SWD IW N N 0.0050 

8 SD UIC A N 0.0360 

8SD DW C N 

58 SWD PET A Y 

33946 8 SO IW A N 

34233 58SWD 1W A N 

34224 8 SD DW A N 

8 SD IW A N 

51 SWD REU A N 

34275 58 SWD IW A Y 

34275 58 SWD IW A N 

34275 58 SWD IW A Y 

34275 58 SWD iW A Y 

34232 58SWD IW A N 

34233 58 SWD IW A Y 

34241 58 SWD W A Y 

34292 58 SWD IW A N 

34210 41 SWD DW A N 

34232 58 SWD DW A N 

58 SWD Om A N 

34240 58 SWD DW A N 

34241 58 SWD RES A N 

34285 58SWD DW A N 

34275 58 SWD DW A Y 

34235 58 SWD DW A N 

... 34240 58 SWSA DW A N 

3901 BAHIA VISTA ST SARASOTA 34232 58 SWSA Dw A N 

4860 17TH STREET 

N OF LAUREL RD, E OF US 41 

800 SARABAY ROAD 

400 LAKE DRIVE N 

124 HAPPY HAVEN DRIVE 

375 VENICE EAST BOULEVARD 

150 SATULAH CR 

5200 OAKMOW PLACE 

2496 SYLVIA LANE 

- . . - . - - . . . 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

OSPREY 

NOKOMIS 

OSPREY 

VENICE 

VENICE 

SARASOTA 

VENICE 

58SWD DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA Dw 

58SWD DW 

SflSWSA DW 

58SWD DW 

58 SWSA DW 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Front Gale 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Center of Plant 

18.0000 Front Gate 

1.7500 Front Gate 

Front Gale 

1.5000 Front Gate 

5.0000 Front Gate 

0.5500 Front Gate 

3.0000 Front Gate 

0.4560 Front Gate 

0.0300 Front Gate 

0.0400 Front Gate 

0.9840 Front Gate 

0.0500 Front Gate 

0.0075 Front Gate 

0.0450 Front Gate 

0.0075 Front Gate 

2.0000 Front Gate 

0.0105 Front Gate 

2.7000 Front Gate 

0.0350 Front Gate 
14078 FLA014078 HIDEAWAY BAY BEACH CLUB CONDOASSOCIATION INC 

14089 FLA014089 GASPARILLA MOBILE ESTATES 

14097 FLA014097 BIZZY BUZZrS COIN LAUNDRY 

14102 FLA141020 GASPARILLA ISLAND WATER ASSOC 

14123 FLA014123 MERCURY MARINE 

14126 PLA014126 ENGLEWOOD WATER DISTRICT SOUTH 

16096 MI60962 VENICE GARDENS WATER UTIL DIW 

16569 FL0165697 FAIR WINDS CONDOMINIUM W0 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 

13467 FL0041785 SNOWBIRDLANO VISTAS. INC. 

17031 FLA017031 SARASOTA COUNTY AREA TRANSIT FACILITY 

17062 FLA017062 F.P.L WEST AUTOMOTIVE CENTER 

13394 FLA013394 CORAL COVE TRUST WWTP 

13418 FLA013418 JAPANESE GARDENS MHP WWTP 

17376 FLA017376 LAUREL OAK COUNTRY CLUB/ GOLF COURSE OPERATIONS 

13407 FLA013407 LAKE TIPPECANOE CONDOMINIUMS WWTP 

1341 1 FL0032808 SOUTH GATE AWWTP 

13410 FL0032816 GULF GATE AWWTP 

17934 FL0179345 FORMER HYNAUTIC, INC. 

13380 FL0043621 SARASOTA. CITY OF - R/0 PLANT 

13390 FLA013390 CAMELOT LAKES WWTP 

13432 M013432 2224 SOUTH TRAIL WWTP 

14127 FL0025780 AQUASOURCE UTILITY ING FORMERLY ROTONDA WEST UTILIITY 

14098 FLA014098 AQUASOURCE UTILITY 1NC AKA: ROTUNDA WEST 

14118 FLA014118 INDIGO ISLES MHP OWNERS ASSOC INC 

13473 FL0035335 VENICE. CITY OF - WO PLANT 

13403 FIA013403 PARK PLACE VILLAS (FKA BARCLAY HOUSE) 

13430 ~M013430 LYONS COVE CONDO 

17596 MI75960 GULF OLDS PONTIAC AUTOBODY SHOP 

26807 PLG911063 QUICK STOP NO. 8 

28434 FIRNEE028 EMCEE ELECTRONICS. INC 

28568 FLRNEE033 SUN HYDRAULICS INC 

13423 FLA013423 ARBORS MOBILE HOME PARK WWTP 

16936 M016936 MANATEE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKWVEHICULAR WASH WATER RECOVERY 

18890 FlA188905 WINDWARD ISLE RO WTP 

13368 FLA013368 NOKOMIS COMMUNKY PARK WWTP 

13475 PLA013475 SINGELTARY CONCRETE 

13377 FL0040771 SARASOTA, CITY OF. WWTP 

13455 FLA013455 CENTRAL COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY 

12000 PLACIDA ROAD 

2001 GASPARILLA ROAD (C.R. 771) 

3000 PLACIDA ROAD (SR 775) 

1700 E RAILROAD AVE 

S.R. 775 AT BOCA GRANDE CSWAY 

EVERINGTON ROAD 

100 CATTLEMEN ROAD 

350 FAIRWINDS DRIVE 

1200 EAST COLONIA LANE 

5303 PINKNEY AVENUE 

2344 12TH STREET 

7500 SOUTH TAMIAMI TRAIL 

6181 TEAHOUSE ROAD 

2875 DICK WILSON DRIVE 

4636 TIPPECANOE TRAIL 

3209 PINE VALLEY DRIVE 

7302 BOUNTY DRIVE 

1035 OLD VENICE ROAD 

1642 12TH STREET 

5580 AXMINSTER DRIVE 

2224 S TAMIAMI TR 

3560 HAITIAN ROAD 

9494 PLACIDA ROAD 

2801 GRIGGS ROAD 

200 NORTH WARFIELD AVENUE 

3900 S LOCKWOOD RIDGE DRIVE 

101 LOUELLA LN 

2367 TAMIAMI TRAIL 

1634 N. WASHINGTON BOULEVARD 

520 CYPRESS AVENUE 

701 TALLEVAST RD 

51 5 SOUTH TAMIAMI TRAIL 

4508-0 66TH STREET WEST 

1 CATAMARAN DR. 

234 NIPPINO TRAIL EAST 

622 CATTLEMAN ROAD 

1850 12TH STREET 

7905 MCINTOSH ROAD 

PLACIDA 

PLACIDA 

GROVE CITY 

BOCAGRANDE 

PLACIDA 

GROVE CllY 

SARASOTA 

NOKOMIS 

NOKOMIS 

SFSOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

VENICE 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

OSPREY 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

VENICE 

ROTONDA WEST 

PLACIDA 

ENGLEWOOD 

VENICE 

SARASOTA 

NOKOMIS 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

VENICE 

SARASOTA 

OSPREY 

BRADENTON 

SARASOTA 

NOKOMIS 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

SARASOTA 

BSD DW 

BSD DW 

8 SO IW 

BSD IW 

8SD DW 

8SD DW 

58 SWD UIC 

58SWD 1W 

58 SWD IW 

58SWD IW 

58SWD 1W 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWSA DW 

58 SWD IW 

58 SWSA DW 

58SWD DW 

58 SWD DW 

58SWD IW 

58SWD IW 

58 SWD DW 

58 SWSA DW 

a so iw 8SD DW 

8SD DW 

58SWO WU 

58 SWSA DW 

56 SWSA DW 

58 SWD IW 

58 SWD PET 

58 TLST NEX 

41 TLST NEX 

58 SWSA DW 

41 SWD IW 

58 SWD IW 

58SWD DW 

58 SWO IW 

58WO DW 

58 SWD DW 

0.0210 Center of Plant 

0.0250 Center of Plant 

Center of Plant 

0.6700 Center of Plant 

Center of Plant 

1.2000 Center of Plant 

1.8000 Front Gate 

0.01 10 Center of Plant 

Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Front Gale 

0.0050 Front Gale 

0.0480 Front Gate 

Front Gate 

0.0400 Front Gate 

1.3600 Front Gate 

1.8000 Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Office 

0.1680 Front Gate 

0.0030 Front Gate 

0.5000 Center of Plant 

Center of Plant 

Center of Plant 

0.3920 Front Gate 

0.0080 Front Gale 

0.0050 Front Gate 

front gate 

UNKNOWN 

unknown 

0.0300 Front Gate 

Front Gate 

Front Gale 

0.0068 Front Gale 

Front Gate 

10.2000 Front Gate 

4.0000 Front Gale