text stringlengths 0 6.44k |
|---|
Impacts from acts of nature (e.g., hurricanes) |
Heterogeneous habitats |
Public acceptance The situation would only get worse with time Inexpensive but not legal |
Few Reduction in current legal uses of water |
Public acceptance Lack of scientific base to work from Expensive and long term |
Common scientific tool Not developed for Biscayne Bay May be useful with much further study Not understandable as real Expensive and long term |
Common scientific tool Not developed for Biscayne Bay Impacts from acts of nature (e.g., hurricanes) Comparatively low cost on a per acre o g g |
salinity and productivity of Indirect linkages largely unknown |
Comparatively easy to monitor Not connected to salinity changes alone |
Only applicable west of shoreline |
Fast |
Slow |
FEASIBILITY OF COST-EFFECTIVE |
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS |
(Very costly (0), Comparatively inexpensive (5) |
1 4 |
SPEED OF |
ADAPTIVE MGMT |
(Slow (0), Medium (3) , Fast (5)) |
0 |
4 |
Suitability of unvegetated sediments |
for colonization by shoal grass unknown |
Slow |
Fairly Slow |
OPPORTUNITIES & Score |
(0 = creates numerous problems; |
5 = creates few problems) |
THREATS & Score |
(0 = large # of threats, 5 = few) |
Community Index |
1 |
1 1 |
1 |
1 |
Soil Characteristics |
STRENGTHS & Score |
(0 - no strengths, 5 = strong) |
WEAKNESSES & Score |
(0 = Very weak, 5 = few weaknesses) |
3 |
Presence/Absence/Vitality |
of Preferred Habitats |
Ecological Preservation |
Valued Ecosystem Component |
(Crocodiles and Roseate Spoonbills) |
Pre-development Scenario |
There is general agreement that returning to |
anything close to predevelopment water flows is |
not likely |
Recreationally fishing is popular, but most |
fisherman do not understand fish life histories |
The preferred fish community based upon harvests is reefs, not generally sensitive |
to freshwater flows in this area |
2 |
3 |
Medium |
1 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
Would require add'l approach for |
open-water areas |
Adverse impacts from non-salinity water |
quality parameters |
4 1 |
12 |
1 1 |
5 |
13 |
1 15 |
1 5 |
Medium 2 |
Restoration to pre-development |
conditions would be too expensive and |
not likely politically viable |
Inexpensive, but difficult to interpret |
3 3 |
2 3 |
Slow 1 |
3 |
CERP & other restoration projects |
have already been identified to address |
existing deteriorated condition |
23 2 |
Would require monitoring 3 different components |
Preferred habitats is a 'fuzzy' concept - to |
many people, estuarine species may be less |
desirable than marine species |
Conceptually, "preserving the Bay" would be |
popular with the public, but preservation would |
likely involve maintaining degraded habitats |
Possible difficulty in relating pop. Declines |
to reductions in freshwater flow |
Comparatively easy to monitor and to |
ID Significant Harm |
Nesting success not necessarily tied to |
changes in salinity |
16 |
Indicator Species |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.