Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Everglades West Coast

VIEWS: 22 PAGES: 192

									FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Division of Water Resource Management | Bureau of Watershed Management

       SOUTH DISTRICT • GROUP 1 BASIN • SEPTEMBER 2003




         Water Quality Assessment Report


        Everglades West Coast
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
        Division of Water Resource Management
                 SEPTEMBER 2003




     Water Quality Assessment Report

     Everglades West Coast
                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   5

Acknowledgments
    Everglades West Coast Water Quality Assessment Report was prepared by
the Everglades West Coast Basin Team, Florida Department of Environ-
mental Protection, as part of a five-year cycle to restore and protect Florida’s
water quality. Team members and contributors include the following:

    Pat Fricano, Team Coordinator
    T. S. Wu, Water Quality Assessment Coordinator
    Linda Lord, Department Editor
    Khurram Moiz
    Robert Perlowski
    Toni Edwards
    Andy Barienbrock
    Debra Harrington
    Janet Klemm
    Patti Sanzone
    Matt Foss

    Production assistance provided by
    Educational Services Program
    Florida State University
    210 Sliger Building
    2035 E. Dirac Dr.
    Tallahassee, FL 32306-2800

    Map production assistance provided by
    Florida Resources and Environmental Analysis Center
    Florida State University
    University Center, C2200
    Tallahassee, FL 32306-2641

    For additional information on the watershed management
    approach and impaired waters in the basin, contact
    Pat Fricano, Environmental Manager
    Florida Department of Environmental Protection
    Bureau of Watershed Management, Watershed Planning and
    Coordination Section
    2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 3565
    Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400
    pat.fricano@dep.state.fl.us
    Phone: (850) 245-8559; Suncom: 205-8559
    Fax: (850) 245-8434
6   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                              Access to all data used in the development of this report can be
                              obtained by contacting
                              T. S. Wu or Robert Perlowski
                              Florida Department of Environmental Protection
                              Bureau of Watershed Management, Watershed Assessment Section
                              2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 3555
                              Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400
                              Tien-Shuenn.Wu@dep.state.fl.us or Robert.Perlowski@dep.state.fl.us
                              Phone: (850) 245-8457; Suncom: 205-8457 or
                              (850) 245-8467; Suncom: 205-8467
                              Fax: (850) 245-8536


                           Web Sites

                           Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of
                           Watershed Management

                              TMDL Program
                              http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/index.htm

                              Identification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule
                              http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/AmendedIWR.pdf

                              STORET Program
                              http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/storet/index.htm

                              2000 305(b) Report
                              http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/305b/index.htm

                              Status Reports
                              http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/stat_rep.htm

                              Allocation Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC) Report
                              http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/Allocation.pdf

                           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National STORET Program
                           http://www.epa.gov/storet/
                             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   7

Preface
Content Features

  • Executive Summary: Appears at the beginning of every report
    and provides an overarching view of the watershed management
    approach, its implementation, and how this approach will be used
    to identify impaired waters. A summary of impaired waters in this
    basin is also included.
  • Noteworthy: Appears on pages near text that needs additional
    information but is too lengthy to fit in a sidebar.
  • Definitions: Appear at the side of pages where scientific terms occur
    that may not be familiar to all readers. The word being defined is
    bold-faced in the text.
  • References: Appear at the end of Chapter 5 and provide a complete
    listing of all sources used within the text.
  • Appendices: Appear at the end of each report and provide additional
    information on subjects, such as bioassessment methodology, rainfall
    and stream flow, types of natural communities, STORET stations,
    water quality statistics, land use, and permitted facilities. Also
    included is a master list that summarizes the water quality in all the
    basins addressed in this report.
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   9

Executive Summary
Everglades West Coast

     The Water Quality Assessment Report for the Everglades West Coast
Basin is part of the implementation of the Florida Department of Envi-
ronmental Protection’s (Department) watershed management approach
for restoring and protecting water resource problems and addressing Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program requirements. A TMDL rep-
resents the maximum amount of a given pollutant that a waterbody can
assimilate and still meet the waterbody’s designated use. A waterbody that
does not meet its designated beneficial uses is defined as impaired. The
watershed approach, which is implemented using a cyclical management
process, provides a framework for implementing the requirements of the
federal Clean Water Act and the 1999 Florida Watershed Restoration Act
(FWRA) (Chapter 99-223, Laws of Florida).
     A Status Report, published during Phase 1 of the watershed manage-
ment cycle, provided a Planning List, or preliminary identification, of
potentially impaired waterbodies in the Everglades West Coast Basin. This
Assessment Report presents the results of additional data gathered during
Phase 2 of the cycle. The report contains a Verified List of impaired waters
(Table 4.2 in Chapter 4) that has been adopted by Secretarial Order and
sent to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval.
TMDLs must be developed by 2007 and implemented for these waters.
The Verified List also constitutes the Group 1 basin-specific 303(d) list of
impaired waters, so called because it is required under Section 303(d) of the
Clean Water Act. The Noteworthy in Chapter 1 describes the contents of
this report, by chapter.
     In the Everglades West Coast Basin, state, federal, regional, and local
agencies and organizations are making progress towards identifying prob-
lems and improving water quality. Through its watershed management
activities, the Department works with these entities to support programs
that are improving water quality and restoring and protecting ecological
resources. The Department’s TMDL Program will be closely associated
with such efforts as the Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program’s
(CHNEP) Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP),
the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), Southwest
Florida Water Management District’s (SFWMD) Estero Bay Watershed
Assessment, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s (USACOE) Southwest
Florida Feasibility Study.
     Not only do stakeholders in the basin share responsibilities in achieving
water quality improvement objectives; they also play a crucial role in pro-
viding the Department with important monitoring data and information
on management activities. These stakeholders include the communities of
Naples, Ft. Myers Beach, Marco Island, Golden Gate, Bonita Springs, and
Everglades City; Lee, Collier, and Hendry Counties; SFWMD; Southwest
Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC); Estero Bay Agency on
10   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            Bay Management; Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
                            (FWC); Florida Department of Agriculture; Seminole and Miccosukee
                            Indian Reservations; Conservancy of Southwest Florida; Southwest Florida
                            Watershed Council; CHNEP; and Responsible Growth Management
                            Coalition.
                                 During the next few years, considerable data analysis will be done to
                            establish TMDLs for impaired waters in the Everglades West Coast Basin,
                            establish the initial allocations of pollution loads needed to meet those
                            TMDLs, and produce a Basin Management Action Plan (B-MAP) to
                            reduce the amount of pollutants that cause impairments. These activities
                            depend heavily on the active participation of the water management dis-
                            trict, local governments, businesses, and other stakeholders. The Depart-
                            ment will work with these organizations and individuals to undertake or
                            continue reductions in the discharge of pollutants and achieve the estab-
                            lished TMDLs for impaired waterbodies.


                            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Review
                            of Florida’s Amended Section 303(d) List

                                 On June 11, 2003, the EPA released a Decision Document based on its
                            review of the Department’s amendments to Florida’s 1998 Section 303(d)
                            list. The EPA found that the Department’s Group 1 update substantially
                            met the intent of Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and partially
                            approved the submission.
                                 Applying its own evaluation methodology, the EPA proposed list-
                            ing 80 additional waterbody segments/pollutants for public comment by
                            July 18, 2003. Under this methodology, approximately half of the added
                            waters failed to meet water quality criteria for dissolved oxygen (DO),
                            but no causative pollutant could be identified. Florida law precludes the
                            Department from including such waters on its Verified List of impaired
                            waters until the causative pollutant is known. The majority of the remain-
                            ing waters were added to the list based on a different interpretation of the
                            methodology for assessing potential impairment for bacteria. The Depart-
                            ment agreed to apply this alternative methodology when assessing the next
                            group (Group 2) of waterbodies for bacteria.
                                 The consequence of having the EPA add waters to Florida’s Section
                            303(d) list is that the EPA would be obligated to propose TMDLs for these
                            waters. However, the EPA has proposed assigning a “low” priority for
                            TMDL development for these waterbodies, thus providing the Department
                            an opportunity to investigate them further. Information on the status of
                            Florida’s amended Section 303(d) list can be found on the EPA’s Web site
                            at http://www.epa.gov/region4/water/tmdl/florida.
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   11
Summary of Findings

    The Department’s assessment shows that 14 waterbodies or waterbody
segments in the Everglades West Coast Basin are impaired and require
the development of TMDLs. The following paragraphs summarize, by
planning unit, impairments by waterbody types and the primary pollut-
ants. Planning units are smaller areas within the basin that provide a more
detailed geographic basis for assessment, reporting, and planning activities
under the watershed management approach.

Estero Bay Planning Unit
    The Estero Bay (EB) planning unit consists of a total of 19 waterbody
segments, each classified as stream, lake, estuary, or coastal, which delin-
eate the series of tributaries that flow into Estero Bay proper. Of these 19
segments, 7 require TMDLs, all of which are due in 2007. The parameters
of concern identified for TMDL development here include DO, nutrients,
fecal coliforms, and copper.

Southwest Coast Planning Unit
     The Southwest Coast (SWC) planning unit consists of a total of 44
waterbody segments. The segments are mostly classified as stream, lake,
estuary, or coastal. This planning unit covers the middle portion of the
Everglades West Coast Basin and addresses the sheet flow of water through
the basin and out into the gulf. Of the 41 segments in this planning unit, 7
require TMDLs, all of which are due in 2007. The parameters of concern
identified for TMDL development here include DO, nutrients, and bacteria
(in shellfish).

Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit
     The Inner Drainage Area (IDA) planning unit consists of a total of
eight waterbody segments. These are mainly classified as stream segments,
with only one being given an estuary classification. This planning unit
addresses the hydrology in the eastern portion of the Everglades West Coast
Basin. No TMDLs are required as no parameters of concern were veri-
fied for impairment. There are a number of parameters here that have been
placed on the Department’s planning list, which include DO and mercury
(in fish tissue). Additional data collection efforts in this area may result
in some of these parameters being verified for impairment, thus leading to
TMDL development.
                                                    Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                               13

Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
  Purposes and Content of the Assessment Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
  The Watershed Management Cycle in the Florida Department of
  Environmental Protection’s South District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Chapter 2: Basin Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
  Chapter Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
  Basin Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
        Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
        Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
    Surface Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
        Surface Water Quality Classifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
        Special Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
         Outstanding Florida Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
         Surface Water Improvement and Management Priority Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
         Minimum Flows and Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
    Ground Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
        Aquifers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         29
        Ground Water Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                   29
        Water Resource Caution Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                           30
        Ground Water–Surface Water Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                  30
    Watershed Management Activities and Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
        Historical Watershed Management Issues and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
              Tamiami Trail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
              Residential Development, Roads, and a Jetport to Nowhere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
              Citrus Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
        Ongoing Issues and Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
              Agricultural Best Management Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                34
              Big Cypress Basin Watershed Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .             35
              Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Comprehensive Conservation
              and Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       36
              Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                   36
              Environmental Impact Study (EIS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .            37
              Estero Bay Watershed Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .               37
              Lee County Conservation 20/20 Land Acquisition and Stewardship Program . . . . . . . . . . . .                                      37
              Lower West Coast Water Supply Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                38
              Preservation 2000/Florida Forever . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .           38
              Southwest Florida Feasibility Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .           38
        Stakeholder Forums. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
              Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Management Conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                   39
              Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                   39
              Governor’s Commission for the Everglades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                40
              South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                    40
              Southwest Florida Watershed Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .               40
              Water Quality Monitoring Consortium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .               41

Chapter 3: Surface Water Quality Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
  Chapter Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
  Sources of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
  Attainment of Designated Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
  Integrated Report Categories and Assessment Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
14   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                       Planning Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
                       Update on Strategic Monitoring and Data-Gathering Activities
                       During Phase 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
                       Assessment by Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
                           Estero Bay Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
                                 General Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   51
                                 Water Quality Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       51
                                 Permitted Discharges and Land Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .              53
                                 Ecological Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    56
                                 Fish Consumption Advisories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         58
                                 Water Quality Improvement Plans and Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                    59
                           Southwest Coast (West Collier) Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
                                 General Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   59
                                 Water Quality Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       60
                                 Permitted Discharges and Land Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .              65
                                 Ecological Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    65
                                 Fish Consumption Advisories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         66
                                 Water Quality Improvement Plans and Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                    66
                           Inner (East Collier) Drainage Area Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
                                 General Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   67
                                 Water Quality Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       67
                                 Permitted Discharges and Land Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .              69
                                 Ecological Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    69
                                 Fish Consumption Advisories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         71
                                 Water Quality Improvement Plans and Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                    72

                   Chapter 4: The Verified List of Impaired Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
                     Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
                     Identification of Impaired Waters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
                           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Review of Florida’s Amended
                           Section 303(d) List. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
                       The Verified List of Impaired Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
                           Pollutants Causing Impairments ................................................................................... 75
                                 Estero Bay Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
                                 Southwest Coast Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
                                 Inner Drainage Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
                           Adoption Process for the Verified List of Impaired Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

                   Chapter 5: Monitoring Priorities and TMDL Development,
                   Allocation, and Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
                     Stakeholder Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
                     Prioritization of Listed Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
                     TMDL Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
                           Schedule for TMDL Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
                       TMDL Allocation and Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
                           Initial Allocation of Pollutant Loadings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
                           Implementation Programs and Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
                            NPDES Permits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
                            Domestic and Industrial Wastewater Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
                            Florida Stormwater/Environmental Resource Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
                            Local Land Development Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
                            Best Management Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
                            Other Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
                       Development of Basin Management Action Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

                   References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

                   Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
                                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                                 15
Tables

Table 2.1:    Historical and Projected Population Growth by County in the Everglades West
              Coast Region (1980 to 2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .             23
Table 2.2:    Acreage of Agricultural Production by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                      23
Table 2.3:    OFWs in the Everglades West Coast Basin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                      28
Table 2.4:    Historical Timeline of Environmental Issues and Activities in the Everglades
              West Coast Basin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       32
Table 3.1:    Summary of Data Providers in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                  44
Table 3.2:    Designated Use Attainment Categories for Surface Waters in Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                    46
Table 3.3:    Categories for Waterbodies or Waterbody Segments in the 2002 Integrated Report . . . .                                              47
Table 3.4:    Planning Units in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                         49
Table 3.5:    Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Estero Bay Planning Unit . . . . . .                                            54
Table 3.6:    Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Southwest Coast
              Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   62
Table 3.7:    Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Inner Drainage Area
              Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   70
Table 4.1:    Schedule for Development and Adoption of the Group 1 Verified Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                    74
Table 4.2:    The Verified List of Impaired Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                 76
Table 5.1:    Stakeholder Involvement in the Total Maximum Daily Load Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                     86
Table 5.2:    Priorities for TMDL Development in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                    87
Table 5.3:    Schedule for TMDL Development in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                        90
Table 5.4:    Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permittees in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . .                                            91




Figures

Figure 1.1:   Schedule for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle in the Department’s
              South District, Basin Groups 1 through 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                  19
Figure 2.1:   Geopolitical Map of the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                           24
Figure 2.2:   Surface Water Resources of the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                  27
Figure 3.1:   Sources of Data for the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                           45
Figure 3.2:   Locations and Boundaries of Planning Units in the Everglades West Coast Basin. . . . . . .                                          50
Figure 3.3:   Composite Map of the Estero Bay Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                         52
Figure 3.4:   Composite Map of the Southwest Coast Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                              61
Figure 3.5:   Composite Map of the Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                              68
Figure 4.1:   Waters on the Verified List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          79
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                           17

Chapter 1: Introduction


Purposes and Content of the
Assessment Report

     The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department)
is implementing a statewide watershed management approach for restoring
and protecting water quality and addressing Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) Program requirements. Under Section 303(d) of the federal
Clean Water Act and the 1999 Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA)
(Chapter 99-223, Laws of Florida), TMDLs must be developed for all
waters that do not meet their designated uses (such as drinking water, recre-
ation, and shellfish harvesting) and are thus defined as impaired. A TMDL
is the maximum amount of a given pollutant that a waterbody can assimi-
late and remain healthy, such that all of its designated uses are met.
     TMDLs will be developed, and the corresponding reductions in
pollutant loads allocated, as part of the watershed management approach,
which rotates through the state’s 52 river basins over a 5-year cycle. Exten-    Total Maximum
sive public participation from diverse stakeholders in each of these basins      Daily Load
will be crucial throughout the different phases of the cycle.                    The maximum amount of a
                                                                                 given pollutant that a water-
     A Status Report published during Phase 1 of the watershed manage-
                                                                                 body can assimilate without
ment cycle provided a Planning List, or preliminary identification, of            exceeding applicable water
potentially impaired waterbodies in the Everglades West Coast Basin. A           quality standards.
copy of the report can be found at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/
stat_rep.htm.
     This Assessment Report, which updates the information in the Status
Report, incorporates data collected from the Department’s strategic moni-
toring and gathered from other agencies and groups during Phase 2 of the
watershed cycle. The report contains a Verified List of impaired waters
required by the FWRA and Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act,
for which TMDLs must be developed and implemented (see Noteworthy
for a description of the Assessment Report’s contents by chapter). Based on
the assessment results, in the Everglades West Coast Basin, 14 waterbodies
or waterbody segments require the development of TMDLs.
     This report is intended for distribution to an audience of potential
stakeholders, including decision makers from federal, state, regional, tribal,
and local governments; public and private interests; and individual citizens.
     The report follows the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)
guidance for meshing Clean Water Act requirements for Section 305(b)
water quality reports and Section 303(d) lists of impaired waters. This
integrated water quality assessment is used to identify the status of data
sufficiency, the potential for impairment, and the need for TMDL develop-
ment for each waterbody or waterbody segment in the basin.
     A description of the legislative and regulatory background for TMDL
development and implementation through the watershed management
18   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            approach, and a brief explanation of the TMDL Program, are available
                            in Appendix A. Background information on the Department’s TMDL
                            Program, the process of TMDL development and implementation, lists
                            of impaired and potentially impaired waters, and assessments for other
                            parts of the state are available at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/
                            index.htm.
                                 The Department has adopted the Verified List of impaired waters in
                            accordance with the FWRA and the Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR)
                            (Rule 62-303, Florida Administrative Code [F.A.C.]). The EPA has also
                            approved this list as the current 2002 303(d) list of impaired waters for the
                            basin, so called because it is required under Section 303(d) of the Clean
                            Water Act.
                                 The first 303(d) list, which was required by the EPA in 1998, is to
                            be amended annually to include additional basin updates. Florida’s 1998
                            303(d) list included a number of waterbodies in the Everglades West Coast
                            Basin. Tables 3.5 through 3.7 in Chapter 3 list, by planning unit, waters
                            on the 1998 303(d) list.
                                 The Assessment Report also serves as the basis for the biennial water
                            quality assessment or 305(b) report (a requirement under Section 305[b] of
                            the federal Clean Water Act).


                            The Watershed Management Cycle in
                            the Florida Department of Environmental
                            Protection’s South District

                                 Figure 1.1 shows the order in which the watershed management cycle
                            will be implemented in the Department’s South District basin groups.
                            These groups are identified according to a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
                            classification system using hydrologic unit codes.
                                 The Everglades West Coast, a Group 1 basin, was the first to undergo
                            a preliminary assessment in 2000 and is the subject of this Assessment
                            Report. A preliminary assessment for the Group 2 basin, Charlotte
                            Harbor, was initiated in 2001. The Group 3 basin, Caloosahatchee, was
                            assessed on a preliminary basis in 2002. Similarly, preliminary assessments
                            for the Group 4 and Group 5 basins, Fisheating Creek and the Florida
                            Keys, will be initiated in 2003 and 2004, respectively. In 2005, the cycle
                            will resume with the Group 1 basin, Everglades West Coast.
                               Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast            19




Figure 1.1: Schedule for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle in the Department’s South
District, Basin Groups 1 through 5
20      Water Quality Assessment Report:
        Everglades West Coast                                                Noteworthy
     Contents of This Report

     • Chapter 1: Introduction          • Chapter 4: The Verified List
       briefly characterizes the          of Impaired Waters contains
       purpose and content of the         the Verified List of impaired
       Assessment Report and              waters, discusses documenta-
       describes how the watershed        tion of reasonable assurance,
       management cycle will be           lists pollutants causing impair-
       implemented in the Depart-         ments, provides listings based
       ment’s South District.             on other information indicat-
                                          ing a nutrient imbalance,
     • Chapter 2: Basin Overview          and describes the adoption
       characterizes the basin’s gen-     process for the Verified List.
       eral setting, water resources,
       major water quality trends,      • Chapter 5: Monitoring Priori-
       and historical watershed man-      ties and TMDL Development,
       agement issues and activities.     Allocation, and Implementa-
                                          tion discusses stakeholder
     • Chapter 3: Surface Water           involvement, TMDL develop-
       Quality Assessment discusses       ment and initial allocations,
       basinwide water quality trends     the prioritization of listed
       and provides, by basin plan-       waters, the schedule for TMDL
       ning unit, an evaluation of        development, TMDL alloca-
       water quality, a discussion of     tion and implementation, and
       permitted discharges and land      the development of a Basin
       uses, a summary of ecological      Management Action Plan.
       priorities and problems, and
       an overview of water quality
       improvement plans and
       projects.
                         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   21

Chapter 2: Basin Overview


Chapter Summary

This chapter discusses the general basin setting, principal
waterbodies, surface water quality classifications and
special designations, surface water and ground water
interactions, major water quality trends, and historical
watershed management issues and activities in the
Everglades West Coast Basin.
22   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            Basin Setting

                                 The Everglades West Coast Basin, in the southwestern Florida penin-
                            sula, extends northward from Everglades National Park to the edge of the
                            Caloosahatchee River Basin, and east from the Gulf of Mexico to the very
                            western edge of Miami-Dade and Broward Counties. The basin includes
                            southern Lee and Hendry Counties, all of Collier County, and very small
                            slivers of western Miami-Dade, Broward, and northern Monroe Counties.
                            Figure 2.1 shows the principal geopolitical features in the Everglades West
                            Coast Basin. This report does not discuss Miami-Dade, Broward, and
                            Monroe Counties because the portions of the basin within those counties
                            are very small, swampy, and sparsely populated.
                                 The Everglades West Coast Basin is characterized by mangrove-
                            dominated estuaries along the coast, with salt marsh habitats occurring
                            landward of the mangrove zone. The area contains the largest mangrove
                            swamps in the state. The interior parts of the region show remnants of
                            prehistoric shorelines forming sand ridges, interspersed with pine-palmetto
                            flatwoods and large wetland strands. The region may have contained the
                            state’s greatest acreage of hydric pine flatwoods, which have significant
                            ecological and hydrological value.
                                 A major feature of the Everglades West Coast Basin is its many pro-
                            tected natural areas that provide a rich diversity of habitat and native
                            animal life including a number of federally threatened and endangered
                            species. Significant conservation lands include Corkscrew Swamp Sanc-
                            tuary, Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, Florida Panther National
                            Wildlife Refuge, and the Big Cypress National Preserve. Please refer
                            to Appendix B for supplementary information on the basin’s ecology.
                            Additional ecological information can also be found in the Status Report at
                            http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/stat_rep.htm.
                                 One important aspect of the Everglades West Coast Basin is its large-
                            scale, “planned” residential development projects such as Golden Gate
                            Estates (GGE), constructed in the 1960s. During this process, much of
                            the land was dissected by freshwater and estuarine residential canals, roads
                            were constructed, and lots were platted and sold as residential home sites.
                            Many of those platted lots still lie vacant.
                                 The Everglades West Coast Basin is subdivided into three planning
                            units, which provide a more detailed geographic basis for assessment and
                            reporting. They are Estero Bay, Southwest Coast (West Collier), and
                            the Inner (East Collier) Drainage Area, which are described in detail in
                            Chapter 3.

                            Population
                                 Originally occupied for many centuries by the Calusa Indians and
                            their ancestors (from 500 to 1500 A.D.), the Everglades West Coast
                            Basin began modern colonization in the late 1870s, although the popula-
                            tion remained small for many decades because of constant flooding. In
                            recent years, the coastal areas of the basin have had the highest growth
                            rate in Florida. From 1980 to 1990, the regional population grew by 65
                            percent. From 1990 to 2000, it increased another 42 percent. The Naples
                                     Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast            23
metropolitan area is among the fastest growing in the United States.
Figure 2.1 depicts major communities in the basin, and Table 2.1 lists
historical and projected population growth by county.


Table 2.1: Historical and Projected Population Growth by County in the Everglades West
Coast Region (1980 to 2010)

 County                  1980                 1990              2000                2010       2020
 Collier               85,791              152,099           251,377             343,500    441,600
 Hendry                18,599               25,773            36,210              45,800     55,500
 Lee                  205,266              335,113           440,888             539,300    642,200
 Total                311,636              512,985           728,475             930,610   1,141,320

Source: Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council.



Land Use
     Land use in the Everglades West Coast Basin is primarily urban along
the Gulf Coast, while agriculture, conservation land uses, and some min-
eral extraction (oil drilling) dominate the interior.
     This basin has one of the state’s highest rates of land conversion to
agriculture, primarily to citrus. In the 1980s, irrigated agricultural acreage
in Collier and Lee Counties increased by 99 and 35 percent, respectively.
Projected increases in citrus acreage for Collier, Hendry, and Lee Counties
from 1990 to 2010 are 150, 100, and 50 percent, respectively (South Flor-
ida Water Management District [SFWMD], 1992). In fiscal year 1997–98,
Collier, Hendry, and Lee Counties had a combined total of 147,650 acres
of land in citrus crops. Other important crops include sugarcane, bell
peppers, tomatoes, watermelon, squash, and cucumbers (Table 2.2).

Table 2.2: Acreage of Agricultural Production by County

 Crop               Collier County          Hendry County        Lee County
 Citrus               35,655                  100,124              11,871
 Sugarcane                   —                 71,000                  —
 Tomatoes               8,350                   4,075               1,770
 Bell Peppers            1,700                  3,900                  —
 Watermelon              1,700                  2,600               1,000
 Squash                    900                      —               1,150
 Cucumbers                 550                   1,100                 —
Source: Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 1999.


    Cattle ranching is also extremely important in the region. In 1999,
Florida ranked third among the states east of the Mississippi River and
twelfth nationally in the number of beef brood cows at 973,000 head.
Hendry County is Florida’s third leading county in beef cattle production,
with 97,000 head. Lee and Collier Counties also have beef cattle, with a
combined herd of 22,000 head.
    In spite of human impacts, the basin still supports large areas contain-
ing diverse natural communities and species. Fifty-nine percent of the
24      Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




     Figure 2.1: Geopolitical Map of the Everglades West Coast Basin


                                      basin’s lands are preserved as conservation areas. While most of these lands
                                      are in public ownership, the National Audubon Society owns one major
                                      conservation area, the Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary. The major conserva-
                                      tion areas found within or adjacent to the Everglades West Coast Basin are

                                          • Big Cypress National Preserve (729,000 acres)
                                          • Cape Romano–Ten Thousand Islands Aquatic Preserve
                                            (53,913 acres)
                                          • Collier-Seminole State Park (7,271 acres)
                                          • Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (23,370 acres)
                                          • Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary (10,895 acres)
                                          • Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve (11,300 acres)
                                          • Estero Bay State Buffer Preserve (9,757 acres)
                                          • Everglades National Park (1,507,850 acres)
                                          • Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park (70,376 acres)
                                          • Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (26,529 acres)
                                          • Koreshan State Historic Site (193 acres)
                                          • Lovers Key State Recreation Area (1,616 acres)
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                            25
    • Picayune Strand State Forest (65,436 acres)                                Sources of
    • Rookery Bay Aquatic Preserve & National Estuarine Research                 Information
      Reserve (70,000 acres)
                                                                                 A substantial portion of the
    • Ten Thousand Islands National Wildlife Refuge (19,650 acres)               information in this chapter
                                                                                 is adapted from the Florida
    It is important to note that some of the above-referenced conservation       Department of Agriculture
                                                                                 and Consumer Service’s
lands contain substantial amounts of submerged acreage. Also, the Ever-          Florida Agricultural Facts
glades National Park is only slightly within and mostly borders the eastern      document, the Department’s
edge of the Everglades West Coast Basin. Acreage numbers for these con-          South Florida Water Quality
servation lands were obtained from Jue et al. (2001).                            Protection Program, the
                                                                                 SFWMD’s Water Man-
                                                                                 agement Plan, the U.S.
                                                                                 Army Corps of Engineers’
Surface Water Resources                                                          (USACOE) Central and South-
                                                                                 ern Florida (C&SF) Project
                                                                                 Comprehensive Review
     This section briefly describes and characterizes major surface water and     Study and its Southwest
                                                                                 Florida Feasibility Study, and
ground water resources. It also summarizes historical, current, and pro-
                                                                                 the U.S. Geological Survey
posed watershed management activities.                                           (USGS) publication The
     The natural surface hydrology of South Florida has resulted from the        South Florida Environment—
interaction of the region’s subtropical climate with its topography and          A Region Under Stress. The
                                                                                 References section contains
geology. The topography of the Everglades West Coast Basin is relatively         a complete listing of the
flat, ranging from sea level to 25 feet above sea level, with higher elevations   literature used to compile
of 25 to 42 feet on the Immokalee Rise, a sandy ridge in the northeastern        this report.
portion of the basin. This ridge also separates the Caloosahatchee River
drainage from that of the Big Cypress Swamp.
     The basin contains several physiographic regions—including, from
east to west, the Everglades, Immokalee Rise, Big Cypress Spur, South-
western Slope, Reticulate Coastal Swamps, and Ten Thousand Islands.
The main divisions are the Everglades, the sandy flatlands (Immokalee
Rise), the Big Cypress, and the coastal areas. Because these divisions often
merge gradually into one another, their boundaries are indistinct. The
Everglades are generally wet throughout the year, except where drained.
The sandy flatlands are low-lying, poorly drained lands, with many shallow
sand- bottomed ponds, although the portions on higher terraces are gently
rolling. The Big Cypress is flat and poorly drained, with thin marly or           Marly
mucky-sandy soils and bare areas of solution-riddled limestone.                  Clay or mixture of calcite
                                                                                 or dolomite usually with
     The Everglades West Coast Basin was once part of the huge Everglades
                                                                                 fragments of seashells.
ecosystem, in which slowly moving sheet flows of water drained to the
Atlantic Ocean, Florida Bay, and Gulf of Mexico. Under natural condi-
tions, water flow in the basin generally moved south to southwestward
from the Immokalee Rise, providing fresh water to the estuaries along the
southwest coast. As canals and levees were built to control flooding and
drain large areas for agricultural and residential use, hydrologic connections
among different parts of the Everglades ecosystem were severed. Today, the
natural freshwater sheet-flow patterns have been significantly altered, result-
ing in drought conditions and major fire hazards during the dry season and
excessive stormwater runoff during the wet season. Consequently, salinity
patterns have changed, nutrient loadings have increased, and the numbers
of seagrasses, fisheries, and shellfish have been reduced.
26   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                                Figure 2.2 shows the locations of the largest waterbodies in the basin.
                            A more detailed discussion in Chapter 3 provides information on each
                            planning unit.

                            Surface Water Quality Classifications
                                Florida’s water quality standards program, the foundation of the state’s
                            program of water quality management, designates the “present and future
                            most beneficial uses” of the waters of the state (Section 403.061[10],
                            Florida Statutes [F.S.]). Water quality criteria for surface water and ground
                            water, expressed as numeric or narrative limits for specific parameters,
                            describe the water quality necessary to maintain these uses. Florida’s sur-
                            face water is classified using the following five designated use categories:

                                Class I       Potable water supplies
                                Class II      Shellfish propagation or harvesting
                                Class III     Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy,
                                              well-balanced population of fish and wildlife
                                Class IV      Agricultural water supplies
                                Class V       Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state
                                              waters currently in this class)

                                 Under Rule 62-302.400, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), the
                            Everglades West Coast Basin contains no Class I or Class V waters. The
                            following waters are listed as Class II:

                                • Cocohatchee River
                                • Wiggins Pass
                                • Connecting waterways—from Wiggins Pass south to Outer
                                  Doctors Bay
                                • Dollar Bay
                                • Inner and Outer Clam Bay
                                • Inner and Outer Doctors Bay
                                • Little Hickory Bay
                                • Tidal bays and passes—Naples Bay and south and easterly through
                                  Rookery Bay and the Ten Thousand Islands

                                 The remainder of the state waters in the basin are Class III unless
                            specifically designated as Class IV waters. Class IV waters consist of all
                            secondary and tertiary canals or ditches wholly within agricultural areas
                            behind a water control structure permitted by the water management dis-
                            trict under Sections 373.103, 373.413, or 373.416, F.S. Figure 2.2 depicts
                            surface water classifications in the basin.
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   27




Figure 2.2: Surface Water Resources of the Everglades West Coast Basin
28   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            Special Designations
                            Outstanding Florida Waters
                                 Table 2.3 and Figure 2.2 list and depict the Outstanding Florida
                            Waters (OFWs) in the Everglades West Coast Basin. OFWs are designated
                            for “special protection due to their natural attributes” (Section 403.061,
                            F.S.). These waters are listed in Rule 62-302.700, F.A.C. The intent of
                            an OFW designation is to maintain ambient water quality, even if these
                            designations are more protective than those required under the waterbody’s
                            surface water classification. Most OFWs are associated with managed areas
                            in the state or federal park system, such as aquatic preserves, national sea-
                            shores, or wildlife refuges. Other OFWs may also be designated as “Special
                            Waters” based on a finding that the waters are of exceptional recreational or
                            ecological significance and are identified as such in Rule 62-302, F.A.C.

                            Surface Water Improvement and Management Priority Waters
                                On February 13, 2003, the SFWMD Governing Board adopted a
                            resolution naming Lower Charlotte Harbor a Surface Water Improvement
                            and Management (SWIM) priority water. This designated area includes
                            Estero Bay, which is within the Everglades West Coast Basin. In 1987,
                            the Florida legislature created the SWIM Program to restore waterbodies.
                            The initial legislation identified 7 priority waterbodies—Lake Apopka,
                            Tampa Bay, Indian River Lagoon, Biscayne Bay, Lower St. Johns River,
                            Lake Okeechobee, and the Everglades. Today, SWIM plans have been
                            developed for 30 waterbodies statewide. The SWIM Program addresses a
                            waterbody’s needs as a system of connected resources, rather than isolated
                            wetlands or waterbodies. The state’s 5 water management districts and the

                            Table 2.3: OFWs in the Everglades West Coast Basin

                            County        Location
                            Hendry        None
                            Lee           Koreshan State Historic Site
                                          Estero Bay State Aquatic & Buffer Preserve
                                          Estero Bay (Special Waters)
                                          Estero Bay Tributaries and Acquisitions
                                          Lovers Key State Recreation Area
                            Collier       Barefoot Beach Acquisitions
                                          Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Recreation Area
                                          Wiggins Pass/Cocohatchee River System (Special Waters)
                                          Rookery Bay State Aquatic Preserve
                                          Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve
                                          Rookery Bay Acquisitions
                                          Collier-Seminole State Park
                                          Cape Romano-Ten Thousand Islands State Aquatic Preserve
                                          Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park
                                          Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge
                                          Save Our Everglades Acquisitions
                            Collier and   Big Cypress National Preserve
                            Monroe        Everglades National Park
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   29
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) work with
federal, state, and local governments and the private sector to develop and
implement SWIM plans to restore damaged ecosystems, prevent pollution
from runoff and other sources, and educate the public.

Minimum Flows and Levels
     Under the District Water Management Plan (DWMP) for the
SFWMD, the Estero River and tributaries are designated as priority water-
bodies for the development of minimum flows and levels (MFLs).
     To help determine the amount of water that is available for human
use from a particular source, the district must determine each waterbody’s
MFL. Under the Florida Water Resources Act (Section 373, F.S.), an MFL
is the limit at which further water withdrawals will cause significant harm
to the water resources of the area and the related natural environment.
Lakes and aquifers have minimum levels. Minimum flows are set for rivers
and streams.


Ground Water Resources

Aquifers
     There is a complex sequence of hydrostratigraphic units represent-
ing all three aquifer systems in this basin. The most productive aquifers
are the surficial and Hawthorn aquifer systems, especially in northeastern
Collier and southwestern Hendry Counties (Herr and Shaw, 1989). The
surficial aquifer system provides significant quantities of potable water for
domestic and agricultural uses in Lee, Hendry, and Collier Counties. The
intermediate aquifer system serves as a source of drinking and irrigation
water in Lee and Hendry Counties (Herr and Shaw, 1989) and is only used
for irrigation in Collier County. Although the Floridan aquifer system is
capable of high yields, it is too mineralized (high salinity and hardness)
for most uses in Lee, Collier, and Hendry Counties. The Upper Floridan
aquifer discharges ground water at a rate of 0–2 inches per year through-
out the basin and does not contain areas of high recharge (Fernald and
Purdum, 1998).

Ground Water Usage
     The SFWMD has the largest freshwater withdrawals when compared
to the other water management districts in Florida. Comparing state-
wide freshwater utilization, SFWMD uses close to or more than half of
the total freshwater withdrawals statewide for public supply (47 percent),
agricultural self-supplied use (68 percent), and recreational irrigation (67
percent). Withdrawals have increased in the SFWMD due to increases in
irrigated acreage and population. The projected ground water and surface
water use in the year 2020 is expected to dramatically increase in this basin
(SFWMD, 1998). The increased population and agricultural demands are
expected to cause ground water levels to decline.
30   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            Water Resource Caution Areas
                                 The SFWMD has designated the entire Everglades West Coast Basin
                            as Water Resource Caution Area (WRCA). Under Section 373.036, F.S.,
                            and Rule 62-40.520(1), F.A.C., each water management district in the
                            state must identify areas in which potential water shortages, considerable
                            reductions in water levels, saltwater intrusion, or other degradations may
                            occur within 20 years and develop management plans to address their
                            water resource problems. In these areas, existing and anticipated sources
                            of water and conservation efforts may not be adequate to supply water for
                            all existing legal uses, reasonably anticipate future needs, and sustain water
                            resources and related natural systems. Five constraints are considered in
                            establishing these WRCAs:

                                • Impacts to native vegetation, primarily wetlands;
                                • Impacts to minimum flows and levels, primarily spring flows;
                                • Impacts to ground water quality in terms of increased saltwater
                                  intrusion;
                                • Impacts to existing legal users; and
                                • Failure to identify a source of supply for future development.

                                 The designation prohibits new or expanded use of the Floridan aquifer
                            for nonpotable supplies (Fernald and Purdum, 1998). Rule 62-40, F.A.C.,
                            also requires the reuse of reclaimed water from domestic wastewater treat-
                            ment facilities in these areas, if feasible.

                            Ground Water–Surface Water Interactions
                                 In the Everglades West Coast Basin there are two surficial aquifers—
                            the water table and lower Tamiami, which are separated by a leaky con-
                            fining zone (Tamiami confining beds). The water table aquifer is under
                            unconfined conditions and ground water flow follows the topography of the
                            land. The highest water levels are in the northeast (the Immokalee Rise),
                            where the land surface elevations are high, and the lowest levels occur
                            along tidal streams or at the major outflow boundaries along the coastal
                            margin. Therefore, ground water flows through the surficial aquifer system
                            in a southwesterly direction (like surface water) with potentiometric highs
                            for both the water table and “lower Tamiami” aquifers occurring near the
                            Immokalee Rise. Generally, precipitation, especially along the Immokalee
                            Rise, provides recharge to the surficial aquifer in Lee and Collier Counties.
                            The natural north-south sheet flow of both surface and surficial ground
                            water has been impeded by the construction of the Tamiami Trail highway
                            that bisects the Big Cypress National Preserve.
                                 The proximity of the surficial aquifer system to the ground surface, the
                            lack of a confining layer, high recharge, relatively high permeability, and a
                            high water table in most areas all increase the ground water vulnerability
                            to contamination. This is of concern since the surficial and intermedi-
                            ate aquifers are used for most ground water purposes in this basin. The
                            intermediate and Floridan aquifer systems are not as threatened by sur-
                            face contamination but, due to lower permeabilities and transmissivities
                            can be affected by well pumping. Relict seawater can get trapped in an
                               Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   31
aquifer during deposition or as the result of high sea levels. This usually
occurs in low-permeability sediments or confined aquifers that are not
readily influenced by direct freshwater recharge. This is the case for both
coastal Collier County and beneath Lake Okeechobee. Since mineraliza-
tion of aquifer waters increases with depth, excessive pumping can cause an
upward flow of poorer quality water from deeper aquifers in areas such as
Collier County. Additionally, both Lee and Collier Counties are located
on the Gulf Coast, where ground water quality is threatened by saltwater
intrusion.


Watershed Management Activities and
Processes

     Conditions in and around the Everglades West Coast Basin have
changed dramatically in the last century. Historically, long periods of
flooding and hurricanes made most of the Everglades region inhospitable to
development. To accommodate agricultural and urban development and
to combat floods, the natural hydrologic system was extensively modified
beginning in the last century. As canals and levees were built to control
flooding and drain large areas for agricultural and residential use, hydro-
logic connections among different parts of the Everglades ecosystem were
severed.
     In more recent times, management plans and activities have been
implemented in the basin to reduce or eliminate discharges of polluted
water from urban and agricultural areas and to protect, preserve, and
restore special areas. The following section describes historical, current,
and ongoing activities and processes that initially caused and now seek to
address water quality problems. Table 2.4 provides a historical timeline of
environmental issues and activities that have taken place in the Everglades
West Coast Basin.

Historical Watershed Management Issues and Activities
    A number of significant events, including the following, have contrib-
uted greatly to ecological and hydrologic modifications in the region.

Tamiami Trail
     The construction of the Tamiami Trail, begun in 1916, initiated the
drainage process in the Everglades West Coast Basin. Between 1921 and
1923, Barron Collier’s Tamiami Road Building Company purchased 90
percent of the land in southern Lee County (which later became Col-
lier County). The Tamiami Trail, completed in 1928, crossed the state
through the swamps of the Everglades and Big Cypress, linking Tampa
with Miami. The road’s construction forever altered the natural sheet flow
of water through the Everglades/Big Cypress system. Upon completion of
the trail, the Big Cypress became easily accessible and economic exploita-
tion began. Lumbering boomed in the 1930s and 1940s. Ditching and
draining occurred in the Fakahatchee Strand to build tramways to take the
logs out of the swampland forests. In 1943, Florida’s first oil- producing
32      Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


     Table 2.4: Historical Timeline of Environmental Issues and Activities in the Everglades
     West Coast Basin

     Year        Issues and Activities
     1865–1895   Farmers colonized the Allen (Barron) River area after the Civil War, creating Everglades City.
                 Ranchers and citrus farmers began colonizing the Immokalee area in the late 1880s. Cyrus Reed
                 Teed, a religious visionary, established the Koreshan community along the banks of the Estero River
                 in 1894.
     1904–1907   Napoleon Bonaparte Broward was elected governor of Florida on a promise to drain the Everglades
                 in 1904. The Florida legislature created the Everglades Drainage District in 1907, publicly funding
                 drainage and flood control projects.
     1913–1916   The “District,” established in 1913, was the first of several that carried out drainage projects in south
                 Florida. The General Drainage Act of 1913 authorized adjacent landlords to establish drainage
                 districts to drain and “reclaim” their lands. The construction of Tamiami Trail began in 1916.
     1920–1929   Barron Collier’s Tamiami Road Building Company acquired large tracts of land in Collier and south-
                 ern Lee Counties from 1921 to 1923. Drainage of the Big Cypress began with the construction of the
                 Barron River Canal and the Turner River Canal. The Tamiami Trail was completed in 1928. Major
                 hurricanes flooded South Florida from 1922 to 1928, killing many people.
     1943–1949   Florida’s first oil-producing well was drilled in 1943, north of the Big Cypress Swamp near
                 Sunniland. Everglades National Park opened in 1947. Two more hurricanes and floods hit South
                 Florida in 1947. The existing canal network was unsuccessful in alleviating flood conditions. Con-
                 gress passed the Flood Control Act of 1948, authorizing the Army Corps of Engineers to create a
                 huge, multistage flood control project in South Florida. The Florida legislature created the Central
                 and Southern Florida (C&SF) Flood Control District in 1949 to operate and maintain the massive
                 project. Most of the virgin stands of cypress were logged in the Big Cypress during the 1940s.
     1950–1969   Drainage of the Big Cypress continued as land development and speculation schemes blossomed,
                 including the Golden Gate Estates (GGE) canal drainage system. Jetport plans were unveiled for
                 the swamp’s eastern edge in 1968, and construction began in October 1968. Governor Claude Kirk
                 temporarily halted construction in 1969. One two-mile runway was already completed. Friends of
                 the Everglades formed to oppose the jetport in the same year.
     1970–1974   President Richard Nixon killed the jetport project on January 15, 1970. One of Florida’s worst
                 droughts occurred in 1970–71 and the C&SF Flood Control District ordered cutbacks in agricultural
                 water withdrawals. Congress passed the federal Clean Water Act in 1972. The Big Cypress Swamp
                 was designated as an area of critical state concern in 1973. Congress set aside about 40 percent of
                 the Big Cypress Swamp (570,000 acres) in 1974 as a National Preserve, a new category of federally
                 protected lands.
     1979–1988   The Florida legislature established the Conservation and Recreation Lands (CARL) Program and the
                 Save Our Rivers (SOR) Act in 1979 and 1981, respectively. The SOR Program authorized the water
                 management districts to purchase lands along rivers. Governor Bob Graham initiated the Save the
                 Everglades Program in 1983, which laid the groundwork for a federal-state-regional partnership to
                 restore the natural functions of the Everglades ecosystem. Congress passed the Big Cypress Pre-
                 serve Addition Act in 1988, which added 146,000 acres to the preserve.
     1990–1996   The Florida legislature adopted Governor Bob Martinez’s Preservation 2000 (P-2000) program in
                 1990, which provided funds for the CARL and SOR land acquisition programs. Congress passed the
                 Everglades and South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Act in 1996 to restore the water quality and
                 basic hydrologic patterns in the entire Everglades ecosystem.
     1997–2001   The Florida legislature established Forever Florida in 1999, which replaced P-2000. This new
                 program provides $300 million per year for preservation and restoration efforts. The 1999 C&SF
                 restudy recommended to Congress that a hydrologic feasibility study be conducted for southwest
                 Florida.
     2002–2003   January through April of 2002, a mysterious area of “black water” was observed expanding over 700
                 square miles of Florida Bay south of the Everglades West Coast Basin. The area was first detected
                 on satellite photos in December of 2001. The “black water” was later determined to be a diatom
                 bloom originating from offshore. On February 13, 2003, the SFWMD Governing Board adopted a
                 resolution naming Lower Charlotte Harbor a SWIM priority water. The designation includes Estero
                 Bay. On March 25, 2003, the Governor and Cabinet approved the acquisition of 710 acres of addi-
                 tional land for the Estero Bay Buffer Preserve, thereby expanding the buffer preserve to 9,757 acres.
                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   33
well was drilled just north of the Big Cypress Preserve in Sunniland.
Today there still are oil-producing wells in Big Cypress, and the fill roads
created to serve the industry affect the region’s hydrology.

Residential Development, Roads, and a Jetport to Nowhere
     Major urban areas such as Naples, Marco Island, and Golden Gate
underwent intensive development in the 1960s as freshwater and saltwater
swamps were ditched, drained, and filled to create residential subdivisions.
Of particular note was the construction of the Golden Gates Estates
(GGE), advertised as “the largest subdivision in America.” This massive
real estate project decimated the Picayune Strand, a freshwater cypress
swamp just west of the Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve in the greater Big
Cypress ecosystem. Covering 173 square miles, with 813 miles of roads
and 183 miles of canals, the GGE drainage system lowered water levels in
the western side of Big Cypress by two feet (McPherson and Halley, 1996).
Land parcels, most of which were still too swampy to build on, were sold
sight-unseen to about 50,000 purchasers all over the world in the 1960s
and 1970s. Florida’s reputation for real estate chicanery was certainly not
improved by the GGE land scam.
     Also occurring at the same time was the Big Cypress Jetport debacle.
Led by Miami-Dade County, the construction of the facility was promoted
as essential to the area’s economic well-being. The jetport, about 50 miles
from downtown Miami in western Miami-Dade/eastern Collier County,
was to cover 39 square miles of swampland. At four times the size of the
current Miami Airport, it would have been by far the largest airport in the
world. The imminent construction of this airport galvanized a group of
local environmentalists to form the Friends of the Everglades. Concerned
about wetland destruction and contamination from aviation fuels, the
Friends of the Everglades managed to convince Governor Claude Kirk and
subsequently the Nixon administration to halt the project. The threat that
the project posed to the Everglades National Park watershed sparked the
establishment in 1974 of the Big Cypress National Preserve, a new category
of federally protected lands. One two-mile runway of the jetport was com-
pleted, however, and is currently used for pilot training.

Citrus Industry
     While citrus production has historically been concentrated in the cen-
tral portion of the state, a series of severe freezes during the 1980s resulted
in the migration of citrus acreage southward. Hendry County, not origi-
nally in the citrus belt, now has the third highest citrus acreage in Florida.
Citrus traditionally requires drier soils to grow well. The agricultural lands
in the Everglades West Coast Basin are suboptimal for citrus production
because of high water tables and must often be drained. The drainage of
these agricultural lands lowers ground water levels and further affects the
hydrology, structure, and function of area wetlands.
34   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            Ongoing Issues and Activities
                                 Much of the progress in the Everglades West Coast Basin for devel-
                            oping water quality restoration plans and implementing watershed and
                            water quality improvements is attributable to coordinated local, state, and
                            regional efforts. Many plans share common goals, and their implementa-
                            tion is based on various groups playing critical roles in planning, funding,
                            managing, and executing projects. The Department continues to coordi-
                            nate its efforts with these entities to obtain data, strengthen monitoring
                            activities, and exchange information through periodic meetings. The
                            restoration initiatives described below will have major positive effects on
                            the basin’s water quality.

                            Agricultural Best Management Practices
                                 The Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA) authorizes the
                            Department and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer
                            Services (DACS) to develop interim measures and agricultural best man-
                            agement practices (BMPs) to address nonpoint sources. The existing
                            authority for BMPs is provided in legislation on nitrates and ground water
                            (Section 576, F.S.), the Lake Okeechobee Protection Program (Section
                            373.4595, F.S.), Agricultural Water Conservation (Section 570.085, F.S.),
                            and Florida Right to Farm Amendments (Section 823.14, F.S.). While
                            BMPs are adopted by rule, they are voluntary if not covered by regulatory
                            programs. If they are adopted by rule and the Department verifies their
                            effectiveness, then implementation provides a presumption of compliance
                            with water quality standards.
                                 Over the last several years, DACS has worked with agriculturists, soil
                            and water conservation entities, the University of Florida’s Institute of Food
                            and Agricultural Sciences, and other major interests to promote agricultural
                            operational efficiency by implementing BMPs that can also achieve water
                            quality and water conservation objectives. In addition, programs have been
                            established and are being developed to create a network of state, local, fed-
                            eral, and private sources of funds for developing and implementing BMPs.
                                 Agricultural BMP practices and programs under way in the Everglades
                            West Coast Basin include the following:

                                • Guide for Producing Container Grown Plants. This manual,
                                  published in 1995 by the Southern Nurserymen’s Association,
                                  includes irrigation and fertilization BMPs for the container cultiva-
                                  tion of nursery plants. It was produced through a cooperative effort
                                  between the University of Florida, Auburn University, Tennessee
                                  Tech University, and Virginia Tech. Since the manual is not Flor-
                                  ida-specific, an effort is currently under way to use the document in
                                  developing a Florida-specific manual.

                                • BMPs for Blended Fertilizer Plants in Florida. The manual for
                                  blended fertilizer industrial operations, published in October 1997,
                                  was cooperatively produced by the Florida Fertilizer and Agrichemi-
                                  cal Association, DACS, and the Department.
                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   35
    • BMPs for Agrichemical Handling and Farm Equipment
      Maintenance. Recently revised and reprinted, this manual gives
      producers guidance on hazardous materials, proper pesticide
      handling, and the proper disposal of waste products. It was coop-
      eratively produced in 1998 by DACS, the Department, and several
      industry associations.

    • Water Quality BMPs for Cow/Calf Operations. Many cattle
      operators statewide have been trained in using this manual and
      applying BMPs. The Florida Cattlemen’s Association and several
      state, federal, and local agencies developed the manual, which was
      published in 1999. Copies were printed and distributed in 2000
      using EPA Section 391 grant funds.

    • Aquaculture BMPs. As directed by the 1998 Florida legislature,
      DACS worked cooperatively with industry, state agencies, and the
      environmental community to develop a comprehensive BMP manual
      for aquaculture. Florida law requires that the Department adopt the
      manual by rule and provides regulatory exemptions under Sections
      373 and 403, F.S., for growers who implement BMPs and are certi-
      fied by DACS’s Division of Aquaculture. The manual, which was
      printed and distributed in 2000, has been adopted by rule.

    • Florida Green Industries BMPs for Protection of Water
      Resources in Florida. This manual provides BMPs for professional
      turfgrass and landscape managers. Published in 2002, it was devel-
      oped through a cooperative effort by Florida Green Industries (an
      industry association); the Department; DACS; the Florida Depart-
      ment of Community Affairs; and the St. Johns, South Florida, and
      Southwest Florida Water Management Districts.

    • Ongoing BMP Initiatives. DACS’s Office of Agricultural Water
      Policy expects to produce in the next year draft manuals on row
      crops (generally applicable statewide), equine or horse farms (appli-
      cable to both small landowner operations and concentrated facilities),
      and ornamental nurseries.

Big Cypress Basin Watershed Plan
     Sponsored by the Big Cypress Basin Board, a subdivision of SFWMD,
the Big Cypress Watershed Plan will develop a guide for future capital
project construction and operation of the water management facilities
in the Big Cypress Basin. To meet the plan’s objective, a comprehensive
evaluation has been proposed for the surface water and ground water flow
characteristics of the western Collier County region as a singular watershed.
Under the proposal, a regional hydrologic-hydraulic routing model will be
developed as a tool for evaluating alternatives for improved water manage-
ment strategies. The study will incorporate surface hydrology, the hydrau-
lics of the canal network, and general land use data at various spatial scales.
36   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            It will integrate the dynamic processes that have influenced the overall
                            hydrology and ecology of the Big Cypress Basin region. The model will
                            help to evaluate alternative strategies for effective managing of water and
                            related land resources to achieve the following goals:

                                • Maintain or improve levels of flood protection in the developed and
                                  developing areas consistent with the Collier County Comprehensive
                                  Plan.
                                • Restore historical surface water flow characteristics on conservation
                                  and public lands.
                                • Improve water retention and aquifer recharge potential.
                                • Reduce threats of saltwater intrusion.
                                • Reduce the effects of excessive freshwater discharges on downstream
                                  estuaries.
                                • Enhance natural system functions and values on publicly owned and
                                  conservation lands.

                            Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Comprehensive
                            Conservation and Management Plan
                                 The program, sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                            (EPA), is a partnership of citizens, elected officials, resource managers, and
                            commercial and recreational resource users collaborating to address diverse
                            resource management concerns over the 4,400-square-mile watershed. A
                            cooperative decision-making process was used to produce a Comprehensive
                            Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP), which outlines priority
                            actions that should be taken to improve the water quality and ecological
                            integrity of the greater Charlotte Harbor watershed. The Charlotte Harbor
                            program gets most of its funding from the EPA, with some limited support
                            from local and regional governments. The only portion of the Everglades
                            West Coast Basin within the jurisdiction of the Charlotte Harbor study
                            area is the Estero Bay planning unit.

                            Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan
                                The Central and Southern Florida (C&SF) Project was first authorized
                            in 1948 to provide flood control, water control, water supply, and other ser-
                            vices to an area that stretches from Orlando to Florida Bay. Although the
                            project has performed its intended purposes, it also contributed to an unin-
                            tended decline in the south Florida ecosystem. As a result, a comprehensive
                            review study (“The Restudy”) was conducted to investigate structural and
                            operational modifications to the C&SF Project to achieve the following:

                                • Improve the quality of the environment;
                                • Improve aquifer protection;
                                • Improve the integrity, capability, and conservation of agricultural
                                  and urban water supplies; and
                                • Maintain current levels of flood protection.
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   37
    The Restudy, conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACOE) and SFWMD, resulted in the Comprehensive Everglades Res-
toration Plan (CERP), which was transmitted to Congress on July 1, 1999.
Two notable projects planned for this basin are the hydrologic restoration
of Southern Golden Gates Estates (GGE), and the restoration of Lake
Trafford.

Environmental Impact Study (EIS)
     In 1997, with encouragement from citizens’ groups, the Jacksonville
District of the USACOE began an environmental impact study of parts
of Lee and Collier Counties. To gather information, the USACOE was
assisted by the Alternatives Development Group, made up of people from
diverse backgrounds, including proponents of development, agriculture,
and conservation. It also received help and advice from representatives of
federal, state, and local governments. At various stages, citizen input was
also solicited at public meetings. In the future, when the USACOE makes
permitting decisions in the study area, it will consider the stewardship of
wetlands and cumulative impacts.

Estero Bay Watershed Assessment
     Sponsored by SFWMD, the Estero Bay Watershed Assessment will
define water quality and freshwater quantity objectives or pollutant load
reduction goals (PLRGs) for the bay and develop tools to evaluate the
effects of watershed management techniques. The assessment will result
in a comprehensive Estero Bay research plan, based on management goals
for the estuary, and will develop land and water management strategies to
achieve the water quality and quantity objectives for the bay. Activities
include

    • A physical description of major features and current management
      practices.
    • The identification of water trends.
    • The identification and ranking of potential pollution problem areas.
    • The development and compilation of data for a watershed model to
      evaluate management scenarios.
    • Recommendations for basin-specific management strategies to
      achieve water quality improvements.

Lee County Conservation 20/20 Land Acquisition and Stewardship
Program
     In 1996, voters approved a referendum to raise real property taxes to
fund the purchase of environmentally sensitive lands to be placed in public
trust for preservation. The Lee County Board of County Commissioners
subsequently created the “Conservation 20/20” Land Acquisition and Stew-
ardship Program to fulfill voter directives. The purpose of the program is
to acquire, preserve, and restore environmentally critical or sensitive lands
in Lee County. Over $11 million per year is generated for the acquisi-
tion of properties of willing sellers. Each proposal goes through a ranking
process based on environmental significance, water resource value, manage-
38   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            ment potential, contiguity to other preserve areas, development potential,
                            and selling price. As of March 31, 2002, $47.50 million was spent to
                            acquire 40 parcels of land totaling 7,550 acres.

                            Lower West Coast Water Supply Plan
                                This state-required regional water supply plan by SFWMD serves as
                            a guide for addressing future water demands in southwest Florida. The
                            plan establishes a framework around which future water use decisions for
                            the Lower West Coast (LWC) Planning Area can take place. The LWC
                            Planning Area includes all of Lee and Collier and portions of Hendry and
                            Monroe Counties. The plan seeks to accomplish the following:

                                •   Develop a comprehensive water conservation program,
                                •   Quantify the ground water resources available,
                                •   Quantify the potential reclaimed water available,
                                •   Quantify the regional irrigation system water available,
                                •   Quantify the seawater potential available,
                                •   Quantify the water storage potential available,
                                •   Quantify the regional and local water retention available,
                                •   Quantify the water potential available in reservoirs,
                                •   Quantify the surface water potentially available,
                                •   Reassess the Caloosahatchee hydrology, and
                                •   Address MFLs.

                            Preservation 2000/Florida Forever
                                The Florida legislature established Preservation 2000 (P-2000) as a
                            funding source for the Conservation and Recreational Lands (CARL),
                            Save Our Rivers (SOR), Florida Communities Trust, and Florida Fish and
                            Wildlife Conservation Commission’s (FWC) land acquisition programs.
                            P-2000 and related programs have been requested to fund some of the
                            sensitive land purchases in the Everglades West Coast Basin. In the spring
                            of 1999, as P-2000 was about to expire, the legislature established Florida
                            Forever to take its place. Under this program, $300 million per year will
                            be available for preservation and restoration efforts.

                            Southwest Florida Feasibility Study
                                The Southwest Florida Feasibility Study was born out of The Restudy’s
                            recommendations for the C&SF Project to Congress in July 1999. The
                            Restudy, which only assessed water resource issues as they related to the
                            Caloosahatchee Basin on the west coast, recognized that other hydrologic
                            watersheds in southwest Florida have not been comprehensively studied.
                            Thus, the restudy recommended a feasibility study to identify southwest
                            Florida’s water resource conditions and to develop potential solutions to
                            problems. The USACOE and SFWMD are conducting the Southwest
                            Florida Feasibility Study.
                                The study area includes all of Lee County, most of Collier and Hendry
                            Counties, and portions of Charlotte, Glades, and Monroe Counties. It
                            encompasses approximately 4,300 square miles and includes 2 major drain-
                            age basins. The northern boundary includes the Caloosahatchee River and
                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   39
corresponds to the jurisdictional boundary between the South Florida and
Southwest Florida Water Management Districts in Charlotte County. The
eastern boundary delineates the divide between the Big Cypress Swamp
and the Everglades system.
    The study will determine the feasibility of making structural, nonstruc-
tural, and operational modifications and improvements in the region in the
interest of environmental quality, water supply, and other purposes. It will
develop a comprehensive regional plan of action to address

    •   The health of aquatic and upland ecosystems;
    •   The quantity, quality, timing, and distribution of water flows;
    •   The agricultural, environmental, and urban water supply;
    •   The sustainability of economic and natural resources;
    •   Flood protection; and
    •   Fish and wildlife, biological diversity, and natural habitat.

     The Southwest Florida Feasibility Study will be accomplished using
a two-phase process. The first phase (scoping), paid for by the federal
government, quickly identifies problems and opportunities and poten-
tial solutions in an area. The second phase (feasibility), conducted with
SFWMD, will develop alternative solutions in more detail so that Congress
can authorize and fund a viable plan.

Stakeholder Forums
    The stakeholder forums listed below have been instrumental in design-
ing or shaping many of the aforementioned restoration initiatives.

Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Management Conference
     The program, sponsored by the EPA, is a partnership of citizens,
elected officials, resource managers, and commercial and recreational
resource users collaborating to address diverse resource management
concerns over the 4,400-square-mile watershed. The program is led by a
director and a management conference of four committees (Policy, Man-
agement, Technical Advisory, and Citizen Advisory) and several technical
subcommittees (Water Quality, Habitat Conservation, and Hydrologic
Alterations). A cooperative decision-making process was used to produce
a CCMP, which outlines priority actions that should be taken to improve
the water quality and ecological integrity of the greater Charlotte Harbor
watershed. The Charlotte Harbor program gets most of its funding from
the EPA, with some limited support from local and regional governments.
The only portion of the Everglades West Coast Basin within the jurisdic-
tion of the Charlotte Harbor study area is the Estero Bay planning unit.

Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management
    The Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management (ABM) is a nonregulatory
advisory group borne out of a settlement agreement between the Florida
Board of Regents and petitioners opposed to the site of the new Florida
Gulf Coast University in Fort Myers. The ABM was created to oversee
the maintenance of the natural resources of Estero Bay. The signatories to
40   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            the settlement agreement are the South Florida Regional Planning Coun-
                            cil, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC), Florida
                            Department of Community Affairs, Florida Board of Regents, Florida Gulf
                            Coast University, and several private citizens. The ABM, which meets
                            monthly, has more than 40 members, who are appointed by the regional
                            planning council. The settlement agreement required the ABM to pro-
                            duce the State of the Bay Report. It has also created a map targeting specific
                            lands for public acquisition and has implemented an outreach/education
                            function. Currently, members are reviewing work plans for Phase 2 of the
                            SFWMD’s Estero Bay Watershed Assessment. Finally, they are reviewing
                            land use permits and writing a Section 319 grant application for a storm-
                            water retrofit feasibility study.

                            Governor’s Commission for the Everglades
                                 Established by Governor Jeb Bush in June 1999 to follow in the
                            footsteps of the previous Governor’s Commission for a Sustainable South
                            Florida, the Governor’s Commission for the Everglades continues to serve
                            as the advisory body to the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task
                            Force. Its other charges are as follows:

                                • Evaluate the USACOE’s restudy implementation progression.
                                • Evaluate the region’s overall water conservation efficiency.
                                • Recommend actions for integrating the needs of farmworker, low-
                                  income, and rural communities with Everglades restoration.
                                • Develop a demonstrable benefit/cost analysis for a restudy-related
                                  issue in a rural area.
                                • Restore, manage, and protect the natural resources of the Everglades.
                                • Enhance sustainable and environmentally compatible development
                                  to sustain the regional economy and a healthy Everglades system.
                                • Create sustainable agriculture programs.
                                • Allocate natural resources to support natural and human systems.

                            South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force
                                 Established in 1993 to coordinate interrelated federal programs and
                            foster communication and cooperation in ecosystem restoration efforts, the
                            task force has the goal of achieving restoration, preservation, and protection
                            of the ecosystem while promoting a sustainable South Florida. It presently
                            consists of seven federal and two state agencies, along with one regional
                            agency; two local governments; and two tribal governments. Its activities
                            include involvement in the implementation of CERP.

                            Southwest Florida Watershed Council
                                 Established in 2001, the council is a community-based effort to estab-
                            lish a watershed forum for the combined geographic area of the Everglades
                            West Coast and Caloosahatchee Basins. Its mission is to “protect, con-
                            serve, manage, and/or restore the land and water resources of the Caloosa-
                            hatchee and Big Cypress watersheds through participation and cooperation
                            of all stakeholders in consensus building, planning, and decision making
                            to meet the economic, natural, and cultural needs for this and succeeding
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   41
generations.” The council membership represents agency, academic,
development, and environmental interests, as well as the interests of private
citizens.

Water Quality Monitoring Consortium
     Recommended by the Big Cypress Science Plan Steering Committee (a
subset of the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force), the con-
sortium was initiated in 1998 to provide a forum for exchanging informa-
tion and improving coordination among the agencies and organizations
monitoring water quality in the Big Cypress region. The consortium has
since expanded to include Lee County and the Charlotte Harbor ecosys-
tem. Its mission is to implement a comprehensive regional water quality
monitoring program through a collaborative effort, using standardized
quality assurance protocols. Plans include (1) centralized geographic infor-
mation systems that map sites and parameters and (2) a shared water qual-
ity monitoring database. The consortium will also conduct training classes
in the STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) database (the EPA’s water qual-
ity database) and has expressed an interest in assisting the Department and
EPA in assessing and identifying impaired waterbodies.
                          Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   43

Chapter 3: Surface Water Quality Assessment


Chapter Summary

This chapter presents the results of an updated assess-
ment of surface water quality in the Everglades West
Coast Basin. The primary purpose of this assessment is
to determine if waterbodies or waterbody segments are
to be placed on the Verified List of impaired waterbodies.
The listing will be in accordance with evaluation thresh-
olds and data sufficiency and data quality requirements in
the Identification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR)
(Rule 62-303, Florida Administrative Code [F.A.C.]). The
results of the assessment will be used to identify waters in
the basin for which Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
will be developed.

The chapter describes the planning units in the basin as
a basis for the assessment. A section on each planning
unit contains a general description and summary of key
water quality indicators (such as nutrients, chlorophyll a,
dissolved oxygen [DO], and microbiological parameters).
Permitted discharges, land uses, ecological status, and
water quality improvement plans and projects are sum-
marized for each planning unit. The discussion notes
where applicable surface water quality criteria have been
exceeded and summarizes the report’s findings in maps,
noting potentially impaired waterbodies in each planning
unit. The chapter also contains background information
on sources of data and on designated use attainment, and
explains the state’s integrated water quality assessment
process.

While potentially impaired waters and their causative
pollutants are identified, it is not within the scope of this
report to identify discrete sources of potential impair-
ments. Information on the sources of impairment will be
developed in subsequent phases of the watershed man-
agement cycle, including TMDL development and imple-
mentation. Appendix A contains a discussion of the
44   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            legislative and regulatory background for TMDL development and imple-
                            mentation. Appendix C provides additional information on reasonable
                            assurance. The methodology used to develop the Verified List is pro-
                            vided in Appendix D. The complete text of the IWR is available at http:
                            //www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/amendedIWR.pdf.


                            Sources of Data

                                 The assessment of water quality in the Everglades West Coast Basin
                            includes an analysis of quantitative data from a variety of sources, some of
                            which are readily available to the public. These sources include the U.S.
                            Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Legacy and “new” STOrage and
                            RETrieval (STORET) databases, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and
                            the Florida Department of Health. The STORET databases contain water
                            quality data from a variety of sources, including the Florida Department of
                            Environmental Protection (Department), water management districts, local
                            governments, and volunteer monitoring groups. Appendix D contains a
                            detailed description of STORET and the methodology used to develop the
                            Planning and Verified Lists, based on the IWR.
                                 Table 3.1 summarizes the individual data providers who contributed
                            to the IWR 2002 Database for the Everglades West Coast Basin for the
                            period of record used in this assessment. Figure 3.1 contains a pie chart
                            showing the amount of data provided by each source.
                                 The Department’s Bureau of Watershed Management created the IWR
                            2002 Database to evaluate data in accordance with the methodology pre-
                            scribed in Rule 62-303, F.A.C. For the Verified List assessment, the data
                            evaluation period of record is 7.5 years. Table D.2 in Appendix D shows
                            the periods of record for the Verified Lists in the first basin rotation cycle.
                            Data collected between January 1, 1995, and June 30, 2002, were evaluated
                            to establish the Verified List for the Everglades West Coast Basin (IWR
                            2002 Run 8.2).


                            Table 3.1: Summary of Data Providers in the Everglades West
                            Coast Basin

                                                                                Data Provided for Verified
                                                                                List Purposes
                             Data Owners                                        (Jan 1995–June 2002)
                             United States Geological Survey (USGS)             642
                             National Park Service                              698
                             Florida Department of Environmental Protection     19082
                             Collier County Pollution Control                   27874
                             Florida Department of Health                       2150
                             Lee County Environmental Lab                       59673
                             Florida LakeWatch                                  154
                             South Florida Water Management District            52598
                             Save the Bay Association                           2344
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                     45
                                         United States Geological
                                              Survey 0.39%
                            Save the Bay                        National Park
                          Association 1.42%                     Service 0.42%

                                                                           Florida Department of
                                                                               Environmental
                                                                             Protection 11.55%


South Florida Water
Management District
                                                                                Collier County Pollution
      31.84%
                                                                                    Control 16.87%




    Florida Lake Watch                                                          Florida Department of
            .09%                                                                     Health 1.3%




                                            Lee County
                                         Environmental Lab
                                              36.12%

Figure 3.1: Sources of Data for the Everglades West Coast Basin




Attainment of Designated Use

    While the designated uses of a given waterbody are established using
the surface water quality classification system described previously, it is
important to note that the EPA uses slightly different terminology in its
description of designated uses. Because the Department is required to pro-
vide use attainment status for both the state’s 305(b) report and the state’s
303(d) list of impaired waters, the Department uses EPA terminology when
assessing waters for use attainment. The water quality evaluations and
decision processes for listing impaired waters that are defined in Florida’s
IWR are based on the following designated use attainment categories:

    Aquatic Life Use Support-Based Attainment
    Primary Contact and Recreation Attainment
    Fish and Shellfish Consumption Attainment
    Drinking Water Use Attainment
    Protection of Human Health
46   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                                          Table 3.2 summarizes designated uses assigned to the various surface
                                      water classes.

                                      Table 3.2: Designated Use Attainment Categories for Surface
                                      Waters in Florida

                                       Designated Use Attainment Category Used in Impaired   Applicable Florida Surface
                                       Surface Waters Rule Evaluation                        Water Classification
                                       Aquatic Life Use Support-Based Attainment             Class I, II, and III
                                       Primary Contact and Recreation Attainment             Class I, II, and III
                                       Fish and Shellfish Consumption Attainment             Class II
                                       Drinking Water Use Attainment                         Class I
                                       Protection of Human Health                            Class I, II, and III



                                      Integrated Report Categories and
                                      Assessment Overview
     Understanding the
     Terms “Pollutant”
     and “Pollution”                       This Assessment Report contains a preliminary evaluation of water-
                                      bodies that fall into Integrated Report Categories 1 through 3 (Table 3.3).
     For purposes of the TMDL
     Program, pollutants are               Because not enough recent data on chemistry, biology, and fish con-
     chemical and biological          sumption advisories have been collected, currently only a few waterbodies
     constituents, introduced by      or waterbody segments statewide fall into Category 1 (attaining all uses).
     humans into a waterbody,
     that may result in pollution
                                      In particular, fish tissues in many waterbodies statewide have not been
     (water quality impairment).      tested for mercury. Out of the 68 waterbodies or waterbody segments in
     There are other causes of        the Everglades West Coast Basin, there are none that are in Category 1.
     pollution, such as physical           More waterbodies and segments statewide fall into Category 2 (attain-
     alteration of a waterbody
     (for example, canals, dams,      ing some uses but with insufficient data to assess completely) than Cat-
     and ditches). However,           egory 1 (attaining all uses), because monitoring programs can sometimes
     TMDLs are established only       provide sufficient data for partially determining whether a designated use
     for impairments caused by
                                      in a particular waterbody is attained. Eight waterbody segments in the
     pollutants (a TMDL quantifies
     how much of a given pollut-      basin fall into Category 2.
     ant a waterbody can receive           However, most waterbodies in the state fall into Category 3 (having
     and still meet its designated    insufficient data). In the Everglades West Coast Basin, the breakdown of
     uses).
                                      waterbodies or segments in Category 3 is as follows:

     Waterbodies that are verified
                                          • Category 3a—21 segments for which no data are available to deter-
     impaired due to specified pol-
     lutants, and therefore require         mine their water quality status;
     a TMDL, are listed under
     Category 5 in the Integrated         • Category 3b—10 segments with some data, but not sufficient data
     Assessment Report; water-
     bodies with water quality
                                            for making any determinations; and
     impairments due to other
     causes, or unknown causes,           • Category 3c—18 segments that are potentially impaired based on the
     are listed under Category              Planning List criteria.
     4b. Although TMDLs are
     not established for Cat-
     egory 4b waterbodies, these          Several potentially impaired (Category 3c) waters fail to meet water
     waterbodies still may be         quality standards for DO, or show signs of biological stress or nutrient
     addressed through a water-
                                      impairment. According to the IWR, specific pollutants causing DO
     shed management program
     (for example, the Kissimmee      exceedances or biological stress, or an underlying nutrient imbalance
     River restoration).              creating an imbalance in flora or fauna, must be documented for a
                            Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                              47
Table 3.3: Categories for Waterbodies or Waterbody Segments in the 2002 Integrated Report

Category     Description                           Comments
1            Attaining all designated uses         If use attainment is verified for a waterbody or segment
                                                   that was previously listed as impaired, the Department
                                                   will propose that it be delisted.
2            Attaining some designated uses        If attainment is verified for some designated uses of a
             and insufficient or no information    waterbody or segment, the Department will propose
             or data are present to determine if   partial delisting for the uses attained. Future monitor-
             remaining uses are attained           ing will be recommended to determine if remaining
                                                   uses are attained.
3a           No data and information are           Future monitoring will be recommended to determine if
             present to determine if any           designated uses are attained.
             designated use is attained
3b           Some data and information are         Future monitoring will be recommended to gather suf-
             present but not enough to deter-      ficient information and data to determine if designated
             mine if any designated use is         uses are attained.
             attained
3c           Enough data and information are       This indicates a waterbody or segment is potentially
             present to determine that one or      impaired for one or more designated uses. These
             more designated uses may not be       waters will be prioritized for future monitoring to verify
             attained according to the Planning    use attainment or impaired status.
             List methodology
3d           Enough data and information are       This indicates that a waterbody or segment exceeds
             present to determine that one or      Verified List evaluation criteria and may be listed as
             more designated uses are not          impaired at the end of Phase 2 of the watershed man-
             attained according to the Verified    agement cycle. However, the data have not yet been
             List methodology                      fully evaluated and the waters have not been formally
                                                   verified as impaired. This category is not applicable to
                                                   the Assessment Report. Waters that pass the Verified
                                                   List criteria at this stage of the process are placed in
                                                   Category 5.
4a           Impaired for one or more desig-       After a TMDL for the impaired waterbody or segment is
             nated uses but does not require       approved by EPA, it will be included in a Basin Manage-
             TMDL development because a            ment Action Plan to reduce pollutant loading toward
             TMDL has already been completed attainment of designated use(s).
4b           Impaired for one or more crite-       This category includes waterbodies or segments that
             ria or designated uses but does       are impaired because of naturally occurring condi-
             not require TMDL development          tions or pollution. The impairment is not caused by
             because impairment is not caused specific pollutants. (See sidebar on previous page for
             by a pollutant                        a discussion of the difference between pollution and
                                                   pollutants.)
4c           Impaired for one or more desig-       Other pollutant control mechanisms designed to attain
             nated uses but does not require       applicable water quality standards within a reasonable
             TMDL development because the          time frame are in place.
             water will attain water quality stan-
             dards due to existing or proposed
             pollution control measures
5            One or more designated uses           Waterbodies or segments in this category are impaired
             are not attained and a TMDL is        for one or more designated uses by a pollutant or
             required                              pollutants. Waters in this category are included on
                                                   the basin-specific Verified List adopted by the Depart-
                                                   ment’s Secretary as Florida’s impaired waters list and
                                                   submitted to the EPA as Florida’s 303(d) list of impaired
                                                   waters at the end of Phase 2.
48   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            waterbody or segment to be listed as impaired. Sometimes these conditions
                            cannot be linked to a causative pollutant, and sometimes they may reflect
                            natural background conditions.
                                 Currently, there are no waterbodies in the basin that are designated as
                            being in Category 4. This category includes those waterbodies/segments
                            that are impaired but do not require a TMDL for one of three reasons:
                            (1) a TMDL has already been developed (Category 4a); (2) the impairment
                            is not attributable to a pollutant or pollutants but is due to other alterations
                            to the waterbody (Category 4b); or (3) there is reasonable assurance that
                            the designated use of an impaired waterbody will be restored by a pollutant
                            control measure.
                                 Finally, 15 waterbodies in the basin are in Category 5. These water-
                            bodies, which have been determined to be impaired, are on the Verified
                            List of impaired waters adopted by the Department’s Secretary and will
                            require TMDLs. Chapter 5 of this report discusses in detail the waters in
                            this category.


                            Planning Units

                                 The Everglades West Coast Basin encompasses approximately 3,177
                            square miles and a complex hydrologic system. To provide a more
                            detailed geographic basis for assessing and reporting on water quality,
                            and for carrying out planning activities under the watershed management
                            approach, the Department subdivided this area into smaller planning units.
                            Planning units help organize information and management strategies
                            around prominent watershed characteristics.
                                 Water quality assessments were conducted on individual waterbody
                            segments within planning units. Each waterbody segment is assigned a
                            unique waterbody identification number (WBID). Waterbody segments
                            are the assessment units or polygons that the Department has historically
                            used to define waterbodies in inventorying and reporting water quality to
                            the EPA under Section 305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act. The same
                            WBIDs are the assessment units identified in the Department’s lists of
                            impaired waters submitted to the EPA in reports under Section 303(d) of
                            the Clean Water Act.
                                 The Everglades West Coast Basin contains three planning units: Estero
                            Bay, Southwest Coast (West Collier), and Inner (East Collier) Drainage
                            Area. Table 3.4 describes these planning units, and Figure 3.2 shows
                            their locations and boundaries. The remainder of this chapter provides
                            a general description of each planning unit, information on land use and
                            potential point sources of pollution, water quality assessments for individ-
                            ual waterbody segments, and summaries of ecological issues and watershed
                            quality improvement plans and projects.
                                 Appendix E of this report provides a water quality summary by
                            planning unit, contains a list of water quality monitoring stations, the
                            integrated assessment summary, and trend data. Appendix F includes
                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast              49
Table 3.4: Planning Units in the Everglades West Coast Basin

 Planning Unit   Description
 Estero Bay      The Estero Bay planning unit covers about 288 square miles within the basin, and
                 is divided into 19 waterbody (WBID) units. There are 65 sampling stations within
                 the Estero Bay unit.
 Southwest Coast The Southwest Coast planning unit stretches over approximately 904 square
                 miles of the Everglades West Coast Basin and is divided into 45 WBIDs. The
                 majority of the Southwest Coast unit lies in Collier County, with small portions
                 in Lee and Hendry Counties. There is a total of 215 sampling stations within this
                 unit from which data have previously been collected.
 Inner Drainage  The Inner Drainage Area planning unit covers approximately 1,985 square
 Area            miles of the Everglades West Coast Basin and is divided into 8 WBIDs. The unit
                 includes portions of Collier, Hendry, Monroe, and Broward Counties. There
                 is a total of 58 sampling stations within this unit from which data have been
                 previously collected.



summary information by planning unit for permitted wastewater treat-
ment facilities, Superfund sites, and permitted landfill facilities in the basin.
Appendix G lists Level 1 land uses by planning unit.


Update on Strategic Monitoring and Data-
Gathering Activities During Phase 2

      To determine the status of surface water quality in the Everglades West
Coast Basin, chemistry data, biological data, and, if available, fish con-
sumption, beach closure, and shellfish-harvesting advisories were evaluated
to determine impairment. Data from strategic monitoring and data-
gathering activities during Phase 2 of the watershed management cycle were
included. A detailed description of the methodology used to develop the
Planning and Verified Lists is available in Appendix D.
      It should be added that a highly motivated effort was made specifically
within the Everglades West Coast Basin to collect data not already incor-
porated in the Department’s assessment. Through coordination with the
Department’s District staff and local agencies, a large number of previously
unrealized data points were successfully added to the assessment. This
consisted mainly of data sets provided by Lee and Collier Counties. The
addition of this data provided quite a positive effect on the authenticity and
accuracy of the verification process, one with which both the Department
and local agencies are thoroughly satisfied.
      Appendix E contains the integrated water quality assessment summary
(Table E.1), the water quality monitoring stations used in the assessment
(Table E.2), and data on water quality trends (Table E.3). Appendix F
lists permitted wastewater treatment facilities in the basin that discharge
to surface water, Appendix G lists Level 1 land use by planning unit, and
Appendix H provides pollutant loading estimates.
50     Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




     Figure 3.2: Locations and Boundaries of Planning Units in the Everglades West Coast Basin
                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   51
Assessment by Planning Unit

• Estero Bay Planning Unit

General Description
     The Estero Bay planning unit includes Estero Bay, which is a shallow,
subtropical lagoon (11,317 acres) separated from the Gulf by barrier islands.
Seagrass beds are common in the bay, but high turbidity restricts seagrasses
to shallow depths. The Estero and Imperial Rivers and Spring, Mullock,
and Hendry Creeks, although small, are the major tributaries in this area.
The Estero Bay Basin was, and in many areas still is, typical of low, flat,
southern Florida lands dominated by wetlands and characterized by slow,
sheet-flow drainage patterns. In the past, the naturally dispersed water pat-
terns distributed nutrients over broad areas of wetland vegetation. Seasonal
fluctuations in flow from rainfall created the necessary salinity regime in
Estero Bay for good estuarine productivity. Increasing development in the
1960s led to changes in the natural river systems around Estero Bay, alter-
ing freshwater inflow patterns.
     Coastal areas in this planning unit are rapidly being developed in
response to a continuing influx of new residents. Retirement, tourism,
and the service industries drive the economy. In addition, the region has a
new state university (Florida Gulf Coast University), founded in 1997 and
an international airport (Southwest Florida International Airport). The
interior population is low, and the land use is primarily in cattle, vegetable,
and citrus farms.
     Population centers include the coastal towns of Bonita Springs, Estero,
Fort Myers Beach, and San Carlos Park. Bonita Springs, south of the
Imperial River, is the planning unit’s main population center, with 32,727
people (SWFRPC, 2003). The oldest community is Estero, which was
colonized in 1894 by Cyrus Reed Teed, a religious visionary. He brought
his followers (the “Koreshan”) from Chicago to settle along the banks of
the Estero River. Four remaining members deeded the settlement to the
state in 1961, and it is now preserved as the Koreshan State Historic Site.
     Figure 3.3 is a composite map of the planning unit that shows poten-
tially impaired waters and potential point sources of pollution.

Water Quality Summary
    The Estero Bay planning unit covers about 288 square miles (not
including coastal WBIDs) and was initially divided into 9 assessment units,
as presented in the EWC Group 1 Status Report (November, 2001).
    Due to a petition filed by the Responsible Growth Management Coali-
tion (RGMC), which represents coastal interests in southwest Florida, some
changes were made to the waterbody segments being assessed. The peti-
tion indicated in part that the segments representing the tributaries flowing
into Estero Bay, which were all initially classified as freshwater segments,
did not accurately reflect the estuarine portions of those tributaries. As
the assessment of the data provided can vary dramatically depending on
the waterbody type designation of the segment itself, it was suggested that
52     Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




     Figure 3.3: Composite Map of the Estero Bay Planning Unit
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   53
the tributary segments be redrawn to allow for representation of both the
estuarine and freshwater aspects of these tributaries.
     This then led to a resegmentation effort, which resulted in five of the
freshwater tributary segments being split to create five additional segments,
which were then classified as estuarine. This also resulted in a division
of the stations previously being assessed together. Data for stations now
located within the new estuarine segments were assessed against the appro-
priate criteria provided in 62-302 F.A.C.
     Also, the Everglades West Coast Status Report had not provided a seg-
ment for Estero Bay proper, which had remained unassessed. For the pur-
poses of better understanding the effects of the hydrology of this region on
the bay, into which most of the water flows, Estero Bay was delineated as a
segment and stations within it were assessed as per the IWR requirements
for this report. Finally, 4 newly introduced coastal segments were added to
allow for the assessment of the marine areas with which the surface waters
of the planning unit interact. The Estero Bay planning unit now consists
of a total of 19 waterbody segments.
     A significant portion of the planning unit lies in Lee County, with a
small percentage in Collier County. The Estero River, Imperial River, and
Spring Creek all lie within the planning unit and are the major tributaries
draining into Estero Bay. Warm, slow-moving estuarine waterbodies such
as these have naturally low water quality characteristics, such as low DO.
As a result, they may be more susceptible to water quality impacts from
human activities. These tributaries also provide minor freshwater flows to
Estero Bay, and their naturally low-flow characteristics make them vulner-
able to varying water quality, volume, and seasonal inputs (EPA, 2000).
The construction of canals in the region has contributed to increased sur-
face water flow, thus decreasing aquifer recharge. This results in increased
saltwater intrusion into aquifers in the area.
     Table 3.5 summarizes the water quality assessment status of all
waterbody segments in the planning unit and shows that seven waterbody
segments are impaired by chlorophyll a, copper, DO, and fecal coliforms.

Permitted Discharges and Land Uses
    Point Sources. There is only one facility permitted to discharge to
surface waters in this planning unit. (See Noteworthy for a definition of
point sources.)
                                                Permitted       Design
                                                Capacity        Capacity
 Facility ID   Facility Name    Description     MGD             MGD
 FL0145190     Three Oaks       Domestic        1,357           1.5
               Wastewater       Wastewater
               Treatment        Treatment
               Facility         Plant (WWTP)
               (WWTF)
54    Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


Table 3.5: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Estero Bay Planning Unit

                                                                  Data Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria3
                                                                                                                     EPA’s 305(b)/
                                                                                Verified                             303(d) Inte-
                                                               Potentially      Impaired (Cat. Not Impaired          grated Report
                                            1998 303(d) List   Impaired (Cat.   4a, 4b, 4c, or   (Cat. 2)            Assessment
          Waterbody      Waterbody          Parameters of      3c) for Listed   5) for Listed    for Listed          Category for
 WBID     Segment        Type1     Class2   Concern            Parameters       Parameters4      Parameters          WBID5
 3258A    Estero Bay     Estuary   IIIM     Nutrients          N/A              N/A              Chlorophyll a,      2
          Wetlands                                                                               DO, Fecal Coli-
                                                                                                 forms, Turbidity
 3258B    Hendry         Stream    IIIF     Nutrients, DO      N/A              Chlorophyll Copper, Fecal            5
          Creek                                                                 a, DO            Coliforms, Lead,
                                                                                                 Turbidity, Zinc
 3258B1   Hendry       Estuary     IIIM     Nutrients, DO      Copper, Lead DO, Chloro- Turbidity, Zinc              5
          Creek Marine                                                          phyll a, Fecal
                                                                                Coliforms
 3258C    Estero Bay     Stream    IIIF     NPS Survey         Cadmium          Chlorophyll Arsenic, Copper, 5
          Drainage                                                              a, DO            Fecal Coliforms,
                                                                                                 Lead, Turbidity,
                                                                                                 Zinc
 3258C1   Estero Bay     Estuary   IIIM     NPS Survey         DO               N/A              Chlorophyll a,      3c
          Drainage                                                                               Fecal Coliforms,
          Marine                                                                                 Turbidity, Zinc
 3258D    Estero River   Stream    IIIF     N/A                DO               N/A              Chlorophyll a,      3c
                                                                                                 Copper, Fecal
                                                                                                 Coliforms, Lead,
                                                                                                 Turbidity, Zinc
 3258D1 Estero River     Estuary   IIIM     N/A                N/A              Chlorophyll Turbidity, Zinc          5
        Marine                                                                  a, Copper,
                                                                                DO, Fecal
                                                                                Coliforms
 3258E    Imperial       Stream    IIIF     DO, Nutrients      N/A              DO, Chloro- Copper, Fecal            5
          River                                                                 phyll a          Coliforms, Lead,
                                                                                                 Turbidity, Zinc
 3258E1   Imperial       Estuary   IIIM     DO, Nutrients      DO               Copper           Chlorophyll a,      5
          River                                                                                  Fecal Coliforms,
          Marine                                                                                 Turbidity, Zinc
 3258F    Oak Creek      Estuary   IIIM     N/A                N/A              N/A              N/A                 3b
 3258G    Tenmile        Stream    IIIF     N/A                DO               N/A              Chlorophyll a,      3c
          Canal                                                                                  Copper, Lead,
                                                                                                 Fecal Coliforms,
                                                                                                 Turbidity, Arse-
                                                                                                 nic, Zinc
 3258H    Spring Creek Stream      IIIF     DO, Nutrients      DO               N/A              Chlorophyll a,      3c
                                                                                                 Copper, Lead,
                                                                                                 Fecal Coliforms,
                                                                                                 Turbidity, Zinc
 3258H1   Spring Creek Estuary     IIIM     DO, Nutrients      N/A              Chlorophyll Fecal Coliforms, 5
          Marine                                                                a, Copper,       Turbidity, Zinc
                                                                                DO
                                            Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                  55
Table 3.5 (continued)

                                                                     Data Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria3
                                                                                                                        EPA’s 305(b)/
                                                                                   Verified                             303(d) Inte-
                                                                  Potentially      Impaired (Cat. Not Impaired          grated Report
                                               1998 303(d) List   Impaired (Cat.   4a, 4b, 4c, or   (Cat. 2)            Assessment
            Waterbody    Waterbody             Parameters of      3c) for Listed   5) for Listed    for Listed          Category for
    WBID    Segment      Type1     Class2      Concern            Parameters       Parameters4      Parameters          WBID5
    3258I   Estero Bay   Estuary   IIIM        N/A                N/A              N/A              Chlorophyll         2
                                                                                                    a, DO, Fecal
                                                                                                    Coliforms,
                                                                                                    Turbidity
    3258X   Lakes Park   Lake        IIIF      N/A                N/A              N/A              N/A                 3b
    8060    Estero Bay   Coastal     IIIM      N/A                N/A              N/A              N/A                 3b
            Gulf
    8060A   Bowditch     Coastal     IIIM      N/A                N/A              N/A             Fecal Coliforms     3a
            Park
    8060B   Lynn Hall    Coastal     IIIM      N/A                N/A              N/A             Fecal Coliforms     3a
            Park
    8060C   Lovers Key   Coastal     IIIM      N/A                N/A              N/A             Fecal Coliforms     3a
            State Park

Notes:
1
 The designation “stream” includes canals, rivers, and sloughs. The designation “lake” includes some marshes.
2
  The state’s surface water classifications are as follows:
     Class I: Potable water supplies
     Class II: Shellfish propagation or harvesting
     Class III: Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife
     Class IV: Agricultural water supplies
     Class V: Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in this class)
3
  The EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report categories are as follows:
     1—Attains all designated uses;
     2—Attains some designated uses;
     3a—No data and information are available to determine if any designated use is attained;
     3b—Some data and information are available, but they are insufficient for determining if any designated use is attained;
     3c—Meets Planning List criteria and is potentially impaired for one or more designated uses;
     4a—Impaired for one or more designated uses and the TMDL is complete;
     4b—Impaired for one or more designated uses but no TMDL is required because the impairment is not caused by a
          pollutant;
     4c—Impaired for one or more designated uses, but no TMDL is required because a proposed pollution control measure
          provides reasonable assurance that the water will attain standards in the future; and
     5 —Water quality standards are not attained and a TMDL is required.
4
  Parameters in italics are in Category 4 (a, b, or c) waters that do not require TMDL development
5
  The assessment categories listed in this column represent the status of each WBID as a whole, based on multiple param-
eters. The hierarchy for assigning these categories is Category 5, then 4, then 3c, then 2, and then 3b—i.e., each WBID is
assigned a category based on the highest category assigned to an individual parameter. For example, if WBID 9999 has total
coliforms as Category 5, fecal coliforms as Category 3c, and coliforms-shellfish as Category 2, the single assessment call for
the WBID is Category 5.
F = Fresh water
M = Marine
NA = Not applicable, i.e., there are no parameters listed.
56   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                                Nonpoint Sources. Based on land use summary information,
                            wetlands and forested area make up a little over 50 percent of the plan-
                            ning unit’s total area. Land uses by urban development and agriculture
                            total almost the same area, at approximately 20 percent each. Urban
                            and agricultural land uses can be associated with nonpoint discharges of
                            pollutants and eroded sediments (see Noteworthy for a definition of non-
                            point sources).

                            Ecological Summary
                                 Ecological Resources. A number of waters in the Estero Bay
                            planning unit are designated as Outstanding Florida Waters (OFWs):
                            Koreshan State Historic Site, Estero Bay State Aquatic and Buffer Preserve,
                            Estero Bay and Estero Bay tributaries, Josslyn Island, and Lovers Key State
                            Recreation Area.
                                 Estero Bay’s shoreline and islands are fringed with mangroves, and
                            its shallow water contains seagrass beds that provide valuable nursery and
                            feeding habitat for many species of birds, reptiles, fish, and crustaceans.
                            Numerous endangered and threatened species are found in and around
                            the bay, including the manatee, loggerhead turtle, bald eagle, Big Cypress
                            fox squirrel, red-cockaded woodpecker, and snowy plover. In addition to
                            roosting areas and rookeries for wading bird species such as brown pelicans,
                            tricolored herons, snowy egrets, and great egrets, the area contains nest-
                            ing and perching areas for bald eagles. Loggerhead turtle nesting areas are
                            documented around the mouth of the Imperial River.
                                 A significant natural area in this planning is the Corkscrew Swamp.
                            Corkscrew Swamp contains one of the largest nesting colonies of endan-
                            gered wood storks in the country. Populations of these large wading
                            birds have dropped because drainage canals have lowered the water table,
                            decreasing the areas of wet pine flatwoods and wet prairies where they
                            forage. Other endangered species found within this planning unit include
                            the Florida panther, Florida black bear, Big Cypress fox squirrel,
                            red-cockaded woodpecker, and the Everglades population of the
                            Southern mink.
                                 Ecological Problems. To present ecological concerns more effectively,
                            this section describes the issues specific to larger areas in the planning unit,
                            rather than those within smaller, individual assessment units.
                                 Estero Bay’s shoreline, a part of the Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve, is
                            protected from development by a buffer preserve ranging from a quarter
                            of a mile to a mile wide. The area’s population is growing, however, and
                            development pressure continues. Inland, urbanization has increased within
                            a corridor extending from Fort Myers to Naples between Estero Bay and
                            Interstate 75. As a result, some of the historical marsh and mangrove com-
                            munities bordering the rivers in the planning unit have been lost to devel-
                            opment. A network of drainage canals in the greater Fort Myers area and
                            in smaller communities along the coast to the south has increased the flow
                            of fresh water, which includes contaminated urban and agricultural runoff
                            to Estero Bay. Between San Carlos Park and Vanderbilt Beach Estates
             Noteworthy                                      Water Quality Assessment Report:
                                                             Everglades West Coast
                                                                                                                      57
Information on Point Sources in Planning Units
   Point sources contributing pol-     storage, handling, or processing      requires identification of the
lution to surface water or ground      facilities). Landfills, hazardous     source(s) of waterbody impair-
water originate from discrete,         waste sites, dry cleaning solvent     ment. As part of the preliminary
well-defined areas such as a facil-    cleanup program (DSCP) sites,         assessment, information was
ity discharge from the end of a        petroleum facility discharges, and    gathered on permitted facilities
pipe, a disposal well, or a waste-     delineated ground water contami-      that discharge wastewater and
water sprayfield. Point sources        nation areas are also considered      landfills and other point sources.
generally fall into two major          point sources. These sites have       Appendix F lists the basin’s
types: domestic wastewater             the potential to leach contami-       domestic and industrial surface
sources (which consist of sewage       nants into ground water and           discharge facilities, along with
from homes, businesses, and            surface water, but the impacts are    their design flows, by planning
institutions) and industrial waste-    difficult to quantify.                unit. It also lists landfills or solid
water sources (which include              A detailed assessment of           waste facilities by planning unit.
wastewater, runoff, and leachate       water quality in the basins for the
from industrial or commercial          purpose of TMDL development



Environmental Remediation
   Environmental remediation           threat to public health and the       for adverse impacts and priority
activities cover a broad spectrum      environment.                          for corrective action. The EPA
of cleanup programs. These                The National Priorities List       Superfund program administers
include state-managed hazard-          (NPL) is a consolidated list of the   the cleanup of NPL sites.
ous waste, dry cleaning, and           uncontrolled hazardous waste             The Department’s state-funded
petroleum cleanup programs,            sites that pose the greatest threat   cleanup program administers the
as well as the federal Superfund       to public health or the environ-      cleanup of contaminated hazard-
and Resource Conservation and          ment. Sites are listed on the NPL     ous waste sites when enforce-
Recovery Act (RCRA) programs.          upon completion of a preliminary      ment action taken against a
These programs are designed            assessment, site inspection, and      responsible party is unsuccessful
to remediate ground water and          hazardous ranking system evalu-       or when no responsible party is
soil contamination that pose a         ation to determine their potential    identified.



Delineated Ground Water Contamination Areas
   The Department’s Delinea-           of contaminated ground water in          application process that
tion Program was established           Florida. The Delineation Pro-            requires stringent water well
in response to the discovery           gram is designed to ensure the           construction standards, and
of ground water contaminated           protection of public health over      • require well water testing after
by ethylene dibromide (EDB),           consumption of potable ground            completion of the water well
a soil fumigant used in thirty-        water supplies and to minimize           to ensure the potable quality
eight Florida counties to control      the potential for cross-contami-         of the water source.
nematodes in citrus groves and         nation of adjacent ground water         Any newly constructed water
row crops. The program now             resources.                            wells in delineated areas, and
includes ground water con-                The Delineation Program’s          existing water wells found to be
taminated by other pesticides,         primary responsibilities are to       contaminated, are remediated by
industrial solvents, and nutri-        • delineate areas of known            installing individual water treat-
ents. The coverage of delineated           ground water contamination,       ment systems or by connecting
areas in this program is not           • implement a water well              the users to public water supply
intended to include all sources            construction permitting/          systems.



Nonpoint Sources and Land Uses
   Rainfall generates stormwater       watershed, and into ground water      runoff often include fertilizers,
runoff. As it flows over the land      supplies. Nonpoint sources also       bacteria, metals, sediments,
and through the ground, runoff         include atmospheric deposition        petroleum compounds, and
may carry nonpoint source pollu-       and leaching from agricultural        metals.
tion from many different sources       lands, urban areas, and unveg-
to lakes, rivers, and estuaries in a   etated lands. The pollutants in
58   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


     Berms                          along Interstate 75, sheet flows have been obstructed by a series of berms
     Elongated ridges.              and dikes. These have affected inland water tables and wetland hydro-
                                    periods in a large area and have also increased freshwater flows to the bay.
                                          Other significant impacts have come from wetlands destruction,
                                    shoreline alterations, and the construction of causeways that have altered
                                    water circulation patterns. Contamination from nutrients (nitrogen and
                                    phosphorus), suspended solids, and turbidity has increased, as has the
     Eutrophication                 deposition of muck. As a result, eutrophication is accelerating. Red tide
     A process by which a           outbreaks occur periodically; the algae produces a toxin that can harm
     waterbody becomes rich in
                                    wildlife and humans.
     dissolved nutrients, often
     leading to algal blooms,             There is anecdotal evidence that the bay’s seagrass beds and fisheries
     low dissolved oxygen, and      have declined significantly since the 1960s because of increased turbid-
     changes in community           ity, low DO levels, and the altered timing of freshwater flows. Seagrasses
     composition. Eutrophication
     occurs naturally, but can be
                                    are an extremely important indicator of overall surface water quality and
     accelerated by human activi-   ecosystem health. These grass flats are found in shallow waters, usually
     ties that increase nutrient    no deeper than six to eight feet. Any factors that reduce light penetration
     inputs to the waterbody.       affect seagrass productivity, including the growth of algae and epiphytes
                                    (fueled by excess nutrients in wastewater and stormwater runoff), and
                                    turbidity from sediment resuspension. Seagrasses are also vulnerable to
                                    damage from boat propellers.
                                          Seagrasses support an interlinked community of diverse marine organ-
                                    isms, including algae, worms, mollusks, benthic organisms, sea turtles, and
                                    waterbirds. They are an important feeding ground for the manatee, and
                                    they also provide valuable shelter and nursery and juvenile habitat for many
                                    commercial and recreational fish and shellfish such as spotted seatrout,
                                    snook, red drum, shrimp, and bay scallop. The grasses help to stabilize
                                    shifting sands on the bottom of the bay, increase water clarity by trapping
                                    fine bottom sediments, and reduce nutrient levels in the water.
                                          Sediments in some areas of Estero Bay are contaminated with heavy
                                    metals such as cadmium, lead, and zinc. These contaminants can release
                                    toxins for years as the sediments are disturbed and redistributed by natural
                                    processes and human activities. In high enough concentrations, they can
                                    be damaging or deadly to aquatic life and can affect human health.
                                          Estero Island, a barrier island that lies west of Estero Bay, is heav-
                                    ily developed. The town of Fort Myers Beach, at the northern end of
                                    the island, is a center for tourist and recreational activities, and there are
                                    numerous boat ramps and marinas in the area that support commercial and
                                    recreational fishing. All of these activities have the potential to degrade
                                    water quality through contaminated runoff, petroleum spills, and raw
                                    sewage discharges from boats.

                                    Fish Consumption Advisories
                                        There are no freshwater fish consumption advisories in this plan-
                                    ning unit. There are, however, the following marine fish consumption
                                    advisories:
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   59
 Fish Species                   Waterbody             Advisory
 Shark (greater than 43 inches) All Coastal Waters    No Consumption
 King Mackerel (greater than     All Coastal Waters   No Consumption
 39 inches)
 Shark (less than 43 inches)     All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
 King Mackerel (33 to 39         All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
 inches)
 Spotted Seatrout (greater       All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
 than 20 inches)
 Little Tunny                    All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
 Cobia                           All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
 Greater Amberjack               All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
 Bluefish                        All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
 Crevalle Jack                   All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption


Water Quality Improvement Plans and Projects
    Water quality improvement projects for the Everglades West Coast
Basin are presented in Chapter 2. For this planning unit, no management
plans or projects complying with the Department’s guidance for reasonable
assurance have been provided for the 2002 list of impaired waters.
    Waters will not be placed on the Verified List if the Department
receives reasonable assurance that existing or proposed projects and/or pro-
grams are expected to result in the attainment of water quality standards or
consistently improve water quality over time. Chapter 4 and Appendix C
contain additional information on the requirements for reasonable
assurance.

• Southwest Coast (West Collier) Planning Unit

General Description
     The Southwest Coast (West Collier) planning unit, which stretches
over approximately 904 square miles (not including coastal WBIDs),
lies mostly in Collier County, with small portions in Lee and Hendry
Counties. The single most conspicuous feature of the Southwest Coast
planning unit is the expansive system of canals constructed during the
1960s for the GGE land development project. The GGE canals channel
drainage from approximately 200,000 acres into the Gordon River, Naples
Bay, and Faka Union Bay. Impacts from the canal system include the
overdrainage of surface waters, lowered ground water levels, altered drain-
age patterns, reduction of habitats, and declines in agricultural potential.
The construction of the GGE has dramatically lowered the ground water
table and changed salinity regimes in coastal areas of the planning unit.
Current water quality in the region’s rivers and bays is undoubtedly linked
to these major hydrologic changes. Other significant named waterbodies
in the planning unit are the Cocohatchee River and Canal, Faka Union
Canal, Gordon River, Haldeman Creek, Henderson Creek, Lake Trafford,
Rookery Bay, and Tamiami Canal.
     Population centers include Naples, Marco Island, Golden Gate, and
Goodland. Naples is the largest population center, with 20,727 people
60   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            (SWFRPC, 2003). Naples started out as a small fishing village and
                            beachside resort for the wealthy in the late 1880s, and underwent intensive
                            development in the 1960s. Although Marco Island was settled in the 1870s
                            and only officially became a city on August 27, 1997, recent archeological
                            excavations indicate habitation by the Calusa Indians and their ancestors
                            from 500 to 1500 A.D. Today the coastal area abounds in commercial
                            and residential development and is fueled by a tourist- and service-based
                            economy.
                                 Figure 3.4 is a composite map of the planning unit that shows poten-
                            tially impaired waters and potential point sources of pollution.

                            Water Quality Summary
                                 The Southwest Coast planning unit was initially divided into 24 sub-
                            basins, as presented in the Everglades West Coast Status Report (November
                            2001). For the purposes of this report, the Southwest Coast has had a
                            number of segments added to it. These are specifically coastal segments
                            that lie on the western edge of the planning unit. These segments allow for
                            assessment of the marine areas with which the surface waters of the plan-
                            ning unit interact. A total of 20 coastal segments were added, and so the
                            Southwest Coast planning unit now consists of 44 waterbody segments.
                                 The other segments in the planning unit are classified as streams, lakes,
                            or estuaries. There are 12 subbasins classified as streams, which total about
                            81.5 miles of surface waters. Although these waterbodies are classified as
                            “streams,” most are canals. The planning unit contains an extensive net-
                            work of canals and water control structures to facilitate flood control, since
                            the area’s topographic relief is low.
                                 Aside from the newly introduced coastal estuarine segments, the
                            Southwest Coast planning unit also includes 10 land-based estuarine sub-
                            basins, which cover approximately 141.8 square miles and contain about
                            46.2 miles of surface waters. In addition to this, there are 2 subbasins clas-
                            sified as lakes. They total about 3.5 square miles and contain 3.1 square
                            miles of surface waters.
                                 Table 3.6 summarizes the water quality assessment status of all
                            waterbody segments in the planning unit. The table and figure show that
                            seven waterbody segments in this planning unit are impaired. An integral
                            part of the assessment of this planning unit lay with the introduction of a
                            large set of surface water quality data, which was provided to the Depart-
                            ment by Collier County, the effects of which were quite evident. Whereas
                            only four segments were found to be potentially impaired in the Everglades
                            West Coast Status Report in 2001, Table 3.6 now indicates that seven
                            segments have been verified impaired. Also, waterbodies in this planning
                            unit that previously had either no data, or insufficient data for any assess-
                            ment, had valuable sample points added to them, allowing for verification
                            of both impairment or non-impairment for a number of parameters. The
                            additional data continued to be useful, as it aided in identifying a number
                            of parameters as potentially impaired and as candidates for placement on
                            the Planning List.
                           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   61




Figure 3.4: Composite Map of the Southwest Coast Planning Unit
62       Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


Table 3.6: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Southwest Coast Planning Unit


                                                                 Data Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria3
                                                                            Verified
                                              1998 303(d)   Potentially     Impaired (Cat. Not Impaired      EPA’s 305(b)/303(d)
                                              List Param-   Impaired (Cat. 4a, 4b, 4c, or (Cat. 2)           Integrated Report
          Waterbody      Waterbody            eters of      3c) for Listed 5) for Listed    for Listed       Assessment Category
 WBID     Segment        Type1       Class2   Concern       Parameters      Parameters4     Parameters       for WBID5
 3259A    Cocohatchee    Stream      II       DO, BOD,      Mercury (in DO                  Turbidity        5
          River                               Coliforms     fish tissue)
 3259B    Cocohatchee    Stream      IIIF     N/A           N/A             DO              Arsenic,         5
          River Canal                                                                       Cadmium,
                                                                                            Chlorophyll a,
                                                                                            Copper, Lead,
                                                                                            Turbidity, Zinc
 3259C    Gordon River Stream        IIIF     DO, BOD,      DO,             N/A             Chlorophyll a, 3c
                                              Coliforms,    Coliforms                       Turbidity
                                              Nutrients
 3259D    Gordon River   Stream      IIIF     N/A           N/A            DO             Chlorophyll a,    5
          Canal                                                                           Turbidity
 3259E    Henderson      Stream      IIIF     N/A           N/A            DO             Turbidity         5
          Creek Canal
 3259F    Golden Gate    Stream      IIIF     N/A           DO             N/A            Chlorophyll a,    3c
          Canal                                                                           Turbidity
 3259G    Naples Bay     Estuary     IIIM     Nutrients     Chlorophyll    N/A            N/A               3c
                                                            a
 3259H    Henderson      Stream      IIIF     N/A           DO             N/A            Chlorophyll a,    3c
          Creek Canal                                                                     Turbidity
 3259I    West Collier   Stream      IIIF     N/A           DO             N/A            Chlorophyll a,    3c
                                                                                          Turbidity
 3259J    Rookery Bay    Estuary     II       N/A           N/A            N/A            N/A               3b
 3259K    Runoff to      Stream      IIIF     N/A           N/A            N/A            N/A               3b
          Gulf
 3259L    Blackwater     Stream      IIIF     N/A           N/A            DO             Chlorophyll       5
          River                                                                           a, Fecal
                                                                                          Coliforms,
                                                                                          Turbidity
 3259M Runoff to         Estuary     II       N/A           N/A            N/A            DO, Fecal         2
       Gulf                                                                               Coliforms,
                                                                                          Turbidity
 3259N    Runoff to      Estuary     II       N/A           N/A            N/A            DO, Fecal         2
          Gulf                                                                            Coliforms,
                                                                                          Turbidity
 3259O    Faka Union     Stream      IIIF     N/A           DO             N/A            Chlorophyll       3c
          Canal                                                                           v, Fecal
                                                                                          Coliforms,
                                                                                          Turbidity
 3259P    Ferguson       Estuary     II       N/A           N/A            N/A            DO, Fecal         2
          River                                                                           Coliforms,
                                                                                          Turbidity
 3259Q    Center of      Estuary     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            N/A               3a
          Outer Clam
          Bay
                                          Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                               63
Table 3.6 (continued)

                                                                 Data Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria3
                                                                            Verified
                                              1998 303(d)   Potentially     Impaired (Cat. Not Impaired      EPA’s 305(b)/303(d)
                                              List Param-   Impaired (Cat. 4a, 4b, 4c, or (Cat. 2)           Integrated Report
        Waterbody        Waterbody            eters of      3c) for Listed 5) for Listed    for Listed       Assessment Category
WBID    Segment          Type1       Class2   Concern       Parameters      Parameters4     Parameters       for WBID5
3259R   Runoff to        Estuary     II       N/A           N/A             N/A             DO, Fecal        2
        Gulf                                                                                Coliforms,
                                                                                            Turbidity
3259S Runoff to     Estuary          II       N/A           N/A             N/A             N/A              3b
      Gulf
3259T Lake Avalon, Lake              IIIF     N/A           N/A            N/A            N/A               3b
      Mid-Lake
3259W Lake Trafford Lake             IIIF     DO,           Turbidity      TSI            DO, Fluoride,     5
                                              Nutrients                                   Mercury
                                                                                          (in fish
                                                                                          tissue), Fecal
                                                                                          Coliforms,
                                                                                          Total
                                                                                          Coliforms
3259X   Drainage to      Stream      IIIF     N/A           DO             N/A            N/A               3c
        Corkscrew
3259Y   Vanderbilt       Estuary     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            N/A               3b
        Waterway
3259Z   Little Hickory   Estuary     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            N/A               3b
        Bay
8061    Southwest        Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            N/A               3a
        Coast Gulf 1
8061A   Little Hickory   Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
        Island Park                                                                       Coliforms
8061B   Bonita Beach     Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
        Park                                                                              Coliforms
8061C   Lely Barefoot    Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
        Beach                                                                             Coliforms
8061D   Wiggans          Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3b
        Pass North                                                                        Coliforms
8061E   Wiggans          Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
        Pass State                                                                        Coliforms
        Park
8061F   Vanderbilt       Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
        Beach                                                                             Coliforms
8062    Southwest        Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            N/A               3a
        Coast Gulf 2
8062A   Clam Pass        Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            DO, Fecal         2
                                                                                          Coliforms
8062B   Parkshore    Coastal         IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
        Beach                                                                             Coliforms
8062C   Doctors Pass Coastal         IIIM     N/A           DO             N/A            DO, Fecal         3c
                                                                                          Coliforms
8062D   Lowdermilk       Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
        Park Beach                                                                        Coliforms
8062E   Naples Pier      Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
                                                                                          Coliforms
64         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


    Table 3.6 (continued)

                                                                   Data Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria3
                                                                              Verified
                                                1998 303(d)   Potentially     Impaired (Cat. Not Impaired      EPA’s 305(b)/303(d)
                                                List Param-   Impaired (Cat. 4a, 4b, 4c, or (Cat. 2)           Integrated Report
            Waterbody      Waterbody            eters of      3c) for Listed 5) for Listed    for Listed       Assessment Category
    WBID    Segment        Type1       Class2   Concern       Parameters      Parameters4     Parameters       for WBID5
    8063    Southwest      Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A             N/A             N/A              3a
            Coast Gulf 3
    8063A   Gordons        Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
            Pass                                                                            Coliforms
    8064    Southwest      Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            DO, Turbidity,    2
            Coast Gulf 4                                                                    Fecal
                                                                                            Coliforms
    8064A   Tigertail      Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
            Beach                                                                           Coliforms
    8064B   Residence      Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
            Beach                                                                           Coliforms
    8064C   Caxambas       Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            N/A            Fecal             3a
            Park                                                                            Coliforms
    8065    Southwest      Coastal     IIIM     N/A           N/A            Bacteria (in   Arsenic,          5
            Coast Gulf 5                                                     shellfish)     DO, Fecal
                                                                                            Coliforms,
                                                                                            Turbidity
Notes:
1
 The designation “stream” includes canals, rivers, and sloughs. The designation “lake” includes some marshes.
2
  The state’s surface water classifications are as follows:
     Class I: Potable water supplies
     Class II: Shellfish propagation or harvesting
     Class III: Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife
     Class IV: Agricultural water supplies
     Class V: Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in this class)
3
  The EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report categories are as follows:
     1—Attains all designated uses;
     2—Attains some designated uses;
     3a—No data and information are available to determine if any designated use is attained;
     3b—Some data and information are available, but they are insufficient for determining if any designated use is attained;
     3c—Meets Planning List criteria and is potentially impaired for one or more designated uses;
     4a—Impaired for one or more designated uses and the TMDL is complete;
     4b—Impaired for one or more designated uses but no TMDL is required because the impairment is not caused by a
          pollutant;
     4c—Impaired for one or more designated uses, but no TMDL is required because a proposed pollution control measure
          provides reasonable assurance that the water will attain standards in the future; and
     5 —Water quality standards are not attained and a TMDL is required.
4
  Parameters in italics are in Category 4 (a, b, or c) waters that do not require TMDL development
5
  The assessment categories listed in this column represent the status of each WBID as a whole, based on multiple param-
eters. The hierarchy for assigning these categories is Category 5, then 4, then 3c, then 2, and then 3b; that is, each WBID is
assigned a category based on the highest category assigned to an individual parameter. For example, if WBID 9999 has total
coliforms as Category 5, fecal coliforms as Category 3c, and coliforms-shellfish as Category 2, the single assessment call for
the WBID is Category 5.
F = Fresh water
M = Marine
NA = Not applicable—i.e., there are no parameters listed.
                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast               65
Permitted Discharges and Land Uses
     Point Sources. There are five facilities in this planning unit permitted
for surface water discharge.
                                                                               Permitted   Design
                                                                               Capacity    Capacity
 Facility ID   Facility Name                 Description                       MGD         MGD
 FL0026271     City of Naples Wastewater     Domestic Wastewater Treatment     10          10
               Treatment Plant               Plant
 FL0141356     Collier County South          Domestic Wastewater Treatment     8           8
               Regional WRF                  Plant
 FL0141399     Collier County north WRF      Domestic Wastewater Treatment     13.5        8.5
                                             Plant
 FL0141704     Port of the Islands – South   Domestic Wastewater Treatment     0.2         0.2
                                             Plant
 FLG830224     Pick KWIK #154                Petroleum Cleanup GP (long        N/A         N/A
                                             term)


     Nonpoint Sources. Based on land use summary information, almost
60 percent of land use in the planning unit consists of wetlands, with agri-
culture the second most prominent land use at about 18 percent. Urban
land use ranks third, although it is heavily concentrated along the coast-
line. Although urban and agriculture are the main human land uses in this
planning unit, some lands that are zoned as agricultural may actually be
swamps. Agricultural and urban land uses can be associated with nonpoint
discharges of pollutants and eroded sediments.

Ecological Summary
   Ecological Resources. Of the three planning units in the Everglades
West Coast Basin, the Southwest Coast contains the largest number of
OFWs. The designation applies to

    •   Barefoot Beach acquisitions
    •   Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Recreation Area
    •   Wiggins Pass Estuarine Area and the Cocohatchee River system
    •   Rookery Bay State Aquatic Preserve
    •   Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve
    •   Rookery Bay acquisitions
    •   Collier-Seminole State Park
    •   Cape Romano–Ten Thousand Islands State Aquatic Preserve
    •   Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve
    •   Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge

     Numerous threatened and endangered species are found in the South-
west Coast, including black bears, Florida panthers, and wading bird
species such as the little blue heron, snowy egret, tricolored heron, white
ibis, and brown pelican. The extensive shoreline and islands along the
Southwest Coast planning unit contain mangrove swamps and seagrass
beds that provide valuable nursery and feeding habitat for many species of
birds, reptiles, fish, and crustaceans.
66   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                                 Ecological Problems. Lake Trafford, which provides important
                            habitat for wildlife, including numerous migratory bird species, has been
                            severely impaired by agricultural, urban, and septic tank runoff. Problems
                            exist with algal blooms and weed growth, and fish kills occur periodi-
                            cally. Because the lake comprises the headwaters of the Corkscrew Swamp
                            Sanctuary, the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed, and the Faka-
                            hatchee Strand system, the potential exists for contaminated water to affect
                            ecological resources in a large area.
                                 Although a number of areas immediately along the coast are protected
                            from development, the region’s population is growing and development
                            pressure continues. Just inland from the coast, urbanization has increased
                            in a corridor extending from Fort Myers to Naples between Estero Bay
                            and Interstate 75. The Golden Gate Canal system east of Naples chan-
                            nels freshwater drainage from about 200,000 acres into the Gordon River,
                            Naples Bay, and Faka Union Bay. It has altered sheet flows of water,
                            decreased wetland acreage, and lowered ground water tables. By increasing
                            freshwater flows to coastal areas, the canal system has altered the salinity
                            regimes on which estuarine productivity depends. In Naples Bay, water
                            quality has been further degraded because of urban stormwater runoff and
                            shoreline alterations, particularly the construction of a large network of
                            finger canals bordered by residential development in the southern part of
                            the city.

                            Fish Consumption Advisories
                                There are no freshwater fish consumption advisories in this plan-
                            ning unit. There are, however, the following marine fish consumption
                            advisories:

                             Fish Species                   Waterbody          Advisory
                             Shark (greater than 43 inches) All Coastal Waters No Consumption
                             King Mackerel (greater than     All Coastal Waters No Consumption
                             39 inches)
                             Shark (less than 43 inches)     All Coastal Waters Limited Consumption
                             King Mackerel (33 to 39         All Coastal Waters Limited Consumption
                             inches)
                             Spotted Seatrout (greater       All Coastal Waters Limited Consumption
                             than 20 inches)
                             Little Tunny                    All Coastal Waters Limited Consumption
                             Cobia                           All Coastal Waters Limited Consumption
                             Greater Amberjack               All Coastal Waters Limited Consumption
                             Bluefish                        All Coastal Waters Limited Consumption
                             Crevalle Jack                   All Coastal Waters Limited Consumption


                            Water Quality Improvement Plans and Projects
                                Water quality improvement projects for the Everglades West Coast
                            Basin are presented in Chapter 2. For this planning unit, no management
                            plans or projects complying with the Department’s guidance for reasonable
                            assurance have been provided for the 2002 list of impaired waters.
                                Waters will not be placed on the Verified List if the Department
                            receives reasonable assurance that existing or proposed projects and/or
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   67
programs are expected to result in the attainment of water quality stan-
dards or consistently improve water quality over time. Chapter 4 and
Appendix C contain additional information on the requirements for rea-
sonable assurance.

• Inner (East Collier) Drainage Area Planning Unit

General Description
     The Inner (East Collier) Drainage Area planning unit covers approxi-
mately 1,985 square miles and includes portions of Collier, Hendry,
Monroe, Broward and Miami-Dade Counties.
     Most of the lands in the Inner Drainage Area planning unit are in the
Big Cypress National Preserve, an area of low flatlands containing cypress
trees, pine forests, and wet and dry prairies. Other lands include the Semi-
nole Indian Reservation and a portion of the Miccosukee Indian Reserva-
tion. Significant waterbodies include the Barron River Canal, Tamiami
Canal, and L-28 Canal.
     Population centers in the Inner Drainage Area include Immokalee in
the northwestern corner and Everglades City/Chokoloskee in the south-
western corner of the planning unit. Cattle ranchers and citrus farmers first
settled in Immokalee in the late 1880s. Today it is a major source of winter
vegetables, citrus, and cattle for the United States. The Calusa Indians,
who built a large shell mound on Chokoloskee Island, inhabited Everglades
City/Chokoloskee many centuries ago. The area’s first permanent white
residents were farmers who settled along the Allen River (now the Barron
River) just after the Civil War. They had to eke out a living on the banks
of the river, the only naturally high ground in the region.
     In 1923, Barron G. Collier made Everglades City the headquarters for
his Tamiami Trail road-building company. Although many construction
jobs were lost in 1928 when the Tamiami Trail was completed, commer-
cial fishing grew. Sponge fishing flourished in the 1940s, shrimping in the
1950s, and stone crabbing in the 1960s. Today the region’s economy still
relies on commercial fishing as well as recreational fishing and tourism.
Although not economically significant, small quantities of oil and gas have
been produced in this region since 1943.
     Figure 3.5 is a composite map of the planning unit that shows poten-
tially impaired waters and potential point sources of pollution.

Water Quality Summary
    The Inner Drainage Area planning unit of the Everglades West Coast
Basin is divided into 8 subbasins consisting of 7 stream subbasins and 1
estuarine subbasin. The stream subbasins contain about 90.2 miles of sur-
face waters, most of which are canal systems. The northern portion of the
unit is mainly flat agricultural land, requiring canal structures to direct the
flow of water for irrigation. The Barron River, the most prominent of these
structures, runs almost the entire length of the unit, and contains a number
of adjoining control structures to regulate flows in the watershed.
    The southern portion of the Inner Drainage Area unit, part of the Big
Cypress National Preserve, is almost entirely wetlands. The one estuarine
68   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




     Figure 3.5: Composite Map of the Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast     69
subbasin, along the coast, is about 10 square miles and has about 6.6 miles
of surface waters.
     Table 3.7 summarizes the water quality assessment status of all water-
body segments in the planning unit. Waterbodies represented by these data
include the C-139 Canal, Barron River Canal, Tamiami Canal, L-28 Inter-
ceptor, Feeder Canal, and the L-28 Gap. The table and figure indicate that
no waterbody segments within this planning unit are considered impaired
per the Verified List Methodology; however, most of the segments indicate
potential impairments for DO and fish consumption advisories for mercury
in fish tissue. It is important to note that since the area is predominantly
swampy, the low DO is probably a consequence of swamp discharge, which
is naturally low in DO.

Permitted Discharges and Land Uses
    Point Sources. There are three facilities permitted for surface water
discharge in this planning unit.
                                                            Permitted       Design
           Facility Name
 Facility ID                        Description             Capacity MGD    Capacity MGD
 Fl0027618 City of Everglades, City Domestic WWTP           0.115           0.115
           WWTF
 FLG910751 Handy Food Store #91 Petroleum Cleanup           N/A             N/A
                                    GP (long term)
 FLG910977 Davis Oil Company/       Petroleum Cleanup       N/A             N/A
           Davis Service Center     GP (long term)


     Nonpoint Sources. Based on land use summary information, about
70 percent of the planning unit comprises wetlands, and a little over 21
percent is agricultural area. Urban land use is very low, at only about 0.4
percent of the planning unit, indicating that the area is very sparsely popu-
lated. Agricultural and urban land uses can be associated with nonpoint
discharges of pollutants and eroded sediments.

Ecological Summary
     Ecological Resources. OFWs in this planning unit include slivers of
the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Fakahatchee Strand State
Preserve, Everglades National Park, and all of the Big Cypress National
Preserve.
     The overwhelming ecological feature in this planning unit is the Big
Cypress Swamp, a flat, forested, low-lying region, on the western side
of the Everglades. The swamp is called “big” because of its size—more
than 2,400 square miles (1.5 million acres)—not because of the size of its
cypress trees. More than half of the surface water flowing to the Everglades
comes from the swamp. Although it is somewhat higher in elevation than
the Everglades, Big Cypress is mostly inundated with water for more than
300 days out of each year. Unique forests of mixed bald cypress and royal
palms have developed along channels in the limestone; in higher areas, pine
and hammock forests predominate. In other areas of the swamp, dwarf
cypress savannas and open prairies grow on thin soils of marl and sand on
top of the limestone. Epiphytic plants are abundant in forested areas. The
Big Cypress National Preserve, managed by the National Park Service,
70          Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


Table 3.7: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit

                                                                        Data Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria3
                                                                Potentially        Verified Impaired      Not Impaired EPA’s 305(b)/303(d)
                                             1998 303(d) List   Impaired (Cat.     (Cat. 4a, 4b, 4c,      (Cat. 2)     Integrated Report
            Waterbody   Waterbody            Parameters of      3c) for Listed     or 5) for Listed       for Listed   Assessment Category
    WBID    Segment     Type1       Class2   Concern            Parameters         Parameters4            Parameters4 for WBID5
    3255    C-139       Stream      IIIF     N/A                DO, Fish           N/A                                 3c
                                                                (mercury)

    3261A Barron River Estuary      IIIM     N/A                Cadmium, Fish Chlorophyll a,                         3c
          Canal                                                 (mercury) ,   Turbidity
                                                                 Mercury

    3261B   Tamiami     Stream      IIIF     DO, Cadmium, DO, Fish                Copper, Arsenic,                   3c
            Canal                            Copper,      (mercury)               Cadmium,
                                             Mercury (in                          Chlorophyll
                                             fish tissue)                         a, Iron, Lead,
                                                                                  Turbidity,
                                                                                  Unionized
                                                                                  Ammonia, Zinc
    3261C   Barron River Stream     IIIF     N/A                DO, Fish          Chlorophyll a,                     3c
            Canal                                               (mercury)         Fluoride, Total
                                                                                  Coliforms,
                                                                                  Fecal Coliforms,
                                                                                  Turbidity
    3261D Tamiami       Stream      IIIF     N/A                N/A               N/A                                3a
          Canal
    3266  L-28          Stream      IIIF     DO, Nutrients,     DO, Fish          Turbidity,                         3c
          Interceptor                        Mercury (in        (mercury)         Unionized
                                             fish tissue)                         Ammonia
    3267    Feeder      Stream      IIIF     N/A                N/A               N/A                                3a
            Canal
    3269    L-28 Gap    Stream      IIIF     DO                 DO, Fish          Turbidity,                         3c
                                                                (mercury)         Unionized
                                                                                  Ammonia
Notes:
1
 The designation “stream” includes canals, rivers, and sloughs. The designation “lake” includes some marshes.
2
  The state’s surface water classifications are as follows:
     Class I: Potable water supplies
     Class II: Shellfish propagation or harvesting
     Class III: Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife
     Class IV: Agricultural water supplies
     Class V: Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in this class)
3
  The EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report categories are as follows:
     1—Attains all designated uses;
     2—Attains some designated uses;
     3a—No data and information are available to determine if any designated use is attained;
     3b—Some data and information are available, but they are insufficient for determining if any designated use is attained;
     3c—Meets Planning List criteria and is potentially impaired for one or more designated uses;
     4a—Impaired for one or more designated uses and the TMDL is complete;
     4b—Impaired for one or more designated uses but no TMDL is required because the impairment is not caused by a pollutant;
     4c—Impaired for one or more designated uses, but no TMDL is required because a proposed pollution control measure pro-
          vides reasonable assurance that the water will attain standards in the future; and
     5 —Water quality standards are not attained and a TMDL is required.
4
  Parameters in italics are in Category 4 (a, b, or c) waters that do not require TMDL development
                                       Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                             71
Table 3.7 (continued)

5
  The assessment categories listed in this column represent the status of each WBID as a whole, based on multiple
parameters. The hierarchy for assigning these categories is Category 5, then 4, then 3c, then 2, and then 3b; that is, each
WBID is assigned a category based on the highest category assigned to an individual parameter. For example, if WBID
9999 has total coliforms as Category 5, fecal coliforms as Category 3c, and coliforms-shellfish as Category 2, the single
assessment call for the WBID is Category 5.
F = Fresh water
M = Marine
NA = Not applicable—i.e., there are no parameters listed.



     makes up only 729,000 acres of this area, and is home to numerous threat-
     ened and endangered species including black bears, Florida panthers, and
     wading bird species.
           Ecological Problems. In 1943, Florida’s first oil-producing well was
     drilled just north of the Big Cypress Preserve in Sunniland. Today there
     still are oil-producing wells in Big Cypress, and the fill roads created to
     serve the industry affect the region’s hydrology.
           Expanding agricultural development in the north-central portion of
     the planning unit is associated with increased freshwater drainage and
     nutrient contamination that could degrade water quality flows to Big
     Cypress National Preserve. Pollutants of concern include excessive nutri-
     ents, coliform bacteria, biochemical oxygen demand, mercury, and low
     levels of DO.
           The L-28 Interceptor Canal contains elevated nutrient levels and low
     levels of DO. Water quality in the Feeder Canal that flows to Big Cypress
     is poor.

     Fish Consumption Advisories
         The following freshwater fish consumption advisories occur either
     within or adjacent to the eastern edge of this planning unit:


      Location                                  County             Fish Species                 Advisory
      Big Cypress Preserve, Turner River Canal, Collier,           Largemouth bass, bowfin,     Limited Consumption
      and Collier and Loop Road culverts        Monroe             and gar
      L-28 Tieback Canal                             Collier       Largemouth bass, bowfin,     Limited Consumption
                                                                   gar, and warmouth
      Portions of canals L-1, 2, 3, and 4 draining   Hendry        Largemouth bass, bowfin,     Limited Consumption
      the Everglades Agricultural Area                             gar, and warmouth
      Water Conservation Area 3 (outside of          Miami-Dade,   Warmouth, oscar, yellow      Limited Consumption
      but immediately adjacent to the eastern        Broward       bullhead, mayan cichlid, and
      edge of the Inner Drainage Area)                             spotted sunfish
      Shark River Drainage (outside of but           Miami-Dade,   Largemouth bass, bowfin,     No Consumption
      immediately adjacent to the eastern edge       Monroe        and gar
      of the Inner Drainage Area)
      Water Conservation Area 3                      Miami-Dade,   Largemouth bass, bowfin,     No Consumption
                                                     Broward       and gar
72   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                               The following marine fish consumption advisories occur within the
                            marine portion of this planning unit:

                             Fish Species                  Waterbody            Advisory
                             Shark (greater than 43        All Coastal Waters   No Consumption
                             inches)
                             King Mackerel (greater than   All Coastal Waters   No Consumption
                             39 inches)
                             Shark (less than 43 inches)   All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
                             King Mackerel (33 to 39       All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
                             inches)
                             Spotted Seatrout (greater     All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
                             than 20 inches)
                             Little Tunny                  All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
                             Cobia                         All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
                             Greater Amberjack             All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
                             Bluefish                      All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption
                             Crevalle Jack                 All Coastal Waters   Limited Consumption


                            Water Quality Improvement Plans and Projects
                                Water quality improvement projects for the Everglades West Coast
                            Basin are presented in Chapter 2. For this planning unit, no management
                            plans or projects complying with the Department’s guidance for reasonable
                            assurance have been provided for the 2002 list of impaired waters.
                                Waters will not be placed on the Verified List if the Department
                            receives reasonable assurance that existing or proposed projects and/or pro-
                            grams are expected to result in the attainment of water quality standards or
                            consistently improve water quality over time. Chapter 4 and Appendix C
                            contain additional information on the requirements for reasonable
                            assurance.
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   73

Chapter 4: The Verified List of Impaired
Waters

Public Participation

     The public was encouraged to participate in the process of develop-
ing and adopting the Verified Lists of impaired waters for the six Group 1
basins across the state. Basin-specific draft Verified Lists of waters that
met the requirements of the Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR) were
made available to the public on July 12, 2002. The lists were placed on
the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s (Department) Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Web site, at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/
water/tmdl, and were also sent on request to interested parties by mail or
via e-mail.
     Citizens were given the opportunity to comment on the draft lists
both in person and/or in writing. Eight public meetings were held across
the state to encourage public participation on a basin-by-basin basis. The
Department also accepted written comments for 45 days beginning July 12,
2002, and ending August 26, 2002.
     Following the public meetings for the Group 1 basins, which took place
between July 19 and July 25, 2002, revised draft lists were made available
to the public on August 7, 2002. The public had the opportunity to com-
ment on these revised lists either in writing and/or at a final public meeting
in Tallahassee. Comments received by August 26, 2002, were considered
in preparing the revised draft lists. Comments on any of the lists were
accepted and considered throughout the full comment period.
     Table 4.1 lists the schedule for the development and adoption of the
Group 1 Verified Lists, including the public meetings. The schedule for the
Everglades West Coast Basin is highlighted in boldface type. Appendix I
contains documentation provided during the public comment period.
     The final basin-specific Verified Lists developed through the public
participation process were adopted by Secretarial Order during the week of
August 26–30, 2002, and were submitted to the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (EPA) on October 1, 2002, as the state’s current 303(d) list
of impaired waters. On March 11, 2003, the Secretary signed a new Order
amending the Group 1 Verified Lists.
74   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


       Table 4.1: Schedule for Development and Adoption of the Group 1 Verified Lists

        Date              Scheduled Activity
        July 12, 2002     Publication of Draft Verified List and Beginning of Public Comment Period
        July 19, 2002     Public Meeting at Marco Island on the Statewide Verified List for All Group 1 Basins
        July 22, 2002     Public Meeting in Tallahassee on the Ocklockonee and St. Marks Basins
        July 22, 2002     Public Meeting in Live Oak on the Suwannee River Basin (Including the Aucilla,
                          Coastal, Suwannee, Waccasassa, and Orange Creek Basins)
        July 23, 2002     Public Meeting in Leesburg on the Ocklawaha River and Orange Creek Basins
        July 24, 2002     Public Meeting in St. Petersburg on the Tampa Bay Basin
        July 24, 2002     Public Meeting in Belle Glade on the Lake Okeechobee Basin
        July 25, 2002     Public Meeting in Fort Myers on the Everglades West Coast Basin
        August 7, 2002    Publication of Revised Draft List
        August 14, 2002   Public Meeting in Tallahassee on Revised Draft List for All Basins, and Public
                          Comments and Input from Prior Public Meetings
        August 26, 2002   Final Deadline for Receiving Public Comments
        August 26–30,     Adoption of Verified List by Secretarial Order
        2002
        October 1, 2002   Submittal to EPA as State’s 303(d) List of Impaired Waters
        March 11, 2003    Verified List Amended by Secretarial Order


                                  Identification of Impaired Waters

                                       Waters on both the Verified and Planning Lists must meet specific
                                  thresholds and data sufficiency and data quality requirements in Rule
                                  62-303, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). Appendix A describes the
                                  legislative and regulatory background for the development of the Planning
                                  and Verified Lists. Appendix D contains a detailed methodology that
                                  describes the criteria and thresholds required for both lists under the IWR.
                                       Any waters that do not have sufficient data to be analyzed in accor-
                                  dance with the requirements of the IWR will remain on the 1998 303(d)
                                  list of impaired waters maintained by the EPA. These waters are not
                                  delisted. They will be sampled during the next watershed management
                                  cycle so that their impairment status can be verified.

                                  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Review of Florida’s
                                  Amended Section 303(d) List
                                       On June 11, 2003, the EPA released a Decision Document based on its
                                  review of the Department’s amendments to Florida’s 1998 Section 303(d)
                                  list. The EPA found that the Department’s Group 1 update substantially
                                  met the intent of Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and partially
                                  approved the submission.
                                       Applying its own evaluation methodology, the EPA proposed list-
                                  ing 80 additional waterbody segments/pollutants for public comment by
                                  July 18, 2003. Under this methodology, approximately half of the added
                                  waters failed to meet water quality criteria for dissolved oxygen (DO),
                                  but no causative pollutant could be identified. Florida law precludes the
                                  Department from including such waters on its Verified List of impaired
                                  waters until the causative pollutant is known. The majority of the
                                  remaining waters were added to the list based on a different interpretation
                                  of the methodology for assessing potential impairment for bacteria. The
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   75
Department agreed to apply this alternative methodology when assessing
the next group (Group 2) of waterbodies for bacteria.
     The consequence of having the EPA add waters to Florida’s Section
303(d) list is that the EPA would be obligated to propose TMDLs for
these waters. However, the EPA has proposed assigning a “low” prior-
ity to these waterbodies, thus providing the Department an opportunity
to investigate them further. The section on “Prioritization of Listed
Waters” in Chapter 5 provides additional details on the criteria for high-,
low-, and medium-priority waters. Information on the status of Florida’s
amended Section 303(d) list can be found on the EPA’s Web site at http:
//www.epa.gov/region4/water/tmdl/florida.


The Verified List of Impaired Waters

     Table 4.2 contains the Verified List of impaired waters for the Ever-
glades West Coast Basin, and Figure 4.1 shows waters on the Verified
List. For presentation purposes, the entire watershed for the listed water is
highlighted. However, only the main waterbody in the assessment unit has
been assessed, and other waters in the watershed may not be impaired.

Pollutants Causing Impairments

Estero Bay Planning Unit
     There are 65 sampling stations within the planning unit. The majority
of surface waters here are described as estuarine systems, which cover a total
of 47.2 square miles. The Lakes Park (WBID 3258X) assessment unit is
the sole lake in this area and it has an estimated area of 1.0 square mile.

Estero Bay Planning Unit Waterbody Segments

 Segment and WBID#                             Type
 Estero Bay Wetlands (3258A)                   Estuarine
 Hendry Creek (3258B)                          Stream
 Hendry Creek Marine (3258B1)                  Estuarine
 Estero Bay Drainage (3258C)                   Stream
 Estero Bay Drainage Marine (3258C1)           Estuarine
 Estero River (3258D)                          Stream
 Estero River Marine (3258D1)                  Estuarine
 Imperial River (3258E)                        Stream
 Imperial River Marine (3258E1)                Estuarine
 Oak Creek (3258F)                             Estuarine
 Tenmile Canal (3258G)                         Estuarine
 Spring Creek (3258H)                          Stream
 Spring Creek Marine (3258H1)                  Estuarine
 Estero Bay (3258I)                            Estuarine
 The Lakes Park (3258X)                        Lake
 Estero Bay Gulf (8060)                        Coastal
 Bowditch Park (8060A)                         Coastal
 Lynn Hall Park (8060B)                        Coastal
 Lovers Key State Park (8060C)                 Coastal
76       Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


Table 4.2: The Verified List of Impaired Waters

                                                      Parameters
                                                      Identified Using
                                                      the 2002
                                          1998 303(d) Impaired           Priority      Projected
Planning           Water Body   Water     Parameters Surface Waters      for TMDL      Year for TMDL
Unit     WBID      Segment      Body Type of Concern Rule                Development   Development     Comments
Estero 3258B       Hendry       Stream    DO          DO                 Low           2007            DO met verification
Bay                Creek                                                                               threshold per IWR.
                                                                                                       biochemical oxygen
                                                                                                       demand (BOD) and
                                                                                                       nutrients are the caus-
                                                                                                       ative pollutant.
Estero    3258B    Hendry       Stream     Nutrients   Nutrients       Low             2007            Chlorophyll a met the
Bay                Creek                               (chlorophyll a)                                 verification threshold
                                                                                                       per IWR indicating a
                                                                                                       nutrient impairment.
Estero    3258B1   Hendry       Estuary    Nutrients   Nutrients       Medium          2007            Chlorophyll a met the
Bay                Creek                               (chlorophyll a)                                 verification threshold
                   Marine                                                                              per IWR indicating
                                                                                                       a nutrient impair-
                                                                                                       ment. Both nitrogen
                                                                                                       and phosphorus are
                                                                                                       identified as causative
                                                                                                       pollutants.
Estero    3258B1   Hendry       Estuary    DO          DO                Medium        2007            DO met the verifica-
Bay                Creek                                                                               tion threshold per the
                   Marine                                                                              IWR. Nutrients are
                                                                                                       indicated as a caus-
                                                                                                       ative pollutant.
Estero    3258B1   Hendry       Estuary                Fecal             Medium        2007
Bay                Creek                               Coliforms
                   Marine
Estero    3258C    Estero Bay   Stream                 DO                Medium        2007            DO met verification
Bay                Drainage                                                                            threshold per IWR.
                   (Mullock                                                                            BOD is the causative
                   Creek)                                                                              pollutant.
Estero    3258C    Estero Bay   Stream                 Nutrients       Medium          2007            Chlorophyll a met the
Bay                Drainage                            (chlorophyll a)                                 verification threshold
                   (Mullock                                                                            per IWR indicating
                   Creek)                                                                              a nutrient impair-
                                                                                                       ment, with nitrogen
                                                                                                       and phosphorus both
                                                                                                       being the causative
                                                                                                       pollutants.
Estero    3258D1 Estero River Estuary                  Nutrients       Medium          2007            Chlorophyll a met
Bay              Marine                                (chlorophyll a)                                 the verification
                                                                                                       threshold per the
                                                                                                       IWR. Both nitrogen
                                                                                                       and phosphorus are
                                                                                                       identified as causative
                                                                                                       pollutants.
Estero    3258D1 Estero River Estuary                  Copper            Medium        2007
Bay              Marine
                                      Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                             77
Table 4.2 (continued)
                                                 Parameters
                                                 Identified Using
                                                 the 2002
                                     1998 303(d) Impaired            Priority      Projected
Planning      Water Body   Water     Parameters Surface Waters       for TMDL      Year for TMDL
Unit     WBID Segment      Body Type of Concern Rule                 Development   Development     Comments
Estero 3258D1 Estero River Estuary               DO                  Medium        2007            DO met the verifica-
Bay           Marine                                                                               tion threshold per the
                                                                                                   IWR. Nutrients are
                                                                                                   identified as the caus-
                                                                                                   ative pollutants.
Estero   3258D1 Estero River Estuary                  Fecal          Medium        2007
Bay             Marine                                Coliforms
Estero   3258E  Imperial     Stream       DO          DO             (Low)         2007            DO met verification
Bay             River                                                                              threshold per IWR.
                                                                                                   Both nitrogen and
                                                                                                   phosphorus are indi-
                                                                                                   cated as the causative
                                                                                                   pollutants.
Estero   3258E    Imperial      Stream    Nutrients   Nutrients       (Low)        2007            Chlorophyll a met the
Bay               River                               (chlorophyll a)                              verification threshold
                                                                                                   per IWR indicating
                                                                                                   a nutrient impair-
                                                                                                   ment, with nitrogen
                                                                                                   and phosphorus both
                                                                                                   being the causative
                                                                                                   pollutants.
Estero   3258E1 Imperial     Estuary                  Copper         Medium        2007
Bay             River Marine
Estero   3258H1 Spring       Estuary      Nutrients   Nutrients       Medium       2007            Chlorophyll a met
Bay             Creek                                 (chlorophyll a)                              the verification
                Marine                                                                             threshold per the
                                                                                                   IWR. Both nitrogen
                                                                                                   and phosphorus are
                                                                                                   identified as causative
                                                                                                   pollutants.
Estero   3258H1 Spring          Estuary               Copper         Medium        2007
Bay             Creek
                Marine
Estero   3258H1 Spring          Estuary   DO          DO             Medium        2007            DO met the verifica-
Bay             Creek                                                                              tion threshold per the
                Marine                                                                             IWR. Nutrients are
                                                                                                   indicated as the caus-
                                                                                                   ative pollutant.
South-   3259A    Coco-         Stream    DO          DO             Low           2007            DO met verification
west              hatchee                                                                          threshold per IWR and
Coast             River                                                                            nitrogen is the caus-
                                                                                                   ative pollutant.
South-   3259B    Coco-         Stream                DO             Medium        2007            DO met the verifica-
west              hatchee                                                                          tion threshold per the
Coast             River Canal                                                                      IWR. BOD is indicated
                                                                                                   as the causative
                                                                                                   pollutant.
78       Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


Table 4.2 (continued)
                                                       Parameters
                                                       Identified Using
                                                       the 2002
                                           1998 303(d) Impaired           Priority      Projected
Planning          Water Body     Water     Parameters Surface Waters      for TMDL      Year for TMDL
Unit     WBID     Segment        Body Type of Concern Rule                Development   Development     Comments
South- 3259D      Gordon         Stream                DO                 Medium        2007            DO met the verifica-
west              River Canal                                                                           tion threshold per the
Coast                                                                                                   IWR. BOD is indi-
                                                                                                        cated as the causative
                                                                                                        pollutant.
South-    3259E   Henderson Stream                      DO                Medium        2007            DO met the verifica-
west              Creek Canal                                                                           tion threshold per the
Coast                                                                                                   IWR. BOD is indi-
                                                                                                        cated as the causative
                                                                                                        pollutant.
South-    3259L   Blackwater     Stream                 DO                Medium        2007            DO met the verifica-
west              River                                                                                 tion threshold per the
Coast                                                                                                   IWR. Phosphorus is
                                                                                                        indicated as the caus-
                                                                                                        ative pollutant.
South-    3259W   Lake           Lake       Nutrients   Nutrients         Low           2007            TSI met verifica-
west              Trafford                              (Trophic State                                  tion threshold per
Coast                                                   Index-TSI)                                      IWR. Nitrogen and
                                                                                                        phosphorus are both
                                                                                                        causative and limiting
                                                                                                        pollutants.
South-    8065    Southwest    Coastal                  Bacteria (in      Medium        2007            Listed based on
west              Coast Gulf 5                          shellfish)                                      change in shellfish
Coast                                                                                                   harvesting classifica-
                                                                                                        tion (downgraded
                                                                                                        from approved to
                                                                                                        conditional).
N/A       8999    Florida Gulf   Coastal                Mercury (in       Medium        2011            Age of data verified
                  Coast                                 fish tissue)                                    to be within last 7.5
                                                                                                        years. Confirmed
                                                                                                        recent data for coastal
                                                                                                        fish advisory for
                                                                                                        mackerel. Includes
                                                                                                        nearshore areas in
                                                                                                        WBIDs 8060, 8061,
                                                                                                        8062, 8063, 8064, and
                                                                                                        8065.
                                  Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   79




Figure 4.1: Waters on the Verified List
80   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                                The Estero River, Imperial River, and Spring Creek are the major
                            tributaries that drain into Estero Bay. Warm, slow-moving estuarine
                            waterbodies such as these often have naturally low DO and are vulnerable
                            to varying water quality, volume, and seasonal inputs. As such, these sys-
                            tems may then be more susceptible to water quality impacts resulting from
                            human activities.
                                Within the Estero Bay planning unit, there are 15 subbasins and 4
                            coastal segments. Of these, 7 were found to have verified exceedances of
                            water quality criteria for at least 1 parameter. A list of the subbasins with
                            exceedances is provided in the following table. Only stations with data
                            from 1995 to 2001 were used.

                            Impaired Subbasin Summary for the Estero Bay Planning Unit

                                                         Area                            Parameters
                                                         in Sq.   Stations               Not Meeting
                             WBID      Subbasin          Miles    Used       Type        Standards
                             3258B     Hendry Creek      0.83     2          Stream      Nutrients, DO
                             3258B1    Hendry Creek      10.81    1          Estuarine   Nutrients, DO,
                                       Marine                                            Fecal Coliforms
                             3258C     Estero Bay        1.73     7          Stream      Nutrients, DO
                                       Drainage
                             3258D1    Estero River      8.55     4          Estuarine   Nutrients,
                                       Marine                                            Copper, DO,
                                                                                         Fecal Coliforms
                             3258E     Imperial River    16.46    5          Stream      Nutrients, DO
                             3258E1    Imperial River    6.67     2          Estuarine   Copper, DO
                                       Marine
                             3258H1    Spring Creek      4.61     2          Estuarine   Nutrients, DO,
                                       Marine                                            Copper



                            Southwest Coast Planning Unit
                                There are a total of 215 sampling stations within this planning unit.
                            This planning unit contains 24 subbasins and 20 coastal segments. Twelve
                            subbasins are classified as streams, containing a total of about 81.5 miles of
                            surface waters. It should be noted that although these waterbodies are clas-
                            sified as streams, they are mainly canal systems used to facilitate the flow
                            of water for urban and agricultural purposes. This is necessary due to the
                            low topographic relief in the area. The Southwest Coast planning unit has
                            been heavily developed in terms of water control structures.
                                Part of the Southwest Coast unit lies along the coast of the Gulf of
                            Mexico, and so it includes 12 estuarine subbasins, which cover approxi-
                            mately 141.8 square miles and contain about 46.2 miles of surface waters.
                            There are also 2 subbasins in this unit that are classified as lakes. In total,
                            they are about 3.5 square miles in area, and contain 3.1 square miles of
                            surface waters.
                               Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   81

Southwest Coast Planning Unit Waterbody Segments

Segment and WBID#                           Type
Cocohatchee River (3259A)                   Stream
Cocohatchee River Canal (3259B)             Stream
Gordon River (3259C)                        Stream
Gordon River Canal (3259D)                  Stream
Henderson Creek Canal (3259E)               Stream
Golden Gate Canal (3259F)                   Estuarine
Naples Bay (3259G)                          Estuarine
Henderson Creek Canal (3259H)               Stream
West Collier (3259I)                        Stream
Rookery Bay (3259J)                         Estuarine
Runoff to Gulf (3259K)                      Stream
Blackwater River (3259L)                    Stream
Runoff to Gulf (3259M)                      Estuarine
Runoff to Gulf (3259N)                      Estuarine
Faka Union Canal (3259O)                    Stream
Ferguson River (3259P)                      Estuarine
Outer Clam Bay (3259Q)                      Estuarine
Runoff to Gulf (3259R)                      Estuarine
Runoff to Gulf (3259S)                      Estuarine
Lake Avalon (3259T)                         Lake
Lake Trafford (3259W)                       Lake
Drainage to Corkscrew (3259X)               Stream
Vanderbilt Wway (3259Y)                     Estuarine
Little Hickory Bay (3259Z)                  Estuarine
Southwest Coast Gulf 1 (8061)               Coastal
Little Hickory Island Park (8061A)          Coastal
Bonita Beach Park (8061B)                   Coastal
Lely Barefoot Beach (8061C)                 Coastal
Wiggans Pass North (8061D)                  Coastal
Wiggans Pass State Park (8061E)             Coastal
Vanderbilt Beach (8061F)                    Coastal
Southwest Coast Gulf 2 (8062)               Coastal
Clam Pass (8062A)                           Coastal
Parkshore Beach (8062B)                     Coastal
Doctors Pass (8062C)                        Coastal
Lowdermilk Park Beach (8062D)               Coastal
Naples Pier (8062E)                         Coastal
Southwest Coast Gulf 3 (8063)               Coastal
Gordons Pass (8063A)                        Coastal
Southwest Coast Gulf 4 (8064)               Coastal
Tigertail Beach (8064A)                     Coastal
Residence Beach (8064B)                     Coastal
Caxambas Park (8064C)                       Coastal
Southwest Coast Gulf 5 (8065)               Coastal
82   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                                     Of the 24 subbasins and 20 coastal segments in the Southwest Coast
                                planning unit, 7 were found to have verified exceedances of water quality
                                criteria for at least 1 parameter. A list of the subbasins with exceedances
                                is provided in the table below. Only stations with data from 1995 to 2001
                                were used.

            Impaired Subbasin Summary for the Southwest Coast Planning Unit

                                                 Area in Sq.   Stations              Parameters Not Meeting
             WBID    Subbasin                      Miles        Used       Type            Standards
             3259A   Cocohatchee River             10.31           8      Stream               DO
             3259B   Cocohatchee River Canal        1.93          29      Stream               DO
             3259D   Gordon River Canal            20.12           9      Stream               DO
             3259E   Henderson Creek Canal        20.63            7      Stream               DO
             3259L   Blackwater River              41.00          18      Stream               DO
             3259W   Lake Trafford                  3.41          14       Lake          Nutrients (TSI)
             8065    Southwest Coast Gulf 5        99.10          19      Coastal     Bacteria in Shellfish



                                Inner Drainage Area
                                    The Inner Drainage Area planning unit is divided into 8 subbasins.
                                There are 44 sampling stations within this unit from which data has been
                                previously collected.
                                    This planning unit contains 7 stream subbasins, and only 1 estuarine
                                subbasin. The stream subbasins contain about 90.2 miles of surface waters.
                                Most of the waters in these stream subbasins are canal systems. The north-
                                ern portion of this unit is mainly flat agricultural land, requiring canal
                                structures to direct the flow of water for irrigation purposes. The Barron
                                River is most prominent in the Inner Drainage Area unit, as it runs down
                                almost the entire length of the unit and has a number of control structures
                                along it that aid in regulating water flow within the Everglades West Coast
                                Basin.
                                    The southern portion of the Inner Drainage Area unit is part of the
                                Big Cypress National Preserve and is almost entirely wetland area. The one
                                estuarine subbasin in this unit is located along the coast, is about 10 square
                                miles in area, and has about 6.6 miles of surface waters.

                                Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit Waterbody Segments

                                 Segment and WBID#                    Type
                                 C-139 (3255)                         Stream
                                 Barron River Canal (3261A)           Estuarine
                                 Tamiami Canal (3261B)                Stream
                                 Barron River Canal (3261C)           Stream
                                 Tamiami Canal (3261D)                Stream
                                 L-28 Interceptor (3266)              Stream
                                 Feeder Canal (3267)                  Stream
                                 L-28 Gap (3269)                      Stream
                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   83
     There are eight subbasins in the Inner Drainage Area planning unit.
Of these, none were found to have verified exceedances of water quality
criteria for at least one parameter. Only stations with data from 1995 to
2001 were used.

Adoption Process for the Verified List of Impaired Waters
     The Verified List must be submitted in a specific format (Rule 62-
303.710, F.A.C.) before being approved by the order of the Department’s
Secretary. The list must specify the pollutant and concentration causing
the impairment. If a waterbody segment is listed based on water qual-
ity criteria exceedances, then the list must provide the applicable criteria.
However, if the listing is based on narrative or biological criteria, or impair-
ment of other designated uses, and the water quality criteria are met, the
Verified List is required to specify the concentration of the pollutant relative
to the water quality criteria and explain why the numeric criterion is not
adequate.
     For waters with exceedances of the DO criteria, the Department must
identify the pollutants causing or contributing to the exceedances and list
both the pollutant and DO on the Verified List.
     For waters impaired by nutrients, the Department is required to iden-
tify whether nitrogen or phosphorus, or both, are the limiting nutrients,
and specify the limiting nutrient(s) in the Verified List.
     The Verified List must also include the priority and schedule for
TMDL development established for a waterbody segment as required by
federal regulations, and must note any waters that are being removed from
the current Planning List. In future watershed management cycles, the list
must also note waters that are being removed from any previous Verified
List for the basin. Chapter 5 discusses the development of TMDLs, includ-
ing the prioritization process.
                              Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   85

Chapter 5: Monitoring Priorities and TMDL
Development, Allocation, and Implementation

Stakeholder Involvement

    The Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA) requires the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (Department) to work closely
with stakeholders to develop and implement Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs). In addition, the Allocation Technical Advisory Committee
(ATAC) report discussed later in this chapter includes recommendations
that rely heavily on stakeholder involvement.
    Stakeholder involvement in the TMDL process will vary with each
phase of implementation to achieve different purposes (Table 5.1).
    The Department will work cooperatively with a number of key stake-
holders to develop, allocate, and implement TMDLs in the Everglades West
Coast Basin. These stakeholders include the following:

    • Cities and Towns—Naples, Bonita Springs, Golden Gate, Fort Myers
      Beach, Marco Island, Everglades City, Chokoloskee
    • Counties—Lee, Collier, Hendry
    • Regional Agencies of State—South Florida Water Management
      District (SFWMD), Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council
      (SWFRPC), Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management (ABM),
      Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program (CHNEP)
    • State of Florida Agencies—Fish and Wildlife Conservation
      Commission (FWC), Department of Agriculture and Consumer
      Services (DACS)
    • Tribes—Seminole Indian Tribe of Florida, Miccosukee Indian Tribe
      of Florida
    • Non-Governmental Organizations—Conservancy of Southwest
      Florida, Southwest Florida Watershed Council, Responsible Growth
      Management Coalition
86   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                 Table 5.1: Stakeholder Involvement in the Total Maximum Daily Load Program

                  Watershed Management Cycle   Nature of Stakeholder Involvement
                  Phase 1:                     Close coordination with local stakeholders to conduct a pre-
                  Preliminary Evaluation       liminary basin water quality assessment; inventory existing
                                               and proposed management activities; identify management
                                               objectives and issues of concern; develop a strategic moni-
                                               toring plan; and produce a preliminary Status Report that
                                               includes a Planning List of potentially impaired waters.
                  Phase 2:                     Cooperative efforts between the Department and local
                  Strategic Monitoring         stakeholders to collect additional data; get data into
                  and Assessment               STORET; complete water quality assessment; produce
                                               a final Assessment Report that includes a Verified List of
                                               impaired waters for Secretarial adoption; and provide an
                                               opportunity for stakeholders to document reasonable assur-
                                               ance (for Department review) that existing management
                                               plans and projects are adequate to restore water quality
                                               without the establishment of a TMDL.
                  Phase 3:                     Coordination with stakeholders to discuss TMDL model
                  Development and              framework, including model requirements, parameters to be
                  Adoption of TMDLs            modeled, model endpoints, design run scenarios and pre-
                                               liminary allocations; communication of science used in the
                                               process; and public workshops for rule adoption of TMDLs.
                  Phase 4:                     Broad stakeholder participation in developing a Basin Man-
                  Development of Basin         agement Action Plan (B-MAP) (including detailed allocations
                  Management Action Plan       and implementation strategies), incorporating it into existing
                                               management plans where feasible; public meetings during
                                               the planning process.
                  Phase 5:                     Emphasis on implementing the B-MAP, other voluntary
                  Implementation of Basin      stakeholder actions, and local watershed management
                  Management Action Plan       structures; Department will continue to provide technical
                                               assistance, fulfill oversight responsibilities, and administer
                                               National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
                                               point and nonpoint source permits.




                                Prioritization of Listed Waters

                                     Because TMDLs cannot be developed for all listed waters during a
                                single watershed management cycle, waterbodies will be prioritized using
                                the criteria in the Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR) (Rule 62-303.500,
                                F.A.C.). The rule states that when establishing the TMDL development
                                schedule for waters on the Verified List, the Department will prioritize
                                impaired waterbody segments according to the severity of the impairment
                                and its designated uses, taking into account the most serious water qual-
                                ity problems, most valuable and threatened resources, and risks to human
                                health and aquatic life.
                                     Table 5.2 lists priorities for TMDL development for waterbody seg-
                                ments in the Everglades West Coast Basin. Impaired waters are prioritized
                                as high, medium, or low priority.
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast              87
Table 5.2: Priorities for TMDL Development in the Everglades West Coast Basin

                         Waterbody Identification                               Priority for TMDL
Planning Unit            Number (WBID)              Parameters of Impairment    Development
Estero Bay               3258B                      DO                          Low
Estero Bay               3258B                      Nutrients (chlorophyll a)   Low
Estero Bay               3258B1                     Nutrients (chlorophyll a)   Medium
Estero Bay               3258B1                     DO                          Medium
Estero Bay               3258B1                     Fecal Coliforms             Medium
Estero Bay               3258C                      DO                          Medium
Estero Bay               3258C                      Nutrients (chlorophyll a)   Medium
Estero Bay               3258D1                     Nutrients (chlorophyll a)   Medium
Estero Bay               3258D1                     Copper                      Medium
Estero Bay               3258D1                     DO                          Medium
Estero Bay               3258D1                     Fecal Coliforms             Medium
Estero Bay               3258E                      DO                          Low
Estero Bay               3258E                      Nutrients (chlorophyll a)   Low
Estero Bay               3258E1                     Copper                      Medium
Estero Bay               3258H1                     Nutrients (chlorophyll a)   Medium
Estero Bay               3258H1                     Copper                      Medium
Estero Bay               3258H1                     DO                          Medium
Southwest Coast          3259A                      DO                          Low
Southwest Coast          3259B                      DO                          Medium
Southwest Coast          3259D                      DO                          Medium
Southwest Coast          3259E                      DO                          Medium
Southwest Coast          3259L                      DO                          Medium
Southwest Coast          3259W                      Nutrients (TSI)             Low
Southwest Coast          8065                       Bacteria (in shellfish)     Medium
Southwest Coast          8999                       Mercury (in fish tissue)    Medium



   High-priority waters are as follows:

   • Waterbody segments where the impairment poses a threat to potable
     water supplies or human health.
   • Waterbody segments where the impairment is due to a pollutant
     regulated by the Clean Water Act and the pollutant has contributed
     to the decline or extirpation of a federally listed threatened or endan-
     gered species, as indicated in the Federal Register listing the species.

   Low-priority waters are as follows:

   • Waterbody segments that are listed before 2010 because of fish
     consumption advisories for mercury (due to the current insufficient
     understanding of how mercury cycles in the environment).
   • Human-made canals, urban drainage ditches, and other artificial
     waterbody segments that are listed only due to exceedances of the
     dissolved oxygen (DO) criteria.
88   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                                • Waterbody segments that were not on the Planning List but were
                                  identified as impaired during Phase 2 of the watershed management
                                  approach and were included on the Verified List, unless the segment
                                  meets the second high-priority criterion.
                                • The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has also proposed
                                  assigning to this category the list of additional waterbody segments
                                  that the agency developed using its own evaluation methodology,
                                  until the Department has had the opportunity to investigate these
                                  waterbodies further.

                                All segments not designated high or low priority are medium priority;
                            these will be prioritized based on the following factors:

                                • The presence of Outstanding Florida Waters (OFWs).
                                • The presence of waterbody segments that fail to meet more than
                                  one designated use from among aquatic life, primary contact and
                                  recreation, fish and shellfish consumption, and drinking water and
                                  protection of human health.
                                • The presence of waterbody segments that exceed an applicable water
                                  quality criterion or alternative threshold with a frequency of greater
                                  than 25 percent at a minimum confidence level of 90 percent.
                                • The presence of waterbody segments that exceed more than one
                                  applicable water quality criterion.

                                 Administrative needs of the TMDL program, including meeting a
                            TMDL development schedule agreed to with the EPA, basin priorities
                            related to the Department’s watershed management approach, and the
                            number of administratively continued permits in the basin.


                            TMDL Development

                                 During Phase 3 of the watershed management cycle, TMDLs will be
                            developed for both point and nonpoint sources of pollution in impaired
                            waterbodies and will be adopted by rule at the end of this phase.
                                 TMDL development involves determining the maximum amount of
                            a given pollutant that a waterbody can assimilate and still meet the appli-
                            cable numeric or narrative water quality criterion for the pollutant. In
                            most cases, this “assimilative” capacity will be determined using computer
                            modeling (both hydrodynamic and water quality models) that predicts the
                            fate and transport of pollutants in the receiving waters. Modeling for the
                            typical TMDL will include model setup, calibration, and verification, fol-
                            lowed by a variety of model runs that determine the assimilative capacity of
                            the water under worst-case conditions.
                                 State law and federal regulations require that TMDLs include a margin
                            of safety (MOS) that takes into account “any lack of knowledge concerning
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   89
the relationship between effluent limitations and water quality.” The EPA
has allowed states to establish either a specific MOS (typically some per-
centage of the assimilative capacity) or an implicit MOS based on conserva-
tive assumptions in the modeling. To date, the Department has elected to
establish an implicit MOS based on predictive model runs that incorporate
a variety of conservative assumptions (they examine worst-case ambient
flow conditions and worst-case temperature, and assume that all permitted
point sources discharge at their maximum permitted amount).
     It is important to note that TMDLs will be developed only for the
actual pollutants causing the impairment in the listed waterbody. These are
called the “pollutants of concern.” In Florida, the most commonly listed
pollutants of concern are nutrients, sediments, and coliforms. TMDLs will
not be developed for those impairments that are not due to pollutant dis-
charges—for example, natural conditions, physical alterations such as dams
and channelization, or changes in the flow of the water. In other cases, a
waterbody may be deemed potentially impaired based on bioassessment
data or toxicity data. In these cases, the Department must determine the
actual pollutant causing the impairment before a TMDL can be developed.

Schedule for TMDL Development
   Table 5.3 lists the schedule for TMDL development in the Everglades
West Coast Basin by planning unit.


TMDL Allocation and Implementation

Initial Allocation of Pollutant Loadings
     The FWRA requires that a TMDL include “establishment of reason-
able and equitable allocations . . . among point and nonpoint sources . . . .”
The Department refers to this as the “initial allocation,” which is adopted
by rule. For the purposes of allocating the required pollutant loadings, the
term “point sources” primarily includes traditional sources such as domes-
tic and industrial wastewater discharges. Recent EPA guidance requires
states also to include as point sources those stormwater systems that are
covered by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
stormwater permit. However, NPDES-permitted stormwater discharges
are not subject to the same types of effluent limitations, cannot be centrally
collected and treated, and typically have not invested in treatment controls
to the same degree as traditional point sources. Nonpoint sources include
intermittent, rainfall-driven, and diffuse sources of pollution associated
with everyday human activities, including runoff from urban land uses,
agriculture, silviculture, and mining; discharges from failing septic systems;
and atmospheric deposition.
     These point and nonpoint definitions do not directly relate to whether
a source is regulated. Some nonpoint sources such as stormwater sys-
tems are permitted under the regulatory programs of the Department or
water management districts, while others, such as agricultural stormwater
discharges, are not. This distinction is important because implementation
90   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


      Table 5.3: Schedule for TMDL Development in the Everglades West Coast Basin

                           Waterbody
                           Identification                                              TMDL Development
       Planning Unit       Number (WBID)            Parameters of Impairment`          Schedule
       Estero Bay          3258B                    DO                                 2007
       Estero Bay          3258B                    Nutrients (chlorophyll a)          2007
       Estero Bay          3258B1                   Nutrients (chlorophyll a)          2007
       Estero Bay          3258B1                   DO                                 2007
       Estero Bay          3258B1                   Fecal Coliforms                    2007
       Estero Bay          3258C                    DO                                 2007
       Estero Bay          3258C                    Nutrients (chlorophyll a)          2007
       Estero Bay          3258D1                   Nutrients (chlorophyll a)          2007
       Estero Bay          3258D1                   Copper                             2007
       Estero Bay          3258D1                   DO                                 2007
       Estero Bay          3258D1                   Fecal Coliforms                    2007
       Estero Bay          3258E                    DO                                 2007
       Estero Bay          3258E                    Nutrients (chlorophyll a)          2007
       Estero Bay          3258E1                   Copper                             2007
       Estero Bay          3258H1                   Nutrients (chlorophyll a)          2007
       Estero Bay          3258H1                   Copper                             2007
       Estero Bay          3258H1                   DO                                 2007
       Southwest Coast     3259A                    DO                                 2007
       Southwest Coast     3259B                    DO                                 2007
       Southwest Coast     3259D                    DO                                 2007
       Southwest Coast     3259E                    DO                                 2007
       Southwest Coast     3259L                    DO                                 2007
       Southwest Coast     3259W                    Nutrients (TSI)                    2007
       Southwest Coast     8065                     Bacteria (in shellfish)            2007
       Southwest Coast     8999                     Mercury (in fish tissue)           2011



                               of the allocations to nonpoint sources outside the authority of regulatory
                               programs will require cooperation from dischargers to voluntarily imple-
                               ment best management practices (BMPs).
                                    While a “detailed allocation” ultimately will be necessary to fully
                               implement a TMDL, a key goal of the initial allocation is to assign respon-
                               sibility for pollutant reductions between point and nonpoint sources. For
                               point sources, allocations will be implemented through the Department’s
                               NPDES wastewater and stormwater permitting programs. The implemen-
                               tation of nonpoint source reductions will be done through a combination
                               of regulatory and nonregulatory processes.
                                    Initial allocations of pollutant loadings will also be made to historical
                               sources (e.g., the phosphorus-laden sediments at the bottom of a lake) and
                               upstream sources (those entering into an impaired waterbody). Upstream
                               sources include sources from outside of Florida, and these sources will
                               receive reduced allocations similar to in-state sources.
                                    The FWRA provided direction for the allocation of TMDLs and
                               directed the Department to provide guidance on the allocation process
                               by establishing an ATAC, consisting of representatives of key stakeholder
                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   91
groups. The committee’s report recommended a three-step process for
developing initial allocations and addressed detailed allocations for non-
point sources, stakeholder involvement, the use of BMPs, and other TMDL
implementation issues (Department, February 1, 2001). A copy of the
ATAC report can be found at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/
Allocation.pdf .

Implementation Programs and Approaches
    The FWRA designates the Department as the lead agency in coordi-
nating the implementation of TMDLs and provides examples of the kinds
of programs and approaches through which TMDLs may be carried out,
including the following:

    1. Permitting and other existing regulatory programs (Table 5.4 lists
       the municipal NPDES stormwater permittees in the Everglades West
       Coast Basin);
    2. Nonregulatory and incentive-based programs, including BMPs,
       cost sharing, waste minimization, pollution prevention, and public
       education;
    3. Basin Management Action Plans (B-MAPs) developed under the
       FWRA;
    4. Other water quality management and restoration activities—for
       example, Surface Water Improvement Management (SWIM) plans
       approved under Section 373.456, Florida Statutes (F.S.);
    5. Pollutant trading or other equitable economically based agreements;
    6. Public works including capital facilities; or
    7. Land acquisition.

     These programs and approaches will be carried out at local, regional,
state, and possibly federal levels. TMDL implementation will require
extensive stakeholder involvement throughout the state, and, in some cases,
between Florida and other states. The following are programs that will be
important to TMDL implementation.

Table 5.4: Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permittees in the
Everglades West Coast Basin

Bay Creek Community Development District
Bayside Community Development District
City of Bonita Springs
East Mulloch Water Control District
Florida Department of Transportation
Gateway Service District
Lee County
San Carlos Estates Drainage District
The Brooks Community Development District
Town of Fort Myers Beach
92   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            NPDES Permits
                                 All point sources that discharge to surface water bodies require a
                            NPDES permit. These permits can be classified into two types: domes-
                            tic or industrial wastewater discharge permits, and stormwater permits.
                            NPDES permitted point sources may be affected by the development
                            and implementation of a TMDL. All NPDES permits include “reopener
                            clauses” that allow the department to incorporate new discharge limits
                            when a TMDL is established. These new limitations may be incorporated
                            into a permit at the time of TMDL implementation or at the next permit
                            renewal, depending on the timing of permit renewal and workload. For
                            NPDES Municipal stormwater permits, the Department intends to insert
                            the following statement once a B-MAP is completed:

                                The permittee shall undertake those activities specified in the
                                (Name of Water Body) Basin Management Action Plan in accor-
                                dance with the approved schedule set forth in the B-MAP.

                            Domestic and Industrial Wastewater Permits
                                In addition to NPDES-permitted facilities, all of which discharge to
                            surface waters, Florida also regulates domestic and industrial wastewater
                            discharges to ground water via land application. Since ground and surface
                            water are so intimately linked in much of the state, reductions in loadings
                            from these facilities may be needed to meet TMDL limitations for pollut-
                            ants in surface waters. If such reductions are identified in the BMAP, they
                            would be implemented through modifications of the existing state permits.

                            Florida Stormwater/Environmental Resource Permits
                                 Florida was the first state in the country to require the treatment of
                            stormwater from all new development with the implementation of the
                            state’s stormwater treatment rule in 1982. Today, except in the area served
                            by the Northwest Florida Water Management District (NWFWMD),
                            new development projects receive an environmental resource permit that
                            combines stormwater flood protection, stormwater treatment, and wetland
                            protection/mitigation into a single permit. These permits are designed
                            to obtain 80 percent average annual load reduction of total suspended
                            solids. This level of treatment may need to be increased, depending on
                            the allocation of load reductions, especially for nutrients. For example, the
                            SJRWMD recently has adopted basin specific criteria for the Lake Apopka
                            Basin. These criteria require the phosphorus loading from new develop-
                            ment not to exceed predevelopment phosphorus loading.

                            Local Land Development Codes
                                 Since structural stormwater treatment practices can only achieve cer-
                            tain levels of load reductions, and because aquatic ecological impacts often
                            are associated with the change in hydrology that accompanies urban devel-
                            opment, local land development codes that promote “low impact develop-
                            ment” are an important component of restoring impaired waters. Local
                            codes may need to be reviewed to determine what changes can be made to
                            promote developments that minimize impervious surfaces (e.g., reduced
                                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   93
street widths, use of pervious pavements), promote protection of vegetation,
promote protection and restoration of riparian buffers along streams and
lakes, and adopt the principles of the Program Florida Yards and Neighbor-
hoods in local landscaping codes.

Best Management Practices
     Typically, Best Management Practices (BMPs) refer to a practice or
combination of practices that, based on sound science and the best profes-
sional judgment available, are determined to be the most effective and prac-
ticable means of reducing nonpoint source pollution and improving water
quality. Both economic and technological considerations are included in
the evaluation of what is practicable. BMPs may include structural controls
(such as retention areas or detention ponds) or nonstructural controls (pol-
lution prevention source controls such as street sweeping or public educa-
tion). Many BMPs have been developed for urban stormwater to reduce
pollutant loadings and peak flows. These BMPs accommodate site-specific
conditions, including soil type, slope, depth to ground water, and the desig-
nation of receiving waters.
     Unfortunately, emphasis on BMPs to reduce nonpoint source pollution
from agricultural operations really has not been widespread until passage of
the FWRA. Recognizing that the development and adoption of BMPs may
take several years, the legislature authorized the use of Interim Measures
(IMs) during the BMP development process for agricultural operations. In
essence, IMs are a set of logical conservation practices designed to reduce
agricultural nonpoint pollution using current knowledge and best profes-
sional judgment. These practices will evolve into more formal BMPs as
better scientific data on their effectiveness is obtained. Once the Florida
DACS adopts BMPs, the Department is charged with verifying their effec-
tiveness in reducing agricultural nonpoint source pollution. Once verified,
agricultural operations that have implemented adopted BMPs will receive
a waiver of liability or presumption of compliance similar to that granted a
developer who obtains an environmental resource permit.

Other Approaches
     The success of implementing nonpoint source TMDL load allocations
will require variety, creativity, and stakeholder commitment to watershed
management and personal stewardship. In addition to BMPs, other pos-
sible strategies for meeting TMDLs, restoring water quality, and prevent-
ing further degradation of Florida’s watersheds include cost sharing, waste
minimization, pollution prevention, new approaches to land use design and
development, and pollutant trading. The Department will assemble a tech-
nical advisory committee to assist in the development of a pollutant-trading
rule, which must be reviewed by the legislature prior to its adoption. The
Department will also seek advisory input on TMDL allocation and imple-
mentation issues from local, regional, and statewide stakeholder groups.
94   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            Development of Basin Management
                            Action Plans

                                 The FWRA authorizes the Department to develop B-MAPs for
                            implementing TMDLs. The ATAC recognized that these plans should be
                            developed with extensive stakeholder input. It also recognized that before
                            developing a plan, the Department should involve affected stakeholders in
                            discussions to build consensus on detailed allocations based on the initial
                            allocations.
                                 The B-MAPs would contain final allocations among the affected par-
                            ties, strategies for meeting the allocations, schedules for implementation,
                            funding mechanisms, applicable local ordinances, and other elements. In
                            cases where stakeholder consensus could not be reached on detailed alloca-
                            tions and/or a B-MAP within a reasonable time, the Department would
                            develop the allocations.
                                 Once a B-MAP is developed, the Department will make it available
                            for public review and comment. The template for the B-MAPs is under
                            development; the plans are likely to include a description of both regulatory
                            and nonregulatory approaches to meeting specific TMDLs.
                               Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   95
References

Barbour, M. T., J. Gerritsen, and J. S. White. 1996. Development of the
    Stream Condition Index (SCI) for Florida. Prepared for the Florida
    Department of Environmental Protection. Owings Mills, MD: Tetra
    Tech, Inc.
Copeland, R. 2001. Draft General Discussion for Each Group 1 Assessment
    Reports for Year 2000. Florida Department of Environmental Protec-
    tion Ground Water Protection Section. Technical Document 2001–01.
Cox, J., R. Kautz, M. MacLaughlin, and T. Gilbert. 1994. Closing the
    Gaps in Florida’s Wildlife Habitat Conservation System. Tallahassee:
    Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.
Davis, S. M., and J. C. Ogden, Eds. 1994. Everglades: The Ecosystem and
    Its Restoration. Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press.
DeFede, J. 2000. “Destiny’s Child—The Battle over Homestead is Déjà
    Vu All Over Again.” Miami New Times. Available:
    http://www.miaminewtimes.com/issues/2000-12-21/defede.html.
DuBar, J. R. 1958. “Stratigraphy and Paleontology of the Late Neocene
                                                                  ”
    Strata of the Caloosahatchee River Area of Southern Florida. Florida
    Geological Survey, Geological Bulletin No. 40.
Duke University Wetlands Center Web site. Available:
    http://www.env.duke.edu/wetland/big_cyp.htm.
Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management. 2000. State of the Bay Report.
    Fort Myers: Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council.
Everglades City Web site. 2000. History of the Everglades. Available:
    http://www.evergladesonline.com/history.
Fernald, E. A., and E. D. Purdum, Eds. 1998. Water Resources Atlas of
    Florida. Tallahassee: Institute of Science and Public Affairs, Florida
    State University.
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 1999. Florida
    Agricultural Facts.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 2001. A Report to the
    Governor and the Legislature on the Allocation of Total Maximum Daily
    Loads in Florida. Tallahassee, Florida: Bureau of Watershed Manage-
    ment, Division of Water Resource Management.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 2000. South Florida
    Water Quality Protection Program—Draft. West Palm Beach: South-
    east District. Compact Disc.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 1998. Florida Water
    Quality Assessment—305(b) Report. Tallahassee.
Florida Division of Forestry. 2001. Picayune Strand State Forest Web site.
    Available: http://www.fl -dof.com/Fm/stforest/picayune.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Web site. Fish
    Consumption Health Advisories. Available:
    http://floridaconservation.org/fishing/health.html.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Web site. Florida’s
    Endangered Species, Threatened Species, and Species of Special Concern,
    Official Lists. Available: http://www.state.fl.us/fwc/pubs.
96   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            Florida Natural Areas Inventory Web site. Available: http://www.fnai.org.
                            Florida Outdoors Parks and Preserves Web site. Available: http://
                                 www.florida-outdoors.com/bigc.htm.
                            Florida State University. Florida’s Mercury Menace and Mercury in Their
                                 Midst. Available: http://www.research.fsu.edu/researchr/fallwinter97/
                                 features/mercury.html.
                            Fort Myers News-Press. 1999. Newcomers Guide—Southwest
                                 Florida. Available: http://www.news-press.com/newcomers99/
                                 community.html.
                            Friedemann, M., and J. Hand. 1989. Typical Water Quality Values for
                                 Florida’s Lakes, Streams, and Estuaries. Tallahassee: Florida Depart-
                                 ment of Environmental Regulation.
                            Gerritsen, J., B. Jessup, E. Leppo, and J. White. 2000. Development of
                                 Lake Condition Indexes (LCI) for Florida. Prepared for the Florida
                                 Department of Environmental Protection. Owings Mills, MD: Tetra
                                 Tech, Inc.
                            Great Outdoor Recreation Pages. 2001. Destinations: Big Cypress National
                                 Preserve. Available: http://www.gorp.com/default.htm.
                            Green, R. C., K. M. Campbell, and T. M. Scott. 1990. Core Drilling
                                 Project: Lee, Hendry, and Collier Counties. Florida Geological Survey,
                                 Open File Report 37.
                            Healy, H. G. 1975. Potentiometric Surfaces and Areas of Artesian Flow of
                                 the Floridan Aquifer of Florida, May 1974. Florida Bureau of Geology,
                                 Map Series 73.
                            Herr, J. W., and J. E. Shaw. 1989. South Florida Water Management
                                 District Ambient Groundwater Quality. West Palm Beach: South
                                 Florida Water Management District Technical Publication 89-1.
                            Hulbert, J. L. 1990. A Proposed Lake Condition Index for Florida.
                                 Tallahassee: Florida Department of Environmental Regulation.
                            Jue, S., C. Kindell, and J. Wojcik. 2001. Florida Conservation Lands 2001.
                                 Florida Natural Areas Inventory. Tallahassee, FL.
                            Klein, H., 1952. Ground Water Resources of the Naples Area, Collier
                                 County, Florida, Report of Investigations No. 11. Tallahassee: Florida
                                 Geological Survey.
                            Klein, H., Lichtler, W. F., and Schroeder, M. C., 1964. Geology and
                                 Ground-Water Resources of Glades and Hendry Counties, Florida,
                                 Report of Investigations No. 37. Tallahassee: Florida Geological
                                 Survey.
                            Knapp, M. S., W. S. Burns, and T. S. Sharp. 1986. Preliminary Assess-
                                 ment of the Ground Water Resources of Western Collier County, Florida.
                                 South Florida Water Management District Technical Publication 86-1,
                                 Part 1.
                            McConnell, D. 1998. January 15th—This Date in Environmental History.
                                 The Good Earth Web site, Department of Geology, University of
                                 Akron. Available: http://newmedia.avs.uakron.edu/geology/ge/cal/
                                 jan/jan15.htm.
                            McCormack, F., J. K. Lewis, T. Swihart, W. Hinkley, and G. W.
                                 Willson, Jr. 1984. “Emerging Issues and Conflicts.” In E. A. Fernald
                                 and D. J. Purdum, Eds. 1998. Water Resources Atlas of Florida.
                               Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   97
    Tallahassee: Florida State University, Institute of Science and Public
    Affairs.
McCoy, H. J., 1972. Hydrology of Western Collier County, Florida,
    Report of Investigations No. 63. Tallahassee: Florida Geological
    Survey.
McCoy, H. J., 1967. Ground Water in the Immokalee Area, Collier
    County, Florida, Information Circular No. 51. Tallahassee: Florida
    Geological Survey.
McPherson, B. F., and R. Halley. 1996. The South Florida Environment—
    A Region Under Stress. National Water Quality Assessment Program,
    U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1134.
Maddox, G. L., J. M. Lloyd, T. M. Scott, S. B. Upchurch, and R. E. Cope-
    land, Eds. 1992. Florida Ground Water Quality Monitoring Program–
    Volume 2, Background Hydrogeochemistry. Florida Geological Survey,
    Special Publication No. 34.
Mendenhall, W., R. L. Scheaffer, and D. D. Wackerly. 1981. Mathematical
    Statistics with Applications, Second Edition. Boston, MA:
    Duxbury Press.
National Atmospheric Deposition Program/National Trends Network
    (NADP/NTN) Web site. Available: http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/.
National Wildlife Federation. 2001. Big Cypress National Preserve—
    Florida Everglades. Available: http://www.nwf.org/everglades/
    bigcypress.html.
Parker, G. G., and C. W. Cooke. 1944. Late Cenozoic Geology of South-
    ern Florida with a Discussion of the Groundwater. Florida Geological
    Survey Bulletin 27.
Pielou, E. 1997. Mathematical Ecology. New York: John Wiley and
    Sons, Inc.
Purdum, E. D., L. C. Burney, and T. M. Swihart. 1998. “History of
    Water Management.” In E. A. Fernald and D. J. Purdum, Eds. 1998.
    Water Resources Atlas of Florida. Tallahassee: Institute of Science and
    Public Affairs, Florida State University.
Puri, H. S., and R. O. Vernon. 1964. Summary of the Geology of Florida.
    Florida Geological Survey Special Publication 5 (revised).
Randazzo, A. F., and D. S. Jones, Eds. 1997. The Geology of Florida.
    Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
Ross, L. T. 1990. Methods for Aquatic Biology. Florida Department of
    Environmental Regulation. Technical Series 10(1):1–47. Tallahassee.
Schroeder, M. C., D. L. Milliken, and S. K. Love. 1954. Water Resources
    of Palm Beach County, Florida. Florida Geological Survey Report of
    Investigations No. 13.
Scott, T. M. 1992. A Geological Overview of Florida. Florida Geological
    Survey Open File Report No. 50.
Scott, T. M. 1988. Lithostratigraphy of the Hawthorn Group (Miocene) of
    Florida. Florida Geological Survey Bulletin No. 59.
Scott, T. M., J. M. Lloyd, and G. Maddox, Eds. 1991. Florida’s Ground
    Water Quality Monitoring Program—Hydrogeological Framework.
    Florida Geological Survey Special Publications No. 32.
98   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast


                            Sinclair, W. C., and J. W. Stewart. 1985. Sinkhole Type, Development, and
                                Distribution in Florida. Florida Geological Survey Map Series 100.
                            Smith, K. R., and K. M. Adams. 1988. Ground Water Resource Assessment
                                of Hendry County, Florida. South Florida Water Management District
                                Technical Publication 88-12, Part 1.
                            South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force. 2001. Southwest
                                Florida/Big Cypress Project Coordination Team (also known as PCT 5)
                                Web site. Available: http://www.sfrestore.org/pct/sw/index.html.
                            South Florida Water Management District. 2000. District Water Manage-
                                ment Plan: Governing Board Draft. West Palm Beach.
                            South Florida Water Management District. 1999. Estero Bay Watershed
                                Assessment—Phase 1. Available: http://www.sfwmd.gov/org/exo/
                                ftmyers/report-text/index.html.
                            South Florida Water Management District. 1998. Big Cypress Basin
                                Watershed Plan. West Palm Beach, FL.
                            South Florida Water Management District. 1998. District Wide Water
                                Supply Assessment. West Palm Beach, FL.
                            South Florida Water Management District. 1992. Water Supply Needs and
                                Sources: 1990–2010. West Palm Beach, FL.
                            Southeastern Geological Society, Ad Hoc Committee on Florida Hydro-
                                stratigraphic Unit Definition. 1986. Hydrogeological Unit of Florida.
                                Florida Geological Survey Special Publication 28.
                            Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Website. 2003. Total Popu-
                                lation and Population Projections. Available: http://www.swfrpc.org/
                                Economic%20Data/popul.htm.
                            Southwest Florida Water Quality Monitoring Consortium Web site. 2001.
                                Available: http://wqc.ces.fau.edu/.
                            Staats, E. 1997. “Undoing a Subdivision. The Everglades—An
                                Online Tour through the River of Grass.” The Naples Daily News.
                                Available: http://www.naplesnews.com/special/everglades/politics/
                                subdivision.html.
                            U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and South Florida Water Management
                                District. 2000. Central and Southern Florida Project, Southwest Florida
                                Feasibility Study—Draft.
                            U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and South Florida Water Management
                                District. 1999. Central and Southern Florida Project, Comprehensive
                                Review Study, Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic
                                Environmental Impact Statement.
                            U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.
                                Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Environmental Impact State-
                                ment on Improving the Regulatory Process in Southwest Florida, Lee and
                                Collier Counties, Florida.
                            U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Demographic Profiles. Available:
                                http://censtats.census.gov/cgi-bin/pct/pctProfile.pl.
                            U.S. Geological Survey. 2000a. The South Florida Environment—
                                A Region Under Stress. Available: http://sflwww.er.usgs.gov/
                                publications/circular/1134/esns/geo.html.
                              Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   99
U.S. Geological Survey. 2000b. The South Florida Environment—
    A Region Under Stress. Available: http://sflwww.er.usgs.gov/
    publications/circular/1134/esas/index.html.
Wedderburn, L. A., M. S. Knapp, D. P. Waltz, and W. S. Burns. 1982.
    Hydrogeologic Reconnaissance of Lee County, Florida—Part I: Text.
    South Florida Water Management District, Technical Publication
    82-1.
White, W. A. 1970. Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula. Florida
    Geological Survey Geological Bulletin No. 51.
Water Quality Assessment Report                                                                                  September 2003


Everglades West Coast Appendices
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Appendix A: Legislative and Regulatory Background on the Watershed
Management Approach and the Implementation of TMDLs.................................. 103
Federal and State Legislation on Surface Water Quality and TMDLs.............................................103
Determining Impairment Based on the State’s Impaired Surface Waters Rule ...............................105
Implementing TMDLs........................................................................................................................107
   Table A.1: Basin Groups for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle, by
               Department District Office .......................................................................................109
   Table A.2: Basin Rotation Schedule for TMDL Development and Implementation—
               Nine Year Cycle ........................................................................................................109
   Figure A.1: Five-Year Rotating Basin Cycle in the Department’s Six Districts ......................110
   Table A.3: Potentially Affected Stakeholders and Actions To Achieve TMDLs .......................111
Appendix B: Supplementary Ecological Information in the Everglades
West Coast Basin ...................................................................................................... 112
Ecoregions ..........................................................................................................................................112
   Figure B.1: Ecoregions and Subecoregions in the Everglades West Coast Basin...................113
Natural Communities .........................................................................................................................114
   Table B.1: Natural Communities in the Everglades West Coast Basin ....................................116
Threatened and Endangered Species .................................................................................................117
   Table B.2: Listed Species in the Everglades West Coast Basin ................................................118
   Table B.3: Imperiled (non-listed) Species in the Everglades West Coast Basin .......................120
Appendix C: Information on Reasonable Assurance .............................................. 121
Background.........................................................................................................................................121
Current Rule Text Relating to Evaluation of Pollution Control Mechanisms..................................122
Responsible Parties for Reasonable Assurance Demonstration........................................................122
Time Frame for Development of Documentation .............................................................................123
What It Means To Be Under Local, State, or Federal Authority......................................................123
Time Frame for Attaining Water Quality Standards.........................................................................123
Parameter-Specific Nature of Demonstration....................................................................................124
Information To Consider and Document when Assessing Reasonable Assurance in the IWR.......124
Water Quality–Based Targets and Aquatic Ecological Goals ..........................................................125
Interim Targets ...................................................................................................................................126
Averaging Periods for Water Quality Targets...................................................................................126
Estimates of Pollutant Reductions from Restoration Actions...........................................................126
New Sources/Growth .........................................................................................................................126
Examples of Reasonable Progress .....................................................................................................127
Long-Term Requirements ..................................................................................................................127
Appendix D: Methodology for Determining Impairment Based on the
Impaired Surface Waters Rule................................................................................. 128
102              Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



The Impaired Surface Waters Rule....................................................................................................128
Attainment of Designated Use(s).......................................................................................................128
    Table D.1: Designated Use Attainment Categories for Surface Waters in Florida.................129
Sources of Data...................................................................................................................................129
    Table D.2: Data Used in Developing the Planning and Verified Lists, First Basin
               Rotation Cycle...........................................................................................................130
Methodology.......................................................................................................................................130
Appendix E: Water Quality Summary for the Everglades West Coast Basin....... 137
     Table E.1: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary, by Planning Unit, for the
                Everglades West Coast Basin...................................................................................137
     Table E.2: Water Quality Monitoring Stations Used in the Assessment, by Planning
                Unit, for the Everglades West Coast Basin..............................................................144
     Table E.3: Water Quality Trend Data for the Everglades West Coast Basin ..........................164
Appendix F: Permitted Facilities with Discharges to Surface Water in the
Everglades West Coast Basin, by Planning Unit ..................................................... 170
Appendix G: Level 1 Land Use in the Everglades West Coast Basin,
by Planning Unit ....................................................................................................... 171
     Table G-1: Level I Land Use in the Estero Bay Planning Unit ................................................171
     Table G-2: Level I Land Use in the Southwest Coast Planning Unit .......................................171
     Table G-3: Level I Land Use in the Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit................................172
Appendix H: Pollutant Loading Estimates for the Everglades West Coast Basin 173
Estimated Loadings in the Estero Bay Planning Unit .......................................................................173
    Table H.1: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay
               Watershed for Area-Weighted Urban Runoff Discharge ........................................173
    Table H.2: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay
               Watershed for Area-Weighted Agricultural Runoff Discharge...............................174
    Table H.3: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay
               Watershed for Area-Weighted Annual Total Nitrogen (TN) Loading.....................175
    Table H.4: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay
               Watershed for Area-Weighted Annual Total Phosphorus (TP) Loading................176
Estimated Loadings in the Southwest Coast Planning Unit..............................................................176
Estimated Loadings in the Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit .......................................................176
Appendix I: Documentation Provided during Public Comment Period............... 177
EPA’s Comments ...............................................................................................................................177
Stakeholder Comments.......................................................................................................................180
    Table 1. Estero Bay chlorophyll reanalysis results. ..................................................................185
             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                         103


    Appendix A: Legislative and Regulatory Background on the
           Watershed Management Approach and the
                   Implementation of TMDLs
Federal and State Legislation on Surface Water Quality and TMDLs

Clean Water Act
     Congress enacted the Clean Water Act in 1972 with the goal of restoring and
maintaining the “chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters” (33
U.S.C. § 1251[a]). The ultimate goal of the act is to eliminate the “discharge of [all]
pollutants into navigable waters” (33 U.S.C. § 1251[a][1]).
     Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act requires states to report biennially to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on their water quality. The 305(b) assessment
report provides information on the physical, chemical, biological, and cultural features of
each river basin in Florida. This initial assessment provides a common factual basis for
identifying information sources and major issues, and for determining the future changes,
strategies, and actions needed to preserve, protect, and/or restore water quality.
Understanding the physical framework of each basin allows the development of a
science-based methodology for assessing water quality and an accurate picture of the
waters that are most impaired or vulnerable to contamination.
     Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to submit to the EPA lists of
surface waters that do not meet applicable water quality standards and establish total
maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for each of these waters on a schedule. A pollution limit
is then allocated to each pollutant source in an individual river basin.
     A TMDL represents the maximum amount of a given pollutant that a waterbody can
assimilate and meet all of its designated uses (see the sidebar on Florida’s surface water
quality classifications for a listing of these classifications). A waterbody that does not
meet its designated use is defined as impaired.


SIDEBAR: FLORIDA’S SURFACE WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS
Florida’s water quality standards program, the foundation of the state’s program of water quality
management, designates the “present and future most beneficial uses” of the waters of the state
(Section 403.061[10], F.S.). Water quality criteria, expressed as numeric or narrative limits for
specific parameters, describe the water quality necessary to maintain these uses for surface
water and ground water. Florida’s surface water is protected for five designated use
classifications, as follows:

Class I         Potable water supplies
Class II        Shellfish propagation or harvesting
Class III       Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced
                population of fish and wildlife
Class IV        Agricultural water supplies
Class V         Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in
                this class)
104        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



Florida Watershed Restoration Act
    In 1998, the EPA settled a lawsuit with the environmental group Earthjustice over
Florida’s TMDL Program. The Consent Decree resulting from the lawsuit requires all
TMDLs on the state’s 1998 Section 303(d) list of impaired waters to be developed in
thirteen years. If the state fails to develop the TMDLs, the EPA is required to do so.
    In response to concerns about the TMDL lawsuit and in recognition of the important
role that TMDLs play in restoring state waters, the 1999 Florida legislature enacted the
Florida Watershed Restoration Act (Chapter 99-223, Laws of Florida). The act clarified
the Department’s statutory authority to establish TMDLs, required the Department to
develop a methodology for identifying impaired waters, specified that the Department
could develop TMDLs only for waters on a future state list of impaired waters developed
using this new methodology, and directed the Department to establish an Allocation
Technical Advisory Committee to address the allocation process for TMDLs. The act
also declared Lake Okeechobee impaired and, as required under the TMDL Consent
Decree, allowed the state to develop a TMDL for the lake (see the sidebar for a
description of the legislation’s major provisions).


SIDEBAR: THE FLORIDA WATERSHED RESTORATION ACT
The Florida Watershed Restoration Act contains the following major provisions:

•   Establishes that the 303(d) list submitted to the EPA in 1998 is for planning purposes only.


•   Requires the Department to adopt 303(d) listing criteria (that is, the methodology used to
    define impaired waters) by rule.


•   Requires the Department to verify impairment and then establish Verified Lists for each
    basin. The Department must also evaluate whether proposed pollution control programs are
    sufficient to meet water quality standards, list the specific pollutant(s) and concentration(s)
    causing impairment, and adopt the basin-specific 303(d) list by Secretarial Order.


•   Requires the Department’s Secretary to adopt TMDL allocations by rule. The legislation
    requires the Department to establish “reasonable and equitable” allocations of TMDLs, but
    does not mandate how allocations will be made among individual sources.


•   Requires that TMDL allocations consider existing treatment levels and management
    practices; the differing impacts that pollutant sources may have; the availability of treatment
    technologies, best management practices (BMPs), or other pollutant reduction measures; the
    feasibility, costs, and benefits of achieving the allocation; reasonable time frames for
    implementation; the potential applicability of moderating provisions; and the extent that
    nonattainment is caused by pollution from outside Florida, discharges that have ceased, or
    alteration to a waterbody.


•   Required a report to the legislature by February 2001 addressing the allocation process.
            Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                         105

•   Authorizes the Department to develop basin plans to implement TMDLs, coordinating with the
    water management districts, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,
    the Soil and Water Conservation Districts, regulated parties, and environmental groups in
    assessing waterbodies for impairment, collecting data for TMDLs, developing TMDLs, and
    conducting at least one public meeting in the watershed. Implementation is voluntary if not
    covered by regulatory programs.


•   Authorizes the Department and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer
    Services to develop interim measures and BMPs to address nonpoint sources. While BMPs
    would be adopted by rule, they will be voluntary if not covered by regulatory programs. If
    they are adopted by rule and the Department verifies their effectiveness, then implementation
    will provide a presumption of compliance with water quality standards.


•   Directs the Department to document the effectiveness of the combined regulatory/voluntary
    approach and report to the legislature by January 1, 2005. The report will include
    participation rates and recommendations for statutory changes.




Determining Impairment Based on the State’s Impaired Surface Waters Rule
    Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act and the Florida Watershed Restoration
Act describe impaired waters as those waterbodies or waterbody segments that do not
meet applicable water quality standards. “Impairment” is a broad term that includes
designated uses, water quality criteria, the Florida antidegradation policy, and moderating
provisions (see the sidebar below for explanations of these terms).
    The state’s Identification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule (Rule 62-303, F.A.C.) was
developed in cooperation with a Technical Advisory Committee and adopted by the
Florida Environmental Regulatory Commission on April 26, 2001. It provides a science-
based methodology for evaluating water quality data in order to identify impaired waters,
and it establishes specific criteria for impairment based on chemical parameters, the
interpretation of narrative nutrient criteria, biological impairment, fish consumption
advisories, and ecological impairment. The rule is available at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/AmendedIWR.pdf.
    The Impaired Surface Waters Rule also establishes thresholds for data sufficiency and
data quality, including the minimum sample size required and the number of exceedances
of the applicable water quality standard for a given sample size that identify a waterbody
as impaired. The number of exceedances is based on a statistical approach designed to
provide greater confidence that the outcome of the water quality assessment is correct.
Waters that are identified as impaired through the Impaired Surface Waters Rule
are prioritized for TMDL development and implementation.
106         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




SIDEBAR: EXPLANATION OF TERMS

•   Designated uses, discussed in an earlier sidebar, comprise the five classifications applied to
    each of the state’s surface waterbodies.


•   Water quality criteria comprise numeric or narrative limits of pollutants.


•   The Florida Antidegradation Policy (Rules 62-302.300 and 62-4.242, F.A.C.) recognizes
    that pollution that causes or contributes to new violations of water quality standards or to the
    continuation of existing violations is harmful to the waters of the state. Under this policy, the
    permitting of new or previously unpermitted existing discharges is prohibited where the
    discharge is expected to reduce the quality of a receiving water below the classification
    established for it. Any lowering of water quality caused by a new or expanded discharge to
    surface waters must be in the public interest (that is, the benefits of the discharge to public
    health, safety, and welfare must outweigh any adverse impacts on fish and wildlife or
    recreation). Further, the permittee must demonstrate that other disposal alternatives (for
    example, reuse) or pollution prevention are not economically and technologically reasonable
    alternatives to the surface water discharge.


•   Moderating provisions (provided in Rules 62-302.300[10], 62-4 and 62-6, F.A.C., and
    described in Rules 62-302.300, 62-4.244, 62-302.800, 62-4.243, F.A.C., and Sections
    403.201 and 373.414, F.S.) include mixing zones, zones of discharge, site-specific alternative
    criteria, exemptions, and variances. These provisions are intended to moderate the
    applicability of water quality standards where it has been determined that, under certain
    special circumstances, the social, economic, and environmental costs of such applicability
    outweigh the benefits.



    Determining impairment in individual waterbodies takes place in two phases. First,
in each river basin the Department evaluates the existing water quality data, using the
methodology prescribed in the Impaired Surface Waters Rule, to determine whether
waters are potentially impaired. Waters found to be potentially impaired are included on
a Planning List for further assessment under Sections 403.067(2) and (3), F.S. As
required by Subsection 403.067(2), F.S., the Planning List is not used to administer or
implement any regulatory program. It is submitted to the EPA for informational purposes
only.
    The second step is to assess waters on the Planning List under Section 403.067(3),
F.S., as part of the Department’s watershed management approach (described in the
following section). The Department carries out additional data gathering and strategic
monitoring, focusing on these potentially impaired waters, and determines—using the
methodology in Part III, Rule 62-303.400, F.A.C.—if a waterbody is, in fact, impaired
and if the impairment is caused by pollutant discharges.
    An Assessment Report is produced containing the results of this updated evaluation
and a Verified List of impaired waters. The criteria for the Verified List are more
stringent than those for the Planning List. The Department is required to develop
TMDLs for waters on the Verified List under Subsection 403.067(4), F.S. A watershed
           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                  107

management plan (called a Basin Management Action Plan) to reduce the amount of
pollutants that cause impairments must also be produced and implemented.
    The Verified List is adopted by Secretarial Order in accordance with the Florida
Watershed Restoration Act. Once adopted, the list is submitted to the EPA for approval
as the state’s Section 303(d) list of impaired waters for the basin.

Implementing TMDLs

The Watershed Management Approach
    The Department's statewide approach to water resource management, called the
watershed management approach, is the framework for implementing TMDLs as required
by the federal and state governments. The approach does not focus on individual sources
of pollution. Instead, each basin is assessed as an entire functioning system, and aquatic
resources are evaluated from a basinwide perspective that considers the cumulative
effects of human activities. Water resources are managed on the basis of natural
boundaries, such as river basins, rather than political or regulatory boundaries. Federal,
state, regional, tribal, and local governments identify watersheds not meeting clean water
or other natural resource goals and work cooperatively to focus resources and implement
effective strategies to restore water quality. Extensive public participation in the
decision-making process is crucial.
    The watershed management approach is not new, nor does it compete with or replace
existing programs. Rather than relying on single solutions to water resource issues, it is
intended to improve the health of surface water and ground water resources by
strengthening coordination among such activities as monitoring, stormwater
management, wastewater treatment, wetland restoration, land acquisition, and public
involvement.
    By promoting the management of entire natural systems and addressing the
cumulative effects of human activities on a watershed basis, this approach is intended to
protect and enhance the ecological structure, function, and integrity of Florida’s
watersheds. It provides a framework for setting priorities and focusing the Department’s
resources on protecting and restoring water quality, and aims to increase cooperation
among state, regional, local, and federal interests. By emphasizing public involvement,
the approach encourages stewardship by all Floridians to preserve water resources for
future generations.
    The watershed approach is intended to speed up projects by focusing funding and
other resources on priority water quality problems, strengthening public support,
establishing agreements, and funding multiagency projects. It avoids duplication by
building on existing assessments and restoration activities and promotes cooperative
monitoring programs. It encourages accountability for achieving water quality
improvements through improved monitoring and the establishment of TMDLs.
108        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



The Watershed Management Cycle
   As part of the Department’s watershed management approach, TMDLs will be
developed, and the corresponding pollutant loadings allocated, as part of a watershed
management cycle, which rotates through the state’s fifty-two river basins over a nine-
year period. The cycle’s five phases are as follows:

•   Phase 1: Preliminary Watershed Evaluation. For each river basin, a Status Report
    is developed, containing a Planning List of potentially impaired waters that may
    require the establishment of TMDLs. The report characterizes each basin’s
    hydrologic, ecological, and socioeconomic setting as well as historical, current, and
    proposed watershed management issues and activities. It also contains a preliminary
    evaluation of major water quality parameters, water quality issues by planning unit,
    an evaluation of ecological resources, and basinwide pollutant loading trends related
    to land uses. At the end of Phase 1, a Strategic Monitoring Plan is developed.

•   Phase 2: Strategic Monitoring and Assessment. Additional data are collected
    through strategic monitoring and uploaded to STORET. The data are used to verify
    whether potentially impaired waters in each basin are impaired and to calibrate and
    verify models for TMDL development. At the end of Phase 2, an Assessment
    Report is produced for each basin that contains a Verified List of impaired waters.
    The report also provides an updated and more thorough evaluation of water quality,
    associated biological resources, and current management plans. The Department will
    adopt the Verified List by the Department through a Secretarial Order and submit it
    to the EPA as the state’s Section 303(d) list of impaired waters.

•   Phase 3: Development and Adoption of TMDLs. TMDLs for priority impaired
    waters in the basin will be developed and adopted by rule. Because TMDLs cannot
    be developed for all listed waters during a single watershed management cycle due to
    fiscal and technical limitations, waterbodies will be prioritized using the criteria in the
    Identification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule, Rule 62-303, F.A.C.

•   Phase 4: Development of Basin Management Action Plan. A Basin Management
    Action Plan will be developed for each basin that specifies how pollutant loadings
    from point and nonpoint sources of pollution will be allocated and reduced, in order
    to meet TMDL requirements. The plans will include regulatory and nonregulatory
    (i.e., voluntary), structural and nonstructural strategies, and existing management
    plans will be used where feasible. The involvement and support of affected
    stakeholders in this phase will be especially critical.

•   Phase 5: Implementation of Basin Management Action Plan. Implementation of
    the activities specified in the Basin Management Action Plan will begin. This
    includes carrying out rule development as needed, securing funding, informing
    stakeholders and the public, and monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the
    plan.
                        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                                     109

              To implement the watershed cycle, the state’s river basins have been divided into five
          groups within each of the Department’s six districts statewide, and each district will
          assess one basin each year. Table A.1 shows the basin groups for implementing the
          cycle in the Department’s districts, and Figure A.1 shows these groups and the rotating
          cycle in the districts. Table A.2, which lists the basin rotation schedule for TMDL
          development and implementation, shows that it will take nine years to complete one full
          cycle of the state.
              The watershed management cycle is an iterative, or repeated, process. One of its key
          components is that the effectiveness of management activities (TMDL implementation)
          will be monitored in successive cycles. Monitoring conducted in Phase 2 of subsequent
          cycles will be targeted at evaluating whether water quality objectives are being met and
          whether individual waters are no longer impaired. The Department also will track the
          implementation of scheduled restoration activities, whether required or voluntary, to
          ensure continued progress towards meeting the TMDLs.

       Table A.1: Basin Groups for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle, by Department
       District Office
 District           Group 1            Group 2            Group 3           Group 4                                                    Group 5
                     Basins            Basins              Basins            Basins                                                    Basins
Northwest          Ochlockonee-                Apalachicola-                Choctawhatchee                Pensacola Bay          Perdido River and
                  St. Marks Rivers             Chipola Rivers              River and Bay and                                           Bay
                                                                            St. Andrews Bay
Northeast         Suwannee River              Lower St. Johns               Upper St. Johns              St. Marys-Nassau        Northeast Coast
                                                   River                          River                       Rivers                 Lagoons
Central           Ocklawaha River             Middle St. Johns                                           Kissimmee River           Indian River
                                                   River                                                                             Lagoon
Southwest             Tampa Bay                 Tampa Bay                  Sarasota Bay and               Withlacoochee           Springs Coast
                                                Tributaries                 Peace-Myakka                       River
                                                                                Rivers
South             Everglades West             Charlotte Harbor              Caloosahatchee               Fisheating Creek          Florida Keys
                       Coast                                                     River
Southeast         Lake Okeechobee                St.Lucie-                    Lake Worth                 Southeast Urban              Everglades
                                               Loxahatchee                   Lagoon/Palm                      Coast
                                                  Rivers                     Beach Coast

          Table A.2: Basin Rotation Schedule for TMDL Development and Implementation—Nine Year Cycle
 YEAR        00    01    01     02      02     03      03     04      04     05      05     06      06     07      07       08   08       09
                  1             2              3              4              5              6              7            8             9
Group 1      PHASE 1          PHASE 2        PHASE 3        PHASE 4        PHASE 5        PHASE 1        PHASE 2    PHASE 3      PHASE 4
Group 2                       PHASE 1        PHASE 2        PHASE 3        PHASE 4        PHASE 5        PHASE 1    PHASE 2      PHASE 3
Group 3                                      PHASE 1        PHASE 2        PHASE 3        PHASE 4        PHASE 5    PHASE 1      PHASE 2
Group 4                                                     PHASE 1        PHASE 2        PHASE 3        PHASE 4    PHASE 5      PHASE 1
Group 5                                                                    PHASE 1        PHASE 2        PHASE 3    PHASE 4      PHASE 5
110      Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Figure A.1: Five-Year Rotating Basin Cycle in the Department’s Six Districts
                     Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                               111

         Pollutants can enter a waterbody through point source discharges (generally from a
     specific facility) or nonpoint discharges (e.g., stormwater runoff, septic tanks).
     Government agencies, businesses, organizations, and individuals who contribute to these
     discharges will be asked to share the responsibility of attaining TMDLs through load
     allocations (the amount of a specified pollutant allotted for discharge) that are based on
     an established TMDL. Table A.3 summarizes these potentially affected stakeholders,
     and the actions they may be asked to take to help achieve a TMDL.


     Table A.3: Potentially Affected Stakeholders and Actions To Achieve TMDLs

              Potentially Affected Stakeholders                              Actions To Achieve TMDL

                                                              Reduce and treat urban stormwater runoff through
Municipal stormwater/wastewater programs
                                                              stormwater retrofits, replacement of septic tanks

Commercial developers, homebuilders, individual               Improve development design and construction, enhance
homeowners                                                    best management practices, replace septic tanks

Municipal and industrial wastewater treatment facilities,
                                                              Reduce pollutant loadings from permitted discharges
NPDES-permitted facilities

                                                              Reduce and treat runoff through best management
Farming and silviculture operations
                                                              practices

Federal, regional, state agencies; regional and local water
                                                              Carry out waterbody restoration projects
quality coalitions




       For additional information on the Department’s Watershed Management Program and
     TMDLs, please contact the following basin coordinators:

          •     Southwest Florida, Lake Okeechobee and the Fla. Keys, Pat Fricano (850) 245-
                8559
          •     Southeast Florida and Ochlockonee-St. Marks Basins, Rick Hicks (850) 245-8558
          •     Northwest and Central Florida, Mary Paulic, (850) 245-8560
          •     Northeast Florida and Suwannee Basin, John Abendroth (850) 245-8557
          •     West Central Florida and Tampa Bay Region, Tom Singleton (850) 245-8561

         For information on establishing and implementing TMDLs, contact Jan Mandrup-
     Poulsen at (850) 245-8448. Additional information is available on the Department’s Web
     site at www.dep.state.fl.us/water/watersheds/index.htm.
112        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




     Appendix B: Supplementary Ecological Information in the
                  Everglades West Coast Basin

Ecoregions
    The Everglades West Coast Basin straddles the Southern Coastal Plain and Southern
Florida Coastal Plain ecoregions, and encompasses the Southwestern Florida Flatwoods,
Big Cypress, and Southern Coast and Islands subregions (Figure B.1). Ecoregions are
regions of relative ecological homogeneity for factors such as climate, physiography,
geology, soils, and vegetation. The Southwestern Florida Flatwoods subregion is
characterized by pine flatwoods, extensive areas of pasture and rangeland, cabbage palm
hammocks, and marshes. The Big Cypress subregion is a flat, poorly drained plain with
vegetation consisting of pine flatwoods, cypress swamps, grasslands, and marl prairie.
The Southern Coast and Islands subregion includes the low coastal areas of Ten
Thousand Islands and Cape Sable. Only small quantities of fresh water are available, and
soils are primarily marshy and swampy, with some rock outcrops. Standing water, tidal
sloughs, open lagoons, low beach ridges, vermetid reefs, and sediment islands cover
more than half of this subregion.

SIDEBAR DEFINITION: VERMETID
Little tunnels made and cemented together into rock-like reefs by colony dwelling worms.
          Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast        113




Figure B.1: Ecoregions and Subecoregions in the Everglades West Coast Basin
114       Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



Natural Communities
    The Everglades West Coast Basin is characterized by mangrove-dominated estuaries
along the coast, with salt marsh habitats occurring landward of the mangrove zone. The
area contains the largest mangrove swamps in the state. The interior parts of the region
show remnants of prehistoric shorelines forming sand ridges, interspersed with pine-
palmetto flatwoods and large wetland strands. The region may have contained the state’s
greatest acreage of hydric pine flatwoods, which have significant ecological and
hydrological value. In spite of human impacts, the basin still supports large areas
containing diverse natural communities and species.
    Lake Trafford, the largest lake in Florida south of Lake Okeechobee, lies inland from
the coast. The lake forms the headwaters of Corkscrew Swamp and Fakahatchee Strand,
and provides important habitat for migrating birds. Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary,
managed by the National Audubon Society, contains tracts of old-growth cypress forest.
    Fakahatchee Strand is a gently sloping channel in the limestone plain that underlies
the region. About 20 miles long and 3 to 5 miles wide, it forms part of the main drainage
slough of the Big Cypress Swamp and contributes water to the tidal swamps and
mangrove estuaries of the Ten Thousand Islands. This subtropical swamp has North
America’s largest concentration and richest variety of orchids, as well as abundant
epiphytes and many rare ferns and bromeliads. It also contains the country’s largest
stand of native royal palms and the only cypress/royal palm forest.
    Big Cypress Swamp, a flat, forested, low-lying region, lies just west of the
Everglades. It is called “big” because of the swamp’s size—more than 2,400 square
miles (1.5 million acres)—not because of the size of its cypress trees. More than half of
the surface water flowing to the Everglades comes from the swamp. Although it is
somewhat higher in elevation, Big Cypress is mostly inundated with water for more than
300 days out of each year. Unique forests of mixed bald cypress and royal palms have
developed along channels in the limestone; in higher areas, pine and hammock forests
predominate. In other areas of the swamp, dwarf cypress savannas and open prairies
grow on thin soils of marl and sand on top of the limestone. Epiphytic plants are
abundant in forested areas. The Big Cypress National Preserve, managed by the National
Park Service, comprises 728,000 acres of this area.
    Along the Gulf Coast of the basin, there are extensive marine and estuarine
communities. The northwestern side of the basin contains Estero Bay, a long, narrow,
and relatively small estuarine system of about 15 square miles. To the south of Estero
Bay lie two smaller bays: Wiggins and Naples Bay. Still farther south are a number of
much larger bays and estuaries: Rookery Bay, the Marco Island Estuary, Faka Union
Bay, Fakahatchee Bay, Chokoloskee Bay, and Cape Romano–Ten Thousand Islands.
With a few exceptions, the natural communities along this stretch of Florida’s southwest
coast are relatively undisturbed.
    Of the 2,054,891 acres in the Everglades West Coast Basin, wetlands comprise 52
percent. Major wetland types include cypress swamp (522,736 acres), freshwater marsh
(358,833 acres), mangrove swamp (67,748 acres), hardwood swamp (59,008 acres), and
shrub swamp (35,858 acres). Coastal salt marsh is the smallest wetland community type,
with 24,689 acres.
           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                  115

     Disturbed community types comprise 27 percent of the basin. Grass and agricultural
land occupy the largest area (312,531 acres), followed by barren land (139,448 acres) and
shrub and brush (100,140 acres). Exotic (upland) plant communities take up 1,026 acres.
     Uplands comprise 19 percent of the basin’s total area. Predominant upland types are
hardwood hammock (155,742 acres), pinelands (142,988 acres), dry prairie (more than
71,111 acres), and mixed hardwood pine (26,619 acres). Other upland communities such
as coastal strand, oak scrub, and tropical hammock occupy 1,045 acres. Upland
communities contribute organic matter and nutrients to surface waters, supporting the
microorganisms that form the base of the food web. They buffer surface waters from the
effects of human activities, such as contaminated urban and agricultural runoff.
     Open water occupies 1.72 percent of the basin (35,369 acres) including inland
freshwater lakes, ponds, rivers, creeks, canals, and brackish and saline waters. Table B.1
lists the acreage and percentage of the natural and disturbed community types in the basin
and describes their principal characteristics.
  116        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



  Table B.1: Natural Communities in the Everglades West Coast Basin
Category     Community   Area in Percent of                         Characteristics
               Type       Acres      Total Area
Upland
   1       Coastal strand     12       0.00     Occurs on well drained sandy coastlines and includes
                                                typically zoned vegetation of upper beach, nearby dunes, or
                                                coastal rock formations
   2         Dry prairie    71,111     3.46     Large treeless grasslands and shrublands on very flat terrain
                                                interspersed with scattered cypress domes, cypress strands,
                                                isolated freshwater marshes, and hammocks
   3         Pinelands      142,988    6.96     Includes north and south Florida pine flatwoods, south
                                                Florida pine rocklands, scrubby flatwoods, and commercial
                                                pine plantations. Cypress domes, bayheads, titi swamps,
                                                and freshwater marshes are commonly interspersed in
                                                isolated depressions.
   6         Oak scrub       819       0.04     Hardwood community consisting of clumps of low-growing
                                                oaks interspersed with white sand. Occurs in areas of deep,
                                                well-washed sterile sand.
   7           Mixed        26,619     1.30     Southern extension of the Piedmont southern mixed
           hardwood pine                        hardwoods, occurring mainly on clay soils of the northern
                                                Panhandle. Also includes upland forests in which a mixture
                                                of conifers and hardwoods dominate overstory
   8         Hardwood       155,742    7.58     Includes major upland hardwood associations that occur
             hammock                            statewide on fairly rich sandy soils.
   9          Tropical       214       0.01     Cold-intolerant hardwood community with very high plant
             hammock                            diversity that occurs on coastal uplands in extreme south
                                                Florida. It is characterized by tropical trees and shrubs at
                                                the northern edge of their range, which extends into the
                                                Caribbean.
Wetland
   10       Coastal salt    24,689     1.20     Herbaceous and shrubby wetland communities that include
              marsh                             cordgrass, needlerush, and transitional or high salt marshes,
                                                occurring statewide in brackish waters along protected low
                                                energy estuarine shorelines.
   11       Freshwater      358,833   17.46     Wetland communities dominated by wide assortment of
              marsh                             herbaceous plant species growing on sand, clay, marl, and
                                                organic soils in areas where water depths and inundation
                                                regimes vary.
   12     Cypress swamp 522,736       25.44     Regularly inundated communities that form forested buffer
                                                along large rivers, creeks, and lakes, or occur in
                                                depressions as circular domes or linear strands. Strongly
                                                dominated by bald cypress or pond cypress.
   13        Hardwood       59,008     2.87     Association of wetland adapted trees, composed either of
              swamp                             pure stands of hardwoods or hardwood-cypress mixture.
                                                Occurs on organic soils and forms forested floodplain of
                                                nonalluvial rivers, creeks, and broad lake basins.
   15      Shrub swamp      35,858     1.74     Dominated by low-growing, woody shrubs or small trees,
                                                usually found in wetlands changed by natural or human
                                                perturbations such as altered hydroperiod, fire, clear-cutting
                                                or land clearing, and siltation.
   16        Mangrove       67,748     3.30     These dense, brackish water swamps, usually dominated by
              swamp                             red, black, and white mangroves, occur along low-energy
                                                shorelines and in protected, tidally influenced bays of
                                                southern Florida. This community is composed of freeze-
                                                intolerant tree species that are distributed south of a line
                                                from Cedar Key on the Gulf coast to St. Augustine on the
                                                Atlantic coast.
                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                117

Category     Community       Area in    Percent of                         Characteristics
               Type          Acres      Total Area
Open water
   18           Water        35,369       1.72       Open water areas of inland lakes, ponds, rivers, and
                                                     streams and brackish and saline waters of estuaries, bays,
                                                     and tidal creeks.
Disturbed
   19         Grass and       312,531     15.21      Upland communities with very low-growing grasses and
            agricultural land                        forbs. Intensively managed sites such as improved
                                                     pastures, lawns, golf courses, road shoulders, cemeteries,
                                                     or weedy fallow agricultural fields.
   20         Shrub and      100,140      4.87       Includes different situations where natural upland
                brush                                communities have recently been disturbed and are
                                                     recovering through natural successional processes.
   21        Exotic plant     1,026       0.05       Upland and wetland areas dominated by invasive non-native
             communities                             trees that have invaded native plant communities.
   22         Barren and     139,448      6.79       Unvegetated areas such as roads, beaches, active strip
              Urban land                             mines, borrow areas, cleared land on sandy soils, and urban
                                                     areas (rooftops, parking lots, etc.).
 TOTAL                      2,054,89
                                1




  Threatened and Endangered Species
      The Everglades West Coast Basin contains a rich diversity of native animal life,
  including a number of federally threatened and endangered species. These include four
  reptiles (American alligator, American crocodile, loggerhead turtle, and eastern indigo
  snake), seven birds (Cape Sable seaside sparrow, Florida scrub jay, crested caracara,
  bald eagle, wood stork, red-cockaded woodpecker, and snail kite) and two mammals
  (Florida panther and West Indian manatee). Of all listed (federal and state) and
  imperiled species, three quarters of them use or live in the basin’s various freshwater,
  saltwater, and/or wetland communities. Tables B.2 and B.3 contain a complete list of
  imperiled (state listed and nonlisted) species in the basin.
    118         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



    Table B.2: Listed Species in the Everglades West Coast Basin
    Scientific Name*            Common Name               Federal       State
                                                         Protection   Protection
                                                           Status       Status
FISH
Rivulus marmoratus             Mangrove rivulus                N          LS
Amphibians and
Reptiles
Alligator mississippiensis     American alligator            T(S/A)       LS
Caretta caretta                Loggerhead turtle               LT         LT
Crocodylus acutus              American Crocodile              LE         LE
Drymarchon corais couperi      Eastern indigo snake            LT         LT
Gopherus polyphemus            Gopher tortoise                 N          LS
Rana capito                    Gopher frog                     N          LS
BIRDS
Ajaia ajaja                    Roseate spoonbill              N           LS
Ammodramus maritimus           Cape Sable seaside             LE          LE
mirabilis                      sparrow
Aphelocoma coerulescens        Florida scrub jay              LT          LT
Athene cunicularia floridana   Florida burrowing owl          N           LS
Caracara plancus               Crested caracara               LT          LT
Charadrius alexandrinus        Snowy plover                   N           LT
Columba leucocephala           White-crowned pigeon           N           LT
Egretta caerulea               Little blue heron              N           LS
Egretta thula                  Snowy egret                    N           LS
Egretta tricolor               Tricolored heron               N           LS
Eudocimus albus                White ibis                     N           LS
Haliaeetus leucocephalus**     Bald eagle                     LT          LT
Mycteria americana             Wood stork                     LE          LE
Pelecanus occidentalis         Brown pelican                  N           LS
Picoides borealis              Red-cockaded                   LE          LT
                               woodpecker
Rostrhamus sociabilis          Snail kite                     LE          LE
plumbeus
Rynchops niger                 Black skimmer                   N          LS
Sterna antillarum              Least tern                      N          LT
MAMMALS
Felis concolor coryi           Florida panther                LE          LE
Mustela vison                  Everglades mink                N           LT
Sciurus niger avicennia        Mangrove fox squirrel          N           LT
Ursus americanus floridanus    Florida black bear             N           LT
PLANTS
Acrostichum aureum             Golden leather fern             N          LE
Andropogon arctatus            Pine-woods bluestem             N          LT
Asclepias curtissii            Curtiss’ milkweed               N          LE
Asplenium auritum              Auricled spleenwort             N          LE
Asplenium serratum             American bird’s nest            N          LE
                               fern
Burmannia flava                Fakahatchee burmannia           N          LE
Campylocentrum                 Ribbon orchid                   N          LE
pachyrrhizum
Campyloneurum                  Narrow-leaved strap             N          LE
angustifolium                  fern
Campyloneurum costatum         Tailed strap fern               N          LE
                   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                     119

   Scientific Name*                   Common Name                       Federal                   State
                                                                       Protection               Protection
                                                                         Status                   Status
Catopsis berteroniana               Powdery catopsis                          N                          LE
Catopsis floribunda                 Many-flowered catopsis                    N                          LE
Catopsis nutans                     Nodding catopsis                          N                          LE
Chamaesyce cumulicola               Sand-dune spurge                          N                          LE
Cheilanthes microphylla             Southern lip fern                         N                          LE
Cheiroglossa palmata                Hand fern                                 N                          LE
Ctenitis sloanei                    Florida tree fern                         N                          LE
Cyrtopodium punctatum               Cow horn orchid                           N                          LE
Encyclia cochleata var.             Clamshell orchid                          N                          LE
triandra
Encyclia pygmaea                    Dwarf encyclia                            N                          LE
Epidendrum blancheanum              Acuna’s epidendrum                        N                          LE
Epidendrum nocturnum                Night-scented orchid                      N                          LE
Epidendrum strobiliferum            Pendant epidendrum                        N                          LE
Glandularia maritima                Coastal vervain                           N                          LE
Glandularia tampensis               Tampa vervain                             N                          LE
Gossypium hirsutum                  Wild cotton                               N                          LE
Guzmania monostachia                Fakahatchee guzmania                      N                          LE
Huperzia dichotoma                  Hanging clubmoss                          N                          LE
Ionopsis utricularioides            Delicate ionopsis                         N                          LE
Jacquemontia curtissii              Pineland jacquemontia                     N                          LE
Lantana depressa var.               Gulf Coast Florida lantana                N                          LE
sanibelensis
Lechea cernua                       Nodding pinweed                           N                          LT
Lepanthopsis melanantha             Tiny orchid                               N                          LE
Linum carteri var. smallii          Carter’s large-flowered                   N                          LE
                                    flax
Maxillaria crassifolia              Hidden orchid                             N                          LE
Microgramma heterophylla            Climbing vine fern                        N                          LE
Oncidium undulatum                  Mule ear orchid                           N                          LE
Peperomia glabella                  Cypress peperomia                         N                          LE
Peperomia obtusifolia               Blunt-leaved peperomia                    N                          LE
Pleurothallis gelida                Frost-flower orchid                       N                          LE
Polyrrhiza lindenii                 Ghost orchid                              N                          LE
Pteroglossaspis ecristata           Giant orchid                              N                          LT
Roystonea elata                     Florida royal palm                        N                          LE
Stylisma abdita                     Scrub stylisma                            N                          LE
Tillandsia flexuosa                 Banded wild-pine                          N                          LE
Tillandsia pruinosa                 Fuzzy-wuzzy air plant                     N                          LE
Trichomanes holopterum              Entire-winged bristle                     N                          LE
                                    fern
Tripsacum floridanum                Florida gama grass                        N                          LE
Vanilla phaeantha                   Leafy vanilla                             N                          LE
   * Species listed in boldface type use or live in freshwater, saltwater, and/or wetland communities.
   ** Proposed for federal delisting because of the species’ recovery.

   LE—Listed as Endangered.
   LT—Listed as Threatened.
   T(S/A)—Threatened due to similarity of appearance
   LS— Listed as Species of Special Concern.
   N—Not currently listed, nor currently being considered for listing.
120          Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



Table B.3: Imperiled (non-listed) Species in the Everglades West Coast Basin
         Scientific Name*                            Common Name
AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES
Crotalus adamanteus                        Eastern diamondback rattlesnake
Sceloporus woodi                           Florida scrub lizard
BIRDS
Ardea alba                                 Great egret
Buteo brachyurus                           Short-tailed hawk
Coccyzus minor                             Mangrove cuckoo
Dendroica discolor paludicola              Florida prairie warbler
Elanoides forficatus                       Swallow-tailed kite
Picoides villosus                          Hairy woodpecker
Plegadis falcinellus                       Glossy ibis
Sterna sandvicensis                        Sandwich tern
Vireo altiloquus                           Black-whiskered vireo
MAMMALS
Corynorhinus rafinesquii                   Rafinesque’s big-eared bat
Mustela frenata peninsulae                 Florida long-tailed weasel
PLANTS
Elytraria caroliniensis var. angustifolia Narrow-leaved carolina scalystem
Forestiera segregata var. pinetorum       Florida pinewood privet
Galactia pinetorum                        Pineland milk pea

* Species listed in boldface type use or live in freshwater, saltwater, and/or wetland communities.


Sources: Florida’s Endangered Species, Threatened Species, and Species of Special Concern, Official
Lists, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, http://www.state.fl.us/fwc/pubs; Marois, Katherine
C., Tracking List of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants and Animals and Natural Communities of
Florida (Tallahassee: Florida Natural Areas Inventory, June 1999); Ashton, Ray E. (Ed.); Rare and
Endangered Biota of Florida (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1992); Wunderlin, Richard P., Guide
to the Vascular Plants of Florida (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998).
            Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                    121


         Appendix C: Information on Reasonable Assurance

   TO:                 Interested Parties

   FROM:               Mimi Drew, Director
                       Division of Water Facilities

   DATE:               September 2002

    SUBJECT:        Guidance for Development of Documentation To Provide
                    Reasonable Assurance that Proposed Pollution Control
                    Mechanisms Will Result in the Restoration of Designated Uses in
                    Impaired Waters

    The purpose of this memo is to describe the types of information that should be
considered, and subsequently documented, when evaluating whether there is sufficient
reasonable assurance that:

1. Proposed pollution control mechanisms (typically described in watershed
   management or restoration plans) addressing impaired waters will result in the
   attainment of applicable water quality standards (designated uses) at a clearly defined
   point in the future, and

2. Reasonable progress towards restoration of designated uses will be made by the time
   the next 303(d) list of impaired waters is due to be submitted to the EPA.


    There are many site-specific issues related to determining whether reasonable
assurance has been provided. Accordingly, this document describes the elements or
issues that should be considered when evaluating a submittal or when documenting the
basis for the Department’s decision, rather than attempting to establish specific criteria on
what constitutes reasonable assurance.
    It should be noted that the term “reasonable assurance” is used throughout many
Department programs and rules, and this guidance specifically addresses the issues
related to the “reasonable assurance” provided by proposed pollution control
mechanisms. This guidance should not be used to evaluate the meaning of reasonable
assurance in other contexts, particularly in permitting decisions.

Background
    The Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR), Rule 62-303, F.A.C. (Identification of
Impaired Surface Waters), establishes a formal mechanism for identifying surface waters
in Florida that are impaired (do not meet applicable water quality standards) by
122        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



pollutants. Most waters that are verified as being impaired by a pollutant will be listed on
the state’s 303(d) list pursuant to the Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA) and
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. Once listed, Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs) will be developed for the pollutants causing the impairment of the listed
waters. However, as required by the FWRA, the Department will evaluate whether
existing or proposed pollution control mechanisms will effectively address the
impairment before placing a water on the state’s Verified List. If the Department can
document there is reasonable assurance that the impairment will be effectively addressed
by the control measure, then the water will not be listed on the final Verified List (other
impaired waters that will not be listed include waters with TMDLs and waters impaired
by pollution).

Current Rule Text Relating to Evaluation of Pollution Control Mechanisms
    The rule text addressing the evaluation of proposed pollution control mechanisms is
as follows:

       Rule 62-303.600, Evaluation of Pollution Control Mechanisms

2. Upon determining that a waterbody is impaired, the Department shall evaluate
   whether existing or proposed technology-based effluent limitations and other
   pollution control programs under local, state, or federal authority are sufficient to
   result in the attainment of applicable water quality standards.

•   If, as a result of the factors set forth in (1), the waterbody segment is expected to
    attain water quality standards in the future and is expected to make reasonable
    progress towards attainment of water quality standards by the time the next 303(d) list
    is scheduled to be submitted to EPA, the segment shall not be listed on the Verified
    List. The Department shall document the basis for its decision, noting any proposed
    pollution control mechanisms and expected improvements in water quality that
    provide reasonable assurance that the waterbody segment will attain applicable water
    quality standards.


Responsible Parties for Reasonable Assurance Demonstration
    It is ultimately the Department’s responsibility to assure adequate documentation in
the administrative record whenever the Department decides to not list an impaired
waterbody segment for a given pollutant. This documentation will be very important
because the Verified Lists will be adopted by Order of the Secretary and third parties will
be provided an opportunity to challenge, via an administrative hearing, all listing
decisions (both those listing a water and those to not list a water for a given pollutant).
However, the Department expects that local stakeholders will often offer to prepare the
necessary documentation to demonstrate reasonable assurance that proposed control
                Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                             123

mechanisms will restore a given waterbody. The Department will provide guidance to
stakeholders on what information is needed and how it should be submitted.

Time Frame for Development of Documentation
    The Department plans to prepare basin-specific Verified Lists as part of its watershed
management cycle, which rotates through all of the state’s basins over a five-year, five-
phased cycle1. During the first phase of the cycle, the Department will assess water
quality in the basin and prepare a draft Planning List of potentially impaired waters. The
Department and interested parties will then have approximately one year (Phase 2) to
monitor waters on the planning list and prepare documentation, as appropriate, to provide
reasonable assurance that impaired waters will be restored. The Department will review
submittals from interested parties during Phase 2, before adopting the Verified List for
the basin containing the waterbody segment in question.

What It Means To Be Under Local, State, or Federal Authority
    Both the FWRA and the IWR require that the pollution control programs under
consideration be “under local, state, or federal authority.” A pollution control
program will be considered "under local, state, or federal authority" if the program
is subject to or required by a local ordinance, state statute or rule, or federal statute
or regulation.
    Programs will also be considered under local, state, or federal authority if they
are subject to a written agreement, signed by both local stakeholders and at least
one governmental entity, that includes measurable goals, performance criteria,
benchmarks, and back-up corrective actions to assure the further progress of the
program. It is important to note that these written agreements do not need to be
enforceable for nonregulated nonpoint sources.
    Many nonpoint sources are currently outside of the regulatory programs of EPA, the
Department, and the water management districts, and reductions at these nonpoint
sources will be voluntary. In fact, pollution control mechanisms for these nonpoint
sources would be voluntary even if a TMDL were developed. As such, these agreements
may provide the same level of reasonable assurance that can be provided for a TMDL
implementation plan as long as they maintain the Department’s enforcement capability
over all point sources involved.

Time Frame for Attaining Water Quality Standards
    The FWRA and the IWR do not establish a specific time limit by which waters must
attain applicable water quality standards or designated uses. However, the pollution
control mechanisms or watershed restoration plan must provide reasonable assurance that
designated uses will be met at some time in the future. As such, the documentation

1
 Federal regulations currently call for state 303(d) lists every two years, but Florida plans to submit annual updates
based on the basin-specific Verified Lists.
124        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



submitted to the Department must provide a specific date by which time designated uses
are expected to be restored. In cases where designated uses will not be met for many
years, the documentation should also provide justification as to why the specified time is
needed to restore designated uses.

Parameter-Specific Nature of Demonstration
    For the Department not to place an impaired waterbody segment on the Verified List,
reasonable assurance must be provided for each pollutant that has been documented to be
causing impairment of the waterbody segment. However, some entities, including the
Department, may want to provide reasonable assurance addressing only selected
pollutants, which could result in the Department not listing the waterbody segment for
those pollutants, but still listing it for others. In this event, TMDLs will only be
developed for the remaining listed pollutants.

Information To Consider and Document when Assessing Reasonable
Assurance in the IWR
   To provide reasonable assurance that existing or proposed pollution control
mechanisms will restore designated uses, the following information should be evaluated
and documented for the Administrative Record:

3. A Description of the Impaired Water—name of the water listed on the Verified
   List, the location of the waterbody and watershed, the watershed/8-digit cataloging
   unit code, the NHD identifier (when they become available), the type (lake, stream, or
   estuary) of water, the water use classification, the designated use not being attained,
   the length (miles) or area (acres) of impaired area, the pollutant(s) of concern (those
   identified as causing or contributing to the impairment), and the suspected or
   documented source(s) of the pollutant(s) of concern.

•   A Description of the Water Quality or Aquatic Ecological Goals—a description of
    the water quality–based targets or aquatic ecological goals (both interim and final)
    that have been established for the pollutant(s) of concern, the averaging period for
    any numeric water quality goals, a discussion of how these goals will result in the
    restoration of the waterbody’s impaired designated uses, a schedule indicating when
    interim and final targets are expected to be met, and a description of procedures (with
    thresholds) to determine whether additional (backup) corrective actions are needed.

•   A Description of the Proposed Management Actions To Be Undertaken—names
    of the responsible participating entities (government, private, others), a summary and
    list of existing or proposed management activities designed to restore water quality,
    the geographic scope of any proposed management activities, documentation of the
    estimated pollutant load reduction and other benefits anticipated from implementation
                  Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast              125

       of individual management actions, copies of written agreements committing
       participants to the management actions, a discussion on how future growth and new
       sources will be addressed, confirmed sources of funding, an implementation schedule
       (including interim milestones and the date by which designated uses will be restored),
       and any enforcement programs or local ordinances, if the management strategy is not
       voluntary.

•      A Description of Procedures for Monitoring and Reporting Results—a
       description of the water quality monitoring program to be implemented (including
       station locations, parameters sampled, and sampling frequencies) to demonstrate
       reasonable progress; quality assurance/quality control elements that demonstrate the
       monitoring will comply with Rule 62-160, F.A.C.; procedures for entering all
       appropriate data into STORET; the responsible monitoring and reporting entity; the
       frequency and format for reporting results; the frequency and format for reporting on
       the implementation of all proposed management activities; and methods for
       evaluating progress towards goals.

•      A Description of Proposed Corrective Actions—a description of proposed
       corrective actions (and any supporting document[s]) that will be undertaken if water
       quality does not improve after implementation of the management actions or if
       management actions are not completed on schedule, and a process for notifying the
       Department that these corrective actions are being implemented.


Water Quality–Based Targets and Aquatic Ecological Goals
    Some of the most important elements listed above are the requirements to provide
water quality–based targets or aquatic ecological goals and a discussion on how resultant
pollutant(s) reduction targets/goals will result in restoration of designated uses. Some
people have expressed concern about these targets because they equate a water
quality–based restoration target with a TMDL (thus assuming a “Catch 22” that a TMDL
is needed to make a demonstration that a TMDL is not needed). However, as is also the
case for TMDLs, water quality–based targets can take many forms, and need not be a
result of a complex hydrodynamic/water quality model.
    In some cases, there may be sufficient historical data (paleolimnological data,
loadings from periods predating the impairment, or baseline data for Outstanding Florida
Waters2, for example) that could be used to determine an appropriate water quality target.
In other cases, simplified modeling (including regression analysis) may allow for
conservative estimates of the assimilative capacity that could then be used as the basis for
restoration goals. And, finally, a water quality target may have been developed that
would be scientifically equivalent to (or act as the basis for) a TMDL, but the target has
not been administratively adopted as a TMDL. In each of these cases, a sound water
quality target could be used to evaluate whether the proposed pollution control

2
    Baseline data would be data for the year prior to designation of the OFW.
126        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



mechanisms will sufficiently reduce loadings to meet the assimilative capacity of the
water in question and result in attainment of designated uses.

Interim Targets
    Because it will usually take many years to restore fully the designated uses of an
impaired water, interim water quality targets will often be needed to measure whether
reasonable progress is being made towards the restoration of designated uses. Examples
of such interim targets are provided in the last section of this document, but site-specific
measures are also encouraged.

Averaging Periods for Water Quality Targets
    While the averaging period for water quality–based targets should be consistent with
how the underlying standard is expressed, they can often be expressed in a variety of
ways and need not be expressed as “daily loads.” Annual averages or medians are often
appropriate for some parameters, but shorter-term (seasonal, for example) averages may
be necessary if the impairment is limited to specific seasons or parts of the year. Multi-
year averages may be appropriate in limited circumstances where there is naturally high
variation of the water quality target.

Estimates of Pollutant Reductions from Restoration Actions
     It will often be difficult to estimate precisely the pollutant reductions that will result
from specific restoration activities. This is particularly true for the implementation of
best management practices (BMPs). However, to provide reasonable assurance that a
BMP or other restoration action will reduce loadings of the pollutant of concern to a level
that will restore the water’s designated uses, documentation should address how the
reductions were calculated, including providing documented values from the scientific
literature for reductions attributed to similar management actions. If the expected
reductions are expressed as a range, the midpoint of the range should be used as the basis
for estimating reductions, unless documentation is provided supporting the use of
different removal efficiencies in this specific application.

New Sources/Growth
    Another key element is the discussion on how future growth and new sources will be
addressed. Restoration goals must address possible increased loadings of the pollutant of
concern that are anticipated due to population growth or land use changes in contributing
watersheds, both from point and nonpoint sources. This will be particularly important for
waters impaired by nutrients, given that so many Florida watersheds are faced with
continuing urban, residential, and agricultural development that results in increased
nutrient loading from stormwater, septic tanks, and wastewater discharges.
            Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                    127

Examples of Reasonable Progress
    The determination of whether there will be reasonable progress towards attainment of
water quality standards will be very site- and pollutant-specific. Documentation should
be provided supporting specific progress towards restoration of the designated uses of the
impaired water. Possible examples of reasonable progress include, but are not limited to
the following:

•   A written commitment to implement controls reducing loadings within a specified
    time frame from watershed stakeholders representing at least 50 percent of the
    anthropogenic load of the pollutant(s) of concern;

•   Evidence of at least a 10 percent reduction (or alternatively, a percent reduction
    consistent with meeting the water quality target by the specified date) in annual
    anthropogenic loading of the pollutant(s) of concern;

•   Evidence of at least a 10 percent decrease (or alternatively, a percent decrease
    consistent with meeting the water quality target by the specified date) in the annual
    average concentration of the pollutant(s) of concern in the water;

•   Bioassessment results showing there has been an improvement in the health of the
    biological community of the water, as measured by bioassessment procedures similar
    to those used to determine impairment and conducted in similar conditions; or

•   Adoption of a local ordinance that specifically provides water quality goals, restricts
    growth or loads tied to the pollutant(s) of concern, and provides an enforcement
    option if the proposed management measure(s) are not implemented as required.


    Reasonable progress must be made by the time the next 303(d) list is due to be
submitted to EPA, which is currently every two years. EPA has contemplated changing
the listing cycle to every four or five years, and the IWR was specifically worded to
allow a longer time frame for requiring reasonable progress in the event that the listing
cycle changes.

Long-Term Requirements
    If at any time the Department determines that reasonable assurance and reasonable
progress are not being met, the order adopting the Verified List will be amended to
include the waterbody on the Verified List for the pollutant(s) in question. Additional
reasonable progress must be made each time a waterbody is considered for listing under
Rule 62-303, F.A.C. (every five years).
    If you have any questions about this guidance memo, contact Daryll Joyner of the
Department’s Bureau of Watershed Management in Tallahassee at 850-245-8431.
128        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




  Appendix D: Methodology for Determining Impairment Based
             on the Impaired Surface Waters Rule
    In implementing the watershed management approach, the Department relies on
environmental data collected by a variety of organizations. Effective project planning,
sampling design, raw data review, and data analysis are essential to making accurate
determinations of impairment and to TMDL development and implementation.

The Impaired Surface Waters Rule
    To identify impaired waters in each of the state’s river basins, the Department
evaluates water quality data using the science-based methodology in the Impaired
Surface Waters Rule (Identification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule, Rule 62-303,
F.A.C.). The rule establishes specific criteria and thresholds for impairment, in addition
to data sufficiency and data quality requirements. The methodology described in the rule
is based on a statistical approach designed to provide greater confidence that the outcome
of the water quality assessment is correct. The complete text of the Impaired Surface
Waters Rule is available at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/AmendedIWR.pdf.
    As part of the watershed management approach, for each river basin in the state the
Department will follow the methodology in Rule 62-303.300, F.A.C., to develop a
Planning List of potentially impaired waters to be assessed under Sections 403.067(2)
and (3), F.S. The methodology for developing the Planning List includes an evaluation
of aquatic life use support, primary contact and recreational use support, fish shellfish
consumption use support, drinking water use support, and protection of human health.
Data older than ten years cannot be used to evaluate water quality criteria exceedances
for the Planning List. As required by Section 403.067(2), F.S., the Planning List will not
be used to administer or implement any regulatory program, and is submitted to the EPA
for informational purposes only.
    After further assessment, using the methodology in Part III, Rule 62-303.400, F.A.C.,
the Department will determine if waters on the Planning List are, in fact, impaired and if
the impairment is caused by pollutant discharges. These waters are placed on a Verified
List. The criteria for the Verified List are more stringent than those for the Planning List.
Data older than five years should not be used to verify impairment. The Verified List
will be adopted by Secretarial Order and forwarded to the EPA for approval as Florida’s
Section 303(d) list of impaired waters. The Department will develop TMDLs for these
waters under Section 403.067(4), F.S.

Attainment of Designated Use(s)
   While the designated uses of a given waterbody are established using the surface
water quality classification system described previously, it is important to note that the
EPA uses slightly different terminology in its description of designated uses. Because the
Department is required to provide use attainment status for both the state’s 305(b) report
and the state’s 303(d) list of impaired waters, the Department uses EPA terminology
             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                         129

when assessing waters for use attainment. The water quality evaluations and decision
processes for listing impaired waters that are defined in Florida’s Impaired Surface
Waters Rule are based on the following designated use attainment categories:

    Aquatic Life Use Support-Based Attainment
    Primary Contact and Recreation Attainment
    Fish and Shellfish Consumption Attainment
    Drinking Water Use Attainment and Protection of Human Health

    Table D.1 summarizes designated uses assigned to the various surface water classes.

Table D.1: Designated Use Attainment Categories for Surface Waters in Florida
  Designated Use Attainment Category Used in
                                                    Applicable Florida Surface Water Classification
    Impaired Surface Waters Rule Evaluation
    Aquatic Life Use Support-Based Attainment                       Class I, II, and III
    Primary Contact and Recreation Attainment                       Class I, II, and III
     Fish and Shellfish Consumption Attainment                          Class II
           Drinking Water Use Attainment                                Class I
            Protection of Human Health                              Class I, II, and III


Sources of Data
    The assessment of water quality for each basin statewide includes an analysis of
quantitative data from a variety of sources, many of which are readily available to the
public. These sources include the EPA’s Legacy and “new” STOrage and RETrieval
(STORET) databases, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Department, the Florida
Department of Health (DOH), the water management districts, local governments, and
volunteer monitoring groups.
    Historically, the Department carried out statewide water quality assessments using
data available in the EPA’s Legacy STORET Database; STORET makes up
approximately 60 percent of the statewide data used in the 2002 Impaired Surface Waters
Rule assessment. The Legacy STORET dataset is a compilation of data collected by
numerous organizations that uploaded their data directly to the national database
maintained by the EPA until 1999. The Legacy STORET Database can be accessed at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/storet/index.htm.
    In 2000, the EPA created a “new” STORET Database that included modernized
features designed to provide an improved repository for data (see the new STORET
Website at www.epa.gov/storet/). However, because of software difficulties associated
with batch uploading of data to the modernized STORET, the data being uploaded to the
national repository decreased dramatically, and lingering problems have temporarily
reduced STORET’s importance as a statewide data source. Modernized STORET
comprised only about 5 percent of the statewide Impaired Surface Waters Rule 2002
Database.
    Approximately 35 percent of the data used in the 2002 Impaired Surface Waters Rule
assessment was uploaded from individual organizations that for various reasons were not
able to enter their data into the national database. The organizations providing the largest
datasets include the South Florida, Southwest Florida, and St. Johns River water
130           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



management districts; the USGS; and the University of Florida LakeWatch volunteer
monitoring group. Several of these databases are readily available to the public via the
Internet: South Florida Water Management District at http://www.sfwmd.gov/, USGS
http://www.usgs.gov/ and Florida LakeWatch http://lakewatch.ifas.ufl.edu/.
    The Impaired Surface Waters Rule 2002 Database was created to evaluate data
simultaneously in accordance with the Impaired Surface Waters Rule methodology for
every basin in the state, based on the appropriate data “window.” For the Verified List
assessment, the window is 7.5 years (for the Impaired Surface Waters Rule 2002
Database), and the Planning List assessment window is 10 years. Table D.2 shows the
periods of record for the Verified and Planning lists in the first basin rotation cycle.
    The evaluation of water quality in the state’s basins also includes some qualitative
information. These sources are described in the Status Reports and Assessment Reports
for each basin.

Table D.2: Data Used in Developing the Planning and Verified Lists, First Basin Rotation Cycle
    Basin Group                Reporting             Period of Data Record Used in Impaired
                                                         Surface Waters Rule Evaluation
      Group 1                 Planning List           January 1, 1989 – December 31, 1998
                              Verified List              January 1, 1995 – June 30, 2002
      Group 2                 Planning List           January 1, 1991 – December 31, 2000
                              Verified List            January 1, 1996 – December 31 2002
      Group 3                 Planning List           January 1, 1992 – December 31, 2001
                              Verified List           January 1, 1997 – December 31, 2003
      Group 4                 Planning List           January 1, 1993 – December 31, 2002
                              Verified List            January 1, 1998 – December 31 2004
      Group 5                 Planning List           January 1, 1994 – December 31, 2003
                              Verified List           January 1, 1999 – December 31, 2005

Notes: Typically, a 10-year data record is used for the development of the Planning Lists, and a 7-year record is used for
the Verified Lists. If necessary, however, the data record for the Verified listing can be extended by up to 6 months to
complete a monitoring period that will provide sufficient information to make a listing determination. This 6-month
extension applies to the development of the Impaired Surface Waters Rule 2002 Database.




Methodology
    To determine the status of surface water quality in individual river basins in Florida,
three categories of data—chemistry data, biological data, and fish consumption
advisories—were evaluated to determine potential impairments.

Aquatic Life Based Attainment
    To determine the status of surface water quality in individual river basins in Florida,
three categories of data—chemistry data, biological data, and fish consumption
advisories—were evaluated to determine potential impairments. The Impaired Surface
Waters Rule follows the principle of independent applicability. A waterbody is listed for
potential impairment of aquatic life use support based on exceedances of any one of four
types of water quality indicators (numeric water quality criteria, nutrient thresholds,
biological thresholds, and toxicity data).
               Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                           131

EXCEEDANCES OF NUMERIC WATER QUALITY CRITERIA

    The chemistry data from STORET used in evaluating impairment were also used for
preparing the state’s 2000 305(b) report. The stations were determined to be ambient
surface water quality stations, and water quality information from point sources or wells
was purposely excluded. Stations were classified as one of five waterbody
types—spring, stream, lake, estuary, or blackwater—based on criteria described in the
305(b) report. The data included the following parameters:


      Metalsβ                           Arsenic, aluminum, cadmium, chromium VI, chromium III,
                                        copper, iron, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver,
                                        thallium, and zinc
      Nutrients                         Chlorophyll a for streams and estuaries, and Trophic State
                                        Index (TSI) (chlorophyll a, total nitrogen, and total
                                        phosphorus) for lakes
      Conventionals                     Dissolved oxygen (DO), fecal coliforms, total coliforms,
                                        pH, unionized ammonia


    The requirements for placing waters on the Planning List included a minimum of 10
temporally independent samples from the ten-year period of 1991 through 2000, unless
there were 3 exceedances of water quality or 1 exceedance of an acute toxicity criterion
in a three-year period. The screening methodology for the Verified List requires at least
20 samples from the last five years preceding the Planning List assessment. An
exceedance, meaning that water quality criteria or standards are not met, is recorded any
time the criterion is exceeded by any amount. An exceedance for DO, however, means
that a waterbody does not meet the dissolved oxygen criterion, rather than an actual
exceedance of the criterion.
    To determine if a water should be placed on the Planning List for each parameter, the
chemical data were analyzed using a computer program written to assess the data, based
on criteria established in the Impaired Surface Waters Rule, with two exceptions. First,
unionized ammonia data were not analyzed by the program, but rather with an Excel
spreadsheet. Second, because the full complexity of the pH criterion could not be
programmed, the incomplete listings for pH are not included. They will be further
examined while additional data are collected during Phase 2 of the watershed
management cycle. Data analysis and statistical summaries of WBIDs, waterbody types,
and parameters obtained from the STORET Database were conducted using Access, SAS
statistical software, and ArcView GIS applications
    The data for metals and conventional parameters were compared with the state
surface water quality criteria in Rule 62-302.530, F.A.C. (Identification of Impaired
Surface Waters Rule). The rule contains a table of sample numbers versus exceedances.

β
 Although arsenic and selenium are not true metals according to the periodic table of elements, they are considered to
be metalloids by the EPA and are treated as metals for water quality purposes.
132        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



A waterbody was placed on the Planning List if there was at least 80 percent confidence
that the actual criteria exceedance rate was greater than or equal to 10 percent. To be
placed on the Verified List, at least a 90 percent confidence rate was required.

EXCEEDANCES OF NUTRIENT THRESHOLDS

    The state currently has a narrative nutrient criterion instead of a numeric value for
nutrient thresholds. The narrative criterion states, “In no case shall nutrient
concentrations of a body of water be altered so as to cause an imbalance in natural
populations of aquatic flora or fauna.” The Impaired Surface Waters Rule provides an
interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion. In general, the Trophic State Index (TSI)
and the annual mean chlorophyll a values are the primary means for assessing whether a
waterbody should be assessed further for nutrient impairment.
    The rule also consider other information that indicates an imbalance in flora or fauna
due to nutrient enrichment, such as algal blooms, excessive macrophyte growth, a
decrease in the distribution (either in density or aerial coverage) of seagrasses or other
submerged aquatic vegetation, changes in algal species richness, and excessive diel
oxygen swings.
    Potential nutrient impairment was evaluated by calculating annual mean chlorophyll a
values for estuaries and streams and the TSI for lakes. For lakes, the TSI was calculated
using chlorophyll a, total phosphorus, and total nitrogen measurements. Direct evidence
of imbalances of flora and fauna in waterbodies was also considered in the evaluation of
nutrient impairments.
    In estuarine areas, a water was considered nutrient enriched if the annual mean
chlorophyll a values were greater than 11 µg/L or if annual mean chlorophyll a values
increased by more than 50 percent over historical values for at least two consecutive
years. For streams, a water was considered nutrient enriched if the annual mean
chlorophyll a values were greater than 20 µg/L or if the annual mean increased by more
than 50 percent over historical values for at least two consecutive years.
    A lake with a mean color greater than 40 platinum cobalt units (PCUs) was
considered nutrient enriched if the annual mean TSI exceeded 60. A lake with a mean
color less than or equal to 40 PCUs was considered nutrient enriched if the annual mean
TSI exceeded 40. In addition, a lake was considered nutrient enriched if there was an
increase in TSI over the 1989 to 2000 period or if TSI measurements were 10 units higher
than historical values.

EXCEEDANCES OF BIOLOGICAL THRESHOLDS

    Bioassessments were carried out for streams, lakes, canals, and rivers using the
Impaired Surface Waters Rule as guidance and following the Department’s standard
operating procedures, which provide definitions and specific methods for the generation
and analysis of bioassessment data. These are referenced in the individual bioassessment
data tables contained in the Status Reports. The purpose behind using a bioassessment
methodology in surface water characterizations is that biological components of the
environment manifest long-term water quality conditions and thus provide a better
indication of a waterbody’s true health than discrete chemical or physical measurements
             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                  133

alone. Similar to water quality criteria, bioassessment methods involve the identification
of a biological reference condition, based on data from unimpaired or least impacted
waters in a given region.
    For the Planning and Verified list assessments, the reference condition data were used
to establish expected scores, ranging from best to worst, for various measures of
community structure and function, such as numbers or percentages of particular species
or feeding groups. Data on community structure and function from waters of unknown
quality in the same region as reference waters were compared with the expected scores of
metrics to evaluate their biological integrity.
    Metrics (e.g., number of taxa, percent Diptera, percent filter feeders) were used
independently and as an aggregated group called an index. Indices have advantages over
individual metrics in that they can integrate several related metrics into one score that
reflects a wider range of biological variables. A number of bioassessment metrics and
indices exist for assessing populations of plant and animal life, including fish, diatoms
(e.g., microscopic algae and unicellular plankton), and macroinvertebrates (e.g., insects,
crayfish, snails, and mussels).
    Only macroinvertebrate data from ambient sites in state surface waters were used in
the bioassessments analyzed for the Planning and Verified Lists. The data included sites
designated as test and background sites for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) fifth-year inspections, but excluded data from effluent outfalls from
discharging facilities or data from monitoring sites not clearly established to collect
ambient water quality data. Because site-specific habitat and physicochemical
assessment information (e.g., percent suitable macroinvertebrate habitat, water velocities,
extent of sand or silt smothering, and riparian (see the sidebar definition) buffer zone
widths) was not available at the time of reporting, it was not included. However, this
information is instrumental in pinpointing the causes for failed bioassessment metrics and
will be included in future reporting.

SIDEBAR DEFINITION: RIPARIAN
Of, on, or relating to the banks of a natural course of water.

    The data used to develop the Planning and Verified Lists were obtained from the
Department’s Biological Database (SBIO) and the EPA’s STORET Water Quality
Database, where it could be substantiated that the data were generated in compliance with
the bioassessment standard operating procedures in Rule 62-303.330, F.A.C.
    The data from these databases are used without regard to the randomness of sample
site selection. The general period of record for data used in the analysis of lotic (moving)
waters was January 1, 1991, through December 31, 1998. The period of record for data
used in the analysis of lentic (still) waters was June 21, 1995, through December 31,
1998. The June 21st date corresponds to the inception of the Department’s current
standard operating procedures for sampling lakes (FS-7640). For the purposes of the
Status Reports, the seasons are defined as follows: winter (1/1–3/31), spring (4/1–6/30),
summer (7/1–9/30), and fall (10/1–12/31). Wet seasons are generally spring and
134        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



summer, and dry seasons are fall and winter, although conditions can vary in the state as
a whole.

LAKE CONDITION INDEX

   The scoring of the individual metrics of the Lake Condition Index (LCI), except
percent Diptera, was performed according to the following formula:

    100(B/A) where A = the 95 percentile of the reference population and B = observed
value

   For percent Diptera, the following formula was used:

   100 (100-B)/(100-A) where A = the 95 percentile of the reference population and B =
observed value

    An average LCI score was calculated by averaging the scores of the six metrics in the
method: total number of taxa; total number of taxa belonging to the orders
Ephemeroptera, Odonata, and Trichoptera (EOT taxa); percent EOT taxa; Shannon-
Wiener Diversity Index score; Hulbert Index score; and percent Dipteran individuals.
LCI calculations were only provided for clear lakes (< 20 platinum cobalt units [PCUs]).
As macroinvertebrate-based indices have not been shown to assess colored lakes in
Florida accurately (> 20 PCUs), they have been excluded from bioassessments. A poor
or very poor rating based on the average score constituted a failed bioassessment, based
on the Impaired Surface Waters Rule.

STREAM CONDITION INDEX

    A total Stream Condition Index (SCI) score was calculated by adding the scores of
the seven metrics in the method, i.e., total number of taxa; total number of taxa belonging
to the orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT taxa); percent
Chironomid taxa; percent dominant taxa; percent Diptera; percent filter feeders; and
Florida Index. A poor or very poor rating based on the total score constituted a failed
bioassessment, based on the Impaired Surface Waters Rule. The Status Reports contain
definitions and specific methods for the generation and analysis of bioassessment data.

BIORECON

    To establish an impairment rating based on BioRecon data, three metrics were used:
the Florida Index score, total number of taxa, and total number of EPT taxa. If all three
metrics failed to meet thresholds, the water was deemed “impaired” based on the
Impaired Surface Waters Rule.
            Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                   135

BIOLOGICAL INTEGRITY STANDARD

     Quantitative data, generated through the use of Hester-Dendy artificial substrate
samplers, were used to calculate Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index scores for paired
background and test sites, as specified in the Biological Integrity Standard of Rule 62-
302.530(11), F.A.C. One failure of the standard meant that a waterbody segment was
listed as potentially impaired.

EVALUATION OF TOXICITY DATA

    Although the Impaired Surface Waters Rule describes the use of toxicity data for the
assessment of aquatic life-based attainment, no ambient toxicity data are available for
assessment and this metric was not used.

Primary Contact and Recreation Attainment
    For Class I, II, or III waters, a waterbody was potentially impaired if the following
criteria were met:
    • The waterbody segment did not meet the applicable water quality criteria for
         bacteriological quality,
    • The waterbody segment included a bathing area that was closed by a local health
         department or county government for more than one week or more than once
         during a calendar year based on bacteriological data,
    • The waterbody segment included a bathing area for which a local health
         department or county government issued closures, advisories, or warnings totaling
         twenty-one days or more during a calendar year based on bacteriological data,
    • The waterbody segment included a bathing area that was closed or had advisories
         or warnings for more than twelve weeks during a calendar year based on previous
         bacteriological data or on derived relationships between bacteria levels and
         rainfall or flow.

   Bathing area closures were also considered in determining attainment of use.

Fish and Shellfish Consumption Attainment
    For Class I, II, or III waters, a waterbody was potentially impaired if it did not meet
the applicable Class II water quality criteria for bacteriological quality, or if a fish
consumption advisory had been issued. Fish consumption advisories were based on the
Florida Department of Health’s “limited consumption” or “no consumption” advisories
for surface waters because of high levels of mercury in fish tissue. In addition, for Class
II waters, waterbody segments that had been approved for shellfish harvesting but were
downgraded to a more restrictive classification were listed as potentially impaired.
136       Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



Drinking Water Attainment and Protection of Human Health
   For Class I waters, a waterbody was potentially impaired if it did not meet the
applicable Class I water quality criteria.
                                                                    Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                           137


                             Appendix E: Water Quality Summary for the Everglades West Coast Basin

             Table E.1: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary, by Planning Unit, for the Everglades West Coast Basin
                                                                                             Parameters
                                                                                              Identified                           3        Projected
                                                                      1      1998 303(d)                      Integrated    Priority for
                                                   Waterbody    Class                         Under the                                      Year for
 Planning Unit       WBID      Waterbody Segment                            Parameters of                    Assessment        TMDL                        Comments
                                                     Type                                   2001 Impaired              2                      TMDL
                                                                              Concern                         Category     Development
                                                                                               Surface                                     Development
                                                                                             Waters Rule
                               ESTERO BAY
Estero Bay           3258A                          ESTUARY    3M         NUTR              N/A                  2             N/A             N/A
                               WETLANDS
                                                                                                                                                         Chlorophyll met
                                                                                                                                                         verification
                                                                                            Nutrients
                                                                                                                                                         threshold per
Estero Bay           3258B     HENDRY CREEK         STREAM       3F       NUTR, DO          (Chlorophyll),       5           Medium           2007
                                                                                                                                                         IWR indicating a
                                                                                            DO
                                                                                                                                                         nutrient
                                                                                                                                                         impairment.
                                                                                                                                                         Chlorophyll met
                                                                                                                                                         verification
                                                                                                                                                         threshold per
                                                                                                                                                         IWR indicating a
                                                                                            Nutrients                                                    nutrient
                               HENDRY CREEK                                                 (Chlorophyll),                                               impairment.
Estero Bay          3258B1                          ESTUARY      3M       NUTR, DO                               5           Medium           2007
                               MARINE                                                       DO, Fecal                                                    Both nitrogen
                                                                                            Coliform                                                     and
                                                                                                                                                         phosphorous
                                                                                                                                                         are identified as
                                                                                                                                                         causative
                                                                                                                                                         pollutants.
                               HENDRY CREEK
Estero Bay          3258B1                          ESTUARY      3M                         Copper, Lead         3c            N/A             N/A
                               MARINE
                                                                                                                                                         DO met
                                                                                                                                                         verification
                                                                                            Nutrients
                               ESTERO BAY                                                                                                                threshold per
Estero Bay           3258C                          STREAM       3F       NPS survey        (Chlorophyll),       5           Medium           2007
                               DRAINAGE                                                                                                                  IWR. BOD is the
                                                                                            DO
                                                                                                                                                         causative
                                                                                                                                                         pollutant.
                               ESTERO BAY
Estero Bay           3258C                          STREAM       3F                         Cadmium              3c            N/A             N/A
                               DRAINAGE
                               ESTERO BAY
Estero Bay          3258C1                          ESTUARY      3M       NPS survey        DO                   3c            N/A             N/A
                               DRAINAGE MARINE
Estero Bay           3258D     ESTERO RIVER         STREAM       3F       N/A               DO                   3c            N/A             N/A
             138      Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



                                                                                        Parameters
                                                                                         Identified                            3        Projected
                                                                  1     1998 303(d)                       Integrated    Priority for
                                                Waterbody   Class                        Under the                                       Year for
 Planning Unit     WBID     Waterbody Segment                          Parameters of                     Assessment        TMDL                        Comments
                                                  Type                                 2001 Impaired               2                      TMDL
                                                                         Concern                          Category     Development
                                                                                          Surface                                      Development
                                                                                        Waters Rule
                                                                                                                                                     Chlorophyll met
                                                                                                                                                     verification
                                                                                       Nutrients                                                     threshold per
                            ESTERO RIVER                                               (Chlorophyll),                                                the IWR.
Estero Bay         3258D1                       ESTUARY      3M       N/A                                    5           Medium           2007
                            MARINE                                                     DO, Copper,                                                   Nutrients are
                                                                                       Fecal Coliforms                                               identified as
                                                                                                                                                     causative
                                                                                                                                                     pollutants.
                                                                                                                                                     Chlorophyll met
                                                                                                                                                     verification
                                                                                                                                                     threshold per
                                                                                                                                                     IWR indicating a
                                                                                                                                                     nutrient
                                                                                       Nutrients
                                                                                                                                                     impairment.
Estero Bay         3258E    IMPERIAL RIVER      STREAM       3F       NUTR, DO         (Chlorophyll),        5             Low            2007
                                                                                                                                                     Both nitrogen
                                                                                       DO,
                                                                                                                                                     and
                                                                                                                                                     phosphorous
                                                                                                                                                     are identified as
                                                                                                                                                     causative
                                                                                                                                                     pollutants.
                            IMPERIAL RIVER
Estero Bay         3258E1                       ESTUARY      3M                        Copper                5           Medium           2007
                            MARINE
                            IMPERIAL RIVER
Estero Bay         3258E1                       ESTUARY      3M       NUTR, DO         DO                    3c            N/A             N/A
                            MARINE
Estero Bay         3258F    OAK CREEK           ESTUARY      3M       N/A              N/A                   3b            N/A             N/A
Estero Bay         3258G    TENMILE CANAL       STREAM       3F       N/A              DO                    3c            N/A             N/A

Estero Bay         3258H    SPRING CREEK        STREAM       3F       NUTR, DO         DO                    3c            N/A             N/A

                                                                                                                                                     Chlorophyll met
                                                                                                                                                     verification
                                                                                                                                                     threshold per
                                                                                                                                                     IWR indicating a
                                                                                                                                                     nutrient
                                                                                       Nutrients
                            SPRING CREEK                                                                                                             impairment.
Estero Bay         3258H1                       ESTUARY      3M       NUTR, DO         (Chlorophyll),        5           Medium           2007
                            MARINE                                                                                                                   Both nitrogen
                                                                                       Copper, DO
                                                                                                                                                     and
                                                                                                                                                     phosphorous
                                                                                                                                                     are identified as
                                                                                                                                                     causative
                                                                                                                                                     pollutants.
Estero Bay         3258I    ESTERO BAY          ESTUARY      3M       N/A              N/A                   2             N/A             N/A
                                                             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                            139

                                                                                       Parameters
                                                                                         Identified                          3        Projected
                                                                 1     1998 303(d)                      Integrated    Priority for
                                               Waterbody   Class                        Under the                                      Year for
 Planning Unit    WBID     Waterbody Segment                          Parameters of                    Assessment        TMDL                        Comments
                                                 Type                                 2001 Impaired              2                      TMDL
                                                                        Concern                         Category     Development
                                                                                          Surface                                    Development
                                                                                       Waters Rule
Estero Bay        3258X   LAKES PARK            LAKE        3F       N/A              N/A                  3b            N/A             N/A
Estero Bay         8060   ESTERO BAY GULF      COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                  3b            N/A             N/A

Estero Bay        8060A   BOWDITCH PARK        COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                  3a            N/A             N/A

Estero Bay        8060B   LYNN HALL PARK       COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                  3a            N/A             N/A
                          LOVERS KEY STATE
Estero Bay        8060C                        COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                  3a            N/A             N/A
                          PARK

Interdrainage                                                                         DO, Fish
                  3255    C-139                STREAM       3F       N/A                                   3c            N/A             N/A
Area                                                                                  (mercury)
Interdrainage             BARRON RIVER                                                DO, Fish
                  3261A                        ESTUARY      3M       N/A                                   3c            N/A             N/A
Area                      CANAL                                                       (mercury)
                                                                     FISH, DO,        DO, Fish
Interdrainage
                  3261B   TAMIAMI CANAL        STREAM       3F       CADMIUM,         (mercury)            3c            N/A             N/A
Area
                                                                     COPPER           Mercury
Interdrainage             BARRON RIVER                                                DO, Fish
                  3261C                        STREAM       3F       N/A                                   3c            N/A             N/A
Area                      CANAL                                                       (mercury)
Interdrainage
                  3261D   TAMIAMI CANAL        STREAM       3F       N/A              N/A                  3a            N/A             N/A
Area
Interdrainage
                  3266    L-28 INTERCEPTOR     STREAM       3F       NUTR, FISH, DO   DO                   3c            N/A             N/A
Area
Interdrainage
                  3267    Feeder Canal         STREAM       3F       N/A              N/A                  3a            N/A             N/A
Area
Interdrainage                                                                         DO, Fish
                  3269    L-28 GAP             STREAM       3F       DO                                    3c            N/A             N/A
Area                                                                                  (mercury)
                                                                                                                                                   DO met
                                                                                                                                                   verification
                                                                                                                                                   threshold per
                          COCOHATCHEE
Southwest Coast   3259A                        STREAM        2       COLI, BOD, DO    DO                   5           Medium           2007       the IWR and
                          RIVER
                                                                                                                                                   nitrogen is the
                                                                                                                                                   causative
                                                                                                                                                   pollutant.
                          COCOHATCHEE
Southwest Coast   3259A                        STREAM        2                        Fish (mercury)       3c            N/A             N/A
                          RIVER
          140        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



                                                                                        Parameters
                                                                                         Identified                          3        Projected
                                                                1     1998 303(d)                       Integrated    Priority for
                                              Waterbody   Class                          Under the                                     Year for
 Planning Unit    WBID    Waterbody Segment                          Parameters of                     Assessment        TMDL                        Comments
                                                Type                                   2001 Impaired             2                      TMDL
                                                                       Concern                          Category     Development
                                                                                          Surface                                    Development
                                                                                        Waters Rule
                                                                                                                                                   DO met
                                                                                                                                                   verification
                                                                                                                                                   threshold per
                          COCOHATCHEE
Southwest Coast   3259B                       STREAM       3F       N/A                DO                  5           Medium           2007       the IWR and
                          RIVER CANAL
                                                                                                                                                   BOD is indicated
                                                                                                                                                   as the causative
                                                                                                                                                   pollutant.
                                                                    COLI, NUTR, BOD,
Southwest Coast   3259C   GORDON RIVER        STREAM       3F                          DO, Coliforms       3c            N/A             N/A
                                                                    DO
                                                                                                                                                   DO met
                                                                                                                                                   verification
                                                                                                                                                   threshold per
                          GORDON RIVER
Southwest Coast   3259D                       STREAM       3F       N/A                DO                  5           Medium           2007       the IWR and
                          CANAL
                                                                                                                                                   BOD is the
                                                                                                                                                   causative
                                                                                                                                                   pollutant.
                                                                                                                                                   DO met
                                                                                                                                                   verification
                                                                                                                                                   threshold per
                          HENDERSON CREEK
Southwest Coast   3259E                       STREAM       3F       N/A                DO                  5           Medium           2007       the IWR and
                          CANAL
                                                                                                                                                   BOD is the
                                                                                                                                                   causative
                                                                                                                                                   pollutant.
                          GOLDEN GATE
Southwest Coast   3259F                       STREAM       3F       N/A                DO                  3c            N/A             N/A
                          CANAL
                                                                                       Nutrients
Southwest Coast   3259G   NAPLES BAY          ESTUARY       2       NUTR                                   3c            N/A             N/A
                                                                                       (Chlorophyll)
                          HENDERSON CREEK
Southwest Coast   3259H                       STREAM       3F       N/A                DO                  3c            N/A             N/A
                          CANAL
Southwest Coast   3259I   WEST COLLIER        STREAM       3F       N/A                DO                  3c            N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast   3259J   ROOKERY BAY         ESTUARY       2       N/A                N/A                 3b            N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast   3259K   RUNOFF TO GULF      STREAM       3F       N/A                N/A                 3b            N/A             N/A
                                                                                                                                                   DO met
                                                                                                                                                   verification
                                                                                                                                                   threshold per
Southwest Coast   3259L   BLACKWATER RIVER    STREAM       3F       N/A                DO                  5           Medium           2007       the IWR and
                                                                                                                                                   phosphorous is
                                                                                                                                                   the causative
                                                                                                                                                   pollutant.
Southwest Coast   3259M   RUNOFF TO GULF      ESTUARY       2       N/A                N/A                 2             N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast   3259N   RUNOFF TO GULF      ESTUARY       2       N/A                N/A                 2             N/A             N/A
                                                               Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                             141

                                                                                         Parameters
                                                                                           Identified                           3        Projected
                                                                   1     1998 303(d)                       Integrated    Priority for
                                                 Waterbody   Class                        Under the                                       Year for
 Planning Unit    WBID     Waterbody Segment                            Parameters of                     Assessment        TMDL                        Comments
                                                   Type                                 2001 Impaired               2                      TMDL
                                                                          Concern                          Category     Development
                                                                                            Surface                                     Development
                                                                                         Waters Rule
Southwest Coast   3259O   FAKA UNION CANAL       STREAM       3F       N/A              DO                    3c            N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast   3259P   FERGUSON RIVER         ESTUARY       2       N/A              N/A                   2             N/A             N/A
                          Center of Outer Clam
Southwest Coast   3259Q                          ESTUARY       2       N/A              N/A                   3a            N/A             N/A
                          Bayou
Southwest Coast   3259R   RUNOFF TO GULF         ESTUARY       2       N/A              N/A                   2             N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast   3259S   RUNOFF TO GULF         ESTUARY       2       N/A              N/A                   3b            N/A             N/A
                          LAKE AVALON MID-
Southwest Coast   3259T                            LAKE       3F       N/A              N/A                   3b            N/A             N/A
                          LAKE
                                                                                                                                                      TSI met
                                                                                                                                                      verification
                                                                                                                                                      threshold per
                                                                                                                                                      the IWR.
                                                                                                                                                      Nitrogen and
Southwest Coast   3259W   LAKE TRAFFORD            LAKE       3F       NUTR, DO         Nutrients (TSI)       5             Low            2007
                                                                                                                                                      phosphorous
                                                                                                                                                      are both
                                                                                                                                                      causative and
                                                                                                                                                      limiting
                                                                                                                                                      pollutants.
Southwest Coast   3259W   LAKE TRAFFORD            LAKE       3F       NUTR, DO         Turbidity             3c            N/A             N/A
                          DRAINAGE TO
Southwest Coast   3259X                          STREAM       3F       N/A              DO                    3c            N/A             N/A
                          CORKSCREW
Southwest Coast   3259Y   VANDERBILT WAY         ESTUARY      3M       N/A              N/A                   3b            N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast   3259Z   LITTLE HICKORY BAY     ESTUARY      3M       N/A              N/A                   3b            N/A             N/A
                          SOUTHWEST COAST
Southwest Coast   8061                           COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   3a            N/A             N/A
                          GULF 1
                          LITTLE HICKORY
Southwest Coast   8061A                          COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   3a            N/A             N/A
                          ISLAND PARK
Southwest Coast   8061B   BONITA BEACH PARK      COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   3a            N/A             N/A
                          LELY BAREFOOT
Southwest Coast   8061C                          COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   3a            N/A             N/A
                          BEACH
                          WIGGINS PASS
Southwest Coast   8061D                          COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   3b            N/A             N/A
                          NORTH
                          WIGGINS PASS
Southwest Coast   8061E                          COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   3a            N/A             N/A
                          STATE PARK
Southwest Coast   8061F   VANDERBILT BEACH       COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   3a            N/A             N/A
                          SOUTHWEST COAST
Southwest Coast   8062                           COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   3a            N/A             N/A
                          GULF 2
Southwest Coast   8062A   CLAM PASS              COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   2             N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast   8062B   PARKSHORE BEACH        COASTAL      3M       N/A              N/A                   3a            N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast   8062C   DOCTORS PASS           COASTAL      3M       N/A              DO                    3c            N/A             N/A
          142             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



                                                                                                      Parameters
                                                                                                       Identified                              3        Projected
                                                                             1     1998 303(d)                         Integrated       Priority for
                                                         Waterbody     Class                           Under the                                         Year for
 Planning Unit        WBID       Waterbody Segment                                Parameters of                       Assessment           TMDL                        Comments
                                                           Type                                      2001 Impaired              2                         TMDL
                                                                                    Concern                            Category        Development
                                                                                                        Surface                                        Development
                                                                                                      Waters Rule
                                LOWDERMILK PARK
Southwest Coast       8062D                              COASTAL        3M       N/A                N/A                    3a              N/A             N/A
                                BEACH
Southwest Coast       8062E     NAPLES PIER              COASTAL        3M       N/A                N/A                    3a              N/A             N/A
                                SOUTHWEST COAST
Southwest Coast        8063                              COASTAL        3M       N/A                N/A                    3a              N/A             N/A
                                GULF 3
Southwest Coast       8063A     GORDONS PASS             COASTAL        3M       N/A                N/A                    3a              N/A             N/A
                                SOUTHWEST COAST
Southwest Coast        8064                              COASTAL        3M       N/A                N/A                    2               N/A             N/A
                                GULF 4
Southwest Coast       8064A     TIGERTAIL BEACH          COASTAL        3M       N/A                N/A                    3a              N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast       8064B     RESIDENCE BEACH          COASTAL        3M       N/A                N/A                    3a              N/A             N/A
Southwest Coast       8064C     CAXAMBAS PARK            COASTAL        3M       N/A                N/A                    3a              N/A             N/A
                                                                                                                                                                     Listed based on
                                                                                                                                                                     change in
                                                                                                                                                                     shellfish
                                SOUTHWEST COAST                                                     Bacteria (in                                                     harvesting
Southwest Coast        8065                              COASTAL        3M       N/A                                       5             Medium           2007
                                GULF 5                                                              shellfish)                                                       classification
                                                                                                                                                                     (downgraded
                                                                                                                                                                     from approved
                                                                                                                                                                     to conditional).
                                                                                                                                                                     Data verified to
                                                                                                                                                                     be within the last
                                                                                                                                                                     7.5 years.
                                                                                                                                                                     Confirmed
                                                                                                                                                                     recent data for
                                                                                                                                                                     coastal fish
                                FLORIDA GULF                                                                                                                         advisory for
Southwest Coast        8999                              ESTUARY         2       N/A                Fish (mercury)         5             Medium           2011
                                COAST                                                                                                                                mackerel.
                                                                                                                                                                     Includes
                                                                                                                                                                     nearshore areas
                                                                                                                                                                     in WBIDs 8060,
                                                                                                                                                                     8061, 8062,
                                                                                                                                                                     8063, 8064, and
                                                                                                                                                                     8065.

          1
              The state’s surface water classifications are as follows:
                  Class I:      Potable water supplies
                  Class II:     Shellfish propagation or harvesting
                  Class III:    Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife
                  Class IV:     Agricultural water supplies
                  Class V:      Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in this class)
                                                           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                 143

      F = Fresh water M = Marine
2
  The EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report categories are as follows:
      1 – Attains all designated uses;
      2 – Attains some designated uses;
      3a – No data and information are available to determine if any designated use is attained;
      3b – Some data and information are available, but they are insufficient for determining if any designated use is attained;
      3c – Meets Planning List criteria and is potentially impaired for one or more designated uses;
      4a – Impaired for one or more designated uses and the TMDL is complete;
      4b – Impaired for one or more designated uses but no TMDL is required because the impairment is not caused by a pollutant;
      4c – Impaired for one or more designated uses, but no TMDL is required because a proposed pollution control measure provides reasonable
             assurance that the water will attain standards in the future; and
     5 – Water quality standards are not attained and a TMDL is required.
3
  Priorities were retained from the 1998 303(d) list (i.e., High or Low), but High, Medium and Low are used for newly listed waters identified under the
IWR. Dates and priorities placed within parentheses indicate a TMDL is scheduled under the terms of the consent decree between EPA and Earthjustice,
but for which sufficient information is lacking to assess the waterbody using the IWR.
NA = Not applicable, i.e., there are no parameters listed.
        144         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



        Table E.2: Water Quality Monitoring Stations Used in the Assessment, by Planning Unit, for the Everglades West Coast Basin

        Note:    BD – Year sampling began (19**)
                 ED – Year of most recent sample (19**)


Planning                                                                                                                         Begin      End     #
                WBID Name            WBID                 Station ID                         Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                           Date       Date   Obs.
Estero Bay

             ESTERO BAY
                                     3258A          21FLCHAREBV001      Matanzas Pass/San Carlos Is/DEP dock                         1998   2000   296
             WETLANDS
             ESTERO BAY
                                     3258A           21FLEECOEB-11      South of mantanzas Pass                                      1995   2001    570
             WETLANDS

             HENDRY CREEK            3258B        21FLEECOHENDGR11      HENDRY CREEK- US 41                                          1995   2001   2136

             HENDRY CREEK            3258B        21FLEECOHENDGR20      HENDRY CREEK- Gladiolus East                                 1995   2001   1770

             HENDRY CREEK
                                     3258B1       21FLEECOHENDGR30      HENDRY CREEK- Gladiolus West                                 1995   2001   1756
             MARINE

             ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE     3258C         21FLEECO46B-9GR      MULLOCK CREEK- US 41                                         1995   2001   1770

             ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE     3258C         21FLEECO46B-L6GR     MULLOCK CREEK- US 41 and Hickory Rd.                         1995   2001   1377

             ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE     3258C         21FLEECOSIXMILE1     SIX MILE CYPRESS- Buckingham Rd.                             1995   2001   1447

             ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE     3258C         21FLEECOSIXMILE2     SIX MILE CYPRESS- I-75                                       1995   2001   1647

             ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE     3258C         21FLEECOSIXMILE3     SIX MILE CYPRESS- Six Mile Slough                            1995   2001   1619

             ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE     3258C        21FLFTM 28020262FTM   Estero River at East Broadway                                2001   2002    24

             ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE
                                     3258C1        21FLEECO10MIGR10     TEN MILE- Park Rd.                                           1995   2001   1439
             MARINE

             ESTERO RIVER            3258D         21FLEECO47A-40GR     ESTERO RIVER- Alico Rd.                                      1995   2001   1431

             ESTERO RIVER            3258D         21FLEECO47A-28GR     ESTERO RIVER- Three Oaks Blvd.                               1995   2001   1254
                                                         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast            145


Planning                                                                                                           Begin   End     #
              WBID Name          WBID           Station ID                                 Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                             Date    Date   Obs.

           ESTERO RIVER          3258D      21FLEECO47B-11GR       HALFWAY CREEK- US 41                             1995   2001   1751

           ESTERO RIVER MARINE   3258D1   112WRD 262552081485703   L-2308                                           1999   1999     2

           ESTERO RIVER MARINE   3258D1      21FLEECO47A-4GR       ESTERO RIVER- Riverwoods Plantation rec. area    1995   2001   1855

           ESTERO RIVER MARINE   3258D1     21FLEECO47A-15GR       ESTERO RIVER- US 41                              1995   2001   1877

           ESTERO RIVER MARINE   3258D1   112WRD 262552081485702   46S25E33 L -2295 LEE CO ROADS ESTERO             2000   2000     1

           IMPERIAL RIVER        3258E     21FLFTM 28020264FTM     Imperial River at Orr Rd in Bonita               2001   2002    57

           IMPERIAL RIVER        3258E      21FLEECOIMPRGR90       IMPERIAL RIVER- Corkscrew Rd.                    1995   2001    951

           IMPERIAL RIVER        3258E      21FLEECOIMPRGR70       IMPERIAL RIVER- I-75                             1995   2001    470

           IMPERIAL RIVER        3258E      21FLEECOIMPRGR51       IMPERIAL RIVER- Leitner Creek @ Goodwin Rd       1995   2001   1767

           IMPERIAL RIVER        3258E        21FLA 28020244       IMPERIAL RIVER AT ORR ROAD                       1998   1998    16

           IMPERIAL RIVER
                                 3258E1     21FLEECOIMPRGR30       IMPERIAL RIVER- US 41                            1995   2001   1971
           MARINE
           IMPERIAL RIVER
                                 3258E1     21FLEECOIMPRGR41       IMPERIAL RIVER- Oak Creek @ Pennsylvania         1995   2001   1770
           MARINE

           TENMILE CANAL         3258G      21FLEECO10MIGR60       TEN MILE- Crystal Dr.                            1996   2001   1066

           TENMILE CANAL         3258G      21FLEECO10MIGR20       TEN MILE- Tamiami Weir                           1995   2001   1282

           TENMILE CANAL         3258G      21FLEECO10MIGR91       TEN MILE- Suspected ind. Pt. Souce               1995   2001   1285

           TENMILE CANAL         3258G      21FLEECO10MIGR80       TEN MILE- Colonial                               1995   2001   1284

           TENMILE CANAL         3258G      21FLEECO10MIGR50       TEN MILE- Daniels Rd.                            1995   2001   1366

           TENMILE CANAL         3258G      21FLEECOSIXMILE4       SIX MILE CYPRESS- Daniels Rd.                    1995   2001   1750
      146         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Planning                                                                                                           Begin   End     #
             WBID Name           WBID         Station ID                                 Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                             Date    Date   Obs.

           TENMILE CANAL         3258G     21FLEECOSIXMILE5     SIX MILE CYPRESS- Daniels Pkwy near “Sunharvest”    1995   2001   1964

           TENMILE CANAL         3258G    21FLFTM 28020260FTM   Ten Mile canal at north end of Old US41             2001   2002    26

           TENMILE CANAL         3258G    21FLEECO10MIGR40      TEN MILE- Six Mile                                  1995   2001   1282

           SPRING CREEK          3258H      21FLA 28020243      SPRING CREEK AT POWER LINE CROSSING                 1998   1998    21

           SPRING CREEK          3258H    21FLFTM 28020263FTM   Spring Creek in Bonita                              2001   2002    58

           SPRING CREEK          3258H     21FLEECO48-25GR      SPRING CREEK- Old 41 @ Spring Creek                 1995   2001   1691

           SPRING CREEK MARINE   3258H1    21FLEECO48-10GR      SPRING CREEK- US 41W. @ Bay Creek Dr.               1995   2001   1739

           SPRING CREEK MARINE   3258H1    21FLEECO48-15GR      SPRING CREEK- US 41S. @ Spring Creek                1995   2001   1757

           ESTERO BAY            3258I      21FLEECOEB-04       Near mouth of Spring Creek                          1995   2001    570

           ESTERO BAY            3258I    21FLSFWMROOK470       Central Estero Bay, R2                              1999   2000    120

           ESTERO BAY            3258I      21FLEECOEB-01       Big Hickory Pass                                    1995   2001    569

           ESTERO BAY            3258I      21FLEECOEB-03       East of Squaw Creek inside Bay                      1995   2001   816

           ESTERO BAY            3258I    21FLSFWMROOK466       New Pass                                            1999   2000    120

           ESTERO BAY            3258I      21FLEECOEB-05       Squaw Creek road                                    1995   2001    570

           ESTERO BAY            3258I      21FLEECOEB-06       New Pass                                            1995   2001    570

           ESTERO BAY            3258I      21FLEECOEB-07       Johnson Fish Camp                                   1995   2001   570

           ESTERO BAY            3258I      21FLEECOEB-08       Big Carlos Pass                                     1995   2001    570

           ESTERO BAY            3258I      21FLEECOEB-09       Coon Key                                            1995   2001    570
                                                    Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast              147


Planning                                                                                                        Begin   End     #
              WBID Name         WBID       Station ID                               Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                          Date    Date   Obs.

            ESTERO BAY          3258I     21FLEECOEB-10    Julies Island                                         1995   2001    570

            ESTERO BAY          3258I     21FLEECOEB-13    Near mouth of Estero river                            1995   2001    570

            ESTERO BAY          3258I     21FLEECOEB-14    West of Mound Key                                     1995   2001    570

            ESTERO BAY          3258I     21FLEECOEB-02    Near Mouth of Imperial River                          1995   2001    570

            ESTERO BAY          3258I   21FLSFWMROOK468    Big Carlos Pass Bridge                                1999   2000    120

            ESTERO BAY          3258I    21FLCHAREBV006    Estero Bay/Marker G 51                                2000   2000    89

            ESTERO BAY          3258I    21FLCHAREBV005    Estero Bay/Pelican Bay Nature Park Pier               1998   2000    271

            ESTERO BAY          3258I    21FLCHAREBV004    Estero Bay/Carl Johnson Park Boat Ramp                1998   2000    284

                                                                           st
            ESTERO BAY          3258I    21FLCHAREBV003    Estero Bay/1 sm island W of Estero R mo               1998   2000    223

            ESTERO BAY          3258I   21FLSFWMROOK469    Coon Key, R2A                                         1999   2000    120

            ESTERO BAY GULF     8060      21FLSFWMRD8      CALOOSAHATCHEE WATER QUALITY MONITORING STATION       2000   2000    371

            ESTERO BAY GULF     8060    21FLSFWMROOK471    Point Ybel, R8                                        1999   2000    120

            BOWDITCH PARK       8060A    21FLDOH LEE146    BOWDITCH PARK                                         2000   2002    62

            LYNN HALL PARK      8060B    21FLDOH LEE147    LYNN HALL PARK                                        2000   2002    62

            LOVERS KEY STATE
                                8060C    21FLDOH LEE148    LOVERS KEY STATE PARK                                 2000   2002    60
            PARK
Southwest
  Coast

            COCOHATCHEE RIVER   3259A   21FLSFWMROOK467    Wiggins Pass Bridge                                   1999   2000   113

            COCOHATCHEE RIVER   3259A   21FLCOLLCOCOREST   East side of Vanderbilt Drive bridge as where it c    1996   1996    22
      148         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Planning                                                                                                              Begin   End     #
             WBID Name         WBID        Station ID                               Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                Date    Date   Obs.

           COCOHATCHEE RIVER   3259A   21FLCOLLCOCOHOSP      Bridge at intersection of Collier?s Reserve and Co        1997   1998    54

           COCOHATCHEE RIVER   3259A   21FLSFWMCOCAT41       Cocohatchee River at US 41                                2000   2001   157

           COCOHATCHEE RIVER   3259A     21FLSFWMBC13        Downstream of weir in Immokalee Rd. Canal west of Palm    2000   2001   181

           COCOHATCHEE RIVER   3259A     21FLA 28030009      COCOHAT R SR 865 A BR                                     1995   1995    15

           COCOHATCHEE RIVER   3259A     21FLA 28030036      COCOHAT R US 41 BR                                        1995   1995    31

           COCOHATCHEE RIVER   3259A     21FLCOLLIMPGC       Imperial Golf Course outflow along power line             1997   1998    66

           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B     21FLCOLLCORKN       Bridge just south of County line and USGS gauging         1997   1998    65
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B   21FLFTM 28020265FTM   Cocohatchee River at Immokalee Rd and Palm River B        2000   2002    36
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B     21FLSFWMBC14        Immokalee Rd. Canal at intersection of Palm River Blvd    2000   2001   207
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B    21FLSFWMCORKS        Southern most bridge on tram road in Corkscrew Swamp S    2001   2001    26
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B   21FLSFWMCOCEOF31      COCOHATCHEE CANAL AT S.R. 846 _ MILEEAST OF S             2000   2001    246
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B     21FLSFWMBC25        Bridge just east of Oil Well Grade Rd. on CR 858 in Ca    2000   2001   201
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B   21FLCOLLORANGETR      Bridge at intersection of Orange Tree canal and Ra        1996   1997    67
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B     21FLCOLLKEAISS      Bridge on CR858, 3.5 miles east of Everglades Blvd        1995   1995    145
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B    21FLSFWMFAKA858      South side of bridge at Faka Union Canal and CR858        2000   2001    186
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B     21FLCOLLCORKS       Southern most bridge on tram road in Corkscrew Swa        1997   1998    110
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B    21FLCOLLCORKSW       Canal along tram road at southwest corner of Corks        1997   1998    64
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                               3259B     21FLCOLLVICLAK      Southwest corner of Victoria Lake subdivision             1997   1998    66
           CANAL
                                                 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                   149


Planning                                                                                                          Begin   End     #
             WBID Name       WBID       Station ID                              Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                            Date    Date   Obs.
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B    21FLCOLLWCOCO2     Bridge on North WWTP entrance road from Immokalee         1997   1998    65
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLCOLLWCOCORIV    Upstream side of first amil gate on south side of         1997   1998    54
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLCOLLWILSON846   Immokalee Rd. Canal at intersection of Wilson Rd          1997   1998    41
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLCOLLECOCORIV    Upstream side of second amil gate on south side of        1997   1998    54
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B     21FLSFWMBC26      Intersection of 951 Canal and Immokalee Rd. Canal (“CO    2000   2001    171
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLSFWMCOCPALM     Bridge at intersection of Palm River Drive and Coconut    2000   2001   251
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B    21FLCOLLQUAILCK    Immokalee Rd. Canal at intersection of entrance rd        1998   1998    15
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B    21FLSFWMCORKN      Bridge S. of USGS gauge n on tram rd. to Little Corksc    2001   2001    26
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLSFWMECOCORIV    E. BRANCH OF COCOHATCHEE RIVER AT S.R. 846 NEAR           2000   2001    273
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLSFWMCORK@846    Bridge at intersection of Corkscrew Canal and CR846       2000   2001    203
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLCOLLCOCPALM     Bridge at intersection of Palm River Drive and Coc        1997   1998    64
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B    21FLCOLLNNAPLES    South side of amil gate at junction of North Naple        1997   1998    66
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLCOLLCOCEOF31    Bridge at intersection of Euclid Ave. and Cocohatc        1995   1998   235
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B    21FLCOLLPIPERS     Immokalee Rd. Canal at east entrance to Piper?s Pa        1997   1998    46
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B     21FLSFWMBC15      Airport Rd. Canal at entrance to Sam’s Club               2000   2001   272
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLSFWMCORKSW      Canal along tram road at southwest corner of Corkscrew    2001   2001    26
           CANAL
           COCOHATCHEE RIV
                             3259B   21FLCOLLCOCAT951    Intersection of 951 Canal and Immokalee Rd. Canal         1997   1998    41
           CANAL

           GORDON RIVER      3259C     21FLSFWMBC4       Dwnstrm. Weir in Golden Gate Canal across from Bear’      2000   2001    249
      150         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Planning                                                                                                              Begin   End     #
             WBID Name          WBID        Station ID                              Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                Date    Date   Obs.

           GORDON RIVER         3259C   21FLCOLLDOCTORS      Where Harbour Drive bridge crosses Moorings Bay           1996   1996    42

           GORDON RIVER         3259C    21FLFTM 28030047    GORDON R ABOVE WIER 951                                   2000   2002    35

           GORDON RIVER         3259C   21FLCOLLGORDONRIV    Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Pkwy and Gor        1995   1998    222

           GORDON RIVER         3259C    21FLCOLLROCK62      Located at junction of Rock Creek and Harbor Lane         1996   1996    48

           GORDON RIVER         3259C      21FLSFWMBC2       Just inside the mouth of Rock Creek                       2000   2001    215

           GORDON RIVER         3259C      21FLSFWMBC3       Gordon River Ext. at mouth of canal leading to Main Po    2000   2001    240

           GORDON RIVER CANAL   3259D     21FLCOLLGGC10      Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and Sa        1996   1997    77

           GORDON RIVER CANAL   3259D   21FLCOLLGREEN@SB     Bridge at intersection of Green Canal and Santa Ba        1996   1996    28

           GORDON RIVER CANAL   3259D   21FLCOLLMGG03@32     Bridge at intersection of Main Golden Gate Canal #        1996   1997    54

           GORDON RIVER CANAL   3259D    21FLCOLLGGCAT31     Bridge at intersection of Airport Rd and Golden Ga        1995   1998   261

           GORDON RIVER CANAL   3259D    21FLCOLLARS@896     Bridge at intersection of Airport Rd. Canal South         1996   1997    90

           GORDON RIVER CANAL   3259D   21FLSFWMGGCAT31      NO DESCRIPTION AVAILABLE FOR THIS STATION                 2000   2001    246

           GORDON RIVER CANAL   3259D   21FLCOLLARN@VAND     Bridge at intersection of Airport Rd. Canal North         1996   1997    67

           GORDON RIVER CANAL   3259D     21FLCOLLD2886      I-75 Canal (D2) at Golden Gate Pkwy                       1996   1997    70

           GORDON RIVER CANAL   3259D   21FLCOLLAIRPORT886   Bridge at intersection of Airport Rd & Golden Gate        1996   1997    78

           HENDERSON CREEK
                                3259E   21FLCOLLI75C@VAN     Upstream of weir at intersection of I-75 Canal and        1996   1997    80
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                                3259E   21FLCOLL9CN@GGBL     Bridge at intersection of 951 Canal North and Gold        1996   1997    67
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                                3259E   21FLCOLLGCB01@20     Bridge at intersection of Green Canal #01 and 20t         1996   1997    67
           CANAL
                                                       Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                     151


Planning                                                                                                                  Begin   End     #
             WBID Name         WBID           Station ID                                 Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                    Date    Date   Obs.
           HENDERSON CREEK
                               3259E         21FLSFWMBC23        Bridge at intersection of Main Golden Gate Canal and C    2000   2001   245
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                               3259E      21FLCOLLGCB02@SUN      Bridge at intersection of Green Canal #02 and Suns        1996   1997    67
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                               3259E       21FLCOLLGGCAT951      Bridge at intersection of Main Golden Gate Canal a        1996   1997    67
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                               3259E        21FLCOLLGGC14        Bridge at canal crossing on Green Blvd. West of SR        1996   1997    76
           CANAL

           GOLDEN GATE CANAL   3259F      21FLCOLLCYPR@GGB       Bridge at intersection of Cypress Canal and Golden        1996   1997    66

           GOLDEN GATE CANAL   3259F      21FLCOLLGGC@WHITE      Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and Wh        1996   1997    64

           GOLDEN GATE CANAL   3259F       21FLCOLLGGC@858       Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and CR        1996   1997    92

           NAPLES BAY          3259G   21FLKWAT021NAPLESBAY-31                                                             2001   2001    12

           NAPLES BAY          3259G        21FLCOLLNBAY24       Naples Bay at Marker 24                                   1996   1996    45

           NAPLES BAY          3259G   21FLKWAT021NAPLESBAY-11                                                             2001   2001    12

           NAPLES BAY          3259G         21FLSFWMBC1         Channel marker 38 in Naples Bay                           2000   2001   265

           NAPLES BAY          3259G   21FLKWAT021NAPLESBAY-21                                                             2001   2001    12

           NAPLES BAY          3259G        21FLCOLLHALDNB       Junction of Haldeman Creek and Naples Bay                 1996   1996    48

           NAPLES BAY          3259G        21FLCOLLLELYICW      First confluence of tidal creek at channel marker         1996   1996    52

           HENDERSON CREEK
                               3259H       21FLCOLLHALDCRK       Upstream of amil gate at intersection of US41 and         1995   1997    181
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                               3259H       21FLCOLLHENDCRK       Gauging Station North of intersection of US41 and         1995   1998    374
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                               3259H         21FLSFWMLELY        LELY CANAL AT U.S. 41                                     2000   2001    200
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                               3259H       21FLCOLLLANDFILL      SW corner of Naples Landfill at outfall into Allig        1995   1995    58
           CANAL
      152         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Planning                                                                                                                 Begin   End     #
             WBID Name       WBID            Station ID                                 Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                   Date    Date   Obs.
           HENDERSON CREEK
                              3259H         21FLCOLLLELY        Bridge at intersection of US41 and Lely Main Canal        1995   1998   234
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                              3259H       21FLCOLLHEND951       Gauging station on CR951 canal south of intersecti        1995   1995    144
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                              3259H        21FLCOLLROCKE        East side of Rock Creek bridge on Airport Rd              1996   1997    98
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                              3259H        21FLCOLLROCKW        Upstream of weir in canal entering Rock Creek at i        1995   1997    180
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                              3259H       21FLSFWMHALDCRK       Upstream of amil gate at intersection of US41 and Hald    2000   2001    223
           CANAL
           HENDERSON CREEK
                              3259H         21FLSFWMBC5         Bridge at intersection of Haldeman Creek and Bayshore     2000   2001   274
           CANAL

           WEST COLLIER       3259I         21FLSFWMBC12        Prairie Canal at the end of 82nd Ave. S.E.                2000   2001    185

           WEST COLLIER       3259I      21FLCOLLGGC@GGBE       Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and Go        1996   1997    79

           WEST COLLIER       3259I       21FLCOLLGGC05@23      Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal #05 an        1996   1997    55

           WEST COLLIER       3259I         21FLSFWMBC9         Miller Canal at intersection of I-75                      2000   2001    238

           WEST COLLIER       3259I      21FLCOLLLUCKYLAKE      Lucky Lake near SW corner of Florida Panther Natio        1995   1995    49

           WEST COLLIER       3259I         21FLSFWMBC10        Faka Union Canal at intersection of I-75 (FAKAUC75)       2000   2001    262

           WEST COLLIER       3259I       21FLCOLLFAKAUC75      North side of overpass at intersection of Faka Uni        1995   1995    68

           WEST COLLIER       3259I         21FLSFWMBC11        Merritt Canal at intersection of I-75                     2000   2001    257

           ROOKERY BAY        3259J       21FLCOLLJOHNSBAY      Just inside southern entrance of Johnson Bay from         1995   1995    46

           ROOKERY BAY        3259J       21FLSFWMROOK461       Rookery Bay                                               1999   2000    120

           ROOKERY BAY        3259J        21FLCOLLHCKEST       Near mouth of Henderson Creek as it enters Rookery        1996   1996    42

           TARPON BAY        3259J1   21FLKWAT021TARPONBAY-31                                                             2001   2001    11
                                                       Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                     153


Planning                                                                                                                  Begin   End     #
             WBID Name        WBID            Station ID                                  Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                    Date    Date   Obs.

           TARPON BAY         3259J1   21FLKWAT021TARPONBAY-11                                                             2001   2001    12

           TARPON BAY         3259J1   21FLKWAT021TARPONBAY-21                                                             2001   2001    11

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259K        21FLCOLLHNDRCRK       Approximately 1 mile northeast of the end of shell        1996   1996    42

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259K        21FLCOLLSANDHILL      Middle of Sandhill Bay                                    1996   1996    22

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L         21FLA 66299SEAS      Blackwater River Channel Marker 11                        1995   2000    473

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L         21FLA 66300SEAS      Blackwater River Channel Marker 14                        1995   2000    552

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L        21FLCOLLLMANOR2       Southernmost end of Lely Manor Canal                      1995   1996    91

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L          21FLSFWMBC6         Downstream of weir in Henderson Creek south of US 41 E    2000   2001    188

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L        21FLCOLLTOMATO41      Gauging station near intersection of US41E and Tom        1995   1998    294

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L        21FLCOLLTAMBR55       South side of Bridge 55 on US41 East                      1995   1995    137

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L        21FLCOLLTAMBR39       South side of Bridge 39 on US41 East                      1995   1995    136

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L         21FLCOLLLMANOR       Bridge at intersection of Lely Manor Canal and US4        1995   1996    90

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L        21FLCOLLMILLEXPO      Pond on south side of side of U.S. 41E across from        1995   1995    46

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L          21FLSFWMBC21        Bridge #55 on US 41E (TAMBR55)                            2000   2001   230

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L          21FLSFWMBC20        Bridge #52 on US 41E                                      2000   2001    234

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L          21FLSFWMBC19        Bridge #69 on US 41E                                      2000   2001    214

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L    21FLKWATBLACKWATER-31                                                               2001   2001    10

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L          21FLSFWMBC22        Gauging Station North of intersection of US41 and Hend    2000   2001    213
      154         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Planning                                                                                                                 Begin   End     #
             WBID Name        WBID           Station ID                                 Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                   Date    Date   Obs.

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L   21FLKWATBLACKWATER-21                                                               2001   2001    10

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L        21FLCOLLLMAIN2       Southernmost end of Lely Main Canal                       1995   1996    88

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L         21FLSFWMBC18        Bridge #73 on US 41E                                      2000   2001    248

           BLACKWATER RIVER   3259L   21FLKWATBLACKWATER-11                                                               2001   2001    10

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M        21FLA 66036SEAS      Mouth of Pumpkin River                                    1995   2000    545

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M        21FLCOLLBLACKW       Mouth of Blackwater River, in Collier Seminole Sta        1996   1996    46

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M        21FLA 66037SEAS      Island E of Santina Bay                                   1995   2000   494

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M       21FLCOLLBLACKW13      Blackwater River at Channel Marker #13                    1995   1995    46

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M      21FLCOLLEMARCOBY       South of Bear Pt. Cove at deepening of East Marco         1995   1995    88

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M        21FLA 66020SEAS      S tip of island due E of Goodland                         1995   2000    527

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M       21FLCOLLLKMRCOSH      Middle of eastern end of Lake Marco Shores                1995   1995    86

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M        21FLA 66303SEAS      Buttonwood Bay entrance                                   1995   2000    552

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M        21FLA 66298SEAS      SE corner of Palm Bay                                     1995   1999   272

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M        21FLA 66035SEAS      Santina Bay western entrance                              1995   2000    548

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M       21FLCOLLMARCPAS       Mouth of flotilla passage adjacent to Marco Pass B        1996   1996    43

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259M       21FLCOLLPORTAUPR      Dock located behind 37 Ocho Rios Rd. in Port au Pr        1995   1995    46

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259N   21FLKWAT021FAKAUNION-21                                                             2001   2001    10

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259N       21FLSFWMFAKAUPOI      Faka-Union Canal at entrance to Port of the Islands Ma    2000   2001    276
                                                      Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                    155


Planning                                                                                                                Begin   End     #
             WBID Name        WBID           Station ID                                 Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                  Date    Date   Obs.

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259N   21FLKWAT021FAKAUNION-31                                                            2001   2001    10

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259N        21FLA 66038SEAS      Faka Union Channel Marker 19                             1995   2000   509

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259N   21FLKWAT021FAKAUNION-11                                                            2001   2001    10

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259N        21FLA 66077SEAS      Faka Union Channel Marker 59                             1995   2000   521

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259N       21FLCOLLFAKAUPOI      Faka-Union Canal at entrance to Port of the Island       1995   1995    72

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259N       21FLCOLLFAKAUCAN      Faka-Union Canal at Channel Marker #50                   1995   1996    68

           FAKA UNION CANAL   3259O         21FLSFWMFAKA        FAKA UNION CANAL AT U.S.41 NR COPELAND FLA. (W           2000   2001    182

           FAKA UNION CANAL   3259O         21FLSFWMBC8         Merritt Canal at east bend of "T"                        2000   2001    177

           FAKA UNION CANAL   3259O         21FLCOLLFAKA        Gauging station north of weir at the intersection        1995   1998    514

           FAKA UNION CANAL   3259O         21FLSFWMBC7         Faka Union Canal at west bend of "T"                     2000   2001    178

           FAKA UNION CANAL   3259O        21FLA 66401SEAS      Faka Union Channel Marker 23                             1995   2000    524

           FAKA UNION CANAL   3259O        21FLCOLLFAKA858      South side of bridge at Faka Union Canal and CR858       1995   1995   150

           FERGUSON RIVER     3259P        21FLA 66007SEAS      Mouth of Ferguson River                                  1995   2000    478

           FERGUSON RIVER     3259P       21FLSFWMGGC@858       Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and CR858    2000   2001   213

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259R        21FLA 66114SEAS      Mouth of Fakahatchee River                               1995   2000    546

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259R        21FLA 66111SEAS      Middle of Fakahatchee Bay                                1995   2000    453

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259R        21FLA 66112SEAS      West end of Fakahatchee Bay                              1995   2000   501

           RUNOFF TO GULF     3259R        21FLA 66113SEAS      Ruins at south end Fakahatchee Bay                       1995   2000    554
      156         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Planning                                                                                                                  Begin   End     #
             WBID Name            WBID           Station ID                             Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                    Date    Date   Obs.

           LAKE AVALON MID-LAKE   3259T        21FLA 28030068    LAKE AVALON,MID-LAKE                                      1997   1997    32

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W   21FLKWAT021TRAFFORD3                                                             2001   2001     4

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W       21FLCOLLLKTRAF7    Second canal south of the marina on the east side         1999   2002    532

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W   21FLKWAT021TRAFFORD1                                                             2001   2001     4

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W       21FLCOLLLKTRAF2    Northwest corner of Lake Trafford, Immokalee              1996   2002   1510

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W   21FLKWAT021TRAFFORD2                                                             2001   2001     4

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W       21FLCOLLLKTRAF1    Northeast corner of Lake Trafford, Immokalee              1996   2002   1514

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W       21FLCOLLLKTRAF3    Middle of Lake Trafford, Immokalee                        1996   2002   1510

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W       21FLCOLLLKTRAF4    Southwest corner of Lake Trafford, Immokalee              1996   2002   1542

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W       21FLCOLLLKTRAF6    First canal south of the marina on the east side o        1999   2002    529

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W       21FLCOLLLKTRAF8    Canal furthest south of the marina on the east sid        1999   2002    534

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W        21FLA 28030024    LK TRAFF CENTER                                           1995   1995    16

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W        21FLA 28030025    LK TRAFF 50 OUT MARINA                                    1995   1997    166

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W         21FLGW 3496      LKTRAFRD                                                  1998   2001    924

           LAKE TRAFFORD          3259W       21FLCOLLLKTRAF5    South end of Lake Trafford, Immokalee                     1996   2002   1499

           DRAINAGE TO
                                  3259X      21FLSFWMCORKSCRD    Bridge at intersect Corkscrew Rd.& canal NE. of Corksc    2001   2001    20
           CORKSCREW
           DRAINAGE TO
                                  3259X      21FLCOLLCORK@846    Bridge at intersection of Corkscrew Canal and CR84        1996   1997    67
           CORKSCREW
           DRAINAGE TO
                                  3259X      21FLCOLLCORKSCRD    Bridge at intersection of Corkscrew Rd. and canal         1997   1998    69
           CORKSCREW
                                                      Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast        157


Planning                                                                                                    Begin   End     #
              WBID Name          WBID        Station ID                              Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                      Date    Date   Obs.

           VANDERBILT WWAY       3259Y     21FLCOLLVBILT      Mid-channel, opposite Tradewinds Avenue        1996   1996    44

           LITTLE HICKORY
                                 8061A     21FLDOH LEE149     LITTLE HICKORY ISLAND PARK                     2000   2002    61
           ISLAND PARK

           BONITA BEACH PARK     8061B     21FLDOH LEE150     BONITA BEACH PARK                              2000   2002    61

           LELY BAREFOOT BEACH   8061C   21FLDOH COLLIER312   LELY BAREFOOT BEACH                            2000   2002    45

           WIGGINS PASS NORTH    8061D   21FLDOH COLLIER314   WIGGINS PASS NORTH                             2000   2002    53

           WIGGINS PASS STATE
                                 8061E   21FLDOH COLLIER51    WIGGINS PASS STATE PARK                        2000   2002    53
           PARK

           VANDERBILT BEACH      8061F   21FLDOH COLLIER315   VANDERBILT BEACH                               2000   2002    65

           CLAM PASS             8062A   21FLDOH COLLIER52    CLAM PASS                                      2000   2002    61

           CLAM PASS             8062A   21FLSTBASTATION 3    CENTER OF OUTER CLAM BAY                       1995   1998    345

           PARKSHORE BEACH       8062B   21FLDOH COLLIER53    PARKSHORE BEACH                                2000   2002    64

           DOCTORS PASS          8062C   21FLSTBAMOORINGS     MOORINGS BAY BETWEEN DR. PASS & HARBOUR DR.    1995   1998   1009

           DOCTORS PASS          8062C   21FLDOH COLLIER54    DOCTORS PASS                                   2000   2002    61

           DOCTORS PASS          8062C     21FLSTBAGULF       IN GULF N OF DOCTOR PASS                       1995   1998    951

           LOWDERMILK PARK
                                 8062D   21FLDOH COLLIER55    LOWDERMILK PARK BEACH                          2000   2002    64
           BEACH

           NAPLES PIER           8062E   21FLDOH COLLIER316   NAPLES PIER                                    2000   2002    62

           GORDONS PASS          8063A   21FLDOH COLLIER57    GORDONS PASS                                   2000   2002    31

           SOUTHWEST COAST
                                 8064    21FLSFWMROOK457      Big Marco River, R24                           1999   2000    120
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                                 8064    21FLSFWMROOK456      Rt. 951 Bridge, R26                            1999   2000    120
           GULF 4
      158         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Planning                                                                                                         Begin   End     #
             WBID Name       WBID          Station ID                              Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                           Date    Date   Obs.
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064     21FLSFWMROOK455      Capri Pass, R2A                                       1999   2000    120
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064     21FLSFWMROOK454      Caxambas Pass, R4                                     1999   2000    120
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064     21FLSFWMROOK451      Coon Key Pass, G3                                     1999   2000    120
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064       21FLA 28030002     SMOKE HOUSE BAY N COLLIER BLV BR                      1996   1996    13
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064     21FLCOLLROBBAYBR     Bridge at intersection of Winterberry Dr. & Robert    1995   1995    44
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064     21FLCOLLGULLIVAN     West side of Coon Key in Gullivan Bay                 1995   1995    44
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064     21FLCOLLGOODBAY      South side of westernmost overpass of C.R. 92 and     1995   1996    95
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064      21FLCOLLCOLLBAY     200 yards south of Channel Marker #6 in Collier Ba    1995   1995    48
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064      21FLA 66030SEAS     Cape Romano                                           1995   2000    431
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064      21FLA 66021SEAS     Coon Key Pass Channel Marker 2                        1995   2000   526
           GULF 4
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8064      21FLA 66032SEAS     West of Coon Key at Channel Marker 2                  1995   2000    555
           GULF 4

           TIGERTAIL BEACH    8064A    21FLDOH COLLIER310   TIGERTAIL BEACH                                       2000   2002    74

           RESIDENCE BEACH    8064B    21FLDOH COLLIER58    RESIDENCE BEACH                                       2000   2002    64

           CAXAMBAS PARK      8064C    21FLDOH COLLIER60    CAXAMBAS PARK                                         2000   2002    31

           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8065       21FLSFWMTTI74      Shell   Key                                           1996   2000    774
           GULF 5
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8065       21FLSFWMTTI73      Long    Rock                                          1996   2000    771
           GULF 5
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8065       21FLSFWMTTI71      White   Horse Key                                     1996   2000    774
           GULF 5
           SOUTHWEST COAST
                              8065       21FLSFWMTTI68      Panther Key                                           1996   2000    773
           GULF 5
                                                     Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast         159


Planning                                                                                                    Begin   End     #
                   WBID Name      WBID      Station ID                               Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                      Date    Date   Obs.
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065    21FLSFWMTTI67     West    Pass                                     1996   2000    774
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065    21FLSFWMTTI66     Indian Key                                       1996   2000    773
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065    21FLSFWMTTI65     Indian Key Pass                                  1996   2000    764
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065    21FLSFWMTTI64     Barron River                                     1996   2000    776
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66281SEAS    Mouth of Fish Hawk Creek                         1995   2000    568
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLSFWMROOK452    Coon Key Light                                   1999   2000    120
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66302SEAS    SW tip of Snag's Shoal                           1995   2000   557
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66029SEAS    SE tip of Snag's Shoal                           1995   2000   551
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66028SEAS    Southern tip of Turtle Key                       1995   2000    475
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66187SEAS    Fakahatchee Pass entrance                        1995   2000    557
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66301SEAS    Southern tip of Shell Key at marker              1995   2000    567
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66011SEAS    Indian Key Pass Channel Marker 1                 1995   2000    465
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66010SEAS    Indian Key Pass Channel Marker 7                 1995   2000    467
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66771SEAS    Faka Union Channel Marker 15                     1995   2000    559
                GULF 5
                SOUTHWEST COAST
                                  8065   21FLA 66031SEAS    Coon Key Light                                   1995   2000    565
                GULF 5
Interdrainage
     Area
                                                            C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
                C-139             3255   21FLSFWMC13912                                                      1999   2001    116
                                                            STAT
                                                            C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
                C-139             3255   21FLSFWMC13914                                                      1999   2001    121
                                                            STAT
      160          Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Planning                                                                                                            Begin   End     #
              WBID Name         WBID       Station ID                             Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                              Date    Date   Obs.
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13913                                                              1999   2001    116
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13906                                                              1999   2000    36
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13911                                                              1999   2001    117
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13910                                                              1999   2001    107
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13909                                                              1999   2000    48
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13908                                                              1999   2001    121
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13915                                                              1999   2001    121
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13907                                                              1999   2001    86
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13905                                                              1999   2001    118
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13901                                                              1999   2001    119
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13904                                                              1999   2001    118
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13903                                                              1999   2001    121
                                                           STAT
                                                           C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCH
           C-139                3255     21FLSFWMC13902                                                              1999   2001    113
                                                           STAT

           BARRON RIVER CANAL   3261A   21FLCOLLHALFCRK    Adjacent to last channel marker heading into Halfw        1996   1996    78

           BARRON RIVER CANAL   3261A   21FLCOLLHALFCRK2   Adjacent to last channel marker heading into Halfw        1996   1996    22

           BARRON RIVER CANAL   3261A   21FLSFWMBARRIVN    Off dock at Sheriff?s substation on corner of US 41 an    2000   2001   281

           BARRON RIVER CANAL   3261A    21FLCOLLBARRIVE   Barron River, Channel Marker #35, near mouth of ri        1996   1996    42

           TAMIAMI CANAL        3261B    21FLCOLLAABR265   Bridge 030265 on the westbound lane of Alligator A        1995   1996    79
                                               Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast              161


Planning                                                                                                   Begin   End     #
             WBID Name     WBID       Station ID                           Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                     Date    Date   Obs.

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   21FLSFWMTAMBR105   NO DESCRIPTION AVAILABLE FOR THIS STATION             1995   2002   4314

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   21FLSFWMMONROE     Bridge 30096 at intersection of US41 and Loop Road    2000   2001   173

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A05   RACCOON POINT                                         1995   1995    43

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A04   MONUMENT ROAD                                         1995   1995    42

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   21FLSFWMTAMBR90    Bridge 30090 on US41E                                 2000   2001   111

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A06   BRIDGE 105                                            1995   1995    41

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A07   BRIDGE 84                                             1995   1995    43

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A12   KISSIMMEE BILLY STRAND                                1995   1995    43

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B    21FLSFWMGATOR     Bridge 30105 on US41 East                             2000   2001    185

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A10   GUM SLOUGH                                            1995   1995    39

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   21FLSFWMBCWQA8     BRIDGE 83                                             1995   1995     5

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   21FLSFWMBCWQA7     BRIDGE 84                                             1995   1995     5

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   21FLSFWMBCWQA6     BRIDGE 105                                            1995   1995     5

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A08   BRIDGE 83                                             1995   1995    43

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   21FLCOLLTAMBR90    Bridge 30090 on US41E                                 1995   1996    84

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A09   PINECREST HAMMOCK                                     1995   1995    38

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A11   ROBERTS LAKE STRAND                                   1995   1995    43

           TAMIAMI CANAL   3261B   11NPSWRDBICY_A03   EAST CROSSING STRAND                                  1995   1995    40
      162             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




Planning                                                                                                               Begin   End     #
              WBID Name          WBID         Station ID                              Station Name
  Unit                                                                                                                 Date    Date   Obs.

           TAMIAMI CANAL          3261B     21FLCOLLTURNER    Bridge at intersection of US41 and Turner River           1995   1998   231

           TAMIAMI CANAL          3261B      21FLSFWMBC17     Bridge #86 on US 41E                                      2000   2001    227

           TAMIAMI CANAL          3261B      21FLSFWMBC16     Bridge #84 on US 41E                                      2000   2001    236

           TAMIAMI CANAL          3261B    21FLCOLLTAMBR115   Bridge 30115 on US41E                                     1995   1996    76

           TAMIAMI CANAL          3261B     21FLCOLLMONROE    Bridge 30096 at intersection of US41 and Loop Road        1995   1996    83

           BARRON RIVER CANAL     3261C    11NPSWRDBICY_A02   EAST HINSON MARSH                                         1995   1995    37

           BARRON RIVER CANAL     3261C    21FLCOLLCHKMATE    Middle of Checkmate Pond, Fakahatchee Strand              1995   1998    237

           BARRON RIVER CANAL     3261C    11NPSWRDBICY_A13   MULLET SLOUGH                                             1995   1995    43

           BARRON RIVER CANAL     3261C    21FLSFWMOKALA858   Okaloacoochee Slough crossing on CR 858                   2000   2001    225

           BARRON RIVER CANAL     3261C    11NPSWRDBICY_A14   DEEP LAKE STRAND                                          1995   1995    42

           BARRON RIVER CANAL     3261C    11NPSWRDBICY_A01   NORTH BEAR ISLAND                                         1995   1995    41

           BARRON RIVER CANAL     3261C      21FLSFWMBC24     Bridge #30211 on SR 29 approx. 3.1 miles north of I-75    2000   2001   214

           BARRON RIVER CANAL     3261C    21FLSFWMCHKMATE    Middle of Checkmate Pond Fakahatchee Strand               2001   2001    16

           BARRON RIVER CANAL     3261C       21FLGW 3494     BARRNRVR                                                  1998   2001   1069

           L-28 INTERCEPTOR       3266       21FLSFWML28I     L28 INTERCEPTOR AT SR84                                   1995   2002   2679

           L-28 INTERCEPTOR       3266      21FLCOLLTIEBACK   Bridge at intersection of Alligator Alley and L-28        1995   1998   280

           L-28 GAP               3269      21FLCOLLAABR278   Bridge 030278 on the westbound lane of Alligator A        1995   1996    80

           L-28 GAP               3269       21FLSFWMS190     ON L28I 2.5 MILES SOUTH OF SR833                          1995   2002   3429
                                           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast     163


Planning                                                                                     Begin    End     #
              WBID Name   WBID    Station ID                       Station Name
  Unit                                                                                       Date     Date   Obs.

           L-28 GAP       3269   21FLSFWML28IS    L-28 INTERCEPTOR SOUTH AT COLLIER BORDER     1998   1999    410

           L-28 GAP       3269   21FLSFWML28IN    SEMINOLE STATION ON L28 INTERCEPTOR          1997   1998    342
164        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



Table E.3: Water Quality Trend Data for the Everglades West Coast Basin
Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   165
166   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast
Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   167
168   Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast
Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast   169
170           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




   Appendix F: Permitted Facilities with Discharges to Surface
   Water in the Everglades West Coast Basin, by Planning Unit

Estero Bay
Facility ID             Facility Name             Description       Permitted     Design
                                                                    Capacity,    Capacity
                                                                   Millions of    (mgd)
                                                                   Gallons Per
                                                                   Day (mgd)
FL0145190        Three Oaks Wastewater           Domestic
                 Treatment Facility              Wastewater         Stormwater
                                                                                    1.5
                                                 Treatment Plant     discharge
                                                 (WWTP)



Southwest Coast
Facility ID             Facility Name             Description       Permitted     Design
                                                                    Capacity,    Capacity
                                                                   Millions of    (mgd)
                                                                   Gallons Per
                                                                   Day (mgd)
FL0026271        City of Naples Wastewater       Domestic WWTP
                                                                        -           10
                 Treatment Plant
FL0141356        Collier County South Regional   Domestic WWTP
                                                                    Stormwater
                 Wastewater Reuse Facility                                          8
                                                                     discharge
                 (WRF)
FL0141399        Collier County North Regional   Domestic WWTP      Stormwater
                                                                                    8.5
                 WRF                                                 discharge
FL0141704        Port of the Islands—South       Domestic WWTP          0.2         0.2
FLG830224        Pick Kwik #154                  Petroleum
                                                 Cleanup General
                                                                       N/A         N/A
                                                 Permit (GP)
                                                 (long term)



Inner Drainage Area
Facility ID             Facility Name             Description       Permitted     Design
                                                                    Capacity,    Capacity
                                                                   Millions of    (mgd)
                                                                   Gallons Per
                                                                   Day (mgd)
FL0027618        City of Everglades, City        Domestic WWTP
                                                                      0.115        0.100
                 Wastewater Treatment Facility
FLG910751        Handy Food Store #91            Petroleum
                                                 Cleanup GP            N/A         N/A
                                                 (long term)
FLG910977        Davis Oil Company/Davis         Petroleum
                 Service Center                  Cleanup GP            N/A         N/A
                                                 (long term)
           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast           171


   Appendix G: Level 1 Land Use in the Everglades West Coast
                   Basin, by Planning Unit

Table G-1: Level I Land Use in the Estero Bay Planning Unit

 Level 1                        Type                          Percentage
                                                              of Planning
                                                                  Unit
  1000     Urban                                                  18.9
  2000     Agriculture                                            20.7
  3000     Shrub/Brushland                                        1.4
  4000     Forested                                               21.1
  5000     Water                                                  1.7
  6000     Wetlands                                               30.8
  7000     Disturbed Land                                         2.6
  8000     Utilites                                               2.8
           total                                                  100


Table G-2: Level I Land Use in the Southwest Coast Planning Unit

 Level 1                        Type                          Percentage
                                                              of Planning
                                                                  Unit
  1000     Urban                                                  10.9
  2000     Agriculture                                            17.9
  3000     Shrub/Brushland                                         1.1
  4000     Forested                                                9.8
  5000     Water                                                   1.5
  6000     Wetlands                                               57.3
  7000     Disturbed Land                                          0.5
  8000     Utilities                                               0.9
           total                                                  99.9
172        Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



Table G-3: Level I Land Use in the Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit

 Level 1                       Attribute                     Percentage
                                                             of Planning
                                                                 Unit
  1000     Urban                                                  0.4
  2000     Agriculture                                           21.2
  3000     Shrub/Brushland                                        1.7
  4000     Forested                                               8.5
  5000     Water                                                  0.2
  6000     Wetlands                                              67.4
  7000     Disturbed Land                                         0.3
  8000     Utilities                                              0.3
           total                                                 100
             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                               173


   Appendix H: Pollutant Loading Estimates for the Everglades
                      West Coast Basin
Estimated Loadings in the Estero Bay Planning Unit
     In 1999, the consulting firm PBS&J completed a study for the South Florida Water
Management District (SFWMD), Estero Bay and Watershed Assessment, which defined
drainage basins (secondary basins) that were slightly dissimilar to those used by the
Department. PBS&J subdivided these secondary basins into tertiary basins, numbering
each one. The load contributions of each tertiary basin with respect to urban runoff,
agricultural runoff, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus were then calculated. Each
tertiary basin was then ranked against other basins within the watershed to highlight the
highest contributors of the four types of loads.
     This report presents the loading information from the earlier report, as it shows which
areas in the watershed are the main contributors of pollutants, despite differences in basin
delineations. The following tables only list by rank the high-impact (the top 25 percent)
tertiary basins. Tables H.1, H.2, H.3, and H.4 show, respectively, area-weighted urban
runoff, agricultural runoff, total nitrogen loading, and total phosphorus loading.


Table H.1: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay Watershed
for Area-Weighted Urban Runoff Discharge

The area-weighted urban runoff from the entire watershed is 0.39 (acre-feet/year)/acre (SFWMD, 1999).

                                           %                 %         Area-Weighted Urban
                        Tertiary Area    Urban          Agricultural       Runoff (acre-
  Secondary Basin       Basin # (acres) Land Use         Land Use         feet/year)/acre)      Rank
  Hendry Creek             6      449      63                7                1.76872            1
  Mullock Creek            4     3596      81                7                1.70483            2
  Tenmile Canal            4      153      67                0                1.63033            3
  Hendry Creek            10     2459      59                0                1.53293            4
  Hendry Creek             9      517      67                0                1.47858            5
  Tenmile Canal            1      129      67                0                1.40605            6
  Cow Creek                2     1864      61                0                1.31074            7
  Hendry Creek             8      863      66                7                1.28883            8
  Imperial River           1     3464      61                0                 1.2763            9
  Estero River             4      124      64                0                1.23072            10
  Cow Creek                4      132      74                0                1.16561            11
  Tenmile Canal            7      404      47                0                1.06851            12
  Tenmile Canal            9     1266      53               24                1.03585            13
  Imperial River           5      202      63                0                 1.0033            14
  Imperial River           3     1988      58                7                0.97173            15
  Tenmile Canal           11     2569      42               12                0.89831            16
174         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



Table H.2: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay Watershed
for Area-Weighted Agricultural Runoff Discharge

The area-weighted agricultural runoff from the entire watershed is 0.25 (acre-feet/year)/acre (SFWMD,
1999).

                                           %                  %            Area-Weighted
                        Tertiary Area     Urban          Agricultural    Agricultural Runoff
  Secondary Basin       Basin # (acres) Land Use          Land Use      (acre-feet/year)/acre)    Rank
  Tenmile Canal            8     1,441     11                42                0.60592             1
  Six Mile Cypress
  Slough                    5      653         14             29               0.51273              2
  Imperial River            4     4,695        30             37               0.4629               3
  Imperial River            6     41,568       3              25               0.37922              4
  Estero River              8     27,647       16             27               0.37194              5
  Estero River              6     7,467        15             27               0.33781              6
  Tenmile Canal             6     1,728        44             28               0.33523              7
  Six Mile Cypress
  Slough                    6      1,968       13             27               0.33106              8
  Tenmile Canal             9      1,266       53             24               0.32244              9
  Six Mile Cypress
  Slough                    4     18,354       20             23               0.29188              10
  Estero River              7      248         46             24               0.28643              11
  Hendry Creek              5     1,874        27             29               0.28084              12
  Estero River              5     2,460        41             17               0.23157              13
  Six Mile Cypress
  Slough                   1       8,345       29             15               0.20212              14
  Estero River             3       2,699       14             15               0.18168              15
  Tenmile Canal            11      2,569       42             12               0.17701              16
             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                               175

Table H.3: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay Watershed
for Area-Weighted Annual Total Nitrogen (TN) Loading

The area-weighted TN loading from the entire watershed is 7.0 (pounds/year)/acre (SFWMD, 1999).

                                              %        %       Area-Weighted TN
                           Tertiary Area    Urban Agricultural       Load,
      Secondary Basin      Basin # (acres) Land Use Land Use (pounds/year)/acre) Rank
      Tenmile Canal          11     2569      42       12           13.0457       1
      Hendry Creek            9      517      67       0            12.0308       2
      Hendry Creek           10     2459      59       0            11.7398       3
      Hendry Creek            8      863      66       7            11.5284       4
      Mullock Creek           4     3596      81       7             11.513       5
      Spring Creek            6      545      40       0            11.3219       6
      Mullock Creek           5      290      53       0            11.0111       7
      Tenmile Canal           7      404      47       0            10.6779       8
      Imperial River          4     4695      30       37           10.5598       9
      Six Mile Cypress        5      653      14       29           10.3357       10
      Slough
      Estero River            2        72        0           0              10.2914          11
      Tenmile Canal           10      473        26          0              10.2542          12
      Tenmile Canal           4       153        67          0              10.0608          13
      Imperial River          1       3464       61          0              10.0056          14
      Hendry Creek            6       449        63          7              10.0011          15
      Hendry Creek            5       1874       27          29              9.7186          16
176         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



Table H.4: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay Watershed
for Area-Weighted Annual Total Phosphorus (TP) Loading

The area-weighted TP loading from the entire watershed is 1.56 (pounds/year)/acre (SFWMD, 1999).

                                                                      Area-Weighted TP
                                              %        %                    Load,
                           Tertiary Area    Urban Agricultural          (pounds/year)
      Secondary Basin      Basin # (acres) Land Use Land Use                /acre)         Rank
      Cow Creek               7      621      78       4                   3.54578          1
      Tenmile Canal          11     2569      42       12                  2.68013          2
      Spring Creek            6      545      40       0                    2.6564          3
      Six Mile Cypress        5      653      14       29                  2.63303          4
      Slough
      Hendry Creek            5       1874       27          29             2.60596          5
      Spring Creek            5        88        91          0              2.51201          6
      Imperial River          4       4695       30          37             2.49547          7
      Mullock Creek           5       290        53          0              2.47242          8
      Estero River            7       248        46          24             2.44086          9
      Tenmile Canal           8       1441       11          42             2.41656          10
      Hendry Creek            8       863        66          7              2.38358          11
      Spring Creek            3       768        69          0              2.31095          12
      Tenmile Canal           9       1266       53          24             2.25442          13
      Spring Creek            2       868        63          0              2.20255          14
      Tenmile Canal           6       1728       44          28             2.16375          15
      Spring Creek            4        77        46          0              2.02751          16




Estimated Loadings in the Southwest Coast Planning Unit
    Currently, no loading information is available. A number of documents outline a
watershed plan and model development in the area. Information will be added to this
assessment as it is made available.

Estimated Loadings in the Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit
    Currently, no loading information is available. A number of documents outline a
watershed plan and model development in the area. Information will be added to this
assessment as it is made available.
           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                  177


              Appendix I: Documentation Provided during
                        Public Comment Period


                                 EPA’s COMMENTS

August 26, 2002


Daryll Joyner, Program Administrator
Total Maximum Daily Load Program
Department of Environmental Protection
Mail Station 3510
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400

Dear Mr. Joyner:

       The Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 (EPA) has reviewed the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection’s (FDEP) draft 2002 303(d) list and offers the
comments listed below. It is our understanding that the 2002 list will be submitted as an
amendment to the 1998 list for certain waterbodies in Group 1 basins and that all of the
waterbodies in Groups 2 through 5 will stay on the 1998 list until FDEP submits the
appropriate amendments. Furthermore, as agreed during our August 14, 2002 meeting in
Tallahassee, the Group 1 waters on the 1998 list for which FDEP did not have sufficient
water quality data to meet the verification requirements of the Impaired Waters Rule
(IWR) will also stay on the list.

       The following comments were developed using the verified and master lists that
were made available for the public meeting held the morning of August 14, 2002.
Specific comments are organized by the basins that FDEP now identifies as being in
Group 1. It is our understanding that Group 1 no longer includes the Alafia,
Hillsborough, and Manatee Rivers.


                                 General Comments:

1. Because FDEP did not propose the draft 303(d) list in a manner subject to review and
   approval by EPA, the supporting information for the 303(d) list that is required by 40
   CFR §130.7 has not been reviewed. While states are not required to include all of
   this information for public review, it is required for EPA approval. FDEP must
   include this information in the final submission in order for the 303(d) list
   amendment to be approveable. [Acknowledged. No response required.]
178       Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



2. Based on the draft master lists, a significant number of waters in Group 1 basins will
   be delisted from the 1998 list. In order for EPA to approve these delistings, FDEP
   must provide good cause justification for each delisting (as described in 40 CFR
   §130.10(d)(7)(iv)). For example, any delistings based on natural conditions must
   include documentation of the scientific bases for determining that natural conditions
   existed when the waterbodies were originally listed. We hope that our agencies will
   work closely prior to the October 1 submittal deadline to reach agreement on what
   constitutes adequate supporting documentation for all of the delistings.
   [Acknowledged. The Department will provide supporting justifications, where
   applicable (see Attachment 1).]

3. For Group 1 basins, the coliforms listings on the 1998 list appear to have been
   replaced in most cases by both fecal and total coliforms listings on the draft 2002
   master and verified lists. Explanations should be provided in the final 2002 list
   submission for cases where only a fecal or total coliforms listing was included instead
   of both. [Acknowledged. The Department will provide explanations in the Comment
   field, as applicable.]

4. For a number of waters, FDEP intends to use the allowance provided in 40 CFR
   §130.7(b)(1)(iii) in lieu of including them on the 303(d) list. Adequate
   documentation must be provided in the final submission demonstrating that any
   “other pollution control requirements (e.g., best management practices) required by
   local, State, or Federal authority” are stringent enough to meet water quality standards
   in the near future. [Acknowledged. Documentation is provided in Attachments 6 and
   7.]


                          Everglades - West Coast Basins

    1. The following listings on the 1998 list were not included on either the 2002
       master or verified list for the Everglades basin. An explanation must be included
       in the final submission regarding FDEP’s intentions for these waters.

   a. ENP Shark Slough (WBID 3289) - DO, nutrients, iron, and mercury (based on
      fish consumption advisory);

   b. ENP L-67 Culvert US41 (WBID 3289J) - DO and iron; and

   c. ENP Taylor Slough (WBID 3289K) - DO and iron.
           Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast             179

   RESPONSE: These three Everglades units are located in the Everglades National
   Park in the Everglades Group 5 basin and as such will be addressed during the
   Group 5 assessment period, beginning 2004. TMDLs are not due until 2007 under
   the terms of the Consent Decree.


       Thank you for considering our comments. If you have any questions about our
concerns, please feel free to contact Andrew Bartlett at (404) 562-9478.

                                          Sincerely,

                                             /s/

                                          Gail Mitchell, Chief
                                          Standards, Monitoring & TMDL Branch
180         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast




                               STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS


Formal Public Meeting Comments (Ft. Myers, FL., 7/25/02): Jim Beever, of Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Noel Andress, of the Pine Island Civic
Association, and Tony Pellicer, representing Lee County Natural Resources, all made
formal comments at the Everglades West Coast Basin Public Meeting in Fort Myers.
With the exception of the comment from Mr. Andress, the comments made at the meeting
were provided as written comments. Mr. Beever’s and Mr. Pellicer’s comments were
noted and addressed as part of the written comment responses, below.

•   The nutrient loading going on in Matlacha Pass is due to new agriculture in the area.
    [Noel Andress, Pine Island Civic Association]

    RESPONSE: The comment was acknowledged. The Department will consider this
    information when scheduling future ambient monitoring in that area.

Written Public Comments:

•   Why was Estero Bay on the verified list posted to the Internet on July 12 but then
    removed from the list as of the July 22 posting? [Carl P. Hoke, Estero Civic
    Association; Chad Gillis, Naples Daily News; David V. Willems, Johnson
    Engineering, Inc.]
    RESPONSE: As of the July 12 posting of the verified list to the Internet, there were two segments
    called Estero Bay, segment 3258A and segment 3258I. It was discovered later in the process that
    segment 3258A actually contains what is now referred to as Estero Bay Wetlands. Segment 3258I
    contains Estero Bay proper. Segment 3258I (Estero Bay) has consistently met standards for nutrients
    (chlorophyll) throughout all of the Internet versions of the verified list, and continues to do so.
    Segment 3258A (now known as Estero Bay Wetlands) was listed for nutrients, dissolved oxygen and
    copper in the July 12 list. As of the July 22 list update however, it was discovered that a water quality
    monitoring station had been erroneously assigned to segment 3258A, that actually was within segment
    3258G (Tenmile Canal). When the station in question was reassigned to 3258G, a significant amount
    of data went with it, resulting in the listing status of segment 3258A changing from verified for these
    three parameters to meeting standards for nutrients, being planning listed for dissolved oxygen and,
    having no data at all for the assessment of copper and lead. This effectively removed the only listing
    on the verified list for what had been previously known as Estero Bay.

    The reassignment of the station also caused changes to the listing for segment 3258G (Tenmile Canal).
    It became verified impaired for copper, planning listed for dissolved oxygen and it met standards for
    nutrients (chlorophyll). On August 4 a new running of the assessment algorithm was conducted with
    data from additional contributors, and as a result, the listing status of segment 3258A (Estero Bay
    Wetlands) further changed from being planning listed for dissolved oxygen to meeting standards for
    this parameter. Regardless of the name change from Estero Bay to Estero Bay Wetlands however,
    segment 3258A is meeting standards for all parameters assessed.
              Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                   181

•   The L-28 segment is listed on the [Everglades] West Coast list. It should be removed
    and listed on the Southeast Florida Coast . [Tony Pellicer, Lee County Government]

    RESPONSE: The FDEP basin groups do not align exactly with the USGS hydrologic units, therefore
    there can be portions of several hydrologic units in any one basin group. The FDEP Everglades West
    Coast basin includes portions of both the USGS Everglades West Coast and Southeast Florida Coast
    hydrologic units.

•   A number of requests were received for copies of the data used in the Group 1
    assessment of Estero Bay its tributaries. [(Tony Pellicer, Lee County Government;
    Michael Heyl, CDM; William Trey Beeson, CDM, Stephanie MacKenzie, Estero Bay
    Aquatic and State Buffer Preserves]
    RESPONSE: The data were provided as requested. Any additional data requests for the Everglades
    West Coast basin can be directed to Khurram Moiz, at (850) 922-6226 or by writing him at
    Khurram.Moiz@dep.state.fl.us. The IWR2002 database, from which our assessment is based, is very
    large. To speed up the process, requestors are advised to include in their requests a clear description of
    the areas of interest, period of records and/or parameters desired, as well as the desired data format and
    media (Excel, Access, hardcopy, CD, diskette, email, etc.).

•   Does FDEP maintain GIS coverages for station locations that are in STORET? How
    may I obtain the coverage? Please provide me with the list of Estero Bay planning
    unit stations and periods of record for each that were used to develop the verified list
    by waterbody. [Lisa Beever, CHNEP]

    RESPONSE: FDEP maintains GIS coverages for stations that are in STORET. An updated ArcView
    shape file for all the stations in STORET may be obtained through Andrew McClenahan at (850) 921-
    9221 or by writing him at Andrew.McClenehan@dep.state.fl.us. Station lists for the Everglades West
    Coast basin can be obtained by contacting Khurram Moiz, at (850) 922-6226 or by writing him at
    Khurram.Moiz@dep.state.fl.us. The GIS coverages and station lists were sent to Ms. Beever by Ms.
    Holli Brandt.

•   Estero Bay includes four distinct geomorphologic features for considering TMDLs.
    They include the Matanzas Pass, Fishtrap Bay, Estero Gulf-Influenced Bay and
    Estero Bay [map attached]. Water quality stations at the passes are more indicative of
    Gulf of Mexico water quality and should not be included in development of the
    verified list. The averaging of Estero Bay and Estero Gulf-Influenced Bay station
    data hides water quality problems that exist within Estero Bay Back. [James W.
    Beever III, Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management; Lisa Beever, CHNEP]

    RESPONSE: By dividing Estero Bay into four segments based on the geomorphologic characteristics
    of the bay, the data for the entire bay would no longer be aggregated and assessed together, rather the
    analysis would be done by segment. While this scheme might allow us to further focus on specific
    areas of the Bay in which impairments might lie, the specific locations of the proposed new segment
    boundaries would be arbitrary and would not be consistent with how other waters were segmented.
    However, we are in the process of reconsidering our current waterbody segmentation scheme and
    welcome input on alternatives that are amenable to the objectives of our assessments.
182         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



•   We received numerous comments that questioned our assessment of the tributaries to
    Estero Bay. We also received comments regarding the waterbody types we had
    assigned to the tributaries to the bay. (Lisa Beever, CHNEP; Gary A. Davis,
    Conservancy of Southwest Florida; Tony Pellicer, Lee County Government; Michael
    Heyl, CDM; David Graham, Bonita Bay Group; James W. Beever III, Estero Bay
    Agency on Bay Management; Chad Gillis, Naples Daily News; Bruce Boler, EPA;
    Catherine Corbett, CHNEP)

    RESPONSE: On the issue of waterbody type, the consensus among the comments was that many of
    the tributaries we classified as estuaries were in fact streams. Waterbody type dictates which water
    quality criteria are applied to water quality data, and can presumably influence the outcome of our
    assessments, so it is important that the type assigned to a segment is accurate as it relates to the data
    being assessed. There are seven tributaries to Estero Bay: Estero Bay Wetlands (3258A), Hendry
    Creek (3258B), Estero Bay Drainage (3258C), Estero River (3258D), Imperial River (3258E), Tenmile
    Canal (3258G) and Spring Creek (3258H). We reanalyzed the waterbody types for each of these
    waterbody segments with data we had in our IWR database as of September 3, 2002. The method we
    used was a calculation of the median specific conductance value for each segment, using all available
    data, and application of a 5,000 mmhos/cm threshold for an estuarine classification. This method is
    consistent with how our data analysis staff assigned the original waterbody type to these segments,
    however due to new data from various sources being added to the IWR database over the past several
    months, some median specific conductance values are now below 5000 mmhos/cm. As a result, some
    segments needed to be reclassified as streams rather than estuaries, which consequently changed the
    listing status of some segments. The following is a segment-by-segment account of the changes
    precipitated by the reanalysis of waterbody type in the tributaries to Estero Bay.

    1. Estero Bay Wetlands (3258A) was classified as an estuary originally and is still classified as an
    estuary. This segment met standards for nutrients (chlorophyll) consistently throughout all of the
    various updates to the verified list and continues to do so (no change in listing status).

    2. Estero River (3258D) and Tenmile Canal (3258G) were reclassified as streams. They have both
    consistently met standards for nutrients (chlorophyll) throughout all of the various updates to the
    verified list and continue to do so even with the new classification (no change in listing status).

    3. Imperial River (3258E) was reclassified as a stream. Estero Bay Drainage (3258C) was classified as
    a stream originally and is still classified as a stream. The reclassification of these segments as streams
    did not change their listing status and they were placed on the planning list. These segments met the
    verification threshold per the IWR for nutrients (for chlorophyll) prior to the reclassification; however,
    as neither nitrogen nor phosphorus were indicated as causative pollutants, these segments were initially
    placed on the planning list for further investigation. By way of an amendment, these waters will be
    added to the verified list as impaired for nutrients (chlorophyll).

    4. Hendry Creek (3258B) and Spring Creek (3258H) were reclassified as streams. These segments met
    the verification threshold per the IWR for nutrients (chlorophyll) prior to the reclassification, however
    neither nitrogen nor phosphorus were indicated as causative pollutants, therefore these segments were
    placed on the planning list of potential impairment. The reclassification of these segments as streams
    did change their listing status, from potentially impaired to meeting standards for nutrients
    (chlorophyll).

    The reclassified segments (3258B, 3258D, 3258E, 3258G and 3258H) were also reassessed for
    dissolved oxygen and copper. The results of the reassessment for dissolved oxygen remained
    unchanged, no fewer or greater number of verified impairments for dissolved oxygen were realized.
    There were changes with regard to copper however. Where hardness data were available for each
             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                   183

    copper data value, the equation in Rule 62-302.530(24) was applied. Where concomitant hardness data
    were not available, a maximum hardness value of 400 mg/L was presumed and copper values > 38.656
    ug/L were deemed to be an exceedance. Using these procedures, a change from impaired to meeting
    standards for copper was realized for all five reclassified segments.

    In reference to coliform exceedences in the tributaries of Estero Bay mentioned above, we offered the
    following analysis on August 9, 2002:

    Hendry Creek (3258B) - In Run 4 there were 110 fecal coliform observations with 17 exceedences (16
    are needed for verification). In Run 5.1 there were 150 fecal coliform observations with 20
    exceedances (21 are needed for verification). Due to this change in total number of observations and
    exceedances, Hendry Creek’s status changed from verified impaired to meets standards. There were
    insufficient total coliform data in both runs for assessment.

    Estero Bay Drainage (3258C), Spring Creek (3258H), Estero River (3258D), Imperial River (3258E) -
    There were no changes in fecal coliform and chlorophyll status from Run 4 to Run 5.1, both meet
    standards. There were insufficient total coliform data in both runs for assessment.

•   Many of our partners have identified fecal coliforms exceeding standards in the
    tributaries to Estero Bay. Please verify the fecal exceedances for Hendry Creek,
    Estero Bay Drainage, Spring Creek, Estero River, and the Imperial River watersheds.
    [Lisa Beever, CHNEP]

    RESPONSE: See previous response.

• Most sampling for the Gordon River and Naples Bay that has been placed in
  STORET is old. SFWMD has compiled results from recent samples on the Gordon
  River upstream of U.S. 41 for 2000-2001 on its website
  (http://www.sfwmd.gov/org/ema/dfhydro/index.html). [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy
  of Southwest Florida]

    RESPONSE: FDEP’s assessments of impairment include all data from the SFWMD dbHydro
    database which meet the spatial and temporal requirements of the IWR. Only data within the last 7.5
    years were used to assess waters for the verified list.

•   We received comments that questioned our assessment of Estero Bay proper. [James
    W. Beever III, Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management; Chad Gillis, Naples Daily
    News]

    RESPONSE: Estero Bay is a Class III estuary in the FDEP Everglades West Coast Group 1 Basin
    and it is assigned a waterbody segment number of 3258I. Tributaries to Estero Bay include Estero Bay
    Wetlands (3258A), Hendry Creek (3258B), Estero Bay Drainage (3258C), Estero River (3258D),
    Imperial River (3258E), Tenmile Canal (3258G) and Spring Creek (3258H). The following discussion
    covers Estero Bay (3258I) only.

    There were sufficient data from Estero Bay in the FDEP IWR2002 database as of September 3, 2002
    for assessment of chlorophyll, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform and turbidity levels per the Impaired
    Waters Rule (62-303, F.A.C., IWR). These data were assessed with a computerized assessment
    algorithm programmed to the language and assessment requirements of the IWR (Run 6.1). The
    results of the September 3 analysis indicated that Estero Bay is meeting standards for all four of the
184      Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



 above parameters. It should be noted that, though background data were not available for turbidity,
 where there were no test values above 29 NTUs, it was assumed that State criteria for turbidity were
 being met.

 FDEP received numerous public comments following the first posting of the Group 1 verified
 impairment lists on the Internet. Some of these comments proposed that Estero Bay is actually
 impaired for nutrients, and more specifically, that chlorophyll levels have increased by more than 50%
 over historic levels (per Section 62-303.353 of the IWR). In response to public comments, we
 conducted a reanalysis of the data by hand using data from Run 6.1. Criteria shown in the IWR for
 assessing nutrient impairments were used in the analysis, as well as those in the FDEP chlorophyll
 guidance document titled Making and Using Chlorophyll Measurements Under the “Identification of
 Impaired Surface Waters” Rule, dated March 21, 2002.

 The IWR specifies that estuaries or estuary segments shall be included on the planning list and/or
 verified list for nutrients if their annual mean chlorophyll levels for any year [within the assessment
 period] are greater than 11 mg/L or if data indicate annual mean chlorophyll levels have increased by
 more than 50% over historic levels for at least two consecutive years. The assessment period
 established for all Group 1 waters, including Estero Bay, is 01/01/89 through 12/31/98 for the planning
 list, and 01/01/95 through 06/30/02 for the verified list. This means that where annual mean
 chlorophyll values from Estero Bay exceeded 11 mg/L from 01/01/89 through 12/31/98, the Bay
 would be listed on the planning list. Where annual means exceeded 11mg/L from 01/01/95 through
 06/30/02, the Bay would be listed on the verified list. Further, if a historic chlorophyll level could be
 established, and annual mean chlorophyll levels in the planning list period or the verified list period
 exceeded the historic level by more than 50% for two consecutive years, the Bay would be listed on
 the planning list and/or verified list respectively.

 The IWR stipulates that annual means must include chlorophyll data from all four seasons of a
 calendar year. To be considered temporally independent, data must have been collected at least one
 week apart and originated from monitoring locations which were at least 200 meters apart. Samples
 taken from the same location on the same day or within seven days of each other must be averaged
 together and considered as one data value for the location and week.

 The chlorophyll guidance specifies that a historic chlorophyll level shall be determined by averaging at
 least 3 annual means from a five-consecutive-year period. If there is more than one five-consecutive-
 year period of data available, the period selected shall be the one with the lowest annual means within
 it. The calculation of a historic chlorophyll level is not restricted to any specific period of record. It
 may contain any number of years of data, of any age. In the case of Estero Bay, there were both
 corrected and uncorrected chlorophyll data available. For the analysis of historic versus current
 chlorophyll levels, the chlorophyll guidance specifies that corrected data may be used to establish
 current levels (those within the planning list and/or verified list periods) and corrected, uncorrected,
 unknown or pooled chlorophyll data may be used to establish historic levels.

 Annual mean chlorophyll values were calculated for Estero Bay by first calculating seasonal means,
 then by calculating annual means through averaging of the seasonal means. This was done for each
 year with at least one value in each season (there is also a requirement that there be at least 10 samples
 within a ten-year period). Very limited raw data were available for the analysis, from legacy
 STORET, modern STORET or the dataset provided by Lee County. Data were available from only
 one station in legacy STORET (FDEP 28020117) and the data were old, from 1976 through 1979.
 Data were available from twelve Lee County stations (EB01-EB10, and EB13 and EB14) and they
 were current (1998, 2000 and 2001). The data from the twelve Lee County stations constituted all of
 the data in modern STORET for Estero Bay. The results of the reanalysis concurred with our original
 analysis, Estero Bay is meeting standards for nutrients (chlorophyll) (Table 1). There are no annual
 means in either the planning list or the verified list periods which are greater than 11 mg/L. Further,
               Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                 185

    based on the historic data shown in Table 1, there are no instances of individual annual means within
    the planning list or verified list periods that exceed the historic mean.

    Efforts will continue to obtain additional relevant water quality data from the appropriate assessment
    periods, which upon reanalysis, might reveal a different outcome. We will also continue to obtain
    credible evidence of impairment related to nutrients for the Bay based upon other indicators, as
    specified in section 62-303.350(1) of the IWR.


Table 1. Estero Bay chlorophyll reanalysis results.


  Estero Bay Chlorophyll Historical Trends Analysis
Corrected Chlor. Only                        Uncorrected Chla Only

Year    Season        Chlor.             Chla Annual Year            Season       Chlor.              Chlor. Annual
                      S      l           A                                        S      l            A
1998    Fall          4                                    1975      Fall         7

1998    Spring        9.35                                 1975      Spring       4

1998    Summer        7.05                                 1975      Summer       7

1998    Winter        5.55               6.4875            1975      Winter       5.5                 5.875

2000    Fall          2.6                                  1976      Fall         4.3

2000    Spring        4.26                                 1976      Spring       3.2

2000    Summer        8.6                                  1976      Summer       5.4

2000    Winter        8.45               5.9775            1976      Winter       4                   4.225

2001    Fall          2.3                                  1977      Fall         7.85

2001    Spring        4.1                                  1977      Spring       35.7

2001    Summer        6.05                                 1977      Summer       7.95

2001    Winter        2.7                3.7875            1977      Winter       5.2                 14.175

                                                           1978      Fall         5

                                                           1978      Spring       10.95

                                                           1978      Summer       7.5
186         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



    Estero Bay Chlorophyll Historical Trends Analysis
Corrected Chlor. Only                                      Uncorrected Chla Only

                                                           1978     Winter        7.1                 7.6375

                                                           1979     Fall          18.8

                                                           1979     Spring        3.85

                                                           1979     Summer        10.65

                                                           1979 Winter            4.7                 9.5
5-year                                                     5-year
Mean                                     5.4175            Mean                                       8.2825

September 6, 2002


•   Regarding the inclusion of Mullock Creek on the verified list for dissolved oxygen,
    we request that the Department consider the nature of the sampling location when
    evaluating the data. We do not believe the sample collected from a box culvert that
    conveys water from a drainage ditch into a canal that intersects Mullock Creek
    (21FLEECO46B-9GR/Mullock Creek – US 41) can be representative of the quality
    of water in Mullock Creek. [Bonita Bay Group]

    RESPONSE: The station in question is described as Mullock Creek upstream of the culvert at U.S.
    Highway 41.

•   It is not acceptable for the state not to list, for example, threatened waters or waters
    that have been identified as impaired by data other than chemical water quality
    samples indicating exceedances of numerical standards. Similarly, the state must list
    those waterbodies that can reasonably be expected to fail to meet [water quality
    standards] in the future due to, for example, a planned housing or industrial
    development. [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy of Southwest Florida]

    RESPONSE: The IWR establishes a methodology for assessing impairment based upon analysis of
    water quality data as measured against the criteria and standards in Rule 62-302, F.A.C.. In the case of
    nutrients, Sections 62-303.350(1) and 62-303.450(2) of the IWR provide more flexibility to use
    information (“other information indicating an imbalance of flora or fauna due to nutrient enrichment
    shall also be considered”), however, we do not believe there is sufficient information to indicate an
    imbalance of flora or fauna at this time.
    As to listing waters that are expected to fail to meet standards in the future, Section 62-303.100(2) of
    the IWR states that subsection 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and Section 403.067, FS describe
    impaired waters as those not [currently] meeting applicable water quality standards.
             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                    187

•   In developing its list of all threatened or impaired waters, the state must use “all
    existing and readily available water quality-related data and information.” 40 CFR-
    130.7(b)(5). This data includes, at a minimum, waters identified in the most recent
    state section 305(b) report at “partially meeting” or “not meeting” designated uses or
    as “threatened” waters calculated by models not to meet water quality standards; or
    water “for which water quality problems have been reported”. [Gary A. Davis,
    Conservancy of Southwest Florida]

    RESPONSE: The state’s impaired waters list is consistent with the latest 305(b) report completed in
    2002. It should be noted that, as directed by EPA guidance, the Department has changed to the
    Integrated Report format for both the 305(b) and 303(d) reporting.

•   Nor may the state refuse to list an impaired or threatened waterbody segment because
    if does not know the source of the pollutants causing the impairment. [Gary A.
    Davis, Conservancy of Southwest Florida]

    RESPONSE: Waters identified as impaired through the IWR assessment process are not excluded
    from the list because the source of pollutants is not known. In the case of impairments for dissolved
    oxygen and nutrients, a final verification of impairment cannot be accomplished without identification
    of the causative pollutant, however waters identified as such remain on the planning list until data can
    be gathered that allows identification of a causative pollutant, until such time as it has been concluded
    that the impairment is due to a naturally occurring condition.

•   Fish advisories should be used [in the assessment process]. Although the Impaired
    Waters Rule contemplates the use of fish consumption advisories, the only advisories
    mentioned in the list of waters are mercury advisories. There are several other fish
    consumption advisories in the region that have been issued due to localized
    contamination, such as bacterial contamination. These include parts of the Gordon
    River and Naples Bay, as well as Estero Bay (for shellfish harvesting). Have these
    other advisories been taken into account? [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy of Southwest
    Florida]

    RESPONSE: Section 62-303.370 spells out the criteria for use in assessing impairment based upon
    fish advisories. All waters with limited or no consumption fish consumption advisories issued by the
    Department of Health or other authorized government entity were listed. While the vast majority of
    the listings were based on advisories based on mercury in fish tissue, we included advisories for other
    pollutants when available. We also included waters impaired by bacterial contamination if the water
    does not meet the applicable water quality criteria for bacteriological criteria based on the IWR
    methodology, or for Class II waters, if the water included an area that had been approved for shellfish
    harvesting by SEAS and subsequently downgraded in its classification.

•   There is no indication that the protection for Outstanding Florida Waters were
    considered in developing the impaired waters list. [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy of
    Southwest Florida]
188         Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast



    RESPONSE: There are no OFW-specific assessment criteria in the IWR, and as such, we evaluated
    impairment of OFWs just like any other state surface water. The only OFW-specific language in the
    IWR relates to the prioritization of OFWs for TMDL development. We believe our decision to not
    address OFWs with specific language is consistent with state standards and with the OFW Program in
    general, which is implemented through the Department’s permitting program (rather than the TMDL
    program).

•   DEP should keep impaired waters on the Impaired Waters List until DEP
    demonstrates that water quality standards are being met. In any event, it makes sense
    to retain these waters on the impaired list submitted to EPA while these challenges to
    the Impaired Waters Rule are pending. [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy of Southwest
    Florida]

    RESPONSE: All waters on the 1998 303(d) list are retained on the list until either assessment per the
    IWR demonstrates standards are being met, it is determined there was a flaw in the original analysis,
    the impairment is conclusively determined to be due to a natural, unabatable condition, or a TMDL is
    completed.

•   I am unable to attend the July 25th public hearing on the new standards for deciding if
    waters are polluted. My interest is Estero Bay. I am adamantly opposed to any
    lowering of standards for the Estero Bay estuary. This body of water is under
    tremendous pressure from an onslaught of development around its perimeter, from
    condos, single-family home and hotels. Each new residence brings added run-off and
    its accompanying pollution from fertilizers, chemicals, and just general run-off. All of
    this pollution must, by its very nature, further degrade the waters. I would implore
    you to work to help improve the waters of Estero Bay so that our future generations
    can enjoy it as a thriving estuary with lots of fish, amphibians, insects and birds. And
    not another "dead" zone as happens all to often when development interests prevail
    over ordinary citizens wishes. Good science tells us that if a body of water is already
    "impaired", allowing additional pollutants to be added must further impair it. Which
    leads me to a logical conclusion. Every time we in SW Florida see a maneuver by a
    government agency to weaken standards, we wonder who in the development
    community has prevailed for their own economic interests. All to often we find out
    later, after the dirt deed is done. We see what damage is currently being done to the
    US economy and to American's trust in their corporations and government. Corporate
    greed and a lack of "public conscience" allow these travesties to happen. When will
    the government wake up to the fact that too much of our ecological future is on the
    line with each and every weakening of standards. When will reasonable government
    administrators say "enough is enough" and not sell out to every political and
    development pressure that comes along. Southwest Florida and its coastline is an
    ecological gem. Let's keep the "gem" shiny and say no to anything that will diminish
    it. [Marie Gargano, Citizen]
             Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast                                 189

    RESPONSE: State water quality standards for Estero Bay have not been lowered nor weakened, nor
    are there any plans to do so. The State’s Impaired Waters Rule (Rule 62-303, F.A.C.) was designed to
    apply good science, in an objective and repeatable manner, to arrive at conclusions about the
    impairment status of our surface waters. It is the intention of FDEP to continue the assessment of our
    surface waters under the specifications of the Rule, and not bend under pressure from special interest
    groups.

•   Not only must the state use all existing and available information, but also the state
    must actively solicit such information from other agencies, the public and all possible
    sources. 40 CRF 130.7(b)(5)(iii). [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy of Southwest
    Florida].

    RESPONSE: FDEP actively solicited all credible data from which conclusions can be drawn with
    regard to impairment of our surface waters, with the caveat that the data provided must meet the
    QA/QC requirements specified in the Impaired Waters Rule. All data provided to us for inclusion in
    our assessments were evaluated for compliance with the data requirements of the IWR and they were
    used if possible. In most cases, contributed data were uploaded to the IWR database for automated
    assessment. In some cases, due to the format in which data were received, hand analysis was
    necessary. Where there were unclear or missing pieces of information crucial to the assignment of
    data to the appropriate waterbody segment, attempts were made to retrieve the missing information.
    Where there were unresolved questions regarding the appropriate assignment of data or compliance of
    data with FDEP QA/QC requirements, the data were not used.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
    Division of Water Resource Management
          Bureau of Water Management
    2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 3565
        Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400
                 (850) 245-8561
           www.dep.state.fl.us/water

								
To top