DOCSLIB.ORG

Hurricane Wilma Storm Tide Data

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hurricane Wilma Storm Tide Data Monitoring the Storm Tide of Hurricane Wilma in Southwestern Florida, October 2005 Introduction Hurricane Wilma Storm Tide Data Residents in the southeastern United States were still recovering Abstract Measurable storm tide occurred at all temporary stations from Captiva Island south to Everglades City (figs. 6 and 7). Storm from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita when Hurricane Wilma appeared, the tide was also detected at all USGS real-time coastal monitoring stations in southwestern Everglades National Park and third category 5 storm of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season and, at its Temporary monitoring stations employing nonvented pressure transducers were used to augment an existing U.S. Geological northeastern Florida Bay (fig. 8). A storm tide of about 1 ft was observed at the northernmost stations in the Caloosahatchee River peak, the most intense tropical cyclone ever recorded in the Atlantic Survey coastal monitoring network to document the inland water levels related to the storm tide of Hurricane Wilma on the and Estero Bay. A storm tide of 1.5 to 2.0 ft was observed at bridges along Highway U.S. 41 over tributaries to Estero Bay. The Basin (fig. 1). The intensity of Wilma was reduced considerably by its highest storm tide occurred at stations directly south of Marco Island (where Hurricane Wilma made landfall), with a maximum travel over the Yucatán Peninsula on October 21-22, 2005, but southwestern coast of Florida. On October 22, 2005, an experimental network consisting of 30 temporary stations was deployed storm tide of 5.67 ± 0.5 ft above NAVD 88 recorded at Everglades City (WS_30). Storm tide was 4 to 5 ft at major coastal rivers reintensified into a category 3 storm as it moved into the Gulf of over 90 miles of coastline to record the magnitude, extent, and timing of hurricane storm tide and coastal flooding. Sensors were along the southwestern coast of Everglades National Park, decreasing to 1 to 2 ft above NAVD 88 as the storm tide traveled Mexico and approached Florida. Maximum sustained winds increased inland. Storm tide of about 3 ft was measured along the coastal creeks of northeastern Florida Bay. to 115 mi per hour and hurricane-force winds extended outward 85 mi programmed to record time, temperature, and barometric or water pressure. Water pressure was adjusted for changes in from the center (Pasch and others, 2006). A storm surge of 9 to 17 ft barometric pressure and salinity, and then converted to feet of water above the sensor. Elevation surveys using optical levels 6 5 8 8 8 above normal tide levels was predicted for the southwestern coast of 8 EXPLANATION EXPLANATION D D were conducted to reference storm tide water-level data and high-water marks to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 V Florida and areas south of the projected storm path. WS_16 COCONUT POINT V 4 CHATHAM RIVER A 5 A N N MCCORMICK CREEK WS_19 IMPERIAL RIVER O O SHARK RIVER T (NAVD 88). Storm tide water levels more than 5 feet above NAVD 88 were recorded by sensors at several locations along the T On October 20, 2005, a team from the U.S. Geological Survey WS_30 EVERGLADES CITY E E 3 V V I 4 I (USGS) in Ruston, Louisiana, was dispatched to Fort Myers, Florida, T T A southwestern Florida coast. Temporary storm tide monitoring stations used for this effort have demonstrated their value in: (1) A L L E with enough pressure transducers (sensors) and housings to establish 30 0 500 1,000 MILES E 2 R R T 3 T 0 500 1,000 KILOMETERS Lake E temporary stations along the southwestern Florida coast where landfall furthering the understanding of storm tide by allowing the U.S. Geological Survey to extend the scope of data collection beyond E E Okeechobee E F F STUDY AREA 1 N N was expected. Prior to team arrival, USGS employees in Fort Myers I I , that of existing networks, and (2) serving as backup data collection at existing monitoring stations by utilizing nearby structures , Florida Bay N 2 N determined deployment locations for these stations based on preexisting O O I I T T 0 A that are more likely to survive a major hurricane. A structures, such as dock and bridge pilings. The monitored area V Figure 1. Path of Hurricane Wilma during October 2005 (modified from Pasch V E E L 1 L E E and others, 2006). Filled and open circles represent the approximate eye extended from Boca Grande Pass, at the entrance to Charlotte Harbor, -1 E E D D I position of Hurricane Wilma, respectively, at midnight and noon UTC I south to Everglades City at the northern edge of Everglades National T T 82°00´ 81°30´ 81°00´ 80°30´ 82°00´ 81°30´ 81°00´ 80°30´ (Coordinated Universal Time) on the dates shown. Local time (Eastern Daylight M 0 M R -2 Park. An existing USGS real-time coastal hydrologic monitoring DESOTO DESOTO MARTIN R O Time) is UTC time minus 4 hours. SARASOTA HIGHLANDS MARTIN SARASOTA 41 HIGHLANDS O T 17 COUNTY COUNTY COUNTY COUNTY T COUNTY COUNTY S network extends from Everglades City south into Florida Bay and, COUNTY COUNTY S therefore, was already in place to monitor storm tide in that region (fig. 27°00´ 27°00´ -1 -3 31 Lake 31 Lake 10/23/2005 10/23/2005 10/24/2005 10/24/2005 10/25/2005 10/25/2005 10/26/2005 10/26/2005 10/27/2005 10/21/2005 10/22/2005 10/23/2005 10/24/2005 10/25/2005 10/26/2005 10/27/2005 10/28/2005 10/29/2005 10/30/2005 10/31/2005 WS_3 74 74 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 2). Where possible, sites were positioned to create a transect from the WS_2 Okeechobee Okeechobee GLADES <0.4 GLADES DATE AND TIME DATE AND TIME coast to interior estuarine bays and rivers. CHARLOTTE COUNTY CHARLOTTE COUNTY Figure 7. Hurricane Wilma storm tide elevations at selected temporary stations. Figure 8. Hurricane Wilma storm tide elevations at selected real-time stations in Everglades r COUNTY r COUNTY o o b b All temporary stations were installed by October 22, 2005. Less than 48 hours later the hurricane made landfall r r 78 National Park. a 78 a 75 H 75 Boca H WS_4 Boca south of Marco Island, where the magnitude, extent, and timing of the storm tide were recorded by the sensors. e Grande tte Grande tt lo 41 lo 41 12 r River ar <0.4 River Pass ha WS_6 Pass h The temporary stations used for this effort and for Hurricane Rita have allowed the USGS to (1) extend the scope of C HENDRY C HENDRY WS_1 <0.4 8 The maximum recorded water levels occurred at N. LEE LEE 8 Fort COUNTY Fort COUNTY data collection beyond that of existing networks, and (2) backup data collection at existing monitoring stations by WS_7 COUNTY 29 1.02 COUNTY 29 D Myers Myers V Estero River, Spring Creek, and Imperial River (fig. 6). These WS_10 A 10 utilizing nearby structures that are more likely to survive a major hurricane, such as bridge pilings. Data from this N Captiva permanent stations are located on tributaries to Estero Bay Captiva O WS_9 T monitoring effort, conducted under severe conditions, can be used to improve the current understanding and Island PALM BEACH Island 1.63 PALM BEACH WS_14 E upstream from tidal effects under normal conditions. The COUNTY COUNTY V WS_8 2.35 I 8 prediction of storm tide. 26°30´ WS_17 26°30´ 0.74 1.57 T 82 0.97 82 A magnitude of the water levels observed was influenced by the L N Estero 11.34 E WS_11 R S Estero 1.01 5.70 elevation of the streams at that point. Water levels increased WS_13 846 846 T Estero Imperial E Spring Estero 0.38 10/24/2005 E 6 Bay 10/24/2005 F sharply at all three stations (fig. 9), with the smallest increase 8.52 WS_15 Bay 0.97 08:00 EST N 08:00 EST I WS_16 9.03 Purpose and Scope 29 1.58 29 , of 2.79 ft occurring at Spring Creek and the greatest increase WS_18 1.90 2.44 N WS_21 O This report documents the procedures used to collect storm WS_19 I 4 T EXPLANATION of 4.64 ft occurring at N. Estero River. Water levels in these 27 1.97 27 A WS_20 V N. BRANCH ESTERO tide data for Hurricane Wilma in southwestern Florida. Storm E streams increase rapidly during significant rain events, as G G L S. BRANCH ESTERO E Naples Naples U tide elevation data are presented for the 23 of 30 stations where U 10/24/2005 75 10/24/2005 75 R 2 SPRING CREEK occurred during the passing of Hurricane Wilma. The WS_23 E L 06:00 EST L 5.84 06:00 EST T IMPERIAL RIVER 2.20 A storm tide was observed (arbitrary water-level data from the F F maximum water levels are likely more a function of flooding WS_22 BROWARD W O COLLIER BROWARD O COLLIER remaining 7 stations is made available but is not discussed). Data WS_25 COUNTY 2.19 2.18 COUNTY COUNTY and stream elevations than storm tide.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2019 Preliminary Manatee Mortality Table with 5-Year Summary From: 01/01/2019 To: 11/22/2019
    FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MARINE MAMMAL PATHOBIOLOGY LABORATORY 2019 Preliminary Manatee Mortality Table with 5-Year Summary From: 01/01/2019 To: 11/22/2019 County Date Field ID Sex Size Waterway City Probable Cause (cm) Nassau 01/01/2019 MNE19001 M 275 Nassau River Yulee Natural: Cold Stress Hillsborough 01/01/2019 MNW19001 M 221 Hillsborough Bay Apollo Beach Natural: Cold Stress Monroe 01/01/2019 MSW19001 M 275 Florida Bay Flamingo Undetermined: Other Lee 01/01/2019 MSW19002 M 170 Caloosahatchee River North Fort Myers Verified: Not Recovered Manatee 01/02/2019 MNW19002 M 213 Braden River Bradenton Natural: Cold Stress Putnam 01/03/2019 MNE19002 M 175 Lake Ocklawaha Palatka Undetermined: Too Decomposed Broward 01/03/2019 MSE19001 M 246 North Fork New River Fort Lauderdale Natural: Cold Stress Volusia 01/04/2019 MEC19002 U 275 Mosquito Lagoon Oak Hill Undetermined: Too Decomposed St. Lucie 01/04/2019 MSE19002 F 226 Indian River Fort Pierce Natural: Cold Stress Lee 01/04/2019 MSW19003 F 264 Whiskey Creek Fort Myers Human Related: Watercraft Collision Lee 01/04/2019 MSW19004 F 285 Mullock Creek Fort Myers Undetermined: Too Decomposed Citrus 01/07/2019 MNW19003 M 275 Gulf of Mexico Crystal River Verified: Not Recovered Collier 01/07/2019 MSW19005 M 270 Factory Bay Marco Island Natural: Other Lee 01/07/2019 MSW19006 U 245 Pine Island Sound Bokeelia Verified: Not Recovered Lee 01/08/2019 MSW19007 M 254 Matlacha Pass Matlacha Human Related: Watercraft Collision Citrus 01/09/2019 MNW19004 F 245 Homosassa River Homosassa
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 17: Archeological and Historic Resources
    Chapter 17: Archeological and Historic Resources Everglades National Park was created primarily because of its unique flora and fauna. In the 1920s and 1930s there was some limited understanding that the park might contain significant prehistoric archeological resources, but the area had not been comprehensively surveyed. After establishment, the park’s first superintendent and the NPS regional archeologist were surprised at the number and potential importance of archeological sites. NPS investigations of the park’s archeological resources began in 1949. They continued off and on until a more comprehensive three-year survey was conducted by the NPS Southeast Archeological Center (SEAC) in the early 1980s. The park had few structures from the historic period in 1947, and none was considered of any historical significance. Although the NPS recognized the importance of the work of the Florida Federation of Women’s Clubs in establishing and maintaining Royal Palm State Park, it saw no reason to preserve any physical reminders of that work. Archeological Investigations in Everglades National Park The archeological riches of the Ten Thousand Islands area were hinted at by Ber- nard Romans, a British engineer who surveyed the Florida coast in the 1770s. Romans noted: [W]e meet with innumerable small islands and several fresh streams: the land in general is drowned mangrove swamp. On the banks of these streams we meet with some hills of rich soil, and on every one of those the evident marks of their having formerly been cultivated by the savages.812 Little additional information on sites of aboriginal occupation was available until the late nineteenth century when South Florida became more accessible and better known to outsiders.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Trends in Indicator Regions of Everglades National Park Jennifer H
    Florida International University FIU Digital Commons GIS Center GIS Center 5-4-2015 Vegetation Trends in Indicator Regions of Everglades National Park Jennifer H. Richards Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, [email protected] Daniel Gann GIS-RS Center, Florida International University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/gis Recommended Citation Richards, Jennifer H. and Gann, Daniel, "Vegetation Trends in Indicator Regions of Everglades National Park" (2015). GIS Center. 29. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/gis/29 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the GIS Center at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GIS Center by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 Final Report for VEGETATION TRENDS IN INDICATOR REGIONS OF EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK Task Agreement No. P12AC50201 Cooperative Agreement No. H5000-06-0104 Host University No. H5000-10-5040 Date of Report: Feb. 12, 2015 Principle Investigator: Jennifer H. Richards Dept. of Biological Sciences Florida International University Miami, FL 33199 305-348-3102 (phone), 305-348-1986 (FAX) [email protected] (e-mail) Co-Principle Investigator: Daniel Gann FIU GIS/RS Center Florida International University Miami, FL 33199 305-348-1971 (phone), 305-348-6445 (FAX) [email protected] (e-mail) Park Representative: Jimi Sadle, Botanist Everglades National Park 40001 SR 9336 Homestead, FL 33030 305-242-7806 (phone), 305-242-7836 (Fax) FIU Administrative Contact: Susie Escorcia Division of Sponsored Research 11200 SW 8th St. – MARC 430 Miami, FL 33199 305-348-2494 (phone), 305-348-6087 (FAX) 2 Table of Contents Overview ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • C-43 Caloosahatchee River Watershed Protection Plan
    Caloosahatchee River Watershed Protection Plan APPENDICES January 2009 APPENDICES A – Performance Measure and Performance Indicator Fact Sheets B – Management Measure Tool Box and Fact Sheets C – Northern Everglades Regional Simulation Model D – Nutrient Loading Rates, Reduction Factors and Implementation Costs Associated with BMPs and Technologies E – Caloosahatchee River Watershed Research and Water Quality Monitoring Program F – Plan Operations & Maintenance, Permitting, and Monitoring G – Potential Funding Sources H – Agency and Public Comments and Responses APPENDIX A PERFORMANCE MEASURE AND PERFORMANCE INDICATOR FACT SHEETS Appendix A Caloosahatchee River and Estuary Performance Measures Number of Times Caloosahatchee Estuary High Discharge Criteria Exceeded Performance Measure: Number of Times Caloosahatchee Estuary High Discharge Criteria Exceeded – Mean Monthly Flows >2,800 cfs and Mean Monthly Flows > 4,500 cfs Description – The Lake Okeechobee WSE Regulation Schedule is applied to regulate (flood control) discharges to the Caloosahatchee River, and subsequently to the Caloosahatchee Estuary, when lake stages are high. The Caloosahatchee River has primary capacity for local inflows and is only utilized for Caloosahatchee Estuary discharges when there is secondary capacity available. The number of times that the Caloosahatchee Estuary high discharge criterion is exceeded must be limited to prevent destructive impacts on the estuary. Rationale – Researchers have observed an increased rate of eutrophication in Lake Okeechobee from 1973 to the present. Symptoms of this eutrophication include the following: • increases in algal bloom frequency since the mid-1980s (with an algal bloom being defined as chlorophyll-a concentrations greater than 40 μg/L) (Maceina 1993, Carrick et al. 1994, Havens et al. 1995b), • increases in the dominance of blue-green algae following a shift in the TN:TP ratio (Smith et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Rules of the South Florida Water Management District Minimum
    Rules of the South Florida Water Management District Minimum Flows and Levels CHAPTER 40E-8, F.A.C. Effective: September 7, 2015 CHAPTER 40E-8 Effective: September 7, 2015 CHAPTER 40E-8 MINIMUM FLOWS AND LEVELS PART I GENERAL 40E-8.011 Purpose and General Provisions 40E-8.021 Definitions PART II MFL CRITERIA FOR LOWER EAST COAST REGIONAL PLANNING AREA 40E-8.221 Minimum Flows and Levels (MFLs): Surface Waters 40E-8.231 Minimum Levels: Aquifers PART III MFL CRITERIA FOR LOWER WEST COAST REGIONAL PLANNING AREA, MFL CRITERIA FOR KISSIMMEE BASIN REGIONAL PLANNING AREA, AND MFL CRITERIA FOR UPPER EAST COAST REGIONAL PLANNING AREA 40E-8.321 Minimum Flows and Levels (MFLs): Surface Waters 40E-8.331 Minimum Levels: Aquifers 40E-8.341 Minimum Flows and Levels (MFLs): Surface Waters for Upper East Coast Regional Planning Area 40E-8.351 Minimum Levels: Surface Waters for Kissimmee Basin Regional Planning Area. PART IV IMPLEMENTATION 40E-8.421 Prevention and Recovery Strategies 40E-8.431 Consumptive Use Permits 40E-8.441 Water Shortage Plan Implementation PART I GENERAL 40E-8.011 Purpose and General Provisions. (1) The purpose of this chapter is: (a) To establish minimum flows for specific surface watercourses and minimum water levels for specific surface waters and specific aquifers within the South Florida Water Management District, pursuant to Section 373.042, F.S.; and (b) To establish the rule framework for implementation of recovery and prevention strategies, developed pursuant to Section 373.0421, F.S. (2) Minimum flows are established to identify where further withdrawals would cause significant harm to the water resources, or to the ecology of the area.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Document to Support the Central Everglades Planning Project Everglades Agricultural Area Reservoir Water Reservation
    TECHNICAL DOCUMENT TO SUPPORT THE CENTRAL EVERGLADES PLANNING PROJECT EVERGLADES AGRICULTURAL AREA RESERVOIR WATER RESERVATION Draft Report JuneJuly 28, 2020 South Florida Water Management District West Palm Beach, FL Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Authorized by Congress in 2016 and 2018, the Central Everglades Planning Project (CEPP) is one of many projects associated with the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) and provides a framework to address restoration of the South Florida Everglades ecosystem. As part of CEPP, the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) Reservoir was designed to increase water storage and treatment capacity to accommodate additional flows south to the Central Everglades (Water Conservation Area 3 and Everglades National Park). EAA Reservoir project features previously were evaluated to enhance performance of CEPP by providing an additional 240,000 acre-feet of storage. The additional storage will increase flows to the Everglades by reducing harmful discharges from Lake Okeechobee to the Caloosahatchee River and St. Lucie estuaries and capturing EAA basin runoff. The EAA Reservoir also enhances regional water supplies, which increases the water available to meet environmental needs. The Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-541) requires water be reserved or allocated as an assurance that each CERP project meets its goals and objectives. A Water Reservation is a legal mechanism to reserve a quantity of water from consumptive use for the protection of fish and wildlife or public health and safety. Under Section 373.223(4), Florida Statutes, a Water Reservation is composed of a quantification of the water to be protected, which may include a seasonal component and a location component.
    [Show full text]
  • Groundwater Contamination and Impacts to Water Supply
    SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT March 2007 Final Draft CCoonnssoolliiddaatteedd WWaatteerr SSuuppppllyy PPllaann SSUUPPPPOORRTT DDOOCCUUMMEENNTT Water Supply Department South Florida Water Managemment District TTaabbllee ooff CCoonntteennttss List of Tables and Figures................................................................................v Acronyms and Abbreviations........................................................................... vii Chapter 1: Introduction..................................................................................1 Basis of Water Supply Planning.....................................................................1 Legal Authority and Requirements ................................................................1 Water Supply Planning Initiative...................................................................4 Water Supply Planning History .....................................................................4 Districtwide Water Supply Assessment............................................................5 Regional Water Supply Plans .......................................................................6 Chapter 2: Natural Systems .............................................................................7 Overview...............................................................................................7 Major Surface Water Features.................................................................... 13 Kissimmee Basin and Chain of Lakes ...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries Research 213 (2019) 219–225
    Fisheries Research 213 (2019) 219–225 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Fisheries Research journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fishres Contrasting river migrations of Common Snook between two Florida rivers using acoustic telemetry T ⁎ R.E Bouceka, , A.A. Trotterb, D.A. Blewettc, J.L. Ritchb, R. Santosd, P.W. Stevensb, J.A. Massied, J. Rehaged a Bonefish and Tarpon Trust, Florida Keys Initiative Marathon Florida, 33050, United States b Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, 100 8th Ave. Southeast, St Petersburg, FL, 33701, United States c Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Charlotte Harbor Field Laboratory, 585 Prineville Street, Port Charlotte, FL, 33954, United States d Earth and Environmental Sciences, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th street, AHC5 389, Miami, Florida, 33199, United States ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Handled by George A. Rose The widespread use of electronic tags allows us to ask new questions regarding how and why animal movements Keywords: vary across ecosystems. Common Snook (Centropomus undecimalis) is a tropical estuarine sportfish that have been Spawning migration well studied throughout the state of Florida, including multiple acoustic telemetry studies. Here, we ask; do the Common snook spawning behaviors of Common Snook vary across two Florida coastal rivers that differ considerably along a Everglades national park gradient of anthropogenic change? We tracked Common Snook migrations toward and away from spawning sites Caloosahatchee river using acoustic telemetry in the Shark River (U.S.), and compared those migrations with results from a previously Acoustic telemetry, published Common Snook tracking study in the Caloosahatchee River.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.1 Wildlife Habitat
    1 Acknowledgements The Conservancy of Southwest Florida gratefully acknowledges the Policy Division staff and interns for their help in compiling, drafting, and revising the first Estuaries Report Card , including Jennifer Hecker, the report’s primary author. In addition, the Conservancy’s Science Division is gratefully acknowledged for its thorough review and suggestions in producing the finished report. The Conservancy would also like to thank Joseph N. Boyer, Ph. D. (Associate Director and scientist from Florida International University – Southeast Environmental Research Center), Charles “Chuck” Jacoby, Ph. D. (Estuarine Ecology Specialist from the University of Florida), S. Gregory Tolley, Ph. D. (Professor of Marine Science and Director of the Coastal Watershed Institute from Florida Gulf Coast University) as well as Lisa Beever, Ph. D. (Director of the Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program) for their review and/or support of this first edition of the Estuaries Report Card. In addition, special thanks goes to the Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program for its generous financial contribution to the 2005 report. The Conservancy thanks the following for their generous financial support in making this report possible: Anonymous supporter (1); Banbury Fund; Elizabeth Ordway Dunn Foundation; and The Stranahan Foundation Photo Credits: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/Department of Commerce, cover image South Florida Water Management District, pages 4, 6, 23, 36, 41, 63, 105, 109, 117, 147, 166, 176 The recommendations listed herein are those of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida and do not necessarily reflect the view of our report sponsors. © 2005 Conservancy of Southwest Florida, Inc. The Conservancy of Southwest Florida is a non-profit organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Conditions for Everglades National Park, Water Year 2019 Shark River Slough
    Water Quality Conditions for Everglades National Park, Water Year 2019 Shark River Slough Technical Oversight Committee Quarterly Meeting May 5, 2020 1 Water Quality Conditions – WY2019 Shark River Slough Percent of Sampling Events 12-Month Total Flow 12-Month TP FWMC Long-Term Limit Greater than 10 ppb Period Ending (kac-ft) (ppb) (ppb) Guideline Observed Everglades National Park – Shark River Slough Jul 2019 707.7 (780.9) 9.4 (8.9) 9.4 (9.0) 48.9 (46.9) 50.0 (45.8) Aug 2019 666.5 (755.3) 9.9 (9.2) 9.6 (9.1) 50.1 (47.6) 54.2 (50.0) Sep 2019 654.1 (748.5) 10.0 (9.3) 9.7 (9.2) 50.5 (47.8) 52.0 (48.0) FINAL WY2019 RESULTS Method 1 (left values) computed as S12s+(S333+S355A+S355B-S334) and Method 2 (values in parentheses) computed as S12s+(S333+S355A+S355B+S356-S334) Neither method excludes S334 flow from the total flow for long-term limit calculations. 2 Water Quality Conditions – WY2019 Shark River Slough WCA3A Stage S333 Flow TP Weekly (S333) S333 HW Stage S334 Flow TSS (S333) 3 Water Quality Conditions – WY2019 Shark River Slough 4 Water Quality Conditions – WY2019 Shark River Slough Federal WY2017 9.2 ft Reference Line Federal WY2018 9.2 ft Reference Line Federal WY2019 9.2 ft Reference Line 5 *S333 Net Flow = S333 Flow – S334 Flow Water Quality Conditions – WY2019 Shark River Slough Federal WY2017 WY2017 TP FWMC S12A 7 ppb S12B 6 ppb S12C 6 ppb S12D 8 ppb 9.2 ft Reference Line S333 32 ppb SRS 9.7 ppb Federal WY2018 WY2018 TP FWMC S12A 6 ppb S12B 5 ppb S12C 6 ppb S12D 7 ppb 9.2 ft Reference Line S333 12 ppb SRS 7.3 ppb Federal WY2019
    [Show full text]
  • Mud Lake Canal Other Name/Site Nu
    NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK NOMINATION NPS Form 10-900 USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) OMB No. 1024-0018 MUD LAKE CANAL Page 1 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service_________________________________________National Register of Historic Places Registration Form 1. NAME OF PROPERTY Historic Name: Mud Lake Canal Other Name/Site Number: Bear Lake Canal/Bear Lake Archeological District/EVER-192/8MO32 2. LOCATION Street & Number: Everglades National Park Not for publication: N/A City/Town: Flamingo Vicinity: X State: Florida County: Monroe Code: 087 Zip Code: 33034 3. CLASSIFICATION Ownership of Property Category of Property Private: _ Building(s): Public-Local: _ District: Public-State: _ Site: X Public-Federal: X Structure: Object: Number of Resources within Property Contributing Noncontributing _ buildings 1 _ sites 3 structures _ objects 1 3 Total Number of Contributing Resources Previously Listed in the National Register: J, Name of Related Multiple Property Listing: Archaeological Resources of Everglades National Park MPS NPS Form 10-900 USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) OMB No. 1024-0018 MUD LAKE CANAL Page 2 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service_________________________________________National Register of Historic Places Registration Form 4. STATE/FEDERAL AGENCY CERTIFICATION As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this __ nomination __ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property __ meets __ does not meet the National Register Criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Distances Between United States Ports 2019 (13Th) Edition
    Distances Between United States Ports 2019 (13th) Edition T OF EN CO M M T M R E A R P C E E D U N A I C T I E R D E S M T A ATES OF U.S. Department of Commerce Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Secretary of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) RDML Timothy Gallaudet., Ph.D., USN Ret., Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere National Ocean Service Nicole R. LeBoeuf, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services and Coastal Zone Management Cover image courtesy of Megan Greenaway—Great Salt Pond, Block Island, RI III Preface Distances Between United States Ports is published by the Office of Coast Survey, National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), pursuant to the Act of 6 August 1947 (33 U.S.C. 883a and b), and the Act of 22 October 1968 (44 U.S.C. 1310). Distances Between United States Ports contains distances from a port of the United States to other ports in the United States, and from a port in the Great Lakes in the United States to Canadian ports in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. Distances Between Ports, Publication 151, is published by National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and distributed by NOS. NGA Pub. 151 is international in scope and lists distances from foreign port to foreign port and from foreign port to major U.S. ports. The two publications, Distances Between United States Ports and Distances Between Ports, complement each other.
    [Show full text]