text stringlengths 0 6.44k |
|---|
5-2 |
16 Graphic representation of the range of salinity zones |
overlaid on a typical tidal creek system entering a |
higher salinity habitat. |
5-3 |
17 Graphic representation of salinity zones around a |
submerged artesian well in a marine environment. |
5-4 |
18 Graphic showing location of seagrass bed in estuary 5-5 |
19 Graphic showing stationary habitat (seagrass |
meadow) with dynamic habitat (freshwater inflow) |
overlay and resulting seagrass/ salinity zones under |
normal flow conditions. |
5-6 |
Table of Contents |
Freshwater Flow and Ecological Relationships in Biscayne Bay iv |
TABLES DESCRIPTION |
ES-1 Comparison of Relative Strength of Scientific Support for |
the Different MFL Approaches for each Sub-region |
ES-3 |
1 Other MFL Projects in Estuarine Waters in Florida 1-5 |
2 Marine and Estuarine Species that are State-listed and/or |
Federally-listed Species and which are known to occur in |
Biscayne Bay and/or Adjacent Areas |
4-9 thru |
4-11 |
3a Salinity and Habitat Requirements for Potential Vegetative |
Indicator Species |
4-43 |
3b Salinity and Habitat Requirements of Potential Faunal |
Indicator Species |
4-44 thru |
4-46 |
4 Potential Indicator Species for Freshwater MFLs |
Establishment in Biscayne Bay |
5-10 thru |
5-11 |
5 Comparison of Different MFL Approaches for each Subregion |
5-16 |
6 Comparison of Relative Strength of Scientific Support for |
the Different MFL Approaches for each Sub-region |
6-2 |
APPENDICES DESCRIPTION |
A Task 2 Report – Literature and Data Review |
B Task 3 Report – Interviews with Experts |
C Life History Figures of Selected Species |
D Tables of Bio-indicator Ranking Matrix by Subregions |
E Tables of Advantages & Disadvantages of |
Different MFL Approaches by Sub-regions |
Executive Summary |
Freshwater Flow and Ecological Relationships in Biscayne Bay ES-1 |
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
The State of Florida has adopted regulations, which require that Water |
Management Districts identify priority water bodies, establish Minimum Flows |
and Levels (MFLs) rules for these water bodies and implement these MFLs |
through water shortage plans and/or the water use permitting process. |
Specifically, Biscayne Bay has been identified as a priority water body in which |
an MFL rule is to be developed by the South Florida Water Management District |
(SFWMD or the District) by December 2004. |
As one component of the effort to develop an MFL rule for Biscayne Bay, the |
SFWMD issued a work order to undertake a study entitled, Freshwater Flow and |
Ecological Relationships in Biscayne Bay. SFWMD entered into an agreement |
(Contract No. C-15967-WO04-06) with the consultant team of Barnes, Ferland |
and Associates, Applied Technology Management, Inc. and Lewis |
Environmental Services, Inc. to conduct a variety of activities which will assist |
the District in developing the MFL rule for Biscayne Bay. |
The work conducted by the project team involves the following five tasks: |
1) Developing a Project Work Plan |
2) Conducting a Literature Search and Data Review |
3) Contacting and Interviewing Experts |
4) Evaluating Alternative Approaches for District MFL Development |
5) Addressing/summarizing Information and Information Needs |
Tasks 1-4 have been completed and the resulting deliverables for each task were |
transmitted to the District for review and comment. Questions raised by the |
District have been addressed, and the Appendices to this report contain the final |
deliverables for each Task. This document, the Task 5 report, builds on the |
results of the previous tasks and also includes summaries of pertinent portions of |
the previously completed tasks. |
This project has sought to establish a scientific connection between various |
methods to establish MFLs for Biscayne Bay, and indicators of conditions in the |
Bay. The recommended over-all process has been to apply numerical rankings to |
potential indicator species and potential MFL approaches in order to determine |
the most appropriate approach for each of six sub-regions of the Bay. This is |
necessary due to the Bay being a large heterogeneous ecosystem that has |
undergone major anthropogenic changes in the last 100 years. Each of the six |
identified sub-regions has unique characteristics that demand unique treatment |
regarding necessary freshwater flows to either maintain existing conditions, or |
Executive Summary |
Freshwater Flow and Ecological Relationships in Biscayne Bay ES-2 |
restore some semblance of historical conditions to allow for a particular |
ecological function to exist at some level that is acceptable to water managers, |
citizens and scientists. |
Table ES-1 shows the highest rated (and therefore recommended) approach(es) |
for each sub-region, as summarized below: |
Oleta River/Snake Creek: The recommended approach (Indicator Species) |
rated highest at 22 with a range of values from 6-22; the indicator species being |
the American oyster, West Indian Manatee and Johnson's seagrass. |
Northern Biscayne Bay: The recommended approach (Indicator Species) rated |
highest at 22 with a range of values from 6-22; the indicator species being the |
spotted seatrout and manatee grass. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.