Withlacoochee - Florida Department of Environmental Protection

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

Division of Water Resource Management 

SOUTHWEST • GROUP 4 BASIN • 2005 

Water Quality Status Report 

Withlacoochee

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 


2005 

Water Quality Status Report 

Withlacoochee

Water Quality Status Report: Withlacoochee 

5 

Acknowledgments 

The Withlacoochee Water Quality Status Report was prepared by 

the Withlacoochee Basin Team, Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection, as part of a five-year cycle to restore and protect Florida’s water 

quality. Team members include the following: 

Tom Singleton, Team Coordinator 

Kevin Petrus, Water Quality Assessment Coordinator 

Holli Brandt, GIS Coordinator 

Zach Shelley 

Aaron Lassiter 

Deborah Harrington 

CeCe McKiernan 

Charles Kovach 

Diana Williams 

Joan Aguilo 

David Worley 

Editorial and writing assistance provided by 

Linda Lord, Watershed Planning and Coordination 

Production assistance provided by 

Center for Information, Training, and Evaluation Services 

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 


For additional information on the watershed management 

approach and potentially impaired waters in the Withlacoochee 

Basin, contact 

Tom Singleton, Environmental Consultant 

Florida Department of Environmental Protection 

2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 3565 


thomas.singleton@dep.state.fl.us 

Phone: (850) 245-8561; SunCom: 205-8561 

Fax: (850) 245-8434

6 Water Quality Status Report: Withlacoochee 

Access to all data used in the development of this report can be 

obtained by contacting 

Kevin Petrus 


Bureau of Watershed Management, Watershed Assessment Section 



kevin.petrus@dep.state.fl .us 

Phone: (850) 245-8459; SunCom: 205-8459 

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 

2002 305(b) Report 

http://www.dep.state.fl.us./water/docs/2002_305b.pdf 

Criteria for Surface Water Quality Classifications 

http://www.dep.state.fl.us/legal/Rules/rulelistnum.htm 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National STORET Program 

http://www.epa.gov/storet


7 

Preface 

Content Features 

• Executive Summary: Appears at the beginning of every report and 

provides an overview of the watershed management, its implementation, 

and how this approach will be used to identify impaired waters. 

• Sidebar: Appears throughout the report and provides additional 

information pertinent to the text on that page. 

• Noteworthy: Appears on pages near text that needs additional 

information but is too lengthy to fit in a sidebar. 

• Definitions: Appear 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 in the text. 

• Appendices: Appear at the end of the report and provide additional 

information on a range of subjects such as bioassessment methodology, 

rainfall and stream flow, types of natural communities, 

STORET stations, water quality statistics, land use, and permitted 

facilities.


9 

Executive Summary 

Withlacoochee 

The Water Quality Status Report for the Withlacoochee Basin is 

developed in the first phase of the Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection’s (Department) watershed management approach for restoring 

and protecting water resources and addressing Total Maximum Daily 

Load (TMDL) Program requirements. A TMDL represents the maximum 

amount of a given pollutant that a waterbody can assimilate and 

meet the waterbody’s designated uses. A waterbody that does not meet its 

designated 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 (Chapter 99-223, Laws of 

Florida). 

This Status Report provides a preliminary identification of impaired 

waters in the Withlacoochee Basin that may require the development and 

implementation of TMDLs, unless the impairment is documented to be 

a naturally occurring condition that cannot be abated by a TMDL, or 

unless a management plan that is already in place is expected to correct the 

problem. This preliminary assessment, based on readily available data, will 

be revised as additional data are evaluated. The report broadly characterizes 

the basin’s setting and its surface water and ground water resources, 

permitted discharges, land uses, and ecological status. It also identifies 

potential water quality concerns and water quality monitoring needs, and 

summarizes plans and projects that are under way or projected to improve 

water quality. Tables in Chapters 3 and 4 include the current Planning List 

of potentially impaired waterbodies, as well as other summary information. 

See Noteworthy in Chapter 1 for a description of the contents of this 

report by chapter. 

In the Withlacoochee Basin, state, federal, regional, and local agencies 

and organizations are making progress towards identifying problems and 

improving water quality. Throughout 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 objectives will be carried out in the 

basin through close coordination with the efforts of key stakeholders and 

initiatives such as the Southwest Florida Water Management District 

(SWFWMD); the Withlacoochee Regional Planning Council; Polk, Lake, 

Sumter, Pasco, Hernando, Citrus, Marion, and Levy Counties; and the 

Lake Panasoffkee Restoration Council. 

Not only do stakeholders in the basin share responsibilities in achieving 

water quality improvement objectives, they also play a crucial role in providing 

the Department with important monitoring data and information 

on management activities. Significant data providers in the basin include


SWFWMD, U.S. Geological Survey, LakeWatch, Polk County, and the 

Department. 

During the next few years, further data collection and analysis will be 

done to establish TMDLs for impaired waters in the Withlacoochee Basin, 

establish the initial allocations of pollutant load reductions needed to meet 

those TMDLs, and produce a Basin Management Action Plan to reduce 

the amount of pollutants that cause impairments. These activities depend 

on the participation of the water management district, local governments, 

businesses, and other stakeholders. The Department will work with 

these groups and individuals to undertake or continue reductions in the 

discharge of pollutants and achieve the established TMDLs for impaired 

waterbodies. 

The information in this report is being used to identify waterbodies 

and parameters for which additional data are needed to verify water quality 

impairments. Data gathering and monitoring will then focus on these 

potentially impaired waters. Once these data were reevaluated and reassessed, 

in the summer of 2004 the Department presented a list of waters 

for which impairments have been verified and for which TMDLs will be 

developed. 

The Verifi ed List of impaired waters will be adopted by Secretarial 

Order in accordance with the FWRA. Once adopted, the list will be 

submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for approval as the 

state’s Section 303(d) list of impaired waters for the basin. 

Summary of Findings 

The following summarizes potential impairments, including waterbody 

types and primary pollutants, for each planning unit in the basin. 

Planning units are smaller areas that provide a more detailed geographic 

basis for identifying and assessing water quality improvement activities. 

Figures 3.3 through 3.7 (in Chapter 3) depict the results of this 

evaluation. 

Upper Withlacoochee River Planning Unit 

Of the 81 waterbody segments in the Upper Withlacoochee River 

planning unit, 15 segments have sufficient data for assessment. Of these, 

12 are potentially impaired for at least 1 parameter assessed, and 3 meet 

some standards. 

The 12 potentially impaired segments in the planning unit, and the 

parameters of impairment, are as follows: 

Portions of the Withlacoochee River Dissolved oxygen (DO), 

mercury in fish 

Lake Lindsey 

DO, fecal and total coliforms 

Spring Lake 

Iron 

Little Withlacoochee River DO, fecal and total coliforms, 

biology, pH 

Lake Geneva 

DO, iron


11 

Dade City Canal 

Grass Creek 

Lake Agnes 

Mud Lake 

Lake Mattie 

DO, biological oxygen demand, 

chlorophyll a 

Mercury in fish 

Trophic state index (TSI) 

TSI 

TSI 

Lake Panasoffkee Planning Unit 

Of the 29 waterbody segments in the Lake Panasoffkee planning unit, 

3 segments have sufficient data for assessment. Of these, 3 are potentially 

impaired for at least 1 parameter assessed, and no segments meet some 

standards. 

The three potentially impaired segments in the planning unit, and the 


Lake Panasoffkee 

An outlet to Lake 

Panasoffkee 

Lake Okahumpka 

pH 

pH, DO 

Biology 

Tsala Apopka Planning Unit 

Of the 23 waterbody segments in the Tsala Apopka planning unit, 

12 segments have sufficient data for assessment. Of these, 2 are potentially 

impaired for at least 1 parameter assessed, and 10 meet some standards. 

The two potentially impaired segments in the planning unit, and the 


The outlet to Lake Tsala Apopka 

Lake Henderson 

DO, historical chlorophyll 

TSI 

Rainbow River Planning Unit 

Of the two waterbody segments in the Rainbow River planning unit, 

both segments have sufficient data for assessment. Of these, both are 

potentially impaired for at least 1 parameter assessed, and both meet some 

standards. 

The two potentially impaired segments in the planning unit, and the 


Rainbow River 

Rainbow Springs 

Biology 

Chlorophyll a 

Lower Withlacoochee River Planning Unit 

Of the 16 waterbody segments in the Lower Withlacoochee River 

planning unit, 7 segments have sufficient data for assessment. Of these, 5 

are potentially impaired for at least 1 parameter assessed, and 2 meet some 

standards.


The five potentially impaired segments in the planning unit, and the 


Two portions of the Lower 

Withlacoochee River 

Lake Rousseau 

Blue Cove Lake 

Leslie-Hefner Canal 

DO, Mercury in fish 

DO, TSI, fecal and total 

coliforms 

TSI 

DO


13 

Table of Contents 

Chapter 1: Introduction .......................................................................17 

Purposes and Content of the Status Report....................................................... 17 

Explanation of the Planning List.................................................................................... 17 

Explanation of the Verified List ..................................................................................... 18 

Stakeholder Involvement..................................................................................... 18 

The Watershed Management Cycle in the Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection’s Southwest District ................................................. 19 

Chapter 2: Basin Overview ................................................................. 23 

Basin Setting ........................................................................................................23 

Surface Water Resources ....................................................................................26 

Physiography and Hydrology......................................................................................... 26 

Surface Water Features................................................................................................. 29 

Surface Water Quality Classifications ......................................................................... 33 

Special Designations ..................................................................................................... 33 

Outstanding Florida Waters....................................................................................................33 

Surface Water Improvement and Management Priority Waters .............................................33 

Aquatic Preserves ..................................................................................................................34 

National Natural Landmarks ...................................................................................................34 

Minimum Flows and Levels ....................................................................................................34 

Ground Water Resources ....................................................................................35 

Hydrogeology................................................................................................................. 35 

Aquifers .......................................................................................................................... 36 

Surficial Aquifer System.........................................................................................................37 

Confining Unit.........................................................................................................................37 

Upper Floridan Aquifer System...............................................................................................37 

Ground Water–Surface Water Interactions .................................................................. 38 

Ground Water Usage ..................................................................................................... 38 

Major Water Quality Trends.................................................................................39 

Nitrate Contamination.................................................................................................... 39 

Rainbow Springs and River ................................................................................................... 40 

Lake Panasoffkee .................................................................................................................. 40 

Tsala Apopka Chain of Lakes .................................................................................................41 

Southeastern Pasco County....................................................................................................41 

Watershed Management Activities and Processes ........................................... 41 

Major Programs and Projects........................................................................................ 41 

Rainbow River Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan ......................................41 

Rainbow Springs Coordination Council...................................................................................42 

Florida Springs Task Force......................................................................................................42 

Nutrient Remediation Workgroup ...........................................................................................42 

Lake Panasoffkee Restoration Council................................................................................... 43 

Land Acquisition.................................................................................................................... 43 

Cross-Florida Greenway ........................................................................................................ 44 

Restoration Initiatives ............................................................................................................ 44 

Agricultural Best Management Practices............................................................................... 45 

Chapter 3: Preliminary Surface Water Quality Assessment .............. 47 

Scope of the Preliminary Assessment ............................................................... 47 

Sources of Data....................................................................................................48 

Attainment of Designated Use............................................................................49


Integrated Report Categories and Assessment Overview ................................50 

Planning Units ...................................................................................................... 52 

Assessment by Planning Unit .............................................................................55 

Upper Withlacoochee River Planning Unit ................................................................... 55 

General Description................................................................................................................55 

Water Quality Summary .........................................................................................................55 

Permitted Discharges and Land Uses .....................................................................................57 

Ecological Summary...............................................................................................................62 

Lake Panasoffkee Planning Unit.................................................................................... 65 



Permitted Discharges and Land Uses .................................................................................... 68 

Ecological Summary..............................................................................................................68 

Tsala Apopka Planning Unit ........................................................................................... 71 



Permitted Discharges and Land Uses .....................................................................................75 


Rainbow River Planning Unit ......................................................................................... 77 





Lower Withlacoochee River Planning Unit ................................................................... 83 

General Description............................................................................................................... 83 

Water Quality Summary ........................................................................................................ 83 


Ecological Summary.............................................................................................................. 88 

Chapter 4: The Planning List of Potentially Impaired Waters ............ 89 

The Planning List..................................................................................................89 

Relationship Between the Planning List and the 303(d) List.............................89 

Summary of Impairments ................................................................................... 92 

Waters with Insufficient Data To Determine Impairment..................................93 

Chapter 5: Strategic Monitoring and Data Evaluation ...................... 95 

Strategic Monitoring and Data Acquisition Priorities........................................95 

Data Acquisition Objectives ................................................................................95 

Phase 2 Assessment: Data Collection and Database Management 

Leading to the Development of the 303(d) List of Impaired Waters................. 97 

Verified List Development and Public Comment ...............................................98 

References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 

Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111


15 

Tables 

Table 1.1: Stakeholder Involvement in the TMDL Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 

Table 2.1: Estimated Daily Water Use (mgd) in the Withlacoochee Basin in 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 

Table 3.1: Designated Use Attainment Categories for Surface Waters in Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 

Table 3.2: Categories for Waterbodies or Waterbody Segments in the 2002 Integrated Report . . . . 51 

Table 3.3: Planning Units in the Withlacoochee Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 

Table 3.4: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Upper Withlacoochee 

River Planning Unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 

Table 3.5: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Lake Panasoffkee 

Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 

Table 3.6: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Tsala Apopka Planning Unit . . . . 76 

Table 3.7: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Rainbow River Planning Unit . . . 81 

Table 3.8: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Lower Withlacoochee 

River Planning Unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 

Table 4.1: Potentially Impaired Waters in the Withlacoochee Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 

Table 4.2: Parameters Causing Potential Impairments in the Withlacoochee Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 

Table 5.1: Strategic Monitoring and Data Evaluation Objectives for Planning List Waters in the 

Withlacoochee Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 

Figures 

Figure 1.1: Schedule for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle in the Department’s 

Southwest District, Basin Groups 1 through 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 

Figure 2.1: Geopolitical Map of the Withlacoochee Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 

Figure 2.2: Surface Water Resources of the Withlacoochee Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 

Figure 3.1: Sources of Data for the Withlacoochee Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 

Figure 3.2: Locations and Boundaries of Planning Units in the Withlacoochee Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 

Figure 3.3: Composite Map of the Upper Withlacoochee River Planning Unit, Including the 

1998 303(d) List and Planning List Waters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 

Figure 3.4: Composite Map of the Lake Panasoffkee Planning Unit, Including the 1998 303(d) 

List and Planning List Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 

Figure 3.5: Composite Map of the Tsala Apopka Planning Unit, Including the 1998 303(d) 


Figure 3.6: Composite Map of the Rainbow River Planning Unit, Including the 1998 303(d) 


Figure 3.7: Composite Map of the Lower Withlacoochee River Planning Unit, Including the 

1998 303(d) List and Planning List Waters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 

Figure 4.1: Withlacoochee Basin Planning List for All Causes of Potential Impairment, with 

Overlay of 1998 303(d) List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91


17 

Chapter 1: Introduction 

Purposes and Content of the Status 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 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, recreation, 

and shellfish harvesting) and are thus defined as impaired. 

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. Extensive 

public participation from diverse stakeholders in each of these basins is 

crucial in all phases of the cycle. 

This report presents a Planning List of potentially impaired water bodies 

in the Withlacoochee Basin, identifies general water quality monitoring 

needs, and provides an overview of water quality restoration plans and 

projects (see Noteworthy for a description of the contents of the Status 

Report, by chapter). It is intended for distribution to a broad range of 

potential stakeholders, including decision makers in federal, state, regional, 

tribal, and local governments; public and private interests; and citizens. 

A description of the legislative and regulatory background for TMDL 

development and implementation through the watershed management 

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. 

Total Maximum 

Daily Load 

The maximum amount of a 

given pollutant that a waterbody 

can assimilate and 

remain healthy, such that all 

of its designated uses are 

met. 

Explanation of the Planning List 

The Planning List is the preliminary list of potentially impaired surface 

waterbodies or waterbody segments in the Withlacoochee Basin. Under the 

FWRA, the Planning List is submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) for informational purposes only and is not used to 

administer or implement any regulatory program. 

To be placed on the Planning List, waters must meet specifi c data 

sufficiency and data quality requirements in the state’s Identification of 

Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR) (Rule 62-303, Florida Administrative 

Code [F.A.C.]). Developed in cooperation with a Technical Advisory 

Committee, the rule provides a science-based methodology for identifying


impaired waters (Appendix B). It addresses chemical parameters, the 

interpretation of narrative nutrient criteria, biological impairment, fish 

consumption advisories, and ecological impairment. The complete text of 

the IWR is available at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/index.htm. 

Explanation of the Verified List 

The publication of the Status Report is followed by a period of monitoring 

and data gathering and, at the end of Phase 2 of the watershed 

management cycle, by an Assessment Report containing a Verifi ed List of 

impaired waterbodies or segments for which TMDLs will be calculated, as 

provided in Subsection 403.067(2), Florida Statutes (F.S.). This Assessment 

Report also contains additional data gathered by the Department, 

other agencies, and groups doing monitoring in the basin; a more complete 

evaluation of water quality and biological resources; and a designated use 

attainment assessment for basin waters. 

The Assessment Report follows the EPA’s guidance for meshing Clean 

Water Act requirements for Section 305(b) water quality reports and 

Section 303(d) lists of impaired waters. This integrated assessment is used 

to identify the status of data sufficiency, the potential for impairment, and 

the need for TMDL development for each waterbody or waterbody segment 

in the basin. 

The Verified List is required by Subsection 403.067(4), F.S., and 

Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act. It is adopted by the 

Department in accordance with the FWRA and the IWR (Rule 62-303, 

F.A.C.). Once adopted, the list is submitted to the EPA under Section 

303(d)1.c of the Clean Water Act and becomes the 303(d) list of impaired 

waters for the basin. 

The first 303(d) list, which was required by the EPA in 1998, is to 

be amended annually to include basin updates. Florida’s 1998 303(d) 

list included a number of waterbodies in the Withlacoochee Basin. 

Tables 3.4 through 3.8 in Chapter 3 list these waters by planning unit. 

Stakeholder Involvement 

The FWRA requires the Department to work closely with stakeholders 

to develop and implement TMDLs. In addition, the Department’s Allocation 

Technical Advisory Committee report, submitted to the legislature, 

recommends relying on stakeholder involvement. Stakeholder involvement 

in the TMDL process will vary with each phase of implementation to 

achieve different purposes (Table 1.1). 

The Department will work cooperatively with a number of key stakeholders 

to develop, allocate, and implement TMDLs in the Withlacoochee 

Basin. These include the Southwest Florida Water Management District; 

Withlacoochee Regional Planning Council; Polk, Lake, Sumter, Pasco, 

Hernando, Citrus, Marion, and Levy Counties; and Lake Panasoffkee 

Restoration Council.


19 

Table 1.1: Stakeholder Involvement in the TMDL Program 

Watershed Management Cycle 

Phase 1: 

Preliminary 

Evaluation 

Phase 2: 

Strategic Monitoring 

and Assessment 

Phase 3: 

Development and 

Adoption of TMDLs 

Phase 4: 

Development of Basin Management 

Action Plan 

Phase 5: 

Implementation of Basin 

Management Action Plan 

Nature of Stakeholder Involvement 

Close coordination with local stakeholders to conduct a preliminary basin water 

quality assessment; inventory existing and proposed management activities; 

identify management objectives and issues of concern; develop a Strategic 

Monitoring Plan; and produce a preliminary Status Report that includes a Planning 

List of potentially impaired waters 

Cooperative efforts between the Department and local stakeholders to collect 

additional data; get data into STORET (the EPA’s national STOrage and 

RETrieval water quality database); 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 assurance (for Department review) that existing or proposed management 

plans and projects are adequate to restore water quality without the 

establishment of a TMDL 

Coordination with stakeholders to discuss TMDL model framework, including 

model requirements, parameters to be modeled, model endpoints, design run 

scenarios, and preliminary allocations; communication of science used in the 

process; public workshops for rule adoption of TMDLs 

Broad stakeholder participation in developing a Basin Management Action Plan 

(B-MAP) (including detailed allocations and implementation strategies), incorporating 

it into existing management plans where feasible; public meetings 

during the planning process 

Emphasis on implementing the B-MAP, other voluntary stakeholder actions, 

and local watershed management structures; Department will continue to 

provide technical assistance, fulfill oversight responsibilities, and administer 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) point and nonpoint 

source permits 

The Watershed Management Cycle in 

the Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection’s Southwest District 

Figure 1.1 shows the order in which the Department’s Southwest District 

basin groups will be evaluated under the watershed management cycle. 

These groups are identified according to a U.S. Geological Survey classification 

system using hydrologic unit codes. 

Tampa Bay, a Group 1 basin, was the first basin in the district to 

undergo a preliminary assessment in 2000. A preliminary assessment for 

the Group 2 basin, Tampa Bay Tributaries, was completed in 2001 and for 

the Group 3 basin, Sarasota Bay–Peace–Myakka, in 2002. The Group 4 

preliminary assessment for the Withlacoochee Basin is the subject of this 

report. The preliminary assessment for the Group 5 basin, Springs Coast, 

will be carried out in 2004. In 2005, the cycle will resume with the 

Group 1 basin, Tampa Bay.


Figure 1.1: Schedule for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle in the Department’s 

Southwest District, Basin Groups 1 through 5

Noteworthy 

Contents of This Report 

• Chapter 1: Introduction 

briefly characterizes the purpose 

and content of the Status 

Report, discusses stakeholder 

involvement, and describes 

how the watershed management 

cycle will be implemented 

in the Department’s 

Southwest District. 

• Chapter 2: Basin Overview 

characterizes the basin’s general 

setting; surface water and 

ground water resources; and 

watershed management activities 

and processes. 

• Chapter 3: Preliminary 

Surface Water Quality 

Assessment provides, by 

basin planning unit, an evaluation 

of water quality, a discussion 

of permitted discharges 

and land uses, a summary 

of ecological priorities and 

problems, and an overview 

of water quality improvement 

plans and projects. 

• Chapter 4: Planning List of 

Potentially Impaired Waters 

contains the Planning List of 

potentially impaired waterbodies. 

It also describes the 

relationship between the 

Planning and Verified Lists, 

and summarizes water quality 

findings for the basin. 

• Chapter 5: Strategic Monitoring 

and Data Evaluation 

summarizes strategic monitoring 

and data evaluation 

priorities and objectives that 

are critical to the development 

of the Verified List of impaired 

waters during the next phase 

of the watershed management 

cycle. It includes a general 

inventory of monitoring and 

data-gathering activities by 

other groups and programs 

that could be incorporated into 

the assessment. 

Water Quality Status Report: 


21


23 

Chapter 2: Basin Overview 

Basin Setting 

The Withlacoochee River Basin, located in the central/northwest part 

of the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD), covers 

approximately 2,100 square miles. Withlacoochee is a Native American 

word meaning “crooked river.” The 157-mile-long Withlacoochee River 

originates in the Green Swamp in northern Polk County. From there, it 

meanders to the northwest and then west, discharging into Withlacoochee 

Bay in the Gulf of Mexico near Yankeetown. The river’s waters are tea 

colored and tannic from organic material. The riverbed declines from an 

elevation of 125 feet above mean sea level, with an average drop of 0.8 feet 

per mile. 

The Withlacoochee is one of two rivers in the state that flows north 

(the other is the St. Johns River). It traverses eight counties (Polk, Lake, 

Sumter, Pasco, Hernando, Citrus, Marion, and Levy). The river, as well as 

its connected lakes and tributaries, have been designated as Outstanding 

Florida Waters (OFW). 

The Green Swamp constitutes the headwaters for the Withlacoochee 

River and several other major rivers in the region, including the Hillsborough, 

Peace, and Ocklawaha. The Withlacoochee River drains 

approximately 80 percent of the Green Swamp, which consists of a series 

of uplands and marshes covering about 850 square miles in northern Polk 

County, southwestern Lake County, southern Sumter County, and eastern 

Pasco County. Many small, named tributary creeks form an extensive area 

of riverine habitat and contribute flow to the Withlacoochee River within 

the Green Swamp. 

It has been suggested that the Green Swamp ranks second only to the 

Everglades in its hydrologic and environmental significance. The swamp’s 

extensive wetlands are essential to wildlife populations throughout westcentral 

Florida, including many endangered and threatened species or 

species of special concern. Approximately one-fi fth of the state and federally 

listed vertebrate species in Florida (111) are documented to occur in the 

Green Swamp. In 1974, portions of the swamp were designated as Areas of 

Critical State Concern; this designation places strict standards on zoning 

and construction in the floodplain. 

Jumper Creek, which lies north of the Green Swamp, is one of the 

oldest major regional drainage canals in Sumter County. The 16-mile-long 

creek has been designated as an OFW. 

The headwaters of the Little Withlacoochee River, the largest tributary 

of the Withlacoochee River, lie in the Green Swamp in Lake County. 

From there the river flows through the Withlacoochee State Forest, where 

Sources of 

Information 

Much of the information 

about the Withlacoochee 

Basin in Chapters 2 and 3 

was excerpted or adapted 

from the Withlacoochee River 

Watershed Plan (Southwest 

Florida Water Management 

District [SWFWMD], 2001), 

An Ecological Characterization 

of the Florida Springs 

Coast: Pithlachascotee to 

Waccasassa Rivers (U.S. 

Department of the Interior, 

Fish and Wildlife Service and 

Minerals Management Service, 

in cooperation with the 

SWFWMD, Biological Report 

90[21], December 1990), 

and the SWFWMD’s Draft 

Rainbow River Surface Water 

Improvement and Management 

(SWIM) Plan (September 

2003). The References 

section at the end of this 

report contains a complete 

listing of sources.


the river channel is wide and shallow, with a dense canopy of cypress and 

wetland hardwoods. The Little Withlacoochee remains largely undisturbed 

within the bounds of the state forest. The river and its connected 

lakes and tributaries have been designated as OFWs. 

Lakes Panasoffkee and Tsala Apopka, as well as many smaller lakes 

in the basin, are thought to be remnants of a much larger lake that once 

occupied all of a physiographic region called the Tsala Apopka Plain. 

Lake Panasoffkee, the largest lake in Sumter County, is an important and 

unique surface water feature in the basin. It is one of the state’s oldest lakes 

and, unlike most Florida lakes, the Floridan aquifer is actually exposed at 

the land surface within the lake. Depending on rainfall, the lake’s surface 

area ranges from about 3,800 to 4,500 acres. It is relatively shallow, 

with a mean depth of 3 feet and a maximum of 10 feet. Extensive areas of 

wetland vegetation dominate the shoreline, providing habitat for fish and 

wildlife. The lake has been designated as a Surface Water Improvement 

and Management (SWIM) priority waterbody. 

Lake Tsala Apopka, in the middle portion of the river, is the largest 

lake system associated with the Withlacoochee River. The lake comprises 

3 hydrologically distinct pools (Floral City, Inverness, and Hernando) 

covering approximately 20,000 acres in Citrus County. Thousands of 

acres of contiguous marsh surround these open-water features and support 

diverse wetland-dependent species. 

Downstream from Lake Panasoffkee is Lake Rousseau. Approximately 

11 miles long, the lake has a surface area of about 4,200 acres. In 1909, the 

Florida Power Corporation created this reservoir by impounding the river 

to generate electric power. The flow of water over the Inglis Dam produced 

electric power until 1965. 

The 5.7-mile-long Rainbow River (also known as Blue Run), in 

western Marion County, is a spring-fed tributary to the Withlacoochee 

River just upstream of Lake Rousseau in Citrus County. Although a small 

stream reach, the Rainbow River discharges approximately 493 million 

gallons per day (mgd) to the Withlacoochee River. The Rainbow River’s 

waters are crystal clear, since it is fed predominantly by Rainbow Springs, 

a first-magnitude spring that is the largest in the basin and Florida’s 

fourth largest spring. The river has been designated as a SWIM priority 

waterbody, an OFW, and an Aquatic Preserve, and the spring has been 

designated as a National Natural Landmark. 

West of Lake Rousseau, the channel of the lower Withlacoochee River 

from Inglis to the river’s mouth was dramatically altered by the construction 

of the now-deactivated Cross-Florida Barge Canal in the 1960s. 

Before work began on the canal, all waters exiting the Lake Rousseau 

reservoir flowed to the Gulf of Mexico through the natural channel of the 

lower Withlacoochee River. The barge canal bisected the lower river two 

miles below the reservoir spillway, affecting flows to the estuary. 

Numerous control structures regulate flows in both the river and its 

surrounding tributaries and wetlands. The only structure in the river itself 

above Inglis is the Wysong Dam, just downstream of the Lake Panasoffkee 

inflow. The Inglis Structural Complex includes the Inglis Dam and the 

various locks and spillways of the abandoned Cross-Florida Barge Canal.


25 

Approximately 11 miles downstream from the Inglis Dam, the Withlacoochee 

River reaches its terminus at the Gulf of Mexico. The Withlacoochee 

Bay Estuary is part of a large complex of estuaries and bays within 

the Springs Coast region, which extends from Tarpon Springs in the south 

to the Big Bend region in the north. These areas contain diverse fi sh and 

wildlife habitat and are extremely important for commercial and recreational 

fisheries and other wildlife species. 

The Withlacoochee Basin exhibits a wide range of land uses and land 

cover types, including natural lands and areas converted to agriculture, 

silviculture, residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Although residential 

and commercial development in the region is increasing, the basin as a 

whole remains largely undeveloped. Urban areas in the basin include Dade 

City, Ridge Manor, Brooksville, Dunnellon, and Inverness. Currently, 

however, there are no urban centers on the Withlacoochee River. 

Public land ownership is significant in the basin. The Withlacoochee 

State Forest, managed by the Division of Forestry, is currently the second 

largest state forest in Florida. It covers more than 140,000 acres in eastern 

Citrus and Hernando Counties. The Withlacoochee River, Little Withlacoochee 

River, and Jumper Creek, which have been designated as OFWs, 

flow through the forest. Many other large parcels of land, including the 

Flying Eagle Ranch, Potts Preserve, the Lake Panasoffkee Tract, and 

parcels in the Green Swamps, are also publicly owned. 

The basin’s natural communities form an extensive and diverse ecosystem, 

ranging from river floodplain forests, cypress domes, pine fl atwoods, 

and sandhills in the Green Swamp, to extensive lake systems and marshes 

in the middle basin, to salt marshes and the estuary at the mouth of the 

river. This ecosystem supports nearly 500 species of vertebrates (freshwater 

and saltwater fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals). In addition 

to a wide range of common vertebrate species, many listed species inhabit 

the Withlacoochee Basin. 

The dominant land uses and land coverages in the Withlacoochee 

Basin are wetlands, upland forest, rangeland, agriculture, mining, and 

urban and built-up. The Green Swamp has mostly agricultural and 

wetland coverages. Farther downstream, land uses become more urbanized 

near Dade City in Pasco County, but agriculture and wetlands still 

predominate. Finally, in the Lake Tsala Apopka area downstream to 

Dunnellon, more land is urbanized, but agriculture and wetlands are still a 

dominant part of the landscape. 

Agricultural activities include cattle ranching, row crops, sod, pasture, 

pine plantation, and cypress harvesting. Improved pasture comprises most 

of the agricultural land use. The primary industrial land use in the basin 

is limerock mining. Other types of mining include the extraction of sand 

and horticultural peat. Numerous active and inactive mines are scattered 

throughout the basin, many of them in the Green Swamp and along the 

Rainbow River. Although these activities have changed the character of 

the landscape, they do not appear to have significantly affected historical 

river flows.


Figure 2.1 shows the principal geopolitical features in the Withlacoochee 

Basin. Appendix C contains supplementary information on the 

basin’s ecology. 

Surface Water Resources 

The Withlacoochee Basin contains numerous surface waterbodies. 

Surface waters, including lakes, streams, wetlands, and springs, occupy 

338,516 acres, or about 25 percent of the total basin area. This section 

delineates the basin’s hydrology, describes the movement and management 

of water in the basin, briefly describes the major characteristics of surface 

waters that influence water quality in the basin, and describes surface water 

classifications and special designations. 

Figure 2.2 shows the locations of the largest waterbodies. A more 

detailed discussion in Chapter 3 provides information on each planning 

unit. 

Anticline 

Folded strata that has an arch 

shape. 

Physiography and Hydrology 

The primary physiographic features in the basin are the Brooksville 

Ridge, Tsala Apopka Plain, Coastal Lowlands, Webster Limestone Plain, 

and the Dade City Hills. The Brooksville Ridge has a very irregular 

surface, with elevations varying from 70 to 200 feet National Geodetic 

Vertical Datum (NGVD) over short distances. The ridge is mantled with 

clay-rich soils that may, in part, have slowed the weathering process of 

the underlying limestone compared with surrounding areas, creating the 

high areas of the ridge. The erosion of the Dunnellon Gap breached the 

ridge and reversed the ancient course of the river from south to north. The 

creation of the gap also lowered the Tsala Apopka Chain of Lakes to their 

present levels. The Dade City Hills area contains the highest elevations in 

the area. Many hills have elevations above 200 feet, with the highest point 

reaching 301 feet. 

The Northern Ground-Water Basin, which contains the Withlacoochee 

Basin, is bounded by several structural highs. The largest of these 

features creates a ground water boundary to the east, called the Peninsular 

Ridge. This topographic and structural high extends the length of Florida. 

The other boundaries are Bronson and Keystone High in the north, 

Pasco High in the south, and Green Swamp High in the southeast. These 

regional geologic structures helped deposit thicker sediments to the south 

and southeast. Typically, ground water within these boundaries flows into 

the basin and ultimately discharges into the Gulf of Mexico. 

The main structural feature in the Withlacoochee Basin is the Ocala 

Uplift. This broad, tension faulted anticline trends northwest-southwest 

through the center of the basin and is approximately parallel with the 

Peninsular Arch. The Ocala Uplift, a smaller feature than the Peninsular 

Arch, is of more recent geologic age, probably post-Oligocene. It has 

undergone extensive weathering and erosion, which created the trough of 

the Withlacoochee River and the Green Swamp watershed. The oldest,


27 

Figure 2.1: Geopolitical Map of the Withlacoochee Basin


Figure 2.2: Surface Water Resources of the Withlacoochee Basin


29 

underlying formations are exposed along the axis of the uplift; the eroded 

remnants of younger formations can be found in the fl anks of the uplift. 

Several faults in the southern portion of the Green Swamp complicate 

the definition of the area’s geology and hydrogeology. The faults are probably 

post-Oligocene in age. Subsequent movement along fault zones may 

have occurred over a long period, with the later movements causing subsidence 

and sinkhole collapse along the faults. The faulting may affect the 

hydrology of the Green Swamp by causing zones of high or low permeability, 

producing barriers that retard water movement, or increasing ground 

water circulation between aquifers. 

Surface Water Features 

The headwaters of the Withlacoochee and Hillsborough River originate 

in the potentiometric high for the central Florida region, known as 

the Green Swamp. The exact boundaries of the swamp are indefi nite, but 

the area consists of about 850 square miles of swampy flatlands and sandy 

ridges varying in elevation from about 200 feet NGVD in the eastern portion 

to about 75 feet in the stream valleys in the western portion. 

The headwaters for the Withlacoochee River are located in the Green 

Swamp in north-central Polk County. Gator Creek, the largest of the 

headwater tributaries, discharges into the Withlacoochee River just downstream 

of the Highway 471 Bridge. At the confluence with Gator Creek, 

near Richland and U.S. Highway 98, the Withlacoochee River begins 

to flow in a southwesterly direction to an overflow into the Hillsborough 

River; it then abruptly turns and flows in a northwesterly direction. 

The Withlacoochee River’s headwaters flow through a number of 

natural control points, or plateaus, in the Green Swamp. During periods of 

heavy rainfall in the Green Swamp, the Withlacoochee River can overflow 

across one of these plateaus, the Richland control point, to the Hillsborough 

River. 

In recognition of its ecological and hydrological importance, in 1974 

the Florida legislature designated portions of the Green Swamp as an Area 

of Critical State Concern. This designation restricts zoning and construction 

in the floodplain to protect the area’s unique natural features, which 

were increasingly threatened by new development. 

Rainfall and base flow from the Floridan aquifer are the only sources 

of water to the swamp, since the area receives no surface flow. Flows 

through the Green Swamp are slow, and much of the area’s rainfall evaporates, 

transpires, or percolates into the surficial and Floridan aquifers on 

the swamp’s eastern side. The Green Swamp is the potentiometric high 

of the Floridan aquifer in this region. Swamps, marshes, and the porosity 

of the Floridan aquifer act as sponges to moderate the discharges of water 

to the Withlacoochee River. Drainage canals have been constructed in 

many places within the swamp, connecting adjacent swamps, reducing the 

circuitous route by which the surface water drains, and generally speeding 

the rate of drainage. 

The triangular-shaped Duck Lake watershed covers approximately 

40 square miles. One of several watersheds that are tributary to the upper 

Withlacoochee River, it is located in east-central Pasco County. Dade City


is the approximate center, and the cities of Saint Leo and San Antonio lie at 

the western apex of the watershed. The outlet from Clear Lake forms the 

headwaters of the watershed. Except for a number of small, intermittent 

streams tributary to and interconnecting a number of lakes and wetlands, 

the watershed contains no distinguishable natural streams. 

The headwaters of the Little Withlacoochee River, the largest tributary 

of the Withlacoochee River, lie in the Green Swamp near Highway 33 

in Lake County. From there the river flows westerly and to the northwest 

through 13 miles of the Withlacoochee State Forest. Here the river channel 

is wide and shallow, with a dense canopy of cypress and wetland hardwoods. 

The Little Withlacoochee remains largely undisturbed within the 

bounds of the state forest. It joins the Withlacoochee River 3 miles downstream 

of U.S. Highway 301, or just upstream of Silver Lake. The Little 

Withlacoochee drains about 5,230 square kilometers; its flows increase the 

mean annual discharge of the Withlacoochee River at the confluence by 

23 percent. 

Jumper Creek, which lies north of the Green Swamp, contributes an 

average of 26.4 cubic feet per second to the Withlacoochee River. This 

canal is one of the oldest major regional drainage canals in Sumter County. 

It is 16 miles long and collects and conveys runoff from an approximately 

85-square-mile watershed that extends from north Center Hill to Interstate 

75. Long-time residents of the area report that during the wet years 

of 1959–60, Jumper Creek Canal and Big Prairie were interconnected. 

Like many other areas in the basin, the Jumper Creek watershed has been 

channelized to facilitate drainage. 

The Big Prairie Canal watershed encompasses more than 110 square 

miles and spans two counties (Sumter and Lake) and two water management 

districts (the St. Johns River Water Management District 

[SJRWMD] and the SWFWMD). Big Prairie Canal is irregular in shape 

and is approximately 14 miles long and 8 miles wide. The canal’s discharge 

capacity largely depends on aquifer recharge, and the system drains into a 

sinkhole complex near Sumterville. 

Lake Panasoffkee is Florida’s third largest lake, the largest lake in 

Sumter County, and one of the oldest lakes in the state. It covers about 

3,800 to 4,500 acres, depending on the water surface elevation, which 

varies directly with rainfall. The lake is relatively shallow, with a mean 

depth of 3 feet and a maximum of 10 feet. It contains an exposed portion 

of the Floridan aquifer. The SWFWMD has designated the lake as a 

SWIM priority waterbody, and it has also been designated as an OFW. 

Major tributaries to Lake Panasoffkee are Big Jones Creek and Little 

Jones Creek, which enter at the north end of the lake, and Shady Brook, 

which enters at the south end of the lake. The 2-mile Outlet River, the 

lake’s only surface water discharge, connects the west side of the lake to 

the Withlacoochee River. The outlet river, on average, accounts for about 

20 percent of the Withlacoochee’s flow. 

Historical accounts indicate that the lake played an important role in 

the region’s commerce and transportation network as early as the 1830s. 

The town of Panasoffkee became an important shipping port for timber, 

citrus, and other goods between the late 1800s and the 1920s, but severe


31 

freezes and the depletion of large cypress trees resulted in a population 

decline in the Lake Panasoffkee area after the 1920s. 

Currently, Lake Panasoffkee is a significant freshwater sport fishery 

resource and an important contributor to the local and regional economy. 

It has a national reputation, especially for its redear fishery. However, the 

lake’s fisheries have declined considerably. In the mid-1950s, no less than 

15 fish camps operated there. Today, only 3 remain. 

Lake Tsala Apopka is actually a series of 3 large, hydrologically 

distinct pools (the Floral City, Hernando, and Inverness Pools). The lake 

covers approximately 19,000 acres (30 square miles) and drains a watershed 

encompassing about 63,000 acres (92 square miles). Inflows from the 

Withlacoochee River influence water quality in Lake Tsala Apopka. As 

water flows northward through the chain of lakes, the river water is diluted 

by rainfall and surface water runoff. 

During periods of high water, flow from the Withlacoochee River is 

diverted into the Floral City Pool through the Leslie Heifner and Orange 

State Canals. Both canals have control structures that regulate inflow from 

the river and prevent backflow from the lake system to the river. During 

flows in excess of a 10-year flood event, the river rises above natural control 

elevations along the west boundary of Flying Eagle Ranch and spills over 

into the lake system. 

Lake Rousseau, a 5.7-mile-long, human-made impoundment formed 

by the Inglis Dam near the city of Inglis, covers 4,163 acres. The lake lies 

11 miles upstream of the mouth of the Withlacoochee River. One of the 

oldest impoundments of its kind in Florida, it was constructed in 1909 

by Florida Power Corporation for electric power generation. The powergenerating 

facility ceased operation in 1965. 

The Withlacoochee and Rainbow Rivers are the two major surface 

waters that contribute to Lake Rousseau. These rivers strongly influence 

the water chemistry of Lake Rousseau; the lake’s water quality also reflects a 

transition from a riverine to a reservoir environment. 

Above Dunnellon, the Withlacoochee is generally well buffered, with 

moderately high levels of color and nutrients. The Rainbow River (in 

southwest Marion County), a spring-fed tributary of exceptional ecological 

and scenic beauty, flows to the Withlacoochee just upstream of Lake 

Rousseau in Citrus County. Although it is only a small stream reach of 

5.7 miles, the Rainbow River discharges on average 470 mgd to the Withlacoochee 

River. The Rainbow River’s water is clear, isothermal (i.e., at a 

relatively constant temperature), and well buffered. The SWFWMD has 

designated the Rainbow River as a SWIM priority waterbody. 

Water quality below the confluence of the Withlacoochee and Rainbow 

Rivers reflects the inflows of these two sources and shows differences 

between dry and wet season flows. During dry periods, flows are 

dominated by the Rainbow River and other springs in the Withlacoochee 

Basin. During wet periods, surface drainage becomes more important. 

Considerable organic material is delivered to the Withlacoochee River from 

the abundant wetlands in the Withlacoochee Basin. Like the river, water 

chemistry in Lake Rousseau responds to the differences in dry and wet 

season flows.


Structures controlling flow from Lake Rousseau are part of the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACOE) Cross-Florida Barge Canal facilities. 

Work on the canal took place between 1965 and 1969. Before the 

canal was built, all waters exiting the Lake Rousseau reservoir flowed to the 

Gulf of Mexico through the natural channel of the lower Withlacoochee 

River. President Richard M. Nixon halted work on the canal because of 

environmental and water resources concerns, and Congress deauthorized 

the rest of the project in 1989. These lands, which have become part of 

the Cross-Florida Greenway State Recreation and Conservation Area, are 

now used for parks, recreation, and open space. Three structures at the 

west end of Lake Rousseau remain operational, controlling its elevation: a 

bypass channel and spillway, the Inglis Dam, and the Inglis Lock. These 

structures have substantially altered flows in the lower Withlacoochee. 

The Bystre Lake watershed, a closed basin (not connected to the 

river) in eastern Hernando County, comprises about 27 square miles. The 

Brooksville Ridge defines the watershed’s boundaries, with elevations ranging 

from 270 feet to less than 60 feet NGVD. The Bystre Lake watershed 

is primarily undeveloped; however, the area receives runoff from developed 

areas in the city of Brooksville and small subdivisions such as High Point 

Gardens. The remaining watershed consists of agricultural, range, pasture, 

forest, and barren lands. 

Surface water resources consist of two large lakes (Irvin Lake and 

Bystre Lake), wet prairies, and numerous isolated depressions. The watershed 

is internally drained, with runoff collecting in the low-lying depressional 

areas. There are no distinct drainage systems, except for two ditches 

that drain the city of Brooksville. 

The Blue Sink watershed, which encompasses approximately 

23 square miles, is located in the northeastern part of central Hernando 

County. It is internally drained by Blue Sink, an open sinkhole approximately 

150 feet in diameter that is directly connected to the underlying 

limestone aquifer. Blue Sink is the principal outlet for stormwater runoff 

from the watershed. 

The basin also contains a number of springs. The largest, Rainbow 

Springs in Marion County, is a fi rst-magnitude spring and Florida’s 

fourth largest. It discharges approximately 470 mgd into the Rainbow 

River. Rainbow Springs State Park consists of about 1,000 acres of upland 

property adjacent to the river. The river has been designated as a SWIM 

priority waterbody, an OFW, and an Aquatic Preserve, and the springs have 

been designated as a National Natural Landmark. 

Second-magnitude springs in the basin include Gum Springs and 

Fenney Springs. Numerous smaller springs (fourth magnitude and less) are 

also present, but most—such as springs in the Lake Panasoffkee area—are 

unnamed and difficult to locate. Cumulatively, the basin’s 25 springs discharge 

approximately 2.2 billion gallons of water per day, on average. Of 

these, the 4 major springs (including Rainbow Springs) account for about 

520 mgd of discharge.


33 

Surface Water Quality Classifications 

Florida’s water quality standards, the foundation of the state’s program 

of water quality management, designate the “present and future most 

beneficial uses” of the waters of the state (Subsection 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 surface water is 

classified using the following five designated use categories: 

Class I 

Class II 

Class III 

Class IV 

Class V 

Potable water supplies 

Shellfi sh propagation or harvesting 

Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, 

well-balanced population of fi sh and wildlife 

Agricultural water supplies 

Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state 

waters currently in this class) 

All of the waters assessed in the Withlacoochee Basin are Class III 

waters. 

Special Designations 

Outstanding Florida Waters 

The following waterbodies in the basin have been given additional 

protection through designation as OFWs: 

• Withlachoochee River and its connected lakes and tributaries, 

• Little Withlacoochee River and its connected lakes and tributaries, 

• Jumper Creek, and 

• Rainbow River. 

OFWs are designated for “special protection due to their natural 

attributes” (Section 403.061, F.S.). These waters are listed in Section 62- 

302.700, Florida Administrative Code (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 seashores, 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 

Lake Panasoffkee and the Rainbow River have been designated as 

SWIM priority waters. The section later in this chapter on Watershed 

Management Activities and Processes provides additional details on the 

SWIM Plan for the Rainbow River and on the work of the Lake Panasoffkee 

Restoration Council. 

In 1987, the Florida legislature created the SWIM Program to restore 

waterbodies. The initial legislation identified 6 priority waterbodies—Lake


Apopka, Tampa Bay, Indian River Lagoon, Biscayne Bay, Lower St. Johns 

River, and Lake Okeechobee. 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 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. 

Aquatic Preserves 

The entire length of the Rainbow River was designated as an Aquatic 

Preserve in 1986. The Florida legislature created this designation under the 

1975 Florida Aquatic Preserve Act (Section 258.35, F.S.). Aquatic preserves 

are submerged lands of exceptional beauty that are to be maintained 

in their natural or existing condition. 

National Natural Landmarks 

The Rainbow River Springs were designated as a National Natural 

Landmark in 1972. This designation applies to significant natural areas 

that have been designated by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior. It was 

established in 1962, under the authority of the 1935 Historic Sites Act 

(16 U.S.C. 461-467), and is administered by the National Park Service. 

Minimum Flows and Levels 

The SWFWMD plans to develop minimum flows and levels (MFL) 

for a number of waterbodies in the basin according to the following 

schedule: 

2002–2005 Citrus County lakes (Tsala Apopka and Marion) 

Sumter County lakes (Panasoffkee, Big Gant, Deaton, 

Miona, and Okahumpka) 

2006–2010 Lower Withlacoochee River system (Lake Rousseau/ 

Rainbow Springs) 

Middle Withlacoochee River system 

Upper Withlacoochee River system (Green Swamp) 

Consumptive use and alterations to these watersheds have reduced or 

have the potential to reduce the amount and timing of surface water being 

delivered. Projected increases in withdrawals also could reduce future flows 

and levels. 

Under the FWRA (Chapter 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 related natural systems. To help determine the amount of 

water that is available for environmental and human uses, the SWFWMD 

must determine MFLs. Lakes and aquifers have minimum levels. Minimum 

flows are set for rivers and streams.


35 

Ground Water Resources 

Hydrogeology 

The most recent sediments found at the land surface in the Withlacoochee 

Basin were deposited during the high water levels resulting from 

the melting of the polar ice caps in the Holocene and Pleistocene Epochs. 

These deposits, which are sometimes referred to as terrace deposits, consist 

generally of unconsolidated sand, clay, peat, and marl. The majority of 

the unconsolidated deposits in the basin are mapped as undifferentiated, 

reworked Cypress Head Formation. One of the more important features 

formed during this period are the quartz sand terrace deposits, which can 

store water and ultimately provide recharge to the Floridan aquifer. 

Beneath the terrace deposits are formations of the Pliocene and 

Miocene Epochs. These formations, progressing from the youngest to 

the oldest, comprise three stratigraphic units: the Cypress Head Formation 

(formerly the Alachua Formation), the Hawthorn Group sediments, 

and the Tampa Member of the Arcadia Formation. Except for the Tampa 

Member, which is a muddy limestone, these formations consist generally of 

clastic materials, sands, silts, and clays. 

Beneath the Cypress Head Formation lie the clastic early Miocene 

deposits of the Hawthorn Group. This group is thin and discontinuous in 

the south and generally absent as one moves north, except for a few erosional 

remnants associated with the ridges, such as the Brooksville Ridge. 

These deposits generally consist of phosphatic sands, clayey sands, and 

clays. The clayey sediments in the Hawthorn Group protect the underlying 

carbonates beneath the Brooksville Ridge from dissolution. The absence of 

sediments in surrounding areas leads to the preferential dissolution of the 

limestone, resulting in the formation of the ridge. Most streams and creeks 

in the Brooksville Ridge area are relatively short and typically terminate in 

a sinkhole or other karst feature that breaches the Hawthorn Group. This 

type of drainage is commonly referred to as internal drainage. 

Beneath the clastic deposits of the Cypress Head Formation and the 

Hawthorn Group is the Suwannee Limestone, consisting of a fossiliferous 

limestone. The Suwannee Limestone has been weathered away and is 

generally absent along the Withlacoochee River alignment. The Suwannee 

is present in the Brooksville Ridge area. 

Beneath the Suwannee Limestone lies the Ocala Limestone, which consists 

of fossiliferous to micritic limestone. Due to the extensive erosion of 

the Ocala Limestone, it is very thin in the Withlacoochee Basin compared 

with other parts of Florida. In southwest Marion County and bordering 

Levy County, the Ocala Limestone has been completely removed by 

erosion. Where the Ocala Limestone is present and of sufficient thickness, 

it is very permeable and produces a highly irregular, karstified surface. 

Beneath the Ocala Limestone is the Avon Park Formation. The upper 

part of this formation contains the deepest occurring potable water in the 

basin. The lower two-thirds of the Avon Park Formation contains extensive 

evaporite deposits (gypsum and anhydrite), which form an impermeable 

unit that separates the upper potable zone from the lower, nonpotable 

zone. The upper part of the Avon Park Formation consists primarily of


Karst 

A type of topography that 

is characterized by caves, 

sinkholes, springs, and other 

types of openings caused by 

dissolution of limestone. 

dolomite and sometimes limestone. The lower part consists primarily 

of dolomite with intergranular gypsum and beds of anhydrite, peat, and 

occasionally chert. 

Springs, sinkholes, lineaments, and caves are all land forms that characterize 

the karst geology of the Withlacoochee Basin. The basin contains 

several large springs, as well as numerous smaller springs; these indicate 

that a well-developed underground drainage system exists in the Floridan 

aquifer. 

The close proximity of limestone to the land surface in the Withlacoochee 

Basin creates an ideal chemical environment for dissolution and 

weathering of the limestone bedrock. Consequently, sinkholes are found 

in great numbers in the basin. Some sinkholes are quite large; for example, 

one along the Hernando-Citrus county line covers several square miles. 

However, most sinks are much smaller and typically cover tens to hundreds 

of acres. Sinkholes can form anywhere and at any time in the basin. One 

sinkhole formed in the bottom of the city of Inverness’s wastewater treatment 

pond in 1993 and drained nearly three million gallons of partially 

treated wastewater into the Floridan aquifer in less than two hours. 

Fractures in the limestone of the Floridan aquifer enhance dissolution 

and weathering of the bedrock. As a result, physical features such as 

aligned sinkholes, linear stream segments, and vegetative patterns often 

develop. Fractures in the bedrock are also where conduits and cavern 

systems develop in the aquifer. Flow through these conduits and caverns 

is responsible for rapidly transmitting large quantities of water through the 

Floridan aquifer. 

Aquifers 

The overall ground water quality in the Withlacoochee Basin is very 

good. The ground water in the basin is a calcium bicarbonate water type, 

typical of carbonate aquifers. It results from the dissolution of limestone 

by acidic ground water. Sodium, chloride, magnesium, potassium, and 

sulfate are present in much lower concentrations. Locally, however, enrichment 

of sulfate does occur. For example, high sulfate concentrations in the 

Lake Panasoffkee area and northeast of Rainbow Springs likely result from 

the upwelling of sulfate-rich water from the lower Floridan aquifer and is 

attributable to extensive fracturing of the limestone in those regions. 

Tritium is a rare isotope of hydrogen that was enriched in rainfall 

during atmospheric testing of hydrogen bombs in the mid-1950s to mid- 

1960s. Tritium data, collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 

indicate that much of the ground water in the basin is relatively young 

(recharged since 1952). However, ground water in the Green Swamp 

contains very little tritium, due to lower ground water recharge and higher 

surface water runoff in the swamp. 

Agriculture is a contributor of pollutants in the Northern Ground 

Water Basin, which underlies the Withlacoochee Basin. This area is largely 

unconfined, i.e., there is no confining layer to protect the aquifer from 

contamination. Specific pollutants of concern from this source include 

nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, sulfate, and pesticides.


37 

Surficial Aquifer System 

The surficial aquifer comprises marine sands deposited during different 

sea level stands. Generally, where these fine sands directly overlie 

limestone, a surficial aquifer is not present. Where clay strata separate the 

limestone and sand, a water table may develop within the marine sands. 

In parts of the Withlacoochee Basin where the surficial aquifer exists, there 

are also numerous lakes and wetlands perched above shallow clay lenses. 

Farther north in the basin, the water table becomes progressively deeper 

below land surface, and the surficial deposits thin and become discontinuous 

over large areas. In the western half of the Green Swamp, surficial 

deposits are very thin to nonexistent, and the Floridan aquifer is sometimes 

exposed. In the eastern portion of the Green Swamp, the surficial aquifer is 

much thicker, reaching as much as 200 feet beneath the ridges that rim the 

swamp. Along the Withlacoochee River, the surficial aquifer is generally 

thin to nonexistent, and the Floridan aquifer is exposed in several locations. 

The surficial aquifer found along the Brooksville Ridge is discontinuous 

and perched above the Floridan aquifer. 

Confining Unit 

The discontinuous confining unit separating the surficial aquifer 

system from the Floridan aquifer system consists primarily of clayey soils of 

the Hawthorn Group. Where present, this confining unit ranges in thickness 

from a few feet to greater than 50 feet and restricts vertical ground 

water flow between the aquifer systems. While the confining unit is present 

in most areas of the basin, it is either thin or very fractured, and is often 

breached by sinkholes, allowing ground water to directly enter the Floridan 

aquifer system. 

Upper Floridan Aquifer System 

The Floridan aquifer system is the principal aquifer system and major 

source of water for human use in the basin. The upper Floridan ranges 

in thickness from 600 feet to 1,800 feet. Throughout the basin, the 

upper Floridan acts primarily as a semiconfi ned aquifer. In the north, the 

upper Floridan aquifer is at or near the land surface and can generally be 

described as unconfined, although local confining conditions do exist. The 

unconfined areas encompass eastern through northwestern Pasco County 

and large parts of Hernando, Citrus, Levy, Marion, and Sumter Counties. 

The overall water quality of the upper Floridan in the basin is excellent. 

Although hard water often results from high concentrations of calcium 

and sometimes magnesium from the limestone aquifer, the water generally 

meets all drinking water standards and requires very little treatment. Water 

quality tends to deteriorate with increasing depth and proximity to the 

coast or riverine and swampy, lowland areas. Isolated pockets of sulfaterich 

ground water in the Floridan aquifer have also been identified away 

from the coast. 

Recharge to the upper Floridan aquifer occurs directly via rainfall 

where the confining clays are not present and where sinkholes create a 

direct hydraulic connection to the surficial aquifer system. Discharge 

from the upper Floridan aquifer occurs through spring discharge, upward


leakage to the water table, lateral outflow to the Gulf of Mexico, and 

ground water pumpage. About 90 percent of the discharge north of the 

Withlacoochee River occurs through Rainbow and Silver Springs. 

In coastal areas of the basin and Citrus and Hernando Counties, the 

surficial aquifer system may drain directly into the upper Floridan aquifer 

via solution features. In the Green Swamp area, the recharge rate to the 

Floridan aquifer from the surficial aquifer is limited by the high water table 

and the low-permeability deposits overlying the Floridan aquifer. As a 

result, much of the precipitation that falls in the Green Swamp is directed 

out of the basin by overland flow and evapotranspiration. 

Ground Water–Surface Water Interactions 

The Floridan aquifer outcrops in the western part of the Green Swamp, 

but lies about 60 meters below the land surface in the eastern portion. 

The latter recharges to the Floridan. Portions of the swamp are thought 

to be areas of great potential recharge. The strata below the Green Swamp 

contain a number of faults that, if within the Floridan aquifer, probably 

increase the aquifer’s permeability. When these faults cut confining beds, 

they may also increase the circulation of ground water between aquifers. 

Along the Withlacoochee River, a dynamic recharge/discharge relationship 

exists that is related to the region’s wet and dry cycles. During 

wet periods, when water levels in the Floridan aquifer are higher, the 

aquifer discharges to the river. Conversely, during dry periods, when the 

aquifer’s water levels are low, the river recharges the aquifer. In the Lake 

Panasoffkee area, several springs that feed the lake create an area of ground 

water discharge to the lake. In the Lake Rousseau area, the aquifer is 

recharged by the lake as a result of the higher lake levels created after its 

impoundment. 

The potential for contamination to the Floridan aquifer is great 

throughout much of the basin. Karst geology, coupled with the shallow 

depth of the top of the Floridan aquifer and the discontinuous nature of 

the confining units between the surficial and Floridan aquifers, create 

a situation in which pollution sources can easily reach and contaminate 

portions of the aquifer. Potential pollution sources range from gas stations, 

landfi lls, mining operations, and fertilizers. 

Increasing nitrate concentrations have been documented in the Floridan 

aquifer and spring discharges in the basin. Recent data indicate that 

ground water in the basin is relatively young (recharged since 1952) and 

moving through a short, shallow, flow system. Nitrate in the ground water 

is, therefore, a recent addition to the aquifer and able to travel signifi - 

cant distances in the aquifer in a relatively short period. (The section on 

Water Quality Trends on the following page contains a more detailed 

discussion of nitrate contamination.) 

Ground Water Usage 

An estimated 141 mgd of ground water and surface water were withdrawn 

from the Withlacoochee Basin in 1996. Mining is the largest 

water use, accounting for 40 percent (56 mgd) of the total water pumped 

from the Floridan aquifer. The majority of this water (as much as 90


39 

percent), however, is typically returned to the aquifer via infi ltration after 

use. Agriculture, the second largest user, accounts for 26 percent (36 mgd) 

of total water use. Public supply ranks third, with 17 percent (24 mgd), 

and all other uses combined (rural, industrial, and recreational) account 

for 17 percent (23 mgd) of total water use. Table 2.1 lists 1996 estimated 

daily water ground water and surface water withdrawals in the basin for 

different types of uses. 

Since there are relatively few large, concentrated withdrawals in the 

basin and pumpage is spread out, regional problems such as those in other 

parts of the SWFWMD (i.e., Northern Tampa Bay) have not yet occurred. 

There may, however, be a few localized issues associated with the larger, 

concentrated withdrawals. 

Table 2.1 also lists estimated water use in 2020. The total estimated 

average daily demand is expected to increase from about 141 mgd in 1995 

to more than 180 mgd by 2020, a net increase of 28 percent. 

Major Water Quality Trends 

Nitrate Contamination 

Nutrient concentrations (especially nitrate) in the Floridan aquifer 

in most areas of the Withlacoochee Basin are typically low. Once in the 

nitrate form, nitrogen easily leaches into ground water, where it disperses 

through the aquifer system. Natural inputs of nitrogen (e.g., organic decay) 

have always supplied low levels of nitrate to the aquifer in the basin. 

Water quality investigations on a number of surface waterbodies 

throughout the SWFWMD, however, have documented a trend of increasing 

nitrate loading from ground water sources. The data show that much 

of the nitrate is derived from inorganic fertilizers. Organic sources, such 

as septic tanks, are minor but important contributors. The discharge of 

nutrient-rich ground water to surface water is of concern, as the nitrate can 

stimulate plant growth in surface water systems, increasing productivity 

Table 2.1: Estimated Daily Water Use (mgd) in the Withlacoochee Basin in 1996 

Type of Use 

Surface 

Water Use 

Ground 

Water Use 

Total Water Use 

by Category 

Percentage of 

Total Water Use 

2020 Estimated 

Total Water Use* 

Mining 50.0 6.5 56.5 40% 72.3 

Agriculture 1.3 35.0 36.4 26% 46.6 

Public Supply 0.1 23.8 23.9 17% 30.6 

Industrial 0.0 14.1 14.1 10% 18.0 

Recreational 3.1 6.8 9.9 7% 12.7 

Total Use 54.5 86.2 140.8 100% 180.2 

*This estimate is based on the Water Use Demand Estimates and Projections 1996–2020 Report (SWFWMD, 

1997), which estimated the water production growth to be approximately 28 percent during this period.


and the potential growth of nuisance aquatic vegetation, and accelerating 

the process of eutrophication. 

Rainbow Springs and River 

Rainbow Springs contributes an immense quantity of water (and 

nitrate) to the Rainbow River, and from there to the Withlacoochee River 

each year. Water and nutrient budgets developed for the Rainbow River 

estimate that 85 percent of the total nitrogen and 83 percent of the total 

phosphorus load to the river are directly attributable to spring flow. Water 

quality studies indicate that about 648 tons of nitrate per year are discharged 

from the springs. Nitrogen isotopes, land use distributions, and 

nitrate concentrations show that the nitrate mainly originates from inorganic 

fertilizers applied to pasture acreage. A single nitrogen isotope value 

in the Marion Oaks subdivision, however, indicates that a nearby organic 

nitrogen source, such as septic/wastewater, is likely present. 

The mat-forming blue-green alga, Lyngbya wollei, has increased in 

several spring runs in the SWFWMD, including the Rainbow River. The 

increases may be attributable directly or indirectly to increases in nitrate 

loading. 


Ground water is a significant source of water to Lake Panasoffkee. 

The water budget for 1992–93 indicates that ground water accounted for 

39 percent of the annual water input to the lake, while rainfall on the lake’s 

surface contributed 16 percent and surface runoff, 45 percent. A large 

percentage of the surface runoff stems from springs entering surface water 

tributaries (i.e., Big Jones and Little Jones Creeks). 

Ground water contributes about 34 percent of the annual total phosphorus 

input to the lake and 40 percent of the total nitrogen. Surface 

runoff, which is derived largely from ground water discharge through 

springs, contributes about 57 percent of the total phosphorus load and 

51 percent of the total nitrogen load to the lake. In-lake processes result 

in retention of about 41 percent of the nitrogen and 72 percent of the 

phosphorus input loads. 

Discharges from springs are a major contribution to tributary flows, 

and a regional nitrate increase in the Floridan aquifer appears to be the 

source of the observed increase of nitrates in the tributaries to the lake. 

Nitrate concentrations in the spring flow to the lake from Big Jones Creek, 

Little Jones Creek, and a residential canal increased significantly between 

1980–81 and 1992–93; however, nitrate levels in the lake and the Outlet 

River (the lake’s outflow) were unchanged during the same period. This 

suggests that the nitrogen load is being assimilated in the lake through 

uptake by aquatic macrophytes, attached algae, and phytoplankton. Data 

from monitoring wells and an adjacent residential canal indicate that onsite 

sewage disposal systems (septic tanks and associated drainfields) do not 

cause increased nitrate concentrations in the lake or its inflows. 

Increased nitrate concentrations in water flowing to the lake have not 

resulted in an increase in trophic state index (TSI) values in the lake itself. 

Historical data and recent monitoring results indicate that since 1977 the


41 

TSI has ranged between 45 and 47, which places the lake in a mesotrophic 

category. In a statewide survey of 573 lakes, 47 percent had TSI values in 

the range of 40 to 59. 

Tsala Apopka Chain of Lakes 

In the Lake Tsala Apopka area, surface water and ground water are 

closely related; each influences the other physically and geochemically. 

Elevated nitrates are found in several wells in the region, and although 

a portion of the nitrate in the aquifer likely originates from lake bottom 

sediments, two wells near Inverness contain over 1 mg/L nitrate–nitrogen. 

A single nitrogen isotope value north of Inverness indicates that a nearby 

organic nitrogen source, such as septic/wastewater, is likely present. 

Southeastern Pasco County 

Water quality data collected near Dade City and Zephyrhills indicate 

that ground water in southeastern Pasco County is enriched in nitrate. 

Nitrogen isotopic data collected in May 1999 indicate that much of this 

nitrate is derived from inorganic nitrogen sources, such as inorganic fertilizers. 

These fertilizers were most likely applied during historical land uses, 

including citrus production, in the vicinity of Dade City and Zephyrhills. 

Watershed Management Activities and 

Processes 

Over the years, management plans and activities in the basin have 

been implemented to eliminate wastewater discharges; reduce discharges 

of polluted stormwater from urban and agricultural areas; and protect, 

preserve, and restore special areas. The following section describes historical, 

current, and ongoing activities and processes to address water quality 

problems. 

Much of the progress in the Withlacoochee Basin for developing 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 implementation is 

based on various groups playing critical roles in planning, funding, managing, 

and executing projects. The Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection (Department) continues to coordinate its efforts with these entities 

to obtain data, strengthen monitoring activities, and exchange information 

through periodic meetings. 

Major Programs and Projects 

A number of major restoration initiatives, if continued, will have 

significant positive effects on the basin’s water quality. 

Rainbow River Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan 

The draft Rainbow River SWIM Plan, published in September 2003, 

contains the following five major goals:


• Continue to monitor water quality status and trends throughout the 

watershed and identify water quality parameters of special concern, 

• Develop and implement nitrate reduction goals for the river and help 

initiate programs aimed at preventing further nitrate increases, 

• Maintain water clarity at current levels throughout the river and 

identify areas where water clarity can be improved, 

• Develop and implement projects to protect and manage aquatic and 

emergent vegetation in the river, and 

• Conduct other projects and studies, as needed, to refi ne and achieve 

the goals of the SWIM Plan. 

The principal management issues for the Rainbow River are water 

quality, water clarity, aquatic vegetation, and sediment accumulation. 

Specific management activities have been developed to address each of 

these issues. 

The state’s water policy requires the SWFWMD to develop a pollutant 

load reduction goal (PLRG) for each SWIM waterbody, and to adopt 

the PLRG as part of the SWIM Plan. The PLRG for the Rainbow River 

is to prevent nutrient levels from increasing beyond current levels. The 

SWFWMD will work with the Department to develop numeric targets for 

nutrients and water clarity. 

Rainbow Springs Coordination Council 

The council’s mission is to preserve and protect the unique biological 

communities and scenic beauty of the Rainbow River. Formed in 2001, it 

provides a forum for a collaborative process to identify and resolve problems 

in the Rainbow Springs recharge basin. The group consists of federal, 

state, and local government agencies that have information or are responsible 

for the function of the spring’s recharge basin. Other stakeholders 

include agricultural and commercial interests, environmental organizations, 

and citizens. 

Florida Springs Task Force 

The Department initiated this multiagency task force to recommend 

strategies for protecting and restoring Florida’s springs. The task 

force originally consisted of 16 members, representing 1 federal and 3 

state agencies, 4 water management districts, a state university, a regional 

planning council, the business community, and private citizens. The task 

force developed guidelines for protecting Florida’s springs. Florida Springs 

Strategies for Protection and Restoration was published in November 2000. 

Nutrient Remediation Workgroup 

An organization composed of citizens, industry, and government representatives, 

the Nutrient Remediation Workgroup is administered by the 

Withlacoochee Regional Planning Council. The workgroup’s primary goal 

is to address impacts to central Florida’s springs and drinking water sources 

caused by increasing nitrate levels in ground water and surface water. To 

achieve this goal, the group works to educate the public and exchanges


43 

information with other organizations throughout the state on research, 

education, remediation, and prevention measures. 

Lake Panasoffkee Restoration Council 

The extensive buildup of inorganic sediments and the shallowing of 

Lake Panasoffkee have destroyed historical fish-spawning areas and promoted 

the growth of woody/shrubby vegetation along the east-southeast 

shoreline and substantial bands of emergent vegetation. Since the 1940s, 

almost 800 acres, or 22 percent of the lake’s area, have been lost. Low 

water conditions can also make the lake unnavigable. 

Concerned for the lake’s health, the Florida legislature passed 

Chapter 98-69, Laws of Florida, creating the Lake Panasoffkee Restoration 

Council. The legislature charged the council with identifying strategies to 

restore the lake and required that the council report to the legislature before 

November 25 of each year on the progress of the Lake Panasoffkee restoration 

plan and recommendations for the next fiscal year. 

The council began meeting in June 1998 to evaluate restoration strategies 

and concluded that the following restoration goals should be addressed 

in priority order: fisheries habitat improvement, shoreline restoration, and 

improved navigation. Maintaining the overall good water quality within 

the lake and cleaning up existing sources of pollution to the lake are also 

high priorities. 

The restoration plan that was formally adopted by the council contains 

a six-step dredging project to increase submersed plant development, restore 

the lake’s shoreline and historical fish-spawning areas, and create submersed 

and emergent vegetative zones in woody/shrubby areas. All of these steps 

involve substantial amounts of sediment removal. The implementation of 

the plan will cost approximately $26 million. 

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the 

SWFWMD began working together in 1998 to implement Step 1, the 

Coleman Landing Pilot Project. In 1999, the council obtained a $5 million 

appropriation from the legislature to begin the implementation of Step 2, 

Dredging to Hard Bottom. The council will continue to seek state and 

federal funding sources to complete the lake’s restoration. 

Land Acquisition 

As of 1999, the SWFWMD had purchased nearly 148,091 acres of 

lands in the basin for water resource and natural systems protection. An 

additional 275,000± acres are owned and/or managed by other state and/or 

local agencies. 

The SWFWMD currently has identified 11 land acquisition projects in 

the basin. These range from projects to preserve and protect natural areas 

along the river corridor to projects that are crucial to habitat restoration and 

water quality protection. Communities not represented in their historical 

proportions on public lands and targeted for additional acquisition include 

longleaf pine turkey oak, upland hardwood hammock, and scrub.


Cross-Florida Greenway 

The Cross-Florida Greenway is located in north-central Florida, passing 

through Putnam, Marion, Citrus, and Levy Counties. It begins near 

Palatka at the St. Johns River and continues southwest, passing between 

Ocala and Bellview. The greenway borders the Ocala National Forest as 

it follows the Ocklawaha River floodplain south into Marshall Swamp. It 

continues west through Dunnellon, including portions of the lower river 

and Lake Rousseau, terminating at Yankeetown on the Gulf of Mexico. 

The series of events that laid the foundation for what is now known as 

the Cross-Florida Greenway began in the late 1800s with the visualization 

of a shipping canal through Florida. It was thought that this canal would 

decrease shipping times from the Atlantic Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico. 

Not until 1935, however, when jobs were scarce and war was imminent, did 

construction began on the Cross-Florida Barge Canal. By 1936, funding 

was no longer available for the project and construction did not resume 

until 1964. During the Nixon Administration, a series of lawsuits was filed 

against the canal project, and construction was halted. The project was 

officially deauthorized on November 28, 1990. 

Following deauthorization, much of the barge canal property was conveyed 

to the state. This led to the creation of the Cross-Florida Greenway 

State Recreation and Conservation Area and signaled the beginning of new 

goals for the corridor: the conservation of natural resources and provision 

of multiuse recreational opportunities in a 110-mile, linear park. 

Restoration Initiatives 

From 1995–1997, 51 altered sites on SWFWMD-owned lands in the 

Green Swamp and Withlacoochee Basin were evaluated to determine priority 

restoration needs. The evaluation covered 33 altered sites in the Green 

Swamp, 1 in the Gum Slough area, 2 on the Flying Eagle Ranch, 6 on the 

Lake Panasoffkee project, 5 on Marion One, and 4 on Pott’s Preserve. 

A natural systems restoration plan was developed for implementation. 

It identifies 10 priority capital projects (large, complex projects requiring 

long-range planning and design) and surface water projects (primarily wetland 

restoration projects that may require further evaluation of their need 

for restoration). 

The Green Swamp Surface Water Project is an ongoing water quality 

investigation of the headwater creeks of the Green Swamp. Through 

years of agricultural and drainage projects, many of the swamp’s wetlands 

and creeks have been affected by ditching and channelization. Typically, 

improved pastures in the region were drained by swales or ditches. 

Although individually the following sites were not ranked as high-priority 

restoration projects, the Restoration Committee concluded that their collective 

influence on regional hydrology should be further investigated. The 

sites include the following: Green Swamp 3 (Gator Creek), Green Swamp 

4 (Fussel Pasture ditches), Green Swamp 8 (Mattress Drain and Kinsinger 

Pits), Green Swamp 10 (Grass Creek), Green Swamp 11 (Pony Creek), 

Green Swamp 12 (Judy site ditches), and Green Swamp West 2 (Stink 

Ditch).


45 

Agricultural Best Management Practices 

The Florida Watershed Restoration Act authorizes the Florida Department 

of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS) to develop interim 

measures and agricultural best management practices (BMP). Additional 

authority for agricultural BMPs is provided in legislation on nitrates 

and ground water (Section 576.045, 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 Act Amendments 

(Section 823.14, F.S.). While BMPs are often 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 (IFAS), and other major interests to improve 

product marketability and operational efficiency by implementing agricultural 

BMPs, while at the same time promoting water quality and water 

conservation objectives. In addition, programs have been established and 

are being developed to create a network of state, local, federal, and private 

sources of funds for developing and implementing BMPs. 

BMP Manuals 

To encourage growers to use BMPs, BMP manuals have been published 

for a number of Florida agricultural industries, including container-grown 

plants, blended fertilizer plants, agrichemical handling and farm equipment 

maintenance, cow/calf operations, aquaculture, and landscaping. Many 

of these manuals can be downloaded at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water. 

Manuals for row crops, equine or horse farms, and ornamental nurseries are 

currently being developed. The use of a BMP manual alone, however, does 

not presume compliance with the Department’s water quality standards.


47 

Chapter 3: Preliminary Surface Water 

Quality Assessment 

Scope of the Preliminary Assessment 

This chapter presents the results of a preliminary assessment of surface 

water quality in the Withlacoochee Basin. The primary purpose of this 

assessment is to determine if waterbodies or waterbody segments are to be 

placed on the Planning List of potentially impaired waterbodies. The listing 

will be in accordance with evaluation thresholds 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 monitoring priorities 

in Phase 2 of the watershed management cycle and help the Florida Department 

of Environmental Protection (Department) coordinate with regional 

and local monitoring activities. 

The chapter describes the planning units in the basin used as a basis 

for the preliminary 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 summarized 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 impairments. Information on the sources of impairment 

will be developed in subsequent phases of the watershed management 

cycle, including Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) development and 

implementation. 

Appendix A contains a discussion of the legislative and regulatory 

background for TMDL development and implementation. The methodology 

used to develop the Planning List is provided in Appendix B. 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 Withlacoochee Basin includes 

an analysis of quantitative data from various 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 (DOH). The STORET databases 

contain water quality data from a variety of sources, including the Department, 

water management districts, local governments, and volunteer monitoring 

groups. Appendix B contains a detailed description of STORET 

and the methodology used to develop the Planning and Verified Lists, 

based on the IWR. 

The main data providers in the Withlacoochee Basin, who contributed 

to the IWR 2002 Database for the period of record used in this assessment, 

include the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD), 

USGS, LakeWatch, Polk County, and the Department. Figure 3.1 

contains a pie chart showing the relative amount of data provided by each 

source. 

Withlacoochee Basin Data Providers 1993–2002 

U.S. Army 

Corps of 

Engineers 

Florida 

.05% 

Department of 

Environmental 

Protection 

8.52% 

21FLPOLK 

8.17% 

Florida Game and 

Freshwater Fish 

Commission 

.76% 

11COEJAX 

.49% 

St. John's River 

Water 

Management 

District 

.39% 

Lake County 

Water Resource 

Management 

.22% 

Southwest Florida 

Water Management 

District 

32.87% 

Florida 

LakeWatch 

22.16%% 

U.S. Geological 

Survey 

26.41% 

Figure 3.1: Sources of Data for the Withlacoochee Basin


49 

In 2002, the Department created the IWR Database to evaluate data 

in accordance with the methodology prescribed in the Identification of 

IWR (Rule 62-303, F.A.C.). For the Planning List assessment, the data 

evaluation period of record is 10 years, and for the Verified List, 7.5 years. 

Table B.2 in Appendix B shows the periods of record for the Group 1 

through 5 basins for the Verified and Planning Lists in the fi rst basin 

rotation cycle. Data collected between January 1, 1993, and December 31, 

2002, were evaluated to establish the Planning List for the Withlacoochee 

Basin (IWR 2003 Run 14.2). 

To support listing decisions, the evaluation of water quality in this 

basin also includes qualitative information drawn from data in technical 

reports and documents that are not yet included in the database. Some 

of these sources include historical water quality or ecological information 

that was not uploaded to the database because of its qualitative treatment 

of issues. 

Attainment of Designated Use 

While the designated uses of a given waterbody are established using 

the surface water quality classification system described in Chapter 2, 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 when 

assessing waters for use attainment. The water quality evaluations and 

decision processes that are defi ned in Florida’s IWR for listing impaired 

waters 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 

Table 3.1 summarizes the designated uses assigned to Florida’s various 

surface water classifications. 

Table 3.1: Designated Use Attainment Categories for Surface 

Waters in Florida 

Designated Use Attainment Category Used in 

Impaired Surface Waters Rule Evaluation 






Applicable Florida Surface 

Water Classification 

Class I, II, and III 


Class II 

Class I 

Class I, II, and III


Integrated Report Categories and Assessment 

Overview 

Understanding the 

Terms “Pollutant” 

and “Pollution” 

For purposes of the TMDL 

Program, pollutants are 

chemical and biological 

constituents, introduced by 

humans into a waterbody, 

that may result in pollution 

(water quality impairment). 

There are other causes of 

pollution, such as physical 

alteration of a waterbody 

(for example, canals, dams, 

and ditches). However, 

TMDLs are established only 

for impairments caused by 

pollutants (a TMDL quantifies 

how much of a given pollutant 

a waterbody can receive 

and still meet its designated 

uses). 

Waterbodies that are verified 

impaired due to specified pollutants, 

and therefore require 

a TMDL, are listed under 

Category 5 in the Integrated 

Assessment Report; waterbodies 

with water quality 

impairments due to other 

causes, or unknown causes, 

are listed under Category 

4b. Although TMDLs are 

not established for Category 

4b waterbodies, these 

waterbodies still may be 

addressed through a watershed 

management program 

(for example, the Kissimmee 

River restoration). 

The EPA has requested that the states merge their reporting requirements 

under the Clean Water Act for Section 305(b) surface water quality 

reports and Section 303(d) lists of impaired waters into an Integrated 

Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report (Wayland, 2001). Following 

the publication of the Status Report and further data evaluation, the 

Department will produce an Assessment Report integrating the 303(d) list 

and the 305(b) report for the basin. 

Following the EPA’s guidance, the Department delineated waterbodies 

or waterbody segments in each of the state’s river basins, assessed them 

for potential impairment based on individual parameters, and grouped 

them into one of five major assessment categories and subcategories. These 

categories provide information on a waterbody’s status based on water quality, 

sufficiency of data, and the need for TMDL development (Table 3.2). 

This Status Report contains a preliminary evaluation of waterbodies that 

fall into integrated report Categories 1 through 3 in the table. 

Because not enough recent data on chemistry, biology, and fish consumption 

advisories have been collected, currently only a few waterbodies 

or waterbody segments statewide fall into Category 1 (attaining all uses). 

In particular, fish tissues in many waterbodies statewide have not been 

tested for mercury. Out of 151 waterbodies or waterbody segments in the 

Withlacoochee Basin, none are in Category 1. 

More waterbodies and segments statewide fall into Category 2 

(attaining some uses but with insufficient data to assess completely) 

than Category 1 (attaining all uses) because monitoring programs can 

sometimes provide sufficient data for partially determining whether a designated 

use in a particular waterbody is attained. A total of 15 waterbody 

segments in the basin falls into Category 2. 

However, most waterbodies in the state fall into Category 3 (having 

insufficient data). In the Withlacoochee Basin, the breakdown of waterbodies 

or segments in Category 3 is as follows: 

• Category 3a—71 segments for which no data are available to 

determine their water quality status; 

• Category 3b—41 segments with some data but not sufficient data for 

making any determinations; 

• Category 3c—12 segments that are potentially impaired based on 

the Planning List criteria; and 

• Category 3d—12 segments that may be impaired based on the 

Verified List criteria but require further evaluation. 

Several potentially impaired (Category 3c or 3d) waters either fail to 

meet water quality standards for DO or show signs of biological stress or 

nutrient impairment. According to the IWR, specific pollutants causing 

DO exceedances or biological stress, or an underlying nutrient imbalance


51 

Table 3.2: 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 

and insufficient or no information 

or data are present to determine if 

remaining uses are attained 

3a 

3b 

3c 

3d 

4a 

4b 

4c 

No data and information are 

present to determine if any 

designated use is attained 

Some data and information are 

present but not enough to determine 

if any designated use is 

attained 

Enough data and information are 

present to determine that one or 

more designated uses may not be 

attained according to the Planning 

List methodology 

Enough data and information are 

present to determine that one or 

more designated uses are not 

attained according to the Verified 

List methodology 

Impaired for one or more designated 

uses but does not require 

TMDL development because a 

TMDL has already been completed 



TMDL development because the 

water will attain water quality 

standards due to existing or 

proposed measures 



TMDL development because 

impairment is not caused by a 

pollutant 

5 One or more designated uses are 

not attained and a TMDL is 

required 

If attainment is verified for some designated uses of a 

waterbody or segment, the Department will propose partial 

delisting for the uses attained. Future monitoring will be 

recommended to determine if remaining uses are attained. 

Future monitoring will be recommended to determine if 

designated uses are attained. 

Future monitoring will be recommended to gather sufficient 

information and data to determine if designated uses are 

attained. 

This indicates a waterbody or segment is potentially 

impaired for one or more designated uses. These waters 

will be prioritized for future monitoring to verify use attainment 

or impaired status . 

This indicates that a waterbody or segment exceeds Verified 

List evaluation criteria and may be listed as impaired 

at the end of Phase 2 of the watershed management cycle. 

However, the data have not yet been fully evaluated and the 

waters have not been formally verified as impaired. Further 

monitoring and analysis may be necessary. 

After the EPA approves a TMDL for the impaired waterbody 

or segment, the TMDL will be included in a Basin Management 

Action Plan to reduce pollutant loading toward attainment 

of designated use(s). 

Pollutant control mechanisms designed to attain applicable 

water quality standards within a reasonable time frame are 

either proposed or in place. 

This category includes waterbodies or segments that are 

impaired because of naturally occurring conditions or 

other causes of pollution. The impairment is not caused 

by specific pollutants. (See sidebar on previous page for a 

discussion of the difference between the terms “pollutant” 

and “pollution.”) 

Waterbodies or segments in this category are impaired for 

one or more designated uses by a pollutant or pollutants. 

Waters in this category are included on the basin-specific 

Verified List adopted by the Department’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. 

Note: The descriptions in Table 3.2 are consistent with the EPA’s integrated assessment categories. In the 

Status Reports for Groups 1 through 3 and in the Assessment Reports for Groups 1 through 2 that were previously 

produced, Categories 4b and 4c were reversed. That is, the description of Category 4b was previously 

listed as Category 4c, and the description of Category 4c was listed as Category 4b.


creating an imbalance in flora or fauna, must be documented for a 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, no waterbodies in the basin are designated as being in 

Category 4 or Category 5. These will be proposed at the end of Phase 2 

when the Verified List of impaired waters is developed. 

Category 4 includes those waterbodies/segments that are impaired but 

do not require a TMDL for one of three reasons: 

• Category 4a—no segments for which a TMDL has already been 

developed, 

• Category 4b—no segments for which the impairment is not attributable 

to a pollutant or pollutants but is due to other alterations to the 

waterbody, and 

• Category 4c—no segments for which there is reasonable assurance 

that the designated use of an impaired waterbody will be attained by 

an existing or proposed pollutant control measure. 

Category 5 waterbodies are determined to be impaired and require 

TMDLs. These are included on the Verified List of impaired waters 

adopted by the Department’s Secretary. However, no waters are formally 

assigned to this category until the listing process has been completed, even 

though sufficient data may be available and a waterbody may meet the 

requirements for impairment under the IWR. 

Planning Units 

The Withlacoochee Basin encompasses approximately 2,109 square 

miles and a complex hydrologic system. To provide a more detailed 

geographic basis for identifying and assessing water quality improvement 

activities, the basin was subdivided into smaller areas called planning units. 

A planning unit is either an individual large tributary basin or a group 

of smaller adjacent tributary basins with similar characteristics. Planning 

units help organize information and management strategies around 

prominent watershed characteristics. 

Water quality assessments were conducted for waterbody segments 

within planning units. Each of these smaller, hydrologically based drainage 

areas within a planning unit is assigned a unique waterbody identification 

number (WBID). Waterbody segments are assessment units (or 

geographic information system polygons) that the Department used to 

define waterbodies when it biennially inventoried and reported on water 

quality to the EPA under Section 305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act. 

These 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.


53 

Although WBIDs often encompass several waterbodies, water quality 

data usually reflect conditions within the main waterbody within a polygon. 

In some instances, however, the data from several waterbodies within 

the polygon have been aggregated. As the water quality assessments are 

refined in Phase 2 of the watershed management cycle, individual waterbodies 

within these aggregations that have unique water quality concerns 

will be assigned unique WBIDs and evaluated individually. 

The Withlacoochee Basin contains five planning units: Upper Withlacoochee, 

Lake Panasoffkee, Tsala Apopka, Rainbow River, and Lower 

Withlacoochee. Table 3.3 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 

individual waterbody segments, and summaries of ecological issues and 

watershed quality improvement plans and projects. 

To determine the status of surface water quality in the Withlacoochee 

Basin, chemistry data, biological data, and, if available, fi sh consumption, 

beach closure, and shellfish-harvesting advisories were evaluated to determine 

potential impairments. Appendix B contains a detailed description 

of the methodology used to determine potential impairment. Appendix C 

contains supplementary information on the basin’s ecology. Appendix D 

of this report contains definitions and specific methods for the generation 

and analysis of bioassessment data. Appendix E includes summary information, 

by planning unit, for permitted wastewater treatment facilities, 

Superfund sites, and permitted landfi ll facilities in the basin. Appendix F, 

which provides a water quality summary by planning unit, contains a list of 

water quality monitoring stations, the integrated assessment summary, and 

trend data. Appendix G lists Level 1 land uses, by planning unit. 

Table 3.3: Planning Units in the Withlacoochee Basin 

Planning Unit 

Upper Withlacoochee 


Tsala Apopka 

Rainbow River 

Lower Withlacoochee 

Description 

Upper Withlacoochee covers about 221,674 acres (346 square miles) of wetlands 

and open water and drains a watershed of approximately 696,655 acres (1,089 

square miles). 

Lake Panasoffkee covers about 3,800 to 4,500 acres, depending on the water 

surface elevation, which varies directly with rainfall and drains a watershed 

encompassing about 270,938 acres (423 square miles). 

Lake Tsala Apopka, a series of 3 large, hydrologically distinct pools, covers 

approximately 19,000 acres (30 square miles) and drains a watershed encompassing 

about 63,000 acres (98 square miles). 

Rainbow River covers about 1,212 acres (1.9 square miles) of wetlands and open 

water and drains a watershed of approximately 47,053 acres (74 square miles). 

Lower Withlacoochee covers about 45,430 acres (71 square miles) of wetlands 

and open water and drains a watershed of approximately 205,904 acres 

(322 square miles).


Figure 3.2: Locations and Boundaries of Planning Units in the Withlacoochee Basin


55 

Assessment by Planning Unit 

• Upper Withlacoochee River Planning Unit 

General Description 

The Upper Withlacoochee River planning unit covers about 1,089 

square miles and contains 81 segments with WBIDs (Figure 3.3). 

The headwaters of the Withlacoochee River originate in the 850- 

square-mile Green Swamp in north-central Polk County. Major tributaries 

to the Withlacoochee include the Little Withlacoochee River, Gator Creek, 

and Jumper Creek. 

The Jumper Creek Canal drains a 215-square-kilometer wetland area 

that is used for truck farming, cattle raising, and several limestone mines. 

The watershed has one of the most stable flow regimes in west-central 

Florida due to its above- and below-ground storage capacity. 

The triangular-shaped Duck Lake watershed in east-central Pasco 

County drains approximately 40 square miles. The Bystre Lake watershed, 

which comprises approximately 27 square miles, contains 2 large lakes, 

Irvin Lake and Bystre Lake. The Blue Sink watershed in the northeastern 

part of central Hernando County encompasses approximately 23 square 

miles. It is internally drained by Blue Sink, an open sinkhole approximately 

150 feet in diameter that is directly connected to the underlying 

limestone aquifer. 

Water Quality Summary 

Much of the Withlacoochee River has periods of low DO during high 

flows because of swamp drainage. The Dade City Canal, which is polluted 

by agricultural runoff and orange processing operations, loosely connects to 

the Withlacoochee River through wetlands. The upper stretches of Jumper 

Creek may be affected by agriculture and citrus operations at Center Hill. 

The Little Withlacoochee is affected by agriculture, silviculture, and, near 

its confluence with the Withlacoochee, residential and septic tank runoff. 

The SWFWMD has also received anecdotal accounts that septage and 

sludge are being dumped in the Green Swamp. 

A SWFWMD study of ground water quality shows that agriculture is 

a contributor of pollutants in the Northern Ground Water Basin. This area 

is largely unconfi ned, i.e., there is no confining layer to protect the aquifer 

from contamination. Specific pollutants of concern from this source 

include nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, sulfate, and pesticides. 

Water quality data collected near Dade City and Zephyrhills indicate 

that ground water in southeastern Pasco County is enriched in nitrate. 

Nitrogen isotopic data collected in May 1999 show that much of this 

nitrate is derived from inorganic nitrogen sources such as inorganic fertilizers. 

These fertilizers were most likely applied during historical land uses, 

including citrus production, in the vicinity of Dade City and Zephyrhills.


Figure 3.3: Composite Map of the Upper Withlacoochee River Planning Unit, Including the 1998 303(d) List 

and Planning List Waters


57 

Figure 3.3, a composite map of the planning unit, shows waters on the 

1998 303(d) list and the Planning List. Table 3.4 summarizes the water 

quality assessment status of all waterbody segments in the planning unit. 

Waterbodies represented by these data include the Withlacoochee River 

and tributary creeks and numerous lakes. 

The table and figure show that 12 waterbody segments in this planning 

unit are potentially impaired. These segments include portions of 

the Withlacoochee River (DO, mercury in fi sh), Lake Lindsey (DO, fecal 

and total coliforms), Spring Lake (iron), Little Withlacoochee River (DO, 

fecal and total coliforms, biology, pH), Lake Geneva (DO, iron), Dade 

City Canal (DO, biological oxygen demand [BOD], chlorophyll a), Grass 

Creek (mercury in fish), Lake Agnes (trophic state index [TSI]), Mud Lake 

(TSI), and Lake Mattie (TSI). 

Permitted Discharges and Land Uses 

Point Sources. Figure 3.3 shows permitted wastewater treatment 

facilities, landfills, and delineated ground water contamination areas in 

the planning unit (see Noteworthy for a definition of point sources and 

a discussion of environmental remediation). Appendix E lists the basin’s 

domestic and industrial surface discharge facilities, along with their permitted 

flows, by planning unit. It also lists landfi lls or solid waste facilities by 

planning unit. 

The Upper Withlacoochee River planning unit contains 92 permitted 

domestic and industrial facilities. Six of them discharge greater than 

0.1 million gallons per day (mgd) through surface water discharges or by 

land application of the effluent. None of the domestic facilities discharge 

advanced wastewater treated effluent. 

There are five state-funded hazardous waste cleanup sites in the 


The planning unit contains two Class I solid waste landfi lls. One is 

active and the other is closed/monitored. 

Nonpoint Sources. Major land uses in the planning unit are residential 

(10 percent), agriculture (23 percent), and forestry (23 percent). These 

land uses can be associated with nonpoint discharges of pollutants and 

eroded sediments (see Noteworthy for a definition of nonpoint sources). 

Appendix G provides summary information on general land uses in the 

basin, by planning unit. 

Most of the agricultural areas are concentrated from the central section 

to the northeast section of the planning unit in Sumter County and 

along the south and southwestern portions. Agricultural land uses include 

cropland, pastureland, tree crops, feeding operations, nurseries/vineyards 

and specialty farms. Pastureland is by far the most prevalent use. Future 

land use projections for 2010 indicate that agriculture will continue to be 

the major land use. 

Numerous active and inactive mines are scattered throughout the 

Withlacoochee Basin; many of these are located in the Green Swamp. 

Although these activities have altered the landscape, they do not appear to 

have significantly affected historical river flows. The Jumper Creek Canal


Table 3.4: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Upper Withlacoochee River Planning Unit 

WBID 

1329E 

1329F 

1329G 

Waterbody 

Segment 


River 


River 


River 

Waterbody 

Type 1 Class 2 1998 

303(d) List 

Parameters 

of Concern 

Data Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria 3 

Potentially 

Impaired (Cat. 

3c) for Listed 

Parameters 

Verified 


3d) for Listed 

Parameters 

Stream IIIF — — DO, Mercury 

in Fish 

Stream IIIF — — pH, DO, 

Mercury in 

Fish 

Not Impaired 

(Cat. 2) for Listed 

Parameters 

pH, Turbidity, 

Fluoride, 

Conductance, 

Unionized 

Ammonia, 

Nutrients 

(Chlorophyll a), 

Alkalinity 

Biology, 

Nutrients 


Conductance 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 

Integrated Report 

Assessment 

Category for WBID 4 

Cat. 3d 

Verified List 

Cat. 3d 

Verified List 

Blackwater IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1329H Lake Lindsey Lake IIIF DO, 

Coliforms 

1329I 

1329L 

1329M 

1329N 

1329O 

1329P 

1329Q 


River 

Tank Lake– 

Open Water 

Irvin Lake– 

Open Water 

Sparkman 

Lake–Open 

Water 

McClendon 

Lake–Open 

Water 

Dowling 

Lake–Open 

Water 

Rock Pond– 

Open Water 

DO, Fecal 

Coliforms, 

Total 

Coliforms 

— Unionized 

Ammonia 

Cat. 3c 

Planning List 

Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Lake IIIF — — — Unionized 

Ammonia 

Cat. 2 Meets 

Some Uses 

Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 

Insufficient Data 









1329W Bystre Lake Lake IIIF — — — Unionized 

Ammonia 

1329X Spring Lake Lake IIIF — Iron — Unionized 

Ammonia 

Cat. 2 Meets 

Some Uses 

Cat. 3c 

Planning List 

1329Y Mountain Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1329Z Neff Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1354 Shinn Ditch Stream IIIF — — — Mercury in Fish Cat. 2 Meets 

Some Uses


59 

Table 3.4 (continued) 

WBID 

Waterbody 

Segment 

Waterbody 


303(d) List 

Parameters 



Potentially 



Parameters 

Verified 



Parameters 

Not Impaired 


Parameters 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 


Assessment 


1358 Otter Slough Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1360 Jumper Creek 

Canal 

1363 Schoolhous 

Pond Drain 

1365 Towns Prairie 

Drain 

Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 




1366 Gum Slough Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1367 The Willows Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1368 Unnamed Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Ditch 


Ditch 

1370 Baptizing Hole Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1370A Baptizing Hole Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Outlet 

1372 Grant Slough Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1374 Clabber Creek Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1375 Mobley Pond Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Outlet 

1376 Gator Head Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Slough 

1377 Akins Pond Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Outlet 

1377A Akins Pond Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1378 Big Gant Canal Stream IIIF DO, 

Coliforms 

1381 Little 


Stream IIIF DO, 

Coliforms 

DO, Fecal 

Coliforms, 

Total 

Coliforms 

Fecal Coliforms, 

Total 

Coliforms 

— — Cat. 3c 

Planning List 

Iron, TSI 

Conductance, 

Unionized 

Ammonia, Lead 

Cat. 3d 

Planning List 

1381A Erie Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1381X 

Lake Mill 

Stream 

Swamp 

1383 Giddon Lake 

Outlet 

1385 Rock Pond 

Outlet 

Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 



1385A Rock Pond Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data



WBID 

Waterbody 

Segment 

1386 Spring 

Hammock Run 

1388 Long Lake 

Outlet 

Waterbody 


303(d) List 

Parameters 



Potentially 



Parameters 

Verified 



Parameters 

Not Impaired 


Parameters 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 


Assessment 




1388A Long Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1390 Lake Elizabeth 

Outlet 

1390A Lake Geneva– 

Open Water 

1393 Gator Hole 

Slough 


Lake IIIF — DO, 

Conductance 

— — Cat. 3c 

Planning List 


1394 Devils Creek Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1396 Owensboro 

Swamp Outlet 

1396A Blanton Lake– 

Open Water 

1398 Wild Cat 

Swamp 

1399 Dade City 

Canal 





Stream IIIF DO, BOD, 

Nutrients 

BOD, 

Nutrients 

(Chlorophyll 

a) 

DO 

pH, 

Conductance 

Cat. 3d 

Verified List 

1403 Clear Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1403A 

Sumner Lake– 

Open Water 

1411 Unnamed 

Ditch 

1412 Duck Lake 

Canal 

1413 Tanic Road 

Slough 






1414 Cross Creek Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 


Drain 

1417 Pony Creek Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 


Drain 

1426 Pony Creek Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1427 Grass Creek Stream IIIF — — Mercury in 

Fish 

— Cat. 3d 

Verified List 

1430 Colt Creek Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 

Insufficient Data


61 


WBID 

Waterbody 

Segment 

Waterbody 


303(d) List 

Parameters 



Potentially 



Parameters 

Verified 



Parameters 

Not Impaired 


Parameters 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 


Assessment 


1431 Gator Creek Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1433 Cumbee Drain Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1435 Mattress Drain Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1449 Orange 

Hammock 

Drain 

1449A 

Lake Deeson– 

Open Water 

Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b Insufficient 

Data 



1466 Lake Agnes Lake IIIF — — Nutrients 

(TSI) 

1466A 

Lake Agnes 

Outlet 

— Cat. 3d 

Verified List 


1467 Mud Lake Lake IIIF — — pH, Nutrients 

(TSI) 

1467A 

1467B 

Clearwater 

Lake 

Mud Lake 

Outlet 

1468 Lake Helene 

Outlet 

DO, Conductance, 

Unionized 

Ammonia 

Cat. 3d 

Verified List 




1468A Lake Helene Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1476 Lake Mattie Lake IIIF Nutrients Nutrients 

(TSI) 

1476A Lake Mattie 

Outlet 

1484 Lake Juliana 

Outlet 

1484A 

Lake 

Tennessee 

— — Cat. 3c 

Planning List 






1484B Lake Juliana Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1503 Lake Van Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1503A 

Lake Van 

Outlet 


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; 

3d—Meets Verified List Criteria and is verified 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 an existing or proposed pollutant 

control mechanism provides reasonable assurance that the water will attain standards in the future; 

4c—Impaired for one or more designated uses but no TMDL is required because the impairment is not caused by a 

pollutant; and 

5—Water quality standards are not attained and a TMDL is required. 

4 

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, 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 

BOD = Biological oxygen demand 

DO = Dissolved oxygen 

TSI = Trophic state index 

drainage area is used for truck farming, cattle raising, and several limestone 

mines. 

Except for natural depressional storage and subsequent infiltration, 

Blue Sink is the only outlet for stormwater runoff from the Blue Sink 

watershed. 

The Bystre Lake watershed is primarily undeveloped; however, the 

area receives runoff from developed areas in the city of Brooksville and 

small subdivisions such as High Point Gardens. The remaining watershed 

consists of agricultural, range, pasture, forest, and barren lands. Planned 

future development of the area is limited, with urban or residential areas to 

increase to 22.5 percent of the total area and commercial, transportation, 

and water surface uses to increase to 8.3 percent of the total area. 

Ecological Summary 

The Withlacoochee Basin comprises a variety of natural communities 

that form an extensive and diverse ecosystem, ranging from river floodplain 

forests, cypress domes, pine fl atwoods, and sandhills in the Green Swamp, 

to extensive lake systems and marshes in the middle basin, to salt marsh at 

the mouth of the river near Yankeetown. This diverse ecosystem supports 

nearly 500 species of vertebrates (freshwater and saltwater fish, amphibians, 

reptiles, birds, and mammals). In addition to a wide range of common 

vertebrate species, many listed species inhabit the Withlacoochee Basin. 

The Florida Natural Areas Inventory database records for listed species in 

the basin include the West Indian manatee, wood stork, eastern indigo 

snake, Florida scrub jay, and Florida mouse. Other designated species

Noteworthy 

Water Quality Status Report: 


63 

Information on Point Sources in Planning Units 

Point sources discharging 

pollutants to surface water or 

ground water originate from 

discrete, well-defined areas such 

as a facility discharge from the 

end of a pipe, a disposal well, or 

a wastewater sprayfield. Point 

sources generally fall into two 

major types: domestic wastewater 

sources (which consist of 

sewage from homes, businesses, 

and institutions) and industrial 

wastewater sources (which 

include wastewater, runoff, and 

leachate from industrial or commercial 

storage, handling, or 

processing facilities). Landfills, 

hazardous waste sites, dry 

cleaning solvent cleanup 

program (DSCP) sites, and 

petroleum facility discharges 

are also considered point 

sources. These sites have the 

potential to leach contaminants 

into ground water and surface 

water. 

Identifying the source of 

waterbody impairment is an 

important part of assessing 

water quality and developing 

TMDLs. As part of 

this report, information is 

presented on point sources, 

including permitted wastewater 

facilities and landfills. 

Environmental Remediation 

Environmental remediation 

activities cover a broad spectrum 

of cleanup programs. These 

include state-managed hazardous 

waste, dry cleaning, and petroleum 

cleanup programs; as well as the 

federal Superfund and Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act 

(RCRA) programs. These programs 

are designed to remediate 

ground water and soil contamination 

that pose a threat to public 

health and the environment. 

The National Priorities List 

(NPL) is a consolidated list of the 

uncontrolled hazardous waste sites 

that pose the greatest threat to 

public health or the environment. 

Sites are listed on the NPL upon 

the completion of a preliminary 

assessment, site inspection, and 

hazardous ranking system evaluation 

to determine their potential 

for adverse impacts and priority 

for corrective action. The EPA 

Superfund program administers 

the cleanup of NPL sites. 

The Department’s state-funded 

cleanup program administers the 

cleanup of contaminated hazardous 

waste sites when enforcement 

action taken against a 

responsible party is unsuccessful 

or when no responsible party is 

identified. 

Brownfields are abandoned, 

idled, or underused industrial 

and commercial facilities where 

expansion or redevelopment 

is complicated by real 

or perceived environmental 

contamination. The EPA 

launched the Brownfields 

Economic Redevelopment 

Initiative in January 1995 to 

empower states, communities, 

and other stakeholders 

in economic redevelopment 

to work together in a timely 

manner to prevent, inventory, 

assess, safely clean 

up, and sustainably reuse 

Brownfields. The federal and 

state Brownfields program is 

funded through the Superfund 

taxing authority. 

Nonpoint Sources and Land Uses 

Rainfall generates stormwater 

runoff. As it flows over the land 

and through the ground, runoff 

may carry nonpoint source pollutants 

from many different sources 

to lakes, rivers, and estuaries in a 

watershed, and into ground water 

supplies. Nonpoint sources also 

include atmospheric deposition 

and leaching from agricultural 

lands, urban areas, and unvegetated 

lands. The pollutants in 

runoff often include fertilizers, 

bacteria, metals, 

sediments, and petroleum 

compounds.


found in the Withlacoochee River corridor include the American alligator, 

gopher frog, gopher tortoise, bald eagle, Florida sandhill crane, Sherman’s 

fox squirrel, burrowing owl, southeastern American kestrel, red-cockaded 

woodpecker, limpkin, little blue heron, snowy egret, and tricolored heron. 

Many small, named tributary creeks form an extensive area of riverine 

habitat within the Green Swamp. In addition to these tributary creeks, 

rivers, and their associated floodplains, natural habitats in the Green 

Swamp include a mosaic of cypress and hardwood forests, pine fl atwoods, 

prairies, marshes, and xeric uplands. The interconnected habitats in the 

Green Swamp remain relatively intact, although several major roads (U.S. 

Highway 98, County Road 471, and State Road 33) act as obstacles to 

wildlife movement. Generally, land uses in the Green Swamp have not 

caused widespread fragmentation of the natural landscape. Many of the 

areas in the basin that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 

has identified as Strategic Habitat Conservation Areas are concentrated 

in the Green Swamp and in the northern portion of the basin. 

Among the most important factors contributing to the support of 

wildlife populations in the Green Swamp are the diversity and extent of the 

area’s habitats. The most significant feature in terms of areal extent and 

importance are the Green Swamp’s wetlands. The most extensive body of 

wetland habitats occurs along the rivers and tributary creeks. These wetlands 

support wildlife populations throughout west-central Florida. In the 

upper reaches of the Green Swamp, floodplain forests and swamps provide 

habitat for many wildlife species, including many listed as endangered, 

threatened, or of special concern. 

Waterbodies in the Withlacoochee Basin have a long and welldocumented 

history of aquatic plant problems. These problems are 

primarily the result of the introduction and rapid expansion of the invasive 

exotic species water hyacinth, water lettuce, and hydrilla. Water hyacinth 

required aquatic plant management on the Withlacoochee River as early 

as the 1920s. Decades ago, water hyacinths formed expansive mats that 

jammed large stretches of the Withlacoochee River and Lake Rousseau, 

making navigation impossible. The problem was so severe and the plants 

so abundant that the state was often forced to treat them by aerial herbicide 

application. Similarly, dense mats of hydrilla have blocked the Withlacoochee 

River, Lake Rousseau, and Lake Tsala Apopka. In addition to 

restricting access and navigation, these exotic species have affected native 

plant communities, DO levels, fishery habitat, and recreational uses. 

Another aquatic plant problem that has recently affected waters in 

the Withlacoochee Basin is floating tussocks. Tussocks are free-floating 

mats of organic material that have popped up from the bottom. Over time 

they become colonized by herbaceous plants, woody shrubs, and in some 

cases, trees. Tussocks have caused boat access and navigation problems on 

Lake Tsala Apopka, Lake Panasoffkee, and other waterbodies. The existing 

mechanical removal methods are expensive and time consuming. In 

addition, the lack of adjacent and suitable disposal sites is a major problem. 

One method of disposal involves using the material to amend sandy soils. 

Another involves piling the material in the lake to create stationary islands. 

These islands create new habitat areas and may be used by wildlife for nest-


65 

ing or feeding. This method is slightly less expensive than disposing of the 

material in upland areas. 

Exotic terrestrial species of particular concern in the Withlacoochee 

Basin include cogon grass, natal grass, Brazilian pepper, tropical soda apple, 

and skunk vine. 

• Lake Panasoffkee Planning Unit 


The Lake Panasoffkee planning unit covers about 423 square miles and 

contains 29 segments with WBIDs (Figure 3.4). 

Lake Panasoffkee, the largest lake in Sumter County and the third 

largest in Florida, is one of the state’s oldest lakes. Its surface area ranges 

from 3,800 to 4,500 acres, depending on rainfall. The lake is relatively 

shallow, with a mean depth of 3 feet and a maximum of 10 feet. It contains 

an exposed portion of the Floridan aquifer. Ground water accounts 

for about 39 percent of the annual water input to the lake, while rainfall on 

the lake surface contributes 16 percent, and surface runoff 45 percent. A 

large percentage of the surface runoff stems from springs entering surface 

water tributaries. The lake is valued not only for its sports fishery, but also 

for its large contribution to the base flow of the Withlacoochee River. 

The major tributaries to the lake are Big Jones Creek and Little Jones 

Creek, which enter at the north end of the lake, and Shady Brook, which 

enters at the south end of the lake. On the west side, the 2-mile Outlet 

River connects the lake to the Withlacoochee River. The drainage basin 

that contributes direct surface runoff to Lake Panasoffkee covers about 62 

square miles; however, the total watershed, which includes internal drainage 

due to the area’s karst geology, is approximately 420 square miles. 

The SWFWMD has designated Lake Panasoffkee as a Surface Water 

Improvement and Management (SWIM) priority waterbody, based on 

its regional significance as a recreational fishing resource, public concerns 

about aquatic plant growth, potential pollution sources in the watershed, 

sediment accumulation, and the potential deleterious effects of lake level 

stabilization. The results of a one-year study of algal biomass, productivity, 

and nutrient concentrations determined that the lake was mesotrophic but 

that water quality, based on these criteria, was not a problem (Crisman, 

Beaver, and Bays, 1981). One study (Myers and Edmiston, 1983) listed 

the lake as one of the 50 lakes in Florida most in need of preservation and 

protection. 

Within the planning unit, the Big Prairie Canal watershed encompasses 

more than 110 square miles and spans 2 counties (Sumter and Lake) 

and 2 water management districts (the St. Johns River Water Management 

District [SJRWMD] and SWFWMD). The irregularly shaped canal is 

approximately 14 miles long and 8 miles wide. The system drains into a 

sinkhole complex near Sumterville. 


Lake Panasoffkee has good to fair water quality and is considered 

healthy, mainly due to substantial ground water flows into the lake from 

the Floridan aquifer. Ironically, however, the ground water inflow that


Figure 3.4: Composite Map of the Lake Panasoffkee Planning Unit, Including the 1998 303(d) List and 

Planning List Waters


67 

keeps the lake’s water quality high is also the major contributor to the 

sedimentation that is fi lling in the lake. The ground water carries large 

amounts of dissolved calcium carbonate. When the ground water mixes 

with the lake water, the calcium carbonate solidifies, producing sediments 

that settle on the lake bottom, filling in fish-spawning areas. These factors 

have combined to affect the lake’s fishery, promoting increased shoreline 

vegetation and tussock formations, which affect recreation and navigation. 

Shoreline development, residential septic systems, pollutant inflows from 

mining operations, stormwater runoff, water stabilization, low water levels, 

sediment accumulation, aquatic plant overgrowth, and nutrient inputs are 

also potential threats to water quality. 

No chronic violations of applicable water quality standards have been 

documented in the lake. There have, however, been instances of low DO 

levels that have resulted in fish kills. The Class III standard for copper 

was exceeded in Shady Brook, according to a 1992 study. Historical data 

and recent monitoring results indicate that since 1977 the TSI has ranged 

between 45 and 47, which places the lake in a mesotrophic category. In 

a statewide survey of 573 lakes, 47 percent had TSI values in the range of 

40 to 59. 

Based on existing information, ground water contributes about 34 percent 

of the annual total phosphorus input to the lake and 40 percent of 

total nitrogen. Surface runoff, which is derived largely from ground water 

discharge through springs, contributes about 57 percent of the total phosphorus 

load and 51 percent of the total nitrogen load to the lake. 

Nitrate concentrations in Big Jones Creek, Little Jones Creek, and a 

residential canal increased significantly between 1980–81 and 1992–93; 

however, nitrate levels in the lake and the Outlet River did not increase 

during the same period. Uptake by aquatic macrophytes, attached algae, 

and phytoplankton limit nitrate concentrations in the lake, resulting in the 

retention of about 41 percent of the nitrogen and 72 percent of the phosphorus 

input loads in Lake Panasoffkee. Increased nitrate concentrations 

in water entering the lake have not increased TSI values in the lake itself. 

Discharges from springs are a major contribution to tributary flows in 

the planning unit, and a regional nitrate increase in the Floridan aquifer 

appears to be the source of the observed increase of nitrates in the tributaries. 

Data from monitoring wells and an adjacent residential canal 

indicate that on-site sewage disposal systems (septic tanks and associated 

drainfields) do not cause increased nitrate concentrations in the lake or its 

inflows. 

Sediments in Lake Panasoffkee contain 72 percent inorganic carbonate 

matter and 17 percent organic matter. The sediments are endogenic, and 

are believed to originate from dense populations of submergent plants that 

characterize the lake and fi x the inorganic carbon. The principal source 

of the organic matter in Lake Panasoffkee is attributed to aquatic macrophytes 

located near tributaries (e.g., Big Jones Creek). Runoff and erosion 

apparently do not contribute significant quantities of sediment to Lake 

Panasoffkee. 

Endogenic 

Produced internally within 

the lake.


Walled Sink, in the upper reaches of the planning unit, has poor water 

quality that can be attributed to agriculture. It contains large areas of agriculture, 

particularly pasture land. 

High sulfate concentrations in the Lake Panasoffkee area likely result 

from upwelling of sulfate-rich water from the lower portions of the Floridan 

aquifer and are attributable to extensive fracturing of the limestone in 

those regions. 




Waterbodies represented by these data include Lake Panasoffkee and Lake 

Okahumpka. 

The table and figure show that three waterbody segments in this planning 

unit are potentially impaired. These segments include Lake Panasoffkee 

(pH), an outlet to Lake Panasoffkee (pH, DO), and Lake Okahumpka 

(biology). 



facilities, landfills, and delineated ground water contamination areas in the 

planning unit. Appendix E lists the basin’s domestic and industrial surface 

discharge facilities, along with their permitted flows, by planning unit. It 

also lists landfi lls or solid waste facilities by planning unit. 

The Lake Panasoffkee planning unit contains 76 permitted domestic 

and industrial facilities. Twelve of them discharge greater than 0.1 mgd 

through surface water discharges or by land application of the effluent. 

None of the domestic facilities discharge advanced wastewater treated 

effluent. 

There are four state-funded hazardous waste cleanup sites in the 


The planning unit contains one Class I solid waste landfi ll, which 

is active. 

Nonpoint Sources. Land uses in the planning unit are primarily 

rural. Agriculture, wetlands, forests, and open land occupy about 

83 percent of the drainage basin; residential and commercial uses represent 

5 percent, and the lake itself accounts for the remaining 12 percent. These 

land uses can be associated with nonpoint discharges of pollutants and 

eroded sediments. Appendix G provides summary information on general 

land uses in the basin, by planning unit. 

Residential areas are concentrated along the west shore of Lake Panasoffkee, 

where the elevation rises quickly to form a broad plain. To the 

north and east of the lake, land uses are primarily wetlands and forest 

and will remain so, since more than 9,900 acres of land in this area were 

acquired through the Save Our Rivers (SOR) Program. 


Lake vegetation mapping during 1974, 1975, 1978, and 1980 indicated 

that plant diversity is good, although there have been changes in species 

dominance, and that the lake is eutrophic and aging rapidly.


69 

Table 3.5: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Lake Panasoffkee Planning Unit 

WBID 

Waterbody 

Segment 

Waterbody 


303(d) List 

Parameters 



Potentially 



Parameters 

Verified 



Parameters 

Not Impaired 


Parameters 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 


Assessment 


1324 Big Jones Creek Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1324A Lake Lillian Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1342 Lake Miona Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Outlet 

1342A Lady Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1342B Lake Sunshine Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1342C Cherry Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Outlet 

1342D Black Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Outlet 

1342E Lady Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Outlet 

1342X Black Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1342Y Cherry Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1342Z Lake Miona Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1344 Little Jones 

Creek 


Spring 

1347 Lake 

Okahumpka 

1347A 

Lake 

Okahumpka 

Outlet 

1349 Lake Deaton 

Outlet 



Lake IIIF — Biology — — Cat. 3c 

Planning List 




1349A Lake Deaton Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1350 Myrtle Lake 

Outlet 

1351 Lake 

Panasoffkee Dr 



1351A Outlet River Stream IIIF — — pH, DO Conductance, 

Fluoride, Nutrients 

(Chlorophyll 

a), Turbidity 

1351B 

Lake 


Lake IIIF — — pH Conductance, 

Nutrients (TSI), 

DO, Mercury in 

Fish 

Cat. 3d 

Verified List 

Cat. 3d 

Verified List



WBID 

Waterbody 

Segment 

1351B1 Lake 

Panasoffkee Dr 

1352 Robinson Lake 

Outlet 

Waterbody 


303(d) List 

Parameters 



Potentially 



Parameters 

Verified 



Parameters 

Not Impaired 


Parameters 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 


Assessment 




1352A Robinson Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1356 Shady Brook Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1359 Walled Sink Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3b 


1359A Lake Catherine Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1359B Lake David Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1359C 

Notes: 

Lake Catherine 

Outlet 


1 

The designation “stream” includes canals, rivers, and sloughs. The designation “lake” includes some marshes. 

2 







3 














4 





Category 5. 


M = Marine 


TSI = Trophic state index


71 

Historically, Lake Panasoffkee has supported one of Florida’s most productive 

redear sunfish, bass, and bluegill fisheries. Extensive communities 

of submerged aquatic plants in the lake provide habitat conditions needed 

by these gamefish populations, although this vegetation also restricts access 

to large areas of the lake when lake levels are low. In addition to sportfi sh, 

the lake and its relatively undeveloped eastern shoreline also support a 

diversity of birds, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals. 

Floating tussocks have caused boat access and navigation problems on 

the lake. 

• Tsala Apopka Planning Unit 


The Tsala Apopka planning unit covers about 201 square miles and 


Lake Tsala Apopka consists of a large area of numerous interconnected, 

shallow ponds and wetlands; these drain a watershed encompassing 

approximately 63,000 acres (92 square miles). The lake contains 3 hydrologically 

distinct pools (Hernando, Floral City, and Inverness) and covers 

about 19,000 acres (30 square miles). The pools in the western part of the 

lake are comparatively deep, while the lake grows progressively shallower 

and melds into marsh on the eastern side. Wetlands cover 40 percent of the 

area, but cypress trees are not present in the marshes because water currents 

and a lack of dry periods prevent their establishment. 

No open-water connection existed between the lake and the Withlacoochee 

River before the late 1800s, and what flow there was went through 

the marshes. Now, a system of canals and flow-control structures governs 

the generally northerly movement of water through the lake and into the 

Withlacoochee River. 

During periods of high water, flow from the Withlacoochee is diverted 

into the Floral City Pool through the Leslie Heifner and Orange State 

Canals. Both canals have control structures that regulate inflow from the 

river and prevent backflow from the lake system to the river. Water travels 

northward to the Inverness Pool through the Golf Course control structure 

and Moccasin Slough. 

Just north of Moccasin Slough, water can bypass the rest of the system 

through the Bryant Slough structure (when operated) to the Withlacoochee 

River. If not, water moves through the pool to the Brogden Bridge Structure 

and Culvert, into the Hernando Pool. Discharge from the Hernando 

Pool can occur through the Van Ness Structure to Two Mile Prairie, a 

series of sinks north of the lake, or through a control structure (S-353) to 

Canal 331 that outfalls back to the Withlacoochee River. 

During flows in excess of the 10-year-flood event on the river, in addition 

to inflow through the canal, the lake system in the Floral City area 

also receives considerable uncontrolled inflow from the river. As the river 

rises above natural control elevations along the west boundary of Flying 

Eagle Ranch, the river spills over into the lake system. This overflow can 

amount to several thousand cubic feet per second, many times greater


Figure 3.5: Composite Map of the Tsala Apopka Planning Unit, Including the 1998 303(d) List and 

Planning List Waters


73 

than the maximum potential inflow through the Orange State and Leslie 

Heifner Canals. 


In the Tsala Apopka area, surface water and ground water are closely 

related; each influencing the other physically and geochemically. Water 

quality in the southern reaches of the lake system is most closely related 

to water quality in the river. The lake is connected hydraulically with the 

Floridan aquifer, which is near the surface and overlain with a permeable 

sand bed. The configuration of the potentiometric surface shows that the 

lake is a recharge area for the Floridan. 

Water quality data indicate that total dissolved solids, total organic 

carbon (TOC), and other chemical constituents (e.g., chloride, phosphorus) 

are elevated along the river and in the Tsala Apopka area. This is 

probably due to the close interaction between surface water and ground 

water systems near these features. 

Elevated nitrates are found in several wells in the region, and although 

a portion of the nitrate in the aquifer likely originates from lake bottom 

sediments, two wells near Inverness contain over 1 mg/L nitrate–nitrogen. 

A single nitrogen isotope value north of Inverness indicates that a nearby 

organic nitrogen source, such as septic/wastewater, is likely present in this 

area. 

In 1990, the SWFWMD published the results of a Tsala Apopka 

Environmental Assessment to define the current status of the water quality 

and fishery in the lake and determine if the management of water levels 

was affecting water quality and fisheries. Twelve stations were sampled 

monthly for chemical and physical parameters from June 1987 through 

May 1989. 

The results of the investigation suggest that overall, water quality in 

the lake is good compared with other Florida lakes. Not surprisingly, water 

quality is influenced by inflows from the Withlacoochee River. As water 

flows northward through the chain of lakes, however, the river water is 

diluted by rainfall and surface water runoff, and is affected by biological 

activity. As a result, noticeable changes in water chemistry occur. Statistical 

analyses reveal significant differences in selected parameters between 

the different lake pools as the water moves northward. The data show 

reduced color; increased pH, alkalinity, and hardness; and decreased total 

nitrogen and chlorophyll a concentrations from south to north through the 

system. 

The study shows that the station below the outfall canal from the 

Hernando Pool is the least similar to any other sampling stations. Water 

quality problems were documented at this site during the study. 

Data from a 1982 study indicate that nutrient concentrations were 

higher than those reported during the Tsala Apopka Environmental Assessment, 

suggesting that nutrients previously found in the water column may 

now be bound in sediments and aquatic vegetation. Finally, water quality 

data from Lake Tsala Apopka show that both the Floral City and Inverness 

Pools are mesotrophic, while the Hernando Pool is more oligotrophic.


Determinations of trophic state, however, do not account for aquatic macrophyte 

production; thus, the lake’s trophic state may be underestimated. 

As part of the 1987–1989 environmental assessment, algal growth 

potential and limiting nutrient assays were carried out to quantify the 

algal growth in samples of water from Lake Tsala Apopka and the Withlacoochee 

River under ideal laboratory conditions, to identify the presence of 

growth-limiting nutrients in the system, and to determine the availability 

of nutrients at each water quality sampling site. The results of quarterly 

algal growth potential (AGP) tests indicate the lake is a moderately productive 

system. The AGP for the Withlacoochee River is generally higher than 

for the lake and appears to respond to precipitation in the river watershed. 

Mean AGP declines from south to north in the chain of lakes but shows 

little temporal variability. Limiting nutrient assays indicate both phosphorus 

and nitrogen limitations to algal growth; however, the chemical ratios 

of bioavailable nutrients predict nitrogen-limited conditions, while total 

nutrient ratios predict phosphorus-limited conditions. 

Aquatic macrophytes can act as both a sink and a source for nutrients 

in lakes; modifying ambient water quality by interacting with sediment 

and water. Plant surveys of the abundance and distribution of emergent 

and floating-leaved vegetation in the lake system suggest that all three 

pools have an assemblage of desirable submersed, emergent, and floatingleaved 

macrophyte species. A considerable increase in submersed aquatic 

macrophytes, primarily hydrilla, was documented in the Inverness Pool 

compared with a 1984 study. 

The Floral City Pool had much less submersed vegetation than either 

of the other two pools, probably because of an aggressive control program 

for hydrilla in the early 1980s. As a result, submersed aquatic plants have 

not returned to the lake in any significant quantity. This may also be 

related to highly colored inflows from the Withlacoochee River that would 

reduce light penetration. Finally, there was no significant change in the 

abundance of submersed or emergent and floating-leaved macrophytes in 

the Hernando Pool. 

Blocknet and electrofishing data collected in October 1988 to assess 

the status of the fisheries in the three pools were compared with similar 

data from 1975 and 1978. Results were mixed for the three pools. A 

decline in the standing crop estimate and the amount of harvestable sport 

fish in the Floral City Pool may result from a decline in fish habitat, due 

to the disappearance of hydrilla. Increases in total standing crop and the 

number and weight of harvestable sport fish were reported for the Inverness 

Pool. Standing crop estimates for the Hernando Pool have doubled since 

1978; however, the number of harvestable sport fish has declined. In 

general, and similarly to the 1975 and 1978 data, the 1988 data indicate 

that the pools exhibit a pattern of good reproduction but poor recruitment 

into larger size classes. 

Lake sediment composition is controlled by in-lake processes and 

inputs to the lake from the watershed. Although sedimentation is a natural 

process in a lake, it can be accelerated by poor land practices in the watershed. 

Sediment samples were collected along transects in the three pools, 

using a piston corer to obtain a sediment profi le to the lake’s hard bottom.


75 

Throughout much of the Floral City and Inverness Pools, sediments from 

shallow areas have relatively low organic content, with organic-rich sediments 

found primarily in deeper areas. Sediments from the Hernando Pool 

are generally highest in percent water and organic content, and there is a 

greater distribution of organic sediments in this pool. Data suggest that 

since sediments in the Hernando Pool have the highest percent organic 

content and percent water, this pool is aging (filling in) faster than the 

other two pools. 

Historical changes in water quality can be assessed by examining lakebottom 

sediment strata. A core was obtained from the Floral City Pool 

by the University of Florida for trophic state analysis and sediment dating 

based on Pb (lead 210) activity. Past trophic state conditions were inferred 

by examining fossil diatom communities. The results of the study suggest 

that the trophic state of this pool has been moving toward less-enriched 

conditions since the 1940s. 




The table and figure show that two waterbody segments in this 

planning unit are potentially impaired. These segments include the 

outlet to Lake Tsala Apopka (DO, historical chlorophyll) and Lake 

Henderson (TSI). 







The Tsala Apopka planning unit contains 26 permitted domestic and 

industrial facilities. Three of them discharge greater than 0.1 mgd through 

surface water discharges or by land application of the effluent. None of the 

domestic facilities discharge advanced wastewater treated effluent. 

There are no state-funded hazardous waste cleanup sites in the 


The planning unit contains no Class I solid waste landfi lls. 

Nonpoint Sources. Based on Level I and II land use summary 

information, the predominant land use in the planning unit are urban 

(32 percent) and upland forest (31 percent). Other land uses include 

wetlands (17 percent) and agriculture (15 percent). These land uses can be 

associated with nonpoint discharges of pollutants and eroded sediments. 


basin, by planning unit. 


Dense mats of the invasive aquatic plant hydrilla, as well as floating 

tussocks, have restricted boat access and navigation in Lake Tsala Apopka. 

Hydrilla has also affected native plant communities, DO levels, fi shery 

habitat, and recreational uses.


Table 3.6: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Tsala Apopka Planning Unit 

WBID 

Waterbody 

Segment 

1340 Tsala Apopka 

Outlet 

1340A 

1340B 

1340C 

1340D 

1340E 

1340F 

1340G 

1340H 

1340I 

1340J 

1340K 

1340L 

1340M 

1340N 

1340O 

1340P 

1340Q 

1340R 

Davis Lake– 

Open Water 

Fort Cooper 

Lake–Open 

Water 

Magnolia Lake– 

Open Water 

Hampton Lake– 

Open Water 

Little Lake 

(Consuella) 

Dodd Lake– 

Open Water 

Bellamy Lake– 

Open Water 

Hernando 

Lake–Open 

Water 

Hog Pond 

(Lake Nina) 

Connell Lake– 

Open Water 

Cato Lake– 

Open Water 

Cooter Lake– 

Open Water 

Waterbody 


303(d) List 

Parameters 



Potentially 



Parameters 

Verified 



Parameters 

Stream IIIF — — DO, Nutrients 

(Historical 

Chlorophyll) 

Not Impaired 


Parameters 

pH, Nutrients 


Conductance 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 


Assessment 


Cat. 3d 

Verified List 







Lake IIIF — — — Nutrients (TSI) Cat. 2 Meets 

Some Uses 




Some Uses 


Some Uses 

Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3d 










Little 


Henderson Lake 

Some Uses 

Henderson 

Lake–Open 

Water 

Todd Lake– 

Open Water 

Spivey Lake– 

Open Water 

Tussock Lake– 

Open Water 

Tsala Apopka 

Lake (Floral 

City) 

Lake IIIF — Nutrients (TSI) — — Cat. 3c 

Planning List 

Lake IIIF — — — Nutrients (TSI), 

Mercury in Fish 

Cat. 2 Meets 

Some Uses 


Some Uses 


Some Uses 


Some Uses


77 


WBID 

1340S 

1340T 

Waterbody 

Segment 

Croft Lake– 

Open Water 

Van Ness Lake– 

Open Water 

1371 McKithen Lake 

Outlet 

Waterbody 


303(d) List 

Parameters 



Potentially 



Parameters 

Verified 



Parameters 

Not Impaired 


Parameters 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 


Assessment 


Lake IIIF — — — Mercury in Fish Cat. 2 Meets 

Some Uses 

Lake IIIF — — — Mercury in Fish Cat. 2 Meets 

Some Uses 



1371A McKithen Lake Lake IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

Notes: 

1 


2 







3 














4 





Category 5. 


M = Marine 


• Rainbow River Planning Unit 


The Rainbow River planning unit covers about 74 square miles and 


Rainbow Springs, Florida’s fourth largest spring, discharges approximately 

470 mgd into the 5.7-mile-long Rainbow River (also known as 

Blue Run) in southwest Marion County. The river has been designated 

as a SWIM priority waterbody. This tributary discharges into the lower 

Withlacoochee River. 

The quantity of runoff to the river from the surface watershed 

(7.2 square miles) is small compared with that provided by the recharge 

area of the spring, which comprises about 750 square miles. The recharge


Figure 3.6: Composite Map of the Rainbow River Planning Unit, Including the 1998 303(d) List and Planning 

List Waters


79 

area includes southern Alachua County, eastern Levy County, and western 

Marion County. Only about 5 mgd (1 percent) of the river’s discharge is 

attributable to the topographic watershed. The spring discharge accounts 

for 98 percent of the net water budget. 

The planning unit contains two small population centers: Morriston 

and Dunnellon. It also abuts the city of Ocala, which is rapidly urbanizing 

and expanding. 


Nutrients. Water quality in the Rainbow River is good, based on the 

Water Quality Index, which is 14.83 (a score of less than 45 is considered 

good). However, nitrate concentrations in the ground water discharging 

from the springs have increased steadily over the past 100 years. Average 

nitrate concentrations in the headspring area are currently about 1.0 mg/L. 

Nitrate concentrations measured in the 1940s and 1950s were less than 

0.01 mg/L. Background nitrate concentrations in the Floridan aquifer are 

usually less than 0.01 mg/L. 

This increase in nitrate concentrations represents more than an order 

of magnitude increase over the past 50 years. In addition, if the total discharge 

of Rainbow Springs is 460 mgd, a level of 1.0 mg/L nitrate results 

in a total nitrate load of about 700 tons annually. Thus, the annual nitrate 

loading into Rainbow Springs today is 700 times greater than the annual 

loading at background concentrations. Nitrogen isotopes, land use distributions, 

and nitrate concentrations indicate that the nitrate in the Floridan 

aquifer underlying the region originates from inorganic agricultural 

fertilizers. 

A 1991 SWFWMD study concluded that the sheer volume of water 

contributed by the springs makes them the most significant source of 

nitrogen and phosphorus to the Rainbow River: 85 percent of the annual 

nitrogen load and 83 percent of the total phosphorus load. Additional 

sources include land use activities, atmospheric fallout, and naturally 

occurring nutrients on the land surface and/or in soils and sediments. 

Using worst-case assumptions (the failure of all systems within 500 feet of 

the river), the study estimated that septic systems along the river contribute 

at most 7 percent of the total nitrogen load and 8 percent of the total 

phosphorus load. 

Several researchers (Dr. Clinton Dawes and Dr. Bruce Cowell) at the 

University of South Florida are investigating the potential connection 

between increased nitrate loading and the expansion of the mat-forming 

blue-green alga Lyngbya. There is currently, however, no direct evidence 

of a link between nitrates and the growth of phytoplankton or Lyngbya sp. 

in spring-fed systems. Preliminary studies from several fi rst-magnitude 

springs in north-central Florida suggest that elevated levels of nitrates may 

have little or no effect on the ecology of spring-fed streams, and that the 

impacts to the Withlacoochee River may not be evident until the nitrates 

reach the estuary and Gulf coastal waters. 

Water Clarity. In the Rainbow River, water clarity decreases rapidly, 

from about 50 meters at the headspring, to 20 meters about 2 kilometers 

downstream. It continues to decline throughout the rest of the river run,


but at a much slower rate. Just upstream of the Rainbow River’s confluence 

with the Withlacoochee River, 9 kilometers from the headsprings, water 

clarity is about 8 meters. While increases in plant biomass can decrease 

water clarity, the cause of the decrease in the Rainbow River is not known. 

Sediment Quality and Accumulation. There are concerns that 

sediment quality and/or sediment accumulation in the lower river may be 

affecting vegetative communities. Sediment samples collected upstream 

of the State Road 484 Bridge consisted of 94 percent sand and 6 percent 

silt and clay. In contrast, samples from 4 downstream samplings ranged 

from 36 to 70 percent sand, and 30 to 64 percent silt and clay. These preliminary 

data indicate that sediment quality may be shifting from mostly 

sand to a mixture of sand, silt, and clay. 

Historically, Rainbow River received direct discharge of treated 

effluent from the city of Dunnellon’s wastewater treatment plant. The 

discharge has been diverted and routed to percolation ponds. Because of 

the historical discharge, in the early 1990s the SWFWMD collected and 

analyzed sediment samples above and below the discharge point to determine 

if potential pollutants in the sediments threatened the river’s ecological 

health. The results of the analysis indicate a general trend of decreasing 

arsenic, chromium, lead, and nickel from upstream to downstream. 

Downstream of the historical discharges, sediments are not measurably 

contaminated and pose no significant ecological problems. 

Figure 3.6, a composite map of the planning unit, shows waters on 

the 1998 303(d) list and the Planning List. Table 3.7 summarizes the 

water quality assessment status of all waterbody segments in the planning 

unit. Waterbodies represented by these data include Rainbow River and 

Rainbow Springs. 

The table and figure show that both waterbody segments in this planning 

unit are potentially impaired. These segments include the Rainbow 

River (biology) and Rainbow Springs (chlorophyll a). 







The Rainbow River planning unit contains 8 permitted domestic and 

industrial facilities. Two of them discharge greater than 0.1 mgd through 

surface water discharges or by land application of the effluent. None of the 

domestic facilities discharge advanced wastewater treated effluent. 



The planning unit contains no Class I solid waste landfi lls. 

Nonpoint Sources. Human activities over the past 150 years have 

significantly altered the character of the Rainbow River, especially in its 

lower reaches. Because the river is almost entirely spring fed, land use 

activities in the watershed and the ground water recharge basin directly


81 

Table 3.7: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Rainbow River Planning Unit 

WBID 

Waterbody 

Segment 

Waterbody 


303(d) List 

Parameters 



Potentially 



Parameters 

Verified 



Parameters 

Not Impaired 


Parameters 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 


Assessment 


1320 Blue Run Stream IIIF — Biology — Fluoride Cat. 3c 

Planning List 

1320A 

Notes: 

Rainbow 

Springs #1 

Spring IIIF Nutrients Nutrients 

(Chlorophyll a) 

— pH, Conductance, 

Copper, 

Nickel, Lead 

Cat. 3c 

Planning List 

1 


2 







3 














4 





Category 5. 


M = Marine 

affect the quantity and quality of ground water entering the river. This, in 

turn, can directly affect the water quality, water clarity, and overall health 

of the river system. 

By the 1880s, much of the land surrounding the Rainbow River had 

been logged and converted to citrus. In 1890, deposits of hard rock phosphate 

were discovered near Dunnellon, triggering a mining boom rivaling 

that of California’s Gold Rush in the mid-1800s. Dozens of mines operated 

along the banks of the Withlacoochee River and the lower reaches of 

the Rainbow River. Some of these mines were as much as 40 feet deep; 

most were dug by hand. The old mine pits and numerous artifacts can still 

be seen. Blue Cove, on the western bank of the Rainbow River, is an old 

mine quarry that connects directly to the river about 4 miles downstream 

of the headspring. The boom ended with World War I and the discovery of 

pebble rock phosphate in Hillsborough and Polk Counties, although some 

phosphate mining continued until 1966.


Although most of the watershed remains largely rural, some areas are 

rapidly losing their rural character. Since the 1940s, land use in the planning 

unit has shifted from mining and agriculture to residential. Residential 

and commercial development has increased from 64 acres in 1944 to 

7,151 acres in 1999, and an additional 10,349 acres have been platted for 

development. Agricultural lands have increased from 7,454 acres in 1944 

to 18,418 acres in 1999, while forested lands have decreased from 36,969 to 

9,620 acres. 

Based on Level I and II land use summary information, the predominant 

land uses in the planning unit are agriculture (39 percent) and 

urban development (37 percent). These land uses can be associated with 

nonpoint discharges of pollutants and eroded sediments. Appendix G 

provides summary information on general land uses in the basin, by 



The Rainbow River is home to diverse plant and animal communities. 

The river’s submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), along with the emergent 

macrophytic vegetation, provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, help 

to maintain water clarity, and stabilize sediment. The native SAV communities 

are dominated by strap-leaf sagittaria (Sagittaria kurziana) and, 

to a lesser extent, by eelgrass (Vallisneria americana). These grasses form 

extensive beds throughout the upper and middle reaches of the river. 

In the lower reaches of the river, however, sagittaria and eelgrass are 

almost completely absent, and two invasive exotic aquatic plants predominate: 

hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata) and a blue-green alga (Lyngbya sp.). 

Well established on the river since the 1970s, hydrilla can grow up to an 

inch per day and thus can outcompete native submerged aquatic plant 

communities. The SWFWMD’s 2000 vegetative mapping indicates that 

while the overall acreage of hydrilla has not increased, its distribution has 

expanded approximately 500 feet farther upstream in the river since 1996. 

Hydrilla treatment has been problematic because of the large spring discharge, 

rapidly flowing water, and abundant populations of native species. 

As a result, normal treatment strategies have only slowed its rate of spread. 

There is concern that Lyngbya may be expanding in the river, although 

there are limited data from previous mapping efforts have only established 

baseline conditions. The Lyngbya mats may detach from the bottom or 

from the vegetation to which they are attached and enter the water column. 

Once floating, the mats are carried downriver, impeding navigation, 

impairing recreational use, and often uprooting or smothering emergent 

and submerged vegetation. When the algal cells decompose, they release a 

compound (geosmin) that has a strong, musty odor, further impairing the 

waterbody’s aesthetic value. 

In 1996, sagittaria and eelgrass were found in 57 and 17 percent of the 

river, respectively. In 2000, the occurrence of these species had declined 

to 53 and 12 percent of the river, respectively. Other native species such as 

coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum), southern naiad (Najas guadalupensis), 

and Chara sp. also decreased between 1996 and 2000. While the latter 

species were not dominant in the Rainbow River, the decline is significant.


83 

Bare substrate increased by about 4 percent (5 acres), mainly in recreational 

areas such as the state park swimming area. In some areas, such as the 

main channel upstream of the river’s mouth, bare substrate has replaced 

hydrilla, possibly because of sediment accumulation. 

Previous efforts to reestablish native SAV in areas where it had been 

lost, in both Rainbow River and Kings Bay, have resulted in little or no 

long-term success. As a result, it is important to protect the existing native 

SAV beds and prevent further increases in nuisance species. 

• Lower Withlacoochee River Planning Unit 


The Lower Withlacoochee River planning unit covers about 322 square 

miles and contains 16 segments with WBIDs (Figure 3.7). 

Lake Rousseau, a 5.7-mile-long, human-made impoundment formed 

by the Inglis Dam near the city of Inglis, covers 4,163 acres. The Department’s 

lake classification project (Myers and Edmiston, 1983) listed this 

waterbody as one of the 50 lakes in the state most in need of restoration. 

The Withlacoochee and Rainbow Rivers are the two major surface 

waters that contribute to Lake Rousseau. The structures controlling flow 

from the reservoir are part of the Cross-Florida Barge Canal facilities 

that were built between January 1965 and December 1969. Work on the 

canal was stopped in 1971, and Congress deauthorized the project in 1989. 

These lands, which are now part of the Cross-Florida Greenway State 

Recreation and Conservation Area, are currently used for parks, recreation, 

and open space. 

The control facilities at the west end of Lake Rousseau and westward to 

the Gulf remain authorized and operational. The lake’s elevation is controlled 

by 3 structures: the bypass channel and spillway, the Inglis Dam, 

and the Inglis Lock. The bypass channel and spillway supply the majority 

of the normal discharge (up to 1,540 cubic feet per second [cfs]) to the 

8-mile reach of the lower Withlacoochee River that flows to the river 

mouth. High flows exceeding this capacity are routed through the Inglis 

Dam to a 2-mile reach of the lower river that is connected to the barge 

canal. Waters are also periodically released to the barge canal through the 

Inglis Lock. 


The water chemistry of Lake Rousseau is strongly influenced by the 

Withlacoochee and Rainbow Rivers. Above Dunnellon, the Withlacoochee 

is generally well buffered with moderately high levels of color and 

nutrients, most notably reactive phosphorus. Water discharged from the 

Rainbow River is clear, isothermal (i.e., relatively constant temperature), 

well buffered, and bicarbonate rich; it contains moderately high levels of 

dissolved nutrients (orthophosphorus and nitrate/nitrite nitrogen) but low 

levels of organically bound nutrients. 

Water quality below the confluence of the Withlacoochee and Rainbow 

Rivers reflects the inflows of these two sources and shows differences 

between dry and wet season flows. During dry periods, flows are dominated 

by the Rainbow River and other springs in the Withlacoochee Basin,


Figure 3.7: Composite Map of the Lower Withlacoochee River Planning Unit, Including the 1998 303(d) List 

and Planning List Waters


85 

and color levels are relatively low. During wet periods, surface drainage 

becomes more important; color, organic nitrogen, and total phosphorus 

concentrations increase. An analysis of data collected at the Inglis Dam 

shows that color, organic nitrogen, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus are 

positively correlated with flow, indicating that considerable organic material 

is delivered to the river from the abundant wetlands in the Withlacoochee 

Basin. No significant relationship has been found between flow and 

nitrate/nitrite, ammonia, and orthophosphorus concentrations. 

Lake Rousseau’s morphometry and physical structure have important 

implications for water quality. The reservoir is deep only in the areas that 

correspond to the old river channel. Areas that were originally forested 

are generally shallow, with numerous stumps and dense stands of aquatic 

plants. The average residence time for the reservoir is 9.7 days; however, 

water exchange is likely slower in the clogged shallow areas and more rapid 

above the historical channel. Off-channel areas are more stagnant, with 

localized processes such as sediment nutrient flux, organic decomposition, 

and benthic oxygen demand. Macrophyte metabolism in these areas is 

likely to play a greater role in determining water quality. 

Water quality in Lake Rousseau reflects a transition from a riverine 

to a reservoir environment. In 1987, mean chlorophyll a concentrations 

were much higher in the reservoir than the upstream river. Orthophosphate 

and nitrate/nitrite concentrations were low in the reservoir, probably 

due to uptake by primary producers (phytoplankton, macrophytes, and 

attached algae). Color, hardness, alkalinity, and specific conductance in 

the reservoir were similar to the river. Like the river, water chemistry in 

the reservoir responds to differences in dry and wet season flows. This may 

be particularly important with regard to color, because low flows result in 

low color concentrations (i.e., flow is dominated by the clear waters of the 

Rainbow River) that increase light penetration. 

Overall, comparisons between 1981 and 1987 water quality data 

indicate that Lake Rousseau’s nutrient, phytoplankton (chlorophyll a), and 

light penetration conditions are about average for Florida lakes. A TSI 

value of 45.2 was calculated for the lake, indicating mesotrophic conditions. 

However, this value does not explicitly consider the abundant nutrients 

and biomass incorporated into the reservoir’s huge macrophyte assemblage. 

While the Withlacoochee River is the overwhelming source of nutrient 

loading to Lake Rousseau, the large in-lake macrophyte biomass is probably 

a significant factor in determining lake water quality. 

The SWFWMD has concluded that nutrient levels in Lake Rousseau 

are closely related to the inflowing Withlacoochee River, and the principal 

water quality problem in the reservoir is periodic low DO levels. The 

excessive aquatic weeds may worsen DO conditions by restricting vertical 

mixing and lateral circulation. The organic-rich bottom sediments probably 

increase sediment oxygen demand. 

One study (German, 1978) found that the lake was in a state of 

advanced eutrophication approaching senescence. The study found that 

organic detritus had accumulated to a depth of one of more meters over 

much of the bottom and that the surface was covered by mats of thick


vegetation. The lake did not appear to have high nutrient levels, although 

abundant plant growth caused occasional low DO levels. 

Lake Rousseau currently has fair water quality. Construction, shoreline 

alterations (such as finger canals and docks), and failing septic tanks 

contribute sediments, nutrients, and bacteria. Artificially maintaining 

constant water levels in the lake may also affect its water quality. A major 

fish kill of 45,000 fish was reported in the late 1990s, due to the combined 

effects of herbicide spraying, overcast skies, and low DO levels. 

Downstream of the lake, in the Lower Withlacoochee River, water 

quality is affected by construction, shoreline alterations, and failing septic 

tanks, which contribute sediments, nutrients, and bacteria. In addition, 

limestone mining contributes turbidity to the lower river. 




Waterbodies represented by these data include the Lower Withlacoochee 

River and Lake Rousseau. 

The table and figure show that five waterbody segments in this planning 

unit are potentially impaired. These segments include two portions 

of the Lower Withlacoochee River (DO, mercury in fish), Lake Rousseau 

(DO, TSI, fecal and total coliforms), Lake Blue Cove (TSI), and Leslie- 

Hefner Canal (DO). 







The Lower Withlacoochee River planning unit contains 16 permitted 

domestic and industrial facilities. Two of them discharge greater than 

0.1 mgd through surface water discharges or by land application of the 

effluent. None of the domestic facilities discharge advanced wastewater 

treated effluent. 



The planning unit contains one Class I solid waste landfi ll, which is 

closed. 

Nonpoint Sources. Based on Level I and II land use summary information, 

the predominant land uses in the planning unit are upland forest 

(33 percent) and urban development (25 percent). These land uses can be 

associated with nonpoint discharges of pollutants and eroded sediments. 


basin, by planning unit.


87 

Table 3.8: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Lower Withlacoochee River Planning Unit 

WBID 

1329A 

Waterbody 

Segment 


River 

Waterbody 


303(d) List 

Parameters of 

Concern 


Potentially 



Parameters 

Verified 



Parameters 

Not Impaired 


Parameters 

EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) 


Assessment 




1329B Lake Rousseau Lake IIIF Nutrients, 

Coliforms, 

DO 

1329B1 Lake Rousseau 

Drain 

1329C 

1329D 

1329J 

1329K 


River 


River 

Rush Lake– 

Open Water 

Lake Otting– 

Open Water 

Nutrients (TSI), 

Fecal Coliforms, 

Total 

Coliforms, DO 

— Fluoride, 

Mercury in Fish 

Cat. 3c 

Planning List 



in Fish 


in Fish 

Selenium, 

Nickel, Biology, 

Conductance, 

pH 

Nutrients (Chlorophyll 

a), pH, 

Conductance, 

Turbidity 

Cat. 3d 

Verified List 

Cat. 3d 

Verified List 





1329V Lake Blue Cove Lake IIIF — Nutrients (TSI) — — Cat. 3c 

Planning List 

1334 Bell Branch Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1334A 

Little Bream 

Lake–Open 

Water 



1336 Turner Creek Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1337 Withlacoochee 

River 

Stream IIIF — — — Nutrients 


Turbidity, Fecal 

Coliforms, DO, 

pH 

1338A Gum Springs Stream IIIF — — — Conductance, 

pH 

Cat. 2 Meets 

Some Uses 

Cat. 2 Meets 

Some Uses 

1338B Gum Slough Stream IIIF — — — — Cat. 3a No Data 

1343 Unnamed 

Slough 

1357 Leslie-Hefner 

Canal 

Notes: 


Stream IIIF DO DO — Mercury in Fish Cat. 3c 

Planning List 

1 

The designation “stream” includes canals, rivers, and sloughs. The designation “lake” includes some marshes.



2 







3 














4 





Category 5. 


M = Marine 




Lake Rousseau contains excessive aquatic weed growth, particularly 

hydrilla, and is periodically sprayed for control. Historically, water 

hyacinth was also a problem. 

Because flows of more than 1,540 cfs must be discharged through 

the Inglis Dam to the barge canal, the main channel of the lower river is 

deprived of high flows, which serve important ecological functions in river 

and estuarine ecosystems. The problem is further compounded when 

water levels in Lake Rousseau are lowered by even small amounts. As a 

result, water levels in the lake cannot be effectively managed without causing 

significant flow reductions to the Lower Withlacoochee River. 

Water releases to the 2-mile portion of the river that extends from 

the Inglis Dam to the barge canal can abruptly change from prolonged 

periods of small, intermittent discharges to those in excess of 2,000 to 

3,000 cfs. Extreme flow variability can cause ecological problems in 

coastal ecosystems, but the effects of the high variability of freshwater flows 

through the barge canal to the receiving estuary have never been evaluated.


Chapter 4: The Planning List of Potentially 

Impaired Waters 

89 

The Planning List 

The Planning List (Table 4.1) includes all waterbody segments (waterbody 

identification numbers [WBID]) in the Withlacoochee Basin that are 

identified as potentially impaired. The table also indicates the parameters 

of concern. 

Figure 4.1 shows waterbody segments on the Planning List. In this 

figure, the entire watersheds for listed waterbody segments are highlighted. 

Often, however, only the main waterbody in the assessment unit has been 

assessed. Other waters in the assessment unit may not be impaired, or data 

may not be available. 

The Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR) methodology used to 

develop the Planning List follows the tenet of “independent applicability,” 

which means that a waterbody will be listed if any of its designated uses are 

potentially impaired. Waterbody segments on the Planning List must meet 

specific thresholds and data sufficiency and data quality requirements in the 

IWR (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. The methodology in Appendix B 

describes the criteria and thresholds required for both lists under the IWR. 

Relationship Between the Planning List and 

the 303(d) List 

The state’s Section 303(d) list of impaired waters for the Withlacoochee 

Basin is updated in two stages. The Planning List represents the 

first stage of this process (see sidebar for a discussion of the significance of 

the Planning List). 

Potentially impaired waters identified in this report will be further 

assessed in Phase 2 of the watershed management cycle to verify their 

impairment. In addition to evaluating more thoroughly the data used to 

place these waters on the Planning List (including the verification of quality 

assurance and data sufficiency), the Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection (Department), working with local stakeholders, will identify 

other existing data and collect additional data as needed to complete the 

assessment. 

Once the additional monitoring is completed, the data will be assessed 

and the Department will develop a Verified List of impaired waters. 

Appendix B describes the criteria for data evaluation used to verify 

impaired waterbodies and produce the Verified List. The Verified List will 

Significance of the 

Planning List 

Under the Florida Watershed 

Restoration Act, Planning 

Lists of potentially impaired 

waters are submitted to 

the EPA for informational 

purposes only and are not 

used in administering or 

implementing any regulatory 

programs. The Planning List 

is important, as it is used 

to guide monitoring in the 

basin and is the precursor to 

the Verified List of impaired 

waters. As such, stakeholders 

are encouraged to review 

the Planning List carefully, 

including the data used by 

the Department to produce 

the list. If reviewers identify 

and have access to pertinent 

data that were not used, they 

should enter the data into 

STORET or submit the data to 

the Department so that it can 

be used in evaluating waterbodies 

to be included on the 

Verified List.


Table 4.1: Potentially Impaired Waters in the Withlacoochee Basin 

WBID 

Waterbody Segment 

Waterbody 

Type 1 

1998 303(d) List 

Parameters of Concern 

Causes of Potential Waterbody 

Impairment Identified under the 

Impaired Surface Waters Rule 


1329E Withlacoochee River Stream — DO, Mercury in Fish 

1329F Withlacoochee River Stream — pH, DO, Mercury in Fish 

1329H Lake Lindsey Lake DO, Coliforms DO, Fecal Coliforms, Total 

Coliforms 

1329X Spring Lake Lake — Iron 

1378 Big Gant Canal Stream DO, Coliforms DO, Fecal Coliforms, Total 

Coliforms 

1381 Little Withlacoochee Stream DO, Coliforms Fecal Coliforms, Total Coliforms 

1390A Lake Geneva– 

Lake — DO, Conductance 

Open Water 

1399 Dade City Canal Stream DO, BOD, Nutrients DO, BOD, Nutrients 

(Chlorophyll a) 

1427 Grass Creek Stream — Mercury in Fish 

1466 Lake Agnes Lake — Nutrients (TSI) 

1467 Mud Lake Lake — pH, Nutrients (TSI) 

1476 Lake Mattie Lake — Nutrients (TSI) 


1347 Lake Okahumpka Lake — Biology 

1351A Outlet River Stream — pH, DO 

1351B Lake Panasoffkee Lake — pH 


1340 Tsala Apopka Outlet Stream — DO, Nutrients (Historical 

Chlorophyll) 

1340N 

Henderson Lake– 

Open Water 

Lake — Nutrients (TSI) 


1320 Blue Run Stream — Biology 

1320A Rainbow Springs #1 Spring Nutrients Nutrients (Chlorophyll a) 


1329B Lake Rousseau Lake Nutrients, Coliforms, DO Nutrients (TSI), Fecal Coliforms, 

Total Coliforms, DO 

1329C Withlacoochee River Stream — DO, Mercury in Fish 

1329D Withlacoochee River Stream — DO, Mercury in Fish 

1329V Lake Blue Cove Lake — Nutrients (TSI) 

1357 Leslie-Hefner Canal Stream DO DO 

Notes: 

1 

The designation “stream” includes canals, rivers, and sloughs. The designation “lake” includes some 

marshes. 

BOD = Biological Oxygen Demand 

DO = Dissolved Oxygen 

TSI = Trophic State Index


91 

Figure 4.1: Withlacoochee Basin Planning List for All Causes of Potential Impairment, with Overlay of 1998 

303(d) List


be adopted by Secretarial Order by October 2004 and then submitted to 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as an update to Florida’s 

current 303(d) list. Subsequently, the Department will develop Total 

Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) for 303(d)-listed waterbodies. 

Summary of Impairments 

The Withlacoochee Basin contains a total of 151 waterbody segments. 

Of these, 24 are on the Planning List as potentially impaired based on the 

IWR evaluation criteria and/or the 1998 303(d) list criteria. Table 4.2 

summarizes the major parameters for which potential impairments were 

identified. 

Table 4.2 shows that DO levels exceeding criteria are a potential cause 

of impairment in waterbody segments in this basin. As previously mentioned, 

low DO levels are often natural and not always attributable to pollutants. 

For this reason, additional work will be conducted to differentiate 

between pollutant-related and other causes of low DO before the Verified 

List for the basin is developed. 

Other parameters indicating potential impairment of waterbody segments 

in this basin include nutrients and coliform bacteria. At the completion 

of Phase 2, the data for these parameters will be reevaluated to verify 

the condition of the waterbody segments being monitored. Chapter 5 

provides more information about the Phase 2 monitoring activities. 

Table 4.2: Parameters Causing Potential Impairments in the Withlacoochee Basin 

Parameter 

Included Only 

on the 1998 

303(d) List 

Potential Waterbody Segment Impairments 

Identified Only 

by the Impaired 

Surface Waters Rule 

Evaluation 

Identified on Both the 

1998 303(d) List and by 

the Impaired Surface 

Waters Evaluation 

Total Potential 

Impairments 

Dissolved Oxygen — 7 7 14 

Nutrients (general, 

— 5 4 9 

chlorophyll a, other data) 

Mercury in Fish — 5 — 5 

Coliforms (general, total, 

fecal) 

— — 4 4 

pH — 2 1 3 

Biology — 3 — 3 

Metals (iron) — 2 — 2 

Conductance — 1 — 1 

Suspended Solids 

(turbidity) 

— — — —


93 

Waters with Insufficient Data To Determine 

Impairment 

Any waters that do not have sufficient data to be analyzed in accordance 

with the requirements of the IWR, but that were included on the 

1998 303(d) list, will remain on the 303(d) list maintained by EPA. They 

will also be included on the Planning List until sufficient data are available 

to evaluate their condition. The Department intends to collect data on 

these waters in Phase 2 of the watershed management cycle to verify their 

condition. 

Many waterbodies in the Withlacoochee Basin are not identified on 

the 1998 303(d) list and do not have sufficient (or any) data to be assessed 

under the IWR methodology. Because of resource limitations, it may not 

be possible for the Department to monitor all of these waterbodies during 

the first five-year watershed management cycle. The priority during 

Phase 2 of the cycle is to conduct monitoring and other data gathering to 

address potentially impaired waters identified on the Planning List. 

While the Department plans to monitor waters without enough data 

to determine potential impairment during subsequent watershed cycles, 

available data gathered by others will also be used for this purpose. It is 

important that the Department and stakeholders in the basin coordinate 

their monitoring plans to collect data most efficiently for these waterbodies. 

Chapter 5 discusses monitoring and data evaluation priorities 

and objectives, database management issues, and the development of the 

Verified List.


95 

Chapter 5: Strategic Monitoring and 

Data Evaluation 

Strategic Monitoring and Data Acquisition 

Priorities 

Waters on the Planning List must meet specific thresholds and data 

sufficiency and data quality requirements in the Impaired Surface Waters 

Rule (IWR) (Rule 62-303, Florida Administrative Code [F.A.C.]). The 

Planning List includes waterbody segments that were previously on the 

1998 303(d) list, but for which the Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection (Department) had insufficient data for assessment under the 

IWR. Additional data that are collected will be used to verify the status of 

waters listed as potentially impaired, assess those with insufficient data, and 

support modeling efforts to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) 

for impaired waterbodies. 

Due to resource limitations, the Department alone is not capable of 

addressing all of the strategic monitoring objectives within the fi rst fiveyear 

cycle for the five Group 4 basins. The Department’s monitoring focus 

during the months prior to submitting the Verified List of impaired waters 

to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (by October 2004) 

was to obtain data necessary to verify the status of potentially impaired 

waters. 

Priority for data acquisition has been given to Planning List waterbody 

segments that are also on the 1998 303(d) list and the potentially impaired 

waterbodies that did not have sufficient data to verify their condition at 

the time the Planning List was generated. Data from other monitoring 

organizations will be included in the evaluation to help verify the condition 

of potentially impaired waterbodies and provide data by which other 

waterbodies can be evaluated. 

Data Acquisition Objectives 

Currently, 27 waterbody segments on the Planning List in this basin 

are targeted for additional monitoring. As discussed, the Department’s 

focus prior to producing the Verified List is to collect and assemble suffi - 

cient data to evaluate waterbodies that are potentially impaired for parameters 

that do not have sufficient data to meet the Verified List evaluation 

criteria (Section 62-303.400, F.A.C.). The priority is to collect data for 

waterbodies on the 1998 303(d) list. An additional monitoring priority is 

to develop data that may be needed to identify pollutants causing dissolved


oxygen (DO) exceedances or biological impairments. As mentioned in 

Chapter 3, these conditions are at times not attributable to pollutants. 

Table 5.1 summarizes the objectives of data gathering and evaluation 

to verify the condition of waterbody segments on the Planning List. 

Table 5.1: Strategic Monitoring and Data Evaluation Objectives for Planning List Waters in 

the Withlacoochee Basin 

WBID 


Monitoring and Data Evaluation Objectives To Address 

Planning List Waterbody Segments 

Verify Potential Impairment 

(parameters exceeding Planning 

List evaluation criteria and/or 

included on the 1998 303[d] list) 

Confirm Impairment (parameters 

exceeding Verified List 

evaluation criteria) 


1329E Withlacoochee River — DO, Mercury in Fish DO 

1329F Withlacoochee River — pH, DO, Mercury in Fish DO 

1329G Withlacoochee River No Data — — 

1329H Lake Lindsey DO, Coliforms — DO 

1329I Withlacoochee River No Data — — 

1329M Irvin Lake Insufficient Data — — 

1329N Sparkman Lake– Insufficient Data — — 

Open Water 

1329O McClendon Lake– Insufficient Data — — 

Open Water 

1329P Dowling Lake– Insufficient Data — — 

Open Water 

1329X Spring Lake Iron — — 

1329Y Mountain Lake Insufficient Data — — 

1360 Jumper Creek Canal Insufficient Data — — 

1370 Baptizing Hole No Data — — 

1370A Baptizing Hole Outlet No Data — — 

1378 Big Gant Canal DO, Coliforms DO, Fecal Coliforms, Total DO 

Coliforms 

1381 Little Withlacoochee DO, Coliforms DO, Fecal Coliforms, Total DO 

Coliforms 

1399 Dade City Canal DO, BOD, Nutrients DO, BOD, Nutrients 

(Chlorophyll a), Biology 

DO 

1476 Lake Mattie Nutrients Nutrients (TSI) — 


— — — — — 


1340R Tsala Apopka Lake Insufficient Data — — 

(Flora) 


1320 Blue Run — Biology — 

1320A Rainbow Springs #1 Nutrients Nutrients (Chlorophyll a) — 

Identify/Verify 

Causative 

Pollutant(s)


97 


WBID 


Monitoring and Data Evaluation Objectives To Address 

Planning List Waterbody Segments 

Verify Potential Impairment 

(parameters exceeding Planning 

List evaluation criteria and/or 

included on the 1998 303[d] list) 

Confirm Impairment (parameters 

exceeding Verified List 

evaluation criteria) 


1329A Withlacoochee River Insufficient Data — — 

1329B Lake Rousseau DO, Coliforms, Nutrients DO, Fecal Coliforms, Total DO 

Coliforms, Nutrients (TSI) 

1329C Withlacoochee River — DO, Mercury in Fish DO 

1329D Withlacoochee River — DO, Mercury in Fish DO 

1337 Withlacoochee River Insufficient Data — — 

1357 Leslie-Hefner Canal DO DO, Biology DO 

BOD = Biological oxygen demand 



Identify/Verify 

Causative 

Pollutant(s) 

Phase 2 Assessment: Data Collection and 

Database Management Leading to the 

Development of the 303(d) List of Impaired 

Waters 

The Department has been working to update the database that will be 

used in the Phase 2 assessment, collecting its own data as well as working 

with the other key data providers to obtain the most current and comprehensive 

water quality data. The data to be used in evaluating waterbodies 

to be included on the Verified List include the following: 

• Existing data in the database that were not collected during the 

Planning List period of record, 

• Existing data that had not been imported into the IWR Database at 

the time of the Planning List evaluation, and 

• Monitoring data that had not been collected or reported. 

The database now includes monitoring data collected before and after 

the Planning List period of record that were not evaluated for the Planning 

List. The 10-year period of record for the data used to produce the 

Planning List for the Withlacoochee Basin extends from January 1, 1993, 

to December 31, 2002. The 7.5-year period of record for the Verified List 

evaluation, from January 1, 1998, to June 30, 2005, will capture more 

recent data. 

The IWR Database contains data that were uploaded since the Planning 

List evaluation was conducted. Over the past year, the Department


has provided support to organizations that are interested in uploading their 

water quality data to the national STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 

Database. Data uploaded since the Planning List evaluation will be 

included in the database. 

A significant number of data records produced by the Southwest 

Florida Water Management District that were not available for the Planning 

List evaluation are anticipated to be available via STORET and will 

be included in the Verified List evaluation. Additional data from other 

providers may also be included in the next download from STORET. 

Based on preliminary data reviewed for the production of this Status 

Report, the Department developed a plan to address potential data gaps. 

The Water Quality Section of the Department’s Southwest District began a 

strategic monitoring program in January 2004 to address TMDL Program 

data needs. The focus of this program is to collect additional data to verify 

conditions in many of the potentially impaired waterbody segments. 

Verified List Development and Public 

Comment 

The Verified List of impaired waters for the Withlacoochee Basin will 

be produced by the Department in the early summer of 2005, and will be 

adopted by the Secretary of the Department and submitted to the EPA 

later in the year. The tentative submittal date to the EPA for the adopted 

Verified List is October 1, 2005. 

Prior to the Secretary’s action, the Department will distribute the draft 

Verified List to the public. As part of the review process, public workshops 

will be advertised and held in each basin to help explain the process for 

developing the Verified List, exchange information, and encourage public 

involvement. 

If additional information or data is provided during the public comment 

period or before, the Department will consider it before submitting 

the proposed list to the Secretary and EPA.


99 

References 

Adams, A. 1985. Groundwater Supplement to the Wysong-Panasoffkee 

Study. Southwest Florida Water Management District. Brooksville, 

Florida. 

Advisory Work Group. 1996. Sumter and Lake County Flooding Report. 

Southwest Florida Water Management District. Brooksville, Florida. 

American Engineering Co. 1991, July 30. Blue Sink Watershed Study, 

Hernando County, Florida, Interim Report Phase I & II. Brooksville, 


—. 1992. Blue Sink Watershed Study, Hernando County, Florida. 

Brooksville, Florida. 

Anderson, W., and C. P. Laughlin. 1982. Geohydrology of the Floridan 

Aquifer in the Withlacoochee River Basin of the Southwest Florida 

Water Management District. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources 

Investigations Open File Report 82-331. 

Aravena, R., M. L. Evans, and J. A. Cherry. 1993. Stable Isotopes of Oxygen 

and Nitrogen in Source Identifi cation of Nitrate from Septic Systems. 

Groundwater. v. 31. 

Attardi, V. 1983. An Environmental Description of Lake Tsala Apopka. 

Technical Report 1983-4. Brooksville, Florida: Southwest Florida 

Water Management District. 

Aucott, W. R. 1988. Areal Variation in Recharge to and Discharge from 

the Floridan Aquifer System in Florida. U.S. Geological Survey Water 

Resources Investigations Report 88-4057. 

Ayers Associates. 1995. An Estimate of Nutrient Loadings from Wastewater 

Residuals Management and On-Site Wastewater Treatment Systems in 

the Tampa Bay Watershed. Prepared for the Southwest Florida Water 

Management District. Tampa, Florida. 

Belanger, T., H. Howell, M. Sohn, and R. P. Sweets. 1993. Sediment 

Mapping and Analysis in Crystal River/Kings Bay and Lake Panasoffkee. 

Final report submitted to the Southwest Florida Water Management 

District. Brooksville, Florida. 

Berryman and Henigar. 1997. Environmental Assessment of Altered Sites on 

District-Owned Lands in the Hillsborough River Basin. Prepared for the 

Southwest Florida Water Management District. Brooksville, Florida. 

Bicki, T. J., R. B. Brown, M. E. Collins, R. S. Mansell, and D. F. Rothwell. 

1984. Impact of On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems on Surface and 

Ground-Water Quality. Gainesville, Florida: Institute of Food and 

Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. 

Bradner, L. A. 1988. Hydrology of the Floral City Pool of Tsala Apopka 

Lake, West-Central Florida. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources 

Investigations Report 88-4024. 

Bradshaw, C. 1995. Green Swamp Basin and the Withlacoochee Riverine 

System Past, Present and Future. 

Brown, M. T. 1992. Ecological Evaluation of the Green Swamp Riverine 

Corridor Tract.

100 


Buickerood, M., J. Mann, Q. Wylupek, and K. Romie. 1990. Lake Tsala 

Environmental Assessment. Brooksville, Florida: Southwest Florida 


Buker, G. E. 1982, April. “Engineers vs. Florida’s Green Menace.” Florida 

Historical Quarterly. 

Buono, A., R. M. Spechler, G. L. Barr, and R. M. Wolansky. 1979. Generalized 

Thickness of the Confi ning Bed Overlying the Florida Aquifer. 

Southwest Florida Water Management District. U.S. Geological 

Survey Water Resources Investigations Open-File Report 79-1171. 

Camp, Dresser, and McKee. 1988. Withlacoochee River Basin Bibliography. 

—. 1988. Withlacoochee River Basin Plan: Final Report. 

Canter, L. W., and R. C. Knox. 1985. Septic Tank System Effects on 

Groundwater Quality. Michigan: Lewis Publishers, Inc. 

CH2M Hill, Inc. 1995. Lake Panasoffkee Water and Nutrient Budget 

Study. Final report submitted to the Southwest Florida Water Management 

District. Brooksville, Florida. 

Cherry, R. N., J. W. Stewart, and J. A. Mann. 1970. General Hydrology 

of the Middle Gulf Area, Florida. Florida Geological Survey Report of 

Investigations 56. 

Citrus County. 1981, July. Stormwater Drainage Study. Citrus County, 


—. 1987. Citrus County Comprehensive Plan 1985–2000: Conservation 

and Coastal Zone Element, 1985425. Water Resources Development 

(pamphlet). 

—. 1989. Citrus County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 4: Coastal, Lakes 

and Rivers Management Element. 

City of Center Hill. The Comprehensive Plan for the City of Center Hill. 

Coastal Engineering Associates, Inc. 1966, February. A Preliminary 

Drainage Study of the Northeast Quadrant of City of Brooksville, 

Florida, and Surrounding Area. Report 38—Southwest Florida Water 

Management District. 

Cox, J., R. Kautz, M. MacLaughlin, and T. Hoehn. 1997. The Preservation 

2000 Act Study; Biodiversity Conservation Analysis. Office of Environmental 

Services, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. 

—. 1994. Closing the Gaps in Florida’s Wildlife Habitat Conservation 

System. Office of Environmental Services, Florida Game and Fresh 

Water Fish Commission. 

Crisman, T. L., J. R. Beaver, and J. S. Bays. 1981. “Examination of 

the relative impact of microzooplankton and macrozooplankton on 

bacteria and algae in Florida Lakes.” Verhandlungen Internationale 

Vereinigung Limnol 21: 359–362. 

Dames & Moore, Inc. 1988. Interim Report #1 Bystre Lake Watershed 

Study, Southwest Florida Water Management District. Phase I & II. 

—. 1989. Bystre Lake Watershed Stormwater Management Master Plan. 

Volume I—Text. Southwest Florida Water Management District and 

Hernando County, Florida. Tampa, Florida. 

—. 1989. Bystre Lake Stormwater Management Master Plan, Volume II— 

Appendices. Southwest Florida Water Management District and 

Hernando County. Tampa, Florida.


101 

—. 1992. Peck Sink Watershed Study Interim Status Report. Hernando 

County Department of Public Works. Tampa, Florida. 

Downing, H. C., Jr., M. S. Flannery, M. J. Buickerood, J. A. Mann, and 

W. M. Matheison. 1989. Lake Rousseau Operations and Management 

Study. Brooksville, Florida: Southwest Florida Water Management 

District. 

Ecological Consultants, Inc. 1996. Green Swamp Environmental Assessment. 

Prepared for the Southwest Florida Water Management District. 

Faulkner, G. L. 1973. Ground-Water Conditions in the Lower Withlacoochee 

River-Cross-Florida Barge Canal Complex Area. U.S. Geological 

Survey Water Resources Inventory. 

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1977, July. Flood Hazard 

Boundary Maps. Marion County, Florida. 

Fernald, E. A., and E. D. Purdum, Eds. 1998. Water Resources Atlas of 

Florida. Tallahassee, Florida: Institute of Science and Public Affairs, 

Florida State University. 

Florida Bureau of Land and Water. Green Swamp Background Information. 

Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 1989. Typical Water 

Quality Values for Florida’s Lakes, Streams, and Estuaries. 

—. 1994. Ecosystem Management for Public Lands Report. 

—. 1996. Water Quality Assessment for the State of Florida. Section 305(b) 

Main Report and Technical Appendices. Tallahassee, Florida. 

—. 1997. Conservation and Recreation Lands (CARL) 1997 Annual Report. 

—. 2001, February 1. A Report to the Governor and the Legislature on 

the Allocation of Total Maximum Daily Loads in Florida. Tallahassee, 

Florida: Bureau of Watershed Management, Division of Water 

Resource Management. 

Florida Department of Natural Resources. 1989. Florida Rivers Assessment. 

Prepared by Florida Resources and Environmental Analysis Center, 

Florida State University. Tallahassee, Florida. 

Florida Division of Forestry Web site. September 2001. Available: http: 

//www.fl -dof.com/state_forests/withlacoochee.html. 

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. 1972. Green Swamp 

Wildlife Management Plan. 

—. 1972. Progress Report Central Florida Region Lake Panasoffkee. 

—. 1989. Evaluation of the Fish Population in Lake Tsala Apopka, Florida. 

Tallahassee, Florida. 

—. 1991. Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies. 

Florida Geological Survey. 2003. Springs of Florida. Available: http: 

//www.flmnh.ufl.edu/springs_of_florida/fenney.html and http: 

//www.flmnh.ufl.edu/springs_of_florida/gum.html. 

Florida Institute of Government. 1997, May. Exotic Plant Invasion on 

Florida’ s Water Management District Lands: A Cooperative Inter- 

District Report. Tampa, Florida: University of South Florida. 

Fretwell, J. D. 1985. Water Resources and Effects of Development in 

Hernando County, Florida. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources 

Investigations Report 84-4320.

102 


German, E. R. 1978. The hydrology of Lake Rousseau, west-central 

Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations, 

Open-File Report 77-126, 1 sheet. 

Gilboy, A. E. 1984. Hydrogeology of the Southwest Florida Water Management 

District. Brooksville, Florida: Southwest Florida Water 


Golder, Inc. 1997. Environmental Assessment of Altered Sites on District- 

Owned Lands in the Upper Coastal/Withlacoochee River Basin. Prepared 

for the Southwest Florida Water Management District. 

Gooch, R. G. 1986, May. Environmental Assessment of the Flying 

Eagle Ranch. Save Our Rivers Project. Southwest Florida Water 


Green Swamp Task Force. 1992. The Green Swamp System: A Scientifi c 

Analysis. 

Greiner Engineering. 1978. Wysong-Lake Panasoffkee Resource Management 

Study Executive Summary and Addendum. 

Handbury, T. H. 1984. Preliminary Examination of the Withlacoochee 

River, Florida. 

Hoyer, M., and D. Canfield. 1997. Rainbow River—Lyngbya Workshop: 

October 24–25, 1996. Gainesville, Florida: University of Florida, 

Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. 

Huber, W., P. Brezonik, J. Heaney, R. Dickinson, S. Preston, S. Swornik, 

and M. Demaio. 1982. A Classifi cation of Florida Lakes. Gainesville, 

Florida: Department of Environmental Engineering and Sciences, 

University of Florida. 

HydroGeologic, Inc. 1997. Development of a Computer Model of the 

Regional Groundwater Flow System in Hernando County for the Hernando 

County Water Resources Assessment Project; Phase I: Data 

Compilation and Analysis. 

Jones, G. W., and S. B. Upchurch. 1993. Origin of Nutrients in Groundwater 

Discharging from the Lithia and Buckhorn Springs. Brooksville, 

Florida: Southwest Florida Water Management District. 

—. 1994. Origin of Nutrients in Groundwater Discharging from the King’s 

Bay Spring. Brooksville, Florida: Southwest Florida Water Management 

District. 

Jones, G. W., S. B. Upchurch, and K. Champion. 1996. Origin of Nitrate 

in Groundwater Discharging from Rainbow Springs, Marion County, 

Florida. Brooksville, Florida: Ambient Ground-Water Quality Monitoring 

Program, Southwest Florida Water Management District. 

Jones, G. W., S. B. Upchurch, K. M. Champion, and D. J. DeWitt. 1997. 

The Water Quality and Hydrology of the Homosassa, Chassahowitzka, 

Weekiwachee, and Aripeka Spring Complexes with Emphasis on Increasing 

Nitrate Concentrations. Brooksville, Florida: Southwest Florida Water 


Kautz, R. S. 1993. “Trends in Florida Wildlife Habitat, 1936–1987.” 

Florida Scientist 56(1):7–24.


103 

Kelly, M., and G. Jones. 1997. “Landuse Impacts from Outside the 

Watershed: Experiences from the Rainbow River and Other Florida 

Watersheds.” In Proceedings of a National Symposium: Assessing the 

Cumulative Impacts of Watershed Development on Aquatic Ecosystems 

and Water Quality. Chicago, Illinois: Northeastern Illinois Planning 

Commission. 

Lake Panasoffkee Restoration Council. 1998, November 25. Report to the 

Legislature. Available: http://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/ppr/pubplnrpt.htm. 

Lane, E. 1986. Karst in Florida. Florida Geological Survey. Special 

Publication No. 29. 

League of Environmental Organizations; Eco-Logic Laboratories. 1994. 

Green Swamp Bioassay Study. 

Mann, J. A. 1984, November. Wysong-Panasoffkee Study. Citrus and 

Sumter Counties. Southwest Florida Water Management District. 

Manual, S. Preliminary Silvicultural Report of Green Swamp Reservoir Based 

on a Cursory Examination. 

Maurice M. Connell and Associates, Inc. 1961. Preliminary Report on 

Flood Control Problems, Withlacoochee River, Florida. 

—. 1962. Preliminary Report on Cost and Feasibility of Proposed Carlson’s 

Landing Dam in Withlacoochee River. 

McKinney, S. P. 1991, August 19. Correspondence to Ms. Connie Scott. 

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. 

McPherson, B. F. 1979. Land Cover Map of the Green Swamp Area Central 


Miller, C. L., R. L. Machowicz, L. L. Fluty, E. Silverston, and M. D. 

Barcelo. 1985. The Green Swamp Project: Engineering Project. Brooksville, 

Florida: Southwest Florida Water Management District. 

Miller, J. A. 1986. Hydrogeologic Framework of the Floridan Aquifer System 

in Florida, and Parts of Georgia, Alabama, and South Carolina. UAGA 

Professional Paper 1403-B. 

—. 1986. Hydrogeologic Framework of the Floridan Aquifer System in 

Florida. Florida Geological Survey Report of Investigations No. 42. 

Miller, R. A., W. Anderson, and A. S. Navoy. 1981. Water-Resources 

Information for the Withlacoochee River Region, West-Central Florida. 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 81-11. 

Mitchell, J. W. 1981. Jumper Creek Watershed, Sumter County, Florida: 

Final Environmental Impact Statement. U.S. Geological Survey. 

Myers, V. B. and H. L. Edmiston. 1983. Florida lake classifi cation and 

prioritization project #S004388. Florida Department of Environmental 

Regulation Final Report for the Clean Lakes Program, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

Myers, R. L. and J. J. Ewel (Eds.). 1990. Ecosystems of Florida. Orlando, 

Florida: University of Central Florida Press. 

Nature Conservancy. 1998. Withlacoochee State Forest Two-Mile Prairie 

Addition, Citrus County, Florida. Basin Marsh/Prairie and Xeric Oak 

Habitat Restoration/Management Recommendations. 

Nelson, J. A., and M. A. Nelson. 1985. Technical Support Document for 

Petition to Designate the Withlacoochee Riverine and Lake System as 

Outstanding Florida Waters.

104 


—. 1986. Technical Support Document for Petition to Designate the Withlacoochee 

Riverine and Lake System as an Outstanding Florida Water. 

Concerned Citizens of Citrus County, Inc. 

Noss, R. F., and A. Y. Cooperrider. 1994. Saving Nature’s Legacy. Washington, 

D.C.: Island Press. 

Otis, R. J., D. L. Anderson, and R. A. Apfel. 1993. On-Site Sewage 

Disposal System Research in Florida: An Evaluation of Current On-Site 

Sewage Disposal System (OSDS) Practices in Florida. Tampa, Florida: 

Ayres Associates. 

Peninsular Archaeological. 1976. Peninsular Archaeological Society’s Green 

Swamp Investigations. 

—. 1980. Geological/Archaeological Study of a Primitive Site in the Green 

Swamp. Polk County, Florida. 

Polk County Public Health Unit, Environmental Engineering Division. 

1990. Nonpoint Source Impacts on Surface and Groundwater from Land 

Disposal Practices in Polk County. Polk County Health Unit. 

Pride, R. W., F. W. Meyer, and R. N. Cherry. 1966. Hydrogeology of the 

Green Swamp Area in Central Florida. Florida State Board of Conservation. 

Florida Geological Survey Report of Investigations N-42. 

Rea, R. A., and S. B. Upchurch. 1980. “Influence of Regolith Properties 

on Migration of Septic Tank Effluent.” Groundwater. Vol. 18. 

Romie, L. F. 1990. An Evaluation of Factors Contributing to Growth of 

Lyngbya sp. in Kings Bay/Crystal River, Florida. Brooksville, Florida: 

Southwest Florida Water Management District. 

Rosenau, J. C., G. L. Faulkner, C. W. Hendry, and R. W. Hull. 1977. 

Springs of Florida. Florida Bureau of Geology and Florida Department 

of Environmental Regulation. Bull. 31 (revised). 

Ryder, P. D. 1982. Digital Model of Predevelopment Flow in the Tertiary 

Limestone (Floridan) Aquifer System in West-Central Florida. U.S. 

Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 81-54. 

—. 1985. Hydrology of the Floridan Aquifer System in West-Central Florida. 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1403-F. 

Sachs, L. A. 1996. Geochemical and Isotopic Composition of Groundwater 

with Emphasis on Sources of Sulfate in the Upper Floridan Aquifer in 

Parts of Marion, Sumter, and Citrus Counties. Florida. U.S. Geological 

Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4251. 

Scott, T. M. 1988. Lithostratigraphy of the Hawthorn Group (Miocene) of 

Florida. Florida Bureau of Geology. 

Sinclair, W. C. 1978. Preliminary Evaluation of the Water-Supply Potential 

of the Spring-River System in the Weekiwachee Area and the Lower 

Withlacoochee River. West-Central Florida. U.S. Geological Survey 

Water Resources Investigations Report 78-74. 

Southwest Florida Water Management District. 1964, December. Study 

and Report on Desirable Lake Levels for Tsala-Apopka. Number 3. 

—. 1965. Rufe Wysong Dam and Navigational Lock. 

—. 1976, October. Floodplain Information on the Payne and Little Payne 

Creeks from Mouth to Hickey Branch and to District Line Road. Hardee 

and Polk Counties, Florida.


105 

—. 1976. Floodplain Information on the Withlacoochee River from Nobleton 

at S.R. 476 to Cumpressco at S.R. 471. Sumter, Pasco, and Hernando 

Counties, Florida. 

—. 1976. Withlacoochee River Basin: Basin History. 

—. 1977, May. Flood Plain Information on the Tsala Apopka Chain of 

Lakes. Citrus County, Florida. Report 19. 

—. 1978. Wysong: Lake Panasoffkee Resource Management Study. 

—. 1980. Archaeological Survey of the Levee Corridors of the Proposed Green 

Swamp Flood Detention Area. Polk, Sumter, and Lake Counties. 

—. 1980. Green Swamp and Upper Hillsborough/Withlacoochee Water 

Management Plan: A Conceptual Overview. 

—. 1980. Upper Hillsborough Flood Detention Area Environmental 

Assessment. 

—. 1981. Green Swamp Basin Literature Assessment Study. 

—. 1981. Green Swamp Flood Detention Area Environmental Assessment. 

—. 1981. Withlacoochee River Basin Literature Assessment. 

—. 1982. Floristic Survey of Five Wetland Areas in the Green Swamp Flood 

Detention Area. 

—. 1983. Environmental Description of Lake Tsala Apopka: 1982. 

—. 1984. Hydrobiological Monitoring of Cypress Domes in the Green Swamp 

Area of Lake and Sumter Counties, Florida, 1979–1982. 

—. 1984. Wysong Panasoffkee Study: Citrus and Sumter Counties, Florida. 

—. 1985. Plan for the Protection of the Green Swamp River Systems; 

Hillsborough, Withlacoochee, and Peace Rivers. 

—. 1987. Ground-Water Resource Availability Inventory: Citrus County, 


—. 1987. Ground-Water Resource Availability Inventory: Hernando 

County, Florida. 

—. 1987. Ground-Water Resource Availability Inventory: Marion County, 


—. 1988. Ecological Protection Study: Flying Eagle Ranch. 

—. 1989. Ecological Research Protection Study: Dee River Ranch and 

Carlton Ranch. 

—. 1989. Ecological Resource Protection Study: Withlacoochee Riverine 

Corridor A, D, B, Upper Hillsborough Flood Detention Area. 

—. 1989. Lake Rousseau Operations and Management Study. 

—. 1989. Save Our Rivers Five-Year Plan. 

—. 1989. Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan for 

the Rainbow River. 

—. 1990. 1988 Estimated Water Use in the Southwest Florida Water 


—. 1990. Ground-Water Quality Sampling Rsults from Wells in the Southwest 

Florida Water Management District: Northern Region Section 1. 

Brooksville, Florida: Ambient Ground-Water Quality Monitoring 

Program. 

—. 1990. Lake Tsala Apopka Environmental Assessment. 

—. 1990. Resource Evaluation of the Proposed East Lake Panasoffkee Water 

Management Land Acquisition.

106 


—. 1991. Coastal Ground-Water Quality Monitoring Program Report. 


Program. 

—. 1991. Comprehensive Large Game Wildlife Alternatives for the Flying 

Eagle Ranch. 

—. 1991. Diagnostic Studies of the Rainbow River. 

—. 1991. Ground-Water Quality Sampling Results from Wells in the Southwest 

Florida Water Management District: Northern Region Section 2. 


Program. 

—. 1991. Preliminary Assessment of George Washington Pasture. 

—. 1991. Resource Evaluation of the Agri-Timber Tract Proposed Water 

Management Land Acquisition. 

—. 1992. Aquatic and Terrestrial Wildlife Surveys for the Lake Panasoffkee 

Watershed. 

—. 1992. Aquatic and Terrestrial Wildlife Surveys for the Rainbow River 

Watershed. 

—. 1992. 1989 and 1990 Estimated Water Use in the Southwest Florida 


—. 1992. Green Swamp System: A Scientifi c Analysis. 

—. 1992, December. Marion One Resource Evaluation Report. Save Our 

Rivers/Preservation 2000 Water Management Lands Trust Fund—Staff 

Report. 

—. 1992. Resource Evaluation of the Alston Tract Proposed Water Management 

Land Acquisition. 

—. 1993, August. Gum Slough Resource Evaluation Report. Save Our 

Rivers/Preservation 2000 Water Management Lands Trust Fund—Staff 

Report. 

—. 1994. Clear Lake (Lake Jovita) Diagnostic Feasibility Study. 

—. 1994. Estimated Water Use in the Southwest Florida Water Management 

District: 1991 and 1992. 

—. 1994. Final Report of the Withlacoochee River Work Group. 

—. 1994. Plan for the Use and Management of the Green Swamp Wilderness 

Preserve. 

—. 1995. Alternative Methods of Land Acquisition. Report to the Southwest 

Florida Water Management District Governing Board from the 

Less-Than-Fee Acquisition Team. Brooksville, Florida. 

—. 1995. CH2M Hill, Berryman, and Henigar. Lake Panasoffkee Water 

and Nutrient Budget Study Final Report. 

—. 1995. Northern Tampa Bay Water Resource Assessment Project: 

Volume 1, Ground-Water/Surface-Water Interactions. 

—. 1995. Rainbow River: Surface Water Improvement and Management 

(SWIM) Plan. 

—. 1997. Preservation 2000 Remaining Needs and Priorities. 

—. 1997. Save Our Rivers/Preservation 2000 Five-Year Plan. Brooksville, 


—. 1997. Water Use Demand Estimates and Projections, 1996–2020. 

—. 1998, November 25. Lake Panasoffkee Restoration Plan—Report to the 

Legislature.


107 

—. 1998. Water Management Lands Trust Fund Save Our Rivers/ 

Preservation 2000 Five-Year Plan. 

—. 1998. Water Supply Assessments, 1995–2020. 

—. 1999. Northern Tampa Bay White papers: White papers supporting 

the establishment of minimum flows and levels for isolated cypress 

wetlands, Category 1 and 2 lakes, seawater intrusion, environmental 

aquifer levels, and the Tampa Bypass Canal. Brooksville, Florida. 

—. 2000. Resource Monitoring Program Report. Land Management 

Section. 

—. 2001. Withlacoochee River Watershed Plan. 

—. 2003, September. Rainbow River Surface Water Improvement and 

Management (SWIM) Plan (Draft). 

Storer, J. H. 1962. “Green Swamp.” Florida Naturalist. 

Sumter County Recreation and Water Conservation and Control Authority. 

1958, April. Engineering Report of the Withlacoochee River Basin, 

Sumter County, Florida. 

Sumter County Recreation and Water Conservation and Control Authority. 

1963, August. Watershed Work Plan—Big Four Watershed—Sumter 

and Lake Counties, Florida. 

Sumter County Soil Conservation District. 1962. Work Plan for Jumper 

Creek Watershed, Sumter County, Florida. 

—. 1962. Work Plan for South Sumter Watershed, Sumter County, Florida. 

Swancar, A., and C. Hutchinson. 1992. Chemical and Isotopic Compositions 

and Potential for Contamination of Water in the Upper Floridan 

Aquifer, West-Central Florida, 1986–89. U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 92-47. 

Sumter County. 1985, February. Sumter County Comprehensive Plan 

Evaluation and Appraisal Report. 

—. 1988, February. Sumter County Comprehensive Plan. Section III— 

Conservation Element—Sumter County. 

Telfair, J. 1961. Preliminary Report on Flood Control Problems, Withlacoochee 

River, Florida. Maurice H. Connell & Associates. 

Telfair, J. S., and M. H. Connell and Associates. 1961. Statement to 

the Honorable Farris Bryant, Governor of Florida, and the Honorable 

Governing Board of SWFWMD at the Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida, on 

Preliminary Planning for Flood Control in the Withlacoochee River Basin, 

Florida. Number 45. 

Torp, L. C. 1991. Archaeological Investigations at the Cowhouse East Head 

and Cowhead West Head Sites. 

Turner, J. F., and W. M. Woodham. 1980, February. Evaluation of Remote 

Hydrologic Data-Acquisition Systems, West-Central Florida. U.S. Geological 

Survey Waters Resources Investigations Report 79-102. 

University of South Florida. 1986. Archaeology of the Green Swamp: A 

Predictive Model for a Swamp Environment. 

Upchurch, S. B., and A. F. Randazzo. 1997. “Environmental Geology of 

Florida.” In A. F. Randazzo and D. S. Jones (Eds.). The Geology of 

Florida. Tallahassee, Florida: University Press of Florida.

108 


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1961. Comprehensive Report on Four River 

Basins, Florida, and Appendix, November 1961. Four River Basins, 

Florida, 1963. Report 34. 

—. 1974, September. Floodplain Information: Withlacoochee River, Sumter 

County, Florida. Report 21. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Land Conditions 

in Green Swamp Area: Pasco, Polk, and Lake Counties. 

—. 1988. Soils Survey of Sumter County, Florida. 

U.S. Department of the Interior/Fish and Wildlife Service. 1977. Impact 

of Water Level Changes on Woody Riparian and Wetland Communities: 

Volume II, The Southern Forest Region. FWS/OBS-77/59. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5. 1984, September. 

Technical Report – Literature Evaluation of Wetland Evaluation 

Methodologies. Number 549. 

U.S. Geological Survey. 1966. Hydrology of Green Swamp Area in Central 


—. 1977. Summary of U.S. Geological Survey Investigations and Hydrologic 

Conditions in the Southwest Florida Water Management District 

for 1977. 


Conditions in the Southwest Florida Water Management District 

for 1978. 


Conditions in Southwest Florida for 1979. 

—. 1981. Index to Active Hydrologic Data Collection Sites in Florida, 

1980–81. Open-File Report 81-813. 

—. 1981. Water Resources Investigations in Florida, 1980–1981. 

—. 1987. Potential for Pollution of the Upper Floridan Aquifer from Five 

Sinkholes and an Internally Drained Basin in West-Central Florida. 

Water Resources Investigations Report 87-4013. 

—. 1988. Bibliography of the U.S. Geological Survey Report on the Water 

Resources of Florida 1886–1986 List of Publications. Information 

Circular 87. 

—. 1988. Projects/Reports and USGS/SWFWMD Joint Investigations. 

Vernon, R. O. 1951. “Geology of Citrus and Levy Counties, Florida.” 

Florida Geological Survey. Bulletin 33. 

Wakefield, J. W. 1960. “Water Resources and Conservation in Florida.” 

Journal of the American Water Works Association. Vol. 52: 970-978. 

Water and Air Research, Inc. 1987. Hydrologic Investigation and Development 

of a Stormwater Management Master Plan for the Duck Lake 

Watershed, Pasco County, Florida (Interim Status Report). 

Water and Air Research, Inc. 1991. Diagnostic Studies of the Rainbow 

River. Prepared for the Southwest Florida Water Management District. 

Gainesville, Florida.


109 

Wayland, R. H., III. 2001. 2002 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and 

Assessment Report Guidance. Memorandum to EPA Regional Water 

Management Directors; EPA Regional Science and Technology Directors; 

and State, Territory, and Authorized Tribe Water Quality Program 

Directors. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

White, W. B. 1988. Geomorphology and Hydrology of Karst Terrains. New 

York: Oxford University Press. 

White, W. A. 1970. Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula. Florida 

Bureau of Geology. 

Wilhelm, S. R., S. L. Schiff, and J. A. Cherry. 1994. Biochemical Evolution 

of Domestic Waste Water in Septic Systems: 1. Conceptual Model. 

Groundwater. Vol. 32. 

Withlacoochee Regional Planning Council. 1977. General Atlas: Features 

and Characteristics of the Withlacoochee Region. Report 572. 

Wolansky, R. M., R. K. Spechler, and A. Buono. Generalized Thickness 

of the Surfi cial Deposits above the Confi ning Bed Overlying the Floridan 

Aquifer. Southwest Florida Water Management District. U.S. Geological 

Survey Open File Report 70-1071. 

Wolfe, S. H. 1990. An Ecological Characterization of the Florida Springs 

Coast: Pithlachascotee to Waccasassa Rivers. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service Biological Report 90 (21).

Water Quality Status Report 2005 

Withlacoochee Appendices 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Appendix A: Legislative and Regulatory Background on the Watershed 

Management Approach and the Implementation of TMDLs................................. 112 

Federal and State Legislation on Surface Water Quality and TMDLs.............................................112 

Determining Impairment Based on the State’s Impaired Surface Waters Rule...............................114 

Implementing TMDLs........................................................................................................................115 

Table A.1: Basin Groups for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle, by 

Department District Office .......................................................................................118 

Table A.2: Basin Rotation Schedule for TMDL Development and Implementation.................118 

Figure A.1: Five-Year Rotating Basin Cycle in the Department’s Six Districts.......................119 

Table A.3: Potentially Affected Stakeholders and Actions To Achieve TMDLs .......................120 

Appendix B: Methodology for Determining Impairment Based on the 

Impaired Surface Waters Rule................................................................................. 124 

The Impaired Surface Waters Rule....................................................................................................124 

Attainment of Designated Use(s).......................................................................................................124 

Table B.1: Designated Use Attainment Categories for Surface Waters in Florida .................125 

Sources of Data...................................................................................................................................125 

Table B.2: Data Used in Developing the Planning and Verified Lists, First Basin 

Rotation Cycle...........................................................................................................126 

Methodology.......................................................................................................................................126 

Appendix C: Supplementary Ecological Information for the Withlacoochee 

Basin .......................................................................................................................... 132 

Terrestrial and Freshwater Communities...........................................................................................132 

Saltwater and Coastal Communities..................................................................................................142 

Appendix D: Bioassessment Methodology .............................................................. 147 

Methodology.......................................................................................................................................147 

Metric Definitions ..............................................................................................................................148 

References...........................................................................................................................................149 

Appendix E: Permitted Discharge Facilities, Superfund Sites, and Landfills 

in the Withlacoochee Basin, by Planning Unit......................................................... 150 

Table E.1: Permitted Facilities with Discharges to Surface Water and Ground Water, 

by Planning Unit......................................................................................................150 

Table E.2: Hazardous Waste Sites, by Planning Unit...............................................................159 

Table E.3: Permitted Landfill Facilities, by Planning Unit ......................................................160 

Appendix F: Integrated Assessment (Master List) for the Withlacoochee Basin.. 162 

Table F.1: Integrated Assessment (Master List), by Planning Unit..........................................162 

Table F.2: Water Quality Monitoring Stations, by Planning Unit............................................216 

Appendix G: Level 1 Land Use by Planning Unit for the Withlacoochee Basin ... 227


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 EPA 

on their water quality. The 305(b) 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 Noteworthy 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. 

NOTEWORTHY: 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 

(Subsection 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 

Class II 

Class III 

Class IV 

Class V 

Potable water supplies 

Shellfish propagation or harvesting 

Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced 

population of fish and wildlife 

Agricultural water supplies 

Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in 

this class)

Water Quality Status Report: Withlachochee 113 

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 Noteworthy for a 

description of the legislation’s major provisions). 

NOTEWORTHY: 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 a Verified List 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 pollutants 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. 

• Authorizes the Department to develop basin plans to implement TMDLs, coordinating with the 

water management districts, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 

(FDACS), 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 FDACS 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 Noteworthy 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 Regulation Commission on April 26, 2001. It provides a sciencebased 

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. 

NOTEWORTHY: 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 (Sections 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 Subsection 62-302.300[10] and Rules 62-4 and 62-6, 

F.A.C., and described in Sections 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 Subsections 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 Subsection 

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, Section 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 

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 causes 

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. 

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 that 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 Basin 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, 

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 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 a Basin Management Action Plan (B-MAP). A B-MAP 

will be developed for each basin to specify how pollutant loadings from point and 

nonpoint sources will be allocated and reduced in order to meet TMDL requirements. 

The plans will include regulatory and nonregulatory (i.e., voluntary) and 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 a Basin Management Action Plan. Implementation of 

the activities specified in the B-MAP 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. 

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 

Group 1 

Group 2 

Group 3 

Group 4 

District 

Basins 

Basins 

Basins 

Basins 

Choctawhatchee 

Ochlockonee–- Apalachicola–Chip 

Northwest 

River and Bay and Pensacola Bay 

St. Marks Rivers ola Rivers 

St. Andrews Bay 

Northeast 

Central 

Southwest 

South 

Southeast 

Suwannee River 

Ocklawaha River 

Tampa Bay 

Everglades West 

Coast 

Lake Okeechobee 

Lower St. Johns 

River 

Middle St. Johns 

River 

Tampa Bay 

Tributaries 

Charlotte Harbor 

St.Lucie–Loxahatch 

ee Rivers 

Upper St. Johns 

River 

Sarasota Bay and 

Peace–Myakka 

Rivers 

Caloosahatchee 

River 

Lake Worth 

Lagoon/Palm 

Beach Coast 

St. Marys–Nassau 

Rivers 

Kissimmee River 


River 

Fisheating Creek 

Southeast Urban 

Coast 

Group 5 

Basins 

Perdido River and 

Bay 

Northeast Coast 

Lagoons 

Indian River 

Lagoon 

Springs Coast 

Florida Keys 

Everglades 

Table A.2: Basin Rotation Schedule for TMDL Development and Implementation


Figure A.1: 

Five-Year Rotating Basin Cycle in the Department’s Six Districts


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 

Municipal stormwater/wastewater programs 

Commercial developers, homebuilders, individual 

homeowners 

Municipal and industrial wastewater treatment 

facilities, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (NPDES) permitted facilities 

Farming and silviculture operations 

Federal, regional, state agencies; regional and 

local water quality coalitions 

Actions To Achieve TMDL 

Reduce and treat urban stormwater runoff through 

stormwater retrofits, replacement of septic tanks 

Improve development design and construction, 

enhance best management practices, replace septic 

tanks 

Reduce pollutant loadings from permitted 

discharges 

Reduce and treat runoff through best management 

practices 

Carry out waterbody restoration projects 

Permitting and Other Approaches 

NPDES PERMITS 

All point sources that discharge to surface water bodies require a NPDES permit. 

These permits can be classified into two types: domestic 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 

when a TMDL is implemented 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 Waterbody) 

Basin Management Action Plan in accordance 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 pollutants in surface waters. If such reductions are identified in the B- 

MAP, they would be implemented through modifications of the existing state permits. 

FLORIDA STORMWATER/ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMITS 

Florida was the first state 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, 

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 

St. Johns River Water Management District recently adopted basin-specific criteria for 

the Lake Apopka Basin that require the phosphorus loading from new development not to 

exceed predevelopment phosphorus loading. 

LOCAL LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES 

Since structural stormwater treatment practices can only achieve certain levels of 

load reductions, and because the hydrologic changes accompanying urban development 

often cause ecological impacts to aquatic systems, local land development codes that 

promote “low-impact development” are an important component of restoring impaired 

waters. Local codes may need to be reviewed to determine how to promote 

developments that minimize impervious surfaces (such as reduced street widths or the use 

of pervious pavements), promote the protection of vegetation, promote the protection and 

restoration of riparian buffers along streams and lakes, and adopt the principles of the 

Florida Yards and Neighborhoods Program in local landscaping codes. 

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) 

Typically, BMPs refer to a practice or combination of practices that, based on sound 

science and best professional judgment, are determined to be the most effective and 

practicable means of reducing nonpoint source pollutant discharges 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 (such as street sweeping or public education). 

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 designation of receiving waters.


The passage of the Florida Watershed Restoration Act increased the emphasis on 

implementing BMPs to reduce nonpoint source pollutant discharges from agricultural 

operations. Recognizing that the development and adoption of BMPs might 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 pollutant discharges 

based on current knowledge and best professional judgment. These practices will evolve 

into more formal BMPs as better scientific data on their effectiveness is obtained. 

Once the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services adopts BMPs, 

the Department is charged with verifying their effectiveness in reducing agricultural 

nonpoint sources. Once verified, agricultural operations that have implemented BMPs 

will receive a waiver of liability and presumption of compliance similar to that granted a 

developer who obtains an environmental resource permit. 

NONREGULATORY PARTNERSHIPS 

An excellent example of a nonregulatory partnership, established by local 

stakeholders through the Tampa Bay Estuary Program, is the Tampa Bay Nitrogen 

Management Consortium. Formed to address the issue of reducing current and future 

nitrogen loading, the Consortium is a dynamic alliance of local governments, regulatory 

agencies and key industry representatives committed to “holding the line” on future 

nitrogen loading. Through an interlocal agreement, the Consortium voluntarily 

developed and implemented an action plan to reduce the projected increase in nitrogen 

loading of 84 tons per year by two-thirds (a 56-ton-per-year reduction) by the year 2000. 

The identified reductions come from sources throughout the watershed, including urban 

stormwater, industrial point sources, fertilizer shipping and handling practices, and 

intensive agriculture. 

The Consortium is composed of a team of scientists and engineers; managers from 

the agricultural, phosphate, and electric utility industries; and local, state, and federal 

government representatives. In March 1998, the Consortium adopted Partners for 

Progress, a compilation of 105 projects that are either completed or to be undertaken by 

Consortium partners by the year 2000. 

The projects include the construction of regional stormwater treatment facilities, the 

conversion of septic tanks to central sewer systems, improvements to manufacturing 

processes to reduce pollutant discharges, the conversion to more efficient agricultural 

irrigation and fertilization practices, and land acquisition programs to prevent 

environmentally significant lands from being developed. Also included are public 

outreach initiatives such as the Florida Yards & Neighborhoods Program that are 

designed to educate homeowners about environmentally friendly landscaping practices. 

Measuring the success of the management activities initiated by the Tampa Bay 

Estuary Program has been critical to building and maintaining community support for the 

restoration of the bay. The baywide monitoring program is not run by one agency, but is 

a combined effort of the cities, counties, and regulatory agencies. The Department has 

recognized the successful coordination of these efforts as a model for statewide 

implementation.


OTHER STRATEGIES 

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 possible strategies for meeting TMDLs, 

restoring water quality, and preventing the 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 

Technical Advisory Committee to help develop a pollutant-trading rule, which must be 

reviewed by the legislature prior to its adoption. The Department will also continue to 

work with local stakeholders on TMDL allocation issues and implementation plans. 

Sources of Information 

For additional information on the Department’s Watershed Management Program 

and TMDLs, please contact the following basin coordinators: 

• Southwest Florida and Lake Okeechobee, 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.


Appendix B: Methodology for Determining Impairment Based 

on the Impaired Surface Waters Rule 

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 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 Section 62-303.300, F.A.C., to develop a 

Planning List of potentially impaired waters to be assessed under Subsections 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 and 

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 Subsection 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, Section 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 Subsection 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 

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:







Table B.1 summarizes the designated uses assigned to Florida’s various surface 

water classifications. 

Table B.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 






Class II 


Class I 



Sources of Data 

The Department’s 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 modernized 

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 Impaired Surface Waters Rule 

assessment. The Legacy STORET Database is a repository of data collected and 

uploaded by numerous organizations through 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 modernized version of STORET that included new 

features designed to address data quality assurance/quality control concerns (see the new 

STORET Web site 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. It houses only 

about 5 percent of the statewide Impaired Surface Waters Rule Database. 

Approximately 35 percent of the data used in the assessment under the 2002 

Impaired Surface Waters Rule was provided by individual organizations that for various 

reasons, such as time constraints or resource limitations, 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 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: the South Florida 

Water Management District at http://www.envirobase.usgs.gov/, the USGS at 

http://water.usgs.gov/, and LakeWatch at http://lakewatch.ifas.ufl.edu/. 

The Department created the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Database 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 B.2 shows the 

periods of record for the Verified and Planning Lists for the five basin groups. 

The evaluation of water quality in the state’s basins also includes some qualitative 

information. These sources are described in the Basin Status Reports and Assessment 

Reports for each basin. 

Table B.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 









Notes: Typically, a 10-year data record is used for the development of the Planning Lists, and a 7.5-year record is used 

for the Verified Lists. 

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 for the four attainment of 

designated use categories discussed earlier: aquatic life, primary contact and recreation, 

fish and shellfish consumption, and drinking water use and protection of human health. 

Aquatic Life Based Attainment 

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).


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. Only ambient surface water quality stations 

were included in the assessment of impairment. Water quality information from point 

sources or wells was excluded. Monitoring stations were classified as one of five 

waterbody types—spring, stream, lake, estuary, or blackwater—based on criteria 

described in the latest 305(b) report. The assessments included the following parameters: 

Metals 

Nutrients 

Conventionals 

Arsenic, aluminum, cadmium, chromium VI, chromium III, 

copper, iron, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, 

thallium, and zinc 

Chlorophyll a for streams and estuaries, and Trophic State 

Index (TSI) (chlorophyll a, total nitrogen, and total 

phosphorus) for lakes 

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 record shown in Table B.2, 

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. For 

most parameters, an exceedance is recorded any time the measured value is higher than 

the applicable water quality criterion by any amount. However, for the DO criterion, 

which is expressed as a minimum numeric value, an "exceedance" is recorded whenever 

the measured value is lower than the applicable DO 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 Section 62-302.530, F.A.C. (Identification of Impaired 

Surface Waters Rule). The rule contains a table of sample numbers versus exceedances. 

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 considers other information that might indicate 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 micrograms per liter (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 Basin 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 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 definition below) 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. 

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 referenced in the Impaired Surface 

Waters Rule (Section 62-303.330, F.A.C.). 

The data from these databases are used without regard to the randomness of sample 

site selection. For the purposes of the Basin 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 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 Basin 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. 

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, Subsection 

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. 


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. 


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. 

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.


Appendix C: Supplementary Ecological Information for the 

Withlacoochee Basin 

NOTEWORTHY: SOURCES OF INFORMATION 

Much of the information about the ecology of the Withlacoochee Basin in this appendix was 

excerpted or adapted from An Ecological Characterization of the Florida Springs Coast: 

Pithlachascotee to Waccasassa Rivers (U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service 

and Minerals Management Service, in cooperation with the SWFWMD, Biological Report 90[21], 

December 1990), and from the SWFWMD’s Withlacoochee River Watershed Plan (2001). 

Terrestrial and Freshwater Communities 

Terrestrial and freshwater communities vary depending on factors such as geology, 

topography, the amount of sunlight available, flooding, fire, and soil chemistry. The 

following describes the major terrestrial and freshwater communities in the 

Withlacoochee Basin, as well as their associated species. 

COASTAL STRAND 

The coastal area at the mouth of the Withlacoochee River is very flat, sloping 

imperceptibly from low, flat uplands at the river mouth through a level tidal zone and into 

the very shallow waters of the Gulf of Mexico. The coastline is relatively sheltered from 

wave action and tides, and has very small vertical tidal fluctuations. The horizontal tidal 

fluctuation, however, is large because the land surface is so flat. Consequently, a band of 

salt marsh borders most of this low-energy coastline; in inland areas, this gives way to 

forest. 

In only a few spots—mostly on offshore islands—are beaches, sand dunes, or coastal 

strand forests present. The sand for these beaches is supplied by the remnants of ancient 

sand dunes, which are gradually eroding away as the coastline subsides and sea levels 

rise. 

Some of the islands support coastal-strand forest (maritime hammock), which is 

dominated by sand live oak (Quercus geminata) and live oak (Quercus virginiana), in 

association with cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), red cedar (Juniperus silicicola), and 

other trees. The majority of coastal live oak, cabbage palm, and red cedar forest is on 

low-lying land subject to flooding, and is classified as hydric hammock. 

Because beaches do not support any living communities of vascular plants, the food 

chain here is based mainly on detritus and sea wrack washed up by storm tides and 

waves. This includes seagrasses and other plant debris, as well as shells, dead fish, 

jellyfish, crabs, and other marine creatures. Insects, amphipods, ghost crabs, fiddler 

crabs, seagulls, and other species feed on the detritus. In turn, shore birds such as gulls 

and sandpipers feed on the insects, amphipods, and crabs.


SCRUB 

A relatively large and ecologically significant scrub area is present in south-central 

Marion County and northern Sumter County, in the Lake Panasoffkee Planning Unit. 

Scrub is almost completely restricted to Florida, and many scrub species are 

endemic, that is, they occur only on the Florida peninsula in this habitat. It is, on 

average, the most xeric (dry and hot) of Florida’s communities, and is adapted to natural 

fires. These burn the vegetation periodically (every ten to fifty years); plants resprout 

from their base or roots. Scrub occurs only on well-drained sand with a low nutrient 

content. 

Scrub vegetation is almost entirely evergreen. It consists of a dense growth of 

evergreen shrubs and small trees without much herbaceous ground cover. It is often 

fairly uniform in density from the ground to the top of the canopy, except for mature sand 

pine scrub, in which the sand pines form a canopy above the rest of the vegetation. 

In addition to sand pine, scrub plant species include the long-spurred mint 

(Dicerandra cornutissima), scrub pawpaw (Asimina obovata), Florida rosemary 

(Ceratiola ericoides), garbaria (Garbaria heterophylla), palafoxia (Palafoxia feayi), 

scrub palmetto (Sabal etonia), and silkbay (Persea humilis). 

Animal species, some of which are endemic to scrub, include the scrub jay 

(Aphelocoma coerulescens), short-tailed snake (Stilosoma extenuatum), worm lizard 

(Rhineura floridana), peninsula mole skink (Eumeces egregious onocrepis), central 

Florida crowned snake (Tantilla relicta neilli), Florida black bear (Ursus americanus 

floridanus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), wild 

hog (Sus scrofa), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), Sherman’s fox squirrel (Sciurus 

niger shermani), and wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo). Insects include the pushup 

beetle (Peltotrupes spp.), numerous grasshopper species, and the Florida harvester ant 

(Pogonomyrmex badius). 

HIGH PINE FOREST (SANDHILL) 

Most of the well-drained uplands in the Withlacoochee Basin were originally open 

forests of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), with a scattered subcanopy of deciduous oaks 

and a ground cover of wiregrass (Aristida stricta), other grasses, and broad-leaved herbs. 

Several hundred thousand acres of younger, denser forest of this type remain, mostly in 

the Withlacoochee State Forest and elsewhere on the Brooksville Ridge in central Citrus 

and Hernando Counties. However, there are no virgin sandhill tracts left in Florida. 

Fire plays a dominant role in the sandhill community. Historically, it burns mostly 

in summer every two to three years. When fire is suppressed, the community is replaced 

within a century by a xeric (dry) to mesic (moist) hammock of low diversity. 

Most sandhill species are adapted to—and in fact depend on—frequent, low-intensity 

ground fires. Grasses, herbs, and small woody plants resprout from their bases or roots, 

while longleaf pine and hardwoods such as turkey oak (Quercus laevis), southern red oak 

(Quercus falcata), and mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa) have thick bark, stems, 

branches, and buds to withstand the effects of fire. Longleaf pine cannot reproduce 

unless fires thin out the understory vegetation and leaf litter, allowing the seedlings to


take hold. Other plant species found here include dwarf blueberry (Vaccinium 

myrsinites), gopher apple (Licania michauxii), and showy pawpaw (Asimina incarna). 

The high pine community supports numerous animal species, many of which are 

declining. Of these, the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) is perhaps the most 

important. The tortoise’s 15- to 20-foot-long burrows are home to nearly forty additional 

species, such as the Florida mouse (Podomys floridanus), gray fox (Urocyon 

cinereoargenteus), indigo snake (Drymarchon corais), coachwhip (Masticophis 

flagellum), eastern diamondback rattlesnake (Crotalus adamanteus), and gopher frog 

(Rana capito). 

Other sandhill species include the red-cockaded woodpecker (Dendrocopos 

borealis), southeastern kestrel (Falco sparverius), and Sherman’s fox squirrel (Sciurus 

niger shermani), common ground dove (Columbina passerina), loggerhead shrike 

(Lanius ludovicianus), Bachman’s sparrow (Aimophila aestivalis), northern bobwhite 

(Colinus virginianus), eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis), tufted titmouse (Parus bicolor), 

great crested flycatcher (Myiarchus crinitus), and screech owl (Otus asio). 

Sandhills dominated by turkey oak (Quercus laevis) are common today on the 

Brooksville Ridge. Most of the original longleaf pines growing in these areas were 

harvested for use in the rosin industry. 

PINE FLATWOODS 

The pine flatwoods community is found in southwestern Lake County, most of 

Sumter County, and northeastern Pasco County in the Upper Withlacoochee and Lake 

Panasofkee Planning Units. It occurs on very flat, poorly drained land where the soil is 

sandy, acidic, and low in nutrients. A clay hardpan layer usually underlies the water 

table, which ranges from 1 to 4 feet below the surface. During wet periods, the soils may 

remain saturated with water for several months. Conversely, during droughts, the water 

table may lie below plant root zones. Both of these conditions, in addition to the lack of 

nutrients and soil acidity, severely stress plant and animal species and restrict species 

composition. 

As in the high pine forest, fire plays a similar role, and some of the dominant plants 

(such as longleaf pine and wiregrass) are the same. However, the shrub understory burns 

less frequently (every two to five years, with considerable variation) but more intensely. 

This community has two layers: a tall forest of pine with a second layer of evergreen 

shrubs, mostly saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), gallberry (Ilex glabra), and fetterbush 

(Lyonia lucida). Diverse grasses and wildflowers are also present. 

Animal species include the pine woods tree frog (Hyla femoralis), southern black 

racer (Coluber constrictor priapus), eastern diamondback rattlesnake (Crotalus 

adamanteus), eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), pine warbler 

(Dendroica pinus), brown-headed nuthatch (Sitta pusilla), summer tanager (Piranga 

rubra), blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), eastern wood-pewee (Contopus 

virens), northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus), Bachman’s sparrow (Aimophila 

aestivalis), rufous-sided towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), white-eyed vireo (Vireo 

griseus), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus 

virginianus), wild hog (Sus scrofa), and hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus).


HAMMOCKS 

Hammocks are found in a number of areas in the Withlacoochee Basin, mainly 

scattered along the Withlacoochee River and its tributaries in north-central Sumter 

County and south-central Marion County, as well as near the mouth of the river. This 

community is particularly important to the fauna of much of the eastern United States, 

because it supports very large populations of overwintering songbirds and provides 

important habitat for migrants that winter farther south. 

Scattered in a few spots throughout Florida’s original vast pine forests, these dense 

hardwood forests develop in places that are protected to some degree from wildfire by 

bodies of water or swamps. While most hammocks occur in flat areas, some are found in 

slopes along rivers and their tributaries, and on the sides of sinkholes. Hammocks grow 

in a wide variety of soils, but they are generally found in areas containing relatively 

fertile soil, with either clay or limerock near the surface. There are three main types of 

hammocks: xeric (dry), mesic (moist), and hydric (wet). 

The dominant trees are usually a mixture of oaks (Quercus spp.), other hardwoods, 

understory trees, and shrubs; the individual species vary depending on the type of 

hammock and its distance from the coast. 

The most distinctive feature of hammocks is the invertebrate fauna of the forest 

floor, which includes snails, earthworms, millipedes, isopods, springtails, harvestmen, 

mites, beetles, orthopterans, dipterans, and hemipterans. These in turn support a diversity 

of spiders and other predatory insects, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. 

SINKHOLES AND TERRESTRIAL CAVES 

Caves are common in the Withlacoochee Basin, particularly in central Citrus and 

Hernando Counties. Inside the caves, algae and fungi predominate, but there are no 

vascular plants. However, there is often an interesting community of calcareous (mesic) 

hammock plants in sinkholes or on the rock outcrops associated with the caves. Many 

fern species are largely confined to sinkholes with limerock outcrops. Central Citrus and 

Hernando Counties contain the best-known populations of some of these plants. They 

include two species of maidenhair fern (Adiantum tenerum and A. capillus-veneris), two 

species of brake fern (Pteris vittata and P. cretica), a number of species of spleenwort 

(Asplenium heterochroum, A. resiliens, A. cristatum, A. pumilum, A. verecundum, A. 

auritum, and A. subtile), southern lip fern (Cheilanthes microphylla), sinkhole fern 

(Blechnum occidentale), and several species of wood fern (Thelypteris spp.). Other 

species include mosses and liverworts. 

There is less animal life in the caves than in surface habitats. Species found in the 

caves include deer mice (Peromyscus spp.), eastern woodrats (Neotoma floridana), rat 

snakes (Elaphe spp.), and salamanders. Their main habitat value is for bats. Breeding 

colonies of the southeastern myotis bat (Myotis austroriparius), sometimes numbering in 

the thousands, occupy some of the caves during the summer. Several other bat species 

also use the caves. 

The bat guano in the caves serves as the base of the food chain for cave 

invertebrates. These include two spiders (Gaucelmus augustinus and Nesticus pallidus), 

two springtails (Isotoma notabilis and Tomocerus dubius), and a cave cricket


(Ceuthopilus latibuli). The caves also contain mites (Acarina), harvestmen (Phalangida), 

and other invertebrates—including aquatic invertebrates if water is present. 

BAYHEAD 

Bayheads in the Withlacoochee Basin occur mostly as small, scattered patches of a 

few acres to perhaps 100 acres. This community is generally defined as a wetland forest 

dominated by any one or a combination of three species of broad-leaved evergreen trees, 

known as bay trees. Swamp tupelo (Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora), a deciduous tree, is 

also generally codominant. There is usually a moderately dense shrub layer dominated 

by broad-leaved, evergreen species. Ferns are often abundant in the ground cover. 

Soils are acidic and usually made up of peat or organic muck, underlain by sand. 

Bayheads may either be on seepage slopes or on peat bogs with good drainage. Although 

found in moist areas, they are usually not subject to flooding. They are exposed to fire 

but, unlike pine communities, are neither adapted to fire nor dependent on it. 

Plant species found here include loblolly bay (Gordonia lasianthus), sweet bay 

(Magnolia virginiana), and swamp bay (Persea palustris). Animal species include 

numerous birds, amphibians, reptiles, and black bears. 

MIXED SWAMP 

There are large areas of mixed swamp all along the Gulf coast, including along the 

Withlacoochee River and its tributaries. Mixed swamps generally occur as strands or 

sloughs, or as the deep-water part of the floodplain forests beside rivers, creeks, or lakes. 

These wetlands are often flooded for months at a time. They are generally tall, dense 

forests, with an open, deeply shaded understory and sparse ground cover. However, 

some of the most deeply flooded swamps and most swamps right on the coast have an 

open canopy of shorter trees and much more shrub and groundcover vegetation. 

Soils in mixed swamps are usually sand or clay over limerock, with varying amounts 

of muck on the surface. Because the swamps are generally connected hydrologically to 

an established drainage system, the water is generally flowing except during very low 

water. The soil never dries out much below the surface. Mixed swamps are flooded a 

little more than half the time. They rarely, if ever, burn, except for individual trees struck 

by lightning. 

Mixed swamps are very fertile and productive communities, but they are not 

especially diverse. Tree species such as green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), pumpkin 

ash (Fraxinus profunda), swamp tupelo (Nyssa sylvatica), bald cypress (Taxodium 

distichum), and red maple (Acer rubrum) are present. Other trees that are mixed in to 

some degree—usually in the shallower areas or edges of the swamp—are cabbage palm 

(Sabal palmetto), swamp laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), sweet bay (Magnolia 

virginiana), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), American hornbeam (Carpinus 

caroliniana), and Florida elm (Ulmus Americana var. floridana). Buttonbush 

(Cephalanthus occidentalis) is often the only shrub, except in the more open forests, 

where wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera) is also common.


A combination of flooding and shade restricts the diversity of herbaceous plants. 

The more open, deep-muck swamps may contain an abundance of bamboo vine (Smilax 

laurifolia). Densely forested mixed swamps may have very few herbaceous plants. 

The major swamp habitats are the crowns of the tall trees, the hollow trunks and 

branches of older trees, the muck, and the water. Animal species include mud-dwelling 

earthworms, several kinds of crayfish and shrimp, several kinds of snails—including the 

Florida apple snail (Pomacea paludosa), which is the primary food source for the limpkin 

(Aramus guarauna)—and numerous insects and their larvae. The cavities in tree trunks 

are especially important, because there is little shelter on the ground. Swamp-dwelling 

birds requiring cavities for nesting include the wood duck (Aix sponsa), barred owl (Strix 

varia), great crested flycatcher (Myiarchus crinitus), Carolina chickadee (Parus 

carolinensis), tufted titmouse (P. bicolor), and prothonotary warbler (Protonotaria 

citrea). Other tree-dwelling species include the gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), 

flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans), eastern woodrat (Neotoma floridana), cotton mouse 

(Peromyscus gossypinus), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), raccoon (Procyon 

lotor), and various snakes and lizards. 

CYPRESS DOME 

Cypress domes occur as isolated swamps in depressions scattered throughout the 

pine flatwoods community in the Withlacoochee Basin. They generally constitute about 

30 percent of the total area of the north Florida flatwoods, although in the Green Swamp, 

the percentage is much higher. Most of these domes range between 1 and 100 acres in 

size. The smaller ones are mostly round to oval and are often dome-shaped when viewed 

from the side, since the tallest trees grow in the center of the swamp. Some larger domes 

are open in the middle and contain either an open-water pond or a small marsh. 

Pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens) are the predominant tree species in the domes. 

Very dense shrubs usually form a border around the edge. These support much of the 

plant and animal diversity, and help to maintain a moist microclimate inside the dome. If 

shrubs or groundcover are present in the interior, they usually comprise fetterbush 

(Lyonia lucida) and Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica). Other hardwoods may 

also be present around the edge. 

Soils are nutrient poor and more acidic than in other kinds of swamps. Cypress 

domes have clay hardpans at varying depths, so that they are rather like large, shallow 

saucers that hold water. Some organic topsoil or sediment is usually present on the 

surface. 

The domes are isolated hydrologically except at high water, when they overflow 

through poorly defined channels from one dome to the next. As with other swamps, 

many domes lose their surface water almost every year during the dry season. During 

severe droughts, however, the water stored in the soil may also disappear, subjecting the 

vegetation to severe drought stress. Cypress domes are a fire-adapted community; the 

bark of pond cypress is much thicker than that of other cypress species, allowing it to 

withstand fires. 

The cypress domes provide valuable habitat for a number of reptile and amphibian 

species, but have few mammals and no unique bird species. However, they add an


important element of diversity to the flatwoods areas, support a higher density and 

diversity of animals than the surrounding flatwoods, and are important as a refuge for the 

flatwoods fauna when the pine forests are harvested. The dense thicket at the edge is 

especially valuable habitat, containing much higher densities and diversity of reptiles, 

amphibians, and birds than either adjacent community. Cypress domes, especially the 

edge thickets, are an important habitat for white-tailed deer. Other animal species found 

here include the chicken turtle (Deirochelys reticularia), glossy crayfish snake (Regina 

rigida), and dwarf siren (Pseudobranchus striatus). 

FRESHWATER MARSHES AND PRAIRIES 

The Withlacoochee Basin contains numerous freshwater marshes and prairies. The 

largest expanse of marsh in the basin, totaling several thousand acres, covers the shallow 

waters around and between the many bodies of open water at Lake Tsala Apopka in 

eastern Citrus County. Many smaller marshes and wet prairies are scattered throughout 

the region, some in flatwoods areas, some in low spots on the Brooksville Ridge, and 

some near the coast. 

These treeless wetlands vary in size from less than an acre to several hundred acres. 

They occur in areas of permanent shallow water, around lakes, or in areas that flood or 

burn frequently enough to prevent woody plants from invading. Soils are made up of 

sand over limerock—or, in the flatwoods, of varying amounts of organic muck over sand, 

with a clay layer beneath. Other marshes, such as that on the eastern side of Lake 

Panasoffkee in Sumter County, are on deep organic muck, probably over marl or 

limestone. 

In the Green Swamp, and to some extent in other areas of pine flatwoods, there are 

many areas called wet prairies. These contain mixtures of maidencane, Virginia chain 

fern (Woodwardia virginica), redroot (Lachnanthes caroliniana), meadow beauties 

(Rhexia spp.), and many other species of flatwoods grasses and wildflowers. 

Marshes and wet prairies are often dominated by one species of tall grass, sedge, or 

other herb. The predominance of a species often changes with water depth, sometimes 

producing a series of bands of different vegetation from the edge to the deepest area. In 

general, the emergent plants are more common in areas with shallower water, and the 

floating-leaved and submerged plants are more common in deeper water. Algae 

comprise the base of the food chain in the marshes and prairies. 

Many of the basin’s marshes comprise nearly pure stands of maidencane (Panicum 

hemitomon). Some of these, as at Lake Tsala Apopka, are in fairly deep and permanent 

water. Other species that may be present—depending on the soil, water depth, and 

hydroperiod—are pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), bladderwort (Utricularia spp.), 

and bluestem (Andropogon spp.). Cordgrass (Spartina bakeri) and swamp hibiscus 

(Hibiscus grandiflorus) are found in mildly brackish areas near the coast. Cattail (Typha 

spp.) marsh grows in areas of high fertility, often replacing other forms of marsh in the 

presence of nutrients from fertilizers or sewage effluent. 

Some marsh vegetation on the edges of lakes is highly desirable. The deep-water 

parts of the marsh often contain patches of white water lilies (Nymphaea odorata), 

spatterdock (Nuphar luteum), or thin stands of maidencane (Panicum hemitomon). These


provide good habitat for large fish, such as largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and 

bream (Lepomis macrochirus). The denser marsh vegetation in shallower waters harbors 

numerous smaller fish, providing a nursery area and a habitat that supports an important 

part of the food chain. Marshes also support many other animals, help remove nutrients 

from the lake, and trap sediments washed from the shore into the lake. 

Marshes and prairies are habitat for a number of broadly adapted aquatic species and 

a few terrestrial species. Some animals are specifically adapted to this habitat. Species 

that use marshes include the hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), red-winged blackbird 

(Agelaius phoeniceus), peninsula newt (Notophthalmus viridescens piaropicola), several 

kinds of frogs, and a number of small fish species. Insects, crayfish, snails, and other 

invertebrates are also quite abundant, providing a good food source for wading birds, 

raptors, and other predators. Marshes that go dry periodically are particularly important 

feeding habitat for wood storks (Mycteria americana). Other species that use marshes 

include the sandhill crane (Grus canadensis), American bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus), 

king rail (Rallus elegans), Florida green water snake (Nerodia floridana), and roundtailed 

muskrat (Neofiber alleni). 

PONDS 

Ponds are small bodies of open, nonflowing water. There are thousands of ponds of 

5 acres or less in the Withlacoochee Basin, and dozens of larger ones. Most were formed 

by the collapse of solution caves in the underground limestone aquifer, while others are 

shallow depressions that were once part of ancient seas. They are diverse in their sizes, 

depths, and locations. 

While many ponds are permanent, some are ephemeral, drying out completely every 

few years. All ponds are temporary, however, since they eventually fill up with 

sediment. Pond ecology is influenced by the surrounding upland soils and biological 

communities. Another important factor is whether a pond is isolated or part of a drainage 

system. The most important factor determining the diversity and species inhabiting a 

pond is whether it is permanent. 

The plants around the edges of ponds are mostly swamp, marsh, and wet prairie 

plants. Some of the submerged marsh plants grow in the open-water areas. Pond species 

include duckweed (Lemna spp. and Spirodela spp.), water spangles (Salvinia minima), 

mosquito fern (Azolla caroliniana), and several kinds of Sagittaria. However, algae are 

the most important plants in terms of importance to wildlife. 

No other habitat has such a high value per acre, and the habitat value of ponds 

increases with their isolation and separation from other wetlands. A very significant part 

of the animal species of an area larger than 2,000 acres may depend on less than 1 acre of 

ephemeral, isolated pond. A single, isolated pond may also have great importance as a 

source of drinking water for some animals, such as doves (Columbina passerina and 

Zenaida macroura), and nighthawks (Chordeiles minor). Ponds are breeding sites for a 

number of insects, amphibians, and birds, including toads (Bufo spp. and Scaphiopus 

holbrookii), tree frogs (Hyla spp.), gopher frogs (Rana capito), and dragonflies.


LAKES 

The largest lake in the Withlacoochee Basin is Lake Tsala Apopka, at about 19,000 

acres, followed by Lake Panasoffkee, which ranges in size between 3,800 and 4,500 

acres. Lake Rousseau, a man-made reservoir, is about 3,657 acres. There are several 

hundred other scattered lakes with areas of 5 to 1,000 acres. Like ponds, these large, 

permanently flooded bodies of nonflowing, open water were formed through the collapse 

of solution caves in the limestone aquifer, or are shallow depressions that once formed on 

an ancient sea floor. Factors influencing the ecology of lakes include size, depth, type of 

bottom, water quality, water level fluctuation, water inflow and outflow, and adjacent 

wetland and upland ecosystems. 

The swamps and marshes that are often found on the edges of a lake’s open-water 

area are important to the lake’s ecology. They are generally more productive than open 

water, supplying small fish, insects, crayfish, amphibians, and other small animals. 

These provide an abundant food source for the larger fish and predators in the open 

water. Wetlands also serve as nursery areas for some open-water species, remove excess 

nutrients and other pollutants before they enter the lake, and buffer wave action. 

Marsh and swamp plant species, discussed earlier, are commonly found on the 

margins of lakes. Plants in the open-water areas are dominated by single-celled algae, 

mostly diatoms and green algae. 

Animal species found in or near lakes include numerous birds, fish, reptiles, and 

amphibians. 

BLACKWATER STREAMS 

The Withlacoochee River begins in the pine flatwoods and swamps in and around the 

Green Swamp. In this flat terrain, the soft, acidic water that flows gently through the 

shallow stream channels is stained brown by organic acids. The water can also be very 

acidic, with a pH as low as 4.0. The soft water is not very fertile and is shaded by the 

overhanging forest, so that there are few aquatic plants and little biological productivity. 

Most of these streams cease flowing and many go dry during severe, prolonged droughts. 

The ecology of blackwater streams varies according to their size, permanence, type 

of bottom, and adjacent biological community. Of these factors, the adjacent community 

is the most important, since the streams are so small that the adjacent forest encircles 

them. Not only does the tree canopy close over the top, but the tree roots stretch across 

most of the stream bottom. In addition, in some sections the channel may disappear 

completely, with the stream diffusing through an area of swamp and re-forming again at 

the other side. As a result, the ecology of the upper end of a blackwater stream is similar 

to that of a small cypress dome. Downstream, and for most of the blackwater stream’s 

length, the ecology resembles that of the mixed swamp community that usually occupies 

the adjacent floodplain. Other habitats that occur occasionally along blackwater streams, 

adding to their fauna, are bayheads, hammocks, and pine flatwoods. 

The flora of blackwater streams is mainly the flora of the plant community beside the 

stream, which most often consists of mixed swamp. Where streams flow through pine 

flatwoods, bayheads, or hammocks, some mixed swamp flora are usually present along 

the stream bank.


The fauna consists primarily of a mixture of swamp and river species. There are a 

few benthic invertebrates, mostly oligochaetes in areas with muck bottom and 

chironomids in the most permanently flowing areas. The only common mollusk is the 

pouch snail (Physa pumilia). Downstream from seeps and small, dark-water springs in 

channels filled with loose organic sediment, the one-toed amphiuma (Amphiuma 

pholeter) and lesser siren (Siren intermedia) may be abundant. 

The vertebrates inhabiting blackwater streams include all the swamp species, in 

somewhat different patterns of abundance, and additional species of fish. 

SPRINGS, SPRING RUNS, AND SPRING-FED RIVERS 

The lower end of the Withlacoochee River is strongly influenced by water coming 

from springs in the river’s middle to lower stretches. The springs result from rain falling 

on inland areas; the water drains underground through sinkholes and other channels and 

fissures in the porous limestone rock, reemerging at the land surface. 

Springs provide permanent base flow to rivers and streams in the basin. The water 

temperature remains nearly constant year round, and the water itself is very clear, 

nonacidic, and high in dissolved solids such as calcium carbonate. 

Spring-connected streams have a diverse and productive year-round aquatic plant 

community. In addition, because they never stop flowing, they provide important refuges 

during droughts for aquatic animal species. 

The plant species along spring runs and spring-fed rivers usually consist of mixed 

swamp on shore and freshwater marsh in some scattered, shallow-water areas. In some 

places, hammock forests reach the stream banks. The submerged plants on the stream 

bottom, however, are markedly different. There are abundant quantities of eelgrass 

(Vallisneria americana) and arrowhead (Sagittaria). Of equal or greater importance are 

the diatoms and filamentous algae that are attached to these plants and to everything else 

on the stream. The submerged plants and algae provide dense cover and a productive 

foundation for the food chain. 

Large numbers of aquatic snails support predators such as the loggerhead musk turtle 

(Sternotherus minor) and limpkin (Aramus guarauna). The latter feeds mainly on the 

Florida apple snail (Pomacea paludosa). Other species include marine fish and the 

endangered West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris). 

AQUATIC CAVES 

The thick bed of limerock under the Withlacoochee Basin contains many cracks, 

joints, fissures, and caves filled with water. Underwater or aquatic caves formed when 

the slightly acidic water dissolved larger passageways over thousands of years. The 

caves are often interconnected, forming a complex, extensive maze of passageways 

beneath much of the basin. There are distinct layers in the limerock, each with its own 

caves, and the different layers are interconnected by occasional vertical shafts. 

The water in the caves is generally very clear, with a constant temperature, relatively 

neutral pH, and high levels of dissolved calcium carbonate. Considerable currents may 

be present.


A unique and specialized group of animal species has evolved to take advantage of 

this unique habitat. The region may have more species of blind aquatic cave-dwelling 

animals than any other region in the world. Invertebrates are predominant. Species 

found here include McLane’s cave crayfish (Troglocambarus maclanei), pallid cave 

crayfish (Procambarus pallidus), light-fleeing cave crayfish (P. lucifugus), and 

Leitheuser’s cave crayfish (P. leitheuseri). At least two amphipods, two isopods, and one 

shrimp are present. The caves also provide important habitat for the American eel 

(Anguilla rostrata) and redeye chub (Notropis harperi). 

Saltwater and Coastal Communities 

Marine and coastal environments are shaped by major factors such as geology, 

topography, winds, currents and tides, water depth, water temperature, and water 

chemistry. The following describes the major coastal saltwater habitats and communities 

in the Withlacoochee Basin, as well as their associated species. 

ESTUARIES 

In the nearshore areas of the basin, near the mouth of the Withlacoochee River, the 

water is less saline than marine water because of low wave action and the large quantities 

of fresh water discharged through streams, springs, and sheet flow. Salinity patterns in 

these inshore waters are estuarine, as are the plant and animal species living there. 

Estuaries play an important role in the life cycles of numerous species of fish and 

invertebrates. For example, the young and juvenile populations of many sport and 

commercial species use estuaries as nursery grounds. Between 90 and 97 percent of the 

total commercial fisheries’ catch of the Gulf of Mexico states use estuaries during some 

phase of their life cycle. 

Along the Withlacoochee Basin coast, there are five dominant intertidal estuarine 

habitats—brackish marshes, salt marshes, intertidal flats, oyster reefs, and, to a lesser 

extent, intertidal mangrove forests. 

Brackish marshes. The Withlacoochee Basin is part of the Springs Coast region, 

which comprises one of the largest and most spectacular mixtures of salt marshes and 

brackish marshes in Florida. The area is characterized by numerous karst features, such 

as creek channels, circular ponds, bedrock highs, and freshwater springs. The lowenergy, 

karstic coastline gives rise to an intricate mosaic of marshes and coastal 

hammocks, where small changes in elevation, tidal inundation, soil characteristics, and 

freshwater flow control the various zones of vegetation. 

The marshes are primarily dominated by sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), but cattails 

(Typha spp.) are codominant or dominant in many areas. Large patches of black 

needlerush (Juncus roemerianus) and other herbs interrupt the sawgrass, particularly near 

the river channels. The brackish vegetation is perennial, but it dies back in the fall, 

providing organic detritus that feeds species at the base of the food chain. Submergent 

vegetation includes a number of freshwater plants that are tolerant of low salinities, such 

as eelgrass (Vallisneria neotropicalis), sago pondweed (Potamogeton pectinatus), and


wigeongrass (Ruppia maritima). Numerous species of fish and macroinvertebrates use 

these areas. 

Salt marshes. Salt marshes, which dominate the basin’s coastline, represent a 

transitional zone between terrestrial and marine ecosystems. They develop in the zeroenergy 

areas along the coast, where they are protected from waves. Salt marshes are 

highly productive systems because of the large input of nutrients and organic particulate 

matter from tides and river flows, which support abundant quantities of phytoplankton, 

algae, and vascular plants. 

Salt marshes are generally made up of large, homogeneous expanses of dense, 

grasslike species. Along the Withlacoochee Basin, black needlerush (Juncus 

roemerianus) predominates. Smooth cordgrass (Spartina alternifloria) is usually 

restricted to the narrow fringes bordering the coastline, the edges of tidal creeks and 

channels, and small islands. Other species present include saltgrass (Spartina patens), 

marsh spike grass (Distichlis spicata), and glasswort (Salicornia perennis). 

Cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), red cedar (Juniperus silicicola), and live oak 

(Quercus virginiana) usually dominate the coastal hammock islands; these are widely 

scattered on limestone outcrops among the Withlacoochee Basin’s salt marshes and 

brackish marshes. 

Salt marsh species are frequently exposed to harsh and variable conditions. 

Conditions in the marsh change with tidal ebbs and flows, resulting in salinity, 

temperature, oxygen, and pH fluctuations. Conditions can also vary from one area to 

another. Some animal species live permanently in the marshes; others use it only during 

certain seasons or stages in their life cycles. 

Fish are seasonally very abundant and diverse. Over sixty species of birds, including 

wading birds and shore birds, also use the basin’s salt marshes for food, nesting areas, 

and refuges. The tricolored heron (Egretta tricolor) is the most abundant species. The 

marshes are also an important wintering area for the largest concentration of redhead 

ducks (Anas acuta) in the southeastern United States and also provide feeding sites for 

bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). 

Reptiles and mammals found in the basin’s salt marshes include the Gulf salt marsh 

snake (Nerodia clarkii), diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin macrospilota), and 

American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis), the marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris), 

marsh rice rat (Oryzomys palustris),hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), and Duke’s 

saltmarsh vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus dukecampbelli). 

Intertidal flats. These comprise the portions of the unvegetated bottoms of 

estuaries, bays, lagoons, and river mouths that lie between the high- and low-tide marks. 

Made up of sandy and muddy sediments, they appear barren and unproductive because of 

the absence of macrophytes, such as marshgrasses or seagrasses. However, they contain 

abundant benthic microalgae, bacteria, fungi, and invertebrates, which provide food for 

numerous species of birds and crabs. Bird species found in the intertidal flats include 

herons, egrets, ibises, yellowlegs, sandpipers, plovers, godwits, and curlews. Important 

invertebrate predators are fiddler crabs (Uca spp.), blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus), 

stingrays (Dasyatis sabina), and horseshoe crabs (Limulus polyphemus). 

Oyster reefs. Oysters are typically reef organisms, growing on the shell substrate 

accumulated from previous generations of oysters. Tides bring in food and carry away


waste. The reefs range in size from small, scattered clumps to massive, solid mounds of 

living oysters and dead shells. 

In the Withlacoochee Basin, oyster reefs are found roughly paralleling the shore to 

the Withlacoochee Estuary. The Withlacoochee reefs are now separated from the Crystal 

River reefs by the dredged intake channel and spoil banks of Florida Power Corporation’s 

Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant. 

Oyster reefs influence estuaries physically by removing suspended particulates and 

altering currents, and biologically by removing phytoplankton and other particles and 

producing large quantities of oyster biomass and pseudofeces. In addition, the reef 

provides habitats for many estuarine organisms. 

The principal oyster species in the Withlacoochee Basin are the eastern or American 

oyster (Crassostrea virginica) and the crested oyster (Ostreola equestris). Both species 

grow in a wide range of salinities. Oysters are commercially harvested in Citrus and 

Pasco Counties. 

Oyster reefs usually contain large and diverse numbers of other species, such as 

marine insects (Anurida maritima), barnacles (Balanus improvisus), mud crabs 

(Eurypanopeus depressus and Panopeus herbstii), and various polychaetes, amphipods, 

gastropods, bivalves, mussels, and worms. Stone crabs (Menippe mercenaria) are an 

important commercial fishery along the Springs Coast region, including Withlacoochee 

Basy. The American oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus) is the most important 

vertebrate predator of oysters in the area. 

Intertidal mangrove forests. Mangroves are mainly found fringing the outer marsh 

islands. Two mangrove species are present in the Withlacoochee Basin: the black 

mangrove (Avicennia germinans) is found throughout Florida’s Gulf coast and is the 

most cold resistant, while the red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) is present as far north 

as Levy County. 

Mangroves grow in a variety of soils but flourish on muds and fine-grained siliceous 

sands. Wave and current energy control sediment distribution and mangrove 

development. Mangrove forests modify the substrate through peat deposition. Extensive 

populations of fungi on the submerged portions of the prop roots, stems, branches, and 

living and dead leaves convert mangrove leaf material into detritus that can be used by 

other species. Fires play an important role in mangrove succession. Most fires in the 

basin’s mangrove stands are started by lightning and result in small, circular openings in 

the forest canopy. 

Mangrove forests support diverse algae that attach to the prop roots or live in the 

muddy sediments. Also present is an abundant microscopic community of diatoms and 

dinoflagellates and other filamentous green and blue-green algae. A number of salttolerant 

vascular plants are found in mangrove stands. These include leather leaves 

(Acrostichum aureum and A. Danaeifolium), chaff flower (Alternanthera ramosissima), 

Spanish bayonet (Yucca aloifolia), lianas, and a variety of bromeliads. 

A distinctive and highly diverse group of arthropods, mostly insects, lives in the 

mangrove forests. Other species include the mangrove tree crab (Aratus pisonii), which 

feeds in the mangrove canopy; numerous small invertebrates that graze on the prop-root 

algae; and many other filter feeders and carnivores. The mangrove system also provides 

nursery habitat for the Florida spiny lobster (Panulirus argus). Juveniles are especially


abundant in the prop-root system, which provides protection and food. Fish species 

found here include killifish (Fundulus confluentus), pinfish, silver perch, pigfish, 

anchovies, snook, ladyfish, tarpon, gar, and mangrove snapper. Some of these are fished 

commercially and recreationally. Amphibians and reptiles include four species of marine 

turtles, three species of lizards (Anolis), and American alligators (Alligator 

mississippiensis). 

In addition, mangroves harbor a diverse bird assemblage: wading birds (herons, 

egrets, ibises, bitterns, and spoonbills), probing shorebirds (clapper rails, willets, and 

black-necked stilts), floating and diving birds (ducks, grebes, loons, cormorants, and 

gallinules), aerially searching birds (gulls, terns, kingfishers, black skimmers, and fish 

crows), birds of prey (hawks, falcons, vultures, and owls), and arboreal birds (pigeons, 

cuckoos, woodpeckers, flycatchers, thrushes, vireos, warblers, blackbirds, and sparrows). 

MARINE AREAS 

Open-water estuarine areas. These areas within Withlacoochee Bay are 

characterized by extreme spatial variability, based on daily and seasonal fluctuations in 

local salinity and temperature, and wind and tidal mixing. 

Abundant phytoplankton and zooplankton serve as the base of the food chain. 

Permanent fauna live in the estuaries for an entire life cycle. Temporary fauna include 

the juvenile and larval forms of marine organisms such as polychaetes, fish, shrimp, 

bivalves, and crabs. These use estuarine areas as nursery grounds, and are dispersed by 

the currents to different habitats when they reach maturity. 

Recreationally and commercially important species in the Withlacoochee Bay 

estuary include striped mullet (Mugil cephalus), red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus), spotted 

seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus), Gulf menhaden (Brevoortia patronus), Atlantic croaker 

(Micropogonias undulatus), sea catfish (Arius felis), gafftopsail catfish (Bagre marinus), 

bay anchovy (Anchoa mitchilli), and striped anchovy (Anchoa hepsetus). Two species of 

sea turtles are occasionally found here: the Atlantic loggerhead (Caretta caretta) and 

Atlantic leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea). 

Soft-bottom areas. Subtidal unconsolidated bottom environments such as mud and 

sand form extensive areas of habitat in the Withlacoochee Basin. They are mainly found 

between oyster bars and seagrass beds, and at the mouths of the Withlacoochee River. 

These areas contain many different kinds of species, most of which are buried in the 

bottom sediments, or live and feed on the bottom. They include polychaetes, 

oligochaetes, chironomids, amphipods, bivalves, and isopods, as well as starfish, sand 

dollars, blue crabs, spider crabs, benthic fish, and skates and rays. Recreationally and 

commercially important species found here include southern flounder (Paralichthys 

lethostigma), northern quahog (Mercenaria mercenaria), sunray venus (Macrocallista 

nimbosa), and blue crab (Callinectes sapidus). 

Seagrass beds. Seagrasses are an extremely important habitat in the nearshore 

coastal waters of the Withlacoochee Basin. Five species are found here: turtlegrass 

(Thalassia testudinum), manateegrass (Syringodium filiforme), shoalgrass (Halodule 

wrightii), and star grass (Halophila engelmanii) are abundant, while another star grass 

species, H. decipiens, is relatively scarce.


The seagrasses form essentially one bed, extending from Florida’s Big Bend area to 

the open-sand areas along the southernmost reaches of coastal Pasco County, covering 

more than 3,000 square kilometers. They occur in an offshore band ten to thirty-five 

kilometers wide between St. Marks and Tarpon Springs. The seagrass beds have 

remained relatively stable over time partly because of the region’s extensive, undisturbed 

tidal marshes and swamps, which filter sediment carried from upland areas. Seagrasses 

are extremely vulnerable to any activities that reduce water clarity, such as dredging and 

filling. 

The distribution and composition of seagrass meadows depends on salinity levels. 

Because the major bed-forming species, Thalassia and Syringodium, do not grow in lowsalinity 

areas, the river mouths are dominated by wigeongrass (Ruppia maritima), and 

brackish-tolerant, freshwater species such as eelgrass (Vallisneria neotropicalis). 

Seagrass meadows are highly productive. The numerous types of algae that attach to 

the grasses are an important food source for many herbivorous species. Seagrasses 

harbor a large and diverse number of animals, ranging from tiny, sessile organisms to 

large, commercially important fish such as sea trout. Organisms such as gastropods are 

found on the seagrass blades themselves. Crustaceans are especially abundant in the 

seagrass meadows, both on the blades and in sediments. Fish and scallops are also 

plentiful. Two scallop species—bay scallops (Argopecten irradians) and calico scallops 

(A. gibbus)—are found here. Juvenile and adult blue crabs are also found in large 

numbers. 

Open marine waters. The basin’s marine open-water habitat is physically stable 

compared with that of the estuaries. Salinity varies only slightly throughout the year, and 

temperatures do not fluctuate as much or as quickly. Phytoplankton species diversity is 

higher than in the estuaries. 

Many fish use the estuaries as nursery areas and migrate to deeper marine waters as 

adults, eventually to spawn. This habitat includes prized sport and commercial fish such 

as grouper (Mycteroperca spp.), Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus maculatus), king 

mackerel (S. cavalla), dolphin (Coryphaena hippurus), billfish (Istioophoridae), and 

invertebrates such as the brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus). Five species of threatened or 

endangered marine turtles are occasionally found in the Withlacoochee Basin: the 

Atlantic green turtle (Chelonia mydas mydas), Atlantic hawksbill (Eretmochelys 

imbricata imbricata), Atlantic leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), Atlantic loggerhead 

(Caretta caretta), and Kemp’s ridley (Lepidochelys kempii). The endangered West 

Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris) is also found here.


Methodology 

Appendix D: Bioassessment Methodology 

An increasingly accepted tool for evaluating the biological integrity of surface water 

is bioassessment. The premise behind using bioassessment methodology in surface water 

characterizations is that biological components of the environment manifest long-term 

water quality conditions and can presumably give a better indication of the true health of 

the waters involved than discrete chemical or physical measurements 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. The reference condition data are 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 are compared with the expected scores of metrics to evaluate their 

biological integrities. Metrics may be used independently or 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, and macroinvertebrates. 

Only macroinvertebrate data are included in the following bioassessments. Because 

site-specific habitat and physicochemical assessment information (e.g., percent suitable 

macroinvertebrate habitat, water velocities, extent of sand or silt smothering, and riparian 

buffer zone widths) was not available at the time of reporting, it is not included here. 

However, habitat and physicochemical assessment information is instrumental in 

pinpointing the causes for failed bioassessment metrics and should be included in future 

reporting. 

Data used in this report were obtained from the Department’s Biological Database 

(SBIO) and the EPA’s STORET Water Quality Database, where it could be substantiated 

that such data were generated in compliance with the bioassessment standard operating 

procedures referenced in the Impaired Surface Waters Rule (Section 62-303.330, F.A.C.). 

Bioassessments are provided from streams, canals, and rivers, with data generated 

according to Department standard operating procedure FS-7420 and FS-7430 and 

analyzed according to the Stream Condition Index (SCI) for Florida (Barbour et al., 

1996; FDEP SOP #LT-7200) and/or Subsection 62-302.530(11), F.A.C. (Biological 

Integrity Standard). Bioassessments are also provided for clear lakes (< = 20 platinum 

cobalt units) with data generated according to Department standard operating procedure 

FS-6460 and analyzed according to the Lake Condition Index (LCI) for Florida 

(Gerritsen et al., 2000; FDEP SOP #LT-7300). Since macroinvertebrate-based indices 

have not been shown to assess colored lakes in Florida accurately (>20 platinum cobalt 

units), they have been excluded from the following bioassessments. 

Only ambient data from state surface waters were used in the following 

bioassessments, excluding data from effluent outfalls from discharging facilities or data


from monitoring sites not clearly established to collect ambient water quality data. Data 

were used from the databases noted above without regard to the randomness of sample 

site selection. For the purposes of this report, 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 summer and dry seasons are fall and winter, although conditions can 

vary within the state as a whole. 

Metric Definitions 

# of Taxa—This metric is otherwise known as taxa richness. In this report, it 

indicates the total number of macroinvertebrate taxa found in a sample of stream or lake 

bottom, other in-water substrate such as fallen branches or roots, or artificial surface in 

the waterbody for invertebrate colonization. A taxon (singular) is a group of organisms 

with common traits and characteristics, such as dragonflies (taxon Odonata). As the 

environment is stressed, the number of taxa generally decreases. 

# of Chironomid Taxa—Chironomids are larval flies that are prevalent in many 

surface waters. This metric is also a measure of taxa richness. 

# of EPT or EOT Taxa—Particular organisms or groups of organisms in a given 

surface water habitat are more sensitive to changes in the environment than others, 

making them good indicators of environmental stress. Mayflies (Ephemeroptera), 

stoneflies (Plecoptera), caddisflies (Trichoptera), and dragonflies and damselflies 

(Odonata) are four such taxa. 

% Diptera—Dipterans are larval flies, many of which are tolerant of poor water 

quality conditions. This metric represents the fraction of the total number of dipteran 

organisms in a sample. A large fraction indicates an invertebrate community that is 

predominantly tolerant of low water quality. 

Florida Index—The Florida Index is a weighted measurement of the numbers of 

Class I and Class II macroinvertebrate species known in Florida. It assigns points to 

stream-dwelling macroinvertebrates based on their sensitivities to pollution. It is an 

index in itself, but the results can be incorporated into other indices as measurements of 

biological integrity. 

% Filter Feeders—Filter-feeding organisms indicate the flow regime in a 

waterbody. The larger the fraction of the total community consisting of filter feeders, the 

more likely it is that the waterbody has a good flow regime. 

% Dominant Taxon—In all waterbodies, the taxon that exists in greater number 

than all others is known as the dominant taxon. A high percentage of dominant taxon in a 

sample indicates lower diversity and poorer water quality.


Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index—This is a measurement of macroinvertebrate 

community health, which is specified in Rule 62-302, F.A.C. It incorporates level of taxa 

richness (how many taxa are present) within the distribution of individuals among taxa 

present (how evenly they are distributed). Like the Florida Index, it is an index in itself. 

However, the result is often included in other indices of biological integrity. Low 

diversity scores are indicative of conditions where only a few species are present to the 

exclusion of other taxa. 

Hulbert Index—This index is also a weighted measurement of the numbers of Class 

A and Class B species of macroinvertebrates known in Florida lakes. It is also an index 

in itself, but the result is included in the calculation of the LCI as a separate metric value. 

References 

Barbour, M.T., J. Gerrisen, and J.S. White. 1996. Development of the Stream Condition 

Index (SCI) for Florida. Prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection. Owings Mills, Maryland: Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Gerritsen, J., B. Jessup, E. Leppo, and J. White. 2000. Development of Lake Condition 

Indexes (LCI) for Florida. Owings Mills, Maryland: Tetra Tech, Inc.


Appendix E: Permitted Discharge Facilities, Superfund Sites, and Landfills in the Withlacoochee 

Basin, by Planning Unit 

Table E.1: Permitted Facilities with Discharges to Surface Water and Ground Water, by Planning Unit 

Facility ID Name Facility Type Status 

Design 

Capacity 

(millions of 

gallons per 

day) 

Upper Withlacoochee Planning Unit 

FLA012972 WENDELL WATSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA013523 C JOHN CONIGLIO BUILDING Domestic Waste Active 0.0060 

FLA012031 RIDGE MANOR WEST S/R WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.7500 

FLA186465 CITRUS SERVICE, INC Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLG110321 BOWER ENTERPRISES, INC - POLK CITY Concrete Batch GP Active 0.0000 

FLA012776 HARMONY HEIGHTS MHP WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0125 

FLRNEE159 LAKELAND AUXILIARY VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FACILITY NEX Active 0.0000 

FLA312169 RMC SOUTH FLORIDA-BRONSON MINE Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA013524 SUMTER COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD BUILDING Domestic Waste Active 0.0110 

FLA013531 MISTY WOODS APARTMENTS WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0126 

FLA012718 CYPRESS MANOR Domestic Waste Active 0.0520 

FLA012742 DADE CITY WWTP Domestic Waste Active 1.5000 

FLA012760 MANY MANSIONS RV PARK Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA012780 COUNTRY AIRE ESTATES WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0250 

FLA012815 SEVEN ACRES RV PARK/ Domestic Waste Active 0.0135 

FLA012823 CITRUS HILL R V PARK Domestic Waste Active 0.0240 

FLA012844 RICHLAND FARMS, INC (FORMERLY KNOWN AS NUNEZ RANCH) AFO Active 0.0000 

FL0000485 PASCO BEVERAGE COMPANY (FORMERLY LYKES PASCO, INC ) Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA182613 MAZAK LIMEROCK MINE Industrial Waste Active 0.0000



Design 

Capacity 


gallons per 

day) 

FLA013044 PINE RIDGE ESTATES Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA017164 ZEPHYR EGG COMPANY (FARM #85) AFO Active 0.0000 

FLA013512 DOGWOOD MOBIL HOME COMMUNITY Domestic Waste Active 0.0400 

FLA013072 POLK CITY VILLAS Domestic Waste Active 0.0108 

FLA178659 MAVERICK MOBIL MART Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA012053 RIDGE MANOR CAMPGROUND Domestic Waste Active 0.0120 

FLA180513 RINKER MATERIALS CORPORATION-GATOR MINE Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA013557 I-75 SUMTER COUNTY REST AREA WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0300 

FLA012745 SAINT LEO WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0990 

FLA013511 WEBSTER TRAVEL & RV PARK WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0200 

FLA012833 BLUE JAY MHP Domestic Waste Active 0.0450 

FLA013119 KERN MOBILE ESTATES Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA013504 SUMTER COUNTY FARMERS MARKET WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA013525 BUSHNELL GARDENS APARTMENTS Domestic Waste Active 0.0360 

FLA013538 HILLANDALE FARMS, INC AFO Active 0.0000 

FLA182044 LU-HA R V TRAILOR PARK Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLA012952 MOUNT OLIVE WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.2000 

FLA013121 STOLL MANOR MHP WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0600 

FLA013360 POLK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION Domestic Waste Active 0.3130 

FLA013495 SOUTH SUMTER MIDDLE SCHOOL Domestic Waste Active 0.0300 

FLA013496 SUMTER COUNTY CORRECTIONAL (JAIL) Domestic Waste Active 0.0350 

FLA013500 WOODS S/D Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA013501 DUVAL'S CAMP & TRAILER PARK Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA013507 OAKS RESORT CAMPGROUND WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0350 

FLA013509 WAYFARA RESTAURANT Domestic Waste Active 0.0200 

FLA013518 RED BARN WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0900 

FLA013527 FLORIDA HORSEMAN'S PARK Domestic Waste Active 0.0240



CENTRAL BEEF IND L L C (FORMERLY CENTRAL PACKING CO , Industrial Waste Active 

FLA013532 

INC) 

Design 

Capacity 


gallons per 

day) 

FL0031895 RINKER MATERIALS CORPORATION-CENTER HILL LIMEROCK MINE Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FL0135372 RINKER MATERIALS CORPORATION - ST. CATHERINE MINE Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA013539 METAL INDUSTRIES - BUSHNELL PLANT Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA013558 SUMTER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE (PRISON) Domestic Waste Active 0.3500 

FLA186490 GRUBBS CONSTRUCTION Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA013529 SAFARI CAMPGROUND Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA013499 SUMTER OAKS R V PARK Domestic Waste Active 0.0095 

FLA185400 SPARKY'S C-STORE/CAR WASH Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA012055 HIDDEN VALLEY CAMPGROUND Domestic Waste Active 0.0050 

FLA012063 SPARTON ELECTRONICS Domestic Waste Active 0.0180 

FLA012813 TOWN & COUNTRY RV RESORT Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA012777 VALENCIA MOTEL WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0040 

FLA016056 RINGLING BROTHERS BARNUM & BAILEY CIRCUS AFO Active 0.0000 

FLA016516 ANGELO'S CRUSHED CONCRETE, INC Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA010641 E R JAHNA/SR 474 SAND MINE EQUIPMENT WASH Industrial Waste Active 0.0099 

FLA012085 SPARTON ELECTRONICS Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLA012839 SOUTH FORK MOBILE HOME PARK Domestic Waste Active 0.0200 

FLA013011 POLK CITY BP WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0050 

FLA013122 LELYNN RV RESORT WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0430 

FLA013521 FLORI-LOW OAKS CAMPGROUND Domestic Waste Active 0.0120 

FLA012087 FLORIDA ROCK INDUSTRIES, INC (BROOKSVILLE & RADAR MINES) Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA012827 COUNTRY AIRE MANOR WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0400 

FLA013285 VULCAN CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS, LP Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA013494 SOUTH SUMTER HIGH SCHOOL WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0260 

FLA013526 SUNSHINE VILLAGE MHP Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

0.0000



Design 

Capacity 


gallons per 

day) 

FLA013498 BEST WESTERN GUEST HOUSE MOTEL Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA270628 CLERK'S EAST RECORDS CENTER Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA012862 PASCO COGEN LIMITED Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLA012853 ZEPHYR EGG COMPANY (FARM #88) AFO Active 0.0000 

FLA017293 OSPREY POINT NURSING CENTER WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0095 

FLA012089 WITHLACOOCHEE STOP CAMP Domestic Waste Active 0.0050 

FLA010601 E R JAHNA/SR 474 SAND MINE Industrial Waste Active 11.5000 

FLA011947 FLORIDA ROCK INDUSTRIES, INC - BROOKSVILLE QUARRY Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA012032 HILL N DALE WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0950 

FLA012040 OAK MANOR MHP Domestic Waste Active 0.0050 

FLA012041 BRAEWOOD WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA012045 CAMPERS HOLIDAY Domestic Waste Active 0.0300 

FLA012046 BROOKSVILLE GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0105 

FLA012062 COUNTRYSIDE ESTATES WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0200 

FLA012066 YOUTH CAMP CHURCH OF GOD PROPHECY Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA012067 TALL PINES RV PARK Domestic Waste Active 0.0090 

FLA012071 WESLEYAN VILLAGE Domestic Waste Active 0.0500 

FLA012076 E R JAHNA IND-MILLS MINE Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLG110222 CEMEX, INC - BROOKSVILLE CBP Concrete Batch GP Active 0.0000 

FLA012083 MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 


FLA010516 MASCOTTE WASH-A-TERIA Industrial Waste Active 0.0080 

FLA010528 FLORIDA SELECT CITRUS WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0050 

FLA010549 LAKE NORTH APARTMENTS (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA010555 VILLAGES WWTF (DW) Domestic Waste Active 1.3000 

FLA010571 MIRROR LAKE MANOR APTS WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0090 

FL0002755 FLORIDA SELECT CITRUS/COOLING WATER DISCHARGE Industrial Waste Active 2.5000



Design 

Capacity 


gallons per 

day) 

FLG110237 FLORIDA ROCK INDUSTRIES/LEESBURG Concrete Batch GP Active 0.0000 

FLA016567 

MARION COUNTY VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT WASH RECYCLE 

SYSTEM 

Industrial Waste 

Active 

0.0280 

FLA012679 JET PETROLEUM WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA012704 OCALA MANUFACTURERS MALL Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA012709 OCALA RANCH RV PARK WWTP ( WATER WHEEL R V PARK) Domestic Waste Active 0.0250 

FLA010678 BELLEVIEW, CITY OF (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.5800 

FLA010769 SPRUCE CREEK SOUTH (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.4500 

FLA010734 BRIAR PATCH WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0300 

FLA010496 MASCOTTE ELEM SCHOOL (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0075 

FLA010735 ASSOCIATED GROCERS OF FLORIDA (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.2000 

FLA013505 RIVERS EDGE ESTATES Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA013517 LAKE DEATON RV PARK WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA017260 NORTHSIDE CAR WASH RECYCLE SYSTEM Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA010731 VACATION HOST INN (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0270 

FLA180629 RINGHAVER EQUIPMENT WASH RECYCLE SYSTEM (IW) Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLG110121 RINKER MATERIALS CORPORATION - WILDWOOD Concrete Batch GP Active 0.0000 

FLA013508 PANASOFFKEE APARTMENTS Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLG110520 EVANS SEPTIC TANK & READY-MIX/BELLEVIEW Concrete Batch GP Active 0.0000 

FLG911571 ISLAND FOOD STORE #313 (IW) Petroleum Cleanup GP Active 0.0000 

FLRNEE123 TUCKER'S MACHINE & STEEL SERVICE NEX Active 0.0000 

FLA175790 SUMMERGLEN WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.3500 

FLRNEE034 US SMELTING & REFINING, INC NEX Active 0.0000 

FLA284289 DITCH WITCH TRENCHER (IW) Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA013502 PANA VISTA LODGE MH & RVP Domestic Waste Active 0.0210 

FLA013503 TURTLEBACK CAMPGROUND Domestic Waste Active 0.0125 

FLA013506 LAKE PANASOFFKEE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Domestic Waste Active 0.0120



Design 

Capacity 


gallons per 

day) 

FLA043699 CONTINENTAL COUNTRY CLUB Domestic Waste Active 0.4000 

FLA013519 RAILS END MHP WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0120 

FLA013530 SPIRIT TRAVEL CENTER WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0110 

FL0025569 DIXIE LIME AND STONE MINE Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA013541 GREAT SOUTHERN WOOD OF FLORIDA,INC Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLA013543 FLORIDA POWER WILDWOOD MAINT FACILI Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLA013545 BEDROCK RESOURCES, CR 470 MINE Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLA010711 LIVE OAKS MOBILE HOME PARK, STP Domestic Waste Active 0.0110 

FLA016955 FLORIDA DETROIT DIESEL/ ALLISON NORTH EQUIPMENT WASH Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLA013522 SHADY BROOK R/V RESORT Domestic Waste Active 0.0400 

FLA010708 NAUTILUS TRAILER PARK (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0120 

FLA010611 SUNSHINE MOBILE HOME PARK WWFT Domestic Waste Active 0.0125 

FLA320650 DIAMONDBACK LIMEROCK MINE (IW) Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA010680 OCALA WRF #2 (DW) Domestic Waste Active 6.5000 

FLA016236 MARGIE WOODS TRUCK WASH RECYCLE/SYS (IW) Industrial Waste Active 0.0002 

FLA010570 PENNBROOKE UTILITIES (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.1800 

FLA010643 FRUITLAND ACRES WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0080 

FLA010706 WHISPERING OAKS MHP (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA013497 WILDWOOD CITY OF WWTP Domestic Waste Active 1.7500 

FLA010562 FLORIDA SELECT CITRUS/SPRAYFIELD Industrial Waste Active 0.3000 

FLA010689 CAMP SONLIGHT (FL PRIMITIVE) (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0200 

FLA010768 SOUTHEAST MILK TANKER WASHOUT (IW) Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0017 

FLA175846 PHILLIPS MOTOR CAR RECYCLE SYSTEM Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA271110 WONDER WASH CAR WASH Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLG110379 CEMEX, INC - OXFORD CONCRETE BATCH PLANT Concrete Batch GP Active 0.0000 

FLA280925 SHANKIN WAREHOUSE (IW) Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLA280933 THOMAS WAREHOUSE (IW) Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000



Design 

Capacity 


gallons per 

day) 

FLA280950 TROW WAREHOUSE (IW) Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLG110397 MID STATE CONCRETE Concrete Batch GP Active 0.0000 

FLA017026 PLANTATION LANDING WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0300 

FLA017034 SHORES CAR WASH (IW) Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA017133 LITTLE SUMTER UTILITY CO WWTF Domestic Waste Active 1.8000 

FLA010593 RECREATION PLANTATION RV PARK (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0850 

FLA010595 ACA ACADEMY (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0140 

FL0106445 C & C PEAT MINE Industrial Waste Active 1.5000 

FLA010661 BELLEVIEW SANTOS ELEM SCHOOL (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0180 

FLA010669 SHADY HILLS ELEM SCHOOL (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA010685 ON GOLDEN POND MOBILE HOME PARK,STP Domestic Waste Active 0.0200 

FLA010693 OAK BEND MANUFACTURED HOME COMMUNITY Domestic Waste Active 0.0600 

FLA010748 BENDER INDUSTRIES, INC Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0005 

FLA010764 MARIE'S MHP Domestic Waste Active 0.0050 

FLA010767 CITRUS PARK S/D (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0640 

FLA010771 CEDAR HILLS WWTF (DW) Domestic Waste Active 0.0270 

FLA010776 CENTRAL PROCESS/LIME STABILIZATION Residuals/Septage Active 0.0900 


FLA011949 FLORAL CITY LAUNDROMAT Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLG110317 FLORIDA ROCK INDUSTRIES, INC - HOLDER BATCH PLANT Concrete Batch GP Active 0.0000 

FLA181056 TIMES SQUARE LAUNDROMAT Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA293954 LUV BUG'S CAR WASH Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA011855 SANDY OAKS RV PARK AND MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA011839 FLORAL CITY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0060 

FLA011900 ROYAL OAKS MANOR Domestic Waste Active 0.0710 

FLA011920 INVERNESS PARK (FKA BLANTON'S) Domestic Waste Active 0.0200 

FLA011871 APACHE SHORES Domestic Waste Active 0.0170



Design 

Capacity 


gallons per 

day) 

FLA017072 FOAM CITY CAR WASH Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA011927 TARAWOOD ADULT COMMUNITY Domestic Waste Active 0.0200 

FLA011853 T J MICHAELS WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA011844 BRENTWOOD REGIONAL WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.5000 

FLA011921 CANTERBURY LAKE ESTATES Domestic Waste Active 0.0950 

FLA011847 INVERNESS CITY OF WWTF Domestic Waste Active 1.5000 

FLA011864 MOONRISE RESORT Domestic Waste Active 0.0130 

FLA011869 BEVERLY HILLS WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.5750 

FLA011879 OAK POND MOBILE HOME ESTATES Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA011880 STONERIDGE LANDING Domestic Waste Active 0.0300 

FLA011884 FLORAL OAKS APARTMENTS WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA011891 SINGING FOREST MHP Domestic Waste Active 0.0250 

FLA011893 POINT OF WOODS UTILITIES Domestic Waste Active 0.0580 

FLA011898 HARBOR LIGHTS MOBIL HOME RESORT WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA011904 OASIS Domestic Waste Active 0.0075 

FLA011918 CITRUS CENTER SHOPPING CENTER WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0600 

FLA011928 VENTURA VILLAGE APARTMENTS WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 


FLA012657 ROMEO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Domestic Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA126594 DUNNELLON CITY OF Domestic Waste Active 0.2500 

FLA012674 RIO VISTA WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0250 

FLA012717 RAINBOW SPRINGS STATE CAMPGROUND WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0150 

FLA012715 ACTICARB Industrial Waste Active 0.0000 

FLA012658 DUNNELLON HIGH SCHOOL WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0360 

FLA012693 RAINBOW SPRINGS FIFTH REPLAT WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.2300 

FLA012682 SATEKE VILLAGE WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0100



Design 

Capacity 


gallons per 

day) 

Lower Withlacoochee Planning Unit 

FLA012614 INGLIS VILLAS APARTMENTS WWTF (FLYNN) Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA012714 DEVELOPMENT & CONSTR CORP OF AMERI Industrial Waste Inactive 0.0000 

FLA012613 SEABREEZE MANOR APARTMENTS WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLG110316 CEMEX, INC - DUNNELLON CBP Concrete Batch GP Active 0.0000 

FLA012669 MARION OAKS S/D Domestic Waste Active 0.2250 

FLA012701 TIMBER RIDGE WWTF Domestic Waste Active 0.0450 

FLA016867 SPRUCE CREEK PRESERVE Domestic Waste Active 0.0950 

FLA011939 

CEMEX, INC - INGLIS QUARRY (FORMERLY INDEPENDENT 

AGGREGATE) 

Industrial Waste 

Active 

0.0000 

FLA011863 LAKE ROUSSEAU SAFARI CAMPGROUND Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA013515 CAMPERS WORLD WWTP Domestic Waste Active 0.0045 

FLA011878 CITRUS SPRINGS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA181439 YANKEETOWN SCHOOL WWTF (LCSB) Domestic Waste Active 0.0100 

FLA011917 SOUTH DUNNELLON Domestic Waste Active 0.0400 

FLA011860 NORTHWOOD ESTATES Domestic Waste Active 0.0420 

FLA011877 CITRUS SPRINGS UTILITIES Domestic Waste Active 0.2000 

FLA011906 RIVER LODGE RV PARK Domestic Waste Active 0.0200


Table E.2: Hazardous Waste Sites, by Planning Unit 

Name Program Status Operation 


Helms Drum Service State Funded Delisted Other 

Lake Panasofkee Planning Unit 

Florida Peach - Baseline State Funded Delisted Pesticide/Insecticide/Herbicide 

Florida Peach - Belleview State Funded Delisted Pesticide/Insecticide/Herbicide 

Camview State Funded Delisted Gas/Petroleum 

Belleview Gasoline Contamination State Funded Delisted Gas/Petroleum 

Note: There are no Superfund hazardous waste sites in any of the Withlacoochee Planning Units.


Table E.3: Permitted Landfill Facilities, by Planning Unit 

Facility ID Name Status* Facility Type Class 


SUMTER RECYCLING & SOLID WASTE 

53020 

DISPOSAL INC Active SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

41069 S A WILLIAMS CORP SITE #2 (C & D) Inactive SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

45936 ST LEO COLLEGE DUMP Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class II 

41024 CAL WILSON WILDLIFE LANE (C & D) Inactive SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

40740 HIGH CORNERS LF (EAST SIDE) Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class II 

85764 ACMS C&D DIPOSAL FACILITY Inactive SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

51496 CLINE LAND CLEARING DEBRIS DISPOSAL Active SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

45797 EAST PASCO LF (DADE CITY LF) Active SOLID WASTE Class I 

87895 SID LARKIN & SON, INC. Active SOLID WASTE Class III 

40775 RIDGE MANOR DISPOSAL SERVICE LF Inactive SOLID WASTE Class II 

40723 CROOM SLF (HIGH CORNER RD LF) Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class I 

41063 WILSON C & D FACILITY Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

40779 W CLYDE DANIEL CONST INC (C & D) Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 


Lake Panasofkee Planning Unit 

SUMTER RECYCLING & SOLID WASTE 

Construction Demolition 

53020 

DISPOSAL INC Active SOLID WASTE 


45936 ST LEO COLLEGE DUMP Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class II 

41024 CAL WILSON WILDLIFE LANE (C & D) Inactive SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

40740 HIGH CORNERS LF (EAST SIDE) Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class II 

85764 ACMS C&D DIPOSAL FACILITY Inactive SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

51496 CLINE LAND CLEARING DEBRIS DISPOSAL Active SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

45797 EAST PASCO LF (DADE CITY LF) Active SOLID WASTE Class I


Facility ID Name Status* Facility Type Class 


39872 HERNANDO HWY200 DUMP Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class II 

39874 FLORAL CITY DUMP Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class II 

39909 INVERNESS CITY DUMP Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class II 

40147 486 SAND PIT INC (C & D DEBRIS) Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

40148 SANDLAND PIT C & D DEBRIS Active SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

39999 CRYSTAL RIVER LAND DEVELOPMENT C&D Inactive SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

39910 BEVERLY HILLS DUMP Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class II 

40149 D.E.I. SITE PREP INC. C&D LANDFILL Inactive SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 


- - - - - 

Lower Withlacoochee Planning Unit 

20898 DUNNELLON LANDFILL Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class I 

40151 HOLLINS CORP C & D LF Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Construction Demolition 

39876 SOUTH DUNNELLON DUMP Closed/Monitored SOLID WASTE Class II


Appendix F: Integrated Assessment (Master List) for the Withlacoochee Basin 

Table F.1: Integrated Assessment (Master List), by Planning Unit 

Planning Unit 

Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 

Status [Impaired 

(IM), Planning List 

(PL), Not Impaired 

(NI), No data (ND), 

Insufficient data 

(ID)] 

WBID 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


1324 Big Jones Stream 3F ND 3a 

Creek 

1324A Lake Lillian Lake 3F ND 3a 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 

Development (2) 

Projected Year 

For TMDL 


Comment 

(# Exceedances/# 

Samples) 

PP=Planning Period 

VP=Verified Period (3) 

1342 Lake Miona 

Outlet 

Stream 3F ND 3a 

1342A Lady Lake Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 2/2 Insufficient 

data; VP - 2/2 


1342A Lady Lake Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 



1342A Lady Lake Lake 3F Dissolved 

ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 

Oxygen 



1342A Lady Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 

1342A Lady Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 







1342A Lady Lake Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 1/2 Insufficient 



1342A Lady Lake Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 



1342B Lake 

Lake 3F ND 3a 

Sunshine 

1342C Cherry Lake Lake 3F ND 3a 

Outlet 

1342D Black Lake Lake 3F ND 3a 

Outlet


Planning Unit 

Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


WBID 

1342E 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Lady Lake 

Outlet 

Waterbody 

Class 

Lake 3F ND 3a 

Waterbody 

Type 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



1342X Black Lake Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 


data; VP - No data 

1342X Black Lake Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 2/2 Insufficient 


1342X Black Lake Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 


1342X Black Lake Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 


1342X Black Lake Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 


1342Y Cherry Lake Lake 3F ND 3a 

1342Z Lake Miona Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1342Z Lake Miona Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 




1342Z Lake Miona Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1342Z Lake Miona Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 1/1 Insufficient 



1342Z Lake Miona Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 




1342Z Lake Miona Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1342Z Lake Miona Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 


Creek 




Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 


Spring 

1347 Lake 

Okahumpka 

1347 Lake 

Okahumpka 

1347 Lake 

Okahumpka 

1347 Lake 

Okahumpka 

1347 Lake 

Okahumpka 

1347 Lake 

Okahumpka 

1347 Lake 

Okahumpka 

1347 Lake 

Okahumpka 

1347A Lake 

Okahumpka 

Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Waterbody 

Type 


Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 3/3 Potentially 

impaired; VP - 1/1 


Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 



Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 1/3 Insufficient 



Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 

Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 










Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 



Lake 3F Biology PL 3c PP - Potentially 

impaired; VP - No 

data 

Lake 3F ND 3a 

Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 1/3 Insufficient 



Stream 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 



Stream 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 



Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 


Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Stream 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 






Stream 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 2/3 Insufficient 



Stream 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 




(Total 

Coliform) 

Stream 3F Nutrients 

(Chlorophyll) 




ID 3b PP- Insufficient data; 

VP - Insufficient data 


Outlet 

1349A Lake Deaton Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1349A Lake Deaton Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1349A Lake Deaton Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

1349A Lake Deaton Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 

1349A Lake Deaton Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 










1349A Lake Deaton Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1349A Lake Deaton Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1350 Myrtle Lake Stream 3F ND 3a 

Outlet


Planning Unit 

Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 

1351 Lake 


Dr 

Waterbody 

Class 

Lake 3F ND 3a 

Waterbody 

Type 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



1351A Outlet River Stream 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 



1351A Outlet River Stream 3F Conductance NI 2 PP - 2/37 Not 


Not impaired 

1351A Outlet River Stream 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

IM 3d PP - 9/36 Potentially 


Potentially impaired 

1351A Outlet River Stream 3F Fluoride NI 2 PP - 0/29 Not 


Not impaired 

1351A Outlet River Stream 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 1/2 Insufficient 



1351A Outlet River Stream 3F pH IM 3d PP - 13/37 Potentially 



1351A Outlet River Stream 3F Nutrients 

NI 2 PP - Not impaired; VP 

(Chlorophyll) 

- Not impaired 

1351A Outlet River Stream 3F Turbidity NI 2 PP - 0/37 Not 


Not impaired 

1351B 

1351B 

1351B 

1351B 

Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 3F Copper ID 3b PP - 0/15 Not 



Lake 3F Conductance NI 2 PP - 0/35 Not 


Not impaired 

Lake 3F Arsenic ID 3b PP - 0/15 Not 



Lake 3F Nutrients (TSI) NI 2 PP - Potentially 

impaired; VP - Not 

impaired


Planning Unit 

Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


WBID 

1351B 

1351B 

1351B 

1351B 

1351B 

1351B 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 0/15 Not 




Oxygen 

NI 2 PP - 3/34 Not 


Not impaired 

Lake 3F Zinc ID 3b PP - 0/15 Not 



Lake 3F Mercury ID 3b PP - 2/2 Insufficient 


Lake 3F pH IM 3d PP - 10/37 Potentially 



Lake 3F Nickel ID 3b PP - 0/15 Not 



Lake 3F Mercury-Fish NI 2 PP - Not impaired; VP 


Lake 3F ND 3a 

1351B Lake 


1351B Lake 

1 Panasoffkee 

Dr 

1352 Robinson Stream 3F ND 3a 

Lake Outlet 

1352A Robinson Lake 3F ND 3a 

Lake 

1356 Shady Brook Stream 3F Dissolved 


Oxygen 


1356 Shady Brook Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 0/6 Insufficient 



1356 Shady Brook Stream 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/6 Insufficient 



1356 Shady Brook Stream 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lake 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

WBID 

1359 Walled Sink Stream 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 

1359 Walled Sink Stream 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 









1359 Walled Sink Stream 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 



1359 Walled Sink Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 1/2 Insufficient 



1359 Walled Sink Stream 3F Nutrients 

ID 3b PP - Insuffcient data; 

(Chlorophyll) 


1359 Walled Sink Stream 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 



1359A Lake 

Lake 3F ND 3a 

Catherine 

1359B Lake David Lake 3F ND 3a 

1359C 

1329A 

1329B 

1329B 

1329B 

1329B 

Lake 

Catherine 

Outlet 


River 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 3F ND 3a 






Lake 3F Nutrients Nutrients (TSI) PL 3c Low 2010 PP - Potentially 


impaired 

Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 2/6 Insufficient 



Lake 3F Fluoride NI 2 PP - 0/23 Not 


data


Planning Unit 

Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


WBID 

1329B 

1329B 

1329B 

1329B 

1329B 

1329B 

1329B 

1329B 

1329B 

1 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Lake 

Rousseau 

Drain 


River 


River 


River 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Lake 3F Coliforms Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 

Lake 3F Coliforms Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



PL 3c Low 2010 PP - 0/28 Not 



PL 3c Low 2010 PP - 0/12 Not 



Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/25 Not 



Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/40 Not 

impiared; VP - 0/10 



Oxygen 

Dissolved 

Oxygen 

PL 3c Low 2010 PP - 15/42 Potentially 



Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/42 Not 



Lake 3F Unionized 

Ammonia 

ID 3b PP - 0/31 Not 



Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 2/41 Not 



Lake 3F ND 3a 


Oxygen 

IM 3d PP - 28/130 

Potentially impaired; 

VP - 20/90 Potentially 

impaired 

Stream 3F Mercury-Fish IM 3d PP - Potentially 

impaired; VP - 


Stream 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/28 Not 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


WBID 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

1329C 

1329D 

1329D 

Water 

Segment 

Name 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 


(Total 

Coliform) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 





Not impaired 

Stream 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/85 Not 


Not impaired 

Stream 3F Unionized 

Ammonia 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 






Not impaired 

Stream 3F Selenium NI 2 PP - 0/11 Not 


data 

Stream 3F Nickel NI 2 PP - 0/11 Not 


data 

Stream 3F Biology NI 2 PP - Not impaired; VP 

- No data 

Stream 3F Fluoride ID 3b PP - 0/45 Not 


Not impaired 




Stream 3F Conductance NI 2 PP - 0/132 Not 


Not impaired 

Stream 3F pH NI 2 PP - 2/129 Not 


Not impaired 


(Total 

Coliform) 






Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


WBID 

1329D 

1329D 

1329D 

1329D 

1329D 

1329D 

1329D 

Water 

Segment 

Name 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 

Withla-- 

coochee 

River 

Withlacooch 

ee River 

1329D Withlacoochee 

River 


River 


River 

1329J Rush Lake - 

Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 


(Chlorophyll) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 







Not impaired 


Ammonia 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 









Not impaired 






Not impaired 

Stream 3F Turbidity NI 2 PP - 0/45 Not 


Not impaired 





Oxygen 







Ammonia 





Oxygen 



Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 

1329K Lake Otting - 

Open Wat 


Open Wat 


Open Wat 


Open Wat 


Open Wat 


Open Wat 


Open Wat 

1329V 

Lake Blue 

Cove 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 










(Total 

Coliform) 











(Total 

Coliform) 








(Fecal 

Coliform) 


Oxygen 
















Lake 3F Nutrients (TSI) PL 3c PP - Potentially 


data


Planning Unit 

Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

WBID 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1334 Bell Branch Stream 3F ND 3a 

1334A 

1334A 

1334A 

1334A 

1334A 

1334A 

1334A 

1334A 

Little Bream 

Lake - Op 

Little Bream 

Lake - Op 

Little Bream 

Lake - Op 

Little Bream 

Lake - Op 

Little Bream 

Lake - Op 

Little Bream 

Lake - Op 

Little Bream 

Lake - Op 

Little Bream 

Lake - Op 


(Total 

Coliform) 


Ammonia 


Oxygen 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 







data; VP - 0/2 No data 

















(Fecal 

Coliform) 

1336 Turner Creek Stream 3F ND 3a 


River 


River 


River 


River 




Stream 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 1/31 Not 







(Chlorophyll) 


(Total 

Coliform) 


- No impaired 



Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 

1337A Bypass 

Channel 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 


Ammonia 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 











Not impaired 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 


Oxygen 

NI 2 PP - 8/376 Not 


Not impaired 

NI 2 PP - 26/265 Not 


Not impaired 



Not impaired 





1338A Gum Springs Stream 3F Conductance NI 2 PP - 0/29 Not 


Not impaired 

1338A Gum Springs Stream 3F pH NI 2 PP - 0/29 Not 


Not impaired 

1338A Gum Springs Stream 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/18 Not 


Not impaired 

1338A Gum Springs Stream 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

1338B Gum Slough Stream 3F ND 3a 

1343 Unnamed 

Slough 


ID 3b PP - 7/7 Potentially 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Lower 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 


Canal 


Canal 


Canal 


Canal 


Canal 


Canal 


Canal 


Canal 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



Stream 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 







(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 


Oxygen 

Dissolved 

Oxygen 







PL 3c High 2005 PP - 1/1 Insufficient 


Insufficient data. 

Naturally low 

Dissolved Oxygen. 

Located in swamp 

area. 




Stream 3F Mercury-Fish NI 2 PP - Not impaired; VP 





Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Biology PL 3c PP - Potentially 


data 

Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Fluoride NI 2 PP - 0/10 Not 


data 

Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 0/34 Not 



Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Unionized 

Ammonia 



Insufficient data


Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



Planning Unit WBID 

Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/33 Not 



Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 




Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 

data; VP - 0/1 No data 

Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/28 Not 



Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/36 Not 



Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

Rainbow River 1320 Blue Run Stream 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 

Rainbow River 1320A Rainbow 

Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 







Spring 3F Arsenic ID 3b PP - 0/12 Not 



Spring 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



Spring 3F pH NI 2 PP - 5/76 Not 


Not impaired 

Spring 3F Conductance NI 2 PP - 0/82 Not 


Not impaired 

Spring 3F Unionized 


Ammonia 


Spring 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 0/4 Insufficient 


Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Spring 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 

Spring 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 

Spring 3F Nutrients Nutrients 

(Chlorophyll) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 









PL 3c High 2005 PP - No data; VP - 

No data. SWFWMD 

suggested. SWIM 

waterbody. Interim 

PLRG developed 



Spring 3F Dichloroethyle 

ne 

Spring 3F Copper NI 2 PP - 0/14 Not 



Spring 3F Trichloroethyl 

ene 



Spring 3F Cadmium ID 3b PP - 0/15 Not 



Spring 3F Tetrachloroeth ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 

ylene 


Spring 3F Nickel NI 2 PP - 0/15 Not 



Spring 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/30 Not 



Spring 3F Zinc ID 3b PP - 0/15 Not 



Spring 3F 1,1,2,2- 


Tetrachloroeth 


ane 

Spring 3F Methyl 


Chloride 


Spring 3F Mercury ID 3b PP - 1/1 Insufficient 

data; VP - No data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 


Springs #1 

Tsala Apopka 1340 Tsala 

Apopka 

Outlet 


Apopka 

Outlet 


Apopka 

Outlet 


Apopka 

Outlet 


Apopka 

Outlet 

Tsala Apopka 1340A Davis Lake - 

Open Wate 


Open Wate 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Spring 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 








Spring 3F Carbon 

Tetrachloride 

Spring 3F Lead NI 2 PP - 0/13 Insufficient 


Spring 3F Methylene 


Chloride 


Spring 3F Chloroform ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 


Spring 3F Fluoride ID 3b PP - 0/3 Not impaired; 

VP - 0/3 Insufficient 

data 

Spring 3F Chromium III ID 3b PP - 0/3 Not impaired; 

VP - 0/2 Insufficient 

data 

Spring 3F Bromoform ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 


Stream 3F pH NI 2 PP - 8/53 Potentially 


Not impaired 


(Historic 

Chlorophyll) 


(Chlorophyll) 


Oxygen 

IM 3d PP - Potentially 










Not impaired 



Oxygen 



data; VP - No data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 

Tsala Apopka 1340B Fort Cooper 

Lake - Ope 


Lake - Ope 


Lake - Ope 


Lake - Ope 


Lake - Ope 


Lake - Ope 


Lake - Ope 

Tsala Apopka 1340C Magnolia 

Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Waterbody 

Class 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 



Waterbody 

Type 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Comment 


Samples) 










Ammonia 






(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 

















Oxygen 








Ammonia 





Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Tsala Apopka 1340D Hampton 

Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Tsala Apopka 1340E Little Lake 

(Consuella) 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 










Oxygen 








Ammonia 







(Total 

Coliform) 








Oxygen 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 







Lake 3F Nutrients (TSI) NI 2 PP - Not impaired; VP 







Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


(Consuella) 


(Consuella) 


(Consuella) 


(Consuella) 


(Consuella) 


(Consuella) 


(Consuella) 

Tsala Apopka 1340F Dodd Lake - 

Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 

Waterbody 

Class 


Waterbody 

Type 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Comment 


Samples) 



Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 



Ammonia 






Oxygen 


(Total 

Coliform) 











(Fecal 

Coliform) 









Ammonia 








(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 











Oxygen 



Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Open Water 


Open Water 

Tsala Apopka 1340G Bellamy 

Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Tsala Apopka 1340H Hernando 

Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Waterbody 

Class 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 



Waterbody 

Type 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Comment 


Samples) 

















(Total 

Coliform) 


Ammonia 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 


Oxygen 

















Lake 3F Nutrients (TSI) IM 3d PP - Potentiall 




Oxygen 



Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Tsala Apopka 1340I Hog Pond 

(Lake Nina) 


(Lake Nina) 


(Lake Nina) 


(Lake Nina) 


(Lake Nina) 


(Lake Nina) 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 







(Total 

Coliform) 











(Fecal 

Coliform) 


Ammonia 











Ammonia 






(Fecal 

Coliform) 











Oxygen 



Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


(Lake Nina) 


(Lake Nina) 

Tsala Apopka 1340J Connell Lake 

- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 

Tsala Apopka 1340K Cato Lake - 

Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 







(Total 

Coliform) 








(Total 

Coliform) 








(Fecal 

Coliform) 


Oxygen 















Ammonia 



(Total 

Coliform) 


Ammonia 








Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 

Tsala Apopka 1340L Cooter Lake 

- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 


Oxygen 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 













(Fecal 

Coliform) 








Oxygen 








(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 










Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 








Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


- Open Wat 

Tsala Apopka 1340M Little 

Henderson 

Lake 


Henderson 

Lake 


Henderson 

Lake 


Henderson 

Lake 


Henderson 

Lake 


Henderson 

Lake 


Henderson 

Lake 


Henderson 

Lake 


Henderson 

Lake 

Tsala Apopka 1340N Henederson 

Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Waterbody 

Class 


Waterbody 

Type 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Comment 


Samples) 



Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 



Ammonia 






Oxygen 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 











(Total 

Coliform) 













Ammonia 


(Total 

Coliform) 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 









Lake 3F Nutrients (TSI) PL 3c PP - Potentially 


data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Tsala Apopka 1340O Todd Lake - 

Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 







Oxygen 














Ammonia 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 





















Oxygen 



Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 

Tsala Apopka 1340P Spivey Lake 

- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 

Tsala Apopka 1340Q Tussock 

Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Waterbody 

Class 


Waterbody 

Type 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Comment 


Samples) 



Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 



Ammonia 






(Total 


Coliform) 



Oxygen 











(Total 

Coliform) 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 












Ammonia 












Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 


Lake - Open 

Wa 

Tsala Apopka 1340R Tsala 

Apopka Lake 

(Floral City) 


Apopka Lake 

(Floral City) 


Apopka Lake 

(Floral City) 


Apopka Lake 

(Floral City) 


Apopka Lake 

(Floral City) 


Apopka Lake 

(Floral City) 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 










(Fecal 

Coliform) 


Oxygen 


(Total 

Coliform) 













Ammonia 


(Total 

Coliform) 










Oxygen 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 











- Not impaired



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Apopka Lake 

(Floral City) 


Apopka Lake 

(Floral City) 

Tsala Apopka 1340S Croft Lake - 

Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 

Tsala Apopka 1340T Van Ness 

Lake - Open 

W 


Lake - Open 

W 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 













(Total 

Coliform) 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 



















Oxygen 







Ammonia 






Insufficient data



Water 

Segment 

Name 


Lake - Open 

W 


Lake - Open 

W 


Lake - Open 

W 


Lake - Open 

W 


Lake - Open 

W 


Lake - Open 

W 


Lake - Open 

W 

Tsala Apopka 1371 McKithen 

Lake Outlet 


Lake Outlet 


Lake Outlet 


Lake Outlet 


Lake Outlet 


Lake Outlet 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 


(Total 

Coliform) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 










(Fecal 

Coliform) 


Oxygen 











Ammonia 















Oxygen 








(Chlorophyll) 

ID 3b PP - Insufficient data; 

VP - Insufficient data


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 


Water 

Segment 

Name 

Tsalo Apopka 1371A McKithen 

Lake 

Upper 

1329E Withlacoochee 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 

Waterbody 

Class 

Lake 3F ND 3a 

Waterbody 

Type 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 





Not impaired 



Not impaired 


(Total 

Coliform) 




Stream 3F Fluoride NI 2 PP - 0/54 Not 


Not impaired 



Not impaired 

Stream 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 1/16 Not 



Stream 3F Nickel ID 3b PP - 0/12 Not 




Ammonia 


(Chlorophyll) 

NI 2 PP - 0/17 Not 


data 



Stream 3F Zinc ID 3b PP - 0/12 Not 



Stream 3F Copper ID 3b PP - 0/12 Not 



Stream 3F Arsenic ID 3b PP - 0/12 Not 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


WBID 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329E 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

Water 

Segment 

Name 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 






Stream 3F Alkalinity NI 2 PP - 1/16 Not 







Oxygen 

IM 3d PP - 69/186 


VP - 38/114 


Stream 3F Zinc ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 



Stream 3F Arsenic ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 



Stream 3F Copper ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 



Stream 3F Mercury ID 3b PP - 1/1 Insufficient 


Stream 3F Nickel ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 



Stream 3F Biology NI 2 PP - Not impaired; VP 

- No data 



Not impaired 



Not impaired


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


WBID 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329F 

1329G 

Water 

Segment 

Name 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 


River 

Assessment 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



Stream 3F pH IM 3d PP - 33/221 


VP - 17/115 






(Chlorophyll) 







Oxygen 

IM 3d PP - 108/218 


VP - 62/112 






Ammonia 






Not impaired 


(Total 

Coliform) 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 

Blackwate 

r 

3F ND 3a 



Not impaired 



Not impaired 

1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F Fluoride ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 

data; VP - No data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



WBID 

1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/22 Not 



1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F Coliforms Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 

1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F Coliforms Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 

PL 3c Low 2010 PP - 2/7 Insufficient 






1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/23 Not 



1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 7/8 Potentially 



1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

Dissolved 

Oxygen 




1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 13/14 Potentially 



1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F Unionized 

Ammonia 

NI 2 PP - 0/11 Not 


data 

1329H Lake Lindsey Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 12/23 Potentially 



1329I Withlacoochee 


River 

1329L Tank Lake - 

Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Oxygen 







Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 4/14 Potentially 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 

1329M Irvin Lake - 

Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 


Open Wate 

1329N 

1329N 

1329N 

Sparkman 

Lake - Open 

W 

Sparkman 

Lake - Open 

W 

Sparkman 

Lake - Open 

W 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 


Ammonia 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



NI 2 PP - 0/13 Not 


data 














Oxygen 











(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 














Oxygen 



Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


WBID 

1329N 

1329N 

1329N 

1329N 

1329O 

1329O 

1329O 

1329O 

1329O 

1329O 

1329O 

1329P 

1329P 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Sparkman 

Lake - Open 

W 

Sparkman 

Lake - Open 

W 

Sparkman 

Lake - Open 

W 

Sparkman 

Lake - Open 

W 

McClendon 

Lake - Open 

McClendon 

Lake - Open 

McClendon 

Lake - Open 

McClendon 

Lake - Open 

McClendon 

Lake - Open 

McClendon 

Lake - Open 

McClendon 

Lake - Open 

Dowling 

Lake - Open 

Wa 

Dowling 

Lake - Open 

Wa 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 













(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 











(Total 

Coliform) 














Oxygen 









Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


WBID 

1329P 

1329P 

1329P 

1329P 

1329P 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Dowling 

Lake - Open 

Wa 

Dowling 

Lake - Open 

Wa 

Dowling 

Lake - Open 

Wa 

Dowling 

Lake - Open 

Wa 

Dowling 

Lake - Open 

Wa 

1329Q Rock Pond - 

Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 


Open Water 

1329 

W 

1329 

W 

1329 

W 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 


Oxygen 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 






















Ammonia 








Oxygen 




Bystre Lake Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/14 Not 



Bystre Lake Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 2/15 Not 



Bystre Lake Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/15 Not 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


WBID 

1329 

W 

1329 

W 

1329 

W 

1329 

W 

1329 

W 

1329 

W 

1329 

W 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Bystre Lake Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 






Bystre Lake Lake 3F Fluoride ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 


Bystre Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 


(Fecal 


Coliform) 


Bystre Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 




Bystre Lake Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 


Bystre Lake Lake 3F Unionized 

NI 2 PP - 0/11 Not 

Ammonia 


data 

Bystre Lake Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 12/13 Potentially 



1329X Spring Lake Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/2 Insufficient 



1329X Spring Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 




1329X Spring Lake Lake 3F Iron PL 3c PP - 13/13 Potentially 


data 

1329X Spring Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 

1329X Spring Lake Lake 3F Unionized 

Ammonia 




NI 2 PP - 0/14 Not 


data 

1329X Spring Lake Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/17 Not 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

WBID 

1329X Spring Lake Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 






1329X Spring Lake Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/17 Not 



1329X Spring Lake Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 1/17 Not 



1329Y 

1329Y 

1329Y 

1329Y 

Mountain 

Lake 

Mountain 

Lake 

Mountain 

Lake 

Mountain 

Lake 

Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 




(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 










1329Z Neff Lake Lake 3F ND 3a 

1354 Shinn Ditch Stream 3F Mercury-Fish NI 2 PP - Not impaired; VP 


1358 Otter Slough Stream 3F ND 3a 

1360 Jumper 

Creek Canal 

1360 Jumper 

Creek Canal 

1360 Jumper 

Creek Canal 

1363 Schoolhous 

Pond Drain 


Oxygen 




Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 0/30 Not 






Stream 3F ND 3a


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

WBID 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


1365 Towns 


Prairie Drain 

1366 Gum Slough Stream 3F ND 3a 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

1367 The Willows Stream 3F ND 3a 

1368 Unnamed 

Ditch 


1369 Unnamed Stream 3F ND 3a 

Ditch 

1370 Baptizing Lake 3F ND 3a 

Hole 

1370A Baptizing Lake 3F ND 3a 

Hole Outlet 

1372 Grant Slough Stream 3F ND 3a 

1374 Clabber 

Creek 


1375 Mobley Pond Stream 3F ND 3a 

Outlet 

1376 Gator Head Stream 3F ND 3a 

Slough 

1377 Akins Pond Stream 3F ND 3a 

Outlet 

1377A Akins Pond Lake 3F ND 3a 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 






Stream 3F Fluoride ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 



Oxygen 

Dissolved 

Oxygen 



Insufficient data. SW 

District suggested. 

Stream 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 3/3 Potentially 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

1378 Big Gant 

Canal 

1379 Wild Cow 

Prairie Drain 

1381 Little Withlacoochee 





Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 










Stream 3F Coliforms Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 













(Chlorophyll) 



Stream 3F Biology PL 3c PP - Potentially 


data 



Not impaired 

Stream 3F Lead NI 2 PP - 1/10 Not 


data 

Stream 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 9/15 Potentially 

impaired; VP 1/2 



Oxygen 

Dissolved 

Oxygen 

IM 3d Low 2010 PP - 86/109 


VP 25/30 Potentially 

impaired. SW District 

suggested.


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 











Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



Stream 3F Arsenic ID 3b PP - 0/10 Not 



Stream 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 0/10 Not 



Stream 3F Nickel ID 3b PP - 0/10 Not 



Stream 3F Zinc ID 3b PP - 0/10 Not 



Stream 3F pH IM 3d PP - 60/113 


VP - 16/32 Potentially 

impaired 

Stream 3F Copper ID 3b PP - 1/10 Not 




Ammonia 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 


(Total 

Coliform) 

NI 2 PP - 0/15 Not 


data 

PL 3c Low 2010 PP - 0/14 Not 




PL 3c Low 2010 PP - 0/14 Not 







1381A Erie Lake Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1381A Erie Lake Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 1/1 Insufficient 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



WBID 

1381A Erie Lake Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1381A Erie Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 

1381A Erie Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 







1381A Erie Lake Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1381A Erie Lake Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

1381X Lake Mill 

Stream 

Swamp 

Lake 3F ND 3a 

1383 Giddon Lake Stream 3F ND 3a 

Outlet 

1385 Rock Pond Stream 3F ND 3a 

Outlet 

1385A Rock Pond Lake 3F ND 3a 

1386 Spring 

Hammock 

Run 


1388 Long Lake Stream 3F ND 3a 

Outlet 

1388A Long Lake Lake 3F ND 3a 

1390 Lake 

Elizabeth 

Outlet 

1390A Lake Geneva 

- Open Wat 


- Open Wat 








data; VP - No data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


WBID 

1390A 

1390A 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Lake Geneva 

- Open Wat 

Lake Geneva 

- Open Wat 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



Lake 3F Iron PL 3c PP - 9/9 Potentially 


data 


Oxygen 

PL 3c PP - 3/9 Potentially 


data 


- Open Wat 



1390A Lake Geneva Lake 3F Unionized 


- Open Wat 

Ammonia 


1393 Gator Hole Stream 3F ND 3a 

Slough 

1394 Devils Creek Stream 3F ND 3a 

1396 Owensboro 

Swamp 

Outlet 

1396A Blanton Lake 

- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 


- Open Wa 

1398 Wild Cat 

Swamp 


Canal 


Canal 


Canal 










Oxygen 









Oxygen 

Dissolved 

Oxygen 

IM 3d High 2005 PP - 20/41 Potentially 





Not impaired


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 


Canal 


Canal 


Canal 


Canal 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



Waterbody 

Type 

Stream 3F BOD BOD PL 3c High 2005 PP - No data; VP - No 

data 

Stream 3F Nutrients Nutrients 

PL 3c High 2005 PP - No data; VP - No 

(Chlorophyll) 

data 



Not impaired 




1403 Clear Lake Lake 3F ND 3a 

1403A Sumner Lake 

- Open Wat 



1403A Sumner Lake Lake 3F Dissolved 


- Open Wat 

Oxygen 


1403A Sumner Lake Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 1/1 Insufficient 

- Open Wat 


1403A Sumner Lake Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 

- Open Wat 


1403A Sumner Lake Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 

- Open Wat 


1403B Clear Lake Lake 3F ND 3a 

Outlet 


Ditch 

1412 Duck Lake Stream 3F ND 3a 

Canal 

1413 Tanic Road Stream 3F ND 3a 

Slough 

1414 Cross Creek Stream 3F ND 3a 


Drain 

1417 Pony Creek Stream 3F ND 3a 

1419 Unnamed 

Drain 

Stream 3F ND 3a


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



WBID 

1426 Pony Creek Stream 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 1/1 Insufficient 



1426 Pony Creek Stream 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 


1426 Pony Creek Stream 3F Coliforms 

ID 3b PP - No data; VP - No 

(Fecal 

data 

Colform) 

1426 Pony Creek Stream 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 

1426 Pony Creek Stream 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

ID 3b PP - No data; VP - No 

data 



1426 Pony Creek Stream 3F Fluoride ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 


1426 Pony Creek Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 1/1 Insufficient 



1426 Pony Creek Stream 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 


1427 Grass Creek Stream 3F Mercury-Fish IM 3d PP - Potentially 



1430 Colt Creek Stream 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/9 Insufficient 



1430 Colt Creek Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 7/9 Potentially 



1430 Colt Creek Stream 3F Dissolved 


Oxygen 



1430 Colt Creek Stream 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/9 Insufficient 



1430 Colt Creek Stream 3F Zinc ID 3b PP - 0/4 Insufficient 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



WBID 

1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 




1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F Copper ID 3b PP - 2/2 Insufficient 



1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F Zinc ID 3b PP - 1/8 Insufficient 



1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/19 Not 

Impaired; VP - 0/7 


1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F Fluoride ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F Lead ID 3b PP - 4/4 Potentially 



1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 13/19 Potentially 



1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F Nutrients 


(Chlorophyll) 


1431 Gator Creek Stream 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 3/19 Not 



1433 Cumbee Stream 3F ND 3a 

Drain 

1435 Mattress 

Drain 

1435 Mattress 

Drain 




Stream 3F Zinc ID 3b PP - 1/3 Insufficient 


Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 

1435 Mattress 

Drain 

1435 Mattress 

Drain 

1435 Mattress 

Drain 

1435 Mattress 

Drain 

1435 Mattress 

Drain 

1449 Orange 

Hammock 

Drain 

1449 Orange 

Hammock 

Drain 

1449 Orange 

Hammock 

Drain 

1449 Orange 

Hammock 

Drain 

1449A Lake Deeson 

- Open Wat 

1449A 

1449A 

1449A 

Lake Deeson 

- Open Wat 

Lake Deeson 

- Open Wat 

Lake Deeson 

- Open Wat 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 






Stream 3F Copper ID 3b PP - 1/1 Insufficient 




Oxygen 




Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 6/9 Potentially 



Stream 3F Lead ID 3b PP - 1/1 Insufficient 







Oxygen 











Oxygen 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 











(Total 

Coliform) 



Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


WBID 

1449A 

1449A 

1449A 

1449A 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Lake Deeson 

- Open Wat 

Lake Deeson 

- Open Wat 

Lake Deeson 

- Open Wat 

Lake Deeson 

- Open Wat 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 




impaired; Vp - 0/11 


Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 4/13 Potentially 




Ammonia 







1466 Lake Agnes Lake 3F Unionized 

Ammonia 




1466 Lake Agnes Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/11 Not 



1466 Lake Agnes Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/22 Not 



1466 Lake Agnes Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 




1466 Lake Agnes Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 3/22 Not 



1466 Lake Agnes Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 




1466 Lake Agnes Lake 3F Nutrients (TSI) IM 3d PP - Potentially 



1466 Lake Agnes Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 2/4 Insufficient 



1466 Lake Agnes Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 



Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


WBID 

1466A 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Lake Agnes 

Outlet 

Waterbody 

Class 

Lake 3F ND 3a 

Waterbody 

Type 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



NI 2 PP - 0/38 Not 


Not impaired 




1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F Conductance NI 2 PP - 0/38 Not 


Not impaired 

1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 




1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/24 Not 



1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 2/4 Insufficient 



1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 5/11 Potentially 



1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F Nutrients (TSI) IM 3d PP - Potentially 



1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F pH IM 3d PP - 8/38 Potentially 



1467 Mud Lake Lake 3F Unionized 

Ammonia 

1467A Clearwater 

Lake 

1467B Mud Lake 

Outlet 

1468 Lake Helene 

Outlet 

Lake 3F ND 3a 

Lake 3F ND 3a 


NI 2 PP - 1/11 Not 


data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

WBID 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1468A Lake Helene Lake 3F ND 3a 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 



1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 2/37 Not 



1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 2/4 Insufficient 



1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 15/15 Potentially 



1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Fecal 

Coliform) 




1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/37 Not 



1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 




1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/37 Not 



1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F Unionized 

Ammonia 

1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F Coliforms 

(Total 

Coliform) 







1476 Lake Mattie Lake 3F Nutrients Nutrients (TSI) PL 3c Low 2010 PP - Potentially 


impaired. SW District 

suggested. 

1476A Lake Mattie Lake 3F ND 3a 

Outlet 


Outlet 


Oxygen 



Insufficient data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Water 

Segment 

WBID Name 


Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 


Outlet 

1484A 

1484A 

1484A 

1484A 

1484A 

1484A 

Lake 

Tennessee 

Lake 

Tennessee 

Lake 

Tennessee 

Lake 

Tennessee 

Lake 

Tennessee 

Lake 

Tennessee 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 






Stream 3F pH ID 3b PP - 5/23 Not 









(Fecal 

Coliform) 


Ammonia 


(Chlorophyll) 


(Total 

Coliform) 


(Fecal 

Coliform) 






ID 3b PP - Potentially 
















Oxygen 








Ammonia 


data; VP - No data


Planning Unit 

Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


Upper 


WBID 

1484A 

1484A 

Water 

Segment 

Name 

Lake 

Tennessee 

Lake 

Tennessee 

Waterbody 

Type 

Waterbody 

Class 

1998 303(d) 

List 

Parameters 


Parameters 

Assessed 

Using the 

Impaired 

Waters Rule 

(IWR) 

Assessment 






(ID)] 

Integrated 

Report 

Category (1) 

Priority for 

TMDL 



For TMDL 


Comment 


Samples) 







(Total 

Coliform) 




1484B Lake Juliana Lake 3F Alkalinity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1484B Lake Juliana Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1484B Lake Juliana Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 




1484B Lake Juliana Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1484B Lake Juliana Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/1 Insufficient 



1503 Lake Van Lake 3F Conductance ID 3b PP - 0/5 Insufficient 



1503 Lake Van Lake 3F pH ID 3b PP - 1/3 Insufficient 



1503 Lake Van Lake 3F Turbidity ID 3b PP - 0/3 Insufficient 



1503 Lake Van Lake 3F Iron ID 3b PP - 2/3 Insufficient 



1503 Lake Van Lake 3F Dissolved 

Oxygen 

1503A 

Lake Van 

Outlet 

Lake 3F ND 3a 



Insufficient data


Notes: 

(1) 1 - Attains all designated uses; 2 - Attains some designated uses; 3a - No data and information available to determine if any designated use is attained; 3b - Some data and information available 

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; 3d - Waterbody meets Verified 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 will be developed 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; 5 - Water quality standard not attained, water impaired and requires TMDL, Verified List and 303(d) List. 

(2) Priorities and schedule for TMDL development are only provided for waters in Category 5. Priorities were retained from the 1998 303(d) list (i.e., High or Low), but High, Medium, and Low are us 

for newly listed waters identified under the IWR. 

(3) Planning Period (PP) - 1/1/1993 to 12/31/2002; Verified Period (VP) - 1/1/1998 to 12/31/2004 

Draft Master List for the Withlacoochee River Group 4 Basin is based on IWR Run 14.2


Table F.2: Water Quality Monitoring Stations, by Planning Unit 

WBID Waterbody Segment Name Waterbody Type STORET Station ID Station Description BD ED # Obs. 

1342A LADY LAKE LAKE 112WRD 02312694 LADY LAKE NR LADY LAKE, FLA. 2000 2000 2 

1342A LADY LAKE LAKE 21FLKWATLAK-LADY-1 Lake-Lady-1 1993 1993 20 



1342A LADY LAKE LAKE 21FLLCPCLKLADYSHR 

LADY LAKE NW SHORE @ 3000 PINE 

GROVE LN LADY LAKE FL 2001 2001 27 

1342A LADY LAKE LAKE 21FLLCPCLKLADYSHR2 LADY LAKE @ END OF LADY LAKE BLVD 2002 2002 26 

1342X BLACK LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0253 LAKE MIONA - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 83 

1347 LAKE OKAHUMPKA LAKE 21FLSWFDOKAHUMPKA 2001 2001 29 

1347 LAKE OKAHUMPKA LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0406 LAKE OKAHUMPKA - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 77 

1349 LAKE DEATON OUTLET STREAM 21FLSWFDDEATON 2001 2001 29 

1349 LAKE DEATON OUTLET STREAM 21FLSWFDSTA0408 LAKE DEATON - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 83 

1351A OUTLET RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFD28.798059782.16 LAKE PANASOFFKEE OUTLET 2001 2001 163 

1351A OUTLET RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO 278 873 0 LAKE PANASOFFKEE OUTLET 2000 2002 873 

1351B LAKE PANASOFFKEE LAKE 112WRD 02312698 

LAKE PANASOFFKEE NR LAKE 

PANASOFFKEE, FLA. 1998 1998 5 

1351B LAKE PANASOFFKEE LAKE 112WRD 02312700 

OUTLET RIVER AT PANACOOCHEE 

RETREATS, FLA. 1993 2001 578 

1351B LAKE PANASOFFKEE LAKE 21FLKWATSUM-PANASOFFK-1 Sumter-Panasoffkee-1 1993 2002 180 



1356 SHADY BROOK STREAM 112WRD 02312667 SHADY BROOK NR SUMTERVILLE, FLA. 1994 1994 27 

1356 SHADY BROOK STREAM 21FLSWFD28.785822 82.04 SHADY BROOK HEA 1998 2001 75 

1359 WALLED SINK STREAM 21FLLCPCLKCATGROV 

LAKE CATHERINE @ SPEARS PROPERTY 

GROVELAND 2001 2002 39 

1359B LAKE DAVID LAKE 21FLKWATLAK-DAVID-1 Lake-David-1 2000 2001 19 



WITHLACOOCHEE R AT INGLIS DAM NR 

1329A WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 112WRD 02313230 

DUNNELLON, FLA. 1999 1999 4 

1329B LAKE ROUSSEAU LAKE 21FLGW STA0084 LAKE ROUSSEAU 1997 1998 211



1329B LAKE ROUSSEAU LAKE 21FLGW STA0085 LAKE ROUSSEAU 1997 1998 209 

1329B LAKE ROUSSEAU LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-ROUSSEAE-1 Citrus-Rousseau East-1 1996 1998 28 



1329B LAKE ROUSSEAU LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-ROUSSEAU-1 Citrus-Rousseau-1 1996 2000 99 



1329B LAKE ROUSSEAU LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0084 LAKE ROUSSEAU 1993 1997 418 

1329B LAKE ROUSSEAU LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0085 LAKE ROUSSEAU 1993 1997 476 

1329C WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 112WRD 02313000 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER NR HOLDER, FLA. 1993 1999 380 

1329C WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 112WRD 02313200 

1329C WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLA 23010465 

WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER AT DUNNELLON, 

FLA. 1995 2001 201 

WITHLACOOCHEE R.BASIN/STOKE'S 

FERRY/FRESHWAT 1993 1997 113 

1329C WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLGW 3513 FLO 52 115 0 1998 2002 1490 

1329C WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLGW FLO0090 WITHLACOOCHEE RV. @ STOKES FERRY 1997 1998 179 

1329C WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO 52 2512 0 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER @ HWY 41 2002 2002 30 

1329C WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO0090 WITHLACOOCHEE RV. @ STOKES FERRY 1995 1997 267 

1329C WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLTPA 23010465 TP7 - WITHLACOOCHE RIVER 1999 2001 23 

1329D WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 112WRD 02312720 

WITHLACOOCHEE R AT WYSONG DAM AT 

CARLSON, FLA. 1995 2001 188 

1329D WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLGW FLO0093 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER AT SR 44 1997 1998 180 

1329D WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO 52 399 0 WITHLACOOHEE RV. @ SR 44 2000 2002 821 

1329D WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO0093 WITHLACOOHEE RV. @ SR 44 1995 1997 298 

1329J RUSH LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDRUSH 2000 2001 58 

1329J RUSH LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0272 RUSH LAKE - OPEN WATER 1994 1995 69 

1329K LAKE OTTING - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLSWFDOTTING 2001 2001 28 

1329K LAKE OTTING - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0630 LAKE OTTING - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 77 

1329V LAKE BLUE COVE LAKE 21FLKWATMAR-BLUECOVE-1 Marion-Blue Cove-1 1993 1996 131 



1334A LITTLE BREAM LAKE - OP LAKE 21FLSWFDLITTLE BREAM 2000 2001 58



1334A LITTLE BREAM LAKE - OP LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0885 LITTLE BREAM LAKE - OPEN WATER 1994 1995 69 

1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLA 23010405 

WITHLACOOCHEE 

R.BASIN/YANKEETOWN/FRESHWATER 1993 1995 207 

1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLA 34010SEAS Withlacoochee River at Bennets Creek 1993 2000 469 

1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLA 34020SEAS Withlacoochee River CM# 43 1993 2000 562 

1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLA 34100SEAS CM 40A at river juction with passes 1993 2000 714 

1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLA 34110SEAS park beach near Hwy 40 1993 2000 779 

1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLGW FLO0092 

WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER @ 

YANKEETOWN@ HWY 1997 1998 178 

1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLKWATCIT-WI-RIVER-1 Citrus-Withlacoochee River-1-1 1993 2001 297 





1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO 52 469 0 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER @ YANKEETOWN 2002 2002 30 

1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO0092 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER @ YANKEETOWN 1995 1997 293 

1337 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDSTA0086 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER ABOVE BAY 1993 1993 79 

1338A GUM SPRINGS STREAM 21FLSWFD28.953844 82.23 GUM SPRINGS NO. 1998 2001 134 

1338A GUM SPRINGS STREAM 21FLSWFD28.95872 82.23 GUM SPRINGS MAI 1998 2001 230 

1338A GUM SPRINGS STREAM 21FLSWFD28.959301 82.23 GUM SPRINGS NO. 1998 2001 193 

1357 LESLIE-HEFNER CANAL STREAM 21FLTPA 23010438 TP102 - LESLIE-HEIFNER CANAL 1998 1998 12 

1320 BLUE RUN STREAM 21FLA 23010404 

WITHLACOOCHEE R. 

BASIN/DUNNELLON/FRESHWATER 1993 1995 205 

1320 BLUE RUN STREAM 21FLA 23010409 

RAINBOW 

RIVER/DUNNELLON/FRESHWATER REF 

SITE 1994 1997 159 

1320 BLUE RUN STREAM 21FLGW FLO0091 BLUE RUN 1997 1998 195 

1320 BLUE RUN STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO0091 BLUE RUN 1995 1997 325 

1320A RAINBOW SPRINGS #1 SPRING 112WRD 02313100 

RAINBOW SPRINGS NEAR DUNNELLON, 

FLA. 1993 1999 438 

1320A RAINBOW SPRINGS #1 SPRING 21FLGW 290608082261601 WMD SITE ID RAINBOW SPRINGS COMP 1994 1994 57 

1320A RAINBOW SPRINGS #1 SPRING 21FLGW 9700 RAINBOW #1 2001 2002 67



1320A RAINBOW SPRINGS #1 SPRING 21FLSWFD29.101942 82.43 RAINBOW BRIDGE 1993 2001 418 

1320A RAINBOW SPRINGS #1 SPRING 21FLSWFD29.102553 82.43 RAINBOW #1 SPRI 1993 2001 580 

1340 TSALA APOPKA OUTLET STREAM 112WRD 02312975 

TSALA APOPKA OUTFALL CAN AT S-353 NR 

HERNANDO 1993 2000 496 

1340 TSALA APOPKA OUTLET STREAM 112WRD 02312976 

TSALA APOPKA OUT CAN BL S-353 NR 

HERNANDO, FLA. 1995 2000 89 

1340 TSALA APOPKA OUTLET STREAM 21FLKWATCIT-CROFT-1 Citrus-Croft-1 1993 1999 117 



1340 TSALA APOPKA OUTLET STREAM 21FLKWATCIT-TSALAAPO-1 Citrus-Tsala Apopka-1 1994 2001 214 



1340 TSALA APOPKA OUTLET STREAM 21FLKWATCIT-TSALASAPO-1 Citrus-Tsala Apopka South-1 1995 2002 216 



1340 TSALA APOPKA OUTLET STREAM 21FLKWATCIT-TUSSOCK-1 Citrus-Tussock-1 1995 1999 160 

1340 TSALA APOPKA OUTLET STREAM 21FLKWATCIT-VANNESS-1 Citrus-Van Ness-1 1993 2000 141 



1340A DAVIS LAKE - OPEN WATE LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-DAVIS-1 Citrus-Davis-1 1998 1998 26 



1340A DAVIS LAKE - OPEN WATE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0846 DAVIS LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 71 

1340B FORT COOPER LAKE - OPE LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-FORTCOOP-1 Citrus-Fort Cooper-1 2002 2002 12 



1340B FORT COOPER LAKE - OPE LAKE 21FLSWFDFT COOPER 2001 2001 29 

1340B FORT COOPER LAKE - OPE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0844 FORT COOPER LAKE - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 83 

1340C MAGNOLIA LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLSWFDMAGNOLIA 1999 1999 27 

1340C MAGNOLIA LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0464 MAGNOLIA LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 57 

1340D HAMPTON LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-HAMPTON-1 Citrus-Hampton-1 1995 2002 236 

1340D HAMPTON LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-HAMPTON-2 Citrus-Hampton-2 1995 2002 239



1340D HAMPTON LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-HAMPTON-3 Citrus-Hampton-3 1995 2002 239 

1340D HAMPTON LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDHAMPTON 1999 2000 55 

1340D HAMPTON LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0847 HAMPTON LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 76 

1340E LITTLE LAKE (CONSUELLA LAKE 21FLSWFDLITTLE (CONSUEL 1999 2000 55 

1340E LITTLE LAKE (CONSUELLA LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0113 LITTLE LAKE (CONSUELLA) - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 56 

1340F DODD LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-DODD-1 Citrus-Dodd-1 1993 2001 148 



1340F DODD LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDDODD 1999 2000 56 

1340F DODD LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0852 DODD LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 76 

1340G BELLAMY LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-BELLAMY-1 Citrus-Bellamy-1 1994 2001 143 



1340G BELLAMY LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDBELLAMY 1999 2000 56 

1340G BELLAMY LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0851 BELLAMY LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 76 

1340H HERNANDO LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-HERNANDO-1 Citrus-Hernando-1 1993 2002 125 

1340H HERNANDO LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-HERNANDO-2 Citrus-Hernando-2 1993 2002 125 

1340H HERNANDO LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLSWFDHERNANDO 1999 2000 56 

1340H HERNANDO LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0490 HERNANDO LAKE - OPEN WATER 1993 1997 291 

1340I HOG POND (LAKE NINA) - LAKE 21FLSWFDHOG POND (NINA) 1999 1999 30 

1340I HOG POND (LAKE NINA) - LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0072 HOG POND (LAKE NINA) - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 62 

1340J CONNELL LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDCONNELL 1999 1999 29 

1340J CONNELL LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0179 CONNELL LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 57 

1340K CATO LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDCATO 1999 1999 30 

1340K CATO LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0480 CATO LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1996 34 

1340L COOTER LAKE - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLGFWF03100208-005 Cooter Pond Muck Monitoring Site 2 2002 2002 20 

1340L COOTER LAKE - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLGFWF03100208-010 Cooter Pond Muck Monitoring Site 4 2002 2002 46 

1340L COOTER LAKE - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLSWFDCOOTER 1999 2000 58 

1340L COOTER LAKE - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0454 COOTER LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 57 

1340M LITTLE HENDERSON LAKE LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-LITTLEHE-1 Citrus-Little Henderson-1 1994 2001 158 

1340M LITTLE HENDERSON LAKE LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-LITTLEHE-2 Citrus-Little Henderson-2 1994 2001 174 

1340M LITTLE HENDERSON LAKE LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-LITTLEHE-3 Citrus-Little Henderson-3 1994 2001 173



1340M LITTLE HENDERSON LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDLITTLE HENDERSO 1999 2000 56 

1340M LITTLE HENDERSON LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0848 LITTLE HENDERSON LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 77 

1340N HENEDERSON LAKE - OPEN LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-HENDERSON-1 Citrus-Henderson-1 1994 2002 153 



1340N HENEDERSON LAKE - OPEN LAKE 21FLSWFDHENDERSON 1999 2000 57 

1340N HENEDERSON LAKE - OPEN LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0496 HENEDERSON LAKE - OPEN WATER 1993 1997 293 

1340O TODD LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-TODD-1 Citrus-Todd-1 1993 2002 203 



1340O TODD LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0853 TODD LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 76 

1340O TODD LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDTODD 1999 2000 56 

1340P SPIVEY LAKE - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-SPIVEY-1 Citrus-Spivey-1 1994 2002 197 



1340P SPIVEY LAKE - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLSWFDSPIVEY 1999 2000 57 

1340P SPIVEY LAKE - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0849 SPIVEY LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 76 

1340Q TUSSOCK LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-TUSSOCK-2 Citrus-Tussock-2 1995 1999 157 

1340Q TUSSOCK LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-TUSSOCK-3 Citrus-Tussock-3 1995 1999 158 

1340Q TUSSOCK LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0850 TUSSOCK LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 76 

1340Q TUSSOCK LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDTUSSOCK 1999 2000 55 

1340R TSALA APOPKA LAKE (FLORAL CITY) LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-FLORALCI-1 Citrus-Floral City-1 1995 2002 210 



1340R TSALA APOPKA LAKE (FLORAL CITY) LAKE 21FLKWATCIT-FLORALNCI-1 Citrus-Floral City North-1 2001 2001 3 



1340R TSALA APOPKA LAKE (FLORAL CITY) LAKE 21FLSWFDFLORAL CITY 1999 2000 55 

1340S CROFT LAKE - OPEN WATE LAKE 21FLSWFDCROFT 1999 2000 57 

1340S CROFT LAKE - OPEN WATE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0838 CROFT LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 76 

1340T VAN NESS LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0854 VAN NESS LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 76 

1340T VAN NESS LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLSWFDVAN NESS 1999 2000 57



1371 MCKITHEN LAKE OUTLET STREAM 21FLSWFDMCKENTHAN 2001 2001 27 

1371 MCKITHEN LAKE OUTLET STREAM 21FLSWFDSTA0497 MCKETHAN LAKE - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 72 

1329E WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 112WRD 02312500 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER AT CROOM, FLA. 1993 2001 1010 

1329E WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 112WRD 02312600 

WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER NR FLORAL CITY, 

FLA. 1993 2000 783 

1329E WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLA 23010417 

WITHLACOOCHEE 

R.BASIN/ST.CATHERINE/FRESHWATER 1995 1997 131 

1329E WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFD28.723519782.24 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER @ CR 48 2001 2001 163 

1329E WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFD28.743704482.21 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER @ TRAILS END 2001 2001 166 

1329E WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO 52 874 0 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER @ CR 48 2000 2002 889 

1329E WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO 52 875 0 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER @ TRAILS END 2000 2002 889 

1329E WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO0104 WITHLACOOCHEE RV. NR. CROOM 1995 1997 304 

1329E WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLTPA 23010417 TP54 - WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER 1998 1998 12 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 112WRD 02310947 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 112WRD 02311500 

WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER NEAR 

CUMPRESSCO, FLA. 1993 2001 918 

WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER NR DADE CITY, 

FLA. 1993 1999 376 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 112WRD 02312000 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER AT TRILBY, FLA. 1995 2001 230 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLA 23010412 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLA 23010464 


BASIN/LACOOCHEE/FRESHWATER 1995 1995 18 

WITHLACOOCHEE 

R.BASIN/BRANCHBOROUGH/FRESHWATE 1993 1997 233 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLGW 3560 FLO 52 117 0 1998 2002 1175 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLGW FLO0103 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER AT US HWY 301 1997 1998 243 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLGW FLO0104 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER NR CROOM 1997 1998 201 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLPOLKWITHLACOO RVR1 

UNDER BRIDGE ON SR471 3MILE N OF 

HW98N 1997 2001 98 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO0103 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER @ HWY 301 1995 1997 288 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLTPA 23010416 TP53 - WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER 1998 1998 12 

1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLTPA 23010442 TP139 - Withlacoochee River 1999 1999 12 


1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLTPA 23010445 TP141 - Withlacoochee River 1999 1999 7




1329F WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER STREAM 21FLTPA 23010464 TP3 - WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER 1998 1999 36 

1329H LAKE LINDSEY LAKE 21FLSWFDLINDSEY 2001 2001 27 

1329H LAKE LINDSEY LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0079 LAKE LINDSEY SOUTH 1993 1993 88 

1329H LAKE LINDSEY LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0083 LAKE LINDSEY NORTH 1993 1993 88 

1329H LAKE LINDSEY LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0533 LAKE LINDSEY - OPEN WATER 1993 1995 390 

1329H LAKE LINDSEY LAKE 21FLTPA 23010439 L40P - LAKE LINDSEY 1998 2002 17 

1329L TANK LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0582 TANK LAKE - OPEN WATER 1993 1995 484 

1329L TANK LAKE - OPEN WATER LAKE 21FLSWFDTANK 2001 2001 26 

1329M IRVIN LAKE - OPEN WATE LAKE 21FLSWFDIRVIN 2001 2001 29 

1329M IRVIN LAKE - OPEN WATE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0289 IRVIN LAKE - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 68 

1329N SPARKMAN LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLSWFDSPARKMAN 2001 2001 29 

1329N SPARKMAN LAKE - OPEN W LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0012 SPARKMAN LAKE - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 62 

1329O MCCLENDON LAKE - OPEN LAKE 21FLSWFDMCCLENDON 2001 2001 23 

1329O MCCLENDON LAKE - OPEN LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0634 MCCLENDON LAKE - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 67 

1329P DOWLING LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDDOWLING 2001 2001 28 

1329P DOWLING LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0890 DOWLING LAKE - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 63 

1329W BYSTRE LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDBYSTRE 2001 2001 29 

1329W BYSTRE LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0081 BYSTRE LAKE NORTH 1993 1993 27 

1329W BYSTRE LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0082 BYSTRE LAKE SOUTH 1993 1993 27 

1329W BYSTRE LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0147 BYSTRE LAKE - OPEN WATER 1993 1995 402 

1329X SPRING LAKE LAKE 21FLA 24040028 

CRYSTAL R. BASIN/SPRING 

LAKE/FRESHWATER SITE 1995 1996 39 

1329X SPRING LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDSPRING 2001 2001 29 

1329X SPRING LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0175 SPRING LAKE - OPEN WATER 1993 1995 829 

1329X SPRING LAKE LAKE 21FLTPA 28293488217418 L65P-Spring Lake 2000 2000 12 

1329Y MOUNTAIN LAKE LAKE 21FLTPA 24040124 L41P - MOUNTAIN LAKE 1998 1998 7 

1360 JUMPER CREEK CANAL STREAM 112WRD 02312640 

JUMPER CREEK CANAL NR BUSHNELL, 

FLA. 1993 2001 193 

1378 BIG GANT CANAL STREAM 21FLSWFDBIG GANT 2001 2001 29 

1378 BIG GANT CANAL STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO0080 

BIG GANT CANAL ABOVE LITTLE 

WITHLACOOCHEE 1993 1993 75 

1378 BIG GANT CANAL STREAM 21FLSWFDSTA0355 BIG GANT LAKE - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 78



1378 BIG GANT CANAL STREAM 21FLTPA 23010437 TP101 - BIG GANT CANAL 1998 1998 12 

1381 LITTLE WITHLACOOCHEE STREAM 112WRD 02312140 

BAYROOT SLOUGH HEADWATERS NR 

BAYLAKE, FLA. 1993 2001 152 


LITTLE WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER NR 

TARRYTOWN, FL. 1993 2001 482 


LITTLE WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER AT 

RERDELL, FLA. 1993 2001 844 

1381 LITTLE WITHLACOOCHEE STREAM 21FLA 23010428 

WITHLACOOCHEE BASIN/ST. 

CATHERINE/FRESHWATER 1997 1997 60 



BASIN/WEBSTER/FRESHWATER 1996 1996 9 


LIL' WITHLACOOCHEE 

R.BASIN/WEBSTER/FRESHWATER 1993 1997 221 

1381 LITTLE WITHLACOOCHEE STREAM 21FLTPA 23010428 TP55 - LITTLE WITHLACOOCHE RIVER 1998 1998 17 

1381 LITTLE WITHLACOOCHEE STREAM 21FLTPA 23010466 TP10 - LITTLE WITHLACOOCHE RIVER 1998 1998 12 

1381X LAKE MILL STREAM SWAMP LAKE 21FLKWATLAK-MILLSTRE-1 Lake-Mill Stream Swamp-1 1993 1994 30 



1396A BLANTON LAKE - OPEN WA LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0567 BLANTON LAKE - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 66 

1399 DADE CITY CANAL STREAM 112WRD 02311700 DADE CITY CANAL NR DADE CITY, FLA. 1993 2001 276 

1399 DADE CITY CANAL STREAM 21FLTPA 23010436 TP92 - DADE CITY CANAL 1998 1998 12 

1426 PONY CREEK STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO 234 698 0 PONY CREEK @ ROCK RIDGE ROAD 2002 2002 30 

1431 GATOR CREEK STREAM 21FLPOLKMOORE RD1 

E SIDE OF MOORE RD 2.8 MILE N OF OPC 

RD 1996 1998 123 

1431 GATOR CREEK STREAM 21FLPOLKMOORE RD2 

9/10 MILE N OF ST1 ON W SIDE AT 

MARK177 1996 1998 125 

1431 GATOR CREEK STREAM 21FLSWFDFLO 232 695 0 GATOR CREEK @ HWY 471 2002 2002 30 

1449 ORANGE HAMMOCK DRAIN LAKE 21FLPOLKDEESON1 LAKELAND CENTER OF LAKE 1993 2002 375 

1449 ORANGE HAMMOCK DRAIN LAKE 21FLPOLKDEESON2 LAKELAND EAST SHORE OF LAKE 1995 1995 22 

1449 ORANGE HAMMOCK DRAIN LAKE 21FLPOLKDEESON3 LAKELAND SOUTH SHORE OF LAKE 1995 1995 22 

1449 ORANGE HAMMOCK DRAIN LAKE 21FLPOLKDEESON4 LAKELAND WEST SHORE OF LAKE 1995 1995 21 

1449 ORANGE HAMMOCK DRAIN LAKE 21FLPOLKDEESON5 LAKELAND NORTH SHORE OF LAKE 1995 1995 23 

1449A LAKE DEESON - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLPOLKDEESON8 WEST SIDE IN LAKE DEESON AT PUMP 1998 1998 122 

1449A LAKE DEESON - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLSWFDDEESON 1999 2000 55 

1449A LAKE DEESON - OPEN WAT LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0116 LAKE DEESON - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 77



1466 LAKE AGNES LAKE 21FLKWATPOL-AGNES-1 Polk-Agnes-1 2000 2002 68 



1466 LAKE AGNES LAKE 21FLPOLKAGNES1 POLK CITY CENTER OF LAKE 1993 2002 347 

1466 LAKE AGNES LAKE 21FLSWFDAGNES 1999 2000 57 

1466 LAKE AGNES LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0129 LAKE AGNES - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 77 

1467 MUD LAKE LAKE 21FLGFWF03100208-ML-01 Mud Lake Station 1 2002 2002 110 




1467 MUD LAKE LAKE 21FLPOLKMUD1 MUD LAKE CENTER 1993 2002 364 

1467 MUD LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDMUD 1999 2000 55 

1467 MUD LAKE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0285 MUD LAKE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 76 

1467A CLEARWATER LAKE LAKE 21FLKWATPOL-CLEARWATE-1 Polk-Clearwater-1 1996 1997 16 



1476 LAKE MATTIE LAKE 21FLA 23010406 

WITHLACOOCHEE R.BASIN/POLK 

CITY/FRESHWATER 1994 1994 38 


WITHLACOOCHEE 

R.BASIN/AUBURNDALE/FRESHWATER 1994 1994 38 







1476 LAKE MATTIE LAKE 21FLKWATPOL-MATTIE-1 Polk-Mattie-1 1997 1999 32 



1476 LAKE MATTIE LAKE 21FLPOLKMATTIE1 MATTIE LAKE CENTER 1993 2001 339 

1476 LAKE MATTIE LAKE 21FLSWFDMATTIE 1999 2000 58 

1476 LAKE MATTIE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0466 LAKE MATTIE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 77 

1476 LAKE MATTIE LAKE 21FLTPA 23010410 L1P - LAKE MATTIE 2002 2002 10 

1484 LAKE JULIANA OUTLET STREAM 21FLKWATPOL-JULIANA-1 Polk-Juliana-1 1997 1997 20 

1484 LAKE JULIANA OUTLET STREAM 21FLKWATPOL-JULIANA-2 Polk-Juliana-2 1997 1997 20 

1484 LAKE JULIANA OUTLET STREAM 21FLKWATPOL-JULIANA-3 Polk-Juliana-3 1997 1997 20



1484 LAKE JULIANA OUTLET STREAM 21FLPOLKJULIANA1 JULIANA LK CENTER 1993 2002 360 

1484 LAKE JULIANA OUTLET STREAM 21FLSWFDJULIANA 1999 2000 58 

1484 LAKE JULIANA OUTLET STREAM 21FLSWFDSTA0169 LAKE JULIANA - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 77 

1484A LAKE TENNESSEE LAKE 112WRD 280838081485600 LAKE TENNESSEE NEAR POLK CITY FL 1999 2000 4 

1484A LAKE TENNESSEE LAKE 21FLPOLKTENNESSEE1 CENTER OF LAKE TENNESSEE 1993 2002 341 

1484A LAKE TENNESSEE LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0226 LAKE TENNESSEE - OPEN WATER 1996 1997 72 

1484A LAKE TENNESSEE LAKE 21FLSWFDTENNESSEE 1999 2000 54 

1484B LAKE JULIANA LAKE 21FLTPA 28073928148198 L69P-Lake Julianna 2002 2002 10 

1503 LAKE VAN LAKE 112WRD 280635081465900 LITTLE VAN LAKE NEAR AUBURNDALE FL 1999 2000 6 

1503 LAKE VAN LAKE 21FLSWFDSTA0348 LAKE VAN - OPEN WATER 1995 1996 77 

1503 LAKE VAN LAKE 21FLSWFDVAN 2001 2001 27

Water Quality Status Report: Nassau–St. Marys 227 

Appendix G: Level 1 Land Use by Planning Unit for the 

Withlacoochee Basin 

Upper Withlacoochee Lake Panasoffkee Tsala Apopka 

Land Use Category 

Area 

(square miles) 


Land Area 

Area 



Land Area 

Area 



Land Area 

Urban And Built-Up 108.1788 9.9381 84.4031 19.9373 63.7950 31.6642 

Agriculture 326.9800 30.0388 187.5719 44.3074 29.5749 14.6793 

Rangeland 50.8746 4.6737 11.4140 2.6962 2.6052 1.2931 

Upland Forests 248.3310 22.8135 66.9658 15.8184 61.5582 30.5540 

Water 18.0286 1.6562 10.0999 2.3858 7.2407 3.5939 

Wetlands 328.3391 30.1636 57.1953 13.5104 35.1500 17.4464 

Barren Land 1.3151 0.1208 0.9335 0.2205 0.1987 0.0986 

Transportation, Communications, 

And Utilities 6.4799 0.5953 4.7590 1.1242 1.3509 0.6705 

Totals 1088.5271 100.0000 423.3425 100.0002 201.4736 100.0000 

Rainbow River 

Lower Withlacoochee 

Land Use Category 

Area 



Land Area 

Area 



Land Area 

Urban And Built-Up 27.3935 37.2595 80.9008 25.1361 

Agriculture 28.7792 39.1443 52.0870 16.1835 

Rangeland 0.2752 0.3744 9.5651 2.9719 

Upland Forests 14.9927 20.3925 104.9854 32.6192 

Water 0.2804 0.3814 10.5129 3.2664 

Wetlands 1.6140 2.1952 60.4721 18.7888 

Barren Land 0.0283 0.0385 0.1348 0.0419 

Transportation, Communications, 

And Utilities 0.1575 0.2142 3.1934 0.9922 

Totals 73.5208 100.0000 321.8515 100.0000



Bureau of Water Management 


Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400 

(850) 245-8561 

www.dep.state.fl.us/water

Withlacoochee - Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Transform your PDFs into Flipbooks and boost your revenue!

Delete template?

Save as template ?