DOCSLIB.ORG

United States Department of the Interior

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States Department of the Interior United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE South Florida Ecological Services Office 1339 20" Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 January 6,2005 Colonel Robert M. Carpenter District Engineer U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 701 San Marco Boulevard, Room 372 Jacl<sonville. Florida 32207-8 175 Dear Colonel Carpenter: This document is the Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) biological opinion for 22 single- family dock projects listed below resulting in 25 additional slips within Reaches 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38 of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) Reach Characterization for Florida Waters (Corps 2001) in Charlotte County, Florida. Reach 34 encompasses the waters of Charlotte Harbor (from the mouth of the Myakka River and the Peace River south to Pine Island and west to the Gulf of Mexico), and all connecting tributaries and residential canal systems in Charlotte County, Florida. Reach 35 encompasses the waters of Turtle Bay, Gasparilla Sound, Placida Harbor, the southern portion of Lemon Bay, and all connecting tributaries and residential canal systems in Charlotte County, Florida. Reach 36 encompasses the waters of the Myalka River from approximately 3 miles north of Interstate 75 to Charlotte Harbor and all connecting tributaries and residential canal systems in Sarasota County, Florida. Reach 37 encompasses the waters of the Peace River (from Charlotte Harbor to approximately 2 miles north of State Road 70), and all connecting tributaries and residential canal systems in Charlotte County and Desoto County, Florida. Reach 38 encompasses the waters of Lemon Bay and its connecting tributaries and residential canal systems in Charlotte County and Sarasota County, Florida. Service Log No. Corps Application No. Boat Slips Date Applicant 4- 1-05-PL-9606 SAJ-2004-96 17 10112104 Stan Thurber 4- 1-05-PL-9607 SAJ-2004-96 14 10112104 Joseph Borg 4- 1-05-PL-9608 SAJ-2004-9616 10112104 Mike Murillo 4- 1-05-PL-9609 SAJ-2004-9622 10112104 James Roberts 4- 1-05-PL-96 10 SAJ-2004-9636 10112104 Jolin Bacialc 4- 1-05-PL-96 11 SAJ-2004- 10428 10112104 Peter Strong 4-1 -05-PL-9612 SAJ-2004-9987 10112104 Joe Rajlcovich 4-1 -05-PL-9613 SAJ-2004-9986 10112104 Beverly Linwood 4-1 -05-PL-9614 SAJ-2004-9820 10112104 Steve Poisall 4- 1-05-PL-96 15 SAJ-2004-98 19 10112104 Danny Kett 4- 1-05-PL-96 16 SAJ-2004-9604 10112104 Stuart Valentine 4-1 -05-PL-9617 SAJ-2004-9990 10112104 Nancy Drysdale Service Log No. Corps Application No. Boat Slips Date Applicant 4- 1-05-PL-96 18 SAJ-2004-10233 1 1011 2104 Mark Davison 4- 1-05-PL-9619 SAJ-2004-10231 1 101 12104 Elona Haskell 4- 1-05-PL-9620 SAJ-2004-9635 1 10112104 Robert Ohm 4-1 -05-PL-962 1 SAJ-2004-9615 1 101 12104 Frank Montana 4- 1-05-PL-9622 SAJ-2004-9624 1 1011 2104 Howard Goodrich 4- 1-05-PL-9623 SAJ-2004-9620 1 10112104 Bonnie Eldon 4- 1-05-PL-9624 SAJ-2004-9638 1 10112104 David Palmer 4-1 -05-PL-9625 SAJ-2004-9639 1 101 12/04 Joe Paiiico 4- 1-05-PL-9626 SAJ-2004-9637 1 10112104 Thoin Pettij ohii 4-1-05-PL-10119 SAJ-2004-19 17 (LP-CDO) 2 1210 1104 Patrick Dejong This biological opinion addresses the potential effects of these projects on the southwest subpopulation of the West Indian (= Florida) manatee (Trichechus manatus) (manatee) within Reaches 34,35,36,37, and 38, in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA) (16 U.S.C. 1461 et seq.). No other listed species will be affected by the proposed actions. This biological opinion was prepared based on information provided by the Corps, the Corps' Reach Characterization (Corps 2001), the Florida it/lanatee Recovery Plan (Service 2001), the South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan (Service 1999), data supplied by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and by the Florida Marine Research Institute (FMRI), and other sources of information. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at the Service's South Florida Ecological Services Office in Vero Beach, Florida. CONSULTATION HISTORY On the dates listed above, the Service received public notices from the Corps requesting concurrence on "may affect" determinations for the manatee and initiation of formal consultation for the proposed actions. The proposed actions would authorize the construction of 22 single-family dock projects resulting in 25 slips. BIOLOGICAL OPINION DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIONS The proposed actions would authorize the construction of 22 single-family dock projects resulting in 25 slips in Reaches 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38, in Charlotte County, Florida. To reduce direct construction-related effects to the manatee, the Corps will incorporate Standard Manatee Construction Conditions (FWC 2001) as a condition of the Department of the Army permits, if issued, for the projects listed above. Indirect effects of the projects to the manatee have been ameliorated by providing boater education and manatee awareness programs and brochures to local marinas, State, county, and city public offices, and at local boating events; by establishing and posting appropriate ~nanateespeed zones in the project vicinity; and by providing enforcement of these zones by Federal and local law enforcement agencies. Seagrasses may occur in the project areas. If present, the Corps will require the applicant to avoid impacts to seagrasses by constructing the project based on the Dock Construction Guidelinesfbr Florida developed by the Corps and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) (formerly the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (Corps and NMFS 2001). These proposed actions resulted in "may affect" determinations after processing them through the Corps and Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP) January 2,200 1, Manatee Key. [Note - Service concurrence for the key was provided in a letter dated January 2,20011. The Service acknowledges the Corps' determination of "may affect" for the manatee. We selected the Corps' Reach Characterization as the basis for our geographic area analysis. The Corps compiled existing data relevant to the evaluation of the potential effects of watercraft access projects on manatees. The information contained in the Reach Characterization included manatee use data such as aerial surveys and radio telemetry; manatee habitat characteristics such as warmwater sites, seagrass distributions, and batliymetry; human use characteristics such as relative dock densities, boat densities, and navigation channels; and existing manatee protection measures (speed zones). Throughout Florida, the Corps defined 80 segments or "reaches" based on manatee use, manatee habitat characteristics, and human use characteristics and compiled this information into its Geographic Information System (GIS) database. The Corps also provided the Service with the applicant's completed Manatee Checklist which provides additional site- specific information on the factors defined in the Reach Characterization database. The action area is determined by the reach boundaries that best encompass the direct and indirect effects of the projects under consideration. This reach analysis is supplemented with a county review approach because many factors important to manatee protection are provided at the county level. Manatee Protection Plans (MPP) are produced by counties, manatee speed zones are designated by the State with county participation or by counties directly, and county sheriffs' departments provide enforcement within county boundaries. This combined analysis provides a more holistic evaluation of factors affecting manatees than a piecemeal project-by-project review and also identifies localized threats and options that may be applied to minimize these threats. Action Area The proposed projects are located within Turtle Bay, Gasparilla Sound, Placida Harbor, Lemon Bay, Myakka River, Peace River, Charlotte Harbor, and all connecting tributaries and residential canal systems in Reaches 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38, in Charlotte County, Florida. Vessels using the single-family docks would likely travel through waters of Turtle Bay, Gasparilla Sound, Placida Harbor, Lemon Bay, Myakka River, Peace River, Charlotte Harbor, and the Gulf of Mexico in Charlotte County Florida. These waters closely correspond to the area defined as 35 and 38, by the Corps' Reach Characterization for Florida waters (Corps 2001). Therefore, for the purposes of this consultation, the Service defines the action area for this biological opinion as all waters within Reaches 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38, in Charlotte County, Florida. New watercraft access projects may have a number of direct and indirect effects on manatees and manatee habitat. Direct impacts include potential direct harm or harassment of manatees during construction activities and are generally addressed through application of the Standard Manatee Construction Conditions (http://www.floridaco~~servation.org/psm/permit/construct.htm) codeveloped by the Corps, Service, and FWC. Anticipated direct impacts to habitat, such as the presence of seagrasses within the project footprint are minimized through modifications in the project design during the permit review process andlor the application of Dock Construction Guidelines for Florida developed by the Corps and NOAA Fisheries (Corps and NMFS 2001). These two minimization efforts are routinely included as conditions of Department of the Army permits issued for construction projects in manatee habitat and have previously undergone section 7 consultation. Indirect effects to manatees include effects to routine rnovement and migration patterns to freshwater, foraging, calving, and breeding areas, and associated behavior patterns. Indirect effects also include effects to manatee habitat caused by operation of the proposed watercraft access projects. Construction of the proposed watercraft access projects rnay provide increased access by watercraft to areas frequented by manatees or may alter watercraft traffic patterns in such a way as to increase watercraft-manatee interactions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Fishing Deep in the Biloxi Marsh
    I by Al Rogers Fishing Deep in the Biloxi Marsh nexplored, difficult to reach trout and redfish. The pristine waterways and even harder to navigate, ran through countless passes and into the interior of the Biloxi interior bays before eventually spilling Marsh is believed to be a into even larger nearby bodies of open major factor in the success of fisheries water. from the lower Mississippi River Delta, Spring was in the air. The chill I to Lake Pontchartrain, to the Chandeleur recalled a week earlier was gone. Longer Islands. days warmed the water, driving the Capt. Brian Gagnon looked out over speckled trout and redfish to the surface. the pristine wilderness and inhaleddeeply . In a nearby bay off Bayou Biloxi several It was nearly March, a clear afternoon screeching seagulls hovered over a and this was a long awaited breath of disturbance on the water. In the middle fresh spring air. Seated at the stern of a 14- bays, specks fed aggressively while foot sluff, Gagnon could not have been redfish plowed through the shallows and happier. This was just exactly where the along grass lines. Bay St.Louis,Mississippi native wanted to Gagnon -reached for his chrome be. As far from civilization as he could get. MirrOlure She Dog. Although well worn, "It's hard to believe we haven't seen withdeep slashes from recent battles with or heard another boat or motor in three toothy predators, it was a choice of days," he said. "Three days. When was confidence. Gagnon hit the kill switch, "What'd I tell you?" he asked.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix I: Critical Erosion Report 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan ______
    Appendix I: Critical Erosion Report 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan _______________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX I: Critical Erosion Report _______________________________________________________________________________________ Florida Division of Emergency Management Critically Eroded Beaches In Florida Division of Water Resource Management Florida Department of Environmental Protection August 2016 2600 Blair Stone Rd., MS 3590 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 www.dep.state.fl.us 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 sixty-six coastal barrier tidal inlets. The erosion problem areas are classified as either critical or non-critical and county maps and tables are provided to depict the areas designated critically and non-critically eroded. Many areas have significant historic or contemporary erosion conditions, yet the erosion processes do not currently threaten public or private interests. These areas are therefore designated as non-critically eroded areas and require close monitoring in case conditions become critical. This report, originating in 1989, is periodically updated to include additions and deletions. All information is provided for planning purposes only and the user is cautioned to obtain the most recent erosion areas listing available in the updated critical erosion report of 2016 on pages 4 through 20 or refer to the specific county of interest listed
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 62-302: Surface Water Quality Standards
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. blue – not a standard black – standard TCHAPTER 62-302: WATER QUALITY STANDARDS Effective April 30, 2018 In instances where the EPA has determined that certain provisions are not considered new or revised water quality standards, the Agency has attempted to indicate those in blue text. However, the font color indicated within this document, should not be interpreted as the official position of the Agency, and primarily addresses recent reviews by the EPA. For more detailed explanations on the EPA’s analysis and rationale related to decisions of new or revised water quality standards, see the Agency’s historical decision documents and associated records or contact the appropriate Agency staff. Additionally, arrow boxes found in the margins of this document direct the reader to other new or revised water quality standards which are related to provisions found in Chapter 62-302 but are found in documents outside of the regulations and are generally incorporated by reference. (See Attachments A-E of this document). The State of Florida recently revised the table of surface water criteria set out at section 62-302, F.A.C., to incorporate new human health criteria and designated uses promulgated by the state in 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Simulation of Tidal-Flow, Circulation, and Flushing of the Charlotte Harbor Estuarine System, Florida
    Simulation of Tidal-Flow, Circulation, and Flushing of the Charlotte Harbor Estuarine System, Florida By Carl R. Goodwin U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4153 Prepared in cooperation with the FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Tallahassee, Florida 1996 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Suite 3015 Box 25286 227 N. Bronough Street Denver, CO 80225 Tallahassee, FL 32301 CONTENTS Page Abstract ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 Introduction -------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Purpose and scope ---------------------------------------------------- 2 Previous studies ----------------------------------------------------- 3 Acknowledgments ------------------------------------------------------ 4 Approach ------------------------------------------------------------------ 4 Description of study area ------------------------------------------------- 5 Physical characteristics --------------------------------------------- 6 Hydrologic characteristics ------------------------------------------- 7 Tidal stage -----------------------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Beach Management Plan: Southwest Gulf Coast Region Office of Resilience and Coastal Protection Florida Department of Environmental Protection
    Strategic Beach Management Plan: Southwest Gulf Coast Region Office of Resilience and Coastal Protection Florida Department of Environmental Protection April 2020 Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Southwest Gulf Coast Region Table of Contents Introduction – Southwest ......................................................................................................................... 1 Pinellas Barriers ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Strategies for Inlets and Critically Eroded Beaches .......................................................................... 2 Honeymoon Island, Pinellas County, R6–R12 .................................................................................... 2 Hurricane Pass, Pinellas County, R15-R16 ......................................................................................... 3 Clearwater Pass North Shore, Pinellas County, R47-R49 ................................................................... 4 Clearwater Pass, Pinellas County, R47-R51 ....................................................................................... 4 Sand Key, Pinellas County, R56-R115.4 ............................................................................................ 5 John’s Pass, Pinellas County, R125-R126 .......................................................................................... 7 Treasure Island, Pinellas County, R126-R143 ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Boundary Descriptions and Names of Regions, Subregions, Accounting Units and Cataloging Units
    Boundary Descriptions and Names of Regions, Subregions, Accounting Units and Cataloging Units Region 01 New England Region -- The drainage within the United States that ultimately discharges into: (a) the Bay of Fundy; (b) the Atlantic Ocean within and between the states of Maine and Connecticut; (c) Long Island Sound north of the New York-Connecticut state line; and (d) the Riviere St. Francois, a tributary of the St. Lawrence River. Includes all of Maine, New Hampshire and Rhode Island and parts of Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, and Vermont. Subregion 0101 -- St. John: The St. John River Basin within the United States. Maine. Area = 7330 sq.mi. Accounting Unit 010100 -- St. John. Maine. Area = 7330 sq.mi. Cataloging Units 01010001 -- Upper St. John. Maine. Area = 2120 sq.mi. 01010002 -- Allagash. Maine. Area = 1250 sq.mi. 01010003 -- Fish. Maine. Area = 908 sq.mi. 01010004 -- Aroostook. Maine. Area = 2420 sq.mi. 01010005 -- Meduxnekeag. Maine. Area = 634 sq.mi. Subregion 0102 -- Penobscot: The Penobscot River Basin. Maine. Area = 8610 sq.mi. Accounting Unit 010200 -- Penobscot. Maine. Area = 8610 sq.mi. Cataloging Units 01020001 -- West Branch Penobscot. Maine. Area = 2150 sq.mi. 01020002 -- East Branch Penobscot. Maine. Area = 1130 sq.mi. 01020003 -- Mattawamkeag. Maine. Area = 1510 sq.mi. 01020004 -- Piscataquis. Maine. Area = 1460 sq.mi. 01020005 -- Lower Penobscot. Maine. Area = 2360 sq.mi. Subregion 0103 -- Kennebec: The Kennebec River Basin, including part of Merrymeeting Bay. Maine. Area = 5900 sq.mi. Accounting Unit 010300 -- Kennebec. Maine. Area = 5900 sq.mi. Cataloging Units 01030001 -- Upper Kennebec. Maine. Area = 1570 sq.mi. 01030002 -- Dead. Maine. Area = 878 sq.mi.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Beach Management Plan – Southwest Gulf Coast Region
    Strategic Beach Management Plan: Southwest Gulf Coast Region Division of Water Resource Management Florida Department of Environmental Protection May 2018 Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Southwest Gulf Coast Region Table of Contents INTRODUCTION - SOUTHWEST ........................................................................................................ 1 PINELLAS BARRIERS ........................................................................................................................... 2 Strategies for Inlets and Critically Eroded Beaches ............................................................................. 2 Honeymoon Island, Pinellas County, R6–R12 ......................................................................................2 Hurricane Pass, Pinellas County, R15-R16 ...........................................................................................3 Clearwater Pass North Shore, Pinellas County, R47-R49 .....................................................................4 Clearwater Pass, Pinellas County, R47-R51 ..........................................................................................4 Sand Key, Pinellas County, R56-R115.4 ...............................................................................................5 John’s Pass, Pinellas County, R125-R126 .............................................................................................6 Treasure Island, Pinellas County, R126-R143 .......................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Department of Environmental Protection
    FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BUREAU OF BEACHES AND COASTAL SYSTEMS STRATEGIC BEACH MANAGMENT PLAN for the SOUTHWEST GULF COAST REGION SUBREGIONS Pinellas Barriers Sarasota Barriers, North Reach Sarasota Barriers, South Reach Manasota Barriers Charlotte Harbor Complex Estero Barriers Naples Coast Southern Barriers SBMP May 2008 PINELLAS BARRIERS There are 39.3 miles of beaches in the Pinellas Barriers subregion, which extends from Anclote Key in Pasco County to the Southwest Channel entrance to Tampa Bay in Hillsborough County, as shown on Figure SW.1. There are 21.4 miles of critically eroded beaches in this subregion, of which 14.2 miles have been restored. Erosion is attributed to winter frontal systems, tropical storms and hurricanes, and the effects of inlets including Hurricane Pass, Clearwater Pass, Johns Pass, Blind Pass, Pass-a-Grille, Bunces Pass, and Egmont Channel. The most erosive storms in recent years were Hurricane Agnes (1972), subtropical storms in June of 1974 and June of 1982, Hurricane Elena and Tropical Storm Juan (1985), Tropical Storm Josephine (1996), and Hurricanes Frances and Jeanne (2004). STRATEGIES FOR INLETS AND CRITICALLY ERODED BEACHES HONEYMOON ISLAND, PINELLAS COUNTY, R6–R12 This is a 1.4 mile segment of critically eroded beach on the southern gulf shoreline of Honeymoon Island at Honeymoon Island State Park. In 1969, over one million cubic yards of sand and limestone was placed along the gulf shoreline of Honeymoon Island (R8-R12) using 230,000 cubic yards of material from a nearshore borrow area. A groin field was constructed near the south end of the beach fill.
    [Show full text]
  • Ss. 258.35-258.394 and 258.40-258.46. 258.36 Legislative Intent
    History.—s. 3, ch. 2011-110. PART II AQUATIC PRESERVES 258.35 Short title; ss. 258.35-258.394 and 258.40-258.46. 258.36 Legislative intent. 258.37 Definitions. 258.38 Types of aquatic preserves. 258.39 Boundaries of preserves. 258.391 Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserve. 258.392 Gasparilla Sound-Charloe Harbor Aquatic Preserve. 258.3925 Lemon Bay Aquatic Preserve. 258.393 Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve wastewater or effluent discharge activities. 258.394 Guana River Marsh Aquatic Preserve. 258.395 Big Bend Seagrasses Aquatic Preserve. 258.396 Boca Ciega Bay Aquatic Preserve. 258.397 Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve. 258.399 Oklawaha River Aquatic Preserve. 258.40 Scope of preserves. 258.41 Establishment of aquatic preserves. 258.42 Maintenance of preserves. 258.43 Rules. 258.435 Use of aquatic preserves for the accommodation of visitors. 258.44 Effect of preserves. 258.45 Provisions not superseded. 258.46 Enforcement; violations; penalty. 258.35 Short title; ss. 258.35-258.394 and 258.40-258.46.—Sections 258.35-258.394 and 258.40-258.46 shall be known and may be cited as the “Florida Aquatic Preserve Act of 1975.” History.—s. 1, ch. 75-172. 258.36 Legislative intent.—It is the intent of the Legislature that the state-owned submerged lands in areas which have exceptional biological, aesthetic, and scientific value, as hereinafter described, be set aside forever as aquatic preserves or sanctuaries for the benefit of future generations. History.—s. 1, ch. 75-172. 258.37 Definitions.—As used in ss. 258.35-258.46: (1) “Aquatic preserve” means an exceptional area of submerged lands and its associated waters set aside for being maintained essentially in its natural or existing condition.
    [Show full text]
  • Southwest Coast Red Tide Status Report March 19, 2021
    Red Tide Status - Florida Southwest Coast March 19, 2021 Present Status: The red tide organism, Karenia brevis, persists in Southwest Florida. K. brevis was observed at background to low concentrations in six samples collected from Charlotte County, background to high concentrations in 29 samples collected from or offshore of Lee County, and background to medium concentrations in 10 samples collected from or offshore of Collier County. No samples were analyzed this week from Monroe County. A more detailed summary is provided in the table below. No fish kills suspected to be related to red tide were reported over the past week. For more details, please visit: https://myfwc.com/research/saltwater/health/fish-kills-hotline/. No reports of respiratory irritation were received over the past week. 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 net southern movement of surface waters and southeastern transport of subsurface waters in most areas over the next four days. Date Alongshore County Offshore Site Location Collector Collected Inshore Pinellas - 03/15 not present - Clearwater Pass FWRI Grand Bellagio Condo Docks - 03/15 not present - FWRI (Old Tampa Bay) - 03/15 not present - La Contessa Pier FWRI FWRI Peninsula; SE tip of - 03/15 not present - FWRI (Bayboro Harbor) FWRI Peninsula; SE tip of - 03/15 not present - FWRI (Bayboro Harbor) Eckerd College (Wallace - 03/15 not present - FWRI Cove) - 03/15 not
    [Show full text]