Artificial Reef Program Management Plan for Walton County, Florida

Artificial Reef Program Management Plan

for Walton County, Florida

May 2015

Artificial Reef Program Management Plan

for Walton County, Florida

Prepared for

1221 Airport Road, Suite 210 Destin, FL 32541 (850) 460-7040

May 2015

C2014-007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ...... II LIST OF TABLES ...... II 1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 1 1.1 Walton County ...... 1 1.2 South Walton Artificial Reef Association ...... 2 1.3 State and Federal Agencies ...... 3 1.4 Walton County Natural Reefs...... 5 1.5 Walton County Artificial Reefs ...... 6 1.6 Previous State and Federal Funding for Walton County Reef Construction ...... 6 1.7 Economic Impact and Importance of Artificial Reefs in Northwest Florida ...... 7 2.0 ARTIFICIAL REEF MANAGEMENT PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...... 9 3.0 ARTIFICIAL REEF MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 11 3.1 Definitions ...... 11 3.2 Artificial Reef Planning ...... 11 3.2.1 Walton County Reef Zones ...... 11 3.2.2 SWARA Advisory Board and Walton County Reef Program Coordinator ...... 12 3.2.3 Reef Construction Project Schedule ...... 12 3.2.4 Costs and Funding ...... 13 3.3 Reef Area Selection and Permitting ...... 13 3.3.1 Area Selection and Data Gathering ...... 14 3.3.2 Desktop Evaluations ...... 17 3.3.3 Field Assessment Procedures ...... 17 3.3.4 Permit Application ...... 18 3.4 Material Selection and Deployment Procedures ...... 19 3.4.1 Artificial Reef Material Selection ...... 19 3.4.2 Artificial Reef Construction ...... 20 3.4.3 Reef Monitoring and Maintenance ...... 22 3.4.4 Diver Education Program ...... 28 3.5 Reef Development Plans ...... 29 3.5.1 Shore Side Snorkel Reefs ...... 29 3.5.2 Nearshore Reefs within One Nautical Mile of the Shore ...... 29 3.5.3 Offshore Reefs in Deeper Waters (1 – 3 and 3 – 9 nautical miles) ...... 29

3.5.4 Large Area Reef Areas (LAARS) for Private Reef Deployments (Five-Year Plan)30 ...... 30 3.6 Goals for Continuing Operations ...... 33 3.7 Summary...... 34 4.0 REFERENCES ...... 35

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Economic Impact and Importance of Artificial Reefs in Northwest Florida Appendix 2 Florida’s Artificial Reef Program Appendix 3 Fish Species (by common name) recorded at three Walton County Artificial Reef Areas Appendix 4 History of Walton County, Florida Artificial Reef Development Appendix 5 FDEP and USACE Artificial Reef Permit Regulations Appendix 6 Example Artificial Reef Area Selection and Monitoring Methods

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1. Location Map ...... 4 Figure 1.2. Existing Walton County Artificial Reefs ...... 8 Figure 3.1. SWARA Reef Planning Zones Map ...... 15 Figure 3.2. Artificial Reef Area Selection and Permitting Flow Chart ...... 16 Figure 3.3 Proposed Artificial Reef Sites ...... 31

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1. Economic Benefits of Artificial Reefs to Walton County (Bell et al. 1998) ...... 7 Table 3.1. Fishes Reported in the REEF Database (http://www.reef.org/node/1053) for Walton County Artificial Reefs and from Grayton Beach Reef ...... 25

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Taylor Engineering has prepared this Artificial Reef Program Management Plan (Plan) for Walton County, Florida and the South Walton Artificial Reef Association. The Plan first describes the primary entities associated with the plan, including Walton County and South Walton Artificial Reef Association (SWARA), as well as secondary entities, including the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and federal agencies. The Plan then briefly describes the local Gulf of Mexico marine ecosystem, focusing on the limited hardbottom habitat existing offshore of Walton County. A short history of Walton County artificial reefs concludes the introduction.

The Plan follows this introduction section. Intended to provide an organized, written approach to the management and development of artificial reefs off the Walton County coast, the Plan begins with the goals, objectives, and strategies to achieve an effective and beneficial program. Used in conjunction with Walton County planning regulations, documents, and policies, this Plan provides for the planning and development of future artificial reef areas and the effective management of existing artificial reef areas. Input from artificial reef user groups, municipalities, regulatory agencies, and artificial reef researchers DRAFT will be invited and considered in the development, implementation, and future updates of the Plan. The management of existing reefs will be an ongoing process. As Walton County currently has very few artificial reefs offshore of its shoreline, project partners are presented with a unique opportunity to “start from scratch” and implement feasible and preferred siting, monitoring, and management strategies for the artificial reef program. The program will monitor existing reefs and update the County’s reef files with monitoring reports, and will use DGPS to obtain updated reef coordinates. As new artificial reef areas are permitted and artificial reefs are deployed, associated fish census data will be added to the REEF Environmental Education Foundation (REEF 2014) database and the SWARA website.

1.1 Walton County

Walton County, Florida, located on the Florida Panhandle Gulf of Mexico coast between Okaloosa and Bay counties, is a large (1,037 sq. mi), rural county (53 persons/sq. mi) with 52,582 residents (Census.gov 2014) focused in the communities along the Gulf of Mexico and Choctawhatchee Bay shoreline (Figure 1.1). In addition to numerous towns, the Gulf shoreline includes eight county beach parks with lifeguards and numerous other parks and beach access points along Scenic U.S. Highway 98 and State Road 30A (www.waltonoutdoors.com, 2014). The state of Florida owns and operates another six parks along the Gulf of Mexico. The approximate 26 miles of county shoreline along the Gulf of Mexico does not include an inlet. As such, the majority of local fishermen fish from non-motorozed watercraft (e.g., kayaks and paddleboards) launched from the Gulf beaches. Notably, Walton County residents may also directly access the Gulf via beach boat launching at Grayton Beach. The county issues 150 beach driving permits through an annual lottery system, which is only open to full-time Walton County property owners, or Walton County registered voters. Lottery winners pay permit fees for beach driving within limited areas and have the option of purchasing an additional boat launching permit. In 2014, the county issued 79 boat launching permits to beach driving permit holders. Alternately, many ramps and private docks along the shoreline of Choctawhatchee Bay provide Gulf access via East Pass in neighboring Okaloosa County; 1

however, many of the Walton County boat ramps are a considerable distance (approx. 12 miles minimum) from East Pass (the closest inlet). Walton County residents with larger vessels, likely use the boat ramps in Okaloosa or Bay County to access the Gulf of Mexico.

Each year the Emerald Coast receives approximately 17 million visitors (http://howardgrp.com/our-market/). Tourism is an important economic engine for the county, with an economic impact of about $1 billion annually (http://www.850businessmagazine.com/August-September- 2012/After-a-dismal-2010-tourist-season-Walton-County-has-bounced-back/). Tourism is expected to continue to grow and sustainable recreational activities for those visitors and residents should expand in a similar fashion. An active artificial reef program encourages the sustainability and growth of the tourism economy through additional eco-tourism recreation opportunities. Appendix 1 details economic benefits of artificial reefs and of the marine ecosystem in general.

Walton County has a strong, long-term interest in supporting an artificial reef program. County governments typically hold the permits necessary for construction and maintenance of artificial reefs. Counties are stable entities with the capability to support ongoing and long-term reef planning, permitting, and management. Counties also have the elected officials and staff necessary for coordination and interaction with the boating public and other sectors of the local community which support the reefs with its taxes. Artificial reefs should be considered as publicDRAFT works projects because they benefit the public, which has equal access to all the marine resources associated with these reefs. For these reasons, county governments are often the appropriate entity to support permitting and oversight of an artificial reef program. However, given the limitations placed on county budgets and resulting budget shortfalls, county government greatly benefits from volunteer-based organizations such as the South Walton Artificial Reef Association to support such programs.

1.2 South Walton Artificial Reef Association

To develop and maintain its reef system, Walton County partners with the South Walton Artificial Reef Association (SWARA), Inc. a private, 501(c)(3) nonprofit group of marine enthusiasts and artificial reef advocates based in South Walton County, Florida. Founded in 2013, SWARA serves the marine recreational interests of Walton County by promoting the development of artificial reefs.

SWARA currently provides vision, manpower, and funding to assist Walton County with design, permitting, and construction of new artificial reefs off Walton County. Following construction, SWARA shall monitor and, as needed, augment or renovate existing artificial reefs in the county.

SWARA is made up of a dues-paying membership, led by a non-paid coordinator and a non-paid board of directors. SWARA strives to establish and maintain ties to the County, key artificial reef organizations in Florida, and leaders in state government and the academic community. SWARA supports itself through membership dues, grants, donations, and sale of promotional items.

SWARA has a strong education agenda, teaching local citizens and visitors the value of the marine resources of the area and the role artificial reefs have in maintaining these resources for multiple purposes and users.

1.3 State and Federal Agencies

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) may assist local governments through funding for reef construction and monitoring through a competitive grants program (Appendix 2). The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), with the support of FWC, issues permits for artificial reefs in state waters (up to nine nautical miles from shore). The federal government, through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), issues permits for reefs located within U.S. waters. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) provides federal funding programs to the states such as the Sport Fish Restoration Program, administered through the FWC in Florida. Depending on the location of a reef area, the USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) may also be consulted by the regulatory agencies to consider issues such as protected species and essential fish habitat. The U.S. Coast Guard also provides comments and approvals to the USACE in regards to reef area locations (in relation to navigation safety fairways and other areas of concern) and authorized navigation clearances (water depths). The National Ocean and Atmospheric Association’s National Ocea Service (NOAA-NOS) maintains nautical charts and documents all permitted artificial reef areas for navigational safety.

DRAFT

3 N WALTON COUNTY

PROJECT LOCATION (SEE INSET)

CHOCTAWHATCHEE BAY

331

WALTON 98 COUNTY

PROJECT LOCATION

GULF OF MEXICO

0 5 10 0 70 140

SCALE: 1" = 5 miles SCALE: 1" = 70 miles

PROJECT TAYLOR ENGINEERING INC. FIGURE 1.1 C2014-007 LOCATION MAP DRAWN BY 1221 AIRPORT ROAD AF/CAS WALTON COUNTY ARTIFICIAL REEF MANAGEMENT PLAN SHEET SUITE 210 SOUTH WALTON ARTIFICIAL REEF ASSOCIATION / WALTON COUNTY DESTIN, FL 32541 WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA DATE CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION # 4815 DUNCAN GREERC:\USERS\DGREER\DESKTOP\C2014-007-F-LOCATION MAP.DWG 12/11/2014 2:56:55 PM ---- 4

1.4 Walton County Natural Reefs

The Florida Panhandle has abundant and productive estuarine habitats for marine and estuarine species, but limited natural hardbottom or “reef” habitats in the Gulf of Mexico waters. Many reef fish species require some structural variety in their offshore surroundings to thrive as adults. Consequently, for a healthy, diverse reef fish assemblage, reef planners must pay attention to both the inshore and offshore components of their life cycles.

Habitat in the northern Gulf of Mexico from the shoreline out includes shifting sandy and/or shell bottom and minimal hard substrate. A few areas with limestone outcropping provide the substrate for soft corals, encrusting invertebrates, and algae. The vast majority of Walton County’s offshore waters are absent of ledges and hardbottom outcroppings, particularly the easily-accessible near shore area. Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. (1992) and Thompson et al (1999) have estimated that only about 3% –5% of the offshore bottom of the Florida Panhandle area contains “live bottom” or natural reef

habitat. Because natural reefs are rare off Walton County, artificialDRAFT reefs become a very important habitat enhancement for marine resources. No near shore reefs (within a mile of the beach) are known to occur in Walton County Gulf waters.

Published data on the natural reef systems off Walton County is limited. Local anglers and divers have reported some natural reefs (a series of hardbottom outcrops) in 85 – 95 feet of water about 4.5 miles off Grayton Beach (in Walton County). The locations of the Grayton reefs and other natural and artificial reefs in the Gulf offshore of Walton and East Pass are provided at http://fishingdestinguide.com/gpsSTATEWATERSEAST.html.

The REEF fish census database provides fish survey results for reefs in Florida and contains dive surveys for the Grayton reef(s). The REEF database lists 12 fish surveys on the Grayton reef(s). These 12 surveys documented 65 species of fish. Gobies and blennies are the most abundant species on the reef. Species observed on the Grayton reef(s) also include several popular game fish species like scamp (Mycteroperca phenax), gag grouper (Mycteroperca microlepis), red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus), and vermillion snapper (Rhomboplites aurorubens).

Appendix 3 summarizes the REEF database information for the Grayton reef, and two artificial reefs off Walton County (Eastern Lake Reef and Frangista Reef). The list of reef fish species can be used as a reference species list for future reef monitoring, as the basis for target or anticipated species composition for mature artificial reefs, and to assist in the planning of future artificial reef construction.

1.5 Walton County Artificial Reefs

Most anglers learn quickly that fish congregate around offshore structures on the Gulf bottom. Local anglers have made many attempts to construct artificial reefs with a wide variety of materials. However, any material small enough to be loaded on a small boat would likely not be long term and stable, leaving the structures to provide only a short-term fish attractor and not the long-term or large- scale habitat that can benefit fish stocks. Additionally, deployment of artificial reef material by local anglers likely occurred without regulatory authorization to avoid permitting fees and to maintain secrecy of the area. This approach to artificial reef development is relatively ineffective and may result in less desirable ecosystem characteristics.

Formal development of a Walton County artificial reef system began in 1994 – 1995, with the support of the Organization for Artificial Reefs (OAR), who dove and selected an area in 57 – 60 feet of water directly offshore of the Seacrest community in Walton County on the eastern end of State Road 30A (OAR, 1994). The permitting and construction of that area by OAR was followed by

identification and permitting of two additional areasDRAFT (Frangista and Eastern Lake Reefs) in the next year (Appendix 4). A total of four artificial reefs were constructed on the three areas (Figure 1.2). The permits expired in 2000 and no additional reef deployments have occurred on those areas. Appendix 4 provides a more detailed description of this history, as well as details of state and federal permits and information on related state funding for construction of those areas. Much of the permit information was obtained from existing REEF databases (http://www.reef.org/).

In 2013, Walton County applied for two new artificial reef areas – Fish Haven #1 and Fish Haven #2. These two artificial reef areas are ¼-mile per side (approximately 40 acres or 0.0625 square miles each) located 2.4 and 4.4 nautical miles off the Walton County shoreline. Each area was issued a general permit by FDEP on June 4, 2013, and a USACE permit on June 5, 2014. In addition, SWARA funded and worked with the County to submit 13 additional permit applications; encompassing nine additional ¼- nautical mile nearshore reef areas within one nautical mile from shore and four shoreside snorkel reef areas. These 13 projects have been reviewed and approved by both FDEP and USACE. The Artificial Reef Plan (Chapter 3) provides the locations of the proposed reef areas.

1.6 Previous State and Federal Funding for Walton County Reef Construction

From 1995 to 2001, Walton County successfully partnered with local user groups and the state or federal government to deploy four artificial reefs within the three artificial reef areas using grant funds provided by FWC (or previously through FDEP). Walton County received $95,000 for artificial reef construction between 1995 and 2001 (Appendix 4). The County has not received any state or federal funding since 2001.

1.7 Economic Impact and Importance of Artificial Reefs in Northwest Florida

The major economic impact of offshore marine habitats for Walton County lies in the recreational use by anglers, divers, and small charter boat operators.

Results of a large five-county study for the economic benefits of artificial reefs funded by the state of Florida’s artificial reef program in 1998 (Bell et al., 1998) showed that the existing artificial reefs at that time provided the specific economic benefits to Walton County presented in Table 1.1. While the research paper cited is dated, it clearly shows the large potential economic impact of artificial reefs.

Table 1.1. Economic Benefits of Artificial Reefs to Walton County (Bell et al. 1998) Category Amount Total Annual Use Value: $ .9524 million Asset Value: $57 million Expenditures Generated: $19.71 million Wages Generated $3.63 million Employment: 395 jobs

DRAFT

7 CHOCTAWHATCHEE BAY

COUNTY LINE 331 N

WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA 98

WALTON COUNTY COUNTY LINE ZONE 1 - WITHIN 2,000' MIRAMAR BEACH FROM THE SHORELINE (FRANGISTA) ZONE II - 2,000' TO 1 NM

ZONE III - 1 NM TO 3 NM

EASTERN LAKE

ZONE IV - 3 NM TO 9 NM SAFETY FAIRWAY GENESIS (SEACREST)

GULF OF MEXICO

STATE JURISDICTION BEYOND 9NM LINE LEGEND: EXISTING ARTIFICIAL REEFS POTENTIAL BORROW AREA 0 15,000' 30,000' PERMITTED BORROW AREA SCALE: 1" = 15,000'

PROJECT TAYLOR ENGINEERING INC. FIGURE 1.2 C2014-007 EXISTING ARTIFICIAL REEFS DRAWN BY 1221 AIRPORT ROAD AF/CAS WALTON COUNTY ARTIFICIAL REEF MANAGEMENT PLAN SHEET SUITE 210 SOUTH WALTON ARTIFICIAL REEF ASSOCIATION / WALTON COUNTY DESTIN, FL 32541 WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA DATE CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION # 4815 DUNCAN GREERC:\USERS\DGREER\DESKTOP\C2014-007-F-EXISTINGREEFS.DWG 12/11/2014 2:54:31 PM ---- 8

2.0 ARTIFICIAL REEF MANAGEMENT PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The general goal of artificial reef development in the state and federal waters off the coast of Florida is to create and enhance marine resources and create new sportfishing opportunities. The over-riding goal of the Walton County Artificial Reef Management Program is to provide the framework for a high quality, sustainable, and long-term artificial reef program for the benefit of Walton County citizens, visitors, and marine habitat. The Plan organizes and describes the means of developing, maintaining, and expanding this program.

The goals set forth in the Florida Artificial Reef Plan (FWC, 2003) and National Artificial Reef Plan (NOAA, 2007) provided the basis for the goals and objectives of the Walton County Artificial Reef Program. The overall objective of the Artificial Reef Program is to create and maintain a network of marine artificial reefs for the long-term well-being of the marine resources in the Gulf of Mexico offshore Walton County and for the benefit of Walton County and its visitors. Specific program objectives provide means of meeting the overall goal, within the guiding principle that the program will do no harm to the existingDRAFT natural environment of the Gulf of Mexico.

Objective #1 Create stable and durable artificial reefs that provide valuable habitat for fish and wildlife and maintain and increase the regional abundance of marine life to levels as found on or exceeding the natural reefs off Walton County.

Success in meeting this objective will be measured in part by comparing marine life (species presence / absence) associated with artificial reef structures off Walton County to levels as found on the natural reefs off Walton County. Observations of the reef itself and the community that grows on the reef will complement the species information and provide sufficient information to assess success at the individual reef level.

Objective #2 Increase recreational and eco-tourism opportunities off Walton County for both residents and tourists.

A successful local artificial reef program must meet the needs of the reef users. Walton County has diverse groups of reef users. These include people who don’t have a large boat but want to snorkel nearshore artificial reefs to observe marine life, recreational anglers who want reefs easily accessible from the beach, commercial fishermen and charter operators who want reefs they can use for productive fishing, and SCUBA divers who want interesting dives in a variety of depth ranges. A reef program must include multiple elements to meet the needs of all these users. The Plan includes four separate elements to meet these needs.

(1) Shoreside snorkel reefs (a few hundred feet from the beach) (2) Nearshore reefs within one nautical mile of the shore (3) Offshore reefs in deeper waters (4) Large Area Artificial Reef Areas (LAARS) for private reef deployments

Objective #3 Increase the economic health and resiliency of South Walton County through the use of artificial reefs.

SWARA and Walton County wish to improve existing fisheries for recreational and commercial advantage (fisheries enhancement), create new habitat for fish community development (habitat enhancement), expand diving opportunities, and encourage recreational use of the marine resources. Increased commercial and recreational opportunities create revenue growth. Artificial reefs also provide opportunities for school/community projects to offer hands-on educational experiences for students and for scientific research on reef effects on fish populations and biomass.

The Artificial Reef Program will certainly change over the years. SWARA and Walton County anticipate that this Plan will require periodic review and revision to provide a living management tool guiding present development and maximizing future success.

Objective #4 Improve knowledge and understanding of artificial reef biology and performance measures.

As artificial reefs are created and monitored, data collectedDRAFT from the SWARA / Walton County reefs and entered into public databases will provide the information necessary for fisheries biologists and marine ecologists to increase their understanding of artificial reef performance and biology.

3.0 ARTIFICIAL REEF MANAGEMENT PLAN

This Plan focuses on the planning, design, construction, and monitoring of artificial reefs. Reef areas and materials are chosen systematically and in consultation with the local stakeholder (fishing, diving and environmental) communities. Projects are carefully planned and built with the approval of and in coordination with permitting agencies (FDEP and USACE), FWC, the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries (NOAA – Fisheries, formerly NMFS).

3.1 Definitions

This plan refers to the following terms:

 Artificial Reef Area: An area of seafloor (e.g., one square nautical mile) for which the County holds a permit to place artificial reef materials. An Artificial Reef Area is typically referred on a NOAA nautical chart as a “Fish Haven.”

 Future Artificial Reef Area: An area of seafloor for which the County has submitted or plans to submit a permit application for artificial reef construction.

DRAFT  Artificial Reef: A deployment of artificial reef materials or a cluster of deployments within 150 feet of one another. Separate reefs occur when deployments remain at least 150 feet away from one another. Artificial reefs are also referred to a “patch” reefs.

3.2 Artificial Reef Planning

Artificial reef planning includes identification of future artificial reef areas, management of existing reef areas, and management of artificial reef material stockpiles. SWARA will play a primary role in this process, but county support and active participation is required for the program to function. Planning also includes management of funding sources and regular presentations to the county commission to keep the governing body and residents informed and interested in the program.

3.2.1 Walton County Reef Zones

One of the primary tools in artificial reef planning will be the SWARA Reef Planning Zones Map (Figure 3.1). SWARA designated five management zones off the Walton County coast to support equitable distribution of reefs in the overall area and to aid placement of reefs to support activities of all user groups. These five planning zones extend from shallow to deep waters, lie parallel to the coast, and correspond generally to different activities and end users.

Zone 1. This zone extends from the shoreline to approximately 2,000 feet offshore. This zone will contain snorkel reefs for users that do not have access to boats.

Zone 2. The nearshore reef zone (2,000 feet – one nautical mile from shore) is for small boat owners and other recreational users that reach the areas by both motor and non-motor vessels – kayaks, small sailboats, small power boats, paddle boards, etc.

Zone 3. This zone, 1 – 3 nautical miles from shore, includes smaller reefs in deeper waters that can be used by both small and large recreational vessels.

Zone 4. This zone, 3 – 9 nautical miles from shore, would include areas typically greater than 80-foot depths that would be used primarily by larger recreational boats and charter vessels. This zone and beyond can also accommodate Large Area Artificial Reef Sites (LAARS).

Zone 5. The fifth zone extends beyond state waters (beyond nine nautical miles) and would also be used primarily by larger recreational boats and charter vessels. This zone would also accommodate LAARS for both private and public deployments.

The zone map will be used in conjunction with the area selection flow chart to determine whether and/or where new reef areas are appropriate. Areas and specific material placements will be designed to minimize the potential for known user conflicts while providing the best marine habitat.

3.2.2 SWARA Advisory Board and Walton County Reef Program Coordinator

DRAFT The SWARA Board of Directors (Board) serves as the local advisory board for all reef activities. This non–paid board comprises volunteers from the SWARA membership and provides various backgrounds and points of view regarding the marine resources of the Walton County area. The board meets frequently to discuss local reef building, monitoring projects, and activities.

The Board may meet with County staff to discuss locations for new reef construction, identify reef-related issues to coordinate with County staff, and help maintain close communications between SWARA and the County reef program coordinator. The board will also maintain schedules for reef monitoring dives and maintain artificial reef monitoring records (see below) for permit compliance.

The County reef program coordinator has the responsibility of coordinating with SWARA and the public entities involved in the reef program. Coordination will include working with SWARA to develop sites, educate SWARA members, pursue funding options for the program, and help bring SWARA proposals and presentations to the County and elected officials. The coordinator will also ensure that the permit conditions for reef construction are being followed and that the program maintains proper contacts and coordination with regulatory agencies that certify reef materials as acceptable, and verify compliance with permit conditions.

3.2.3 Reef Construction Project Schedule

The program will attempt to build at least one reef project per year. A project may consist of new reef construction or corrective actions on existing reefs. New reefs will target areas with known user conflicts or crowding problems. Priority shall be given to reefs in zones without existing reefs or work in areas in need of corrective action. Additional reef building may occur should additional funding resources be available.

3.2.4 Costs and Funding

Reef construction requires funding for purchasing and deployment of prefabricated reef units or payment for storage, transport and deployment of materials of opportunity. As an example, the Volusia County, Florida, reef program pays approximately $35,000 per barge deploying 300-400 tons of material as far as 15 miles into the Atlantic Ocean from its storage yard and wharf near Ponce Inlet in New Smyrna Beach. Costs for Walton County will likely vary greatly from this amount given the increased travel distance to the reef area and the lack of an existing waterside staging/loading sites. Pre-fabricated units are typically constructed, transported, and deployed by the manufacturer. Costs vary dramatically depending on the type and size of unit selected, as well as the distance to the deployment site.

SWARA is committed to developing and maintaining funding for artificial reef construction. The County may provide additional funding from the tourist development council (TDC) or the County’s general revenue budget. In addition, Walton County will seek grant funding from FWC for at least one reef project annually. Submittal of an Artificial Reef Construction and Monitoring Grant Application is the first step toward funding from FWC. A grant cycle begins with the application submittal date in March and ends August 31 the following year. A grant application must include information about the area location, project description, and demand for and purpose of the project. The application must include a chart showing the area and proximity to a recognizedDRAFT land based feature such as an inlet, pass or marina, and a drawing of the proposed reef configuration.

FWC awards grants on a competitive basis. Based on information in the application package, FWC ranks all applications received and typically completes the grant awards six to eight months after application submittal. SWARA will assist the County in complying with Chapter 379.249, Florida Statutes and Chapter 68E-9, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) that govern Florida’s artificial reef program.

Private contributions shall be sought for all projects. Private contributions could include donation of materials, transportation, material preparation, cash and in-kind contributions. When grant funds are used, any special conditions associated with the grant funding shall be incorporated into the project specifications. SWARA also expects to hold at least one fundraising event per year and other fundraising activities to support the program and help accelerate artificial reef construction.

3.3 Reef Area Selection and Permitting

After SWARA or the County decides they want to build a new reef, reef area selection is the first step in the process. Upon SWARA and Walton County’s agreement to pursue development of a new area, SWARA and the County or an environmental consultant will perform an initial field survey and desktop analyses. If that work does not identify any issues that would make the area ineligible for permitting, SWARA and the County would develop a draft permit application followed by a pre-application meeting with state and federal regulatory staffs. With the advice of the agencies, SWARA, the County, or the environmental consultant will submit a permit application. The subsequent review process and necessary revisions to the permit application will result in approval of the application and authorization to develop reefs in a new area.

3.3.1 Area Selection and Data Gathering

Many of the benefits and potential pitfalls of artificial reef construction are directly related to area selection. The area selection and permitting flowchart (Figure 3.2) provides a stepwise process for area selection and permitting that the reef program will use. The process helps minimize conflicts with existing fisheries uses and to provide complete permit applications. SWARA and the County must periodically review, and as necessary, update the flowchart to accommodate any changes in standard permit conditions, application requirements, or long-term concerns of the regulatory agencies.

DRAFT

14 CHOCTAWHATCHEE BAY N

331

COUNTY LINE OKALOOSA COUNTY

50 98 WALTON 60 COUNTY 70 60 50 ZONE I - WITHIN 2,000' COUNTY LINE FROM THE SHORELINE 70 ZONE II - 2,000' TO 1 NM

80 80 ZONE III - 1 NM TO 3 NM

BAY COUNTY 80 90

ZONE IV - 3 NM TO 9 NM 50 100 60

70 100

80 110 ZONE V - BEYOND 9NM 90 110

100

DEPTH CONTOURS IN FEET, MLW (NOAA) 0 20,000' 40,000' GULF OF MEXICO SCALE: 1" = 20,000'

PROJECT TAYLOR ENGINEERING INC. FIGURE 3.1 C2014-007 ARTIFICIAL REEF ZONES DRAWN BY 1221 AIRPORT ROAD AF/CAS WALTON COUNTY ARTIFICIAL REEF MANAGEMENT PLAN SHEET SUITE 210 SOUTH WALTON ARTIFICIAL REEF ASSOCIATION / WALTON COUNTY DESTIN, FL 32541 WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA DATE CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION # 4815 DUNCAN GREERC:\USERS\DGREER\DESKTOP\C2014-007-F-ZONE MAP.DWG 12/11/2014 3:01:22 PM ---- 15

DRAFT

Figure 3.2. Artificial Reef Area Selection and Permitting Flow Chart

The selection process begins with formal identification of the need or desire for a new reef. Selection of several areas in priority order may become appropriate to account for rejection of an area due to poor quality sediments, existing natural hardbottom, or artificial reef presence. Identification of materials desired for the reef or reefs and reef area selection, as well as the rest of the process may occur whether or not funding is immediately available. Because artificial reef construction permits are typically valid for five to ten years and the area selection and permitting process will require at least six months, moving ahead with planning is a reasonable action to capture the energy of the community whether or not a reef can be constructed immediately upon receipt of permits and/or funding.

3.3.2 Desktop Evaluations

Prior to field investigations and application submittal, a “desktop” evaluation shall be performed to ensure the proposed reef area will not affect submerged resources. The analysis will include:

 Summary of biological resources literature for the area (e.g., critical habitat, hardbottom, and existing artificial reef maps, etc.)  Identification of any commercial activity in the area (e.g., trawling or other commercial

fishing, shipping lane activity, etc.) DRAFT  Identification of offshore resources (e.g., submerged land lease areas, beach restoration borrow areas, etc.)  Summary of previous diver observations (if available), sediment conditions, observed fauna, etc.  A request to (and results from) the Florida Department of State Division of Historical Resources for a search of the Master Area File to identify any historic or cultural areas.  An accurately scaled figure of the area and its surrounding area showing the various details found on a nautical chart, shipping lanes, and the proposed artificial reef area

Any location identified in the Master Area File search results provided by the Division of Historical Resources must be avoided by at least 250 feet.

3.3.3 Field Assessment Procedures

Field assessment of a proposed reef area is necessary prior to permit application submission to demonstrate the proposed bottom area does not contain submerged resources (grassbed communities, shellfish, or other hardbottom communities or corals). The field efforts typically begin with fathometer or sidescan survey of the area for natural or artificial hardbottom. If the scan results suggest that the area contains something elevated above the bottom, a video camera or bounce (SCUBA) dive on the areas can determine whether the signal indicated an actual structure or an artifact of the scanning.

While not specifically required, at least one assessment dive should occur to test the sediments for their capacity to support the artificial reef materials prior to submittal of a permit application. Appendix 6 provides example protocol for a dive to test sediments. Some locations off Walton County include sediment too soft or fine grained to support reef material. A manual probe penetration test performed by divers will likely determine sediment suitability. A record of the location and results of penetration test(s) kept by SWARA will develop over time and possibly allow identification of general areas suited to artificial reefs and potential areas that have been ruled out because of poor sediment quality.

Video inspection or dive survey observations should be recorded on a standard form (see Appendix 6 for FWC form). Any observations that do not fit into the categories provided on the FWC form must also be noted to provide a full area survey record. A complete survey record should include all locations and findings.

The initial scan of the area may identify “anomalies” that a video camera or bounce dive identifies as an “informal reef.” The placement(s) by individuals over many years of a wide variety of artificial reef “materials” (e.g. washing machines, tires, concrete blocks, car parts, etc.) means that occasionally such areas will be found. If the materials have been colonized, the area typically cannot be disturbed, at least without regulatory agency consultation and approval. Such areas represent existing hardbottom materials, and the quality of the community may dictate that the area should not be disturbed. Construction may occur 250 feet beyond the location of such materials. Alternately, it may become appropriate to clean up the area and replace the material. However, SWARA and the County should first determine whether they can perform the cleanup effectively and present that recommendation to the appropriate agency or agencies.

3.3.4 Permit Application

For areas in state waters, a complete permit package will include a Joint Environmental Resources Permit Application Package with Forms A, C, and F completed. Notably, if the site is less than ¼–nautical mile, only a notice general permit application is required, whereas if the site is larger than ¼- nautical mile, an individual permit is required. The FDEP website (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wetlands/erp/forms.htm) contains blank forms and related guidance. The application package must include all materials such as dive records and the historical resources master site file request and findings.

After development of an initial permit application package, a pre-application meeting should occur with FDEP, USACE, and FWC if considering an area in state waters, and a meeting with USACE and FWC regulatory staff if considering an area in federal waters. Two weeks prior to the pre-application meeting, draft application materials (proposed reef area maps, etc.) should be submitted so that the regulatory staffs have time to review the materials. The purpose of the meeting is to introduce the project to the regulators, ask and answer questions concerning the project, identify permit application costs, and discuss a schedule for the permit process.

Once FDEP receives a permit application, it has 30 days to review and send out a request for additional information (RAI). Responses to that request will usually result in a completed application, and the state permits should be issued within 60 days of satisfying all of the RAIs. The federal review process does not have a schedule, and may span many months prior to issuance of a permit. For projects in state waters, the federal permit cannot be issued prior to the state permit, which provides the federal agency evidence of water quality compliance, one component of a complete federal permit application.

As the official permittee, the County shall maintain a record of the state and federal permits issued to the program.

3.4 Material Selection and Deployment Procedures

3.4.1 Artificial Reef Material Selection

SWARA and Walton County will generally select artificial reef materials in accordance with state and federal regulatory requirements as described in Chapter 62-330.600, F.A.C and federal regulations (Appendix 5). Lukens and Selberg (2004) provide additional guidance for selection of reef materials. The County and SWARA’s priorities for selecting reef materials are: 1) suitability, 2) durability, and 3) cost effectiveness.

Based on the guidance in Lukens and Selberg (2004), materials recommended for artificial reef construction include any of the following.

 Structures specifically designed as artificial reefs: provided all materials used in structures comply with guidelines of the Reef Plan. In recent years, a variety of pre-fabricated artificial reef materials have come on the market. SWARA may also begin to address the question of cost-effectiveness of the materials by deploying prefabricated units available within the region near similar piles of donated pre-cast concrete pipes or culverts. Future monitoring at these areas may determine if purchasing prefabricated, designed reef materials is cost- effective.  Concrete: culverts, junction boxes, power poles, slab, rubble; all concrete must be clean and without potentially hazardous protrusions, such as rebar;  Heavy gauge steel such as pipe or structural beams;  Concrete or steel vessels: cleaned of all petroleum products, loose debris, etc., inspected and approved by USCG; and,  Limestone rubble or natural rock.

A stockpile location is necessary for the artificial reef materials so that those materials may be conveniently inspected before loading for deployment. SWARA and the County should identify locations to stockpile materials for temporary storage and inspection prior to placement.

If any question arises concerning the quality of potential materials, reef planners should consult the guidance document cited above and contact FWC for a recommendation. Notably, not all materials will be appropriate for all locations. In particular, some larger vessels may not prove suitable in shallower waters as state and federal regulations typically require a clearance of at least 50% of the water column from the top of the artificial reef. Additionally, shallower depths may require larger materials to ensure the reef materials remain stable during storms. Finally, a reef constructed with only one type of material (e.g., culverts) is less desirable than a mix of materials that create a variety of spaces.

3.4.2 Artificial Reef Construction

Solicitation of Bids for the Construction of Artificial Reef

After agency approval of permits and sufficient stockpiling of materials, SWARA or the County must retain a contractor to perform the work. For state- or grant-funded projects, the County must select a contractor through competitive solicitation. Obtaining the services of experienced contractors is important because correcting errors in material deployment to ensure permit compliance becomes very difficult and costly at the expected project depths.

Pending appropriation of public funds, SWARA, County staff, and/or their consultant will create a formal bid package and advertise for bids, if applicable. This package describes the project scope and construction specifications. The available funding and materials will dictate the scope of work and bid selection. For example, the County may base the bid selection on unit placement cost ($$/ton of material deployed) for a stockpile of existing materials, or on the total project price for a specific reef design (such as a pre-designed snorkel reef). The bid package will also detail insurance and liability requirements. The period between grant awards, formulation of bid documents, advertising, and bid opening is approximately two to three months.

Stockpile Inspection

SWARA and the County (or their authorized representative), USCG, and other relevant agencies (FWC, FDEP, etc.) will inspect the materials at the stockpile location. The selected contractor will then move the approved materials from the stockpile location to a waterfront loading facility and load the material on a barge. Combining a stockpile and barge loading facility represents the least expensive option but such a site may not be available. In any case, the loading facility should provide access to the long side of the barge for easiest loading.

Stockpile to Dock

The USCG Marine Safety Officer will typically review and observe all materials at the time of inspection and prior to loading the materials onto an American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) rated barge (maneuvered by an ABS rated tug). The SWARA or County project coordinator or their consultant should coordinate and participate in the inspection, material trucking, and barge loading. An appropriate SWARA or County project coordinator or their consultant shall also participate in the deployment procedures. The County project coordinator will support the Safety Officer inspection, coordinate barge loading (if order of material placement is of interest), and oversee the artificial reef deployment location process (see below).

The County project coordinator must also maintain an accurate count of the reef material tonnage loaded for transport to the permitted area and verify that only materials approved for use are loaded and deployed.

Deployment

Any material placed by permit must include GPS location documentation and a survey dive of the drop location immediately after material placement. These procedures represent the primary method to minimize any potential liability exposure to the County. The County’s risk managers shall also be consulted to assign or review necessary insurance coverage for contractors involved in reef construction.

Any placement of material in a reef area will occur only with the direct on-area supervision by a representative of SWARA, the County, or their consultant. Immediately prior to each deployment, the assigned SWARA or County project coordinator will use a separate “chase boat” to verify placement marker buoy locations are at the exact proposed deployment site(s). To assure accurate reef deployment, chase boat, tug captain, and on-board construction oversight personnel will maintain contact via VHF radio and/or cell phone and use DGPS for location information. Once the barge is anchored at the proposed deployment area, the contractor will deploy material to the sea floor.

All deployed materials must remain inside the Artificial Reef Area. In addition, for receipt of funds from FWC, a 150-foot buffer must typically exist between the edge of the Artificial Reef Area and the edge of each artificial reef. This buffer zone helps ensure that no impacts occur to resources (known or unknown) outside the Artificial Reef Area. The assigned SWARA or County project coordinator will immediately confirm all placement locations with GPS. For areas in federal waters near the nine nautical- mile line that marks the state-federal jurisdiction boundary, all work activities and materials must remain outside state waters.

When the barge reaches the deployment area, the contractor will make all efforts possible to reduce movement and swing of the barge from side to side and to maintain a single deposit location for each deployment. Depending on the sea conditions at the time, the contractor should employ multiple anchoring or spudding techniques to better fix the barge position for material off-loading. After completion of deployment, the contractor shall retrieve and remove all temporary location buoys from the project area.

Construction Monitoring

SWARA, County staff, or their consultant on the chase boat, as well as contractor personnel on the barge shall remain vigilant for the presence of protected species. These include manatees, whales, marine turtles, and gulf sturgeon. If a protected species comes within 50 feet of the barge, deployment must cease until the individual has left the area. Harassing or otherwise “encouraging” an individual to leave the construction area is illegal. When the individual has cleared the area on its own, construction may continue.

Post-Construction Dive Inspection

A diver will conduct a final survey to confirm proper placement of materials and obtain photo or video documentation, if possible. The diver inspection of the completed deployment to collect permit compliance information will complete the construction process. The inspection may be performed by SWARA, the County, the consultant, or the reef deployment contractor. The construction should result in a reef with the same or smaller dimensions as permitted. The survey shall include:

 Location and depth  Footprint (maximum length and breadth of materials on the bottom )  Maximum relief (feet above the Gulf bottom)  Photographs and video (if the water is sufficiently clear)  Observations of any fauna seen during the dive

Post-Deployment Report

The permit holder must file a post-deployment report via email to USACE, FWC, and NOAA no less than 30 days after deployment at the reef area. The report must include a complete and signed “Florida Artificial Reef Materials Placement Report and Post-Deployment Notification” form (attached to the permit). Notably, USACE requires the latitude and longitude to be accurate within five meters horizontal distance on the post-deployment report. The report must also include an as-built drawing that contains the approximate deployment configurations and the height of the material after placement. Depth shall be verified utilizing fathometer, depth sounder, or similar device accurate to within one meter. The report should include information on the condition of the material at the time of deployment. The report and drawing shall be limited to a few pages per deployment. USACE encourages submittal of representative photographs and/or video, if available.

If the reef construction has resulted in a too-high or too-widely spread reef, the permit holder must modify the reef to meet the conditions as soon as possible. Excess relief and materials spread outside the permitted footprint must be corrected.

The reef area construction permit also may include other construction compliance reporting requirements, which typically must also be submitted to the permit authorities and FWC within 30 days of deployment. Such site-specific conditions are sometimes identified by regulatory authorities, but SWARA and the County will have reviewed and discussed the permit conditions with the agency or agencies prior to accepting the permit.

SWARA and the County may assist a non-profit or private organization that wishes to build reefs in permitted Walton County Artificial Reef Areas. SWARA and/or the County shall provide direct supervision of such activities to ensure that the materials used are appropriate for the location and that those materials are placed within a permitted reef area in accordance with all regulatory requirements.

3.4.3 Reef Monitoring and Maintenance

Little monitoring of Walton County reefs has occurred over the years. Permit conditions may include periodic monitoring requirements. SWARA’s Reef Management Committee for the Walton

County Artificial Reef Program shall develop a monitoring program based on the permit conditions and the activities of divers, anglers, and other users of the reefs and their resources.

SWARA’s Reef Management Committee shall also collect sufficient information to assess whether reefs generally meet permit conditions. They shall also develop performance monitoring to track biological diversity and level of recreational uses of each area. Each permit will specify reporting requirements and conditions. At some point, if SWARA and the County (as the permit holder) deem it necessary, they may request relief from annual monitoring requirements.

Artificial reef monitoring is considered an important component of artificial reef management (NOAA, 2007). However, monitoring has been interpreted in different ways by different agencies and individuals. The Artificial Reef Monitoring Plan, developed by the Reef Management Committee, shall include several different aspects of artificial reef monitoring, some required by regulatory authorizations and others desirable for understanding the benefits of the reefs and how future reef areas might be improved from existing sites. While the long-term goal of the Artificial Reef Program and Monitoring Plan is to perform all monitoring, fiscal and operational constraints may restrict monitoring activities to those deemed necessary or important. Appendix 6 provides example monitoring methods and details.

Given the importance of artificial reef monitoring, it is imperative that beach accessibility be granted to SWARA's Reef Management Committee and their equipment to effectively research, monitor, and document the reef sites.

Success Criteria for Walton County Artificial Reefs

The success of artificial reefs should be of interest to every stakeholder in the reef program; from those in SWARA and the County managing the system to County taxpayers, private donors, local businesses, scientific researchers, and recreational users. The reefs will vary, and over time, performance assessments should help identify the best materials and deployment patterns for attraction and maintenance of a diverse marine community. Monitoring of artificial reefs is becoming more important to regulatory agencies with reef permitting responsibilities; funding is available through FWC’s grant programs for non-profit organizations as well as local governments.

Biological success criteria will provide the means to measure the success of existing and proposed artificial reef deployments. The Grayton Beach Reef fish species record found in the REEF database may provide the basis for assessing performance of artificial reefs created by Walton County. A such, we recommend the following criteria as an initial basis for defining a successful artificial reef. Notably, the existing reef and fish species record used as the basis for success (i.e., Grayton Beach Reef) should generally correspond with the constructed artificial reef conditions (e.g., water depth, distance offshore, etc.).

 A cumulative record (the record of five years of dive reports) that includes 60% of the fish species reported with a sighting frequency of greater than or equal to 25% at Grayton Beach Reef (from the REEF database, https://www.reef.org/data/data.htm ) or other existing reef within the general area at a similar water depth and distance offshore.

 The occurrence of algae (turf and macroalgae), sessile epibenthos (e.g., tunicates, sponges, gorgonians, hydroids, bryozoans), infaunal bivalves, echinoderms and/or gastropods on the reef.

Actions to Assess Success Meeting Program Objectives

The level of success of the Artificial Reef Program in meeting stated objectives (see Section 2) can be measured. Some of the measurements are directly associated with the reefs and can be performed by divers with relatively little training. Other data collection efforts require interviews and analysis of economic data that may be desirable but not as important as direct observation and recordings of artificial reef life.

Measures:  Perform fish census activities using standard methods on a routine basis to track changes in fish species richness and relative abundance of the artificial and natural reefs.  Perform invertebrate census to track changes in invertebrate growth on the reefs.  Apply video and still photography to create an historical graphic archive of the reefs to document biological changes over time.

Objective #2 Increase recreational and eco-tourism opportunities off Walton County for both residents and tourists.

Measures:  Interview users after trips to the reefs to determine the activities undertaken by the users and the satisfaction of the user with his/her reef experience. Information on fish species caught can be collected to assist in determining the reef’s biological success. Written surveys can also be mailed to reef users/user groups or computer (email) questionnaires can be utilized to track use of the reefs.

Table 3.1. Fishes Reported in the REEF Database (http://www.reef.org/node/1053) for Walton County Artificial Reefs and from Grayton Beach Reef

Present On Species Present of Walton Sighting Frequency, Rank Surveys Grayton County Artificial Reefs Grayton Beach Reef Beach Reef 1 Atlantic Spadefish 4 Y 18.8% 2 Flounder 4 Y 62.5% 3 Gray Snapper 4 Y 62.5% 4 Sheepshead 4 Y 12.5% 5 Slippery Dick 4 Y 87.5% 6 Tomtate 4 Y 93.8% 7 Belted Sandfish 3 Y 93.8% 8 Bank Sea Bass 2 Y 93.8% 9 Black Sea Bass 2 N 10 Blue Angelfish 2 N

DRAFT 11 Cobia 2 N 12 Cocoa Damselfish 2 Y 93.8% 13 Cubbyu 2 Y 87.5% 14 Gag 2 Y 68.8% 15 Gray Triggerfish 2 Y 68.8% 16 Greater Amberjack 2 Y 87.5% 17 Hogfish 2 Y 12.5% 18 Manta Ray 2 Y 12.5% 19 Nurse Shark 2 N 20 Red Snapper 2 Y 50% 21 Round Scad 2 Y 56.3% 22 Sand Perch 2 Y 56.3% 23 Scamp 2 Y 93.8% 24 Seaweed Blenny 2 Y 100% 25 Southern Guitarfish 2 N 26 Spotfin Butterflyfish 2 N 27 White Grunt 2 Y 6.3% 28 Bar Jack 1 N 29 Blue Runner 1 Y 63.8% 30 Greater Soapfish 1 N 31 Whitespotted Soapfish 1 Y 93.8%

Objective #3 Increase the economic health of Walton County through the use of artificial reefs.

Measures:  Track economic indices to determine growth of the marine sector of the County before and after reef construction and over time. This type of assessment would probably be appropriate at baseline and then at five years or longer intervals.

Objective #4 Improve knowledge and understanding of artificial reef biology and performance.

Measures:  SWARA holds regular meetings to discuss various issues concerning artificial reefs. The members of the SWARA Board of Directors come from a variety of user groups. These groups include recreational fishing clubs, professional fishing guides, SCUBA dive clubs, dive shops, and commercial fishermen. SWARA shall continue to conduct workshops and classes to educate the general public and special interest groups concerned with artificial reefs

and their management. DRAFT

Artificial reef management covers a variety of areas. Maintenance of existing reef areas, monitoring of reef deployments, and education of reef users are all important considerations when managing an artificial reef community.

Open lines of communication between SWARA, the County, and other local, state, and federal agencies that are currently researching artificial reefs is an ongoing area of importance. SWARA stays up to date with newsletters and journals that deal with artificial reefs. SWARA staff will also attempt to attend and participate in any applicable reef meetings or conferences.

SWARA operates and maintains a website (http://waltonreefs.org/) that offers a variety of information on artificial reefs. SWARA shall update all of the aforementioned educational materials in a timely fashion and makes the information available to the public. A printout listing the coordinates to each reef area will also be available from SWARA’s website.

Construction and Physical Monitoring

The permit and post-construction report will specify the footprint location and the height of each newly constructed artificial reef, along with the spread of material on the bottom (maximum horizontal dimensions); these dimensions provide a baseline for assessment of reef stability over time. Periodically repeated measurements of these dimensions will provide the information necessary to ensure that the reef remains in the original location, and continues to provide the desired physical structure. These measurements should be taken at least annually and optimally on every survey dive, to record a history of the location and relief of the reef. Specific emphasis shall be placed on surveys following storms to assess any damage or subsidence to the reef structure(s).

Biological Monitoring

The most desirable biological monitoring approach would apply survey techniques described in III-A and/or III-B of the National Artificial Reef Plan (NARP), modified to measure the fish observed and collected (fished) from each artificial reef. Underwater surveys of the fish and other fauna associated with each artificial reef would be performed. Many different underwater faunal survey techniques (e.g., underwater photography/videography, transects, point-counts) exist; each technique has benefits and drawbacks. For the purposes of comparison with previous surveys of the same reef and other reefs in the area or elsewhere, surveyors should use the equivalent established techniques.

Reef Use Monitoring

Surveys can prove beneficial in estimating the amount of use at each artificial reef. SWARA or the County should construct a survey tool to compile artificial reef users’ responses into a product useful to artificial reef program managers. Surveys of anglers at a reef are very valuable, particularly if repeated regularly. In lieu of, or in addition to on-site surveys, the survey tool could be modified for use at marinas, boat ramps, or other locations where an adequate sample of the artificial reef user group could be procured.

Diver Inspection of Reefs

SWARA divers shall visit and survey each reef following construction and conduct follow-on surveys annually. The diver observations will provide the basis for post- construction compliance and on-going performance monitoring. Compliance considers whether the reef still meets the permit conditions, and includes consideration of the following questions:

 Have the reef materials been deployed within the permitted area and within approved navigational clearances?  Over long periods have the materials remained within the permitted area or have they scattered beyond those boundaries due to storms?

Bottom scans (e.g., with a charting fathometer or more sophisticated equipment) may be useful to look at potential material scattering, as the areas may be large and diver visibility relatively low.

As more reefs are constructed at each reef area, a survey of at least one reef in each reef area and each reef less than three years old should be considered if the number of reefs becomes too great. Once reef monitoring has shown that the reef is meeting expectations, survey efforts should focus on reefs that have not yet met performance goals.

Performance monitoring refers to the ecological and recreational functions of the reef.  Is the reef meeting its intended objectives?  Is the substrate sufficiently dense to minimize settling?  Is the material performing as expected in terms of fouling and longevity?

 As the reef ages, does the area need additional reef material due to decay of the original deployment?

Diver reports form the basis of this part of the performance assessment. However, SWARA and the County may also track use by recreational anglers and divers. This monitoring may include use surveys at regular SWARA meetings, seasonal visits with charter vessels and marina owners, and survey forms placed in marinas, boat ramps, fishing or diving shops commonly frequented by reef users, rental agencies and/or TDC Visitor Center(s).

The FWC diver observation form (Appendix 6) provides an appropriate initial tool for diver observations. As use of the form becomes more familiar to SWARA divers, they should recommend changes to better fit the Walton County artificial reef system.

3.4.4 Diver Education Program

SWARA has established an educational program with Seacoast High School and for other dive members similar to OAR (Organization for Artificial Reefs: http://oarreefs.org/) or MBARA (Mexico Beach Artificial Reef Association: http://www.mbara.org/) programs. The program coordinates the training of divers in underwater techniques to monitor artificial reefs using SCUBA equipment and underwater monitoring tools. FWC scientific divers can assist in the training of SWARA divers. This training and the use of waterproof flip charts of fish species and example benthic organisms to take on survey dives should enable divers to recognize different benthic organism types and fish species and accurately report on conditions at artificial reef areas.

Once trained, when SWARA divers visit a reef area, they can perform a survey as a small part of their recreational dive. A survey may include an inspection of the reef material to determine its physical status and condition and an inventory of fish species. These surveys will allow SWARA to track a particular reef’s performance over time. They may help answer questions such as what fish species prefer which material type, or what material appears the most suitable for benthic organism growth, and so on. Tracking reef performance over time is important, as material longevity plays a key role in how productive a reef can be. Results of biological monitoring will allow comparison of natural reef fish species to artificial reef species to track the progress of the maturity of the artificial reefs. A mature reef (one that has developed a stable community) should contain a major portion of the species set, if not all those on local natural reefs.

If artificial reef deployment includes more complicated material arrangements and more time, money, and effort is put into constructing reefs, SWARA can conduct monitoring to determine the most effective methods of building reefs. Uses of the reef can be monitored different ways. Creating online surveys to receive user input about experiences on the reefs is one method. Angler and diver intercept interviews is another way to gain useful user information. This method includes stationing an interviewer at locations where anglers leave the water to ask questions about their experiences, the type of fish caught, how many, locations, the types of reefs, etc. This method should work well in Walton because only one Gulf-front boat launch area exists, on Grayton Beach.

3.5 Reef Development Plans

The currently proposed Reef Development Plan includes reef areas in each of the state water reef zones I – IV. Each zone provides for a slightly different mix of recreational opportunities, and likely different attached communities and fish assemblages.

3.5.1 Shore Side Snorkel Reefs

The Plan initially includes the construction of four shore side snorkel reefs (Figure 3.3). Installation of these reefs will occur within easy access from shore, for use by snorkelers or divers who may not have access to power boats. Kayakers, paddleboarders, canoes, and swimmers will have easy access to these reefs. These reefs will occur off public access points at: (1) Miramar Beach, (2) Topsail Hill State Park, (3) Grayton Beach State Park, and (4) Inlet Beach. The location close to shore provides easy access for snorkeling and diving, which should increase off-the-beach activity and tourism in the local community. This approach to reef placement also provides opportunities for local communities to create new economic opportunities, such as kayak and paddle board eco-tours.

3.5.2 Nearshore Reefs within One Nautical Mile of the Shore

SWARA and the County plan nine nearshore reefs within one nautical mile of shore in approximately 50 – 60 feet of water (Figure 3.3). All reef areas will occur offshore or adjacent to the local public access points listed below.

Miramar Beach Grayton Beach State Park Topsail Hill State Park Santa Clara Fort Panic Deer Lake State Park Ed Walline Park Inlet Beach Blue Mountain

The reefs planned for this zone provide small boat and diving opportunities in somewhat deeper water, yet still quite close to shore for access by experienced kayakers, etc. They occur well within the reach of small recreational boats but deep enough to also accommodate larger vessels. These areas and future reef sites lie farther from shore in deeper water and likely attract a different fish community than do the snorkel reefs. Similar to the snorkel reefs, the nearshore fishing / diving reefs will create new economic opportunities such as no-motor kayak and paddle board fishing tournaments. Such tournaments have proven to be very successful in other areas of Florida and along the Gulf Coast.

3.5.3 Offshore Reefs in Deeper Waters (1 – 3 and 3 – 9 nautical miles)

Reef areas farther offshore, which represent more typical artificial reef deployment depths, provide recreation opportunities for boaters that seek larger or a different set of game fish that inhabit

these slightly deeper waters. These reefs will provide increased recreational fishing and SCUBA diving opportunities to Walton County residents and visitors.

As previously mentioned, the County has obtained state and federal authorization for Fish Havens #1 and #2, both ¼ mile square reef areas, within Zone III and Zone IV. Fish Haven #1 is located approximately 2.4 nautical miles from shore in 60 – 65 feet of water and Fish Haven #2 is located approximately 4.4 nautical miles from shore in 80 – 85 feet of water.

3.5.4 Large Area Reef Areas (LAARS) for Private Reef Deployments (Five-Year Plan)

A single or multiple Large Area Artificial Reef Site (LAARS) will lie from 3 – 9 nautical miles or father offshore. These areas provide opportunities for development of large reefs that may accommodate a wider range of material sizes (within the range of acceptable material types). These areas may provide a place to construct larger reefs of materials from the removal of bridges, large vessels, and other similar items. A LAARS can also provide opportunities for private entities to develop reefs. Specific LAARS locations will be developed in the future in consultation with SWARA, the County, their consultant, and anticipated reef users.

Private entities (individual citizens and others in the private sector) may want the opportunity to develop their own artificial reefs. However, permit compliance of such activities remains the responsibility of the permit holder (i.e., Walton County). The County will execute the same procedures whether they are providing materials or whether a private entity wants to do so. The only difference is in the source of material and who pays for the deployment (and other possible) costs.

The program will decide whether a private entity or the Artificial Reef Program will pay for any of the necessary activities. Payment may depend on who wants to build a reef – e.g. a company demolishing a large bridge or an individual with access to a large amount of reef material they wish to donate or deploy themselves. For the large bridge demolition, stockpiling, loading and deployment of the materials and diver verification of the deployment, and possible monitoring responsibilities should be fully supported by the entity requesting the activity. Exceptions will be considered on a case by case basis, however, as the County will be the permit holder, sufficient oversight should occur.

The Artificial Reef Program will estimate the cost of a deployment by component so that it has a clear understanding of the program cost. This is relatively simple to do and will provide the basis for tracking costs and improving the estimates as new reefs are developed and deployed. This detailed estimate can provide the basis for a “private reef developer fee” if the program decides that such a fee is an appropriate measure to recommend to the county commission.

30 CHOCTAWHATCHEE BAY

COUNTY LINE 331 N

MIRAMAR BEACH WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA 98 TOPSAIL HILL MIRAMAR BEACH WALTON COUNTY COUNTY LINE TOPSAIL ZONE 1 - WITHIN 2,000' BLUFF FROM THE SHORELINE FISH FORT ZONE II - 2,000' TO 1 NM GRAYTON HAVEN 1 BEACH PANIC ED WALLINE BLUE MOUNTAIN ZONE III - 1 NM TO 3 NM GRAYTON BEACH SANTA CLARA INLET FISH DEER BEACH HAVEN 2 LAKE

ZONE IV - 3 NM TO 9 NM SAFETY FAIRWAY INLET BEACH

LEGEND: EXISTING ARTIFICIAL REEFS GULF OF MEXICO SNORKEL REEF ï STATE NEARSHORE FISHING/DIVING REEF ï JURISDICTION BEYOND 9NM LINE OFFSHORE FISH HAVEN ï POTENTIAL BORROW AREA 0 15,000' 30,000' PERMITTED BORROW AREA

1. PERMITTING IN PROGRESS SCALE: 1" = 15,000'

PROJECT TAYLOR ENGINEERING INC. FIGURE 3.3 C2014-007 PROPOSED ARTIFICIAL REEF SITES DRAWN BY 1221 AIRPORT ROAD AF/CAS WALTON COUNTY ARTIFICIAL REEF MANAGEMENT PLAN SHEET SUITE 210 SOUTH WALTON ARTIFICIAL REEF ASSOCIATION / WALTON COUNTY DESTIN, FL 32541 WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA DATE CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION # 4815 DUNCAN GREERC:\USERS\DGREER\DESKTOP\C2014-007-F-PROPOSEDREEFS.DWG 12/11/2014 3:04:48 PM ---- 31

At the very least, the program should develop guidance in the form of a short document outlining the steps necessary for a private entity to create an artificial reef. The list should include the activities required for reef deployment, the individuals in the Artificial Reef Program to contact, and a proposed schedule for reef planning through deployment. Actual placement location, including selection of the site on the map and marking the site with buoys as the first step in material deployment must remain the province of the program.

The County should remain in control of the following activities:

 Selection of the deployment site  Acceptance of proposed reef materials as part of initial considerations. The permit requires inspection of the proposed reef materials by other agency staffs, which would remain in the hands of other agencies.  Contacts with other government agencies concerning material inspections and deployment reports, and submittal of deployment and monitoring reports. Ongoing contact with the County and/or SWARA to support the developer’s activities and guide the developer as necessary. DRAFT

The guidance provided by the program should include the following:

 The initial Artificial Reef Program contact point for a private entity that wants to create a reef. Upon contact, the program should also identify one person to provide the primary contact throughout the reef development process, if not the initial contact person.  Access to a copy of the permit for the reef site so that the entity has all the requirements associated with reef development.  Access to guidance documents (e.g., Artificial Reef Program Management Plan), which includes state and federal regulatory information the developer must read to understand allowable and prohibited materials and activities  Activities required of the private reef developer: o Coordination with the Artificial Reef Program to ensure that all activities meet permit conditions and the availability of program staff and other agency staffs to perform necessary activities o Descriptions of the materials the private developer wants to use o Stockpiling of reef materials for regulatory inspection and removal of any materials not approved o Placement of approved reef materials on a barge for conveyance to the deployment site and deployment of those materials o Responsibility for accurate placement (within the regulatory boundaries) of deployment materials o Monitoring of the reef performance for a set period of years

The County shall consider drafting an agreement that allows the County to hold the private developer financially responsible if the deployment fails to meet permit conditions. Performance of all pre-deployment activities will allow control of the process prior to barge transportation and deployment

steps. An agreement with the private developer could include developer performance of permit-required monitoring as well, with reports submitted to the county for review and submittal to regulatory agencies.

3.6 Goals for Continuing Operations

SWARA and Walton County expect that the Artificial Reef Program will become a permanent private-public partnership that benefits all. Through time, the program will grow and change. The program should include planning for changes by recognizing the fundamental activities that will support permanent, beneficial operations. These goals are guideposts to continued success.

 Continue to maintain and develop artificial reefs in Walton County waters, improving the existing reef areas and marine recreation opportunities for the benefit of residents and visitors alike.  Use designed reef projects to provide long-term habitat benefits and enhanced fishery productivity to the extent possible based on research findings and specific project objectives.  At the beginning, estimate and budget for the costs of reef development by category (e.g. stockpile costs, staff labor costs, boat use for marking sites, etc.). With each deployment record, the actual costs for use in improving cost-effective performance will be a basis for helping those who want to develop a reef understand what costs they must expect.  Develop a formal process for private individuals wanting to fund and create a reef, including County and private entity responsibilities and any fee charges that the county decides are appropriate for such an activity.  Continue to provide assistance to others who create properly constructed reefs in local waters.  Coordinate with and assist any artificial reef activities conducted by other governmental agencies working in Walton County.  Review any economic impact studies of artificial reefs conducted by other entities for applicability to Walton County.  Continue the categorization and verification of existing materials, and the subsequent publishing of educational materials for the public benefit.  Conduct at least one reef deployment project per year.  Continue with applications for both artificial reef construction and montiroing grant assistance from state and federal sources (at least once per year).  Assure sufficient active federal and state (where applicable) permits for reef areas to meet the improvement needs for reefs shown in the Reef Area/Zone Summary Chart. SWARA and the County intend to have at least one active permitted area within each of the four management zones to facilitate the controlled development of the area reefs.  Survey each reef area on a periodic basis to monitor the area's material for durability, longevity, and effectiveness as productive habitat and consistency with stated objectives.  Permit new reef areas in accordance with the Reef Selection Flowchart (Figure 3.2),  Update this Plan every few years to incorporate new or changed conditions relative to reef construction.

As the advocates of the artificial reefs in waters off Walton County’s coast, SWARA will strive to make good use of this management plan and support the County’s goals.

3.7 Summary

SWARA and Walton County have made a very impressive start on a long-term artificial reef program for Walton County, Florida. The long-term success of the program depends upon effective performance of the plan described in this document and a continuing education program for the county’s citizens and elected officials. The importance of artificial reefs for the environment and economy of Walton County and the likely continuing community interest in artificial reefs and recreational fishing and diving are a good indication that this program is aimed toward long-term success.

4.0 REFERENCES

Bell, F.W., M.A. Bonn, and V.R. Leeworthy. 1998. Economic Impact and Importance of Artificial Reefs in Northwest Florida. Prepared for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Division of Marine Resources, Artificial Reef Program under Contract Number MR235. 396 pp and appendices. Census.gov 2014. Data obtained from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/12/12131.html, accessed March 2014 Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. 1992a. Compilation of existing data on the location and areal extent of reef fish habitat on the Mississippi/Alabama/Florida continental shelf -eastern Gulf of Mexico. Report prepared for the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, St. Petersburg, FL. 25 pp. FDEP 1996 FDEP Artificial Reef Assessment Dive Team Project report for Walton County, August 28, 1996, unpublished field report, 6 pages. Fikes, Ryan. 2013. Artificial Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico: A Review of Gulf State Programs & Key Considerations. National Wildlife Foundation. November 2013. Accessed at: http://www.nwf.org/~/media/PDFs/Water/Review-of-GoM-Artificial-Reefs-Report.pdf FWC 2003. State of Florida Artificial Reef Strategic Plan. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Division of Marine Fisheries. November 21, 2003. http://myfwc.com/media/131588/FLARStrategicPlan2.pdf FWC 2013. The Florida Artificial Reef Strategic Plan: is located on the web at: http://myfwc.com/marine/ar/FLARStrategicPlan2.pdf FWC 2000. FWC Artificial Reef Assessment Dive Team Project report for Okaloosa and Walton Counties, July 11, 2000, unpublished field report, 5 pages. Lukens, R.R. and C. Selberg. 2004. Guidelines for Marine Artificial Reef Materials. Publication No. 121. Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission. Washington, D.C./Ocean Springs, MS. Hanson, Chad W. and Beverly Sauls. 2011. Status of Recreational Saltwater Fishing in Florida: Characterization of license Sales, Participation, and Fishing Effort. American Fisheries Society Symposium 75:000-000, 2011. Koenig, C.C. and F.C. Coleman 1998. Absolute abundance and survival of gags in sea grass beds of the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Trans AM. Fish Soc. 127: 44-55. NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) 2007. National Artificial Reef Plan (as amended): Guidelines for Siting, Construction, Development, and Assessment of Artificial Reefs. United States Department of Commerce. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. February 2007. Accessed at website http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/PartnershipsCommunications/NARPwCover3.pdf REEF 2014. Reef Database Portal at https://www.reef.org/data/data.htm Thompson', M.J., W.W. Schroeder2, N.W. Phillips', and B.D. Graham'. 1999. Ecology of Live Bottom Habitats of the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico: A Community Profile. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, USGS/BRD/CR--l999-000l and

Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA, OCS Study MMS 99-0004. WaltonOutdoors.com 2014. Data accessed from http://www.waltonoutdoors.com/all-the-parks-in-walton- county-florida/walton-area-beach-parksaccesses/ March 2014.

36 Appendix 1

Economic Impact and Importance of Artificial Reefs in Northwest Florida

The economic benefits of artificial reefs for a local community are very difficult to quantify given the many factors that require consideration. Fortunately, Walton County has good economic information about its artificial reefs thanks to a large five-county study of the economic benefits of artificial reefs funded by the State of Florida’s Artificial Reef Program (FDEP then, now FWC) in 1998 (Bell et al., 1998).

Results of the study show that the existing artificial reefs at that time provided the following specific economic benefits to Walton County (Table 1).

Table 1. Economic Benefits of Artificial Reefs to Walton County Total Annual Use Value $95.24 million Asset Value $57 million Expenditures Generated $19.71 million Wages Generated $3.63 million Employment 395 jobs

Bell et al. (1998, page 387) estimated on average, for the five county areas, every one dollar invested in the construction and deployment of artificial reefs has returned $131 in recreational value to fishers and divers. Walton County’s data was even higher than this cost to benefit number, with $214 of economic return for every dollar spent of reef construction (FWC, 2013). Few public works projects can boast such a large return on investment.

Economic benefits may include items such as boat sales, fuel sales, marine electronic sales, boat repairs, bait and tackle sales, food, drink, ice, suntan lotion, charter fishing and diving trips, as well as recreational and commercial seafood harvesting. Recreational SCUBA diving should also be considered when discussing local and regional economic impacts. All of the above and more have a direct or indirect impact on the economies of Walton County. Tourism is a major economic generator for the county and accessible artificial reefs can greatly contribute to this portion of the economy.

Bell’s report (based on surveys for a 12-month period June 1997 – May 1998) calculated that Walton County received 587,390 “person-visits,” of which about 29% used hotels or motels. Most other overnight stays occurred at condominiums. The total visitor spending for the study period, $206,497,700, included a wide variety of activities that tourism supports, including jobs. About 15% of all visitor days were spent boating. These activities resulted in $31.48 million in expenditures, generated $5.58 million in wages, and provided 611 full-time jobs. Of particular interest to the Reef Management Plan, about 1/3 of the visitors interviewed said they fished artificial reefs mostly (93.4%) off Walton County, an average of 11.3 miles from shore. Tourists using private boats spent only slightly less than those using charter boats. Divers spent almost all their dive time on artificial reefs. In summary, “…The grand total of all spending that is artificial reef-related is $18.24 million, which supports $3.47 million in related wages and 382 employees.” The report goes on to assess the multiplier effect of the economic inputs, and concludes that a total of 458 direct and indirect jobs are created by the interest in and use of artificial reefs by tourists.

1-1

NOAA Coastal Service Center Ocean Jobs Snapshot Another more recent source of economic information for the Walton County marine sector in general is found in the 2010 NOAA Coastal Service Center Ocean Jobs Snapshot (https://www.csc.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/tools/snapshots). For Walton County, in 2010 the ocean-related businesses provided 19.5% of the total jobs in Walton County. This represents a 362% increase in ocean- related jobs since 2005 and the countywide percent of employment (19.5%) is higher than any of the other five neighboring panhandle counties. According to NOAA, there were 3,619 marine-related employees in Walton County, accounting for $86 million in wages for a total of $196 million on goods and services. This paper indicates that 98% of these marine-related jobs were in the tourism and recreation sector, which includes recreational fishing and diving activities. Marine-related jobs are a very important part of Walton County’s economic health.

Saltwater Fishing License Revenues According to data provided by the FWC, 4,767 anglers held some type of saltwater recreational fishing license in Walton County from 07/01/06 to 6/30/2012 and 1,306,940 statewide in fiscal year 2011 – 2012 (http://www.myfwc.com/conservation/value/saltwater-fishing/). Seven different types or combinations of saltwater fishing licenses are available to anglers. This equates to $146,081.00 in revenue generated from saltwater angling for Walton County. These revenues are deposited into the Marine Resources Conservation Trust Fund, a partial source of funding for the artificial reef grants program, managed by the FWC as well as the marine enforcement of fishing regulations for the state. Marine recreational fishing is a large part of the area’s economy. Interestingly, Hanson and Sauls (2011), studying the saltwater recreational fishery in Florida, found a growing trend for recreational saltwater licenses to be sold to non-residents for use on vacations (data FY 1989 – FY 2007).

Comparing 2011 to 2006, Florida had 12% more anglers and a 12% higher economic impact in 2011. Additionally, Florida saltwater anglers increased by 20% and participation days increased by 58% (http://www.myfwc.com/conservation/value/saltwater-fishing/).

Charter Boat License Revenues Charter boats must have licenses for their angling clients. For the period from July 1, 2006 to June 30, 2012, FWC issued 43 charter boat licenses within Walton County for a total of $12,464.50. Notably, only one charter boat license was for a vessel greater than 10 customers and the vast majority of these licenses were for vessels with four or fewer customers, reinforcing the beach-launched small boat nature of the Walton charter boat fleet.

Registered Vessels According to data provided by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, Walton County had 5,405 registered boats in 2013. The vast majority of these vessels (5,092 or 94%) were smaller than 26 feet in length (Table 2: http://www.flhsmv.gov/dmv/TaxCollDocs/vesselstats2013.pdf). Notably, only 143 (3%) of these boats were registered as commercial vessels. These numbers underscore that the small boat, recreational fishery that exists for the beach launching is probably due to not having a major navigational inlet within the county’s borders that can service large boats. Additionally, registration is not required for smaller (under 16 feet in length), non-motor powered vessels such as paddleboards and kayaks that are frequently used offshore of Walton County.

1-2 Table 2. Registered vessels, 2012 – 2013 Vessel Class (size-feet)) Pleasure Commercial Total Canoes (Motorized) 35 0 Class A-1 (< Than 12') 665 9 Class A-2 (12 - 15' 11") 2,021 28 Class 1 (16 - 25' 11") 2,257 77 Class 2 (26 - 39' 11") 241 14 Class 3 (40 - 64' 11") 40 13 Class 4 (65 - 109' 11") 2 2 Class 5 (110' More) 1 0 Total Vessels 5,232 143 5,405

Walton County Commercial Fish and Shellfish Landings Because Walton County does not have a navigable inlet for vessel access, its coastal waters do not support a large commercial fishery or many commercial fishermen. However, Walton County does have commercial fishing activity; landings for finfish totaled 39,680 pounds while shrimp, shellfish, and other invertebrates accounted for another 51,837 pounds (http://myfwc.com/media/1540765/sumcnty_10.pdf).

The FWC 2010 commercial landings report included 20 species of fish, two species of shrimp, and one species of crab (blue crab) for Walton County. Blue crab, brown shrimp, and black mullet were the top three species in landing value for the county. These species are all considered estuarine in nature and spend their lives in brackish water in bays and lagoons, so they were most likely taken in Choctawhatchee Bay and not offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. Of the offshore species of fish landed commercially, cobia had the highest value for the two years ($4,852), followed by red grouper ($2,539). Red snapper showed only $1,360 total landings value for 2012 and $0 value for 2013, which may result from the recent short fishing seasons. Clearly, based on these recent landings data, the commercial fishing in Walton County is estuarine in nature and very little activity occurs offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. Marine fisheries associated with artificial reefs have a small economic impact for Walton County due to no navigational inlet and poor access to the marine resources offshore; however, commercial fishing from neighboring counties (not included within these estimates) likely occurs offshore of Walton County.

Obviously, based on the above information, the major economic impact of offshore marine habitats for Walton County lies in the recreational use by anglers, divers, and small charter boat operators. Walton County should base artificial reef development on these users and their needs.

1-3 Appendix 2 Florida’s Artificial Reef Program Bill Horn, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

Overview The Walton County/SWARA Artificial Reef Program is one component of the largest artificial reef program in the U.S. with 35 different coastal counties spread along 1,357 miles of ocean-fronting coastline (846 miles fronting the Gulf of Mexico and 511 miles fronting the Atlantic Ocean). The Florida Artificial Reef Program, one of the most diverse and most active artificial reef programs in the U.S., is managed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Notably, Florida is the only state with a reef program that is not run exclusively at the state agency-level, where the state holds all the reef permits. More than 2,700 planned artificial reefs occur in state and federal waters off the Florida coast (Fikes, 2013).

The FWC has administered the Florida Artificial Reef Program, created by a 1982 legislative act (Appendix A), since 1999. The program was developed to obtain a mechanistic and predictive understanding of how artificial reefs function ecologically and physically across spatial and temporal scales in order to use artificial reefs as a component of fisheries management. The primary objectives of the program are to provide financial and technical assistance to coastal local governments, nonprofit corporations, and state universities to develop, monitor, and evaluate new artificial reefs. Under the program, nearshore and offshore reefs (in Florida most offshore reefs are classified as having depths of more than six meters) have been constructed with one or more of the following intended objectives (Fikes, 2013):

1. Enhance private recreational and charter fishing and diving opportunities; 2. Provide a socio‐economic benefit to local coastal communities; 3. Increase reef fish habitat; 4. Reduce user conflicts; 5. Facilitate reef-related research; and 6. While accomplishing objectives 1 – 5, do no harm to fishery resources, Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), or human health.

Fikes (2013) estimated that 70 – 100 public artificial reefs are constructed annually off the coast of Florida, with 40 – 75% of the cost of those deployments administered through the FWC Artificial Reef Program.

The FWC Artificial Reef Program has a long-range Artificial Reef Strategic Plan (FWC, 2003) that serves as a blueprint for both the FWC and the local coastal government reef programs. Representing the broad range of public interests in artificial reefs throughout Florida, the plan comprises guiding principles, goals, and objectives that optimize biological and economic benefits; provide policy guidance; support research and data collection; pursue additional funding opportunities; provide a framework for public education and outreach; and provide guidance for operational planning at the state, regional, and local levels of artificial reef construction and monitoring.

2-1 State Funding for Artificial Reef Projects Because of the extent of coastline and the statewide local involvement in reef activities, the FWC Artificial Reef Program, housed within the Division of Marine Fisheries Management, maintains an ongoing multi-decade cooperative partnership with local coastal governments to manage diverse artificial reef habitats and differing user groups. The program uses two primary funding sources: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration funding assistance, and the Florida marine fishing license revenues (MRCTF – Marine Resources Conservation Trust Fund of Florida). Local government and private contributions provide additional matching support. From 1996 through 2005, the construction and monitoring project component of the state artificial reef program was funded with $300,000 in federal aid and $300,000 in state saltwater fishing license revenues. In 2006, the state artificial reef program funding was increased by an additional $100,000 in federal aid, from theUSFWS for a combined total of $700,000 in federal and state funds available for artificial reef projects statewide. In 2012, the Florida artificial reef program was again legislatively appropriated $400,000 in Federal Aid Sport Fish Restoration from the USFWS that was augmented with $300,000 in state saltwater license revenues from the Marine Resource Conservation Trust Fund. Appendix A and http://myfwc.com/conservation/saltwater/artificial-reefs/ar-program/ contain additional funding details.

Artificial Reef Purposes Overview The purpose of an artificial reef is to create, revitalize, and enhance marine resources in the coastal waters of the U.S. A successful artificial reef should improve existing fisheries, expand diving opportunities, and encourage recreational use of the marine resources. Additional benefits include revenues and revenue growth from recreational/sport fishing and diving activities. Opportunities for school/community projects receive very positive publicity and offer hands-on educational experiences for students. Artificial reefs also allows for expanded scientific research on the environment’s ability to increase fish populations and biomass.

Purposes 1. Fishery Enhancement

The Artificial Reef Program includes the following goals for fishery enhancement. a. Enhance recreationally targeted reef fish species numbers through appropriate reef design and follow up fisheries management. The enhancement of a fishery could take several different paths. One path could be to produce a single target species. Another could target an entire guild of fish species. b. Provide high-profile reef locations for the attraction of seasonally large numbers of forage and bait fish — both for the benefit of the reef fish predators but also to accommodate fishers trying to secure live bait. The production of a primary food source (baitfish) for targeted species could also represent a sought-after goal. c. Construct unpublished conservation reefs where directed fishing pressure and by-catch mortality is reduced as a result of placing difficult-to-locate, unpublished ,low-profile, widely scattered, relatively small artificial reefs. The creation of a difficult-to-locate reef or a reef location not released to the public may allow that reef to increase a fishery stock without the substantial take of targeted fishing pressure. In turn, fish that grow on this reef would presumably move to other sites as the reef reached its carrying capacity. d. Reduce predation on reef fish to which they might otherwise be exposed in a no- or low- quality reef habitat environment. The reef must address certain limiting factors such as shelter, primary food production, etc., specific for the targeted fishery.

2-2 e. Increase reef fish Essential Fish Habitat where reef fish species can feed, grow to maturity, and/ or spawn. f. Provide refugia reefs for juvenile fish to avoid predation until they are large enough to fend on their own and migrate out to deeper reefs as adults. g. Fish aggregation / attraction vs. production — A continuing debate exists on whether or not artificial reefs provide a site that attracts large numbers of fish from surrounding natural areas (attraction), or if the reef actually creates additional "natural" habitat, thereby directly or indirectly increasing the populations of reef fish (production). Large aggregations of fish can provide an easy target for anglers. If artificial reefs act primarily as fish aggregators, fishing pressure on the populations may increase and ultimately result in reduced populations of species attracted to the reef. However, if artificial reefs act to provide an environment that promotes growth and reproduction, artificial reefs may act to reduce human predation (i.e., fishing) pressure. The ramifications of the human impacts on reef fish populations that surround artificial reefs are not clearly understood. Lindberg (1998), Shipp and Bortone (2009) Cowan et al., (2010), and Cowan (2011) provide point and counterpoint on the issue of attraction vs. production for artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico and the U.S. southern Atlantic Ocean.

It has been argued (e.g. Shipp and Bortone, 2009) that the small quantity of natural live bottom areas that provide a home for reef fish is a limiting factor in the reef fish growth and reproduction in the northern Gulf of Mexico along the Florida panhandle coastline. Hard natural structures, which develop communities with relatively high biomass and productivity (“live bottom”) are rare in the large expanses of low-productivity sand bottom of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Low prey levels per unit area cause the fish populations (at least those of particular interest to human predators) to roam large areas of the Gulf to obtain sufficient food for growth and reproduction. With a properly constructed artificial reef creating viable long-term live bottom, food levels per unit area increase, which positively impacts the populations of local reef fish that travel to and stay at or frequent the reef.

Also, the addition of artificial reefs may actually reduce fishing pressure on both natural and artificial sites by simply providing an additional location for fishermen to access. This dilution of fishing pressure is becoming an increasingly important consideration as fishing pressure in north Florida continues to grow. If few or no artificial reefs existed locally, then, in all likelihood, the few existing natural hard bottom or ledge habitats would bear the full brunt of the increased fishing pressure.

Both sides of the issue will continue to be debated as the body of scientific data improves. Recent research in the Gulf of Mexico has indicated that properly constructed reefs do attract fish, but also have the ability to enhance productivity. The studies, however, also indicate that directed fishing pressure could contribute to reduced net productivity by out-harvesting the reefs ability to produce fish. Unknowns, such as environmental conditions, complete species life history requirements, and the human interaction factor should all be addressed in the near future by the scientific community. SWARA will update its reef policies and procedures as new information becomes available.

2. Habitat Enhancement The Artificial Reef Program seeks to provide hard bottom marine habitat enhancement and promote principles of good environmental stewardship and associated fishing conservation ethic. Habitat enhancement focuses on designing a reef that would create an environment suitable for a wide variety of fish and benthic invertebrates to survive and flourish. New reefs could address aspects of the animals' life cycles that have an offshore component. The enhancement of large areas of minor relief, relatively barren sand bottom by providing complex artificial reef structure with vertical relief can increase the local diversity of local fish species and invertebrates.

2-3 Artificial reefs should provide adequate protection against predation, human or natural. The reef should attempt to complement or improve upon the natural habitat of local waters, i.e., live bottom and ledge areas.

3. Scuba Diving Attraction Artificial reefs provide interesting SCUBA diving locations in and of themselves. However, certain types of material can provide a unique diving experience. Large, steel-hulled ships are a major attraction for SCUBA divers; the addition of a few large vessels in Walton County waters would enhance the diving experience for many local divers. Large artificial reefs can be placed at locations accessible to divers interested in non-consumptive recreational diving such as fish watching, underwater photography, maritime history study, wreck exploration, or technical diving.

Certain species of fish, such as goliath grouper, common to the Walton County area could provide additional diving attractions. Reefs could be built specifically to provide habitat for these species, thereby increasing diving activities in the area. By providing additional fishing and diving locations to accommodate increased population growth and tourism, these reefs can provide a socio-economic benefit to the local coastal community.

4. Scientific Study Many unanswered questions exist regarding artificial reefs and their role in the marine environment. Deploying reefs to provide a study area for scientists to answer these questions would aid the future of reef building. SWARA can intentionally place a variety of materials in different footprint configurations with the intent to compare material as habitat for local species of fish. SWARA divers can assess these reefs for years. Artificial reefs can assist in marine ecology research to answer biological questions pertinent to both artificial and natural reef communities by utilizing standardized artificial reef structures or specific artificial reef designs.

5. Improved User Access The Artificial Reef Program should improve access to hard bottom artificial reef fishing sites by placing sites closer to shore, thereby increasing fuel economy by decreasing fuel consumption and enhancing boater safety, particularly for smaller vessels.

Good reef sites have a variety of reef materials within their boundaries. SWARA wants all active sites to have the highest degree of variability in material types. This may increase fishing and diving success and the user experience/satisfaction. This provides the best comparison data for staff to judge the relative productivity of material types and provides a variety of fishery habitats.

Diluted user pressure on existing artificial and natural reefs in a particular area through the construction of additional artificial reefs (allowing for user pressure to spread out), will ideally reduce negative impacts of fishing and diving pressure on natural reefs in the vicinity

6. Mitigation Occasionally, county projects, such as beach nourishment, may impact nearshore habitat. Walton County always attempts to minimize impacts to natural habitat in any coastal project. The proper construction of an artificial reef may offset, or mitigate unavoidable impacts by creating new habitat close to the impacted areas.

2-4

Appendix A.

Florida Statues Chapter 68E-9 The Florida Artificial Reef Program

A-1 CHAPTER 68E-9 THE FLORIDA ARTIFICIAL REEF PROGRAM

68E-9.001 Introduction and Scope. 68E-9.002 Definitions. 68E-9.003 Artificial Reef Program Application. 68E-9.004 Program Criteria for Allocating Funds. 68E-9.005 Project Application Review and Ranking Application Review. 68E-9.006 Project Funding. 68E-9.007 Forms and Instructions.

68E-9.001 Introduction and Scope. (1) It is the intent of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission pursuant to statutory authority under Section 379.249, F.S., to establish a program to provide grant funding and technical assistance to coastal local governments and nonprofit corporations qualified under section 501 (c)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code for the development of artificial reefs and the monitoring and evaluation of their recreational, economic, and biological effectiveness in the predominantly marine waters of Florida and adjacent federal waters. The program is intended to accomplish the following objectives: 1) promote coordinated and effective efforts to develop artificial reefs; 2) locally enhance fishery resources; 3) increase hard bottom reef fish habitat where appropriate; 4) increase saltwater fishing and diving opportunities, and 5) facilitate artificial reef related research and monitoring. (2) The purpose of this rule is to govern the development of state and federally funded artificial reefs, the review and ranking of project applications eligible for funding, and the administration of funds from the Florida Artificial Reef Program.

Specific Authority Article IV, Section, 9 Fla. Const., 379.249 FS. Law Implemented Article IV, Section 9, Florida Constitution, 379.249 FS. History–New 7-1-01.

68E-9.002 Definitions. (1) “Applicant” means a local coastal governmental entity or an eligible nonprofit organization qualified under Section 501 (c)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code submitting a written grant application or proposal for financial assistance. (2) “Artificial reef” for purposes of this rule means one or more manufactured or natural objects intentionally placed on the bottom in predominantly marine waters to provide conditions believed to be favorable in sustaining, or enhancing the spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity of Florida’s managed reef associated fish species as well as to increase the productivity of other reef community resources which support fisheries. Included in this definition are artificial reefs developed with one or more of the following additional objectives: enhancement of fishing and diving opportunities, fisheries research, and fisheries conservation/preservation purposes. (3) “Coastal local government” means any local governing body which is duly constituted under the laws of Florida and whose geographical jurisdiction covers, includes or borders the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, estuaries, or other predominantly marine waters. (4) “Commission” means the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. (5) “Development” for the purposes of this rule shall mean the process of creating a plan for a reef project or reef program, project site selection, obtaining permits, securing or fabricating reef materials, and transportation, and placement of artificial reef materials for the purpose of constructing an artificial reef. (6) “Division” means the Division of Marine Fisheries in the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. (7) “Evaluation” for purposes of this rule means the objective and accurate measurement of various characteristics of the artificial reef and its associated environmental related fishery and user benefits, for the purpose of judging whether the artificial reef is meeting the objectives specified for it by the grantee. Evaluation is synonymous with assessment.

A-2 (8) “Live bottom” for purposes of this rule shall mean an area that contains varying biological assemblages of perennial algal species and/or such invertebrates as sea fans, sea whips, hydroids, anemones, ascidians, sponges, bryozoans, or corals living upon and attached to naturally occurring permanent or ephemeral hard or rocky formations with rough, broken or smooth topography and of variable vertical relief. Live bottom is a subset of hard bottom which also includes living natural reefs such as tropical coral reefs, Oculina coral reefs, oyster reefs, and worm reefs, as well as artificial reefs. (9) “Monitoring” for the purposes of this rule means the process of making technical and scientific observations at a reef site, as a means of gathering data according to a predetermined study plan in order to detect physical, biological, or recreational use patterns and changes. (10) “Nonprofit corporation” for purposes of this rule means an organization that is a not-for-profit charitable, scientific or educational organization under 501 (c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service Code and is in full compliance with the regulations defining and governing that organization. (11) “Permitted site” means an area with discrete boundaries inside of which one or more artificial reefs may be located and for which all required permits and authorizations have been obtained. These permits and authorizations include: artificial reef permits issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and/or the Army Corps of Engineers and other permits, licenses, or authorizations required by any governing body. (12) “Pollution” for purposes of this rule means any substances released into the waters of the state and adjacent federal waters resulting in a man-made alteration of the chemical, physical, biological, or radiological integrity of the water in quantities or levels which are potentially harmful or injurious to human health or welfare, animal or plant life, or property, including outdoor recreation. (13) “Predominantly marine waters” means surface waters in which the chloride concentration at the surface is greater than or equal to 1,500 milligrams per liter. (14) “Prefabricated modules” means structures specifically designed and built for use as artificial reefs and which meet the environmental safety, durability, and stability requirements of this rule, as well as providing complexity and texture which are suitable as habitat for fishes and for colonization by encrusting marine organisms. (15) “Program” means the Florida Artificial Reef Program. (16) “Project” means an artificial reef project involving procurement of services and/or goods which has been granted money from the Artificial Reef Program. (17) “Project Managers” means those individuals designated to act on behalf of the applicant and the Commission on matters relating to any subsequent grant agreement. (18) “Research” for the purposes of this rule means investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and interpretation of facts which may lead to improved methods for the design, construction, placement, and use of artificial reefs as fishery management tools. (19) “Staging area” means a land-based holding area for artificial reef material where such material is stored and prepared for transportation to an approved artificial reef site.

Specific Authority Article IV, Section 9, Fla. Const., 379.249(2), (4) FS. Law Implemented Article IV, Section 9, Florida Constitution, 379.249 FS. History–New 7-1-01.

68E-9.003 Artificial Reef Program Application. (1) Applicant Eligibility. Program financial assistance is available only to coastal local governments as defined in subsection 68E-9.002(3), F.A.C., and nonprofit corporations as defined in subsection 68E-9.002(10), F.A.C. To meet project funding eligibility requirements, a nonprofit corporation must also: (a) State in its articles of incorporation or bylaws that one of its objectives is the development or monitoring of artificial reefs; (b) Demonstrate coordination with the appropriate coastal local government, including conceptual project approval by the local government; (c) Have written authorization from the permit holder to use a permitted site if the permit holder is an entity other than the nonprofit corporation; and (d) Have filed Articles of Incorporation with the Department of State prior to applying for financial assistance

A-3 under this grant program and furnish the Commission with a valid letter of authorization or similar documentation of 501 (c)(3) status from the Internal Revenue Service. (2) A coastal local government or qualified nonprofit corporation interested in applying for financial assistance under the program must submit to the Commission a completed construction and/or monitoring application together with all required attachments. The construction grant application is listed as FWCC-AR01 and the monitoring grant application is listed as FWCC-AR02 in Rule 68E-9.007, F.A.C. An applicant may submit no more than one construction project application and one monitoring application per grant cycle. (3) For complex projects beyond the scope of the standard applications, a formal project proposal is required which includes but is not limited to a detailed project description and relevant application data as provided by the application forms listed in Rule 68E-9.007, F.A.C., and in subsection 68E-9.005(3), F.A.C. In order to meet program strategic plan objectives, or complete federal grant tasks, the Commission may elect to solicit grant applications on specific topics by advertising requests for proposals in the Florida Administrative Register and by contacting interested parties in writing at least two months prior to the closing date for program application. (4) Application Process. The Division shall send out a call for applications to all prospective project applicants in the first week of January. The call for applications shall include both construction and monitoring project application forms and other information as required. The application receipt deadline shall be the third Friday in March. This does not preclude the Division from providing funds for additional projects after the deadline if additional uncommitted funds become available.

Specific Authority Article IV, Section 9, Fla. Const., 379.249(2), (4) FS. Law Implemented Article IV, Section 9, Florida Constitution, 379.249 FS. History–New 7-1-01.

68E-9.004 Program Criteria for Allocating Funds. The following criteria establish minimum standards for the funding of artificial reef development and monitoring projects. (1) Project Activity Eligibility. The following activities are eligible for funding under the program: engineering activities, transportation of artificial reef material, cost of project advertising, purchase or construction prefabricated modules, materials preparation, monitoring or evaluation of artificial reefs, development or updating of local, regional or state artificial reef plans, and associated studies or research needed to gather and analyze data necessary for the development or revision of such plans or to improve artificial reef management processes in Florida. (a) Engineering activities. No more than $5,000 or 10% (whichever is less) of project funds granted under the program may be expended for engineering services. Any funds required in excess of this amount must be provided by the applicant. For purposes of this program, engineering activities may include but need not be limited to the following: 1. Post deployment mapping of the orientation and position of the reef materials in relation to each other; 2. Observation of deployment operations including observation vessel charter, camera film and film development, video and video media, and duplication; 3. Material stability analysis; and 4. When necessary to assure accurate placement of material, costs of anchors, chain, shackles, temporary buoys, line, etc. (b) Transportation of artificial reef materials, for purposes of this program includes: 1. Transportation of artificial reef construction material to a staging area; 2. Water transportation of material from the staging area to the artificial reef site; and 3. Rental of cranes, forklifts, or other equipment for handling material at construction, staging and artificial reef sites. (c) Costs of advertising includes costs associated with all forms of publicity to announce bid specifications and secure vendors; (d) Cost of purchasing natural rock and prefabricated modules, which may include design and construction of the latter material; (e) Reef material preparation costs include cleaning and any necessary inspections or laboratory analyses

A-4 requiring special expertise to identify and insure removal of polluting material any necessary welding, cutting, or other modifications necessary to insure human and environmental safety; or, to enhance the habitat quality of the material; (f) Physical monitoring, mapping, and evaluation of artificial reefs to determine the relative merit of the material and the stability and durability of the artificial reef; biological monitoring to describe the reef community and track reef community trends; evaluations to compare two or more reefs for purposes of comparing reef biological or physical characteristics; (g) Establishment or updating of comprehensive local government, regional, or state artificial reef management plans to guide local reef development activities; and (h) Associated applied research, planning, economic, user, or harvest studies needed to provide documentation for the management direction to be provided in local, regional or state artificial reef plans. (2) Reef Construction Project Eligibility. Only those artificial reef construction projects which are proposed for placement on permitted sites with permits, valid throughout the project period, designed to be in compliance with all permit terms and conditions, and whose primary objectives for development are included in the definition of an artificial reef (subsection 68E-9.002(2), F.A.C.) shall be eligible for program funding. Proposed project activities must be consistent with adopted local, state, and national artificial reef plans, and other applicable local, state and federal regulations and fishery management plans. Although a variety of coastal structures are recognized to create hard bottom habitat, projects not eligible for program funding are those whose primary objective is: (a) Shoreline or inlet stabilization, bridge, pier, jetty or dock construction; (b) Wave or current attenuation (breakwaters); (c) Solid waste or dredge spoil disposal; (d) Mitigation for damaged or destroyed habitat resulting from a specific human activity for which another party is liable; (e) Placement of artificial reef material for the purpose of subsequently removing the material and/or its associated reef community as part of an aquaculture project; and (f) To serve as an underwater art form, novelty or entertainment/media event. (3) Acceptable artificial reef construction locations. Only construction projects with locations that meet all of the following criteria will be considered qualified for program funding. The proposed reef location must: (a) Be at least 150 feet from the boundary of the permitted site to provide a buffer area if some movement of materials occurs, or if problems with placement precision arise; (b) Be no closer than 150 feet from submerged aquatic vegetation, live bottom, coral and other natural reef structures; and (c) Be on substrate firm enough to support the artificial reef materials proposed for deployment so that loss of reef function through subsidence will be minimized. Documentation of substrate compatibility shall include, at a minimum, identification of the specific substrate type. (4) Artificial reef construction materials eligible for program funding. All program funded projects must demonstrate either through prior documented observation and/or based upon an engineering assessment acceptable to the Division, projected durability and stability in a twenty (20) year return interval storm event at the depth placed. Under these conditions the permitted reef should not move off the permitted site or substantially break up with resultant loss of habitat value. Funded artificial reefs are expected to serve as an effective artificial reef for a minimum of twenty (20) years. No artificial reef structures will be funded that consist of low density long-lived component parts that may disassociate and become prone to movement as the reef breaks down over time. Artificial reef materials must not cause pollution. The materials that will be funded in Commission artificial reef projects include clean concrete or rock, clean steel boat hulls, other clean, heavy gauge steel products with a thickness of 1/4 inch or greater, and prefabricated structures that are concrete or a mixture of clean concrete and heavy gauge steel.

Specific Authority Article IV, Section 9, Fla. Const., 379.249(2), (4) FS. Law Implemented Article IV, Section 9, Florida Constitution, 379.249 FS. History–New 7-1-01.

A-5 68E-9.005 Project Application Review and Ranking Application Review. The review of project applications will be conducted by a three person application review team designated by the Division Director. The review process will be as follows: (1) Reef Construction Project Ranking. The application review team will competitively rank eligible artificial reef construction projects according to the following factors based upon information provided by the Applicant: (a) Project site selection and environmental assessment. 1. Submit a bottom survey and discuss these results (up to four points); 2. An environmental assessment that justifies the project and project site based upon minimum environmental impact (up to five (5) points); 3. Discussion of the range of wave height, current velocity, temperature, salinity, visibility, tidal range, and other physical oceanography conditions and how those factors may affect the project (up to four points); and 4. Availability of relevant prior biological, or environmental data associated with the proposed reef site or general site vicinity (up to five (5) points). (b) Local demand for artificial reefs based upon: 1. Demonstrated public support for the proposed artificial reef project, based upon written letters or resolutions of support less than six months old (up to five (5) points); 2. Numbers of recreational boats 16 feet long or longer registered in the affected county (data provided by Division) (up to five (5) points); 3. Number of one year resident and nonresident recreational fishing license holders in the affected county (data provided by Division) (up to five (5) points); and 4. Number of charter/head boats in the affected county (data provided by the Division) (up to five (5) points). (c) Access. The presence of at least one navigable inlet access point regardless of location that is within 20 nautical miles of the project site (three points). (d) Financial. Except in the case of funding steel hulled vessels pursuant to subsection 68E-9.004(4), F.A.C., providing cash match funds is not a requirement for the applicant. However the commitment of the applicant to provide funds to help construct the proposed artificial reef will be ranked in proportion to the percentage match of the project (up to 4 points). (e) Supply. 1. Estimated percent coverage of natural hard bottom in the multi-county area (more points allotted to lesser coverage) (data provided by Division) (up to eight points); and 2. The number of existing artificial reefs within a .25 nautical mile radius of the proposed project (more points awarded for fewer reefs) (up to four points). (f) The applicant included specific, well defined and measurable objectives to gauge the success of the project (up to five (5) points); (g) The applicant’s plan to measure the success of project objective achievement (up to five (5) points); (h) Availability of a five year local artificial reef management plan which shows a linkage with the proposed project (up to five (5) points); (i) Availability of a written artificial reef monitoring and assessment plan (up to five (5) points); (j) The applicant’s project plan that addresses logistics, coordination, and staging area availability and location material (up to five (5) points); (k) Reef design and configuration; habitat complexity, interstitial spaces, surface area, material placement and positioning (up to 10 points); (l) The project is an innovative project or designed to provide future monitoring potential (up to five (5) points); (m) Project practicality. The extent to which the project is physically and economically feasible based upon the project description and the available funding (up to five (5) points); (n) Demonstrated durability and stability of the reef material at the depth proposed for placement based on prior field evaluations or stability analyses (four points); (o) Assurance of the availability of reef material for the proposed project (three points); (p) Demonstrated involvement of a marine advisory board (two points);

A-6 (q) The applicant’s historic ability of timely project completion, and compliance with grant agreement terms and conditions based upon the most recent grant agreement performance (up to five (5) points); (r) Number of staff and percentage of time available to undertake administrative and field aspects of project, including subsequent monitoring and assessment (up to five (5) points); (s) First time participation in the program by the applicant (five (5) points); (t) The applicant is located in an economically depressed rural coastal county (Division provides data) (five (5) points); and (u) Overall quality of application preparation and accuracy (up to four points). (2) Monitoring Project Evaluation. The review of project applications will be conducted by a three person application review team designated by the Division Director. The review process will be as follows: (a) The proposed project collects useful data that will be of value to the Commission and the applicant in determining an artificial reef’s effectiveness in meeting the objectives for which the reef was constructed (up to 5 points); (b) Clearly stated project monitoring or assessment objectives (up to 5 points); (c) The methods of data collection are clearly presented and are scientifically acceptable and proven field methods and appropriate for the specific monitoring objectives stated (up to 5 points); (d) Final deliverables are clearly described in the application (up to 5 points); (e) The data to be collected is transferable to the Commission in an acceptable format (up to five (5) points); (f) The applicant’s historic commitment to timely project completion, and in compliance with grant agreement terms and conditions based upon the most recent monitoring grant agreement performance (up to five (5) points); (g) The qualifications, training and experience of the individuals performing the data collection and data analysis (up to five (5) points); (h) The project’s cost effectiveness in relation to the quantity, quality, and type of data expected to be collected (up to five (5) points); (i) The procedures to be used to check on the quality of the data as it is collected and handled (quality assurance/quality control) (up to five (5) points); (j) Are a continuation of an ongoing multi-year project effort which has provided reliable and useful data and demonstrated high compliance with prior grant agreement terms and conditions (up to three (3) points); (k) Are endorsed by the local government reef coordinator whose county has a written artificial reef monitoring plan in place and who will provide multi-year monitoring (two points); and (l) Project proposals that address unresolved scientific issues or provide data relevant to artificial reef management (up to five (5) points). (3) Ranking of other complex planning, research, and evaluation projects. These projects will be funded based upon ability of the project to meet state or local artificial reef planning and management needs, availability of funds, and likelihood of successful completion of the project objectives. These project applications will include a detailed formal proposal that includes but is not limited to: (a) Purpose of the project and specific measurable objective(s); (b) Detailed scope of work; (c) Complete explanation of how funds are to be spent; (d) A description of sampling methodologies and statistical analyses; (e) A time table; and (f) Qualifications of investigators.

Specific Authority Article IV, Section 9, Fla. Const., 379.249(2), (4) FS. Law Implemented Article IV, Section 9, Florida Constitution, 379.249 FS. History–New 7-1-01.

68E-9.006 Project Funding. Project funding limits. The Commission may provide up to $60,000 per state fiscal year for an artificial reef project, based on the criteria set forth in Rule 68E-9.003, F.A.C., above. During any given funding year the combined funding available to all the applicants applying from a given county shall not exceed twenty percent of the total

A-7 artificial reef project funds available. The Commission may consider project funding in excess of $60,000 for a single project depending on the availability of funds, the total number of applications received, and the nature and scope of project applications which provide the following: (1) Expanded economic opportunities, particularly in depressed areas. (2) Research and evaluation projects on traditional or new artificial reef materials or designs. (3) Experimental artificial reef construction designed to: (a) Provide improvements in habitat quality, durability or stability over that of conventional reuse material; and (b) Provide reefs which enhance the conservation/preservation of fisheries resources through design and placement resulting in reduction of directed fishing pressure and over fishing. (4) Development of local or regional artificial reef management plans and supporting studies. (5) Multi-county regional reef construction or assessment projects.

Specific Authority Article IV, Section 9, Fla. Const., 379.249(2), (4) FS. Law Implemented Article IV, Section 9, Florida Constitution, 379.249 FS. History–New 7-1-01.

68E-9.007 Forms and Instructions. (1) Project Administration Forms. Information required by the Commission must be placed on the prescribed forms, titles and numbers of which are listed below. Such forms and instructions may be obtained without cost by writing: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Division of Marine Fisheries, 620 South Meridian Street Box MF-MFM, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600. (2) This list of forms includes: (a) FWCC-AR01 Artificial Reef Program Construction Grant Application. (b) FWCC-AR02 Artificial Reef Program Monitoring Grant Application.

Specific Authority Article IV, Section 9, Fla. Const., 379.249(2), (4) FS. Law Implemented 379.249 FS. History–New 7-1-01.

A-8 Appendix 3

Fish Species (by common name) recorded at the natural-bottom Grayton Reef and two Walton County artificial reef sites. All data from Reef.org database 2014 (http://www.reef.org/db/reports).

Reef Fish Common Name Grayton Eastern Frangista Reef Lake Reef Reef Atlantic Spadefish x x x Bandtail Puffer x Bank Sea Bass x Barred Blenny x x x Belted Sandfish Black Sea Bass x Blue Angelfish x Bluehead x Clearnose Skate x Cobia x Cocoa Damselfish x Cubbyu x Doctorfish x Dwarf Sand Perch x Gray Snapper x x Gray Triggerfish x Graysby x Greater Amberjack x Greater Soapfish x Gulf Flounder x x Hogfish x x Jackknife-Fish x King Mackerel x Loggerhead Sea Turtle x Moustache Jawfish x Nurse Shark x Oceanic Manta Ray x x Planehead Filefish x Polka-dot Batfish x Queen Angelfish x Red Grouper x Red Snapper x Round Scad x Sandbar Shark x

3-1

Reef Fish Common Name Grayton Eastern Frangista Reef Lake Reef Reef Sand Perch x Scamp x Scrawled Cowfish x Seaweed Blenny x Sergeant Major x Sharksucker x Sharpnose Puffer x Sheepshead x x x Slippery Dick x x Spanish Hogfish x Spanish Mackerel x Spotfin Butterflyfish x Southern Guitarfish x Spotfin Jawfish x Tomtate x x Townsend Angelfish x White Grunt x x Whitefin Sharksucker x Yellow Jawfish x Yellowhead Jawfish x Yellowtail Reeffish x

3-2

Appendix 4

History of Walton County, Florida Artificial Reef Development

History Organized reef construction in Walton County began in May 1994. At that time, a team of volunteer divers led by divers from the non-profit Organization for Artificial Reefs (OAR), based in Tallahassee, performed a bottom survey for a new artificial reef site in 57 – 60 feet of water directly offshore of the Seacrest community on the eastern end of U.S. Highway 30A (OAR, 1994). A good site for reef development, the site was initially called the “Seagrove Reef” but later was renamed the “Seacrest” or “Genesis Reef.” On January 17, 1995, a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) permit was issued for the Seacrest site, valid until January17, 2000. The permitted site was a circle 180 feet in radius, with the center at 30°15.93’ N/ 86° 1.67’ W. This site was about 0.86 nautical miles offshore of what is now Rosemary Beach. The site permit expired in 2000 and was not renewed. Neither the REEF database nor the FWC databases include information on this site (see Tables 1 and 2 for permit information).

OAR conducted a second bottom survey near the Walton County shoreline on June 29, 1996, looking at three separate locations to the west of the previous reef site (OAR, 1996). These sites were selected due to discussions with local anglers and divers. The three sites were off Eastern Lake, Grayton Beach, and Miramar Beach. The Grayton Beach site was rejected due to highly silty, muddy bottom conditions. Such a bottom would have resulted in any reef material sinking into the sediments and losing its habitat value. The other two sites were ultimately permitted for reef use.

The Eastern Lake site is approximately 61 feet deep, about 1.1 nautical miles offshore from the Eastern Lake Channel. The Miramar Reef site is approximately 77 feet deep, about 2.8 nautical miles offshore from the town of Miramar. Both sites were permitted in 1996 for five years. The Miramar Reef site Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) permit was renewed in 2013; the USACE permit renewal is currently pending (anticipated renewal in fall 2014).

The Eastern Lake site was permitted on November 04, 1996, with an expiration date of November 04, 2001. The site was permitted as a square ¼ nautical mile (1,519 feet) on a side. The REEF database contains limited information on this site; however, no additional information is available from FWC.

Walton County and OAR allowed the three artificial reef permits to expire without renewal so no new reef development activity occurred offshore of Walton County for the next 12 years. In 2012, with the assistance of the Emerald Coast Reef Association (ECRA) divers, the permit for the Miramar Reef site was renewed for future reef expansion. In 2012, Walton County contracted Taylor Engineering to design and permit two additional ¼-nautical mile artificial reef sites offshore of Walton County (Tables 1 and 2 – Fish Haven #1 and #2).

SWARA, which was formed in 2012, with Taylor Engineering and Walton County, proposed a nearshore artificial reef network offshore of Walton County in 2013 that included nine nearshore (within 1 nautical mile from shoreline) ¼-nautical mile artificial reef areas and four nearshore snorkel reefs (primarily for recreational use). Table 3 below summarizes the proposed reef locations and FDEP

4-1

authorizations. SWARA has received FDEP permits for all reef areas and anticipates USACE authorization in fall 2014.

4-2

Table 1. FDEP Permits and Permit Status

REEF AREA REEF NAME FDEP Permit # ISSUED EXPIRE LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATUS (ft) GENESIS 662631301 01/17/1995 01/17/2000 30°15.930'N 86°01.670'W 180 RADIUS Expired (SEACREST)

EASTERN LAKE 662968731 11/04/1996 11/04/2001 30°17.450' N 86°06.500'W 1,519 X 1,519 Expired

MIRAMAR (FRANGISTA) 662968731 11/04/1996 11/04/2001 30°19.732'N 86°22.915'W 1,519 X 1,519 Expired

MIRAMAR (FRANGISTA) 66-0311284-001-EG 05/02/2012 05/02/2017 30°19.732'N 86°22.915'W 1,519 X 1,519 Active

FISH HAVEN #1 66-0318419-001-EG 06/04/2013 06/04/2018 30° 19.327'N 86° 17.875'W 1,320 X 1,320 Active

FISH HAVEN #2 66-0318423-001-EG 06/04/2013 06/04/2018 30° 16.109'N 86° 13.875'W 1,320 X 1,320 Active

4-3 Table 2. USACE Permits and Permit Status

REEF AREA REEF NAME USACE Permit # ISSUED EXPIRED LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATUS (ft) GENESIS 199500718 03/02/1995 01/19/2000 30°15.930'N 86°01.670'W 180 RADIUS Expired (SEACREST) (GP-DH)

EASTERN LAKE 1996606244 02/26/1996 01/19/2000 30°17.450' N 86°06.500'W 1,519 X 1,519 Expired

MIRAMAR (FRANGISTA) 1996606244 02/26/1996 01/19/2000 30°19.732'N 86°22.915'W 1,519 X 1,519 Expired 1996606244 02/29/2000 01/19/2005 30°19.732'N 86°22.915'W 1,519 X 1,519 Expired MIRAMAR (FRANGISTA) (GP-RH) SAJ-2013-01166 06/5/2014 04/14/2024 30° 19.327'N 86° 17.875'W 1,320 X 1,320 Active FISH HAVEN #1 (SP-SWA) SAJ-2013-01167 06/5/2014 04/14/2024 30° 16.109'N 86° 13.875'W 1,320 X 1,320 Active FISH HAVEN #2 (SP-SWA)

4-3

Table 3. FDEP Permits and Permit Status for the SWARA/Walton County Artificial Reef Network

SNORKEL REEF AREA FDEP PERMIT # ISSUED EXPIRES LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATUS REEF (FT) Miramar Beach 66-0324064-001-EG 02/14/2014 2/14/2019 30° 22.565' N 86° 23.320 W 225 x 900 Active Topsail Hill 66-0324065-001-EG 02/14/2014 2/14/2019 30° 21.393' N 86° 16.661 W 280 x 900 Active Grayton Beach 66-0322891-001-EG 12/12/2013 12/12/2018 30° 19.359' N 86° 09.471 W 200 x 800 Active Inlet Beach 66-0324077-001-EG 2/12/2014 02/12/2019 30° 16.237' N 86° 00.348 W 200 x 900 Active FISH/DIVE REEF AREA FDEP PERMIT # ISSUED EXPIRES LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATUS REEF (FT) Miramar Beach 66-0324063-001-EG 02/14/14 02/14/19 30° 21.875' N 86° 23.356' W 1,519 x 1,519 Active Topsail Bluff 66-0324066-001-EG 02/14/14 02/14/19 30° 21.375' N 86° 19.356' W 1,519 x 1,519 Active Fort Panic 66-0324067-001-EG 02/07/2014 02/07/2019 30° 20.375' N 86° 15.356' W 1,519 x 1,519 Active 4-4 Ed Walline 66-0324068-001-EG 02/07/2014 02/70/2019 30° 19.975' N 86° 13.856' W 1,519 x 1,519 Active Blue Mountain 66-0324071-001-EG 02/07/2014 02/07/2019 30° 19.375' N 86° 12.056' W 1,519 x 1,519 Active Grayton Beach 66-0324072-001-EG 02/07/2014 02/07/2019 30° 18.675' N 86° 09.656' W 1,519 x 1,519 Active Santa Clara 66-0324070-001-EG 02/13/14 02/13/19 30° 18.075' N 86° 07.356' W 1,519 x 1,519 Active Deer Lake 66-0324074-001-EG 02/13/14 02/13/19 30° 17.375' N 86° 04.856' W 1,519 x 1,519 Active Inlet Beach 66-0324076-001-EG 02/13/14 02/13/19 30° 15.675' N 86° 00.856' W 1,519 x 1,519 Active

4-4

State and Federal Funding for Walton County Reefs From 1995 to 2001, Walton County successfully partnered with local user groups and the state or federal government to deploy four artificial reefs within the three artificial reef areas using grant funds provided by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) (or previously through the FDEP), from state or federal funding sources (Table 4).

Table 4. Artificial Reef Construction Grant Projects for Walton County (provided by Bill Horn, FWC, 2014). Walton #1 Frangista (aka Frangista Beach Reef Name (AKA Seacrest Or Eastern Lake Walton Hopper Culverts (aka Genesis) Reef Barge Site) Miramar Site) Grant OFMAS-028 OFMAS-074 OFMAS-131 FWCC-00118 Funding Source STATE FEDERAL FEDERAL STATE Amount $25,000.00 $20,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 Deployment Date 11/15/1995 6/5/1997 6/30/1999 6/18/2001 65 CONCRETE 300 TONS OF STEEL BARGE 52 PIECES OF Materials GROUPER GHETTOS CONCRETE 195'L X 35' W CONCRETE Description PYRAMIDS CULVERTS X12'H, CULVERTS

Current Status of Artificial Reef System in Walton County Waters Currently, Walton County has a network of three artificial reef areas permitted in the 1990s holding four individual deployments (Table 5) from one to three miles offshore. The Frangista site includes both the Frangista Beach Culvert Reef and the Walton Hopper Barge Reef. None of the reef areas are currently permitted or have held permits since the early 2000s, with the exception of the Frangista (Miramar) Reef.

Recently, the County has added two new reef areas (Fish Haven #1 and Fish Haven #2) but has not had the opportunity to construct reefs within these areas. Nine additional reef areas all about 1 nautical mile from shore have received FDEP permits but still await authorization from the USACE.

Well-meaning, but unauthorized individuals have likely placed additional artificial reefs offshore of Walton County without the proper permits. Materials on these informally constructed reefs portray the history of reef building in Florida, but few are likely still making effective habitat. New reef materials must be long term and stable materials to provide marine habitat for at least 20 – 30 years. Additionally, reefs funded by taxpayer dollars must be accessible to all citizens equally by public distribution of reef coordinates and information about those reefs.

4-5

Table 5. Artificial Reef Data available in the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Artificial Reef Database (http://myfwc.com/media/131585/reefs.pdfeefs/) Name FRANGISTA FRANGISTA SEAGROVE WALTON #1 BEACH (WALTON HOPPER REEF (SEACREST or CULVERTS BARGE) GENESIS) Relief (ft) 6 12 6 Depth (ft) 77 77 70 58 Longitude 86 22.91 86 22.899 86 06.497 86 01.605 Latitude 30 19.752 30 19.686 30 17.447 30 15.052 Description 300 TONS OF 65 CONCRETE 52 PIECES OF STEEL BARGE 195 ft CONCRETE PYRAMIDS CALLED CONCRETE L x 35 ft W x 12 ft CULVERTS, IN GROUPER CULVERTS, 6x8 H,WITH 100 TONS A 40 ft. x 150 ft GHETTOS, 14 & 4x8 ft STEEL BALLAST AREA LOCATIONS Material CONCRETE CONCRETE CONCRETE 195 ft STEEL BARGE GHETTO MODULES CULVERTS (52) CULVERTS (65) Tons 316 473 300 na Deployed 06/18/2001 06/30/1999 06/05/1997 11/15/1995

Artificial Reef Dive Assessments Before reef construction, divers from the FWC’s Artificial Reef Program assessed two of the existing Walton County artificial reefs. On August 28, 1996, the FWC (then FDEP) divers performed mapping and a fish census assessment of the Grouper Ghettos™ placed at the Seacrest (Genesis) artificial reef site in 1999 (Bill Horn, FWC unpublished data). A total of 12 grouper ghettos were located at this artificial reef site, within 50 meters of the benchmark. Exactly 50% of the units located (6 of 12) were on their side, presumably from the deployment, because no hurricanes or tropical storms have hit the area since the deployment. No upright units showed any signs of settling in the sand, as observed with these units in other locations and were making very good habitat.

These modules had been in the water for only 9.6 months at the time of the dive assessment, yet 21 species of fish were observed on the dive, although the visibility was poor, estimated at 15 feet. The most abundant observed were species that would be considered bait fish, like round scad (Decapterus punctatus), blue runner (Caranx crysos), and tomtate (Haemulon aurolineatum). Gag (Mycteroperca microlepis), gray triggerfish (Balistes capriscus), and gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) were also observed but not abundant yet (Bill Horn, FWC unpublished data). After nine months, these units were making good habitats as indicated by the high abundance and moderate diversity of fish present.

A second dive assessment by FWC divers occurred on July 11, 2000 (Bill Horn, FWC unpublished data). A team of divers conducted a dive assessment and fish census on the Miramar (or Frangista Beach) reef site in 77 feet of water. This dive was on the 195-foot long metal hopper barge deployed at this reef site on June 30, 1999, utilizing funding supplied by the state’s artificial reef program. The visibility was estimated at 35 feet at the surface but only 20 feet below the thermocline near the bottom. There was very little current. The barge was mostly intact and upright on the bottom. It did have several large holes on the side that increased the complexity somewhat, however generally it was not a

4-6

very complex reef. There were 15 species of fish noted on this dive, and only cocoa damselfish (Pomacentrus variabilis) and Atlantic spadefish (Chaetodipterus faber) were considered abundant (defined as more than 100 individuals seen). Also observed were red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus), and scamp (Mycteroperca phenax). Of the game fish seen on this reef, only cobia (Rachycentron canadum) was estimated to be of legal size for harvest.

References OAR 1994. Organization for Artificial Reefs (OAR), B. Horn editor, Pre-Deployment Bottom Survey For A New Artificial Reef Site Off Walton County May 14, 1994, 7 Pages.

OAR 1996. Organization For Artificial Reefs (Oar), B. Horn Editor, Pre-Deployment Bottom Survey For 3 New Artificial Reef Sites Off Walton County, June 29,1996, 12 Pages.

4-7 Appendix 5

Florida and USACE Artificial Reef Permit Regulations

Artificial Reef Regulatory Arena in Florida Any reef construction in Florida requires state and federal permits. For areas within nine nautical miles of shore, reef design, construction, and maintenance must remain in compliance with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) General Permit for Artificial Reefs (Section 62- 341.600, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Standard General or Individual Permits (see FDEP and USACE Reef Permit regulations, reproduced below). These permit types allow reef construction with specific spatial and material requirements. Some circumstances, such as desired size, depth, or material type preclude use of the general permit, requiring authorization of an FDEP Individual Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) and a separate USACE Individual Permit. For permits outside the jurisdiction of the state (beyond nine nautical miles), only federal permitting regulations apply. A copy of all (federal) permits shall be supplied to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) as the central repository of artificial reef information for this region regardless of the location of the permitted site. Permitting procedures will be updated or modified as dictated by changes in the regulatory process.

Several state and federal agencies regulate artificial reef construction or are consulted when the state or federal government receives an artificial reef area permit application. State and federal agencies potentially involved in the regulatory process surrounding creation and maintenance of an artificial reef may include FDEP, FWC, USACE, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), and the Bureau of Energy Management (BOEM). State of Florida regulations include Florida Statutes and Florida Administrative Code. All reefs granted a federal permit must remain consistent with federal laws, in particular the Rivers and Harbors Act, Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act.

Construction of artificial reefs in Florida Gulf of Mexico waters (within nine nautical miles from shore) requires permits from FDEP and USACE. Beyond nine miles, only a federal permit is required. To meet the current permit requirements for a State of Florida General Permit, a reef design may measure no more than ¼ nautical mile on a side. This size is also recommended in the federal permit regulation. Larger areas can be permitted by following individual permit rules and fees. An individual permit receives much closer scrutiny and incurs higher fees than a general permit.

In Florida, FWC works closely with FDEP and USACE to ensure that the proposed project meets all applicable rules. FDEP and USACE coordinate with FWC to obtain recommendations concerning the proposed reef plans. FDEP obtains the authorization for use of Florida Sovereignty Submerged Lands (SSL) once the permit is otherwise ready for authorization. As artificial reefs are constructed for the benefit of and open to the general public, and requested by a public agency, the state typically issues a letter of consent for the use of SSL rather than a lease or easement.

Federal regulators are also bound by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to consult with other federal agencies if proposed actions may have consequences that may involve protected species or resources. These consultations may greatly extend the permitting period for federal permits. As

5-1 such, USACE may consult with USCG, NMFS, USFWS, and BOEM. Coordination is necessary to verify that the proposed project meets the standards of the USACE permit requirements, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and “other pertinent laws” (NOAA, 2007). In addition, USCG reviews the project to verify that the proposed reef location lies outside shipping lanes, provides sufficient clearance for vessels, avoids natural hardbottom features, artificial reefs or other documented features, and will not result in a hazard to navigation.

The FWC Division of Marine Fisheries Management manages Florida’s Artificial Reef Program. As governmental managers and regulatory authorities became more involved and interested in artificial reef programs and permitting, the range of appropriate artificial reef materials became more specific. The purpose of increased scrutiny of artificial reef materials and requirements to use a specific set of materials is generally for

1) Protection of the marine environment; 2) Reduction of negative impacts of artificial reef materials to other marine resource uses (oil and gas extraction, trawl fisheries, beach restoration sediment sources, etc.); 3) Reduction of potential of artificial reef materials to wash ashore during storms; and, 4) Provision of long-term marine life habitat instead of short-term fish aggregation. Moreover, when public funds are expended for artificial reef construction, managers strive for the best possible (monetary) “value” by requiring durable and stable artificial reef materials.

If placement of buoys or markers is part of the plan, the permit holder must apply for USCG approval to place the buoys/markers. USCG will also identify appropriate color and signal characteristics of any proposed buoys/markers.

Finally, the permits typically require that the permit holder notify FWC and NOAA with the coordinates and related information for entry into the FWC artificial reef database and for placement of the information on NOAA nautical charts.

5-2 Florida Administrative Code 62-341.600 General Permit for the Construction of Artificial Reefs. (1) A general permit is hereby provided for the construction of an artificial reef by any person, provided: (a) The material to be used shall be clean concrete or rock, clean steel boat hulls, other clean, heavy gauge steel products with a thickness of 1/4 inch or greater, and prefabricated structures that are a mixture of clean concrete and heavy gauge steel; (b) The material shall be free of soils, oils and greases, debris, litter, putrescible substances or other pollutants; (c) The material shall be firmly anchored to the bottom and shall not be indiscriminately dumped; and (d) The material shall be placed so that the top of the reef does not exceed 1/2 the distance from the bottom to the surface of the water unless a greater distance from the surface is required for safe navigation. At no time shall the distance between the top of the reef and the surface of the water be less than 6 feet. (2) This general permit shall be subject to the following specific conditions: (a) The permittee shall conduct a survey of the bottom of the waterbody on which the reef is to be built and shall submit the survey to the Department with the notice required in subsection 62-343.090(1), F.A.C., demonstrating that the bottom does not have submerged grassbed communities, shellfish or other hardbottom communities, or corals; (b) There shall be no reefs constructed in bays, lagoons, or estuaries that are less than 12 feet deep; (c) There shall be no “white goods” (inoperative and discarded refrigerators, freezers, ranges, water heaters, washers, and other similar domestic and commercial appliances), asphalt material, tires, other polluting materials used in construction of the reef; (d) The site shall be marked with perimeter buoys during construction to ensure that no material is deposited outside of the site; (e) The size of the boundaries within which the artificial reef is to be deposited shall not exceed 1/4 mile on any side; (f) The artificial reef site shall not be established within any shipping lanes; and (g) The permittee shall notify the National Ocean Service, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Association, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, Maryland, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Division of Marine Fisheries Management, via e-mail at [email protected] of the precise location of the reef within 30 days of placement of the reef material. Specific Authority 373.026(7), 373.043, 373.118(1), 373.406(5), 373.414(9), 373.418, 403.805(1) FS. Law Implemented 373.118(1), 373.406(5), 373.413, 373.414(9), 373.416, 373.418 FS. History–New 10-3- 95.

5-3 USACE Standard Permit-Artificial Reefs Source: USACE Jacksonville District Regulatory Source Book http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/SourceBook.aspx

Standard Permit-Artificial Reefs Regulatory authority for the deployment of artificial reefs is in accordance with Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbor Act and/or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The extent of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction for permitting artificial reefs extends from the mean high water line to the outer continental shelf. Reef construction within the territorial seas (3 nautical miles off the Atlantic coast of Florida) and inland waterways fall under the purview of Section 10 and Section 404 authority. Beyond the territorial sea, artificial reefs are considered under Section 10 authority only.

The Corps policy is that applicants are typically a government agency (city or county) due to liability and insurance issues. Applicants need to submit a joint Florida Department of Environmental Protection application for proposed artificial reefs within state waters for joint processing. Reefs constructed beyond state waters do not need a state permit; only a federal permit from the Corps is needed.

The basic form of authorization for an artificial reef is a standard permit. Processing and evaluating the proposal can be done in three steps: pre-application consultation, formal project review, and decision making. You are encouraged to contact the local Corps of Engineers field office in your area prior to submitting a new permit application.

New reef sites are typically ¼ nautical mile by ¼ nautical mile. The smaller size sites make it easier to monitor the effectiveness, durability and stability of the deployed material on the sea floor, a public resource. Permits are typically issued for ten years. Reissuance of the permit is required if the time frame for the construction window expires.

Pre-application consultation usually involves a meeting between the applicant, Corps, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and interested stakeholders. Pre-application consultation is needed for new reef sites or material not typically used for artificial reefs. The Corps and FWC will determine if a stakeholder should be invited to the meeting, where the location and orientation of the reef is the main topic of discussion. The proposed material for deployment and the management of the proposed reef may also be discussed. Interested stakeholders may include representatives from the U.S. Coast Guard, State Historic Preservation Office, local port facilities, shrimping industry, etc. The purpose of the meeting is to provide informal discussions before the applicant expends resources (time, funds, preliminary deployment inspections, etc.). The process is designed to inform the applicant of the factors the Corps must consider in its decision making process. This discussion prior to submitting a permit application enables the application to be processed more efficiently. The proposed reef site needs to be situated in an area where there are no conflicting uses of the aquatic resource; such as transit lanes for shipping, an active shrimping area, or cable or utility line rights-of-way.

Material used for artificial reefs must be durable and stable in a 20-year return interval storm event at the requested depth. The material should not move off the proposed reef site or substantially break up with resultant loss of habitat value. To receive funding from FWC the proposed artificial reefs should be effective for a minimum of 20 years. The deployment of material from the following list, which has

5-4 proven to be durable and stable, would expedite the processing of an application. These materials should weigh at least 500 pounds and be clean and free from asphalt, creosote, petroleum, other hydrocarbons and toxic residues, loose free floating material or other deleterious substances. Materials/structures will be configured and constructed to be stable in a 20-year return interval storm event at the depth of placement. Materials will be designed, selected and deployed in such a manner as to avoid entrapping marine life. 1. Prefabricated artificial reef modules that are composed of ferrous and/or aluminum-alloy metals ¼ inch or more in thickness, concrete, rock or a combination of these materials. 2. Natural rock boulders and other pre-cast concrete material, such as, culverts, stormwater junction boxes, power poles, railroad ties, jersey barriers or other similar concrete material. 3. Large concrete building demolition materials, such as bridges, with all steel reinforcement rods severed to ensure the rods will not create a fishing tackle or diver ensnaring hazard. 4. Heavy gauge ferrous & aluminum alloy metal material components or structures, ¼ inch or more in thickness, such as utility poles and antenna towers. 5. Heavy gauge ferrous & aluminum alloy metal hulled vessels that equal or exceed 60 ft. hull length, prepared and deployed in accordance with all applicable U. S. Coast Guard, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission or other applicable state or federal agency regulations or policies. The vessel will not be deployed until all necessary inspections and clearances have been obtained or waived and a stability analysis has been completed, demonstrating that the vessel will be stable during a 50-year storm event based on vessel and deployment site characteristics. The permittee shall follow the national guidance regarding preparation of vessels for deployment as artificial reefs.

The formal project review consists of submitting an application that provides complete information and details of the project. The review is needed for new reef sites, existing reef sites in which the construction window has expired or for material not previously used as an artificial reef. The following information is required for review by the Corps:  Name, address and phone number of applicant.  Permit number, if site was previously permitted.  Complete description of the proposed project, including the type and quantity of material to be discharged, how the material will be transported to the proposed site and deployment method.  Provisions for siting, constructing, monitoring, operating, maintaining and managing the proposed artificial reef.  The project location of the site in degree decimal format. This should be clearly marked on the most recent National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) chart (New reef sites are typically ¼ nautical miles by ¼ nautical miles). The NOAA drawing needs to be on 8.5 inch by 11 inch page.

After the application is received by the Corps, it will be assigned an identification number and reviewed for completeness. A request for additional information may be sent, if necessary for the Corps to review the proposed project. Within 15 days of receiving all the required information, a public notice will be issued with a 15- to 30-day comment period. The proposal is then reviewed by the Corps, local, state and federal agencies, stakeholders, special interest groups and the general public. Concurrently with the public notice, the Corps will consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service, Protected Species Division and possibly with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

5-5 The consultation is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for any endangered or threatened species that may be affected by the project.

After the comment period, the Corps will review all of the comments and consult with other federal and state agencies where appropriate. Additional time may be needed if there are endangered species concerns.

The project manager in the decision making process evaluates the comments received, negotiates necessary modifications of the project if required, and drafts appropriate documentation to support a recommended permit decision. The permit decision document includes a discussion of the environmental impacts of the project, the findings of the public interest review process, and any special evaluation required by the project.

The permit, if issued, will contain special conditions to ensure the material is deployed within the project boundaries, does not create a hazard to navigation, and the deployment will not have an adverse effect on endangered species. The following list contains conditions that are typically added to a permit. The list is provided as a guideline; other conditions may be added if appropriate. Please note, monitoring conditions for reefs that are deployed as mitigation for hard bottom substrate is not included.

The standard conditions are as follows: 1. Reporting Addresses: The Permittee shall reference the permit number, SAJ-0000-00000, on all correspondence. Unless specifically notified to the contrary, the Permittee shall use the following addresses for transmitting correspondence to the referenced agencies:

a. For hard copies: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Division, Special Projects and Enforcement Branch, and Enforcement PM Address. The Permittee shall reference the permit number, SAJ-0000-00000, on all correspondence.

b. For email: [email protected]

c. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office of Coast Survey, N/CS26, Sta. 7317 1315 East-West Highway Silver Springs, MD, 20910-3282

d. Commander, U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) [Enter in the mailing address of the USCG office for your Sector]

e. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) Artificial Reef Program 620 S. Meridian Street, Box 4B2 Tallahassee, FL 32399 Fax: 850-922-0463 Email: [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected]

5-6 2. Initial Agency Notification: The Permittee shall provide to the Corps, NOAA and USCG written notification of the planned deployment start date at least two weeks prior to the initial deployment on the authorized artificial reef site.

3. Protection of Existing Resources: The Permittee shall not deploy artificial reef materials until an assessment of the bottom conditions have been accomplished by diver, submersible video camera, fathometer, depth/bottom sounder (e.g. "fish finder") or sidescan sonar. The inspection of the deployment area may occur at the time of deployment but no more than one year prior to deployment. The Permittee shall maintain a deployment buffer of at least 200 feet from any submerged beds of sea grasses, coral reefs, live bottom, areas supporting growth of sponges, sea fans, soft corals and other sessile macroinvertebrates generally associated with rock outcrops, oyster reefs, scallop beds, clam beds or areas where there are unique or unusual concentrations of bottom dwelling marine organisms. If, during the inspection, evidence is observed of cultural/archaeological resources, such as sunken vessels, ballast, historic refuse piles, or careenage areas the Corps will be notified by the Permittee and the above referenced deployment buffer will be implemented. The Permittee shall maintain a record of the information gained during the inspection such that it can be provided upon request to the Corps.

4. Pre-Deployment Notification: No less than 14 days prior to deployment of material on an artificial reef, the Permittee shall transmit by electronic mail ("email") a complete and signed "Florida Artificial Reef Materials Cargo Manifest and Pre-Deployment Notification" form, provided in Attachment 1 of the permit, to the Corps and FWC to allow inspection of the proposed reef materials as deemed necessary by the agencies. Inspection is allowable at the staging area. By signing the Pre-Deployment Notification the Permittee certifies that all materials are free from asphalt, petroleum, other hydrocarbons and toxic residues. The Permittee shall not deploy material if notified by the Corps or FWC that the material is questionable. The material needs to be evaluated and released for deployment. Any material that is deemed unacceptable for reef material will be disposed in an approved upland disposal site. Deployment of the material shall not occur until after the end of the 14-day inspection period. The Permittee shall ensure both a copy of the Corps permit and the signed "Florida Artificial Reef Materials Cargo Manifest and Pre-Deployment Notification form" are maintained aboard the deployment vessel at all times during loading, transit and deployment.

5. Post-Deployment Placement Report/As-Built Drawing: No less than 30 days after deployment at the reef site, the Permittee shall transmit by email to the Corps and FWC a complete and signed "Florida Artificial Reef Materials Placement Report and Post- Deployment Notification" form provided in Attachment 2 of the permit. Please note, the Corps requires the latitude and longitude to be accurate within five meters horizontal distance on the post-deployment report. Attached to the report, an as-built drawing that contains the approximate deployment configurations and the height of the material after placement. Depth shall be verified utilizing fathometer, depth sounder, or similar device accurate to within one meter. Also, include information on the condition of the material at

5-7 the time of deployment. The report and drawing shall be limited to a few pages per deployment. Representative photographs and/or video, if available, are encouraged to be submitted.

6. Ownership/Maintenance/Liability: By signing the permit, the Permittee certifies and acknowledges ownership of all artificial reef materials deployed on the reef, accepts responsibility for maintenance of the artificial reef and possesses the ability to assume liability for all damages that may arise with respect to the artificial reef.

7. Assurance of Navigation and Maintenance: The Permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require the removal, relocation, or other alteration, of the structures or work herein authorized, or if in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the Permittee will be required, upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the United States. No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration.

Additional Special Conditions may be required if there are Endangered Species Concerns.

8. Sea Turtle/Sawfish/Sturgeon Guidelines: The Permittee shall comply with the National Marine Fisheries Service's "Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions," which also apply to sturgeon, provided in Attachment 3 of the permit.

9. Manatee Protection: The Permittee shall ensure that wharf fenders are installed to reduce the risk of a vessel crushing a manatee. The wharf fenders shall be installed with appropriate materials to provide sufficient standoff space of at least three feet under compression. Fenders or buoys providing a minimum standoff space of at least three feet under compression shall be utilized between two vessels that are moored together.

The below Special Conditions are for the protection of Right whales. Their critical habitat is on the east coast of Florida starting north of the Florida border and continues south to the Cape Canaveral area.

10. Protected Species Guidance: The Permittee shall comply with the "Vessel Strike Avoidance Measures and Injured or Dead Protected Species Reporting" guidance for marine turtles and marine mammals, provided in Attachment 3 of the permit.

11. Right Whale Protection: Artificial reef material shall not be transported or deployed between November 15 and April 15 for the conservation of the endangered Northern Right Whale within the boundaries of the NMFS designated Northern Right Whale Southeastern United States critical habitat area. Links to the NMFS critical habitat area maps can be found at the following web sites: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/conservation/ch_rightwhale_southeast.pdf, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/shipstrike/msr_placard.pdf.

5-8

Background Information: For decades the Corps permitted the deployment of artificial reefs off the coast of Florida. Deployed material consist of tugs, barges, and concrete material, such as culverts, stormwater junction boxes, power poles, railroad ties, jersey barriers or other similar concrete material. In the 1990s the Corps started working with the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) due to concerns over shipping interests off the east coast of Florida. The agencies worked together to ensure transit lanes were established for both port facilities and military bases. The shrimping industry also became interested in the proposed location of reef sites because river shrimping is limited and off-shore shrimping became more restrictive. Needless to say, the siting of artificial reefs has become complex over time due to shipping and fishing interests.

More information about factors considered by the Corps during permit review for Artificial Reefs is located at 33 CFR 322.5 (b). More information regarding the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's program is located at: http://myfwc.com/conservation/saltwater/artificial-reefs/ar-program/.

Corps Regulatory Jurisdiction for Artificial Reefs Processing Steps The basic form of authorization used by Corps districts is the Individual Permit. Processing such permits involves evaluation of individual, project specific applications in what can be considered three steps: pre-application consultation (for major projects), formal project review and decision making.

You are encouraged to contact the local Corps of Engineers field office in your area prior to making a permit application. Pre-application consultation usually involves one or more meetings between an applicant, Corps district staff, interested resource agencies (federal, state and/or local), and sometimes the interested public. The basic purpose of such meetings is to provide for informal discussions about the pros and cons of a proposal before an applicant makes irreversible commitments of resources (funds, detailed designs, etc.). The process is designed to provide the applicant with an assessment of the viability of some of the more obvious alternatives available to accomplish the project purpose, to discuss measures for reducing the impacts of the project, and to inform him of the factors the Corps must consider in its decision making process. By discussing the work prior to submitting an application, your application can be processed more efficiently.

Helpful Hints for Submitting a Permit Application:

This information will assist individuals in identifying and acquiring permits for projects affecting waters of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Hopefully, this information will minimize not only the time, effort and expense needed to accomplish projects, but will also help to lessen any adverse impact a project may have on the aquatic environment.

5-9 If you have questions about the extent of wetlands on your site, please contact your local field office to arrange for a wetland jurisdictional determination or a site review. This will allow you to plan your project to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands where possible. Pre-application meetings or a phone call to your local field office may be necessary or helpful to determine the extent of the project and what measures might need to be taken into consideration during your project design.

Please provide clear drawings. Do not clutter the drawings with extraneous information. A simple drawing which clearly shows the project is easier to copy and will be more readable by the time a permit decision is finally reached. Remember, these drawings must be copied for publication in the Public Notice.

It is very important that you provide complete information and details of the project. The following information is required for review by the Corps:  Name, address, and phone number of applicant.  Complete description of the proposed project, including the purpose, type and quantity of material to be discharged.  All related activities. Is this a multiphase project? Have additional permits been applied for or received?  A list of all adjacent property owners and their addresses.  The project location. This should be clearly marked on a road map and a description of the directions should be included. In addition to the map and directions, you should submit the section, township and range and the latitude and longitude of the site.  Has the application been signed?  Be sure to include a full set of drawings on 8.5 inch by 11 inch format. These should include plan view, section view, elevation view, profile and grade drawings. Please use match lines where necessary.

After the application is received by the Corps, it will be assigned an identification number and reviewed for completeness. A request for additional information may be sent to notify you of any additional information which may be necessary for the Corps to review your proposed project. Then within 15 days of receiving all the required information, a public notice will be issued with a 15- to 30- day comment period. The proposal is then reviewed by the Corps, local, state and federal agencies, special interest groups and the general public.

After the comment period, the Corps reviews all of the comments received and consults with other agencies where appropriate. The Corps may ask for additional information at this time, and a public hearing may be conducted if one has been specifically requested and a decision has been made that there is a need.

The project manager evaluates the impacts of the project and all comments received, negotiates necessary modifications of the project if required, and drafts appropriate documentation to support a recommended permit decision. The permit decision document includes a discussion of the environmental impacts of the project, the findings of the public interest review process, and any special evaluation required by the type of activity such as compliance determinations with the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines or the ocean dumping criteria.

5-10 When all considerations are satisfied, the District Engineer decides to either issue or deny the permit application. If a denial is warranted, you will receive a written explanation of the reason for denial.

Fees are required for any issued individual permit and consist of $10.00 for individual, non- commercial projects, and $100.00 for commercial projects.

The Corps makes every effort to process Individual Permit applications within 120 days of the date a complete application is submitted. In some cases, such as controversial projects or projects dealing with endangered species concerns, the processing time may be greater than 120 days.

Permits can be issued with special conditions. When a Standard Permit or Letter of Permission (LOP) is issued, a Self-Certification Form is included. When the authorized activity and or mitigation is completed, the permittee is required to fill out the form and mail it to the Enforcement Branch. This is a special condition attached to all IPs and LOPs and assists our Enforcement Branch with permit compliance.

Survey Information that may be required:  X and Y Coordinates  Hydrographic/Bathymetric Survey  Seagrass Survey Protocol

5-11 Appendix 6

Example Reef Area Selection and Reef Monitoring Methods

Remote Sensing Remote sensing seeks to identify any features that might disqualify the site as a future artificial reef area. These features include submerged natural resources such as natural hardbottom or man-made materials creating an artificial reef. The exact location of any anomaly is noted and is further investigated by a diver or underwater camera operator. If a camera is available and water quality allows, this method is preferable to a dive for investigating a site or a portion of a site. Sending a diver down is more expensive and time consuming, particularly if the anomalies are spread out over a large area (e.g., ¼ nautical mile square site). Generally, significant anomalies must be avoided by at least 250 feet unless it can be verified that the anomaly is an artifact of bottom conditions (e.g., a thick shell hash, which often creates a reflection similar to that of low relief hardbottom).

Site Dive Identification of features by scan is then followed up, if possible, with a site dive. The site dive has two purposes: to verify that no disqualifying features exist and to assess whether the surface sediments are sufficiently firm to support the artificial reef materials.

Anomaly Inspection A diver must go to the anomaly location and make observations, and if water quality allows, take photographs. If the anomaly is a natural feature, artificial reef deployments must avoid the location by at least 250 feet. If the anomaly is random “trash” items like washing machines, tires, etc., the diver should record, photograph, and report to the dive team. The dive team should discuss the findings with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and consider whether it is most appropriate to avoid the material or remove it from the site.

Sediment Testing Sediment testing is relatively simple. At a set of locations, a diver thrusts an iron or brass rod into the sediment until significant resistance occurs. A very hard substrate may allow penetrate of a few inches to about ½ foot. A soft but probably acceptable sediment may allow penetrate of one to three feet. Penetration deeper than two feet is an indicator that the site is insufficiently solid for reef deployment.

Reef areas easiest to permit and most commonly constructed recently in Florida are ¼ nautical mile square sites (1,516 feet on each side). For projects desiring grant funding, FWC requires a 150-foot buffer between the edge of an artificial reef area and the edge of any reef structure.

The diver should test several locations within the identified future artificial reef area. 1. The initial dive should occur 150 feet inside the future reef area at one corner of the area. a. The diver should test that location, and move out 100 feet toward the center of the reef area, test again, move another 100 feet, and test again. i. Each test will consist of three probings within the immediate area (about a 10- foot radius around the diver) ii. Record each location using DGPS. Record all three test results in each location. 2. After completing the first area, the diver should move to the remaining three corners of the reef area and repeat the same tests.

6-1 3. After completing the corners, the diver should go to the center of the reef area. a. Probe the center area three times and record the location and probe results. b. After completing the probes at the center, move out along each of three lines 150 feet from the center location and probe three times. Orient each line 120 degrees from the two, assuming the initial location is the center of a circle.

If any of the areas are found unsuitable for use, the dive team should review the results and recommend additional testing to shift the area (if the data suggest this could identify suitable sediments) or recommend relocation of the future reef area coordinates and additional remote sensing and additional diving.

Notably, there are numerous methodologies for verifying a site is suitable for artificial reef deployment. The information above presents a single method for site suitability verification and should not be considered the sole methodology.

Details of Construction and Physical Monitoring The footprint location, length, width, and height of each newly constructed artificial reef is a required component of the construction process and provides a baseline for assessment of reef stability over time.

Measurements of the newly constructed reef should occur as soon as possible. If time allows, a measurement of the maximum relief should be performed with the construction barge still on site, in case the newly constructed reef exceeds the maximum elevation. The contractor should be prepared to have the equipment necessary to move material off the top of a new deployment to reduce the elevation. This would likely require a crane and sufficient wire to reach the bottom and wrap around a newly deployed object. A diver would take the wire down and secure it to the material. The diver would then move out of the way while the crane operator picks up the material, moves it a sufficient distance, and slowly lowers it to the desired location. The diver can inform the crane operator the distance necessary to move the material but must not remain in the area while the crane is operating. The diver would then unhook the wire. If necessary, this process would be repeated until the appropriate elevation was achieved.

The basic measurements of the reef footprint - the maximum elevation and spread of the reef materials on the ocean floor - should occur on each monitoring dive.

Details of Biological Monitoring Data Recording Form Biological monitoring will occur via the FWC monitoring form (Figure 1), carried by the diver, and filled out during the dive. As divers become more knowledgeable, they may alter the methods described below, include additional information in their observations, and provide supplemental notes.

Divers should receive training in fish identification and in identification of attached flora and fauna. The accurate description of these species and assemblages, combined with photographs, are the best evidence of the success of artificial reef development (Figure 2).

The divers will require the following:  A 100-meter (300-foot) tape

6-2  Waterproof data recording forms (three per reef) on a clipboard with wax pencil or other waterproof writing tool  GPS device or buoy markers to record locations as they move through the site

On the initial dive, the dive team will also require stakes for marking transect start and finish points.

Monitoring Methods A large variety of monitoring methods exist, but for initial monitoring, simple, repeatable steps should occur. Over time, these methods may be modified and improved as divers gain knowledge and experience. For the steps below, the artificial reef is assumed to be roughly circular with a maximum elevation in the center of the circle. However, if the shape is more elongate with a ridge running the long axis of the reef, the method below will work equally well.

1. Select three roughly equally spaced locations toward the outside of the reef. The center location should be oriented roughly in line with the peak of the reef and center of the mass of the reef. The other two locations should occur roughly 2/3 the distance between the peak and the edge of the reef. 2. Place permanent, clearly visible stakes or other markers at each location. Place a permanent marker name on each stake or marker. Record the names and GPS/buoy locations 3. Select and record a compass heading that will lead through the center of the reef. Use that same heading as the direction to survey from each of the other points. 4. Stretch the tape along the transect to the end of the reef. At the end of the transect place a permanent stake, permanently labeled with the transect name. The stretched tape will provide the path to swim along and the distance from the beginning of the tape. a. In subsequent dives, the team will secure that tape at the beginning stake, stretch the tape along the transect and secure it, then swim the transect along the tape, removing the tape at the end of the swim and rewinding it on the spool. 5. Take a photograph at each stake, pointing along the transect heading and 180 degrees away from the transect heading. 6. Starting at one of the side stakes, swim along the selected heading, scanning an approximate 15- foot swath (7.5 feet to either side of the diver). 7. Record observations at the stake, and every 25 – 50 feet along the transect for 200 feet (that should bring the diver to the end of a typical reef deployment). Permanently mark the location as a photograph point. Take four photos, two parallel to the transect in opposite directions, two perpendicular to the transect in opposite directions. The camera should be angled at 45º and held about 3 feet (or somewhat less depending on visibility) focused on the reef fouling community. 8. Return to the original stake location, move to the second stake, and repeat the process. Use a new data sheet and record the identification name or number of the starting point stake. 9. After the dive a. Make copies of the original datasheets b. Create a fourth, master datasheet that summarizes and compiles the findings of the three sheets. This must be done by the diver, as there will be judgment involved in estimating the overall density of fishes as well as species identifications.

6-3

Figure 1. FWC Monitoring Form

6-4

Figure 2. FWC Fish Census Form

6-5