Marine resources geographic information system final report

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

MARINE RESOURCES GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM

FINAL REPOIRT

MARCH 1993

A report of the Florida Department of Community Affairs
pursuant to National ooeanic and Atmospheric Adrninistration
Award No. NA270ZO346-01,

MARINE RESOURCES GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM:

FINAL REPORT

Gall M. MacAulay, Timothy J. Leary, Kelly B.. Donne-11y,
Richard E. Matheson, Jr., Sandra L. Drumm, and Kenneth Dt. Hadda'd

March, 1993

Department of Natural Resources
Division of Marine Resources
Florida Marine Research Institute

A report to the Florida Department of Community Affairs pursuantl tot National,
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award No. NA270Z6345-01
FNI

1-,'X 1,7 V 1:@ SUN4MARY

Task 1. M,.'S0UR('1.,,'S U"OGRAPHIC INVOI@\IATION SN'S'I'E\,l

Subtask A: The Little \i4anatee River (LNIR) watershed, located on the
eastern shore ot.''rampa Bay, Florida was selected for a multi-disciplinary project
focusing on the development of watershed-oriented resource management tools
and strategies. The project is a cooperative effort among federal, state, regional,
and local agencies. The relatively pristine LMR watershed includes portions of
two countl@_-s, and 36 subbasins draining 573 km2 . The dominant land use in the
watershed is agricultural. The recent completion of Interstate-75, however,
provides a major corridor for growth that will undoubtedly impact a significant
portion of the watershed.

A major component of the project was the development of the Little
Manatee River Watershed Atlas, a 20-page map atlas featuring all of the primary
data layers for the watershed. The color atlas was developed for use as a
desk-top reference. The atlas consists of individual map sheets, and mylar
overlays and the four-ring design allows easy removal of individual map sheets.
Co-registration of map pages allows real-time analysis. For example, by placing
the transportation mylar over the flood zone map, roads prone to flooding can
be easily identified. This information could be useful to disaster planners in
identifying evacuation routes for emergency situations.

In addition to the primary data layers, the results of analyses are also
featured in the atlas. An example of one MRGIS-analysis is. the `identification
.of lands within the 100-year flood plain. 'Me identified areas were subsequently
queried based on the future land use data layer. The result of the query shows
the future land use of only those areas that are within the 100-year flood plain.

Data Layer Development

Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and imported into the MRGIS,
This vector based coverage was then employed as the base coverage for a file
showing septic tank densities by s-t-r which were entered manually.

Modeling, and Analysis

Rainfall-runoff-water quality relationships were modeled relative to

hydrologic characteristics at the request of SWFWMD. Model results were
stippled to SWFWMD in tile form of acreage tables. In most cases, they
requested that individual models be run for the entire watershed, and then
separately for each of the 10 hydrologic gaged units. The separation into (aged
units allowed comparison with other SWFWMD databases. For example, the

District. monitored water quality at biweekly intervals from January 26, 1988 to
January 24, 1989 at seven streamflow sites within the watershed., These seven
stream flow locations were used to develop the ten gaged units for the LMR
watershed ,project. Because the soils in proximity to the river have the greatest
potential , impact on the water quality of the river in terms of runoff, analyses
were also conducted for a 500-ft buffer surrounding the river channels.

The LMR database was developed in either the vector or raster environment,
depending upon the source material of the coverage being created. When
analyses warranted, data were transferred to the alternate format using the
standard conversion routines available through ERDAS and ARC/INFO software.

Data Distribution

ARC/INFO vector coverages were transferred to, and used by, Hillsborough
County Engineering Department, the Southwest Florida Water Management
District (SWFWMD), Florida Department of Natural Resources in Tallahassee,
and the Department of Environmental Regulation. The LMR database is
currently being used by SWFWMD to conduct water quality analyses. The
Cockroach Bay Consensus Group, as directed by the Tampa Bay Regional
Advisory: Committee, identified the LMR database as a source of essential data
due to the proximity of the watershed to Cockroach Bay. Digital data were
requested by, and provided to, Hillsborough County to incorporate into their GIS.
County managers will use this database in decisions that will impact the
Cockroach Bay area, as well as the Little Manatee River watershed. An
Ecological Working Group was established within the Florida Department of
Natural Resources to identify major ecosystem issues which cross Division
boundaries. The Little Manatee River watershed was chosen as the Ecosystem
Pilot Project. As a result, the digital database was transferred to Tallahassee to

develop specificscenarios and. determine their potential impacts using the GIS.
The Working Group, is comprised of each of the FDNR Division Directors or
their designces, with the goal of developing a strategic plan to manage Florida's
natural resources using an ecosystem approach.

Data Documentation

Coverages of the MRGIS have been used to test the functionality of the
metadata templates (Data Dictionary and Quality and Accuracy
developed through the Growth Management Data Network Coordinating Council
(GMDNCC). Analyses have indicated that minor changes to the templates are
needed to increase their utility. These completed templates, when. transferred
with the digital data, provide valuable inforniation which cam., be., used the
recipient of the database in evaluating appropriate uses of the -data. -

Subtask B: Over 300 requests for information were handled by.the MRGIS
during this grant period (average of 21.5 request s/month). There. were total of
147 requests answered during the previous grant period (January 1 1991
January 31, 1992) for an average of 11.3 requests/month. This represents a
nearly 50% increase over last year. Information output formats included
hardeopy maps, digital data, presentations, and demonstrations.. ::A substantial
effort was focused on this subtask due to the large number of requests. The
significant increase in requests for information demonstrates the need for
effective dissemination of marine resources information, and signifies the
importance of the MRGIS in coastal management.

Task 1. NIARINI.,' RF,SOURCES CEOGRAPHIC INFOR\IATION SYS'IT'i I
i,1111c \xlaiiatee River J.NiIR) watershed database arialyses
atid local oovernnient Hilerface. data dissciiiiiialloii aild
Lip da I i no

SUbtask A: Complete work with regional and local governments to integrate the
Z-1
kIRGIS data and concepts into the planning and policy making processes.
Analyze MRGIS data relative to watershed characteristics, water quality, and
fisheries distribution and abundance.

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

Subtask A focused on the completion and analysis of data layers for the
Little Manatee River watershed of the Marine Resources Geographic Information
System (MRGIS). The database was also distributed and subsequently integrated
into other GIS systems. Rainfall-runoff-water quality relationships were modeled
relative to hydrologic characteristics at the request of the Southwest Florida
Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD was also the primary
recipient of the digital database that was assembled for the watershed.

The comprehensive database consists of the following GIS coverages: SPOT
satellite basemap; 1988 land use/land cover; detailed soils; 2 ft elevation
contours; Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood zones; future
land use; drainage; game and fish habitat cover and plant communities,
subbasins; hydrographic gage station subdrainage areas; wastewater treatment
facility locations, consumptive use permit locations; permitted well locations;
hydrology; transportation; section-tow ns hip -range zones, and septic tank densities.

A major component of the project was the development of the Little
Manatee River Watershed Atlas, a 20-page map atlas featuring all of the primary
data layers for the watershed. A small scale copy of the atlas is shown in
Appendix A. These 8 1/2" x 11" sheets were printed at a scale of 1:180,000.
The full-scale color atlas, at a scale of 1:80,000, was developed for use as a
desk-top reference. Design of the atlas incorporates individual map sheets, and
mylar overlays. The four-ring design allows easy removal of individual'-inap
sheets. Co-registration of map pages allows real-time analysis. For example, by
placing the transportation mylar over the flood zone map, roads prone to flooding
would be identified. This information could be useful to disaster planners in
identifying evacuation routes for emergency situations. T"he 500-ft buffer overlay
could be used to identify sensitive areas for effective resource management.

In addition to the primary data layers the results of analyses are also
featured in the atlas. An example of one MRGIS analysis is the identification
of lands within the 100-year flood plain. The identified areas were subsequently
queried based on the future land use data layer. The result of the query shows
the future land use of only those areas that are within the 100-year flood plain.
Based upon the adopted future land use map designations, approximately 42,692
dwelling units can be developed within this area of 22,464.

DATABASE DEVELOPMENT

All spatial data are stored and analyze using the Marine Resources
Geographic Information System (MRGIS) at the Florida Department of Natural
Resources's Marine Research Institute in St. Petersburg. The MRGIS
applications, software includes the commercially available ERDAS, Inc.
raster-based package, ESRI's ARC/INFO vector-based package, and ELAS, a
non-proprietary image processing software developed by NASA.

MRGIS hardware configuration consists of the following: SUN 4/490
SparcServer with 4 1 -gigabyte drives; 2 SparcStation 1+ workstations with 669
megabyte disk each; and 3 SparcStation IPX workstations, each with 1.3 GB
disk. A five platter optical juke box, with each platter having 5 gb capacity,
currently serves as an archival device for the MRGIS. Two 386 personal
computers are accessible through the network. Hardcopy plots are generated
primarily by a Calcomp 68436 XP electrostatic plotter. - In addition, a Calcomp
1044GT 8-pen plotter, a Tektronix 4696 ink jet printer, and a Tektronix 4693DX
thermal wax printer provide plotting/printing support. Printing of text is
accomplished by a SUN SparcPrinter.

All data layers were verified and finalized during this grant period. In
addition, two layers, section-township-range (s-t-r) and septic tank density were
identified as being critical to analysis, and were added to the database. The
s-t-r coverage was created as an ARCANFO file by the Southwest Florida Water
Management District (SWFWMD) and imported into the MRGIS. This
vector-based coverage was then employed as the base coverage for a file
showing septic tank density by s-t-r which were entered manually.

Models

The detailed soil database, developed in cooperation with the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (SCS), is a valuable layer

-carlto rKtranch
/'Cy,),ess Creek

Lake Wimauma

Dui Creek

Lower Little Manatee i or

North Fork
Wimaurn

..... .... .
...............
. . . . . . . . . ........

........ ..........

South Fork

T148 HYDOLOGIC GAGE 3011NDARIES OF THE LITTLE MANATEE
RIVER IDENTIFIED IN THIS OVERLAY WERE DEFINED BY
THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
(SWFWMD).

4-S F I
Gage Boundaries
GURE 1. Drainage and Hydrologic

.... ............

4..

.4+

... .......
ZX

Js
0

.5i@- X.

THE BUFFER SHOWN IN THIS OVERLAY WAS COMPUTER GENERATED
TO SHOW THE AREAS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE RIVER CHANNELS

FIGURE
500 Foot Buffer of the Little Manatee River

.... ....... sm,

. . . . . . . . . . . . .71.

in developing analyses relating to watershed characteristics and water quality.
There are 111 discrete soil class classifications, that fall within tile Little Manatee
River watershed ( hillsborough and Manatee Counties). There is an
accompanying database in which 80 soil characteristics are defined for each of*

the 111 soil characteristics, or attributes, include important
information pertaining to each soil. Some important soil characteristics Include:
texture, liquid limit and plasticity index, clay percent, moist bulk density,
permeability-, available water capacity, soil reaction; salinity- shrink-swell
potential; corrosivity to steel-, corrosivity to concrete, erosion factors, wind
erodibility groups; percent organic niatter: flooding; hydrologic groups, suitability
for building site development and use as construction materials; capability and
predicted yields for crops and pasture-, woodland suitability; wildlife suitability;
and potential plant community (Doolittle et at., 1989).

Data for each of the 80 attributes, arranged by soil type, were provided to
the Florida Marine Research Institute as ASCII text files by SCS. These files
were manipulated so the attribute array could be incorporated into both the
ARC/INFO vector coverage and the ERDAS raster file.

Several models were developed in response to requests from the Southwest
Florida Water Management Pistrict (SWFWMD) for use in their evaluation of
water quality characteristics within the LMR watershed. Results of preliminary
analyses pertaining to water quality are discussed in Flannery et al., 1991.
Model results were supplied to SWFWMD in the form of acreage tables. In
most cases, the SWFWMD requested that individual models be run for the entire
watershed and then separately for each of the 10 subdrainage areas or hydrologic
gaged units. The separation into gaged units allowed comparison with other
SWFWD databases. For example, the District monitored water quality at
biweekly intervals from January 26, 1988 to January 24, 1989 at seven
streamflow sites within the watershed. These seven streat flow locations were
used to develop the ten gaged units for the LMR watershed project (Figure 1).
Because the soils in proximity to the river have the greatest potential impact on
the water quality of the river in terms of runoff, analyses were also conducted
for a 500-ft buffer surrounding the river channels (Figure 2).

One of the most frequently used attributes within the soil database is
hydrologic group which provides information used to estimate runoff from
precipitation. Hydrologic units are divided into four different groups: Group A
- low runoff potential (soils having a high infiltration rate); Group B - (soils
having a moderate infiltration rate); Group C - (soils having a slow infiltration
rate); and Group D - high runoff potential (soils having a very slow infiltration
rate). The soil hydrologic units for the watershed, for each of the hydrologic

Table 1. Area (in hectares) of* soil groups for the overall watershed, each gaged unit, and within the 5004t buffer of" the river.

I lydrologic
Summary Gage I Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Ga@
Buffer 51

A 3934 513 0 4 216 0

B 223 74 0 0 69 0

C 8295 1126 46 63 709 14

D 3912 1486 664 48 52 2

B/D 39394 13280 1246 726 1797 70

Hydrologic Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Gage 9 Gage 10 500-ft
Buffer buffer

A 3 416 852 1527 415 674

B 0 0 0 82 0 94

C 52 401 2397 2152 1359

D 27 87 643 432 474 1256

B/D 42 1282 9395 5861 5744 1045

Table 2. Area (in hectares) of soil hydrologic group by land cover for each of the 10 gaged units.

A C S/D Water
Gage 1 Area % Area Area % Area % Area % Area %

------------------- --------- --------------- ------------------------------------

Wetland 38 1 21 1 21 1 982 30 21B5 66 41 1
Water 10 1 1 <1 18 2 75 10 134 18 527 69
Agriculture 149 2 36 <1 711 9 198 2 6935 86 4 <1
Upland 187 7 6 <1 208 7 77 3 2315 83 4 <1
Urban 127 6 10 <1 167 8 155 7 1707 78 20 1

A a C D B/D Water
Gage 2 Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area %

------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------

WetLand --- --- --- --- 1 <1 310 67 142 31 8 2
Water --- --- --- --- 2 1 28 21 47 34 59 43
Agriculture --- --- --- ... 12 3 2 1 447 97 1 <1
Upland ... --- --- --- 3 3 5 4 97 92 <1 <1
Urban --- --- ... --- 28 3 319 36 513 58 31 3

A B C D B/D Water
Gage 3 Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area %

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WetLand --- --- 1 1 27 \23 92 76 <1 <1
Water --- - --- --- 1 13 5 60 3 28
Agriculture 3 1 --- --- 22 6 12 3 326 90 --- ---
Upland 1 <1 --- 29 13 7 3 192 84 <1 <1
Urban ... --- --- 12 9 1 1 111 86 4 3

A C D B/D Water
Gage 4 Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area %

------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------

Wettand 26 5 13 3 31 6 27 5 395 80 <1 <1
Water 1 7 --- ... 1 1 7 5 28 9 50
Agriculture 76 5 35 2 498 35 13 1 802 56 1 <1
Upland 103 15 19 3 139 20 6 1 438 62 <1 <1
Urban 9 4 <1 <1 40 18 4 2 158 72 9 4

A 8 C D 8/0 Water
Gage 5 Area- % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area %

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WetLand --- --- --- --- --- 1 1 5 11 43 88
Water --- --- --- --- 3 <1 <1 <1 4 <1 1022 99
Agriculture --- --- --- --- --- --- 1 2 48 96 1 3
Upland --- --- --- --- 4 29 --- --- 8 70 <1 I
Urban --- --- --- --- 8 60 4 27 2 14

Table 2 continued.

A C D B/D Water
Gage 6 Area % A rea % Area % Area % Area % Area %

.............. ....... ---------- ------------------------- ------- ---------- -------

Wetland - --- --- --- K1 2 16 68 2 7 6 23
Water ... --- --- --- --- --- 2 7 1 4 33 90
Agriculture <1 1 --- ... 4 11 5 16 23 71 - -
Upland --- ... 1 21 1 23 3 56 --- ---
Urban 3 4 --- 47 73 2 3 13 20 ... ---

A B C D B/D Water
Gage 7 Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area
- ---------------- ------- ------------- ----- - - - ------- ------------------ -------------------- -- - - - -----

WetLand 14 7 --- --- 3 2 40 22 129 69 --- ...
Water 1 15 ... --- <1 2 1 6 7 69 1 8
Agriculture 347 19 --- --- 381 21 41 2 1062 58 1 <1
Upland 5 12 --- - . 5 11 2 4 33 74 ... ---
Urban 49 42 --- --- 12 10 4 3 52 45 --- ---

A C D B/D Water
Gage 8 Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area %
----------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wettand 32 2 --- ... 51 2 404 19 1595 76 2 <1
Water <1 <1 --- --- 3 6 18 37 13 26 15 31
Agriculture 527 6 --- --- 1947 23 149 2 6018 70 1 <1
Upland 277 12 ... ... 341 14 71 3 1676 71 --- ---
Urban 16 10 --- --- 55 33 1 1 93 56 --- ---

A 8 C D B/D Water
Gage 9 Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area %

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wetland 190 10 34 2 67 4 254 13 1378 72 <1 <1
Water 1 5 --- --- 2 13 5 28 10 55 ... ---
Agriculture 736 14 36 1 1489 27 99 2 3084 57 --- ---
Upland 599 23 12 <1 579 22 69 3 1363 52 <1 0
Urban 1 3 <1 .<I 7 41 <1 1 9 51 1 3

A 8 C D B/D Water
Gage 10 Area X Area % Area % Area % Area % Area %
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wetland 5 <1 --- 43 3 290 23 927 73 1 <1
Water 8 15 --- 1 3 6 12 33 64 3 6
Agriculture 210 4 --- --- 1175 24 93 2 3420 70 2 <1
Upland 40 3 --- --- 118 9 49 4 1085 84 --- ---
Urban 152 31 --- --- 22 4 36 7 278 57 1 <1

Table 3. Area (in hectares) of soil K Factor ranges for the watershed, each gaged unit, and within the 500-ft
buffer of the river.

500-ft
K Factor Summary Gage 1 Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Gage 5 Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Gage 9 Gage 10 buffer
---------------------

LE 0.16 54123 15290 1621 842 2841 86 124 2176 13228 10022 7979 12850
GT 0.16 & LE 0.22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GT 0.22 & LE 0.28 26 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
GT 0.28 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0
soil not rated 3454 1760 434 7 20 1069 39 2 78 32 20 1046

Table 4. Area (in hectares) of soil permeability ratings within the watershed, for each gaged un it, and within the 500-ft
buffer of the river.

500-ft
Permeability Summary Gage I Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Gage 5 Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Gage 9 Gage 10 buffer

1@ 3699 345 335 60 140 0 27 525 1345 93 832 766
2 14242 2599 57 201 452 55 59 734 4071 2828 3207 3384
3 31165 10508 1195 560 1828 31 35 722 6739 6543 3064 6271
1A 193 193 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188
2A 3940 2029 35 20 212 0 0 91 822 127 605 2267
undefined 2830 940 434 7 98 1069 39 21 58 5 167 642

Table 5. Area (in hectares) of soil water table depth minima and maxima for each of the gaged units. Depth ranges
are given in feet.

Water Table Depth Minima by Hydrologic Unit

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Depth ITotat Watershed I Gage 1 Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Gage 5
Range I Area % I Area % Area % Area % Area % Area
------------------ -- --------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ --------------
I I I I I
0 145 < 1 134 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.0 to 1.0 44556 77 15103 89 1673 81 782 92 1869 65 1140 99
1.1 to 1.9 106 < 1 28 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2.0 to 3.9 8757 15 1224 7 382 19 63 7 765 27 14 1
4.0 to 5.9 383 1 235 1 0 0 0 0 40 1 0 0
> 5.9 3665 6 352 2 0 0 4 < 1 187 7 0 0

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Depth I Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Gage 9 Gage 10 1
Range I Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I
< 0 0 0 0 0 11 < I 1 0 0 0 0
0.0 to 1.0 108 66 1371 63 10045 76 6294 63 6225 78
1.1 to 1.9 0 0 0 0 12 1 66 1 0 0
2.0 to 3.9 52 32 401 18 2385 18 2138 21 1359 17
4.0 to 5.9 0 0 16 1 3 < 1 89 1 0 0
> 5.9 3 400 18 849 6 1466 15 415 5

Water Table Depth Maxima by Hydrologic Unit

Depth ITotal Watershed I Gage 1 1 Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Gage 5
Range I Area % I Area % I Area % Area % Area % I Area %
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I Ii I I I I
< 0 3338 6 1040 6 329 16 48 6 61 2 2 < I
0.0 to 1.0 41469 72 14225 83 1345 65 734 86 1808 63 1139 99
1.1 to 1.9 1698 3 346 2 6 < 1 9 1 193 7 < 1 0
2.0 to 3.9 8990 16 1426 8 376 18 56 7 731 26 14 1
4.0 to 5.9 1063 2 5 < 1 0 0 0 0 28 1 0 0
> 5.9 1054 2 33 < 1 0 0 1 < 1 40 1 0 0

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Depth Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Gage 9 Gage 10 1
Range Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------
I I I I I I
< 0 27 17 77 4 716 5 551 6 487 6
0.0 to 1.0 81 50 1293 59 9352 70 5809 58 5738 72
1.1 to 1.9 0 0 136 6 429 3 320 3 259 3
2.0 to 3.9 55 34 400 18 2247 17 2488 25 1227 15
4.0 to 5.9 0 0 0 0 147 1 879 9 9 < I
> 5.9 0 0 280 13 414 3 8 < 1 279 3

gaged units, and within the 500-ft buffer of the river arc listed in Table 1.
Calculations for the soil hydrologic unit within the,500-ft buffer of the river acre
also shown in Table 1. These values, in conjunction with other soil features, are
used In landd planning that has engineering considerations. Amodel was
developed to Investigate tile relationship between soil hydrologiC groups and

generalized land cover. The 1988 land cover layer, interpreted from aerial
photography and the 1988 SPOT satellite baseniap, was employed in this
analysis. The results of this analysis for the whole watershed are shown in
Table 2.

Soil erosion, the loss of soils by. the forces of wind and water, from
agricultural lands negatively impacts the water quality of the river. When soil
erodes from agricultural lands, fertilizers and pesticides are also washed into
storm drains and into the river. The soil K Factor is an estimation of the
susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by water (Doolittle et al., 1989).
The K Factor is one of six factors used in calculating the Universal Soil Loss
Equation. This equation predicts the average annual rate of soil loss by sheet
and rill erosion. K values range from 0.02 to 0.69, higher values indicate a
greater susceptibility of the soil to sheet and rill erosion by water. Within the
Little Manatee River watershed, K values range from .05 to .32. The soil K
Factor within the entire watershed, for each of the gaged units, and within the
500-ft buffer of the river are listed in Table 3.

Soil permeability, the ability of a soil to transmit. water or air, was also
investigated for the overall watershed, on the basis of each gaged unit, and
within the 500-ft buffer. Results of these models are shown in Table 4. These
estimates indicate the rate of movement of water through a saturated soil.
Design of drainage systems and septic tank absorption fields must consider soil
permeability.

Another attribute of interest to the SWFWMD is water table depth. This
attribute is reported as two separate values which indicate the normal range in
depth to a saturated zone. Depths are recorded to the nearest half foot and
reflect the normal highest level and the normal lowest level. Water table ranges
by gaged unit are given in Table 5.

Data Conversion & Transfer

The LMR database was developed in either the vector or raster environment,
depending upon the source material of the coverage being created. When
analysis warranted, data were transferred to the alternate format using the
standard conversion routines available through ERDAS and ARC/INFO software.

The complexity of tile SI-10T satellite basenlap, liowever, dictated that tile usage
of this data lavcr be, restricted to the raster envii-onnient. Although data analyses
were Conducted in both lorniats, ARC/lNl-`0 vector coveraocs were easily
transfen-ed to and used by 1111100FOUgh C01.111ty F111011IM-1110 Departinent, the
Southwest I'lorlda Water Nlanag-einent District. and I'lorlda Department of Nattiral
Resources in Tallahassee. Both SWFWIMI-) and FDNR have selected ARC/JNl-`0
as their primary vector GIS software. Hillsborough County utilizes GENAMAI'
software which contains algorithms capable of converting ARC/INFO export
coverages into a usable format. Tile LMR database has been transferred to
SWFWMD and is currently being used to conduct water quality analyses.

Selected coverages, of the Little Manatee River watershed database were
transferred to the Hillsborough County Engineering Department. This transfer
was facilitated by the formation of the Cockroach Bay Consensus Group as
directed by the Tampa Bay Regional Coordinating Council (TBRCC). The
TBRCC, has four goals: promote the sharing of data related to growth
management., promote consistency of data elements; adopt common data elements
and formats for interagency transmission of data where feasible, and avoid the
duplication of effort associated with the collection of data. The Cockroach Bay
Consensus Group developed a matrix to identify critical data layers relative to
Cockroach Bay and agencies that possess them. The LN4R database was
identified as providing essential data due to the proximity of the watershed to
Cockroach Bay. , The estuarine portion of the watershed, which includes the
mouth of the river, is of particular interest as it lies within the boundaries of the
Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserve. Digital data were provided and incorporated
into the Hillsborough County GIS. County managers will use this database in
decisions that will impact the Cockroach Bay area, as well as the Little Manatee
River watershed.

An Ecological Working Group has been established within the Florida
Department of Natural Resources to try to identify major ecosystem issues which
cross Division boundaries. The Little Manatee River watershed has been chosen,
as the Ecosystem Pilot Project. As a result, the digital database was transferred
to Tallahassee so that specific scenarios may be developed, and their potential
impacts determined, using the GIS. The Working Group is comprised of each
of the DNR Division Directors or their designees with the goal of developing
a strategic plan for managing Florida's natural resources using an ecosystem
approach.

To maximize the utility of digital data, it is necessary to document the
creation of each data layer. This history or lineage is then included when the
digital data are transferred. Such data about data are referred to as metadata.

The TBRCC has been working with the Growth Management Data Network
Coordinating Council (GMDNCC) to develop a Data Dictionary and Quality and

Accuracy Report. The Data Dictionary template is used to Mine tile data, and
ensures that classification systems are fully explained. The Quality and Accuracy
Report documents standards and techniques employed to develop tile data. 'File
valuable Information M the two completed templates. when transferred with the
digital data, allow tile recipient of tile database to evaluate appropriate uses of
the data. In some cases, the metadata provided in either template might indicate
a discrepancy in an item definition or source map scale that would limit the
utility of the database for the second-hand user. Knowledge of such limitations
are critical in developing responsible uses for the data.

Coverages of the MRGIS database have been used to test the functionality
of the metadata templates. Analyses have indicated that minor changes to the
templates are needed to increase their utility. A sample of the template is
attached (Appendix B).

I)ISti-11111tC NIRGIS digital, tabular and hardcopy 11 abitat data, maps,
images. and otlicr pertinent NWGIS Information. Updatc liabitat data and
CorldLICI treild analyses for areas of' special fOCUS.

Information ReCILICStS

Responding to requests for information to better manage and understand our
coastal resources is an important aspect of Marine Resources Geographic
Information System (MRGIS) activities. During the course of this grant, 302
requests for information were filled. In some cases, requests are -straightforward
in that the data requested are readily available on the MRGIS, and further data
analysis is not required. We have developed some standard map products that
have broad use and are capable of filling multiple requests. In most cases,
however, manipulation and analysis of the data are required to fit individual
requestor's needs.

The following are examples of the types of analyses conducted in response to
requests for assistance during this grant period:

A series of maps depicting the relationship among water depth,
seagrasses, and areas of food and bait shrimp harvesting were developed
as the result of a request from the Florida Marine Fisheries Commission.
This map series has come to be known as the Resource Impact Maps
(RrMs). Thirteen segments within' five regions were defined for the State.
The nature of the RIMs required that some databases be developed. Areas
of shrimp harvesting, for example, were not known. During numerous
public hearings, shrimpers indicated -those areas they shrimped by drawing
polygons on NOAA nautical charts. Charts were returned to the FMR.1
and the "shrimping" polygons were digitized into the MRGIS. Seagrass
data for some of the segments were considered historical and required
updating. A contract was established to-digitize bathymetry data (3 ft, 6
ft, 12 ft, 18 ft, 30 ft, and 60 ft) to automate the water depth component.
Draft maps for twelve of the thirteen segments have been completed:
Pensacola Bay, Choctawhatchee Bay, St. Andrew Bay, St. Joseph Bay,
Apalachicola, Big Bend, Tampa Bay, Charlotte Harbor, Everglades, Florida
Keys, Biscayne Bay, and St. Johns River. The Indian River segment is
in progress. Big Bend is the only segment that is in final form (includes
shrimping zones). As a result of this effort a manuscript (Appendix Q
has been accepted for presentation and publication at Coastal Zone '93.

MRGIS staff was requested to assist FMR1 Marathon Field Station

personnel in designing a rnal) atlas to be used for recording boater activity
ill tile 1-1orlda Keys and in designino a dalabase to enter tile survey restills.
The Flori& Keys Boat t.1se 1)altern study Is an 18-illonth long project that
will niap boat use patterns ill the ['101-1da Keys and dctcrimiic hoatlill,
pressure on sensitive mar lie habitats. The principle tool in trac I boater
activity will be aerial survey. The atlas consists of a serles of 26 rnaps
within the boundaries of the Florida Keys National Nlarlne Sanctuary as
far west as the Marquesas Keys. A one-minute grid was superimposed
over the atlas pages to create blocks into which data Could be recorded.
The prototype of the survey atlas was field-tested and a preliminary
database design for data entry was provided. Final survey data will be
included in the MRGIS. To date, preliminary data have been entered and
draft maps have been created for interim reports to The Nature
Conservancy. Numerous copies (40+) of the survey atlas have already
been provided to the requestor for this study. Furthermore, numerous
requests for the atlas have come from as far away as California and
Maine.

Dr. Gray Multer requested a map depicting benthic communities, main
geologic formations, latitude and longitude, and park boundaries in the
Florida Keys. The map was created to Dr. Multer's exact specifications
to accommodate his text and photographs. The Florida Institute of
Oceanography plans to produce and distribute 15,000 of these maps in the
Florida Keys for, educational purposes.

A Tampa Bay Boaters' Guide was developed in cooperation with the
Tampa Bay National Estuary Program (NEP) at their request. This map
will provide important.- marine resources information, as well as tips on
safe-boating pract@ces, to recreational boaters in Tampa Bay. MRGIS data
layers featured in the Boaters' Guide are: marine habitat, bathymetry,
public boat ramps and marinas, artificial reefs, navigational aids, major
roadways, cultural features, and landmarks. Data were provided as
individual layers to a printing shop for final map assembly. The flip side
of the map features drawings and descriptions of fishes common to Tampa
Bay, and text on the importance and sensitivity of marine habitats to the
health of the estuary.

Many analyses involve conversion between raster and vector formats.
These conversions are routinely performed in response to requests for data.
In many cases, conversion also occurs between projections. Under normal
circumstances, MRGIS data are developed in the Universal Transverse

NICI-CM01- (UTNI) projection. When warranted. data are projected into other
coordinate systems. An example of this type of conversion was Performed
for tile 1-1orida Institute of Oceanography who required data in latitude and
)OD"IlUdc.
C@

The following summarizes the types Of Output and general forms of resource
management information provided:

Information has been provided in several forms, the most common form
of assistance requested being hardcopy maps. These maps are available
in three formats: electrostatic plots, thermal wax prints, and ink- jet prints.
Although we can produce pen plots, this is seldorn utilized due to tile
superior quality and significant reduction in plot time of the electrostatic
plotter. The electrostatic plotter is capable of plotting maps up to 34
inches long on paper or clear rnylar. This plotter played a significant role
in the preparation of the Little Manatee River Atlas. Large-scale plots can
be created by joining individual plotter sheets. Nine panels were
assembled to create a 144" x 76" map to fill a request from NOAA for
use in developing the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Management
Plan. 'Me thermal wax and ink jet printers continue to be used primarily
for printing raster data. An example of this type of request came from,
Mr. Peter Clark of the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, who,
requested prints reflecting changes in mangroves for the Sarasota Bay area
between 1950 and 1982. The nature of the request required the following
areas be defined: areas that were mangrove in 1950 that were unchanged
in 1982, 1950 mangrove areas that were not mangroves in 1982, and 1982
mangrove areas that were not present in 1950. These trends were
determined and results featured in thermal wax prints suitable for inclusion
in a report.

We continue to provide digital data on a routine basis to those agencies
requesting it. We have noted an increase in the number of requests for
digital data. When digital data are requested, the typical output is an
ERDAS or ARC/INFO export file. These files are machine independent
and are readily useable by agencies with these software packages.
Conversions of these data to other formats are performed on an as-needed
basis. Standard output media include 8 mm 5 gb tape cartridges, 1/4 inch
150 mb cartridges, 9-track tapes, and in the cases of small data sets,
floppy disks.

Results of GIS manipulations are also commonly requested in tabular

formal. Acreage of marine habitat clata for specific areas are frequent
recluests, lZcquestors are asked to provide, the boundaries of tile area of
ill1crest and the acreages are calculated based on the defined area. A I)
example of this form of rcqtiest caine froill lZoper Iolialisson of the Cily
of Tampa, I)epartinent of' Sanitary Sewers. Dr. Johansson requested a
tabulation of the number of acres of seagrass that Occur in Tampa Bay
within deptlis of 3 and 6 feet for specific areas of the bay system. These
data are being used to assist in the determination of areas that could
support seagrasses as water quality problems are aniellorated.

Slides or overheads featuring MRGIS coverages and results of GIS
analyses are also supplied to individuals who use them in presentations or
discussions oil the health of marine resources. For example, several slides
and overheads of the Florida Bay area were supplied to @George Barley of
the NOAA Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary to be used in
presentations concerning the Sanctuary.

MRGIS staff have distributed information by participating on
intergovernmental committees, giving public presentations, and conducting
tours and demonstrations of the MRGIS. This interaction is a strong
component of the MRGIS and assists us in understanding management and
user needs. It also, provides a forum to keep recreational fish a priority
in research, environmental planning, growth management, and public
opinion.

The following summarizes the 302 MRGIS requests:

Ruth Folit, New College, Sarasota, FL - Information and review of aerial
photography and propeller scar mapping for the Sarasota Bay area.

Connie Stevens, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Review of available nautical charts and
marine habitat for research area to be used in presentation.

Walter Jaap, Jennifer Wheaton, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida
Marine Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Evaluation of nine photographs
for accuracy of underwater photogrammetric aperture for mapping coral growth.,
in the Florida Keys.

Alice Bard. Florida Dcpartillent of Natural RCSOLIrces@ 1.31visloii of Recreatioii and
Parks, Clermont. Vl_ - Prints of 1950 and 1982 land cover for tile St. Joseph
Sound area to be used in seminar series.

William Teehan. Florida N/larine Fisheries Commission. Tallahassee, l"L -
Resource impact Map of the Panama City area broken into three large-scale
sections.

Dr. Joseph Kimmel, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Nlarine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Aerial photographs of the Dry Tortugas
area for reef fish research.

Tom Wallace, Private Citizen, St. Petersburg, FL - Revised Resource Impact Map
for the Cedar Key/Big Bend area featuring benthic communities and bathymetry.
These data will be used to determine potential aquaculture. locations in the Cedar
Key area.

Bob Heagey, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Seagrass maps of the Banana River.

Tom Wallace, Private Citizen, St. Petersburg, FL - Boundary map of the St.
Martin's Marsh Aquatic Preserve. ne information will be used to ensure that
potential aquaculture sites will not be selecte&within the Preserve.

George Henderson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida I'Viarine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Two Resource b-npact Maps of the
Tampa Bay area to be presented at the Tampa Bay Oil Spill Contingency
Workshop.

Scott Zengel, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Gainesville, FL - Seagrass
distribution maps of the Cedar Key area. U.S. F&WS will be remapping the
seagrass in this area and will provide us with updated maps.

Matthew Clemons, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Crystal River, FL -
Information on the Weedon Island propeller scar mapping project.

Paula Houboulis, University of Georgia, Athens, GA - Information on the
mapping of boat propeller scar damage to seagrasses.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Maps of three grids (1-
2-, and 3-minute) to assist in the development of a geographic segmentation
scheme for the COMPAS project.

Michael (111hrook-, Fast Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Winter Park,
FI, - Infoi-niation on nianne reSOLII'Ces data for lh,6 Indian River Lagoon. These
data will lie Included in the National Estuary I .) rograin's, 111ventory of' natural
I'CSOLH-ce data avallable t'or the Indiaii River area.

Ed Irby, Florida Department of Natural RCSOLII-CCS, Office of l','Ishenes
Management and Assistant Services, Tallahassee, FL - Two Resource Impact
Maps of Tampa Bay and the Florida Keys.

Skip Snow, Everglades National Park, Homestead, FL - Digital coverage of the
Monroe and Collier County area featuring the Florida shoreline and NOAA Aids
to Navigation.

Kathy Swanson, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee,
FL - Digital file of the 1-, 2-, and 3-minute grids for the Florida Keys area.

Barry Douglas, Coastal Technology Corporation, Vero Beach, FL - Map featuring
benthic communities for the John's Pass (1:24,000 scale) and Tampa Bay
(1:100,000 scale) areas.

Mike Phillips, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL - Eight
plots of the Little Manatee River watershed to be used for ecosystem evaluation.

Jennifer Bexley, University of South Florida/U.S. Geological Survey, Tampa, FL
- Assistance with aerial photography for USGS Coastal Center to be used in a
change analysis for the St. Petersburg area from 1962 to 1992.

Pale Beaumariage, U.S. Fish & Wildlife, Division of Federal Aid, Atlanta, GA -
Map featuring the 1990 seagrasses, boat ramps, artificial reefs, and bathymetry
data for the Tampa Bay area. This map was used for the American Tackle
Manufacturer's Association Conference in Miami.

William G. Theiss, Lindahl, Browning, Ferrari, and Hellstrom Inc., Fort Pierce,
FL - Digital files of the Florida Keys shoreline, the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary, and road network.

Joseph O'Hop, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, Fisheries Statistics Section, St. Petersburg, FL - Map of the
Tampa Bay region featuring benthic communities, boat tamps, artificial reefs,
bathymetry, and two insets of Cockroach Bay and Boca Ciega Bay at 1:24,000
scale.

Dr. Luis Lagera, continental Shelf' Associates, Jupiter, FL, - Four maps featuring
land, seagrass, coral. and bathynie try within the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary and four maps showing everything in the map series to support phase,
H of the water quality component.

Joseph Szemer, Sunshine Travel, St. Petersburg FL_ - Map featuring resourceS

from Tarpon Key to Ft. DeSoto for fishing areas.

Billy Causey, NOAA, Marathon, FL - Plot featuring benthic resources for the
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. These data were requested to evaluate
the classification scheme for the area.

Merrie Beth Neely, Pinellas County Department of Environmenta I Management,
Clearwater, FL - Information on seagrass loss in the Tampa Bay area.

Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, Marathon, FL - Five sets of aerial survey charts. These map
atlases were distributed to sanctuary managers. In addition, nine copies of the
master grid chart were provided.

Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associates, Arkport, NY - Map featuring benthic
communities inside the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. In addition,
three plots showing the FKNMS and land (without benthic communities).

A. Hart, Continental Shelf and Associates, Jupiter, FL - Information on the
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary classification system and water quality
monitoring.

Mike Sole,.Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Beaches and
Shores, Tallahassee, FL - Bathymetry and benthic resources for the Smathers
Beach area. These-data will be used for an environmental impact assessment of
the proposed beach renourishment project.

Wanda Prentiss, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Submerged
Lands, Tallahassee, FL - Evaluation of Minerals Management and National High
Altitude Program (NHAP) photography to identify bottom features. This
information was used for aquatic leases.

John Glisch, Orlando Sentinel, Orlando, FL - Information on fisheries habitat and
the effect of seagrass, tidal marsh and wetlands loss due to development.

Alice Bard, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and
Parks Clermont, FL - Three prints of the 1950 and 1982 land cover database for
the norhern Pinellas County area.

John Lable. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,Tallahassee, FL -
Digital data of the Florida shoreline database and bathymetry for the Biscayne

Bay area.

Bob Repenning, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Southwest Florida
Aquatic Preserves Office, Bokeelia, FL - Review of aerial photographs for
seagrass damage for the channel marking project.

Kathy Swanson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Sanctuaries
and Reserves, Tallahassee, FL - Digital files for the upper, middle and lower
Keys including: Monroe County Planning Group coverage, artificial reefs-, John
Pennekamp coverage and great white heron coverage.

Betsy Archer, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Digital data of the upper,
middle, and lower Keys coverages. These data are being used in the COMPAS
project.

Patrick Wells, Florida Park Service, Islamorada, FL Map (1:90,000 scale) of
the Lignumvitae Aquatic Preserve.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - One-minute grid of the
Florida Keys area.

Jim Stillwell, City of Punta Gorda, Punta Gorda, FL - Information on the
mapping of land cover data for the Charlotte Harbor area in 1982.

Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, Marathon, FL - Six maps that reflect boat densities for the
following time periods: weekdays; weekends; July 4th, federal lobster season;
state lobster season; and regular lobster season.

Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associates, Arkport, NY - Map depicting the Keys
benthic resources, the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and all other park
borders, I degree graticule, geologic systems. These data will be used in a
pamphlet to educate citizens on the importance of marine habitat and the
relationship to the fisheries.

Jane Urquhart-Donnelly, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau 01'
Aquatic Presrves, Tampa. FL - Resource lmpact Map of the Tampa Bay area.

Carol Blackwell NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville. MD- Series of five maps of
the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary featuring each of the benthic

Charles Pittinger, Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH - Information on mapping
submerged aquatic vegetation in Florida. Proctor and Gamble is the owner of
a pulp mill in Perry on the Fenholloway River. They are required by FDER to
photograph and map submerged aquatic vegetation.

Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, Marathon, FL - Nine maps depicting boat densities in the
Florida Keys. Three maps featured fishing boats, dive boats (pre-July 25), and
dive boats (post-July 25) densities.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Digital data including:
benthic habitats; enhanced TIGER files; bathymetry; and shoreline for the Florida
Keys National Marine Sanctuary.

J. Jackson, Church/Environmental Group, Orlando, FL - Seagrass information on
the Fenholloway River.

Dr. Mark Lindberg, Department of Geography, University of South Florida,.
Tampa, FL - Aerial survey data and boat use sampling strategy for assessment
of the method.

Eva Marie Koch, U.S. Geological Survey, Center for Coastal Geology, St.
Petersburg, FL - Provided posters of trend analysis for display at a workshop for
Congressmen from Washington, D.C.

Pamela McVety, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL
Boundary map for Little Manatee River.

Vic Klemas, University of Delaware, Wilmington, DE - Review classification for
wetlands.

Joel Jackson, City of Tampa, Tampa, FL - Review Tampa Bay 1982 data,
printed a 1:100,000 wax thermal of TP1982TND.GIS (15 sheets).

John Taylor, Taylor Biological Company. Inc., Panama City. FL - Eleven thermal
wax prints (8 1/2" x 11") of St. Andrew Bay Preserve for CARL application for
the Magnolia Beach Tract.

Walter Jaap, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute. St. Petersburg,FL-Information on coral reefs, near Boca Chica and
Western Sarnbo Reef off Key West, displayed area and hectares in each polygon.

John Hunt, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, Marathon, FL - Benthic community data for the FKNMS.

Stu Marvin, Environmental Planner, Hillsborough County City-County Planning
Commission, Tampa, FL - Information on trends in seagrass distribution in
Cockroach Bay.

Roy Lubke, Professor, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa -
Information on GIS and marine resource mapping and monitoring in Florida.

Ben Randall, National Wetlands Research Center, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,
Slidell, LA - Information. on basinwide management, remote sensing, the use of
remote sensing to access estuarine habitats, and the federal coastal wetland
mapping programs.

Charles McShane, Printer, McShane and Moore, Tampa, FL - Black and white
separates to be used in the printing of the Tampa Bay Boater's Guide.

Georgia Cranmore, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL -
Provided 30" contour maps of St. Andrew's Bay, Biscayne Bay, and the Florida
Keys.

Bob Wasno, Lee County Department of Community Services, Division of Marine
Sciences, Fort Myers, FL - Slide of Little Manatee River fish distribution and
Resource Impact Map of Charlotte Harbor.

Wayne Small, University of South Florida, Tampa, F L - Presentation and tour
to inform students on topics pertaining to remote sensing, GIS, and current
marine research.

Walter Jaap, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Digitized. a coverage depicting the damaged area
(due to boat grounding) of reef near Western Sambo and overlaid the coverage
over the benthic. database and plotted at a very detailed scale.

Dr. Don Hayward. Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota. FL - Supplied a disk of
a conversion utility Program for use in ongoing contracted Mote project.

Roger Johansson City of' Tampa, Department of Sanitary Sewers, Tampa, FL-
Calculated areas of Tampa Bay. Old Tampa Bay, Hillsborough Bay, Lower
Tampa Bay, and west of the Skyway Bridge.

William M. Davis. Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners, Clearwater,
FL - Provided Tampa Bay Resource Impact Map.

Bill Harding, The Nature Conservancy, Naples, FL - Information on ARC\JNFO
and ERDAS applications software in mapping marine habitat.

Maynard Hiss, Sarasota, FL - Provided a thermal wax print of Sarasota County
to exhibit at an administrative hearing concerning the Comprehensive Plan for
Sarasota County.

Don Lord, Pinellas County Department of Communication and Information
Systems, Clearwater, FL - Provided a plot of existing Tampa Bay Resource
Impact Map to illustrate some of the data sets in the MRGIS.

Peter Clark, Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, Agency on Bay
Management, St. Petersburg, FL - Tampa Bay Resource Impact Map.
J. M. Kapetsky, Inland Water Resources and Aquaculture Services, Rome, Italy -
Information on marine resources, GIS, shrimping, and habitat impact.

Bruce Ballister, Student, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL - Provided
information on coastal changes using aerial photography.

Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, Marathon, FL - Maps of boat use patterns in the Florida Keys
using aerial surveys.

George McElvey, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL -
Provided Tampa Bay Resource Impact Maps.

Robert D. Woodward, III, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL
- Resource Impact Map of the Pensacola area.

Dr. Hugh Putnam, Water and Air Research, Inc., Gainesville, FL - Shipwreck
plot of existing file 'and additional file with data for explosive testing study.

Dr. Pamela Hallock-Muller, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, FL-
Presentation to class on Florida Geology.

Ken Haddad, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute. St. Petersburg, FL - Provided ten Resource Impact Maps-(five of
Biscayne and five of the Florida Keys).

Marion Eslich, Suncoast Seabird Sanctuary, Indian Rocks Beach, FL -
Information on seagrass trend analysis and habitat trends and
fisheries in Tampa and Sarasota Bays.

Dr. Joseph Kimmel - Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Copy of low-flying aerial survey of Dry
Tortugas, FL for a reference for habitat maps to aid in the selection of fish
counting sites.

Lyman Barger, Fishery Biologist, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service,
Panama City, FL - Two sets of photographs of Warren Bayou, one from 1980
EPA study and two 1983 NHAP color infrared.

Dr. Joseph Kimmel, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Benthic coverage of resources in the Dry
Tortugas (1:24,000).

Kent Smith, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected
Species Management, Tallahassee, FL - Information on mapping of marine
habitat for the state of Florida.

Nanette Holland, Reporter, Tampa Tribune, Tampa, FL - Photography for news
article on propeller-scar damage to seagrass beds.
Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Two copies of Biscayne
Bay Resource, Impact Map and two of the Florida Keys.

William M. Davis, Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners, Clearwater,
FL - Tampa Bay Resource Impact Map.

Joan Browder, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami, FL - Reprints
on marine habitat mapping and fisheries research from the MRGIS.

FlIen Aildcrson, U.S. Geological Survey, Center for Coastal Geology, St.
llctersburg, FL - Copy of Big Bend GIS and Trailer file frorn server to tape to
be tiscd as @mcfflary data for their project monitorino chaiwcs in the 1-`Iorlda Gulf
I 1@ tr
coast \vetlmicls bem,een Tampa and Tallahaswe.

I-larrY Grier, Florida Department of Natural Resources. Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Photographs and Inforniation about photograph
enlargement for Bishop Harbor for mapping of the habitat.

Dr. Clinton Da\,,,es, University of South Florida, Tanipa, FL - Information about
mapping and propeller scar damage in Cockroach Bay.

Gary Milano, Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management,
Miami, FL - Provided Marszalek map #1 for review in Dade County.

Robert Steward, Department of Marine Science, University of South Florida, St.
Petersburg, FL - Resource Impact Maps of Tampa Bay, Charlotte Harbor, Florida
Bay, Everglades, and Dry Tortugas.

Brad Robbins, Student, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL - Conducted tour
of facility and gave information on seagrass mapping and aerial photography.
Richard Newfield, St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce, St. Petersburg, FL
Presented a slide show for Career Day at Northeast High School.

William Teehan, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL -
Provided Charlotte Harbor Resource Impact Map for public hearing.

John Marcellus, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, Si. Petersburg, FL - Plot of seagrass data from their database
of Bishop's Harbor for use of survey of red drum habitats and movements within
the bay.

Stephen M. Hodges, Homer Hoyt Center for Land Economics and Real Estate,
,Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL - Information on marine resources.

Ben Haskill, NOAA/OCRM, Washington, D.C. - Plot of Resource Impact Map
for the Florida Keys and Biscayne Bay.

Suzanne Yancy, Teacher, Olympic Heights Community High School, Boca Raton,
FL - Provided plots of the Florida Keys and Biscayne Bay'Resource Impact
Maps and marine research brochures for use in 9th and 10th grade science

classes.

.1olill Nlarccllus, Florida Departniclit of' Natural Resources, Florida %larinc
Research Institute. St. Petersburg, FL - Showed heticliniaik svinbology grid
t
network, and tic shift on top quad sheets for Bishop's 1-larbor red d111111 Study.

Kevin Peters, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Photographs of Emerson Point for review to
determine enlargement feasibility for snook research area.

Peter Clark, Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, St. Petersburg FL -
Provided wetland trend map of Tampa Bay, 1950 and 1982.

Harry Grier, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Reviewed aerial photograph enlargements for the
Bishop Harbor area of Tampa Bay.

Doug Hayrnans, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Created a plot file using 1990 Tampa
Bay seagrass data for a base map for a sampling project.

Walter Jaap, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Four maps (Dry Tortugas, Western Sambo, John
Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park and Looe Key) for presentations at two
scientific meetings.

Alice Bard, Florida Department of Natural Resources,. Division of Recreation and
Parks, Clermont, FL - Provided 1950 and 1982 land cover classifications of St.
Joe Sound area.

Monroe County, Key West, FL - Review of coastal element of the
Comprehensive Plan.

Tampa Bay Regional Planning, Council, Agency on Bay Management, St.
Petersburg, FL - Map of seagrass propeller scar damage.

R. Duncan Mathewson, Ell, National Center for Shipwreck Research, Islamorada,
FL - Created plot of shipwrecks in the Florida Keys.

Dr. James Miller, Florida Department of State, Division of Historic Resources,
Tallahassee, FL - Shipwreck database and plot file for management of Florida's
historic resources.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/Sl--.'A Division, lZockville. MD - I-'I()t of shipwrecks In
tile Floi-lda Kcys to aid in FKNMS management.

Dr. James NIllier. Florida Del)artment of State, Division ol' 111storic ReSOLIFUS,
Tallahassee, - Flonda Keys and Tanipa Bay Resource Impact Maps.

Jennifer Wheaton, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - 1982 seagrass map of Upper Tampa Bay
(Anclote Key[Honeymoon Island area) for use in lease site inspectloil.

Gary Waters, Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. Charlotte, NC -
Provided benthic resources, state boundary, sanctuary boundary, and shipwreck
databases.

Ken Hartley, Shrimper, Pinellas Park, FL - Aerial photographs of Ft. DeSoto,
Gulfport to Pinellas Point to study shoreline and bottom in detail.

Dr. Bob Hall, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA -
Reprints on mapping marine resources in Florida.

Will Davis, Pinellas County Environmental Management, Clearwater, FL - List
of concerns for overflight mission to photograph propeller scars and seagrasses
at Ft. DeSoto and gather information pertaining to aerial photography.

Clarita Lund, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Calculation of seagrass area for Indian River for
hard clam distribution study.

Neil Bums, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Management Division,
Atlanta, GA - Compile list of ARCANFO databases for data exchange.

Doug Heatwole, Ecology & Enviromnent, Ta. Ilahassee, FL - List of aerial
photograph acquisition companies for statewide gas pipeline project.

Dr. Robert Aangeenbrug, Department of Geography, University of South Florida,
Tampa, FL - Invited speaker for GIS class a the USF, St. Petersburg.

Walter Jaap, Jennifer Wheaton, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida
Marine Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Review photographs and camera
apparatus for accuracy in mapping coral growth.

Toni Ash, Hillsborough Environmental Protection Commission, Tampa, FL
Copies of aerial guidelines for propeller scar damage mapping.

Dr. Larry Doyle, Dean Milliken, Florida Institute of Oceanography, St.
Petersburg, FL - Converted state plane coordinates to latitude/longitude and
Provided digital file of the coordinates.

Daryl Scherkenbach, Resource Data, Anchorage, AK - Copy of Florida shoreline
to tape cartridge to provide sample data for oil spill application.

Christopher P. Jones, Applied Technology and Management, Inc., Charleston, SC
- Thermal wax prints of Hurricane Pass (Honeymoon Island and Caladesi Island)
from 1950 and 1982.

Dr. Robert Aangeenbrug, Department of Geography, University of South Florida,
Tampa, FL - GIS class given tour and demonstration of MRGIS.

Tom Adams, Brevard Community College, Palm Bay, FL - Assist in setting up
GIS base facility at Brevard Community College.

Kent Smith, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected
Species Management, Tallahassee, Fl- - Seagrass distribution data.

Brad Stieh, Archbold Biological Station, Lake Wales, FL - Information on
scanning aerial photography and digital images.

Dr. Larry Doyle, Department of Marine Science, University of South Florida, St.
Petersburg, FL - Conversion of a series of state plane coordinates into latitude
and longitude.

Jennifer Bexley, U.S. Geological Survey - Tampa, FL Assist with aerial
photography and allow use of the zoom transfer scope when available for project.

Peter Jernakoff, CSIRO, Australia - Reprints on the trends in coastal habitat
mapping and monitoring.

Dr. Randy Parkinson, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL-
Information on salt marsh loss in Florida.

Mike Hoff, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ashland, WI - CZM conference
material.

Patrick Jodice, Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, Lake City, FL -
Information on marine resources in the Tampa Bay area.

Neil Burns, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Management Division,
Atlanta. GA - Digital data depicting boundary of FKNMS and Florida shoreline
for the southern portion of the state in ARC/INFO export format.

Mark McClanahan, Student, Department of Geography, University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL - Landsat TM imagery 15/41 Scene ID 4015115174 to Study
spatial diffusion and urban growth.

Eric Fisher, National Audubon Society, New York, NY - Information relating to
habitat loss and ecosystem types for a biodiversity project.

Joe Santo, GEONEX, St. Petersburg, FL - Information on NOAA's cost of
reproducing aerial photography of the Florida Keys.

Bob Virnstein, St. John's Water Management District, Palatka, FL - Reprints on
seagrass mapping and monitoring, and seagrass distribution and abundance
patterns.

Paula Houhoulis, University of Georgia, Athens, GA - Information on seagrass
experiments in Weedon Island.

Ruth Folit, New College, Sarasota, FL - Information on propeller scar damage,
in seagrass beds.

Eric Fehrman, Pinellas County Department of Environmental Management,
Clearwater, FL - Reviewed aerial photography for propeller scar damage.

Bill Porter, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected Species
Management, Tallahassee, FL - Supplied computer information.

Richard Ring, Everglades National Park, Homestead, FL - Request to be involved
in Florida Bay Interagency Working Group.

Juan A. Vega, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,
Palmetto, FL - 1:24,000 plot of soil database at Hillsborough and Manatee
County line.

Doug McLain, NOAA, Monterey, CA - Information on the marine resources
mapping and monitoring in Florida, habitat trends in Tampa and Sarasota Bays,

and a MRGIS summary.

Bruce Bauer, Breedlove, Dennis & Associates, Inc., Orlando, FL -
Reprints on marine resource mapping and monitoring in FLorida and the role of
GIS in mapping Florida's coastal wetland resources.

Ruth Roaza, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee, FL -
Tour and demonstration of the MRGIS.

Joe O'Hop, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine, Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of keygroups at a large scale to help assign
fish dealers to groups.

Kathy Swanson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Sanctuaries
and Research Reserves, FL - Digital data featuring polygons coded for reefs in
the Florida Keys exported as single precision.

Bill Porter, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected Species
Management, Tallahassee, FL - Digital coverage Florida shoreline base map.

Kathy Nesmith, Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL - Plotted out
print data on a map of south Florida titled "Florida Natural Areas Inventory
South Florida Element Occurrence Locations June 1992."

Jane Urquhart- Donnelly, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Patrol, Tampa, FL - Map showing resources,in area of oil spill drill. Resources
acreages within the spill boundary were calculated.

Holly Greening, Tampa Bay National Estuary Program, St. Petersburg, FL
Digital database of 1950 Tampa Bay land cover.

Doug Haymans, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of Tampa Bay depicting three zones:
Bishop's Harbor, MacDill and Weedon Island, and all of Manatee River
(showing Safety Harbor) at 1:100,000.

Joe O'Hop, Florida Departmen of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Import keygroup file and plot keygroups with land
and FKNMS boundary (COMPAS).

Mary Beth Regan, Reporter, Orlando Sentinel, Orlando, FL - Slides showing
damage to mangroves after Hurricane Andrew for the Everglades and Paradise

Point areas.

Mary Morris, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected
Species Management, Tallahassee, FL - Plot out and assemble a boat sampling
atlas. Plot out two maps (state lobster and federal lobster seasons) that show
collected data.

Billy Causey, NOAA, Marathon, FL - Large-scale map to display the entire Keys
in some form of tile scheme. Map displays bathymetry, benthic resources.
navigational aids, boundaries, and zoning.

Skip Snow, Everglades National Park, Miami, FL - Digital data in ARC/INFO
export format of benthic habitat data.

May Zaitoon, Alghanim Industries, New York, NY - Compiled a variety of
statistics and information regarding the Florida Keys marinas and recreational
facilities for a group of international investors interested in the Florida Keys.

John Hunt, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, Marathon, FL - Provided one complete atlas of boating survey maps.

George Jones, John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, Key Largo, FL - Provided
copy of aerial video for a documentary shown on Channel 2 in Miami.

Cynthia Elder, Broward County, Office of Natural Resources Protection, Marine
Resources, Fort Lauderdale, FL - Provided information of inventory of GIS
coverages to provide advise on oil spill contingency planning and GIS.

Bill Porter, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected Species
Management, Tallahassee, FL - Provided copy of CalComp shade set and a
statewide 5-minute grid.

Margit Crowell, South West Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL
- Provided CalComp shade set for use in developing GIS maps.

Vince Sclafani, National Wetlands Research Center, Lafayette, LA - Digital files
for creating paper plots using the electrostatic plotter.

Tom Marlow, FEMA, Miami, FL - Digital data of Florida shoreline, Florida
county, and 5-minute grid files in ARC/INFO format to be used for Hurricane
Andrew recovery.

Patty Sime. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL -
Digital National Wetlands Inventory coverages for the Florida Keys quads.

Gary J. Reckner. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,
Sarasota, FL - Landsat photocopy for seminar.

Dr. Churchill Grimes, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Panama City,
FL - Landsat imagery.

Paul Carlson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plots of 1:24,000 quad scale of seagrass and marsh
data in St. Joe Bay to estimate seagrass loss.

David Camp, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of benthic community database for South
Florida.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Plot of most desirable
color palette for modifying the colors of the "War Room" map of the Florida
Keys and a plot of some available line types and weights.

Mike Salcedo, Florida International University, Miami, FL - Loaned 36" x 36"
enlargements of Hurricane Andrew with a text summary of the photographs.

Dale Rubin, Dale Rubin Design Associates, Breesport, NY - Plot of Florida Keys
habitat map originally done for Dr. Multer in September 1992.

Virginia Shepherd, Eckerd College, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of Tampa Bay
featuring mangroves and seagrasses from the 1989/1990 Florida land use-land
cover database.

Betsy Archer, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Digital data featuring
bathymetry (3, 6, 12 ft depths) within the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary.

M. Marshall, Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota, FL - Use of remote sensing to
access estuarine habitats and machine processing of remotely sensed data.

Daniel Williams, Architect, We Will Rebuild, Miami, FL - Loaned photographs
of Hurricane Andrew for a presentation.

Steve Schropp, Taylor Engineering, Jacksonville, FL - Background information
on seagrass mapping of Indian River Lagoon for National Estuary Program RFP
for mapping historical seagrass data.

Dr. Joseph Kimmel, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Map of Florida Keys benthic
communities.

Brian Julius, NOAA/Damage Assessment. Rockville, MD - Analysis of south
Florida benthic community database for the Grecian Rocks area.

George Henderson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Two plots that are good examples of
work CAMRA does to show numerous coverages.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Digital data of Aids to
Navigation database for the upper, middle, and lower Keys and an explanation
of bathymetry codes.

Walter Jaap, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Sampling map for Fort Jefferson National
Monument, Dry Tortugas for ecosystem meeting in Miami.

Diane Richards, Geography Club, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL -
Several maps as examples of work done using GIS.

Nick Toth, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Cockroach Bay Aquatic
Preserve, Tampa, FL - Map of marine resources for the Cockroach Bay Aquatic
Preserve.

Jorge Laguna, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL - Reprints
on seagrass distribution, potential of Landsat imagery for assessing fisheries
habitat, and marine resource mapping and monitoring.

Barry Lenz, Dames & Moore, Tampa, FL - Conversation about aerial
photography of seagrass distribution.

Mike Wessel, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Aerial photography of Cedar Key/Crystal River
area to review oyster beds and boat ramps.

lanics lZoheson, Florida Department of I'Aivironniental I@Cgulation - CIPS
coordinate data for use In a test of GPS in Florida.

Robert Finegold. NN0A,i\/VK1NMS. N-laratlion, 1-4, Copy of Nllarszalek liahilat
definitions to calculate habitat acreages.
Z:@

George Barley, NOAA/FKNMS. Orlando, FL, - Satellite photographs of Hurricane
Andrew and pre-1'986 Landsat imagery.

Louis Marcotte. Canada Centre for Remote Sensing, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada -
Reprints on marine wetland mapping and monitoring in Florida.

Dr. Charles W. Finkl, Department of Geology, Florida Atlantic University, Boca
Raton, FL - Landsat TM imagery to test land use land cover classification
system.

Gordon Thayer. NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Beaufort, NC -
Consultation regarding aerial photography for Florida Bay, specifically in the area
of Johnson Key and Man-O-War Keys. Advised him the photographs for that
area to the west are uninterpreted.

Scot Smith, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL - Post-hurricane Andrew TM
imagery for an impact study.

Peter K. Gottfried, Natural Systems Analysts, Winter Park, FL - 7" x 7" print
of TM data for Pithlachascotee River (Pasco County).

Lyman Barger, Fishery Biologist, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service,
Panama City, FL St. Andrew Bay Resource Map coverages and plot.

Peggy Mathews, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee,
FL - Twenty-one slides of seagrass meadow die-off, algal blooms, epiphytic
growth on seagrass, dead mangroves, resource map, sponge die-off

Dr. Gustavo Antonini, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL - Digital export files
of bathymetry coverage contained on chart numbers 11463, 11465, and 11467.

George Henderson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of Tampa Bay oil spill drill.

Stephen Stetson, American Forests, Chris Daniel, Comp-Tron, Baltimore, MD -
Information from Hurricane Andrew in 8 min digital format.

Allen Foley, Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Create turtle coverage with the following items:
latitude/longitude, date, species, and size.

Judy Ott. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Southwest Florida Aquatic
Preserves Office. Bokeelia, FL - Blueprint of eight quads from the 1983
Charlotte Harbor land use and vegetation maps.

Bill Zace, Monroe County, Key West, FL - Plot featuring benthic communities
and selected managed areas for south Florida and Florida lobster season map.

Carol Blackwell. NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Map showing benthic
resources with zoning alternative III areas within the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary.

J. Dobson, Oakridge Laboratory - Shortened version of COASTWATCH papers
form ASPRS/RT 1992.

Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associates, Arkport, NY - Plotted two copies of the
SEAKEYS map and one mylar separate.

Glen Woodson, Environmental Consultant, Tallahassee, FL - Consultation.
regarding all aspects of seagrass mapping from equipment, aerial photographs to
classification and field work.

Cheryl Young, Chiles Communication, Tallahassee, FL - Copy of CAMRA GIS
summary.

Kathy Swanson, Bureau. of Sanctuaries and Research Reserves, Florida
Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL - Plot out a boat user atlas.

Dr. John R. Jensen, Department of Geography, University of South Carolina,
Columbia, SC - Review comments on development of an Everglades vegetation
map using SPOT imagery and GPS coordinate data.

Bob Repenning, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Southwest Florida
Aquatic Preserves Office, Bokeelia, FL - 35 mm slides of propeller sear damage
in southwest Florida.

K. Lollar, New Press, Fort Myers, FL - Slides of specific propeller scar damage
to seagrass between Naples and Boca Grande. Also provided underwater
photographs and an interview.

Nanette Holland, Reporter, Tampa Tribune, Tampa, FL- Seagrass propeller
damage management and education information.

Dale Patchett. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL-
Information on seagrass distribution in Delray Beach, Florida.

Betsy G. Davis, HDR Endineering, Inc., Tampa, FL- Large-scale map of
seagrass and marsh data in Escambia and Blackwater Bays.

Carol Patterson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Patrol,
Jacksonville, FL- Jacksonville Resource Impart Map.

Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associated, Artport, NY- Changes made to the
map featuring bethic communities inside the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary (SEAKEYS).

Marty Armstrong, Armstrong Environmental- Information for the National
Estuary Program (NEP) and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) in the Tampa
Vay area.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- Forty-two maps showing
benthic communities in the Florida Keys for use by the FKNMS Advisory
Council.

Sid Flannery, Southwest Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL-
Revised calculations for water table depth (low) and water table depth (high)
for each gaged unit of the Little Manatee River watershed.

Wei Ji, NWRC/Spatial Analysis Branch, Lafayette, LA- Provided a copy of the
oil spill RFP and ESRI legislation.

Ken Haddad, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Insitute, St. Petersburg, FL- Modified SEAKEYS map showing three more
managed areas, Coupon Bight,Lignumvitae, and Biscayne Bay for the Florida
Bay interagency advisory committee meeting.

Gary J. Reckner, Sarasota Soil & Water Conservation District, Sarasota, FL-
Information on how to obtain image of Sarasota County and surrounging area.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- Copy of Tom Matthews
data in digital format for NOAA mapping for FKNMS management plan.

Louis Coakley, Florida Power & Light, North.Palni Beacli. FL - Information oii
OUr Atitoinated Oil Spill Sensitivity Atlas being developed by the Department.

.lord,lil I I ilics, 'I'lle Conservancy. Key West. VL - Copy ot' the boat SL11-VCy
atlas.

Mary Hoppe, Tampa Bay National Estuary Program, St. Petersburg. FL -
Updated boat ranip database for the Tampa Bay Boater's Guide.

Michael E. Cressey, State of Maine Department of Environmental Protection,
Augusta, ME - Information on COMPAS.

Steve Otwell, James Cato, SeaGrant, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL -
Presentation to the North Florida Fly Fishers.

Marsha Martin, Lake Michigan Construction Company, Naples, FL - Resource
Impact Map which identifies the benthic resources in the Naples, Florida area.

Nicholas W. Klobuchar, Tampa, FL - Toured the facility and requested a listing
of the ARCANFO User's Group roster.

Scott, Taylor, Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL - Draft copy of
a map depicting the boundaries of selected managed areas within the Florida
Keys National Marine Sanctuary in DXF format.

Dr. Gustavo Antonini, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL - Hurricane Andrew
aerial photographs.

John Hunt, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, Marathon, FL - May 1992 TM image and transparency of Florida Bay
showing turbid water and May 1989 image showing clear water. November
1992 and January 1993 airplane survey of Florida Bay with colored areas
showing phytoplankton bloom.

George Barley, NOAA/FKNMS, Orlando, FL -' May 1992 TM image and
transparency of Florida Bay showing turbid water and May 1989 image showing
clear water. November 1992 and January 1993 airplane survey of Florida Bay
with colored areas showing phytoplankton bloom.

Mark Robertson, The Nature Conservancy, Key West, FL - May 1992 TM image
and transparency of Florida Bay showing turbid water and May 1989 image
showing clear water. November 1992 and January 1993 airplane survey of

Florida Bay with colored areas showing phytoplankton bloom.

Besty Archer, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- 3 ft and 12 ft bathumetric
data for three areas to add to COMPAS database.

William Teehan, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL- Big
Bend Resource Impact Map with 3- mile line and new shrimp zones.

James McKenna, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Developed a hypsographic curve of
Tampa Bay.

Allen Foley, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Determine latitude and longitude of three marine
turtle strandings in Pinellas County and add into database.

Mark Butler, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA- Slides of Florida Bay
showing phytoplankton bloom.

Linda Salisburg, Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Port Charlotte, FL- Two Landsat TM
(EARTHSAT) prints of Charlotte Harbor.

Bob Thompson- Florida Departmentof Natural Resources, Bureau of Marine
Resource, Regulation and Development, Tallahassee, FL- 1989 Indian River
seagrass map.

Peter Allen, Everglades National Park, Flamingo, FL- May 1992 TM image and
transparency of Florida Bay showing turbid water and May 1989 image showing
clear water. November 1992 and January 1993 airplane survey of Florida Bay
with colored areas showing phytoplankton bloom.

Alan Farago, FLX Communications, Miami, FL- Information on Florida Bay
water quality. Sent four slides and thermal wax print of Florida Bay.

Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, Marathon, FL- Plot of new data points ad add buoys to boat
sampling atlas.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- ARC/INFO export file
of the lastest south Florida benthic resources database.

Caroi Blackwell. NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, NID Final version of the
South l"1011(t.1 L)C11thic resource nial) with no zones oil it. and a niap of (lie
Florl& Keys boal sampling atlas.

Dr. Gustavo Antonini, University of' Florida, Gainesville, FL - Tiger ditta file and
NWI data file.

Dr. Cathy Parker, Department of Geography, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
- Information on aerial photographs for mapping stands of sand pines.

Rod Hefling, Haff and Daugherty Graphics, Hialeah, FL - Provided Postscript file
for SEAKEYS map.

Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associates, Arkport, NY - Modifications to the
SEAKEYS map.

Bob Mulcahy, Continental Shelf Associates, Jupiter, FL - Draft maps of
explosive testing plots in support of Phase 11 of site selection for explosive
testing in the Florida Keys.

Phil Steele, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Modifications to the Big Bend Resource Impact
Map for the Florida Marine Fisheries Commission meeting. Calculated acreages
for all zones.

Scott Taylor, Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL Exp ort file of
1:40,000 Florida shorelineto set up their GIS.

Randy Imai, California Department of Fish & Game, Office of Spill Prevention
and Response, Sacramento, CA - Copy of FloridaiKeys boat sampling atlas to
help California design an atlas to be used by the primary on-scene coordinator.

Dr. Mark Lindberg, Department of Geography, University of South Florida,
Tampa, FL - Provided small coverage to test importing ARC 6.1 coverages into
ARCVrEW.

Anne Meylan, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Tampa Bay Resource Impact Map to assist in
writing MARFIN grant proposal. Provided reprint of GIS and fisheries
management.

Dave Crewz, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Map showing mangroves in Tampa Bay to be used
as a display tool to show Japanese scientists the mangrove distribution and
extent.

Michael E. Cressey, State of Marine Department of Environmental Protection.
Augusta, ME- Provided a copy of marine facilities questionnaire to assist them
in setting up a marine facilities database.

Jill Paterson, NOAA, Seattle, WA- Provided a copy of marine facilities
questionnaire to assist them in setting up a marine facilities database.

Peter Comeau, Collier County Government, Naples, FL- Requested all data in
the system for Collier County.

Anne Meylan, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Three copies of the Big Bend Resource Impact
Map to be included in a MARFIN grant proposal for turtle research.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- Bathymetry coverage
of the Florida Keys.

Rita Meng, Major Green, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida
Marine Patrol, Tampa, FL- Tour of the facility.

Mark Provancha, Bionetics, Kennedy Space Center, Kennedy Space Center, FL-
Information of UNIX system administration.

Clive Howard, Dale Rubin Design Associaties, Breesport, NY- Provided copy of
SEAKEYS may.

Bob Potter, McShane and Moore, Tampa, FL- Corrections to the Tampa Bay
National Estuary Program Tampa Bay Boaters' Guide.

Margit Crowell, South West Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL
- Provided water table depth (low) and primeablility typw coverages from the
Little Manatee River watershed database in ARC/INFO export format.

Skip Snow, Everglades National Park, Homestead, FL- ARC/INFO coverages
of various "managed areas" in the Florida Keys.

Hans Zarbock, Coastal Environmental, Inc., St. Petersburg, FL- Waste-water
servive areas map.

Hans Zarvock, Coastal Environmental, Inc., St. Petersburg, FL- List of septic
tank densities by section-township-range for the Little Manatee River watershed.

Jazek Balszczynski, Bureau of Land Management,Boulder, CO- Information
about the FKNMS Benthic Mapping Program. Provided a may (8 1/2"x 11")
of the Sanctuary.

Mike Johnson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institiuem Inglis FL- Big Bend Resource Impact map showing seagrasses from
the Lower Suwanee to the Homasassa River area.

Dr. Kathleen Sullivan, University of Miami, FL- Tour of facility and
demonstration of MRGIS.

Dr. Kendall Carder, Department of Marine Science, University of South Florida
St. Petersburg, FL- Tour of MRGIS and demonstration of remote sensing and
GIS techniques for graduate Hyperspectral Remote Sensing class.

Toy Livingston, Department of Consumer Affairs, Tallahassee, FL- Reprint on
seagrass distribution and Florida marine fisheries habitat.

Mike Incze, Naval Undersea Warfare Reserch & Development Laboratory,
Rhode Island- Information on marine resources and GIS particulary with respect
to oil spill applications.

Don Carter, Fry, Hammond, & Barr Orlando, FL- Developed eight scenes of
western Florida Bay area depicting variations on position of phytoplankton bloom
and discolored water. Eight thermal wax prints and eight slides were produced.

Estus Whitfield, Office of the Governor, Environmental and Community and
Economical Development Policy Unit, Tallahassee, FL- Transparency images of
Florida Bay depicting phytoplankton blooms and discolored water.

Ray L. Harris, Department of Geography and Encironmental Studies, San Jose
State University, San Jose, CA- Reprints related to GIS and coastal zone
management.

Dr. Sandy Cargo, Florida Institute of Oceanography, St. Petersburg, FL- Copy
of thermal wax print of phytoplankton bloom in Florida Bay to assist in writing

grant proposal.

Phil Steele, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Two Big Bend Resource Impact Maps for Florida
Marine Fisheries Commission meeting.

Sally Patrenos, Bureau of Seafood & Aquaculture, Tallahassee, FL- Information
regarding water quality of Florida Rivers.

John Couy, Private Citizen, Punta Gorda, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte Harbor
Landsat TM slide that appeard in an article in the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

Ken Hartley, Shrimper, Pinellas Park,FL- Lent 2 thermal wax prints and 4
maps of the Honeymoon Island- Caladesi Island area.

Gary Vandenberg, SAcientific Support Coordinator, NOAA, Miami, FL- Export
file of Florida Shoreline to aid in developing an oil spill response plan.

Charles G. Brown, II, Charlotte State Bank, Port Charlotte, FL- Duplicate of
Charlotte Harbor TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald
Tribune.

Margaret Harmon, Private Citizen, Punta Garda, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte
Harbor TM slide that appeared in an article in the Satasota herald Tribune.

Lucille Fenton, Atlantic Gulf Communities, Port Charlotte, FL- Duplicate of
Charlotte Harvor Landsat TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota
Herald Tribune. The enlargement will be used for the Welcome Center Office
in Port Charlotte.

C.T. Klein, Port Charlotte, FL- Duplicated of Charlotte Harbor Landsat TM slide
that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

William G. Haerr, Private Citizen, Nokomis, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte harbor
Landsat TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

Charles Eastwood, Private Citizen, Venice, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte Harbor
Landsat TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

John Blaser, Blaser's Nurseries, Inc., Tallevast, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte
Harbor Landsat TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald
Tribune.

REFERENCES

Doolittle. J.A. G Schellentrager, and S. Ploetz 1989. Soil Survey of
Hillsborough County, Fl. United States Department of Agriculture. Soil
Conservation Service. 168 pp.

Flannery, M.S.. H.C. Downing, Jr.. G.A. McGarry, and M.O. Walters, 1991.
Increased nutrient loading and baseflow supplementation in the Little Manatee
River Watershed. pp. 369-395 in S.F. Treat and P.A. Clark, eds. Proceedings of
the Tampa Bay Area Scientific Information Symposium II, 528 pp.

Little Manatee River Watershed Atlas

Florida Department of Natural Resources

A report of the 14onda Department of Community Affairs
pursuant to
National Oceamc and Atmospheric Admimstration Award No. NA270ZD345-01

he Little Manatee River (LMR) watershed, located on- the All map sheets and mylar overlays are co-registered to allow
eastern shore of Tampa Bay, Florida, was selected as the real-time analysis of the map pages. We encourage users of
site of a multi-agency project focusing on the development this atlas to explore the relationships among the map layers
of watershed-oriented resource-management tools and by removing the mylar overlays and superimposing them onto
strategies. The project was a cooperative effort by federal, the thematic coverages.
state, regional, and local agencies. The LMR watershed
includes 36 subbasins that drain 573 square kilometers of This atlas is designed to provide a general view of the
land covering portions of two counties. The dominant land watershed and the relationships among the different types of
use in the watershed is agricultural. The recently completed information. 'fhe detailed digital information can be made
interstate-75, however, provides a major corridor for influx available to agencies with GIS capabilities. For additional
and growth and will undoubtedly impact a significant portion information on the Little Manatee River watershed database,
of the watershed. or this atlas, please contact:
Using the Marine Resources Geographic Information- System Gail McGarry MacAulay
(MRGIS) at the Florida Department of Natural Resources -Florida Department of Natural Resources
Florida Marine Research Institute in St. Petersburg, we, Florida Marine Research Institute
through a multi-agency effort, have developed a comprehensive 100 Eighth Avenue SE
database for the watershed. The maps featured in this atlas St Petersburg, FL 33701
represent a portion of that database. The following data (813) 896-8626
layers are included in this atlas: SPOT satellite basemap,
land cover 1988, flood zones, wildlife plant communities,
future land use, elevation, distribution of selected species
of fish, detailed soils, soil hydrologic units, locations of
wastewater treatment facilities, withdrawal sites of
permitted wells, and densities of septic tanks based on
sectiori-township-range. The transportation network,
subbasins, hydrologic gaged boundaries, hydrology, and
section-township-range units are shown as mylar overlays.
In addition, a 500-ft buffer has been calculated for the river-
corridor and is shown as an overlay. The results of a GIS
analysis are demonstrated in the map describing future land
use within the 100 year flood zone. For this analysis we
identified the 100 year flood zone on the basis of the flood
zone data. We then evaluated these flood-prone areas based
on the future land use map.

BEA

THIS IMAGE WAS CREATED USING AN APRIL 1998 SPOT SATELLITE
PANCHROMATIC (10 M]ffER RESOLUTION) IMAGE THAT WAS
SPECIALLY ENHANCED WITH SPOT SATELUM MULTISPECIRAL
(20 MEIER RESOLUTION) DATAL THESE ENHANCED MULTISPECrRAL,
BANDS WERE CO]KBINED TO SIMULATE COLOR INIMARED AERIAL
PHOTOGRAMY. THIS BASE IMAGE, WITH A RESOLUTION OF 10 METERS,
WAS GEOGRAPHICALLY RECTHIIED TO THE UNIVERSAL TRANSVERSE 8CATE Idow
MRRCATOR (U]" COORDINATE SYSTEM USING U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
(USGS) 1:24,OW SCALE 7.5 MINUIE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLES.

SPOT Satellite Basemap,
Aft-
of the Little Manatee River Watershed

p." I.." hw@
ub. P-- 1.ft..dm ay

w E

20
10 28

16 34
13
6
17 19 21 30
7 31
2 1 14 22
3 8
32 35
9 15 18- 23 29 36
12
4 24
Reservoir
25 33

THIS OVERLAY SHOWS nIE SURBASINS OF THE IZrr1E MANA7EE
Rr%qR WAIMRSHED AS DEF114ED, BY TEE SOU`rRWBSr FLORIDA, 27
WATER. MANAGEMM DNIR[Cr (SWFWMD). WAM I 1-.IWAW

Subbasins of the Little Manatee River Watershed
I. LMR - Below SR-301 13. Dus Creek 25 Baker breach
2. Sun City Slough 14. Below Dug Gap 26: LMR - South Flat
3. Wildcat Creek 15. LIAR - Wininums, 27. Keen Branch
4 Unnamed Drainage Ditch 116, Lake Wim@ 28. Pierce Branch
5*Ruskin Inlet Marsh Branch 17. Lake Winumms Drain 29. Unnamed Drain
6. Mills Bayou 18., Below South Clap 30. LMR - Lonesome
7. Bay- Day- 19. Gully BrWWh 31. Upper Howard Prairie Branch
8. Bolster Bayou 20. -Carlion Branch 32. Lower Howard Prairic, Branch
9. Curiosity Creek 21. Below Carlton Gap 33. Long Branch
10. Cypress Czeek 22- - LMR - Nor& Fork 34. Mined Area MW
11. Below Cypress Gap 23. Unnamed Streant. 35. Alderman, Creek Ub. R--
12. Unnamed Slough 24. Moody Branch 36. Mined Area Fkd& R-h h.1ftd.
R-

Branch

s Creek

Take Winmiuma

Ole*
Lower Little hbmdw River

Fort Lonesome

North Fork

South Fork

TM HYDOLOGIC GAGE BOUNDARIES OF THE LITZIE MANATEE
RIVER IDENTIFIED IN TE[IS OVERLAY WERE DEFENUD BY 1AWAW
TECE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATEP NW4AGEWNT DURTRICr
(SWFWMD)-
1 4

Ilk
lemsi-- Drainage and Hydrologic Gage Boundaries

HmW D,

R.-Ch Laft
G-vqf"2@87-

Ab
CA

. .... . ...

Xti

..........
..........-

.. .........

..........
..........
THE ELEVATION RANGES SHOWN IN THIS MAP WERE DERIVED
FROM FIVE FOOT ELEVAnON DATA PROVIDED BY THE
SOUTHWEST IZLORMA WAMM MANAGENEW DISIRICr (SWFW?AD).

2 4

.6
A- Elevation Ranges within the Little Manatee River Watershed

0 - 10 Fmt ME 40 - 50 Feet IM 80 90 Feet EZI 120 - 130 Feet
10 - 20 Feet = 50 - 60 Feet 90 100 Feet M 130 - 140 Feet
20 30 Feet = 60 - 70 Feet 100 - 110 Feet 140 - 150 Feet
30 40 Feet ME 70 - 80 Feet 110 - 120 Feet 150 - 160 Feet
Dhid-.( mb.

Ab
;
P IN
j; X

...... ....

ilm,g

THE DETAHM) SOILS SHOWN IN THIS MAP WERE DIGITIZED
FROM la4,000 SCALE SOIL, MAPS AS RECOmpum FROM THE
FMj-qBOROUGH AND MANATIM COUNTY SOIL SURVEYS BY A
SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE (SCS) SOIL SCIMMST

BCALB IdKOW

1 0 1

Detailed Soils
w *ttle Manatee River Watershed
ithin the Li

r S
F

'Pik

64 4

400

TRE HYDROLOGIC aROUPS DEMC= IN 7HIS MAP WERE
DERIVED FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT' OF AGRICULTUIM
SOIL CONSERVAnON SERVICE (SCS) SOEL SURVEYS OF
EMLLSBOROUGH AND MANAMM COUNTIES.

WAL 8 1 WMWW

.6 A.
Soil Hydrologic Groups within the Little Manatee River Watershed

Hydrologic Group D = High Runoff Potential/Very Slow Infiltration Rate Undefined Runoff Potential
Hydrologic Group B/D Combination of Hydrologic Groups B and D Land Outside the-Watershed
So -

Hydrologic Group C = Slow Infiltration Rate Open Water
Hydrologic Group B = Moderate Infiltration Rate P@" Dv@& N&.W R.-
Hydrologic Group A = Low Runoff Potentialffligh Infiltration Rate

V-1

GRP-
A

THE BUFM SHOWN IN THIS OVERIAY WAS CMMMOR GENERATED.
TO SHOW THE AREAS WMHN SW FEET OF TIM RWER CHANNELS.

500 Foot Buffer of the Little Manatee River
il @ 6@6

'RU

A![

AKE
ME 1988 LAM COVER CLASSUICATION DERCM IN TM MAP .......... NY,
. . ........
WAS onERPRUrED FROM THE SPar SATELIM RASEKAP
AND 1z58;000 AND 1:26,5W SCALE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY.

3&.b. I.- awwhk bft..d. apt-
A,
Little Manatee River Watershed Land Cover 1988
LaW Outsitle the Water&W = Famwd Wetlan& 17,952- BE Hafftwow Forest 3,377* Commercial 542*
Open Water ad& 5,229* Citrus 12,499* F=1 RangeW4 Shrub & Brush 12,424* Mining 1,236*
Mangroves 267* Row Crop 26,295* Forested Pine Flats - 9,360* Golf Course 795*
E-1 Sahmarsh 597* Fish Farm 816* Suburban 7,247* Airstrip 56*
Herbaceous Wetlands 5,6_32* F-1 Pasture 37,377* utility 151* Transportation 558*
Area Calculations Measured in Acres __Jj

6- Juvenile Striped Mullet 600- Bay Anchovy
Juvenile Red Dnun
Juvenile Spotted Seatrout -

5- 500-

0
w 4- pq 400

3- 300-

'Cl
2 '3200-
U

100

0 0
22.7 14.38.6 2.3 0.6 0.2- 22.7 14.38.6 2.3 0.6 0.2
Mean - Salinity om Pam P. m.-m Mean Salinity(. Pm p. T..4

2@
A,

Ga.
dill

J11

THIS FIGURE DEPICTS THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG SALINITY SAMPLING STATION, AND CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT FOR SELECTED SPECIES
OF FISH IN THE ESTUARINE PORTION OF THE LITTLE MANATEE RIVER, CATCH VALUES ARE BASED UPON A BIWEEKLY SAMPLING STRATEGY
WHICH UTIL]ZED SEINES AND TRAWLS FROM JANUARY 1998 THROUGH DECEMEBER 1991. SAMPLING STATIONS ARE SHOWN ON THE BASIS OF
THE 1988 LAND COVER LAYER.

47-1

1 4

THE WILDLIFE AM UPLAND PLANT COMMUN]TIES IN TMS MAP
WERE IN7`ERPRBTED FROM LANDSAT TEIMATIC MAPPER
SATE111TE IMAGERY (1985-1989) BY THE FLORIDA aAME AND
FRESHWATEIL FISH COMMISSION IN COOPERATION WITH 111E
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.

Mk- R-
md. R-h h-ft@
Gvi& ld-a. s)
6
Wildlife And Upland Plant Communiffies
Land Outside the Watershed EM Sand Pine Scrub 600* Saltmarsh 549* Mangroves 289*
Open Water 4,151* SandhiR 94* Freshwater Wedand 5,184* Grassland 55,294*
5

UnWerpreted Area 64* Xeric Oak Scrub 571* Cypress Swamp 793* Shrub and Brushhmd 16,479*
Dry Prairie 7,697* Mixed Hardwoodl?ine Forest 4,878* Hardwood Swamp 6,286* Barr-en 1,and 27,356*
Pinelands 2,515* Hardwood Hammock & Forest 9,479*- Sbnib Swamp 96*
*Area Calculations Measured in Acres

-1x X,

MEE%

THE FLOOD ZONES IDENTIFIED IN TMS MAP WERE DIGTI.-.
FROM TM 1.6,000,1:12M AND 1.24@W
FEDERAL EMERCEN[CY MANAGDONT AGENCY MIMA)
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS "M.

SCALE 1:18DAW

Little Manatee River Watershed Flood Zones

M V Zone - Area of 100 Year Flood with Velocity 240* Open Wder
A Zone - Area of 100 Year Flood 22,224* Land Outside the Waterdied
B Zone - Area Between 10D Year & 500 Year Flood 4,018*
C Zone - Area of Minimg Flood@ 115,887* n." Dq@m d N-d I--
md.
P-M U.I.. I-b bbft
*Area Calculations Measured in Acres U.I. 7 . , ", 1

LNR Watushed Stumn Center
B
oundary

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
75

PmTish
Pewmk

THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK SHOWN ON THIS OVERIAY
WAS CREATED FROM THE 1:100A00 1980 CENSUS DATA
By THE SOUTHWEffr KDREDA WATER MANAGRAENT DISMCr

!,6
Transportation Network

w 0

SCALE I 1:18W

1 2

Amiga

. . ...............

... ......... ..
......... ....

. . . ... .....

Tim RnuRE LAND USE CLASSIRCATIONS H)EffIIqHD IN THIS MAP WERE
DIMTMD FROM THEA-63,360 SCALE BILLSBOROUGH COUNTY MAP
(REVISED OCTDBER 1992) AND 113E 1:40,00D SCALE MANATEE COUNTY
MAP IN TIMIR RESPECTIVE COMF21111ENSIVE PLANS.

... ..............

DtM. & M.J.. R.-
P.d& mw. 1-" heft
Uft.-W. 83
Little Manatee River Watershed Future Land Use
Hillsbolrough County Classifications Manatee County Classifications
m Urban Level 2 00 DUIA) = L@*&&umm Deniaty Urban Residential (9 DUIA) ME Rural Raddeniml (I DU/A) = Havmmunentally Senut- Urban - Pdap Mixed Um
= Urban Level I (B DU/A) = JAM Urcan Dengity Rcdd-d*,1 (6 DU/A) Rural Residential - Planned Open We- Residential (9 DUIGA) ASnoultualffl .. 1 (.2 DUI"
ME C....&I Cid (20 DU/A) EM Suburban Dwdy (4 DUIA) AgriculturWitural (.2 DUIA) Land cansida the Watershed Residential (6 DUIGA) Conamnuon I
= Commercial Office CZO DUIA) Iw Suburban Demmy RdenW C2 DU/A) Agricultural/Mining ffM RmAential (3 DUIGA)
m 1110 Density R-de-tial C20 DU/A) Low Suburban Demany Residential - Planned Agdcultm (.1 DUIA) Em lrutcaftial -- Ligk
Medium Density Residential (12 DU/A) Lw %&wftw Natural ftemervation MajodSomi Public

Fri
Off
r SCALB I lzl8k=
IL

4-
o 4%
r
jp'

..... . ......... .
%

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L - - - - -
Manatee counry

...... .....

COVMAGE DEMONSTRAIM TIM USE OF A GBOGRAPMC
DIFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS) FOR OVERLAYING AND ANALYMNG T WIT
MULTIPLE DATA LAYERS * IN THIS EXAMPLA THE FLOOD ZONE
LAYER WAS USED TO DETERMINE TILE FUTURE LAND USE
CLASSIPICA77ONS WMHN THE 10D YEAR FLA)OD BONE. BASED
UPON THE ADOFIED FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATIONS,
ApPRO)WAAMUM 42.6n DWHULENG UNITS CAN BE DEVELOPED
TIIIS AREA OF 22,464 ACPM.

Fl@& Mb. 1---* h@

.6 .6
Future Land Use Classifications within the- 100 Year Flood Zone
Hillsbolrough County Classifications Manatee County Classifications
Urban L,;Q 2 (26 DU/A) LI.M.&. Density Urban Residamid (9 DU/A) FM Rural Residential (I DU/A) M Bimanscattally Saask,@,. Urban - Fringe Wmd U.
Urbao L,,,.l I (B ]DU/A) Low Urban Density Residential (6 DU/A) Rural Resid-dial - Planned open Water Raidential (9 DUIGA) Agricultinal (2 ]DU/GA)
Community Oom-vil C20 DU/A) Suburban Dansity Residential (4 DU/A) AViculturalfRinal (.2 DUIA) Land outside the Watervilted R.Mfial (6 DUIGA) Contention T
Commercial Office CZO DUIA) LOW Suburban Density Residential (2 DU/A) Agricultmal/Wwing FM Residential (3 DUMA)
Density Residential (20 DU/A) MMH Low Suburban Density Residential - Planned Agriculture (.1 DU/A) hasaw - Lj&
Density Residential (12 DUI/A) EM U& Imiustrid Natural Plesavatim MjdSctd Public

A4L

A
A A
A
A
A
A A h& AA A
A A A
A A AA AIA4 A
A & A A
A- AA AA A
*A, A A
A A A
. . A 9 "'a. A A
A a - . A
AA
A wr A A&
A A
AA AA A
A A A A A A A AA A A A
A A A A 0 AAA AAAA A
A A A A A A A A A A A A
AA A AA A
A A AA hA A
A AAi A & t AA AA,# JAA A
A AA A A A A A A A A AA A A.
A
A A AA A A A A A
AA A A A I A A A hA AA X
AA A A A @A A A It A A A
A A a --- A
A a A AAAA A A
- - A A41L# A A A A
A A A A A A A AAA A A A A
A A A A A A At A A AA A A A
A A A A AA A A AN
A A
A A A
A
A A
A A AA A
A

A A

THIS MAP SHOWS THE DISTRIBUMN AND TYFES OF PERMrrTED WELLS
WITHIN THE LZME MANATEE RIVER WATERSHED AS PROVIDED BY A
THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGIRONT DISTRICT (SWFWMD)
A A

SCME 1:18)MO

1 4

.6
Locations and Types of Permitted Wells
Surface Wells Ground Wells
Tropical Fish Farm A ReereauorW Facility 9 IndutriaMning
Dairy Farming - A AgriculUuW Use * Agriculhml Use
A Residential Use A ln@Billg * Recreational Use
A Sewage Treatnent * Undefted Usage nbm- a Md.
F1.d& M@ R....h bd-
Md.. I..." avqbi. sy

36 St 32 39

4 4 3 2

7 a 91 11 12 7 6 9 12 7 a 10 11
10 10 11 9 9 10 11

14 is 17
16 IS 14a 14 17 26 is 14 93 to 17 Id if 14 13 Is 17 16 Is 14 11

23 20 19 23 21m23 24 19 2D 21 ZZ 23 24 19 2D 21n25 19 2D 22 25
24

26 25- so 29 28 27 26 25 30 so 29 28 27 26 V 25
27 26

96 31 14M n 11 12 33M 14M
94

4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 5 4 3 2 4 S 2 4

to it 127 8 9 10 q to it 71
17 a 9 'a 11 12-
Id 17 IS
cm to
cm 14 13 is 17 16 is 14 is
9 2D
to 20
20 24@_ I'D 21 21
-30
'a 2S WALZ I 1:18DAW
2' 26
THE DIFORMAMON IN Mg, )VERLAY WAS MOVIDED BY f.3
MIE SOUIENEW FWRMA V MM MANAGENIH?a DtSMCr
(SWVM).

Range 18 E Range 19 E Range 20 E Range 21 E Range 22 E
.6
Section-Townsh -Range Grid
within the Little a ee River Watershed
V4
@'4
.2
@.4
t140
21
'@4 1 t2l, 514 4
1@7 J71 9

ip
nat

P."

41lD

Al
W
.L

mmm

. . . . . . . . . . . . .
MENE
0- -

----------
111UN-11

T
... .. .....

. . .........

jig

iilit.- Ov

..........

nm il!111N

fill m%,4,

THIS MAP DEPMTS THE DISTRIBUTION AND QUANT1TY Of
SEPTIC TANKS BY SEMON-TOWNSHIP-RANGE WITEDN ME
LITITZ XkNAM RIVER WATERSHED AS PROVIDED BY
]DAMES & MOOREL t
.... ......

Simms 1019mm

-6 1L
Density- of Septic Tanks
Sections with No Septic Tanks = Sections with 26-30 Septic Tanks Sections with 3014M Septic Tanks
Sections with 1-5 Septic Tanks EM Sections with 3540 Septic Tanks Sections with Mom dm 5W Septic Tanks
Sections with 6-10 Septic Taub Sections with 50-100 Septic Tanks Open Water
Sections with 11-15 Septic -ranks Sections with 101-150 Septic Tanks Land Outside the Watershed
- 4GO
M sections with 16-2D septic -ranks Sections with 151-200 Septic Tanks P@& DMaUl If NM@ Rm-1
Midi- of mlim It-
Sections with 21-25 S ic Tanks Sections with 201-300 Septic Tanks

J.D

gum

awe
imp

MIN

DGIORMATION ON WASTEWATER TREATI@@ SERVICE
ARE" DEPICTED H4 THIS MAP WERE PROVIDED BY
DAMES & MOORE

,6 .6
Wastewater Treatment Service Areas
10-=-N
. . . . . . . . . .
Am Serviced By County Wastewater System Appmimaft Area Serviced By hiterim Wastewater
1. Manatee ILVY. 35.0- a. Rivawood Aparuneeft
Milad-Septic Tanks And Couluty Waamater System i strw@ Ridge 150.0* 9. Rivalhaven MJLF.
3. Ifide.A-Way Catupground 30.,D* 10. HD]idRy Pabus ILV.P.
fiffwaW Wastewater System 4 Chula Via% MIL SID 25.0- 11. Little Manatee CwM
5. Neptune ALV. 26.5- 12. Sm City MJHLp.
6. Little, Manatm lam 30.0* 13. IMo Manatee River
Open water 7. Woodland Estates MJLP. 112* 14. Effils. Co. Rea Ana
land Inside the Watershed Not Presently Serviced *Flow Measured in Thousandsof GaRons Per Day

APPENDIX B

Anlio(a(cd Data Mctionary Tcinplafe

A. F.ntily Template

An entity is an 'object in sp,ace, for example a bridge, that is represented as a point,
line, or polygon on a map. The object is described by a Set Of Ittribffles- such as
composition, length, number of lanes, etc.

1. Label

The reference name for the entity.

2. Entity Authority

The source of the definition. For example, the en6ty authority could be by the
author, a professional organization, a dictionary, etc.

3., Definition

A definition of an ob ect potentially consists of two co description of
j mponents, a
the object like one would find in a dictionary and the procedures that were used to
measure it,

a.: Description

A general description,of the object, ie. a bridge is a foot path or road\1way
that spans a water course or crevice.

b. Measurement/Determination

This describes how the object was measured. This may not be pertinent to
all entities and is left to the discredon of the documenter. An example of an
entity description that would require completion of this section would be the
sources of an abstraction, ie. if group of polygons describing components of
an estuary were collapsed into a larger polygon at a higher level of
classification, it would be important to know what the subclasses consisted
of.

4. Point, Line, Polygon

This is for information purposes to describe how the object is represented in space.

Point: A zero-dimensional object that specifies geometric location. One coordinated
pair or triplet specifies the location.

Line: A direct line between two points. It should be inclusive of the term string
which is: an ordered sequence of points representing a connected non-branching

\cqucmc ot line ,egnicrils.

Po I vp()n @A set of non- intersecting lines. A-Ith closure, that represents a two
dillicil"lon'll oh.1ccl III ',pace,

S. Quantity of Data

A description of how much data, in temis of computer storage, this object occupies.
The units of measure must be provided.

B. Attribute Template

An attribute is a defined characteristic of an entity, for example, composifion is a
possible attribute for a bridge.

1. Label

The reference name of the attribute.

2. Attribute Authority

The source of the definition. For example, the endty authority could be by the
author, a professional organization, a dicbonary, etc. A complete reference should
be provided where possible

3. Derinition

A definition of an attribute potentially consists of two components, a description of
the object like one would find in a dictionary and the procedures that were used to
measure it.

a. Description

A general description of the attribute, ie. one of the attributes of a bridge
would be its composition, that is what it is made of.

b. Measu remen t/Determinat ion

This describes how the attribute was measured, but it may not be pertinent to
all entities and is left to the discrefion of the documenter. An example of an
attribute description that would be the Iab6ratory procedures for measuring
mercury. '17his could be quiet extensive and provisions have been made to
allow an unlimited amount of space for documentation, this information may
be imported from existing electronic documents. If there are aliases and the
documenter feels that they are important, they should be included in this
section.

i ihc,) i I ic lomwi ihit the ittribL11C duc can tlikc. 1lic ,ct in hich a v,in2A)Jc
is cxpicsscd, 1 ,Jpha, alphanumeric, graphic char,ictcr, intcoer, etc.

a. Character type

There are six major speci ica6ons of type:

A data type indicates the manner in which the field or subfield will be
encoded. This is relevant to the data transfer and not to a data dictionary.

A Graphics characte rs, alphanumeric characters, or alphabetic characters
I Implicit-point (integer)
R Explicit-point unscaled (real)
S Explicit-point scaled (real with exponent)
B Bitfield data (unsigned binary, per agreement)
C Character mode bitfield (binary in zero and one characters)

b. Allowable values (domain enumeration)
1. Length This ident ifies theInumber of characters in the variable field.

2. Number of signifi Icant digits

The number of decimal places that are meaningful. For
example, in dealing with dollars.and cents there are two
sianificant digits. If you have a value such as $1.53 multiplied
by .18, you will have an answer of .1754, but the answer will
only be valid (and sensible) to the second decimal. Thus the
correct answer, rounding to the nearest 1800th, is .18.

3. Units of measure

Identifies what measurement was used for a value, i.e. dollars,
francs, feet, inches, meters, pounds., kilograms, etc.

C. Categorical

Data elements which only take up certain values, i.e., a departrhent number
which can take on the values 06, 20 and 33, but no other values.

I'he actual categones, such iis FI, Ga, AL

2. Nivaning

Definition of the values i.e., Fl = Florida, Ga Georgia, Al
Alabama.

d. Continuous

Data elements, which for all practical purposes, can take any value within a
range, i.e., a dollar amount from zero to $999,999,999.99 to the nearest cent.

1. Range of values

The range of values is the minimum and maximum value.

a. Minimum

1. value

Minimum numerical value.

2. inclusive/exclusive

This defines whether or not the minimum numerical value
included in the range or is it excluded in the ra'nge. An
example of an excluded minimum would be a rangge of
numbers from 5.000 to 10.000 where the least value would be
5.001 but never 5.000. If the number was inclusive the
minirnum value would be 5.00Q

b. Maximum

1. value

Maximum numerical value.

2. inclusivelexclusive

Conceptually the same as minimum inclusive/exclusive, but the
maximum value.

2, TYpical Nalue

(7jl, ,,o) Indication as to what I ivpicil value would be. This mav be
dcrihcd 'I" a 111C,111, mediall or Mode, if' appropnite it P., not necessarV 1(i
C-ak'LlIatC 01CW 'd1LJeS. The purpose is to provide a gcneral understanding of
wl)atIs to be expected." Tex(ual description is also appropriate with ,suppori
for the derived number.

5. Other editing information

This would include programmatic edits from the source of data entry.
Examples of edits would be upper or lower case, values = A through G,
values less than 0, etc.

If editing features such as date fields, dollar marks, etc. are included with the
data, this Information should be included here.

SIIIII Data Dictionary Report:

Soils Data Set

A. Entit and iLs asuciatvd attribuics

1. Label Standard Soils Data Set

2. FntitN Authorilv Soil Conservation Scrv)cc

3. Definition of the Entity All auributes associated w4h each soil.

4. Point\Linc\Polygon Polygon

5. Quantity of bata Unknown

B. Attribute Template

1. Label ANFLOOD

2. AtIribute authority Soil Conscrvabon Service

3. Def-inition

a. Dewription Annual Flooding Frequency. Descriptive term used to describe the probabilky that
flooding %kill cur during any car.

b. Measurcment Estimate based on the synthesis of evidence including. but not limited to: seasonal
climatic data, river and coastal hydrological data, and field observations.

4. Domain Value

a. Value Format

1. Domain

a. Character type A (character)

b. Allowable values (domain enumeration)

1. Length 5

2. Number of significant digits , N/A

3. Units of Measure N/A

b.1 Categorical

1. Value None

2. Meaning No ,easonable possibibrqy of 2noo4d:ng (ne6w 0 PCTCCn-,
chance of flooding in any year).

b.2 Categorical

1. Value Rare

2. Meaning Flooding unlikely but possible under unusual weather
condions (from near 0 to 5 8;>crcznt chancc of flooding

In any year or near 0 to 5 times in 100 years

6.3 Categorical

1. Value Oxide

2. Meaning Occasional Flooding is expected infrequently under
usual weather conditions. 5 to 50 percent chance of
flooding in any year or 5 to 50 times in 100 years.

6.4 Categorical

1. Value Freq

2. Meaning Frequent. Flooding is like to occur often under usual
weather conditions (more than a 50 percoent chance of
flooding in any year, or more than 50 times in 100
years).

6.5 Categorical

1. Range of vaules

a. Minumum

1. value N/A

2. inclusive/exclusive N/A

b. Maximum

1. value N/A

2. inclusive/exclusive N/A

2. Typical value N/A

5. Other editing information The category COMMON does not occur as often. It is found
primarily in the older soil surveys.

QUAILTY AND ACCURACY REPORT

Template- Vector Data

Data Coverage Name: Enter a name for this thematic layer, i.e. LULC for Land Use Land Cover.

Data Coverage Description: Description of this coverage, its particulars, parameters, etc.

Organization: Name of organization that prepared/conducted this report.

Prepared By: Name of person who prepared report.

Section: Section of organization that prepared this report.

Department: Department that prepared this report.

Updated: Enter the update period for this report.

A. Lineage

1. Description of source material(s)

a. Lineage Name: Brief desctiptive name of lineage, i.e. USGS 7.5 minute quads.

b. Specify ratio, i.e. 1:24,000. Ratio between the distance on a map, chart, photograph or image
cooresponding distance on the surface of the Earth.

c. Identify datum. Geodetic datum: ratio between the distance on a map, chart, photograph or image
and the cooresponding distance ont he surface of the Earth.

d. Map Project: Systematic drawing of lines of a plane surface to represent the parallels of latitude and the
meridians of longitude of the Earth, such as

polyconic
UTM
Lambert
Transverse Mercator
Albers
Equidistance Cylindrical
Miller Oblated Stereographic
Stereographic
Regulator Mercator
Modified Transverse mercator
Bipolar Oblique Conic Conformal
Other (name and explain)

e. Media of Source: Origins of data and physical substance, i.e., color mylar, paper, etc.

f. Condition of Media: Qualitative statement of condition of media i.e. Excellent, Fair or Poor.

g. Creator organization/individual: Name, address, and phone numer.

h. Date of Source Material: History of development of source material; amy be multiples.

1. Time Interval covered: i.e. Dates of data sampling, i.e. 1954-1989.

2. Update Schedule: Update schedule, if known.

2. Deriction methods for data

The purpose of this step is to describe how the data was brought into the system. By knowning how the data
was created and the technology used, limits inthe accuracy may be deduced.

a. Methods of derivation

1. Preautomation Compilation: Complation information, i.e. Photointerpieted from 1:24,000 scale maps

2. Digitizing_Scanning_Transformations:

3. Equipment

a. Model: Model information, i.e., ANA Tech Eagle 4080 large format scanner

b. Resolution: i.e., 400 dpi Altek Table, accuracy of .001 inches.

c. Tolerance of Digitizer: i.e. Tolerance of Altek tables is .003 inches.

b. Date of Automation

1. Initial Date: i.e. Between 9780 to 11,090

2. Update Schedule: i.e. Every five years.

c. Control Points: Known information on control points used. A control point is any station in a horizontal or
vertical control network that is identified in a data set or [hotograph and used for correlating
data show in that data set or photograph. A coordinate system is a particular kind of
reference frame system, such as plane rectangular coordinated or shperical coordinates, that
uses linerar or angular quantities to designate the position of points within that particular
reference frame or system.

d. Explanation of procedures used to dugitize/scan/transform the data

This is a description of procefures that would indicate the quality/accuracy of the data captured. Information
that would now provide insights should not be included. Transformation routines that are supplied by venders
should include the name of the transformation module. User-created transformations should include the
following:

1. Name of transformation methodology: Any appropriate methodology.

2. Description of Algorithm: Description of any algorithm used.

3. Mathematics used in the transformation: Relevant mathematics.

4. Set of Samples Comutations: If there are any competations, enter a sample here.

e. Software system and version used: i.e., DOS 5.1 OS/2, etc.

B. Positional Accuracy

Tests of accuracy after all transformations have been performed on a particular layer

1. Linework Completencess Check

a. Date: date of test.

b. Value: Identify value

c. Method used to Derive Value: Methodology.

2. Linework Positional Accuracy Check

a. Date: Date of test

b. Value: Identify value

c. Method Used to Derive Value: Explanation of how the above value was derived.

3. Absolute Measure of error reference

Provides a numerical estimate of expected discrepancies.

a. Value: Value of error reference.

b. Method Used to Derive Value: Select one or more of the following options.

1. Deductive estimate The deriving of a conclusion by reasoning. It may be necessary that a best guess is
given. Any assumptions that were made to derive the conclusion should be
descibed.

a. Date of tests: Date of tests.

b. Results: Results of above test.

2. Internal Evidence (geodesy)

a. Date of tests: Date of tests

b. Results: Enter results of above test.

3. Comparison to Source

4. Independent source of higher accuracy

a. Date of tests: Date of tests.

b. Results: Results of above test.

C. Attribute Accuracy

Accuracy assessment for measures on a continuous scale shall be performed using procedures similar to those
used for positional accuracy (providing a numerical estimate of expected discrepancies).

There has been considerable discussion on how much detail is required at this step. It is the view of the
developers of the report that as much information be provided as possible. This does not mean that a test must
be performed that wouldn't normally be performed, but it does mean that all performed tests should be reported.
The level of reporting should be at such a level as to be useful to the recipient.

1. Linework Completeness Check

a. Date: Date of check.

b. Value:

c. Method Used to Derive Value: Method used to derive above value.

2. Linework Attribute Accuracy Check

a. Date: Date of check.
b. Value:
c. Method Used to Derive Value: Method used to derive above value.

3. Absolute Measure of error reference

a. Value: Value of error reference

b. Method Used to Derive Value: Method used to derive value of error refernce

1. Deductive estimate. The deriving of a conclusion by reasoning, with supporting information.

a. Date of tests: Date(s).

b. Results: Results of above test.

2. Internal Evidence (geodesy)

a. Date of Tests: Date(s).

b. Results: Result of above test.

3. Comparison to Source

4. Independent source of higher accuracy

a. Date of tests: Date.

b. Results: Results of above test.

D. Logical Consistency

1. Cartographic Tests

a. Test Performed: Cartographic tests performed.

b. Date: Date cartographic test was performed.

c. Result: Results of cartographic test here.

d. Do lines intersect only where intended? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

e. Were duplicate lines eliminated? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

f. Are all polygons closed? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

g. Have dangles been eliminated? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

h. Have slivers been eliminated? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

i. Do features have unique identifiers? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

2. Topological Tests

Topology is a branch of geometrical mathematics concerned with order, contiguity and relative position, rather
than actual linear dimensions. Topological error checking is the process of ensuring the logical consistency of
data is intact: all polygons are closed, all arcs are connected to nodes, etc.

a. Test Performed: Topological test performed.

b. Date: Date of test.

c. Software Used: Name and version of software used in topological test.

d. Results: Results of test.

1. Test for polygon coverage

a. How many polygons are represented on the digital map product? Number

b. Has a polygon closure been verified? Yes or No.

c. Are polygon-IDs assigned to each polygon on the digital map? Yes or No

1. Do polygons have more than one polygon-Id? Yes or No

2. Are the Polygon-Ids unique? Yes or No.

2. Test for line coverage

a. How many lines are repersented on the digital map product? Number.

b. Do the line segments have unique line segment values? Yes or No.

c. Is the digital map topologically clean? Yes or No.

3. Test for point coverage

a. How many points are represented on the digital map product? Number.

b. Are the Point-Ids unique? Yes or No.

E. Completeness of Source Materials

The purpose of Completeness of Source Materials is to describe the set of information collected in comparison
to a larger set. For example, a set called "Well Data Points" may, be all manmade wells in the area described or
it may be only private wells used for homes.

1. Selection Criteria: Identify how the objects were identified.

2. Definitions Used: Definitions used for selection Criteria.

3. Other relevant mapping rules: i.e., minimum mapping units, etc.

4. Deviation from standard definitions and Interpretations:

5. Description of relationship between the objects

6. Tests for taxonomic completeness

a. Procedures: Procedures of the test used here.

b. Results: Test results.

APPENDIX C

CIS AND FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

Kenneth D. Haddad
Gail McGarry MacAulay'
William H. Teehan2

INTRODUCTION

Florida's marine resources are being stressed by a multitude of
problems related to growth of the human population; these problems
include loss of wetlands, drainage alterations, urbanization, boating
impacts, and fishing pressures. As pressures on marine resource.s
continue to Increase, It has become evident that data needed to make
informed management decisions are either lacking or are Inaccessible.
Gathering this needed information through monitoring and research is
an important step towards better informed management; however, simply
gathering this information will not solve the problems associated with
managing that information and making it readily available. Unless
advanced in format ion-management technologies are instituted in resource
management agencies, effective utilization of the information to better
manage our resources will not occur., Geographic Information System
(GIS) technologies may provide the tool needed to translate and
synthesize geographically oriented marine resources information in
Florida.

A CIS is a data-management and information-analysis system that
is able to capture, synthesize, generate, retrieve, analyze, andoutput
spatial information.. CIS technology is revolutionizing geographical
analysis And has applications in many scientific fields (Cowen,.1988;
Parker, 1988; Peuquet and Marble, 1990). Haddad and Michener (1991)
foresee Geographic Information Systems evolving into the primary tools
for addressing coastal resource-management issues, and published
articles and workshops related to CIS technology are now evident in
almost every field of science and management. A field in which CIS has
not had adequate exposure or use is fisheries management.

Issues facing Florida's fisheries include stressed fish-stocks,
user conflicts, and impacts to fish habitat. The Florida Marine
Fisheries commission (MFC) and the Florida Department of Natural
Resources (FDNR) are working together to advance CIS applications so
that they can be used in managing Florida's fisheries.

--------------- 7----
1 CIS Research Administrators, Department of Natural Resources, Florida
Marine Research Institute, Coastal and Marine Resource Assessment
(CAMRA), 100 8th Avenue S.E., St. Petersburg, FL 33701
' Fishery Management Analyst, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, 2540
Executive Center Circle West, Tallahassee, FL 32301

FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

Florida Marine Fisheries Commission

The MFC was-created in 1983 by the state legislature and
consists of seven c issioners, who are appointed by the Governor and
confirmed by the Senate, and a support staff. The MFC Is charged with
the management and preservation of Florida's renewable marine
fisheries resources. Chapter 370.027, Florida Statutes, grants the MFC
exclusive rule-making authority in the following areas relating to
marine life (with the exception of endangered species): gear
specifications, prohibited gear, bag limits, size limits, species that
may n9t be sold, protected species, closed areas (except for public
health purpodes), quality control of seafood (except for oysters,
clams, mussels, and crabs), fishing seasons, and special considerations
relating to egg-bearing females. Rules that are adopted by the MFC are
subject to approval by the Governor and Cabinet.

Marine Resources Geographic Information System
The FDNR is mandated through Chapter 370, Florida Statutes, to
manage, protect, and enhance Florida's marine resources in the beat
interests of the resources and the public. The FDNR Division of Marine
Resources' Florida Marine Research Institute (FMRI) has implemented the
Marine Resources Geographic Information System (MRGIS) as a tool to
more effectively understand andmanage coastal and marine resources.
The MRGIS consists of an array of computers, software, and regional and
statewide databases. The primary MRGIS software includes ARC/INFO and
ERDAS. Computer hardware and software are the essential technological
components of a GIS, but the power of a CIS lies in its stored
databases. One of the greatest obstacles to effectively managing
Florida's fisheries is the lack of a consolidated information base that
can be manipulated and synthesized to'provide timely assistance and
guidance on research and management issues. We believe that the 14RGIS
can be used to overcome this obstacle. The MRGIS is being developed
as the primary tool to be used in translating and synthesizing
geographically oriented marine resource information in Florida" The
14RGIS can take information from a variety of independent research
programs, data-collection efforts, and management policies of federal,
state, and local agencies and integrate it for correlated multi-
disciplinary analysis and presentation, thus initiating the rudiments
of an ecosystem approach to resource management. This approach to
effectively utilizing information and managing data will serve the
long-term goals of fisheries managers.

SHRIMP MANAGEMENT: A CASE STUDY

The integration of CIS capabilities and information into the
decision-making process of fisheries managers has been an arduous
process because of the difficulty in assembling.the necessary basic
information, on a statewide basis, to address the many complex issues
associated with Florida's marine fisheries. However, advances are
being made, and the use of the information integrated by the MRGIS in
developing a plan for the long-term management of shrimp lays the
foundation for using CIS technologies in fisheries management.

Shrimp Management
Shrimp is the most important invertebrate marine animal harvested 01
in the state, with an estimated 1990 ex-vessel value of'$41,531,527.
Florida has three main targeted species of penaeid shrimp: pink shrimp,

Penasus duorazva; white shrimp, P. set1ferus; and brown shrimp, P.
artecus. Another penaeid, the seabob, Xlphopenaeus kroyerl, Is
seasonally targeted In certain northwest Florida,areas. Rock shrimp,
Sicyonla brevirostris, and the royal red shrimp, Plootlcus robustus,
are also landed in Florida; however, the harvesting of these species
occurs exclusively in federal waters.

The MFC has been developing a statewide shrimp management plan
since 1987 with the following goals: maintaining healthy stocks,
ensuring fair and optimal distribution among user groups, protecting
habitat, minimizing bycatch, standardizing regulations, minimizing
conflict with other fisheries, and ensuring a high-quality product.
The shrimp fishery was divided into three user groups: recreational,
live-bait, and food production. To account for habitat and gear
differences, five contiguous management regions in Florida were
designated: the northeast, Big Bend, southwest, southeast, and
northeast regions.

The schedule for completing the shrimp management plan calls for
two phases of rule-making. The first phase has been completed, and the
rules became effective January 1992. Rules developed for Florida'.9
extensive inshore shrimp fishery during this phase of the plan
addressed allowable gear specifications, mesh size of nets, and shrimp
count for harvesting activity inside the International Regulations for
Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGS). In the first phase of the
plan, numerous local laws were repealed, which simplified inshore and
nearshore shrimp regulations and standardized the fishery on regional
and statewide levels. The Big Bend region of Florida is the only area
where these new regulations include harvest in all state waters. The
second phase of rule-making wil I address the f inf ish bycatch associated
with shrimp trawling and also the adoption of a zone management plan
to determine allowable shrimp-harvesting areas.

MRGIS Database Development

Because of the complex process involved in developing the shrimp
management plan and the goals of the MFC to address user conflict.,
maintain a high-quality shrimp population for harvest, and protect
habitat, the information requirements are substantial. Basic
information identified as important to the planning process includes
nautical chart coastline, depth contours, aids to navigation, benthic
communities, managed areas, shrimping areas, and, in some cases,
potential shrimp nursery areas. All of these, databases are
geographically layered in the MRGIS so that any combination of
information can be analyzed and produced on maps (Figure 1).

Each of the data layers obtained during development of the shrimp
management plan had unique purposes as well as unique problems. - Much
of the data were from external sources and required varying levels of
verification and quality control. Problems in the digital. data ranged
from errors in digitizing to errors introduced in converting the data
to make it compatible with the MRGIS. When data were not available,
MRGIS and MFC staffs collected the needed information or the data
gathering was contracted. cooperation in data collection has been
essential in -our effort to develop an extensive MRGIS database.

Nautical Chart Coastlin

The nautical-chart coastline database is a generalization of the
Florida coastline digitized primarily from National oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) nautical charts. A coastline from
nautical charts was selected after numerous options were presented to
the MFC and the public at a MFC meeting. It was determined that

NAUTICAL CHART
COASTLINE

DEPTH CONTOURS 6

AIDS TD MY IGA I ION Is

BENTHIC COMMUNffiES

FOOD-SHRIMPING &
LIVE-BAIT-SHRIMPING
AREAS

Figure 1. Conceptual view of the relationship among several CIS data
layers used to assist in shrimp management planning.
S
')4N
IES

because both the public and the XFC used NOAA nautical charts as coffAwn
reference maps, the presentation of MR%IS information would be best
understood in that format. The majority of the digitized charts were
at a. map scale of 1:40,000 A' but some charts ranged in scale depending
on their availability. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service developed
this database for the FDNR from digital line data provided by NOAA.'

Benthic Communities

Benthic communities, including seagrass, mangrove, saltmarsh,
non-vegetated bottom, oyster reef, and coral communities, play a
significant role in supporting Florida recreational and commercial
.fisheries.

The areal distribution of these communities Is important to many
issues fa6ing the MFC and the FDNR. Shrimp and other commercial and
recreational species utilize seagrass, saltmarsh, and mangrove areas
as habitat and nursery areas. The seagrass communities are primary
,fishing grounds in the bait-shrimping industry. Shrimp managers
require information on habitat impacts, bycatch, gear use, and zoning
relative to benthic communities.

The benthic-community data used in developing a state-wide
database were compiled from a myriad of sources. Where possible,
existing data, which were developed and verified by other agencies,
were utilized. For areas about which existing, reliable data were not
available, standard remote-sensing techniques utilizing satellite
imagery,and aerial photography were employed.

Depth Contours

Depth contours are common features on NOAA nautical charts and
represent common features,of orientation considered important to map
presentation. In addition, using depth ranges to isolate areas of
interest (e.g., the location of seagrass in depths of less than 3 ft)
allows managers to analyze the relationships between shrimping
activities and the resources.

Depth-contour data were automated for the following depths: 3 ft,
6 ft, 12 ft, 18 ft, 30 ft, and 60 ft. In addition, channels and spoil
areas were identified. Data were digitized from NOAA nautical charts
(primarily 1:40,000 scale) by an independent contractor and are
compatible with the coastline data layer. All depth-contour data
,were required to carry attributes as both lines and polygons for
maximum usage in the GIS. This requirement allows the flexibility of
highlighting individual contour lines as well as providing polygons to
query other layers on the basis of depth range. For example, although
the data are generally depicted as lines in maps, we have found it
useful to extract seagrass areas that occur within specif it - water
depths. Problems encountered during the development of this database
included incomplete contour lines, differences in lines an overlapping
charts, and a single line representing several depths. Data were
interpolated to complete contour lines and a labelling methodology was
developed to allow selection of contours for a specific depth when a
single contour segment represented several depths.

Shrimping Areas

The bait-shrimp-fishing industry maintains live shrimp in holding
tanks for distribution as live bait, whereas food shrimp are usually
frozen onboard the shrimping vessels prior to processing. The
locations of live-bait-shrimping and food-shrimping areas are critical
to the development of the shrimp management plan. The HFC..is using

this information to assess the location of potential habitat impacts,
develop an understanding of potential user conf licts, maximize habitat
protection, and minimize Impact to the fishing industry.

Locations of live-bait-shrimping and food-shrimping areas were
determined by a team of FDNR and MFC staff, who met with shrimpers and
their representatives. Shrimpers identified those areas where they
fished by drawing polygons on NCAA nautical charts. When appropriate,
references were made to the seasonality of these shrimping areas. The
marked-up nautical charts were returned to the FMRI for digitizing Into
the MRGIS as a separate data layer. The accuracy of this particular
..data layer was dependent on the cooperation of the shrimpers.

Aide to Navigation

Landmarks that can be used in determining position are Falled aids
to navigation. Channel markers, lighthouses, buoys, water tanks,
piers,.marinas, and shipwrecks are examples of navigational aids that
appear on NOAA nautical charts. Channel markers and buoys were
determined to be the most important features for inclusion in the aide-
to-navigation data layer. ,Both provide a visual reference for
location,,and the MFC and other marine resource managers use them as
zo ne-boundary references for regulatory and management purposes.

Aids-to-navigation data to be entered into the MRGIS database were
purchased from the NOAA National Ocean Survey (NOS). Data for the
entire country were provided to the FMRI as an ASCII text file. The
data were searched for features that fell within the minimum and
maximum latitude and longitude values for Florida. The data presented
numerous problems that proved difficult to' correct. Labeling
inconsistencies (e.g., buoys were abbreviated several different ways)
made sorting of the data difficult. In addition, multiple entries for
a given location and the inclusion of outdated i 'nformation (e.g.,
positions of channel markers were given even if they were no longer at
that location) were recorded. In some cases, extraneous items from
the charts, such as compass roses, were included in the digital
database. Inconsequential data were eliminated from the database and
errors were corrected.

Managed Areas

ed areas have also been included in the database for some
Manag
regions of the state, which provides an understanding of jurisdictional
boundaries and existing management zones relative to resources and
issues of regulatory responsibilities. Existing state and federal
jurisdictional boundaries and existing shrimp management zones have
been utilized. Boundaries for managed areas were either interpreted
from legal descriptions orwere digitized from NOAA nautical charts.
It is expected that the locations of additional managed areas (e.g.,
National' Marine Sanctuaries and Florida Aquatic Preserves) will be
required for future planning.

APPLICATIONS OF THE SHRIMP MANAGEMENT PLAN

The identification, collection, control of quality, and
integration of geographic data into the MRGIS have been difficult and
time-consuming. Information provided to the MFC to be used in planning
for shrimp management has been in the form of maps that depict various
combinations of data layers and in the form of results of simple
analyses designed to geographically relate different data layers.

Man Makina

Until the users fully understand the analytical power of the
MRGIS, they will continue to request primarily information in the form
of maps that portray all or different combinations of the data ' layers.
Several layers of information for a portion of the Tampa Bay r-'@ion of
eg -
Florida are depicted in Figure 2. These maps are produced in color on
an electrostatic plotter in large-scale forma@t to enhance thii Visual
presentation of the Information.

per

cull of
T11"
M
0
exic
V` WOW
Tampa Bay

.. .......... ......
...................

.. ........
LEGEND
0 SUGUSS
M TIDAL FLITS
0 LAND
LIVE Ri
SRRIKPING
FOOD
SIRINPING
VATIC. IID'

Figure 2. A MRGIS map of a portion of the Ta mpa Bay region showing the
overlay of coastline, benthic communities (peagrasq and
unvegetated tidal flats only), live-bait-shrimping, food-
shrimping areas, and aids to navigation.

The MFC staff uses these maps in formulating the management plans
for a given region. Issues relative to habitat protection, user
conflict, seafood quality, and the like, vary among regions, and the
maps provide a geographic presentation of these differences. Maps are
of particular importance in the development of potential zones for
managing user conflicts and maintaining harvestable yields of shrimp.
The KFC staff developing the management plan also uses maps to support
their recommendations and present them to the commissioners of the MFC.

In addition, maps are used at public hearings and workshops to present
components of the management plan to the public. It is expected that
in the long-term, maps will be one of the more tangible types of
information used in public presentations and will provide the focus for
public understanding and feedback on many of the issues.

The combining of different layers of information for presentation
is rudimentary from the perspective of advanced GIS applications.
However, when the result is the visualization of information in a form
and content that previously was not available, the advantage is
significant.

Informatiom Analysis

The FMRI and MFC are determining acreage (e.g., acres of seagrass
and shrimping areas) and investigating the relationships among some of
the layers of information. Results of an analysis of the Tampa Bay
region to determine the depth and acreage of seagrasses that occur
within live-bait-shrimping or food-shrimping areas are shown in Table
1. Habitat-impact and bycatch issues are better addressed with this
type of information because the impacts of management options can be
assessed. For example, if resource managers were designing shrimp
zoning in Tampa Bay to minimize impacts to seagrass, they could see
from the information in Table 1 that the live-bait-shrimping areas are
the only areas that include seagrass. In fact, 8,464 acres (44%) of the
total live-bait-shrimping area is seagrass. However, 7,582 acres (90%)
of the total seagrass found in the live-bait-shrimping areas are in
depth of less tha 3 ft, and only 10,413 acres (54%) of the total area
shrimped is in less than 3 ft. This implies that zoning options
minimizing shrimping in depths less than 3 ft would protect 90% of the
seagrass areas shrimped but would reduce the primary shrimping areas
by 54%.

Table 1. Result of a MRGIS analysis to determine the amounts of
seagrass found in different depth ranges within live-bait-
shrimping and food-shrimping areas in the Tampa Bay region.

LIVE-BAIT SHRIMPING

DEPTH SEAGRASS ACRES NON-SEAGRASS TOTAL AREA
SHRIMPED ACRES SHRIMPED SHRIMPED

< 3 Feet 7,582 2,831 10,413
3 to 6 Feet 347 4,556 4,903
> 6 Feet 535 3,313 3,848
TOTAL 8,464 10,700 19,164

FOOD SHRIMPING

DEPTH SEAGRASS ACRES NON-SEAGRASS ACRES
SHRIMPED SHRIMPED

< 3 Feet 0 40
3 to 6 Feet 0 575
> 6 Feet 0 32,209
TOTAL 0 32,824

A visual presentation of the results of the geographic analysis
depicting the areas of seagrass in depths less than 3 ft that are
shrimped in a portion of the Tampa Bay region is shown in Figure 3.
Any combination of map layers and results from Table 1 can be
geographically depicted to enhance the understanding of the
information. Of course, results of shrimping-bycatch and seagrass-
impact studies, economic values, resource allocations, and many other
factors contribute to the final determination of shrimping zones. The
real achievement of the MRGIS analysis is that this level of
information and the ability to look at hypothetical management options
have never been available in this way before.

Gulf of

Mexico

Tampa Bay

LEGEND

SEAGRASS
DEPTH TO 3FT
LAND

LIVE BAIT
SHRIMPING

FOOD
SHRIMPING
NAVIG. ATD

Figure 3. A MRGIS map of a portion of the Tampa Bay region showing the
location of Beagrass areas in less than 3-ft depths found in
the live-bait-shrimping or food-shrimping areas.

Conclusions

--a;je,,many issues facing fisheries managers in Florida. We
.qre
I chayp,r@qe that GIS technology can be a valuable tool in
.W,94ptrated
p
VJjrii management., lans. Because much of the information
4e r I e a . -1 f a geographic nature, it is expected
managers xs.,o
@@;he,- pplipation of GIS technologies will continue to expand.
However, fisheries managers must realize that the power of"the GIS is
in the data. Analyses are easy. Most failures in using GIS'technology
result when managers and GIS experts fall to properly identify the need
for, plan for, and commit to data collection, acquisition, and quality
control. If these data issues are not addressed, GIS technologies will
not prove successful in the long-term.

The process of adapting GIS techniques to the needs of the MFC
staff developing the shrimp management plan has not always been easy.
The expectations of the KFC regarding the availability of data layers
necessary for the shrimp management plan and the FMRI's ability to
properly develop them were occasionally different. Schedules for
public hearings and workshops had to be adjusted to accommodate for the
time required to enter accurate databases into the MRGIS. The outcome
of this Interactive process between MFC and FMRI staffs, however, has
been a successful application of GIS for fisheries management.

If properly implemented, GIS technology can become more
valuable every year in managing Florida's fisheries. By including
water-quality, physical, meteorological, socio-economic, and species
information, management options can be explored with a better
understanding of the potential results of a management decision. The
next technological advancement will be to transfer the ability to
manipulate the information to the HFC staff. The FDNR and MFC staffs
are beginning work to provide the MFC with the capability to display
different combinations of map layers and the results of analyses. The
goal is to make these capabilities available not only for technical
analyses but also for low-cost, interactive displays at public
workshops, hearings, and meetings. Only then will the maximum value
of the technology be fully realized.

Appendix

Cowen, D. J. 1988. GIS versus CAD versus DBMS: What are the differ
ences? Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 54 (11):
1551-1555.

Haddad K. D. and W. K. Michener 1991. Design and Implementation of
a Coastal Resource Geographic Information System: Administrative
Consideration. Pp 1958-1967 in 0. T. Lagoon, H. Converse, V.
Tippie, L. T. Tobin and D. Clark (eds.), Coastal Zone 91, V. 3
Proc. Seventh Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management. 1083 pp.

Parker, H. D. 1988. The unique qualities of a Geographic
Information System; a commentary. Photogrammetry Engineering
and Remote Sensing 54 (11): 1547-1549

Peuquet, D. and D. Marble 1990. Introductory Readings in
Geographic Information Systems. Taylor and Francis, Bristol,
PA. 371 pp.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Kelly Donnelly, Henry Norris,
Linda Tripodo, Judy Leiby, and David Camp for assistance in the
preparation of this manuscript. This work was supported, in part, by
grants from the Florida Office of Coastal Management, Department of
Environmental Regulation with funds provided by U.S. Office of Ocean
and Coastal Resource Management, NOAA, under the Coastal Zone
Management Act of 1972 (as ammended); and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Sportfish Restoration Program, F66.

ES C-TR LIBR
NOAA COASTAL SERMCILE
6668