DOCSLIB.ORG

Winter Shorebird Survey, 1994

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Winter Shorebird Survey, 1994 Winter Shorebird Survey FINAL PERFORMANCE REPORT November 1, 1993–March 1, 1994 Gary L. Sprandel Jeffery A. Gore David T. Cobb February 1997 Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600 Winter Shorebird Survey Gary L. Sprandel1 Jeffery A. Gore2 David T. Cobb1 1Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Route 7, Box 3055 Quincy, FL 32351 2Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission 3911 Highway 2321 Panama City, FL 32409 Final Performance Report November 1, 1993–March 1, 1994 Survey and monitoring project 7704 February 1997 Suggested citation: Sprandel, G. L., J. A. Gore, and D. T. Cobb. 1997. Winter shorebird survey. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Comm. Final Perf. Rep. Tallahassee. 162 pp. + vi. ii WINTER SHOREBIRD SURVEY GARY L. SPRANDEL1 JEFFERY A. GORE2 DAVID T. COBB1 1Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Route 7, Box 3055, Quincy, FL 32351 2Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 3911 Highway 2321, Panama City, FL 32409 Abstract: We surveyed the coast of Florida in winter 1993–94 to identify important sites for wintering shorebirds. From November to mid-December 1993, we identified 273 sites from the ground and 217 sites from aircraft. Indices of biological importance and potential for adverse impacts were developed and applied to these initial sites. The 60 sites with the highest biological ranking were visited at least 4 more times between mid-December 1993 and 1 March 1994 and we counted 134,442 shorebirds of 20 species during these visits. Of the top 60 sites, 53 were on Florida’s west coast. Nine sites had very high biological scores: 6 near Tampa Bay, 2 in Florida Bay, and 1 near Apalachicola Bay. Eighteen sites had a moderate or high potential for large numbers of shorebirds to be impacted by human activities. Most were in Tampa Bay or on nearby barrier islands. The number of birds counted at each of the 60 study sites varied widely among visits (mean coefficient of variation [CV] for all shorebirds counted on a site visit was 0.86; when counts were grouped by species, the mean CV of all counts was 1.5). Increasing the number of visits at a site did not reduce the CV for total shorebirds counted. Only for a few sites could the CV be reduced by using just counts made during specific tidal conditions. We prepared power analysis procedures to predict the number of visits required to detect a population trend. Simulations indicated that with a CV of 0.6 at least 5 visits per year for 10 years would be required to detect a 10% annual decline in shorebird numbers at an Alpha of 0.05. At that rate, monitoring any but the most important sites would likely be impractical. We recommend monitoring, at a minimum, the 9 most important sites plus at least 2 sites in each coastal region 4 times each winter. Monitoring other locally important or easily accessible sites would be valuable. Additional surveys, with at least 2 visits per site, would provide a more accurate view of important sites for wintering shorebirds in Florida, particularly in Tampa Bay, Florida Bay, and Northeast Florida. In addition to monitoring bird numbers, conservation actions such as educating visitors about shorebirds, posting areas against disturbance, monitoring contaminants, managing water levels, and seeking acquisition or other formal protection should be initiated. We identify general conservation needs for the 29 most important winter shorebird sites. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . .iii INTRODUCTION . .1 STUDY AREA . .2 METHODS . .4 Pilot Study Surveys . .4 Statewide Surveys . .5 Accuracy of Survey Results . .10 Ranking the Final Sites . .11 Monitoring Winter Shorebird Numbers . .16 Trend Detection . .17 Power and Sample Size . .17 Detection of Statewide Trends from Multiple Sites . .19 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . .19 Shorebird Distribution and Abundance . .19 Influences upon Local Distribution and Abundance . .53 Accuracy of Survey Results . .64 Ranking Winter Shorebird Sites . .74 Potential Impact to Sites . .84 Monitoring Winter Shorebird Numbers . .93 Trend Detection . .100 Power and Sample Size . .102 Conclusions about Trend Detection . .106 Detection of Overall Trends from Multiple Sites . .108 Sampling Sites within the State . .108 What a Trend at a Site in Florida Means . .110 MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS . .110 Conservation of Shorebirds . .110 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . .118 LITERATURE CITED . .119 APPENDICES . .135 v WINTER SHOREBIRD SURVEY—Sprandel et al. 1 INTRODUCTION Shorebirds comprise a diverse group of short-legged wading birds that inhabit the margins of inland or coastal waters (Hayman et al. 1986). Most shorebird species breed in interior locations, often at high latitudes, and move to coastal areas in the nonbreeding season (Burger 1984a). Many species that breed in arctic regions of North America migrate along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts on their way to more distant wintering grounds. Florida serves as a feeding and resting stop each spring and fall for many of these migrating shorebirds, but for others, Florida is the winter destination. At least 25 species reside in the state during winter and the conservation of these wintering species is the focus of this report. The current and future status of Florida’s shorebird populations is of concern because much of the coast has been developed for human use and is vulnerable to further development, pollution, or disturbance (Fernald and Purdum 1992). Because of these threats and the lack of knowledge of shorebird population sizes or trends, the Bureau of Nongame Wildlife of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC) identified shorebirds as a group of coastal wildlife species needing conservation attention and, especially, surveys of their distribution and abundance (Millsap et al. 1990, 1991). The current assessment of shorebird abundance and distribution in Florida focused on wintering birds rather than breeding or migrating birds. Because few species breed in the state, surveys of breeding shorebirds would have addressed few species or individuals. Migrating shorebirds are more common, but reliable estimates of migrating shorebirds are difficult to obtain because of the high daily variation and turnover in bird numbers (Thompson 1993). Wintering shorebirds are more common than breeding shorebirds in Florida and more easily counted than migrants. More importantly, they may be most in need of attention. Impacts from habitat degradation, pollution, and human disturbance may affect shorebirds most severely on their winter range because most species spend considerable time on the wintering grounds and the energy stress due to severe weather and scarce food is often greatest in winter (Baker and Baker 1973, Senner and Howe 1984). For these reasons, we decided that conservation efforts directed toward populations of wintering shorebirds offered the greatest benefits to the greatest number of shorebirds in Florida. We focused on coastal habitats because we assumed that coastal sites supported more shorebirds and presented more potential impacts than interior sites and because access to many interior sites was limited. 2 FLORIDA GAME AND FRESH WATER FISH COMMISSION FINAL PERFORMANCE REPORT The objectives of this study were to: (1) identify, by species, the relative distribution and abundance of wintering shorebirds along Florida’s coast, (2) rank shorebird roosting and foraging sites based upon biological importance and vulnerability, (3) describe the variation in estimates of the number of wintering shorebirds and discuss its effects upon monitoring trends in wintering populations, and (4) suggest needs and means for conserving the most important sites. STUDY AREA The coast of Florida is not ecologically homogeneous (Livingston 1984); therefore, we divided the coast into 6 distinct regions based upon ecological conditions that we suspected would differentially influence shorebird abundance (Fig. 1). The factors we evaluated included tidal variation, water depth, abundance of aquatic vegetation, influx of fresh water, presence of protected waters, and availability of sandflats or mudflats. These factors are not independent and they affect not only the physical features shorebirds require for roosting and feeding but also the conditions necessary for their invertebrate prey to be abundant. The Panhandle coast (Fig. 1) has moderate-energy waves, diurnal tides, and a broad salinity gradient (Fernald and Purdum 1992). This coastal region is also distinguished by the abundance of largely undeveloped barrier islands, broad bays, and large rivers (Wolfe et al. 1988). In contrast to the Panhandle coast, the Big Bend coast (Fig. 1) represents a very low-energy wave system with broad shallow waters, expansive salt marsh, and freshwater influx from smaller rivers and streams (Livingston 1984). The southwest coast (Fig. 1), like the Panhandle, has many barrier islands, large bays, and features moderate-energy waves. Winter temperatures, however, are warmer than in the Panhandle, and mangroves, which are absent to the north, line much of the shoreline of bays and inlets (Fernald and Purdum 1992). Most of the southwest coast, particularly along the sandy beaches, has been highly developed for human use. The Everglades coast, at the southern tip of the Florida peninsula (Fig. 1), is characterized by narrow mangrove-lined shores, sediments with relatively high organic content and shell or coral fragments, and low-energy waves (Fernald and Purdum 1992). We included the Florida Keys in this region, even though the outer coast of the Keys represents a high-energy wave system more typical of the coast to the north. WINTER SHOREBIRD SURVEY—Sprandel et al. 3 We defined 2 survey regions along the Atlantic coast (Fig. 1) and both regions have high-energy waves and semidiurnal tides. The southeast coast (Fig. 1), extending from northern Biscayne Bay (Dade County) to Sebastian Inlet (Indian River County), is characterized by narrow shorelines that have been intensively developed. The northeast coast (Fig. 1) has colder winter temperatures, greater tidal fluctuations, and more bays or lagoons than the southeast coast (Fernald and Purdum 1992).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Physical Description and Analysis of the Variability of Salinity and Oxygen in Apalachicola Bay Eric Mortenson
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2013 Physical Description and Analysis of the Variability of Salinity and Oxygen in Apalachicola Bay Eric Mortenson Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE VARIABILITY OF SALINITY AND OXYGEN IN APALACHICOLA BAY By ERIC MORTENSON A Thesis submitted to the Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Degree Awarded: Summer Semester, 2013 Eric Mortenson defended this thesis on July 1, 2013. The members of the supervisory committee were: Kevin Speer Professor Directing Thesis Eric Chicken University Representative William Dewar Committee Member Mark Bourassa Committee Member William Landing Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the thesis has been approved in accordance with the university requirements. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks to Kevin Speer and the members of my committee. This research was supported by funding from Deep-C, GCOOS, and NGI. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ListofFigures ....................................... vi Abstract........................................... x 1 SALINITY BUDGET OF APALACHICOLA BAY 1 1.1 Introduction and Background . 1 1.2 SalinityandOysterProductivity . 4 1.3 Data........................................ 6 1.3.1 Data Gaps and Fouling . 8 1.3.2 InstrumentAccuracy........................... 9 1.4 Physical Observations of Apalachicola Bay . 9 1.4.1 Hydrographic Sections Surrounding Bay . 9 1.4.2 Density Structure within Apalachicola Bay . 10 1.4.3 Property Profiles at Site A .
    [Show full text]
  • FORGOTTEN COAST® VISITOR GUIDE Apalachicola
    FORGOTTEN COAST® VISITOR GUIDE APALACHICOLA . ST. GEORGE ISLAND . EASTPOINT . SURROUNDING AREAS OFFICIAL GUIDE OF THE APALACHICOLA BAY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE APALACHICOLABAY.ORG 850.653-9419 2 apalachicolabay.org elcome to the Forgotten Coast, a place where you can truly relax and reconnect with family and friends. We are commonly referred to as WOld Florida where You will find miles of pristine secluded beaches, endless protected shallow bays and marshes, and a vast expanse of barrier islands and forest lands to explore. Discover our rich maritime culture and history and enjoy our incredible fresh locally caught seafood. Shop in a laid back Furry family members are welcome at our beach atmosphere in our one of a kind locally owned and operated home rentals, hotels, and shops and galleries. shops. There are also dog-friendly trails and Getting Here public beaches for dogs on The Forgotten Coast is located on the Gulf of Mexico in leashes. North Florida’s panhandle along the Big Bend Scenic Byway; 80 miles southwest of Tallahassee and 60 miles east of Panama City. The area features more than Contents 700 hundred miles of relatively undeveloped coastal Apalachicola ..... 5 shoreline including the four barrier islands of St. George, Dog, Cape St. George and St. Vincent. The Eastpoint ........ 8 coastal communities of Apalachicola, St. George St. George Island ..11 Island, Eastpoint, Carrabelle and Alligator Point are accessible via US Highway 98. By air, the Forgotten Things To Do .....18 Coast can be reached through commercial airports in Surrounding Areas 16 Tallahassee http://www.talgov.com/airport/airporth- ome.aspx and Panama City www.iflybeaches.comand Fishing & boating .
    [Show full text]
  • SEBASTIAN RIVER SALINITY REGIME Report of a Study
    Special Publication SJ94-SP1 SEBASTIAN RIVER SALINITY REGIME Report of a Study Part I. Review of Goals, Policies, and Objectives Part II: Segmentation Parts III and IV: Recommended Targets (Contract 92W-177) Submitted to the: St. Johns River Water Management District by the: Mote Marine Laboratory 1600 Thompson Parkway Sarasota, Florida 34236 Ernest D. Estevez, Ph.D. and Michael J. Marshall, Ph.D. Principal Investigators EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the third and final report of a project concerning desirable salinity conditions in the Sebastian River and adjacent Indian River Lagoon. A perception exists among resource managers that the present salinity regime of the Sebastian River system is undesirable. The St. Johns River Water Management District desires to learn the nature of an "environmentally desirable and acceptable salinity regime" for the Sebastian River and adjacent waters of the Indian River Lagoon. The District can then calculate discharges needed to produce the desired salinity regime, or conclude that optimal discharges are beyond its control. The values of studying salinity and making it a management priority in estuaries are four-fold. First, salinity has intrinsic significance as an important regulatory factor. Second, changes in the salinity regime of an estuary tend to be relatively easy to handle from a computational and practical point of view. Third, eliminating salinity as a problem clears the way for studies of, and corrective actions for, more insidious factors. Fourth, the strong covariance of salinity and other factors that tend to be management problems in estuaries makes salinity a useful tool in their analysis. Freshwater inflow and salinity are integral aspects of estuaries.
    [Show full text]
  • A Addison Bay, 64 Advanced Sails, 351
    FL07index.qxp 12/7/2007 2:31 PM Page 545 Index A Big Marco Pass, 87 Big Marco River, 64, 84-86 Addison Bay, 64 Big McPherson Bayou, 419, 427 Advanced Sails, 351 Big Sarasota Pass, 265-66, 262 Alafia River, 377-80, 389-90 Bimini Basin, 137, 153-54 Allen Creek, 395-96, 400 Bird Island (off Alafia River), 378-79 Alligator Creek (Punta Gorda), 209-10, Bird Key Yacht Club, 274-75 217 Bishop Harbor, 368 Alligator Point Yacht Basin, 536, 542 Blackburn Bay, 254, 260 American Marina, 494 Blackburn Point Marina, 254 Anclote Harbors Marina, 476, 483 Bleu Provence Restaurant, 78 Anclote Isles Marina, 476-77, 483 Blind Pass Inlet, 420 Anclote Key, 467-69, 471 Blind Pass Marina, 420, 428 Anclote River, 472-84 Boca Bistro Harbor Lights, 192 Anclote Village Marina, 473-74 Boca Ciega Bay, 409-28 Anna Maria Island, 287 Boca Ciega Yacht Club, 412, 423 Anna Maria Sound, 286-88 Boca Grande, 179-90 Apollo Beach, 370-72, 376-77 Boca Grande Bakery, 181 Aripeka, 495-96 Boca Grande Bayou, 188-89, 200 Atsena Otie Key, 514 Boca Grande Lighthouse, 184-85 Boca Grande Lighthouse Museum, 179 Boca Grande Marina, 185-87, 200 B Boca Grande Outfitters, 181 Boca Grande Pass, 178-79, 199-200 Bahia Beach, 369-70, 374-75 Bokeelia Island, 170-71, 197 Barnacle Phil’s Restaurant, 167-68, 196 Bowlees Creek, 278, 297 Barron River, 44-47, 54-55 Boyd Hill Nature Trail, 346 Bay Pines Marina, 430, 440 Braden River, 326 Bayou Grande, 359-60, 365 Bradenton, 317-21, 329-30 Best Western Yacht Harbor Inn, 451 Bradenton Beach Marina, 284, 300 Big Bayou, 345, 362-63 Bradenton Yacht Club, 315-16,
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Division of Law
    Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Division of Law Enforcement Weekly Report Patrol, Protect, Preserve August 16, 2019 through August 29, 2019 This report represents some events the FWC handled over the past two weeks; however, it does not include all actions taken by the Division of Law Enforcement. NORTHWEST REGION CASES BAY COUNTY Officer T. Basford was working the area known as North Shore when he noticed a couple of vehicles parked on the shoulder of the road. He later saw two individuals coming towards the vehicles with fishing gear. Officer Basford conducted a resource inspection and found the two men to be in possession of two redfish. One individual admitted to catching both fish. He was issued a citation for possession of over daily bag limit of redfish. GADSDEN COUNTY Lieutenant Holcomb passed a truck with a single passenger sitting on the side of the road with the window down. He conducted a welfare check and found the individual in possession of a loaded 30-30 rifle and an empty corn bag in the cab of the truck. Further investigation led to locating corn scattered along the roadway shoulders adjacent to the individual’s truck. The individual admitted to placing the corn along the roadway and was cited accordingly. GULF COUNTY Officers T. Basford and Wicker observed a vessel in the Gulf County Canal near the Highland View Bridge and conducted a resource inspection. During the inspection Officer Basford located several fish fillets which were determined to be redfish, sheepshead and black drum. The captain of the vessel was issued citations for the violation of fish not being landed in whole condition.
    [Show full text]
  • Currently the Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems
    CRITICALLY ERODED BEACHES IN FLORIDA Updated, June 2009 BUREAU OF BEACHES AND COASTAL SYSTEMS DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION STATE OF FLORIDA Foreword This report provides an inventory of Florida's erosion problem areas fronting on the Atlantic Ocean, Straits of Florida, Gulf of Mexico, and the roughly seventy coastal barrier tidal inlets. The erosion problem areas are classified as either critical or noncritical and county maps and tables are provided to depict the areas designated critically and noncritically eroded. This report is periodically updated to include additions and deletions. A county index is provided on page 13, which includes the date of the last revision. All information is provided for planning purposes only and the user is cautioned to obtain the most recent erosion areas listing available. This report is also available on the following web site: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/beaches/uublications/tech-rut.htm APPROVED BY Michael R. Barnett, P.E., Bureau Chief Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems June, 2009 Introduction In 1986, pursuant to Sections 161.101 and 161.161, Florida Statutes, the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Beaches and Shores (now the Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems) was charged with the responsibility to identify those beaches of the state which are critically eroding and to develop and maintain a comprehensive long-term management plan for their restoration. In 1989, a first list of erosion areas was developed based upon an abbreviated definition of critical erosion. That list included 217.6 miles of critical erosion and another 114.8 miles of noncritical erosion statewide.
    [Show full text]
  • Southwest Coast Red Tide Status Report June 4, 2021
    Red Tide Status - Florida Southwest Coast June 04, 2021 Present Status: The red tide organism, Karenia brevis, persists in Southwest Florida. K. brevis was observed at background and low concentrations in two samples collected from Pinellas County, very low to medium concentrations in seven samples collected from Hillsborough County, very low to medium concentrations in 18 samples collected from Manatee County, background concentrations in one sample collected from Sarasota County, background to low concentrations in 15 samples collected from and offshore of Lee County, and background to medium concentrations in 10 samples collected from and offshore of Collier County. Fish kills suspected to be related to red tide were reported over the past week in Pinellas, Manatee, Lee, and Collier counties. For more details, please visit: https://myfwc.com/research/saltwater/health/fish-kills- hotline/. Respiratory irritation was reported over the past week in Pinellas County (6/1 at Pass-a-Grille) and Collier County. For current information, please visit: https://visitbeaches.org/. Forecasts by the USF-FWC Collaboration for Prediction of Red Tides for Pinellas to northern Monroe counties predict northern movement of surface waters and minimal transport of subsurface waters over the next four days. Date Alongshore County Offshore Site Location Collector Collected Inshore Pinellas - 06/01 not present - Clearwater Beach Pier 60 FWRI Grand Bellagio Condo Dock - 06/01 not present - FWRI (Old Tampa Bay) Bravo Drive; S of (Allens - 06/02 not present -
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Reports
    Stock boundaries for spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus) in Florida based on population genetic structure Item Type monograph Authors Seyoum, Seifu; Tringali, Michael D.; Barthel, Brandon L.; Villanova, Vicki; Puchulutegui, Cecilia; Davis, Michelle C.; Alvarez, Alicia C. Publisher Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute Download date 04/10/2021 17:27:27 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/41131 Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute TECHNICAL REPORTS Stock Boundaries for Spotted Seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus) in Florida Based on Population Genetic Structure Seifu Seyoum, Michael D. Tringali, Brandon L. Barthel, Vicki Villanova Cecilia Puchulutegui, Michelle C. Davis, Alicia C. Alvarez Rick Scott Governor of Florida Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Nick Wiley Executive Director The Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) is a division of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). The FWC is “managing fish and wildlife resources for their long-term well-being and the benefit of people.” The FWRI conducts applied research pertinent to managing fishery resources and species of special concern in Florida. Programs at FWRI focus on obtaining the data and information that managers of fish, wildlife, and ecosystem resources need to sustain Florida’s natural resources. Topics include managing recreationally and commercially important fish and wildlife species; preserving, managing, and restoring terrestrial, freshwater, and marine habitats; collecting information related to population status, habitat requirements, life history, and recovery needs of upland and aquatic species; synthesizing ecological, habitat, and socioeconomic information; and developing educational and outreach programs for classroom educators, civic organizations, and the public. The FWRI publishes three series: Memoirs of the Hourglass Cruises, Florida Marine Research Publications, and FWRI Technical Reports.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies on the Lagoons of East Centeral Florida
    1974 (11th) Vol.1 Technology Today for The Space Congress® Proceedings Tomorrow Apr 1st, 8:00 AM Studies On The Lagoons Of East Centeral Florida J. A. Lasater Professor of Oceanography, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Florida T. A. Nevin Professor of Microbiology Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Lasater, J. A. and Nevin, T. A., "Studies On The Lagoons Of East Centeral Florida" (1974). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 2. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-1974-11th-v1/session-8/2 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDIES ON THE LAGOONS OF EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA Dr. J. A. Lasater Dr. T. A. Nevin Professor of Oceanography Professor of Microbiology Florida Institute of Technology Melbourne, Florida ABSTRACT There are no significant fresh water streams entering the Indian River Lagoon south of the Ponce de Leon Inlet; Detailed examination of the water quality parameters of however, the Halifax River estuary is just north of the the lagoons of East Central Florida were begun in 1969. Inlet. The principal sources of fresh water entering the This investigation was subsequently expanded to include Indian River Lagoon appear to be direct land runoff and a other aspects of these waters. General trends and a number of small man-made canals. The only source of statistical model are beginning to emerge for the water fresh water entering the Banana River is direct land run­ quality parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • Trail Maps and Guide
    1 Segment 5 Crooked River/St. Marks Refuge Emergency contact information: 911 Franklin County Sheriff’s Office: 850-670-8500 Wakulla County Sheriff’s Office: 850-745-7100 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 24-hour wildlife emergency/boating under the influence hotline: 1-888-404-3922 Begin: St. George Island State Park End: Aucilla River launch Distance: 100-103 miles Duration: 8-9 days Special Considerations: Extreme caution is advised in paddling open water areas from St. George Island to Carrabelle and in paddling across Ochlockonee Bay. Introduction From traditional fishing communities to wild stretches of shoreline, tidal creeks and rivers, this segment is one where paddlers can steep themselves in “Old Florida.” This is also the only segment where paddlers can follow two scenic rivers for a significant distance: the Crooked and Ochlockonee rivers. The Crooked River is the only area along the trail where paddlers have a good chance of spotting a Florida black bear. Several hundred black bears roam the Tate’s Hell/Apalachicola National Forest area, one of six major black bear havens in the state. Florida black bears are protected under Florida law. Keep food and garbage tightly packed and hanging in a bag from a tree branch at least ten feet off the ground. In paddling the Crooked River paddlers will enjoy a slice of the untrammeled 200,000- plus-acre Tate's Hell State Forest. This scenic route also features Ochlockonee River State Park where there is a full-service campground a short distance from the water. For camping reservations, visit Reserve America or call (800) 326-3521.
    [Show full text]
  • Generic Amendment for Addressing Essential Fish Habitat Requirements in the Following Fishery Management Plans of the Gulf of Mexico
    Generic Amendment for Addressing Essential Fish Habitat Requirements in the following Fishery Management Plans of the Gulf of Mexico: < Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico, United States Waters < Red Drum Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico < Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico < Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources (Mackerels) in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic < Stone Crab Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico < Spiny Lobster in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic < Coral and Coral Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico (Includes Environmental Assessment) Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council 3018 U.S. Highway 301 North, Suite 1000 Tampa, Florida 33619-2266 813-228-2815 October 1998 This is a publication of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Award No. NA87FC0003. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE ................................................................................................................... 1 ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................... 10 CONVERSION CHART ....................................................................................... 12 GLOSSARY .......................................................................................................... 13 1.0 PREFACE ..................................................................................................... 20 1.1 List of Preparers ........................................................................... 20 1.2 List of Persons and Agencies
    [Show full text]
  • 2004.Phlipsej.Pdf
    Journal of Coastal Research SI 45 93-109 West Patm Beach, Florida Fall 2004 A Comparison of Water Quality and Hydrodynamic Characteristics of the Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve and the Indian River Lagoon of Florida*" Edward J. Phlips'^'t, Natalie Lovev, Susan Badylakt, Phyllis Hansent, Jean Lockwoodt, Chandy V. Johnij:, and Richard GIeeson§ tDepartment of F'iaheries and iSt. Johns River Water §Guana Tolomato Matanzas Aquatic Sciences Management District National Estuarine University of Florida Palatka, FL 32177, U.S.A. Research Reserve Gainesville, FL 32653, Marineland, FL 32080, U.S.A. U.S.A. ABSTRACTI PHLIPS, E.J,; LOVE, N; BADYLAK, S.; HANSEN. P.; LOCKWOOD, J.; JOHN, C.V.. and GLEESON, R,. 2004. A Comparison of Water Quality and Hydrodynainii- Charairteristits nf the Guana TolomaW Matanzas National Estuarine Research Rfservi? and the Indian River I.agonn of Florida. Journal nfConslat Research, .SI(45t. 93-109. West Palm Beach (Klorida). ISSN 0749-U20H. The lagoons that border the evmt coast of the Florida peninxuia pmvide an opportunity to study waU'r chemiBtry and phytoplanktiin oharacteristioB over a wide range of water residence and nutrient load con- ditions. This article include.'! the results of a 2-year study of eight study sites. The northern half of the Hampling range included four saniplinR Bites within the newly estahlished Guana Tiil'imatu Matania.'' Na- tional EHtuarine Research Reserve. The southern half of the sampling range consisted of four study sites distrihuted in ecologically disUntt -Suh-hasins of the Indian River Lagoim. The Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Kwtuarine Keaearch Reserve and Indian Kiver La^joon include estuaries with water residence times ranging from days to months and watersheds with widely differing nutrient load characteristics.
    [Show full text]