### Tampa Bay Estuary Program Technical Report#07-00



# A SUMMARY OF SEAGRASS COVERAGE DATA FOR TAMPA BAY DATA REPORT: 1997

FINAL 

# REPORT

August 2000

# A SUMMARY OF 

# SEAGRASS COVERAGE DATA FORTAMPA BAY DATA REPORT: 1997

Preparedfor: 

# Tampa Bay Estuary Program Mail Station 

## I-1/NEP

1008th 

## Avenue 

## SE St. 

## Petersburg, 

## FL 33701

Prepared by:

11 55 

## Eden 

## Isle Drive 

## NE St. 

## Petersburg, 

## FL 33704 August 2000

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This report was prepared byJanickiEnvironmental, Inc. under Contract No. T-98-06for the Tampa Bay Estuary Program. Mr. Dick Eckenrod and Ms. Holly Greening of the TBEP provided helpful comments. We thank 

### Ms. Diana Burdick of 

### the Southwest FloridaWater Management Districtfor her responsivenessand helpfulness inobtaining necessarydata for the completion of this report. 

### The Emergent and Submerged Habitat Subcommittee of the 

### TBEP has been most helpful in its comments and direction for this effort, including review comments from Dr. Tom Cuba, Dr. Robin Lewis, Mr. Roger Johansson, and Mr. Walt Avery. NOTE FROM

### TBEP STAFF The most recent aerial photographs used by the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) to generate the mapping products in this data report were taken in 1996-1 997. The SWFWMD 

### is currently (at the time of this printing) photointerpreting aerial photographs taken in 1999. To provide timely interpretation of progress towards seagrass restoration goals, interpretation 

### is not included in this data report, but will be discussedwhen 

### the 1999 photointerpretation results are available. This report serves a both the SWFWMD and TBEP data report for the 1996 Tampa Bay seagrass coverage.

## TABLE 

## OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1

2 3

4 

### 5 INTRODUCTlON 1.1 Objectives 1.2 Importance

### of Seagrasses inTampa Bay 1.3 Establishing the SeagrassTarget for Tampa Bay METHODS RESULTS 3.1 Bay-wide Summary 

### of Trends 3.2 3.3 3.4 Comparison

### of Spatial Characteristics Bay Segment Summary 

### of Historical Trends Trends inSeagrass Coverage (1990to 1996) 

### of 1950and 1996Seagrass Coverages
CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES 

### .. II 1-1 1-2 1-2 1-2 2-1 3-1 3-1 3-5 3-13 3-17

4-1 5-1

## INTRODUCTION The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) of the Tampa Bay National Estuary Program (TBNEP) established the restoration of seagrasses in the bay to levels similar to those observed in the 1950's as one of its primary goals. Seagrasses are very important to the health of the bay ecosystem, and are thus of concern to those who manage

### this important resource. The TBNEP identifiedseagrasses as an excellent indicator of overall bay health. Seagrasses provide critical habitat for many of the bay's important biological resources, includingfinfish, shellfish, and benthos. Seagrass losses have been particularly apparent since 1950 and were due to a variety of factors, including dredge and 

### fill projects, poor water clarity, altered bay hydrodynamics, and prop scarring (Lewis and Estevez, 1988; Wade andJanicki, 1993). Seagrass restoration rate 

### isa function of many variables, includingwater quality, physical factors such as prop scarring and currents, and location of seagrass beds in relation to offshore transverse sandbars (Sargent et al., 1995; Sargent et al., 1996). Additionally, sustained cold weather can be detrimental to the rate of restoration. Seagrasses in Tampa Bay may be subject to biological damage as well, such as that due to 

### Labyrinthula, a microorganism associated with seagrass disease. The Tampa Bay Estuary Program (TBEP) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) recognizes that these and other factors may affect progress towards reaching adopted seagrass restoration goals, and 

### is currently initiating actions which will assist with addressing factors in addition to water clarity and quality (including the initiation of measuring the depth of water at various seagrass 

### beds around the bay, and 

### the monitoring of potential seagrass disease). Actions needed to address additional factors, such as the bay-wide effects of prop scarring or the location of various seagrass beds, will 

### be included indiscussions of future monitoringneeds. To address the issue of seagrass habitat 

### loss, recommended seagrass protection and restoration targets were developed (Janicki et al., 1995). Seagrass restorationtargets were determined by comparing 1990 seagrass extent to that observed in 1950. Seagrass restoration targets were defined as those portions of Tampa Bay that had seagrasses in 1950, 

### did not have seagrasses in 1990, and had not been permanently altered to preclude restoration of seagrasses. The establishmentof the bay
-wide seagrass restorationtarget was dependent upon the availability and quality of bathymetric data (Janicki et al., 1995). The restorationtargets were defined as areas that had lost seagrass coveragefrom 1950 to 1990 and were illuminated byat least 20.5% of the incident subsurface light. Based on the results of the Janicki et al. (1995) study, the TBNEP TAC recommended seagrass restoration and protection goals to the TBNEP Management Committee. The TBNEP Management and Policy Committees adopted a minimum seagrass acreage goal of 38,000 acres bay-wide. 

### This goal includes protection of existing seagrasses estimated at 25,600 acres in 1992 and a restoration target of an additional 12,350 acres. The TBNEP Management and Policy Committees also adopted a recommendation that progress towards seagrass acreage goals be reportedtothe Management Boardeveryfifth year.

1-11.1 

### Objectives This report isan element of 

### the data review and analysis performed bythe Estuary Program to determine the status of seagrass restorationas a result of management activities designed to improve water quality in Tampa Bay. This data report examines the areal extents of seagrasses inTampa Bay for in 1950, 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996. The specific objective of this report 

### isto provide an analysisoftrends in seagrass areal extent baywide and by bay segmentthrough 1996. Interpretationof progresstowardsseagrass restorationgoals will be deferred until the 1999 photointerpretation results are available. Figure 1 displays a location map for 

### the bay, including the bay segments. ArcView seagrass coverages for 1950, 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996 are available on the accompanying 

### CD,which also containsthe

### TBEP 1950and current era shorelinecoverages and bay segment boundaries. 1.2 

### Importance of 

### Seagrasses in 

### Tampa Bay Seagrasses in Tampa Bay provide critical habitat for recreationally and commercially important 

### fish and invertebratespecies. Seagrasses in Florida provide juvenile nursery and adult feeding areas for red drum, spotted seatrout, spot, silver perch, sheepshead, snook, shrimp, and the bay scallop (Zieman and Zieman, 1989). Seagrass meadows are also important feeding areas for the Florida manatee. Seagrassesserve to improve water quality 

### by reducing nutrients in the water column and are an important component of the energy and nutrient cycles incoastal environments. Five species of seagrasses are found in Tampa Bay. These are turtle grass 

### (Thalassia testudinurn), manatee grass (Syringodium filiforme), shoal grass (Halodule wrightii), widgeon grass 

### (Ruppia maritima), and star grass 

### (Halophila engelmannii) (Lewis et al., 1985). Increases in seagrass bed extents in Tampa Bay are typically accomplished by vegetative growth and propagule colonization. Propagulesare defined as any portion of a seagrass plant that 

### is capable of colonizing a new site, and include seeds and plant fragmentswith leavesand roots ((Fonsecaet al., 1998). InTampa Bay, seagrasses typically grow at depths no deeper than 

### six to eight feet. Light 

### is one of the limiting factors on the depth at which seagrasses can be found. Light requirements for growth vary by seagrass species. Turtle grass, the most common seagrass species 

### in Tampa Bay, has an estimated light requirement of 20.5% of the incident subsurface light (Dixon and Leverone, 1995). For the purposes of seagrass restoration target setting, this was assumed to be the minimum light requirement for seagrasses in Tampa Bay (JanickiandWade, 1996). 1.3 

### Establishing

### the SeagrassTarget for 

### Tampa Bay To establish a seagrass restoration target for Tampa Bay, a benchmark time period was needed. The 1950 period was selected as the benchmark period for historical seagrass coverage, given that 

### this was the earliest period for which a complete data set existed and 

### this period preceded the most rapid population growth inthe Tampa Bay watershed. The
1-2areal coverage of the 1950 seagrass beds was developed using data collected by the Florida Department of Natural Resources (FDNR) and the U.S. 

### Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Seagrass meadows were mapped from 1:24,000-scale color photography, and obtained in digital form from the 

### FDNR. A 

### GIS coverage of the data was created, and horizontally rectified to geographically coincide with mapped data for the time period (JanickiandWade, 1995). The 1950 seagrass coverage was compared with the 1990 seagrass coverage using 

### GIS technology and the best available bathymetry for 1990. The seagrass restoration target for Tampa Bay was derived from comparison of these data sets (Janicki et al., 1995). The 1990 seagrass coverage data were obtained from the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Program. SWFWMD developed the GIS coverage from photo
-interpretation of 1:24,000-scale aerial photographyflown in December 1990. A 

### GIS coverage of bathymetrywas developed using hydrographic soundings data from the NOAA National Geophysical Data Center that contained more than 350,000 data points collected during the years 1947-1958 in 

### the Tampa Bay area (Janicki et al., 1995). 

### The point soundings and shoreline delineation were used to interpolate a bathymetric 

### GIS coverage utilizing Triangular Irregular Network interpolation software from 

### ESRl(1993) (Janicki et al., 1995). The 1950 

### GIS seagrass coverage was overlain with the 1990 

### GIS seagrass coverage to determine where seagrass losses had occurred. The areas from which seagrasses were lost were overlain on the 1990 bathymetry and shoreline coverages to identify those areas where restoration might be expected. Those areas that had been dredged or 

### filled since 1950 were classified as non-restorable. 

### The seagrass restoration acreage was estimated by the difference in the 1950 and 1990 coverages 

### less these non-restorable areas (Janicki et al., 1995). Based on the results of this study, the TBNEP Management and Policy Committees adopted a minimum seagrass acreage goal of 38,000 acres bay-wide, including the protection of 25,650 acres and restoration of an additional 12,350 acres (TBNEP, 1996). As noted above, evaluation 

### of progress toward goals will be conducted once the most recent photointerpretation products(1999)are available.Egmont RRA CEIA 

### BAY



### RIVER

Figure 1. Tampa Bay segments and locations.

1-4

## 2 

## METHODS Aerial photography of seagrasses in the bay 

### has been gathered approximately every two years since 1988 by the SWFWMD, resulting in seagrass coverages for 1988, 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996. Some of the 1988 areas mapped as seagrasses were later found to actually represent attached macro-algae. From 1990 on, the aerial photography was field checked to verify presence of seagrasses (Kurz et al., 1999). For the purposes of this data report, only the SWFWMD seagrass coverages for 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996 are utilized, as the seagrass coverages from each of these years were field checked for accuracy. The 1990-1996 period includes all seagrass coverages for which data were collected usingconsistent methods, and 

### isthe period duringwhich progress towards

### TBEP seagrass goals 

### isestimated. 

### The SWFWMD aerial photography was 1:24,000-scale true color, and with the exception of the 1996 photography, was obtained during the late faII/early winter time period (November
-February) when water clarity in Tampa Bay 

### is typically greatest (Kurz et al., 1999). The month(s) during which the aerial photos were taken varied from sampling period to sampling period (Tomasko, 1999), so that the greatest water clarity conditions would prevail, as follows: 1990- November, December 1990 1992

### - February 1993 1994-January1995 1996- April, May 1997. 

### To develop 

### GIS coverages from the aerial photography, the SWFWMD analyzed the photos using zoom transfer methodology registeredto 

### U.S. Geological Survey 

### (USGS) 7.5- minute quadrangles. The minimum mapping unit for seagrasses was 

### 0.5 acres. Seagrass polygons were delineatedon mylar overlays andtransferred to an ARC/INFO database. The SWFWMD coverages for 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996 contain two classes of seagrass coverage, patchyand continuous. Forthe purposes of this data report, the acreages of both classes were combined to yield total seagrass acreage. The coverages containing both classes of seagrass acreage can be found on the CD accompanying this report. The seagrass classes are given by the coverage attribute "Lev4", where Lev4=9113 denotes patchy seagrass, and Lev4=9116denotes continuous seagrass. In addition to the SWFWMD seagrass photography, the City of Tampa Bay Study Group has been monitoring seagrasses in Hillsborough Bay since 1986. The data from this monitoring program for Hillsborough Bay do not show the same areal extent of seagrasses as those from the SWFWMD photography, possibly due to the different mapping techniques utilized by the two monitoringprograms. These data are discussed later inthis document, inSection 

### 3.3.

2-1Additional aerial photography exists for 1982, as described in Lewis et al. (1985). The methodology used in developing the 1982 seagrass coverage was different than that employed by the SWFWMD for the 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996 seagrass coverages, so that direct comparisons between 1982 coverages and later coverageswere not made. The 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996 SWFWMD seagrass coverages provide the best dataset for examining changes inseagrass coverage inTampa Bay. Bay segment-specificseagrass acreages for 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996were estimated by intersectingthe SWFWMD seagrass coverages with the segmentation scheme for Tampa Bay. Changes in seagrass acreage between years resulted from the difference in seagrass acreage within each bay segment. Trends in bay-wide seagrass acreage were estimated using the 1950 seagrass acreage and the 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996 acreages. Bay segment-specific trends were based on changes in seagrass acreage within each bay segment. Changes in seagrass acreage from 1990to 1996, for the entire bay and for each bay segment, were estimated, providing recentseagrass changesfrom coveragesdeveloped utilizingthe same methodology for seagrass delineation. These recent changes in seagrass acreage providethe TBEP with datafor tracking progresstowards itsseagrass goals.

## 3 

## RESULTS Seagrass beds covered approximately 40,400 acres inTampa Bay duringthe 1950baseline period (Figure 2). Ofthistotal, approximately halfwas found in OldTampa Bay 

### (OTB)and Boca Ciega Bay (BCB) (10,700 acres and 10,800 acres, respectively), with most of the remainder found in Middle Tampa Bay (9,600 acres) (MTB)and Lower Tampa Bay (LIB) (6,100 acres). Hillsborough 

### (HB) Bay contained approximately 2,300 acres, and Terra Ceia Bay (TCB) and Manatee River 

### (MR) contained approximately 700 and 200 acres, respectively.

v, 

### 2 

# Y 12,000 10,000

8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0

## /I I

OTB HB MTB LTB BCB TCB MR Figure2. 1950seagrass acreage for Tampa Bay segments. 3.1 Bay-wideSummary of Trends The estimated seagrass acreage in Tampa Bay in 1990 was approximately 25,200 acres (Figure

### 3). In 1992, seagrasses covered approximately 25,800 acres (Figure4), increasing to 26,500 acres in 1994 (Figure 

### 5) and 26,900 acres in 1996 (Figure 6). Acreages for all segments are rounded to the nearest 10 acres in Figures 3-6. These bay-wide seagrass acreages are shown byyear inTable 1. The followingfigures present maps of the seagrass areas: Figure 

### 7 - 1950, Figure8 

### - 1990, Figure 9

### - 1992, Figure 10

### - 1994, and Figure 11

### - 1996. ArcView seagrass coveragesfor 1950, 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996are availableon the accompanying

### CD.

### Year 1950 1990 

## I 1992 

## I 25,750 

## I

-14,670 

## I 

# +530 

### Seagrass Acreage Net Change Since 1950 

### Net Change Since 1990 40,420 

## - - 

# _ 25,230 -15,200 

## I 1994 

## I 26,520 

## I

-13,900 

## I 

## + 1,290



### Figure 3. 0 OTB HB MTB LTB BCB TCB MR 7,000 6,000 5,000

v) 4,000 

### 2! 

# ' 3,000 2,000 1,000

1990

### seagrass acreagefor Tampa Bay segments.

3-2v) 

### 2 

## Y 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000
0 OTB HB MTB LTB BCB TCB MR
Figure4. 1992seagrass acreage for Tampa Bay segments.

8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000
v) 4,000 

## Y 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 OTB HB MTB LTB BCB TCB MR

Figure 5. 1994seagrass acreagefor Tampa Bay segments.

3-3v) 

### 2 

# Y 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0

Figure 6. OTB HB MTB

1996seagrass acreage for Tampa LTB BCB TCB MR Bay segments.

3-4

### 3.2 Bay Segment Summary of HistoricalTrends 

### The greatest losses between 1950 and 1990 occurred in Old Tampa Bay (approximately 5,100 acres), Middle Tampa Bay (approximately 4,300 acres), and Boca Ciega Bay (approximately 4,000 acres). Lower Tampa Bay seagrass coverage increased by approximately 100 acres during 

### the 1950 to 1990 time period. Hillsborough Bay experienced the largest percentage decrease, losing approximately 98% of its seagrass coverage over the time period. The changes in seagrass coverage between 1950and 1990 are shown in Figure 12, with the restorable seagrass acreage signified by declines in seagrass acreage. Figure 13 shows 

### the change in seagrass acreage between 1990 and 1996. 

### The followingdescribesthe trends inseagrass coverage by bay segment. 

### Old Tampa Bay 1950 

### - Seagrass coverage in 

### Old Tampa Bay during 

### the 1950 baseline period was extensive, covering the entire shoreline with the exception of some parts of the northwestern portions of the segment. Safety Harbor contained only a small area of seagrass, and the northern shoreline of Mobbly Bay had no seagrass. Another area of shoreline with no seagrasses extended from north of 

### the western end of the Courtney Campbell Causeway to an area about halfway to Safety Harbor. 

### The total seagrass acreagefor the segmentwas approximately 10,700 acres in 1950. 1990 

### - By 1990, net seagrass losses of approximately 5,100 acres had occurred, leaving only 5,600 acres in 

### Old Tampa Bay. Some of the largest areas sustaining losses included the eastern shoreline of the 

### Old Tampa Bay, where dredging and filling had occurred. The western shoreline of the segment had also experienced seagrass losses, especially north of the Howard Frankland Bridge, due to dredging and filling and likely due to water quality impactsof runoff from the adjacent urban area. 

### The area of seagrasses around the mouth of Mobbly Bay was also greatly reduced in size. 1992 

### - By 1992, net seagrass coverage in 

### Old Tampa Bay had increased since 1990 by approximately 300 acres, to a total of approximately 5,900 acres. A large portion of this increase occurred inside and around the western mouth of Mobbly Bay. 

### The increased seagrass acreage in Mobbly Bay was largelydue to 

### Halophila (Johansson, 

### 2000). Increased seagrass coverage was also found south of the eastern end of the Courtney Campbell Causeway, where seagrasses had increased shoreward from those found in 1990. 1994

### - Seagrass coverage in 

### Old Tampa Bay during 1994 showed very little change from that in 1992. Overall, a net increase of approximately 

### 30 acres of seagrass occurred. A small decrease in seagrass cover was noted just north of the western end of the Howard Frankland Bridge, due north of Cabbage Patch Point.

3-51996 

### - Between 1994 and 1996, net seagrass acreage in 

### Old Tampa Bay declined by approximately 150 acres, to approximately 5,800 acres. Seagrass losses were most evident inthe Mobbly Bay area, which had seen a large increase inseagrass acreage from 1990to 1992. Losses also occurred along the northeasternshore north of the Courtney Campbell Causeway. Several small areas of increased seagrass coverage were also found, however. 

### The seagrass cover north of Cabbage Patch Point, where losses had occurred between 1992 and 1994, increased between 1994 and 1996. Increases in seagrass coverage were also found both north and south of the mouth of Allen Creek, with offshore expansion of 1994seagrass beds. Table 

### 2 summarizes the seagrass acreage data for 

### OldTampa Bay. The acreages presented in tabular format are rounded to the nearest 10 acres. From 1950 to 1990, seagrass coverage in 

### Old Tampa Bay declined by approximately 5,100 acres. From 1990 to 1996, net seagrass coverage in 

### OldTampa Bay increased byapproximately 200 acres.
SeagrassAcreage easuremen Net Change Since 1990



### Hillsborough Bay 1950

## - Seagrass coverage in Hillsborough Bay in 1950totaled approximately 2,320 acres. Large areas of seagrasses were found along the eastern shore of the bay from East Bay southward towards the Alafia River, and from the mouth of the Alafia River southward through The Kitchen and towards Big Bend. Along the western shore of Hillsborough Bay, smaller seagrass bedswere found off Gadsden Point, from Catfish Point northward to Ballast Point, and north 

### of Ballast Point. Seagrasses were also found in McKay Bay. 1990

### - By 1990, Hillsborough Bay contained only 47 acres of seagrasses, most of which was inthe mouth of The Kitchen. Extensivedredging and filling had resulted inthe 

### loss of seagrasses inthe Big Bend area and inthe Port Sutton area. Onlyvery small remnantsofthe western shore seagrass beds of 1950existed in 1990.

### 1992

### - Seagrass acreage in 

### 1992 was approximately 

### the same as in 

### 1990, although 

### the distribution of seagrasses within Hillsborough Bay was not the same as in 

### 1990. The seagrass beds found at the mouth of The Kitchen in 

### 1990 had declined slightly in extent, and the seagrass patches alongthe western shore of Hillsborough Bay had increasedslightly inextent.

Year Seagrass Acreage 

### 1950 2,321 1990 47 1992 46 1994 147 1996 193 1994

### - Seagrass coverage in 

### 1994 in Hillsborough Bay showed a net increaseof morethan 

### 100 acres over that found in 

### 1992, totaling 

### 147 acres. The seagrass 

### beds at the mouth of The Kitchen, which had decreased in size from 

### 1990to 

### 1992, increased in size from 

### 1992 to 

### 1994. Seagrasses, primarily Ruppia (Johansson, 

### 2000),were found along the eastern shore of the bay between the Port Sutton peninsula and Archie Creek, and 

### the seagrass beds found along the western shore in 

### 1992 increased insize.

Net Change Since Previous Measurement Net Change Since 

### 1990 (Gains : Losses) 

### - - -2,274 

### -

-1

-1 

# + 101 +l00 

# +46 +146 (+24:

-25) (+

### 106:

-5) (+60:

### -14) 1996

### - By 

### 1996, seagrass 

### beds in Hillsborough Bay covered 

### 193acres. The seagrass beds between the Port Sutton peninsula and Archie Creek, along the eastern shore, 

### had increased in extent, as had the beds near the mouth of The Kitchen. The seagrass 

### beds found along the western shore between Catfish Point and Ballast Point also increased in size. There were no significant seagrass losses between 

### 1994 and 

### 1996 inthis segment. Table 

### 3 summarizes the seagrass coverage data for Hillsborough Bay. The acreages presented in tabular format are rounded to the nearest acres, given the relatively small amount of seagrasses found in Hillsborough Bay. By 

### 1990, seagrass area declined by approximately 

### 2,300 acres from the benchmark period of 

### 1950. From 

### 1990 to 

### 1996, seagrass coverage in Hillsborough Bay increased by approximately 

### 150acres (Table

### 3).

~ 

### MiddleTampa Bay 

### 1950 

### - The seagrass beds in Middle Tampa Bay comprised almost one-quarter of all the seagrassesfound inthe bay in 

### 1950,covering approximately 

### 9,600 acres. Extensive

3-7seagrass beds occurred along the eastern shoreline from the Big Bend area southwardto the mouth 

### of the Little Manatee River, intothe mouth of the river, and southward into Cockroach Bay and towards Piney Point. Along the western shore, seagrass beds were found along the shoreline 

### of northeast 

### St. Petersburg to the North Shore area, and again from just north of Coquina Key southward to Pinellas Point. The region along the southern shoreline of the lnterbay Peninsula also contained extensiveseagrass beds. 1990

### - Seagrass acreage inthis segment had a net decline of approximately 5,300 acres by 1990, with the greatest reductions in acreage occurring along the eastern shore. From the Big Bend area southwardto the Little Manatee River, only the shoreward seagrass beds remained, with the exception of one small area offshore. Similarly, south of the river, only the most shoreward seagrass beds remained, although 

### the losses herewere not as severe. Alongthe western shore, dredgingand fillingfor 

### the Venetian Isles area resulted in seagrass losses, with some offshore losses south of downtown St. Petersburg. In the northern part of the segment, along the lnterbay Peninsula, seagrass losses were not as severe, with only the most offshore areas showing adecline in seagrass coverage. 1992 

### - Between 1990 and 1992, seagrass acreage in Middle Tampa Bay showed a slight net decline, by approximately 40 acres. No obvious changes were found when comparing

### the 1990and 1992 seagrass coverages. 1994

### - By 1994, seagrass beds in MiddleTampa Bay had a net increase of more than 500 acres from those observed in 1992. New seagrass beds appeared southwest of Apollo Beach, and the 1992 seagrass beds between the mouth of the Little Manatee River and Cockroach Bay spread shoreward. It should be noted that the attached macro-algae 

### Caulerpa was also observed north and south of the channel into Cockroach bay during the early 1990’s (Johansson, 2000). An increase of seagrass acreageoccurred just west of Gadsden Pointsouth of the lnterbay Peninsula. 1996

### - Between 1994and 1996, the MiddleTampa Bay segment lostseagrasses, with a net seagrass acreage reduction of more than 240 acres to approximately 5,500 acres. The major areas of 

### loss included the beds west of Gadsden Point south 

### of the lnterbay Peninsula, and north of the mouth of the Little Manatee River, around PelicanCove. Table 4 summarizes the seagrass coverage data for Middle Tampa Bay. The acreages presented in tabular format are rounded to the nearest 10 acres. From 1950 to 1990, seagrass coverage in Middle Tampa Bay declined by approximately 4,300 acres, while from 1990 to 1996, seagrass coverage showed a net increaseof approximately 200 acres.

3-8Year 1950 1990 1992 Net Change Since Previous (Gains : Losses) Seagrass Acreage Measuremen t Net Change Since 1990 9,600 

### - 

# - 5,310 -4,290 

## - 5,2 70 -40 -40 

### (+340 

### :-380)

LowerTampa Bay 1994 1996

1950 - Lower Tampa Bay contained approximately 6,100 acres of seagrasses in 1950. Almost the entire nearshore area of this segment supported seagrass beds, with the exceptions of afew areas nearthe mouth of the bay. 5,780 +510 

## +470 5,540 -240 

# +230 (+ 680 :-1 70) (+ 380 :-620)

1990

### - Very 

### little change was evident in the total seagrass extent found in Lower Tampa Bay by 1990. Seagrass acreage had a net increase of only a small increment (40 acres), with most of 

### this found along the northwestern shoreline of the segment. Seagrass increases were found south of Pinellas Point and in association with the Skyway Bridge causeway, with some seagrass losses found along the southeastern shoreline, west of Terra Ceia Bay and nearthe mouth of the bay. 1992

### - Seagrass acreageshowed a net increaseof approximately 100acres in LowerTampa Bay between 1990and 1992. An area of new seagrasses was observed west of the mouth of Bishop Harbor offshore of the beds found in 1990. There were no other obvious changes inseagrass coverage. 1994 

### - Seagrass acreage in Lower Tampa Bay showed a net decline of approximately 40 acres between 1992 and 1994. Losses of seagrasses occurred southwest of Pinellas Point, and alongthe southeastern shoreof Mullet Key. 1996

### - Between 1994 and 1996, seagrass acreage showed a net increase 

### in Lower Tampa Bay of approximately 200 acres. The seagrass beds west of the mouth of Bishop Harbor first seen in 1992 were not found in the 1996 coverage. Seagrass bed coverage north of the mouth of Anna Maria Sound extended northeastward into Tampa Bay. Some increase in seagrasses was found east of Egmont Key. The seagrasses alongthe southeastern shore

### of Mullet Keythat haddisappeared between 1992 and 1994 were again found in 1996, although they 

### did not cover the same extent as in 1992. It 

### is not known 

### if the decrease in seagrass acreage along this portion of Mullet Key between 1992 and 1994, and the following increase between

3-9

### 1994 and 

### 1996, is an artifact of the photointerpretation or if these changes represented “real world” conditions. Seagrass coverage in Lower Tampa Bay in 

### 1996totaled approximately 

### 6,400 acres.

Net Change Since Previous Year Seagrass Acreage Measurement (Gains :Losses) 

### 1950 6,100 1990 6,140 

## +40 

### - 1992 6,240 +l00 

### (+120:-20) 1994 6,200

-40 

### 1996 6,380 +180 (+80:

-120) (+510:

### -330) Table 

### 5 summarizes the seagrass coverage data for Lower Tampa Bay. The acreages presented in tabular format are rounded to the nearest 

### 10 acres. From 

### 1950 to 

### 1990, seagrass coverage in Lower Tampa Bay increased by approximately 

### 40 acres. From 

### 1990 to 

### 1996,seagrass coverage in LowerTampa Bay increasedbyapproximately 

### 200 acres.

Net Change Since 

### 1990



### - - +l00 

## +60 

## +240
Boca Ciega Bay 

### 1950

### - There were approximately 

### 10,800 acres of seagrasses in Boca Ciega Bay in 

### 1950. The interior of Mullet Key was almost completely covered with seagrass beds, as was the area around Cabbage Key and Pine Key. Seagrass beds covered what is now the area of lsla del 

### Sol, extending eastward to the mainland north of Maximo Channel. Seagrasses were found in Clam Bayou, and along the west coast of Gulfport nearly to Treasure Island. Seagrass beds also extended along the northeastern shore

### of Boca Ciega Bay, southeast of Conch Key. 

### 1990 

### - By 

### 1990, seagrass coverage 

### in Boca Ciega Bay showed a net decline to approximately 

### 6,800 acres, with some areas lost to dredge and 

### fill activities. This was especially evident along the eastern shore of Treasure Island and Redington Shores, with very few small patchesof seagrassfound from lsladel Sol northward. 

### 1992

### - Between 

### 1990and 

### 1992,seagrass coverage in Boca Ciega Bay sowed a net increase of approximately 

### 140 acres. A small area of seagrasses was found north 

### of lsla del 

### Sol, which had expanded since 

### 1990. An area of seagrasses was also found east of Conch Key, at the northern end 

### of Boca Ciega Bay, where none were found 

### in 

### 1990.1994

## - Seagrass coverage in 1994 showed a net increase of 170 acres of seagrasses over that found in 1992. The most significant expansion was found in the northern portion of Boca Ciega Bay, where the patch east of Conch Key extended southeastward along the shoreline of mainland. Additional gains occurred at the southeastern mouth of Long Bayou, around 

### Dog Leg Key.

Year 1950 1990 1992 1994 1996 1996 - A net increase in seagrass coverage of 580 acres was found between 1994 and 1996 in Boca Ciega Bay, to a total of approximately 7,700 acres. The area near Conch Key showed expanded seagrass coverage, with lesser expansions of the area around Indian Key, the area east of the Skyway Bridge Causeway, and the seagrass beds west of Summer Resort Key.

Net Change Since Previous (Gains : Losses) 10,800 

### - - 6,810 -3,990 

### - SeagrassAcreage Measurement Net Change Since 1990

6,950 +140 +140 7,120 

## + 170 +310 7,700 

# +580 

# +890 (+160:
-20) 

### (+ 300:-130) 

### (+ 650 :-70) Table 6 summarizes the seagrass coverage data for Boca Ciega Bay. From 1950 to 1990, seagrass coverage in Boca Ciega Bay decreased by approximately 4000 acres. From 1990 to 1996, seagrass coverage in Boca Ciega Bay increased by approximately 900 acres.

Terra Ceia Bay 1950

### - In 1950, seagrasses covered approximately 700 acres inTerra Ceia Bay. Seagrasses were found along the southern shoreline from the mouth of Terra Ceia Bay eastward into Clambar Bayou and Champlain Bayou. Seagrasses also extended along the eastern shore from the Snead Island Cutoff northward to Palmetto Point, covering Peterson Bayou. Seagrasses were also found along the northwestern shore, from Sea Breeze Pointto Flounder Pass. 1990

## - Seagrass coverage 

### in Terra Ceia Bay experienced a net increase of approximately 300 acres between 1950 and 1990. Seagrasses beds had declined in size in Peterson Bayou, but increased in size from Sea Breeze Point to Flounder Pass, and extended west of Flounder Pass along the southern shore of Rattlesnake Key to the mouth of Terra Ceia Bay. Seagrasses had also extended along the eastern shore of

3-1 1Snead Island, and beds were found north of Sea Breeze Point nearthe northern end of Terra Ceia Bay.

Table 

### 7. Terra Ceia Bay seagrass acreages. Net Change Since Previous Year Seagrass Acreage Measurement Net Change Since 1990 (Gains : Losses) 1950 700 

### - - 1990 1,000 

## +300 

### - i 1992 1,000 0 0 1992

### -There was no net change intotal seagrass coverage between 1990and 1992.

1994 1996 1994

### - Total seagrass acreage 

### did not change between 1992 and 1994, but some changes in location 

### of beds were found. The 1994coverage showed no seagrasses north of Sea Breeze Point, and the bed found in 1992 between Bird Key and Gus Point had expanded insize.

1,000 

### 0 0 9

### 70
-30 

### -30 (0 :0) (+

### 30 :-60) 1996

### - Seagrass coverage inTerra Ceia Bay experienceda net decline of approximately 

### 30 acres between 1994 and 1996. Noobvious changes in seagrass bed size are seen in the 1996 coverage. 

### The total seagrass coverage in Terra Ceia Bay in 1996 was approximately 970 acres. Table 7 summarizes the seagrass coverage data for Boca Ciega Bay. The acreages presented in tabular format are rounded to the nearest 10 acres. From 1950 to 1990, seagrass coverage inTerra Ceia Bay increased by approximately 

### 300 acres. From 1990to 1996, seagrass coverage inTerra Ceia Bay decreased by approximately 30acres.

Manatee River 1950

### - In 1950, approximately 200 acres of seagrasses were found in the Manatee River. These were found along the northern bank from just upstream of Hooker Point downstreamto Hooker Point, and downstream of McKay Point. Along the southern shore, seagrasses extended from McNeil Point downstream. The largest seagrass bedswere nearthe mouth ofthe river 1990

### - Seagrass coverage in the Manatee River experienced a net increase of 160 acres between 1950 and 1990. Along the northern shoreline, seagrasses had extended upstream past Point Ogden, from Hooker Point downstream to McKay Point, and

3-12from McKay Point to the mouth of the river. shorelineextended from Point Pleasantdownstreamto the mouth of the river. Seagrasses along the southern

Year 

### 1950 1992 

### - Total seagrass acreage in 

### 1992 was the same as that for 

### 1990, with no obvious changes apparent.

Net Change Since (Gains : Losses) SeagrassAcreage Previous Measurement Net Change Since 

### 1990



## - - 200 1994

### - By 

### 1994,seagrass coverage inthe segment showed a net increaseof 

### 10acres.



### 1992 1994 1996

### -The seagrass coverage in 

### 1996 remained unchangedfrom that found in 

### 1994.

360 0 

### 0 370 

### +10 +10 

### (0 :

### 0) (+10:0) Table 

### 8 summarizesthe seagrass coverage data for Manatee River. The acreages presented in tabular format are rounded to the nearest 

### 10 acres. From 

### 1950 to 

### 1990, seagrass coverage inthe Manatee River increased byapproximately 

### 160acres. From 

### 1990to 

### 1996, seagrass coverage inthe Manatee River remained relatively unchanged.



### 1996 

### 370 

### 0 +10 (+lo:

- 10) 

## I - 

## I 1990 

## I 360 

## I +160 

## I

3.3 Trends in Seagrass Coverage (1 990to 1996) To examine recenttrends inTampa Bay seagrass acreage, the most appropriate comparison 

### is between the seagrass coverage in 

### 1990 (Figure 

### 3) and that in 

### 1996 (Figure 

### 6). This comparison 

### is made over the longest time span for which data were collected using the same methods, as discussed previously. In 

### 1990,approximately 

### 25,200 acres of seagrasses were found in Tampa Bay (Janicki et al., 

### 1995). From 

### 1990 to 

### 1996, areas from which seagrasses were lost totaled approximately 

### 2,400 acres, while new seagrass beds covered approximately 

### 4,000 acres (Figure 

### 13). This resulted in a net gain of approximately 

### 1,700 acres of seagrasses bay wide. Over half of this gain occurred in Boca Ciega Bay, with the remainder distributed more or 

### less evenly among the four mainstem segments of the bay. 

### The followingdiscusses recenttrends inseagrasses by bay segment.

3-13

### Old 

### Tampa Bay In 1990, seagrasses covered approximately 5,600 acres in Old Tampa Bay. By 1996, seagrass coverage had a net increase of approximately 

### 200 acres, to approximately 5,800 acres, an increaseof 3.6%. Three areas displayed appreciable 

### loss of seagrasses, including the areas northwest of the eastern end of 

### the Courtney Campbell Causeway, along the northeastern shore of Old Tampa Bay, and around the southern end of the peninsula separating Safety Harbor from Mobbly Bay. Seagrass losses were also found along the western shore of 

### Old Tampa Bay, north ofthe western end 

### of the Howard Franklin Bridge and north of Cabbage Patch Point. increases in seagrass coveragewere greatest along the western shore of 

### OldTampa Bay. A large patch of seagrass formed south of the western end of the Howard Frankland Bridge. More new seagrasses were found north and south of Largo Inlet, extendingfrom the mouth of 

### the Cross Bayou Canal almost to the Courtney Campbell Causeway. Between the Courtney Campbell Causeway and Safety Harbor, seagrass beds found in 1990 extended both shoreward and offshore. Some new small seagrass beds were found in Safety Harbor in 1996, alongthe western and eastern shores, and up into Mobbly Bay. Alongthe eastern shore of Old Tampa Bay, very few areas of new seagrasses were found, with 

### the most extensiveextending from Rocky Pointto south of 

### the mouth of 

### Fish Creek. 

### Hillsborough Bay Only 47 acres of seagrasses were found in Hillsborough Bay in 1990. 

### This acreage increasedto 193 acres by 1996. The net increase incoverage of 146acres 

### issimilar tothat found in 

### Old Tampa Bay over the same time period, and this 31 1 % increase over the 1990-1 996time periodwas the greatest percentage increaseof any bay segment. Very few areas lost seagrasses in Hillsborough Bay between 1990 and 1996. Some small losses occurred around Green Key, offshore of The Kitchen, and alongthe western shore of Hillsborough Bay. A few small seagrass patches around the Big Bendareawere also lost. The largest new seagrass area found in 1996 occurred offshore of The Kitchen. The seagrass beds found in 1990 had extended northward, and into Hog and Hominy Cove. Another small patch of new seagrasses was found south of the mouth of Bullfrog Creek. Additional new seagrass beds along the eastern shore 

### of Hillsborough Bay were found between the mouth of Archie Creek and the 

### Port Sutton peninsula. Along 

### the western shore of Hillsborough Bay, between Catfish Point to just north of Ballast Point, new small scattered seagrass beds were found nearthe shore. Data from the City of Tampa Bay Study Group also show increased in seagrass acreage in Hillsborough Bay, although the acreages reportedare notthe same as those obtained from the SWFWMD photography. The SWFWMD coverages yield an increase of 146 acres by 1996 over the 

### 47 acres reported in 1990. The City of Tampa monitoring program found
3-14only 

### 5 acres of seagrass in 1990, 13 acres in 1992, 49 acres in 1994, and 100 acres in 1996 (KurzandAvery, 1999). 

### Middle 

### Tampa Bay Seagrasses covered approximately 5,300 acres in Middle Tampa Bay during 1990. By 1996, seagrasses covered approximately 5,500 acres. In Middle Tampa Bay, most seagrass losses between 1990 and 1996 occurred along the northeastern shore of the segment, along the offshore edge ofthe 1990seagrass 

### beds. This was most prominent from north of the mouth of the Little Manatee River to the southern shore of Apollo Beach. Other offshore edge seagrass losses occurred south of the mouth of the river, southward past Little Cockroach Bay. Some small seagrass losses were found alongthe offshore edge of the beds south of the lnterbay Peninsula, and scatteredalongthe northwesternshore of the segment. 

### The most significant increases in MiddleTampa Bay seagrass acreage from 1990through 1996 were found along the southeastern shore of the segment. These increases were generally in the shoreward direction from those beds found in 1990, especially in Little Cockroach Bay and south of the mouth of Cockroach Bay, in South Stop. Other increases were found inshore of the 1990 

### beds along the southern shore of the lnterbay Peninsula, and in Bayou Grande along the northwesternshore of the segment. LowerTampa Bay Lower Tampa Bay contained approximately 6,100 acres of seagrasses in 1990. By 1996, approximately 6,400 acres of seagrasseswere found inthe segment. Seagrass losses from 1990 to 1996 in Lower Tampa Bay occurred primarily along the offshore edge of the beds along the southeastern shore of the segment. Small areas of seagrass 

### loss were found from north of the southern end of the Skyway Bridgeto south of Rattlesnake Key. Increases in seagrass acreage were generally distributed around the coastline of Lower Tampa Bay. The most significant single new seagrass bedwas found north of the mouth of Anna Maria Sound. The seagrass bed found east 

### of Egmont Key in 1990 had extended southward by 1996. Other new seagrass beds, that were small and dispersed, were found along boththe southeasternand northwesternshores of the segment. Boca 

### Ciega Bay Boca Ciega Bay contained approximately 6,800 acres of seagrasses in 1990. This acreage had increased to approximately 7,700 in 1996, accounting for 900 acres of the net baywide 1,700-acre increase in seagrass coverage. In Boca Ciega Bay, 

### this increase amounted to a 13% increase incoverage.
3-15Areas from which seagrasses were lost between 1990 and 1996 in Boca Ciega Bay were dispersed in the southern region of the segment, with the total area amounting to approximately 150 acres. The largest single 

### loss was found southwest of Pinellas Point, where approximately 20 acres were lost along the western side of a bed. New seagrasses were found covering approximately 1,000 acres in 1996. Approximately half the increases were found in the southern portion of Boca Ciega Bay, where 1990 seagrass beds had expanded. Most significantly, the northern portion of the segment experienced two large seagrass bed expansions. At the head of Boca Ciega Bay, east of Conch Key and southward along the northeastern shore of the segment, a large new area of seagrasses was found, accounting for approximately 

### 200 acres of the new seagrasses found since 1990. Along the eastern mouth of Long Bayou, around Dog Leg Key, a large bed extended from around theJunglearea northward tothe Seminole Bridge and about half

### the distance across the mouth of the bayou. 

### This area of seagrass accounted for almost 90 acres of 

### the increase inthe segment. New seagrasses were found alongthe western shore nearthe mouth ofthe bayouas well. 

### Terra Ceia 

### Bay In 1990, seagrasses in Terra Ceia Bay covered approximately 1,000 acres. Very little changewas found in 1996, when 970 acres of seagrasseswere found. Seagrass losses in Terra Ceia Bay were found near the mouth of the bay, along the southeastern shore of the bay, and nearthe head of the bay, north of Seabreeze Point. The losses in the northern region were mainly along the northwestern shore, at the mouth 

### of Frog Creek, with some losses around the mouth of McMullen Creek as well. These losses in

### the northern portion of Terra Ceia Bay amountedto approximately 20acres. Only one significant area of seagrass increases was found. This occurred on the western side of the seagrass bed found in 1990 between Gus Point and Bird Key, where seagrass coverage increased byapproximately 

### 20 acres from the 1990bed. Manatee River Very little change in seagrass coverage was found inthe Manatee River between 1990and 1996. The 1990 coverage of 360 acres increased to 

### 370 acres by 1996. Small areas of seagrass losses were found near the mouth of the river along the southern shoreline, and some small losses were found around McKay Point on the northern shore of the river as well. Two areas of seagrass increase were found, one near McNeil Point along the southern shore of the river, and the other alongthe northern shore of the river betweenthe two bridgesfor 

### US 41.

3-163.4 Comparison of Spatial Characteristicsof 1950and 1996Seagrass Coverages

Segment OldTampa Bay Hillsborough Bay MiddleTampa Bay LowerTampa Bay

Boca Ciega Bay Manatee River Terra Ceia Bay A comparison of the spatial characteristics of the 1950 and 1996 seagrass coverages was made to estimate the extent of the areas that supported seagrasses in 1950 but did not support seagrasses in 1996. A polygon-by-polygon comparison of the 1950 and 1996 seagrass coverages (less non-restorableareas) results in 

### the maps shown in Figures 14 and 15. The coverages used to create these maps are available on the CDaccompanying

### this report.

Area (acres) 5,660 1,670 4,060 1,270 1,660

120 40 Table 9 presents the breakdown by bay segment of the area of bay bottom that supported seagrasses in 1950that 

### did not support seagrasses in 1996, as shown in Figure 14. These data show that approximately two-thirds of the areal difference between the 1996coverage polygons and the 1950 coverage polygons 

### isfound in OldTampa Bay and MiddleTampa Bay.

Segment OldTampa Bay Hillsborough Bay 

### MiddleTampa Bay LowerTampa Bay

Boca Ciega Bay Terra Ceia Bay Manatee River Total 1950Seagrass Area Non-RestorableArea (acres) (acres) 10,700 1,230 2,320 510 9,600 1,260 6,100 690 10,800 3,560

700 150 

### 200 30 Portionsof the 1950seagrass acreage were inareas that are non-restorabledue to dredging and filling operations. The total and non-restorable acreages based on the 1950 seagrass coverage and bay bottom alterations sincethen are shown inTable 10for each segment.

Table 10. Total and non-restorableseagrassacreage based on 1950seagrass coverageand subseauent alterationsof the bav bottom.

3-17Table 11 presents the breakdown by bay segment ofthe area of bay bottomthat supported seagrasses in 1996that 

### did not support seagrasses in 1950, as shown 

### in Figure 15. These data show that approximately 8,190 acres of the 26,900 acres of seagrasses found in 1996 were found 

### in areas that 

### did not support seagrasses 

### in 1950. The acreages shown inTable 11 result from the differences in acreages between the 1996 acreages and the restorable acreages not supporting 1996seagrasses. These acreages correspond tothose identified in Figure 15. The coverages used to create Figure 15 are available onthe CDaccompanying this report.
Segment Area (acres) 

### OldTampa Bay Hillsborough Bay MiddleTampa Bay LowerTampa Bay

Terra Ceia Bay Manatee River Boca Ciega Bay 1,960 50 1,250 2,240 1,910 540 240

## 4 

## CONCLUSIONS In 1950, seagrasses covered approximately 40,420 acres inTampa Bay. By 1990, seagrass acreage inthe bay had declined to approximately 25,230 acres. The causes of

### this decline include declining water quality, physical factors such as dredge and fill projects, prop scarring, and altered bay hydrodynamics, and location of seagrass beds in relation to offshoretransverse sand bars. Net increases 

### inseagrass acreage occurred bay-widefrom 1990 to 1996. In 1990, the baywide seagrass acreage was 25,230 acres. Seagrass acreage increased to 25,750 acres in 1992, to 26,520 acres 

### in 1994, and to 26,920 acres 

### in 1996. From 1990 to 1996, seagrasses extended over an additional 1,690 acres 

### inthe bay. Increases in seagrass acreage within each bay segment varied from 1990to 1996. More than half of the increase, approximately 900 acres, occurred in Boca Ciega Bay, where the northern portion of the segment had significant gains in seagrass acreage. In Boca Ciega Bay, seagrass acreage increased by 13%from 1990to 1996. The 

### Old Tampa Bay, Middle Tampa Bay, and LowerTampa Bay segments experienced increases of morethan 200acres each, or about 4% within each segment. An increase of approximately 150 acres was found in Hillsborough Bay, resulting in a four
-fold increase in seagrass acreage in that segment. The Manatee River segment gained almost no seagrass acreage during the period, andthe Terra Ceia Bay segment lostapproximately 30 acres of seagrass beds (3%). The rateof increase inseagrass acreagefrom 1990to 1996was approximately 1 %per year bay-wide. Seagrass restoration rate isafunction 

### of many variables, including water quality, physical factors such as prop scarring and currents, and location of seagrass beds in relation to offshore transversesandbars. Additionally, sustained coldweather can be detrimental to the rate of restoration. Seagrasses 

### in Tampa Bay may be subject to biological damage as well, such as that dueto Labyrinthula, a microorganismassociatedwith seagrass disease. The TBEP Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) recognizes that these and other factors may affect progress towards reaching adopted seagrass restoration goals, and 

### is currently initiating actions which will assist with addressingfactors in addition to water clarity and quality (including the initiation of measuring the depth 

### of water at various seagrass beds around the bay, and the monitoring of potential seagrass disease). Actions needed to address additional factors, such as the bay-wide effects of prop scarring or the location of various seagrass beds, will be included indiscussions offuture monitoringneeds. The major findings 

### of this reportare summarized as follows:

0 the 1990 seagrasses covered approximately 2,400 acres 

### in areas where seagrasses were not found 

### in 1996;0 the 1996 seagrasses covered approximately 4,000 acres in areas where seagrasses were not found in 1990; and

0 the rate of increase in bay-wide seagrass acreage slowed during 1994 to 1996, when seagrass acreage increased by approximately 400 acres, compared to the increases observed between 1992 and 1994 (700 acres) and between 1990 and 1992 (600acres). The causes leading to these findings should be the subject of further study. As discussed above, the 

### TBEP recognizes that factors other than water quality should 

### be considered when examining progress towards seagrass restoration goals. The causes of bay
-wide and segment-specific seagrass acreage losses and gains should be addressed, so that future management decisions can 

### be based on a fuller understanding of the factors involved in seagrass recovery inTampa Bay.

## 5 

## REFERENCES Dixon, L.K. and J.R. Leverone. Light requirements of 

### Thalassia testudinum in Tampa Bay, Florida. Prepared for: Southwest Florida Water Management District SWIM Program. Prepared by: Mote Marine Laboratory. 1995.

Janicki, A.J., 

### D.L. Wade, and 

### D.E. Robison. 1995. Habitat protection and restoration targets for Tampa Bay. Tech. Pub#07-93, Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. Prepared by Coastal Environmental, Inc. Johansson,J.O.R. 2000. Personal communication, City of Tampa Bay Study Group. June 9, 2000. Kurz, R.C., and W. Avery. 1999. Chapter 7 

### - Seagrass Coverage. In "Baywide Environmental Monitoring Report 1993-1 998"

. J.R. Pribble, A.J.Janicki, and H. Greening, eds. Tampa Bay Estuary ProgramTechnical Publication#07-99. Kurz, R.C., D.A. Tomasko, D. Burdick, T.F. Ries, K. Patterson, and 

### R. Finck. 1999. Summary of recent trends in seagrass distributions in southwest Florda coastal waters. Southwest Florida Water Management District Surface Water Improvement and Management(SWIM)ProgramTechnical Report. Lewis, R.R. Ill and E.D. Estevez. 1988. 

### The ecology of Tampa Bay, Florida: An estuarine profile. 

### U.S. 

### Fish. Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 85(7-18). 132 p. Lewis, R.R. Ill, R.G. Gilmore, Jr., D.W. Crewz, and W.E. Odum. 1985. Mangrove habitat and fishery resources of Florida. In: W. Seaman, Jr. 

### (Ed.). Florida Aquatic Habitat and Fishery Resources. Florida Chapter of the American Fisheries Society. Sargent, 

### F.J., T.J. Leary, D.W. Crewz, and C.R. Kruer. 1995. Scarring of Florida's seagrasses: assessment and management options. Florida Marine Research Institute. Technical Report

### TR-1. St. Petersburg, 

### FL. Sargent, 

### F.J., T.J. Leary, 

### D.E. Kuhl, A.P. Lamb, M.M. Colby, G.M. Macaulay, and 

### P.J. Rubec. 1996. Propeller scar monitoring program for the Tampa Bay Estuary Program, St. Petersburg, 

### FL. Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. 1996. Charting the Course for Tampa Bay. Tampa Bay National Estuary Program in cooperation with the 

### U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 

### IV. 263 pp. Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (TBRPC). 1986. Habitat restoration study for the Tampa Bay Region. PreparedbyTBRPC, St. Petersburg, Florida. 283 p.

5-1Tomasko, D.A. 1999. Personal communication. Wade, D.L. and A.J. Janicki. 1993. Physical impactsto habitats inTampa Bay. Tech. Pub. 

### #03-93, Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. Prepared by Coastal Environmental, Inc. Zieman, R.C. and 

### R.T. Zieman. 1989. The Ecology of the Seagrass Meadows of the West Coast 

### of Florida: A Community Profile. 

### U.S. 

### Fish. Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 85(7-25).