DOCSLIB.ORG

Pensacola Bay System EPA Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pensacola Bay System EPA Report EPA/600/R-16/169 | August 2016 | www.epa.gov/research Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System: Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation Office of Research and Development 1 EPA/600/R-16/169 August 2016 Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System: Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation by Michael A. Lewis Gulf Ecology Division National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Gulf Breeze, FL 32561 J. Taylor Kirschenfeld Water Quality and Land Management Division Escambia County Pensacola, FL 32503 Traci Goodhart West Florida Regional Planning Council Pensacola, FL 32514 National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Gulf Breeze, FL. 32561 i Notice The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through its Office of Research and Development (ORD) funded and collaborated in the research described herein with representatives from Escambia County’s Water Quality and Land Management Division and the West Florida Regional Planning Council. It has been subjected to the Agency’s peer and administrative review and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. This is a contribution to the EPA ORD Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program. The appropriate citation for this report is: Lewis, Michael, J. Taylor Kirschenfeld, and Traci Goodheart. Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System: Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Gulf Breeze, FL, EPA/600/R-16/169, 2016. ii Foreword This report supports EPA’s Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program. The objective of this Program is to assist community leaders make decisions that preserve the environment and the vital services they provide. The primary objective of this report is to provide an updated summary of the ecological condition of the Pensacola Bay System (PBS) and the value of its ecological goods and services. An updated summary is needed since a considerable amount of published and unpublished technical information has become available since the last summary published 15 years ago. This updated report serves as a technical resource for the public and the regulatory and scientific communities related to resource management. It provides a synopsis of the environmental database (1680-present) and the research needed to maintain and improve the environmental quality of the PBS. The report is a collaborative effort. Authors are from the USEPA’s Gulf Ecology Division Research Laboratory (Gulf Breeze, FL), West Florida Regional Planning Council (Pensacola, FL) and Escambia County Water Quality and Land Management Division (Pensacola, FL). The USEPA Gulf Ecology Division conducts ecological effects research to assess the sustainability of estuarine and coastal systems and determines the factors causing impacts in order to predict future risks. The mission of the WFRPC is to provide professional planning, coordinating and advisory services to local governments, state and federal agencies and to he public to preserve and enhance the quality of life in northwest Florida. Escambia County’s Water Quality and Land Management Division serves the community through development and oversight of local environmental resource projects and programs for the county. iii Table of Contents NOTICE ........................................................................................................................................................................II FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................................................III LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................................... VII LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................................ XII ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................................... XIV ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................................................. XV EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ XVI 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................1 2 HISTORICAL DATABASE ..............................................................................................................................................5 3 NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORIES (BIODIVERSITY) ..................................................................................................... 13 3.1 History/Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 13 3.2 Fish............................................................................................................................................................. 15 3.3 Macrobenthos ........................................................................................................................................... 18 3.4 Phytoplankton ........................................................................................................................................... 20 3.5 Zooplankton .............................................................................................................................................. 20 3.6 Periphytic Algae ......................................................................................................................................... 21 3.7 Tidal Wetland Vascular Plants ................................................................................................................... 22 3.8 Biodiversity Differences ............................................................................................................................. 22 4 ANTHROPOGENIC CONTAMINANTS ........................................................................................................................... 23 5 GROUNDWATER QUALITY/SUPERFUND SITES ............................................................................................................. 25 6 SURFACE WATER QUALITY ...................................................................................................................................... 26 6.1 Nutrients .................................................................................................................................................... 28 6.2 Trace Metals .............................................................................................................................................. 30 6.3 Persistent Non-Nutrient Organics ............................................................................................................. 32 6.4 Effects-Based Research ............................................................................................................................. 32 7 SEDIMENT QUALITY ............................................................................................................................................... 33 7.1 Chemical Quality ........................................................................................................................................ 34 7.2 Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines Exceedance ............................................................................. 40 7.3 Toxicity (Fauna) ......................................................................................................................................... 44 7.4 Phytotoxicity .............................................................................................................................................. 50 7.5 Genotoxicity .............................................................................................................................................. 50 7.6 Macrobenthic Community Metrics ........................................................................................................... 51 iv 7.7 SQAG Predictive Ability ............................................................................................................................. 54 7.8 Spatial Comparisons of Sediment Quality ................................................................................................. 55 7.9 Stressor Source Comparisons for Sediment Quality ................................................................................. 59 8 DREDGING ........................................................................................................................................................... 60 9 BIOACCUMULATION (CONTAMINANT BIOAVAILABILITY) ............................................................................................... 62 9.1 Trace Metals (Sans Mercury) ....................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Florida Audubon Naturalist Summer 2021
    Naturalist Summer 2021 Female Snail Kite. Photo: Nancy Elwood Heidi McCree, Board Chair 2021 Florida Audubon What a privilege to serve as the newly-elected Chair of the Society Leadership Audubon Florida Board. It is an honor to be associated with Audubon Florida’s work and together, we will continue to Executive Director address the important issues and achieve our mission to protect Julie Wraithmell birds and the places they need. We send a huge thank you to our outgoing Chair, Jud Laird, for his amazing work and Board of Directors leadership — the birds are better off because of your efforts! Summer is here! Locals and visitors alike enjoy sun, the beach, and Florida’s amazing Chair waterways. Our beaches are alive with nesting sea and shorebirds, and across the Heidi McCree Everglades we are wrapping up a busy wading bird breeding season. At the Center Vice-Chair for Birds of Prey, more than 200 raptor chicks crossed our threshold — and we Carol Colman Timmis released more than half back to the wild. As Audubon Florida’s newest Board Chair, I see the nesting season as a time to celebrate the resilience of birds, while looking Treasurer forward to how we can protect them into the migration season and beyond. We Scott Taylor will work with state agencies to make sure the high levels of conservation funding Secretary turn into real wins for both wildlife and communities (pg. 8). We will forge new Lida Rodriguez-Taseff partnerships to protect Lake Okeechobee and the Snail Kites that nest there (pg. 14).
    [Show full text]
  • Pensacola Bay Bridge
    Florida Department of Transportation RICK SCOTT 1074 Highway 90 ANANTH PRASAD, P.E. GOVERNOR Chipley, Florida 32428 SECRETARY July 18, 2011 Ms. Lauren P. Milligan Florida State Clearinghouse Department of Environmental Protection 3900 Commonwealth Blvd., Mail Station 47 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 RE: Advance Notification Pensacola Bay Bridge Replacement PD&E Study ETDM #: 13248 From: 17th Avenue in Pensacola to Baybridge Drive in Gulf Breeze Federal Aid Project Number: 4221 078 P Financial Project ID Number: 409334-1-22-02 Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida Dear Ms. Milligan: We are sending this Advance Notification (AN) Package to your office for distribution to State agencies that conduct Federal consistency reviews (consistency reviewers) in accordance with the Coastal Zone Management Act and Presidential Executive Order 12372. We are also distributing the AN Package to local and Federal agencies. Although we will request specific comments during the permitting process, we are asking that permitting and permit reviewing agencies (consistency reviewers) review the attached information and provide us with their comments. This is a Federal-aid action and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), in consultation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), will determine what type of environmental documentation will be necessary. The determination will be based upon in-house environmental evaluations and comments from other agencies. Please provide a consistency review for this project in accordance with the State’s Coastal Zone Management Program. www.dot.state.fl.us In addition, please review the project’s consistency, to the maximum extent feasible, with the approved Comprehensive Plan of the local government to comply with Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Rosa Sound Water Quality Improvement Program Public Participation
    State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Initial SEP Program RESTORE Act Compliance SANTA ROSA COUNTY Santa Rosa Sound Water Quality Improvement Program Public Participation PROJECT NO. 2-1 Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION Financial Integrity The Santa Rosa Sound Water Quality Improvement Program comprises three components that will directly contribute to the restoration of water quality in Santa Rosa Sound by reducing loads of nutrients, bacteria, and heavy metals delivered to the sound. The frst two components of the program will expand the existing centralized sewer system to allow for the abandonment Overall Consistency of 758 septic systems in two areas on the Fairpoint Peninsula. The third component involves the relocation of the effuent outfall from the Navarre Beach Wastewater Treatment Facility (NBWWTF) to eliminate the discharge of up to 900,000 gallons per day (gpd) of treated effuent into Santa Rosa Sound. This program will be implemented in southeastern Santa Rosa County (see Figure 2-1A). Proposed Projects NEED AND JUSTIFICATION Santa Rosa Sound is about 35 miles long, connecting the Pensacola Bay estuary to Choctawhatchee Bay. It is bordered along much of its northern edge by the Fairpoint Peninsula and is separated from the Gulf of Mexico by Figure 2-1A. Location of Santa Rosa Sound Water Quality Santa Rosa Island to the south. Santa Rosa Island is part Improvement Program components in Santa Rosa County. of the Gulf Islands National Seashore, and the associated Implementation waters of the sound are designated Outstanding Florida Waters. Santa Rosa Sound supports seagrass beds, which are important habitat and foraging areas for numerous fsh and invertebrate species, including many of commercial and recreational signifcance.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COLA
    Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COL Application Part 2 — FSAR SUBSECTION 2.4.1: HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.4 HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING ..................................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION ............................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1.1 Site and Facilities .....................................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1.2 Hydrosphere .............................................................................2.4.1-3 2.4.1.3 References .............................................................................2.4.1-12 2.4.1-i Revision 6 Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COL Application Part 2 — FSAR SUBSECTION 2.4.1 LIST OF TABLES Number Title 2.4.1-201 East Miami-Dade County Drainage Subbasin Areas and Outfall Structures 2.4.1-202 Summary of Data Records for Gage Stations at S-197, S-20, S-21A, and S-21 Flow Control Structures 2.4.1-203 Monthly Mean Flows at the Canal C-111 Structure S-197 2.4.1-204 Monthly Mean Water Level at the Canal C-111 Structure S-197 (Headwater) 2.4.1-205 Monthly Mean Flows in the Canal L-31E at Structure S-20 2.4.1-206 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Canal L-31E at Structure S-20 (Headwaters) 2.4.1-207 Monthly Mean Flows in the Princeton Canal at Structure S-21A 2.4.1-208 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Princeton Canal at Structure S-21A (Headwaters) 2.4.1-209 Monthly Mean Flows in the Black Creek Canal at Structure S-21 2.4.1-210 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Black Creek Canal at Structure S-21 2.4.1-211 NOAA
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Survey of Escambia County, Florida
    United States In cooperation with Department of the University of Florida, Agriculture Institute of Food and Soil Survey of Agricultural Sciences, Natural Agricultural Experiment Escambia County, Resources Stations, and Soil and Water Conservation Science Department; and the Service Florida Department of Florida Agriculture and Consumer Services How To Use This Soil Survey General Soil Map The general soil map, which is a color map, shows the survey area divided into groups of associated soils called general soil map units. This map is useful in planning the use and management of large areas. To find information about your area of interest, locate that area on the map, identify the name of the map unit in the area on the color-coded map legend, then refer to the section General Soil Map Units for a general description of the soils in your area. Detailed Soil Maps The detailed soil maps can be useful in planning the use and management of small areas. To find information about your area of interest, locate that area on the Index to Map Sheets. Note the number of the map sheet and turn to that sheet. Locate your area of interest on the map sheet. Note the map unit symbols that are in that area. Turn to the Contents, which lists the map units by symbol and name and shows the page where each map unit is described. The Contents shows which table has data on a specific land use for each detailed soil map unit. Also see the Contents for sections of this publication that may address your specific needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Gulf of Mexico Estuary Program Restoration Council (EPA RESTORE 003 008 Cat1)
    Gulf Coast Gulf-wide Foundational Investment Ecosystem Gulf of Mexico Estuary Program Restoration Council (EPA_RESTORE_003_008_Cat1) Project Name: Gulf of Mexico Estuary Program – Planning Cost: Category 1: $2,200,000 Responsible Council Member: Environmental Protection Agency Partnering Council Member: State of Florida Project Details: This project proposes to develop and stand-up a place-based estuary program encompassing one or more of the following bays in Florida’s northwest panhandle region: Perdido Bay, Pensacola Bay, Escambia Bay, Choctawhatchee Bay, St. Andrews Bay and Apalachicola Bay. Activities: The key components of the project include establishing the host organization and hiring of key staff, developing Management and Technical committees, determining stressors and then developing and approving a Comprehensive Plan. Although this Estuary Program would be modeled after the structure and operation of National Estuary Programs (NEP) it would not be a designated NEP. This project would serve as a pilot project for the Council to consider expanding Gulf-wide when future funds become available. Environmental Benefits: If the estuary program being planned by this activity were implemented in the future, projects undertaken would directly support goals and outcomes focusing on restoring water quality, while also addressing restoration and conservation of habitat, replenishing and protecting living coastal and marine resources, enhancing community resilience and revitalizing the coastal economy. Specific actions would likely include,
    [Show full text]
  • Seagrass Integrated Mapping and Monitoring for the State of Florida Mapping and Monitoring Report No. 1
    Yarbro and Carlson, Editors SIMM Report #1 Seagrass Integrated Mapping and Monitoring for the State of Florida Mapping and Monitoring Report No. 1 Edited by Laura A. Yarbro and Paul R. Carlson Jr. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Fish and Wildlife Research Institute St. Petersburg, Florida March 2011 Yarbro and Carlson, Editors SIMM Report #1 Yarbro and Carlson, Editors SIMM Report #1 Table of Contents Authors, Contributors, and SIMM Team Members .................................................................. 3 Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... 4 Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 7 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 31 How this report was put together ........................................................................................... 36 Chapter Reports ...................................................................................................................... 41 Perdido Bay ........................................................................................................................... 41 Pensacola Bay .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seagrass Status and Trends in the Northern Gulf of Mexico: 1940–2002
    Seagrass Status and Trends in the Northern Gulf of Mexico: 1940–2002 Edited by L. Handley,1 D. Altsman,2 and R. DeMay3 Abstract Introduction Over the past century, seagrass habitats from the The Gulf of Mexico provides a wide array of valuable bays of Texas to the gulf shores of Florida have decreased. natural resources to the nations that border its shores. As Seagrass beds, which are highly dependent on water quality the value of the gulf coastal environment continues to be and clarity for survival, are home to a multitude of aquatic recognized, it becomes increasingly important to invest in the plants and animals and a source of economic activity through conservation of those resources. Reductions in both abundance commercial and recreational fishing and ecotourism. The U.S. and diversity of various organisms and habitats emphasize a Environmental Protection Agency’s Gulf of Mexico Program critical need to protect these natural assets, many of which (GMP) and its partners have made a commitment to restore, serve important ecological functions. In response to increasing enhance, and protect this important ecosystem. As seagrass trends in habitat degradation, several organizations and habitats decrease, the need for information on the causes and institutions have begun to act together with local residents to effects of seagrass loss, current mapping information, and address these issues. One such effort, facilitated by the U.S. education on the importance of seagrassess becomes greater. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Gulf of Mexico This report is the initial effort of the GMP’s research and Program, will integrate the efforts of a wide range of scientific restoration plan for seagrasses.
    [Show full text]
  • 12. Gulf Islands National Seashore
    The massive fort and surrounding trails cuckoos and hairy woodpeckers along offer a great vantage point for viewing the Chain of Lakes Trail. The Hutton sentinel flycatchers, gray kingbirds, Unit nearby is worth a stop to hear Tennessee, Cape May and magnolia the song of Bachman’s sparrows, and warblers. Fallouts can be seen in April the Three Notch Road site is perfect as migrants reach land for the first time. for sighting a red-headed woodpecker. Photo by David Moynahan 8 a.m. to sunset. Far western end of Free binoculars and field guides Fort Pickens Rd. (850) 934-2600, nps. are available. Dawn to dusk. 7720 org/guis Deaton Bridge Rd., (850) 983-5363, floridastateparks.org 12. Gulf Islands National Feathery Finds Seashore: Naval Osprey: Known as Florida’s fishing Live Oaks. The eagles, osprey have a distinct M wing national park’s shape and make their habitat near visitor center on brackish estuaries where they can scan Santa Rosa Sound the surface for fish. Osprey mate for is also a prime spot life – birds of a feather really do stay for sighting goldeneye, scaup, ducks, together! black-and-white warblers. 8 a.m. to sunset. 1801 Gulf Breeze Pkwy., (850) Brown Pelican: A symbol 934-2600, nps.org/guis of the Gulf Coast, the brown pelican is making A 1.5-mile loop trail 13. Garcon Point. a comeback. These runs through live oaks and picturesque water birds weigh 6-7 wetland. Wet prairie sparrows such as pounds and have a Henslow’s and LeConte’s can be seen 7-foot wingspan.
    [Show full text]
  • Escambia County Design Standards Manual
    Escambia County Design Standards Manual LEGEND Blue Highlight Federally Required Red Highlight State Required - Green Highlight Previously Adopted Ordinances *(concepts/standards unchanged) Yellow Highlight Director’s Recommendations *The overall concept was not changed however revisions were made to the language for clarity. In addition in some cases the process was streamlined. 11/2014 1 Design Standards Manual 2 3 4 Chapter 1, Engineering 5 6 Article 1 Stormwater 7 8 Sec. 1-1 Stormwater Management Systems 9 Sec. 1-1.1 Stormwater Quality (treatment) 10 Sec. 1-1.2 Stormwater Quantity (attenuations) 11 Sec. 1-1.3 Stormwater Ponds and Impoundments 12 Sec. 1-1.4 Conveyance Systems 13 Sec. 1-1.5 Exemptions 14 Sec. 1-1.6 Other Agency Approvals 15 16 Sec. 1-2 Stormwater Management Plans 17 Sec. 1-2.1 Methods 18 Sec. 1-2.2 Content 19 20 Article 2 Transportation 21 22 Sec. 2-1 Roadway Design 23 Sec. 2-1.1 Minimum Right-of-way widths 24 Sec. 2-1.2 Minimum pavement widths 25 Sec. 2-1.3 Intersections 26 Sec. 2-1.4 Slopes 27 Sec. 2-1.5 Roadway Elevations 28 Sec. 2-1.6 Street Layout 29 Sec. 2-1.7 Traffic Control Devices 30 31 Sec. 2-2 Access Management 32 Sec. 2-2.1 Access Location 33 Sec. 2-2.2 Pedestrian Access 34 Sec. 2-2.3 Traffic Control 35 Sec. 2-2.4 Modification of Existing access 36 Sec.2-2.5 internal Site Access Design 37 Sec. 2-2.6 Commercial Traffic in Residential Areas 38 39 Article 3 Parking 40 41 Sec.
    [Show full text]
  • Perdido River and Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan
    Perdido River and Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan November 2017 Program Development Series 17-07 Northwest Florida Water Management District Perdido River and Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan November 2017 Program Development Series 17-07 NORTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARD George Roberts Jerry Pate John Alter Chair, Panama City Vice Chair, Pensacola Secretary-Treasurer, Malone Gus Andrews Jon Costello Marc Dunbar DeFuniak Springs Tallahassee Tallahassee Ted Everett Nick Patronis Bo Spring Chipley Panama City Beach Port St. Joe Brett J. Cyphers Executive Director Headquarters 81 Water Management Drive Havana, Florida 32333-4712 (850) 539-5999 Crestview Econfina Milton 180 E. Redstone Avenue 6418 E. Highway 20 5453 Davisson Road Crestview, Florida 32539 Youngstown, FL 32466 Milton, FL 32583 (850) 683-5044 (850) 722-9919 (850) 626-3101 Perdido River and Bay SWIM Plan Northwest Florida Water Management District Acknowledgements This document was developed by the Northwest Florida Water Management District under the auspices of the Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Program and in accordance with sections 373.451-459, Florida Statutes. The plan update was prepared under the supervision and oversight of Brett Cyphers, Executive Director and Carlos Herd, Director, Division of Resource Management. Funding support was provided by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund. The assistance and support of the NFWF is gratefully acknowledged. The authors would like to especially recognize members of the public, as well as agency reviewers and staff from the District and from the Ecology and Environment, Inc., team that contributed to the development of this plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Guide to Eating Fish Caught in Florida
    Fish Consumption Advisories are published periodically by the Your Guide State of Florida to alert consumers about the possibility of chemically contaminated fish in Florida waters. To Eating The advisories are meant to inform the public of potential health risks of specific fish species from specific Fish Caught water bodies. In Florida February 2019 Florida Department of Health Prepared in cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 2019 Florida Fish Advisories • Table 1: Eating Guidelines for Fresh Water Fish from Florida Waters (based on mercury levels) page 1-50 • Table 2: Eating Guidelines for Marine and Estuarine Fish from Florida Waters (based on mercury levels) page 51-52 • Table 3: Eating Guidelines for species from Florida Waters with Heavy Metals (other than mercury), Dioxin, Pesticides, Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), or Saxitoxin Contamination page 53-54 Eating Fish is an important part of a healthy diet. Rich in vitamins and low in fat, fish contains protein we need for strong bodies. It is also an excellent source of nutrition for proper growth and development. In fact, the American Heart Association recommends that you eat two meals of fish or seafood every week. At the same time, most Florida seafood has low to medium levels of mercury. Depending on the age of the fish, the type of fish, and the condition of the water the fish lives in, the levels of mercury found in fish are different. While mercury in rivers, creeks, ponds, and lakes can build up in some fish to levels that can be harmful, most fish caught in Florida can be eaten without harm.
    [Show full text]