text stringlengths 0 6.44k |
|---|
80 (----------1----------1----------1----------1----------1----------1----------1----------1----------1----------1----------1-------- |
month |
Figure 13. Average monthly flows as estimated from 2x2 Alt7r |
(blue). Red bars represent the average monthly flows that comprise the beneficial flow volumes for southern Biscayne Bay's |
10000 acres of SAV (month 1 is January). |
also that the salt concentration will be an integral measure of |
various effects with inherent time scales from days to many |
weeks, and length scales from meters to several kilometers. |
These effects, as we have already seen, are often difficult to |
estimate, span orders of magnitude in size, and are tricky to |
model at the fine scales required in Biscayne Bay. |
Projected Volumetric Mean Salinities in a 1km-wide Coastal Zone |
1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 |
year |
Figure 14. The daily time series of projected salinities in southern Biscayne Bay within a 1 km-wide coastal zone (driven by |
measured flows = green, modeled flows Alt7r5e = blue) with |
the 10,000 acre seasonal volumetric target (red) and 3,200 acre |
target (yellow). |
20 South Florida Natural Resources Center Technical Series (2006:1) |
DISCUSSION |
Prior to the significant changes in the freshwater flow patterns |
in south Florida caused by the creation of a water control system in the early 20th century, Biscayne Bay was a true estuarine system. Large amounts of freshwater in the form of both |
surface and groundwater were present throughout most of |
the year and supported a wide range of flora and fauna. When |
these freshwater sources were diminished and their distribution altered by water management practices, the vegetation in |
the bay, as well as the juveniles of many fish and invertebrate |
species, were adversely affected and the ecosystem in the bay |
changed drastically. The ecosystem that exists today in Biscayne Bay is largely marine in nature, as the volume, timing, |
and distribution of freshwater flows are insufficient to maintain an estuarine environment over ecologically-significant |
temporal and spatial scales. In keeping both with the Everglades restoration efforts and the NPS mandate to preserve |
unimpaired the nation’s natural resources within the parks, |
this document provides ecological and physical targets for desired conditions in Biscayne National Park, and attempts to |
quantify the existing freshwater flows that are necessary for |
the protection of fish and wildlife within the park. |
The spatial focus of the discussion of ecologic targets includes the Coastal Mangrove Zone (CMZ) of mainland Biscayne National Park in this report and the adjacent Western |
Bay Zone (WBZ). Because the CMZ receives no water deliveries currently, the spatial focus for estimation of target flow |
deliveries is on the WBZ within Biscayne National Park - the |
10,000 acre area along the western shoreline which contains |
the portion of the ecosystem that most benefits from freshwater flows. The shallow waters of the WBZ contain thousands |
of acres of seagrasses as well as a fringing mangrove forest. |
The desired condition, or overarching goal, for the western |
zone of Biscayne National Park is the existence of stable estuarine conditions that persist through the dry season, to be |
achieved through more natural timing and distribution of |
freshwater flows. These stable estuarine conditions support |
a productive, diverse benthic community based on seagrass. |
These conditions will also support endangered species and |
sustain productive nursery habitat for local and regional fishery resources. |
The appropriate restoration area to consider was discussed |
in this document. The existing RECOVER performance measures focus on a narrow (500 m) strip of coastline that encompasses 3200 acres of park waters. The alternate approach used |
here is to focus on existing geomorphological information |
to define an area of soft bottom suitable for seagrasses. This |
habitat in the WBZ includes roughly 10,000 acres of park area. |
This larger region was chosen as the target area for stable estuarine conditions because it is based on bay geomorphology, |
a factor that is fundamental to bay ecology. |
The ecological targets for the WBZ were based upon an |
approach that includes the benthic community, endangered |
species, and important fishery resources in the western bay. |
Because seagrass is important nursery and growth habitat |
for indicator species, a fundamental resource management |
and restoration goal is to maximize coverage by SAV beds |
at sustainable levels. Under appropriate salinity and water |
quality conditions, it is expected that this area will support |
excellent SAV growth where sediment and water depth are |
appropriate for such growth. One explicit restoration target |
is an increase in the vitality and diversity of the WBZ seagrass |
community, with wigeon grass as the dominant SAV species |
at the mangrove edge within the nearshore ecotone and shoal |
grass becoming co-dominant with turtle grass through much |
of the rest of the WBZ. Another explicit target is the restoration of the community of seagrass-associated fauna that have |
been largely extirpated from South Bay,and the enhancement |
of habitat for others, such as crocodiles and pink shrimp |
that will likewise benefit substantially from the target salinity |
conditions. |
These ecological targets require freshwater flows that produce mesohaline conditions throughout most of the year at |
the bottom of the bay, with salinities ranging from 5 to 20 ppt |
over the soft bottom areas of the WBZ that have the substrate |
necessary to sustain SAV. In particular, measured dry season |
salinities (November through May) should not exceed 30 |
ppt anywhere in the zone. The ecological and salinity targets |
that link mesohaline conditions and associated seagrass and |
faunal communities for this area are not currently being met |
because current freshwater deliveries are insufficient in terms |
of quantity, timing, and distribution. |
Using draft CERP Guidance Memorandum 4 methodology, freshwater flows that either contribute to reaching, or |
reach, the above salinity ranges in the WBZ can be considered |
“beneficial.” To quantify these beneficial flows, the implicit |
flow targets, the existing flows, and the specific restoration |
area of concern need to be clearly defined. |
Simple volumetric estimates to reach these salinity goals in |
the 10,000 acres of the tidally-driven system result in a target |
annual flow of 1.1 Macre-ft/yr, with dry and wet season variations. Other types of flow target estimates - diffusive, empirical, semi-empirical - discussed in this document fall within |
this range as well. In the absence of any robust hydrological |
modeling results which could reduce the range of estimates, |
the volumetric estimate will suffice as a flow target for comparison against the existing flows. Future work should focus |
on hydrological modeling results that will not only help refine |
the volumetric estimates, but also provide information concerning the expected spatial and temporal distribution of the |
freshwater flows. |
The existing flows are comprised of the managed water |
flows through the control structures at the end of the canals |
that empty directly in or adjacent to the WBZ; groundwater |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.