Everglades West Coast - Florida Department of Environmental ...

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONDivision of Water Resource Management | Bureau of Watershed ManagementSOUTH DISTRICT • GROUP 1 BASIN • SEPTEMBER 2003Water Quality Assessment ReportEverglades West Coast

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONDivision of Water Resource ManagementSEPTEMBER 2003Water Quality Assessment ReportEverglades West Coast

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast5AcknowledgmentsEverglades West Coast Water Quality Assessment Report was prepared bythe Everglades West Coast Basin Team, Florida Department of EnvironmentalProtection, as part of a five-year cycle to restore and protect Florida’swater quality. Team members and contributors include the following:Pat Fricano, Team CoordinatorT. S. Wu, Water Quality Assessment CoordinatorLinda Lord, Department EditorKhurram MoizRobert PerlowskiToni EdwardsAndy BarienbrockDebra HarringtonJanet KlemmPatti SanzoneMatt FossProduction assistance provided byEducational Services ProgramFlorida State University210 Sliger Building2035 E. Dirac Dr.Tallahassee, FL 32306-2800Map production assistance provided byFlorida Resources and Environmental Analysis CenterFlorida State UniversityUniversity Center, C2200Tallahassee, FL 32306-2641For additional information on the watershed managementapproach and impaired waters in the basin, contactPat Fricano, Environmental ManagerFlorida Department of Environmental ProtectionBureau of Watershed Management, Watershed Planning andCoordination Section2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 3565Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400pat.fricano@dep.state.fl.usPhone: (850) 245-8559; Suncom: 205-8559Fax: (850) 245-8434

6Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastAccess to all data used in the development of this report can beobtained by contactingT. S. Wu or Robert PerlowskiFlorida Department of Environmental ProtectionBureau of Watershed Management, Watershed Assessment Section2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 3555Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400Tien-Shuenn.Wu@dep.state.fl.us or Robert.Perlowski@dep.state.fl.usPhone: (850) 245-8457; Suncom: 205-8457 or(850) 245-8467; Suncom: 205-8467Fax: (850) 245-8536Web SitesFlorida Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau ofWatershed ManagementTMDL Programhttp://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/index.htmIdentification of Impaired Surface Waters Rulehttp://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/AmendedIWR.pdfSTORET Programhttp://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/storet/index.htm2000 305(b) Reporthttp://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/305b/index.htmStatus Reportshttp://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/stat_rep.htmAllocation Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC) Reporthttp://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/Allocation.pdfU.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National STORET Programhttp://www.epa.gov/storet/

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast7PrefaceContent Features• Executive Summary: Appears at the beginning of every reportand provides an overarching view of the watershed managementapproach, its implementation, and how this approach will be usedto identify impaired waters. A summary of impaired waters in thisbasin is also included.• Noteworthy: Appears on pages near text that needs additionalinformation but is too lengthy to fit in a sidebar.• Definitions: Appear at the side of pages where scientific terms occurthat may not be familiar to all readers. The word being defined isbold-faced in the text.• References: Appear at the end of Chapter 5 and provide a completelisting of all sources used within the text.• Appendices: Appear at the end of each report and provide additionalinformation on subjects, such as bioassessment methodology, rainfalland stream flow, types of natural communities, STORET stations,water quality statistics, land use, and permitted facilities. Alsoincluded is a master list that summarizes the water quality in all thebasins addressed in this report.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast9Executive SummaryEverglades West CoastThe Water Quality Assessment Report for the Everglades West CoastBasin is part of the implementation of the Florida Department of EnvironmentalProtection’s (Department) watershed management approachfor restoring and protecting water resource problems and addressing TotalMaximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program requirements. A TMDL representsthe maximum amount of a given pollutant that a waterbody canassimilate and still meet the waterbody’s designated use. A waterbody thatdoes not meet its designated beneficial uses is defi ned as impaired. Thewatershed approach, which is implemented using a cyclical managementprocess, provides a framework for implementing the requirements of thefederal Clean Water Act and the 1999 Florida Watershed Restoration Act(FWRA) (Chapter 99-223, Laws of Florida).A Status Report, published during Phase 1 of the watershed managementcycle, provided a Planning List, or preliminary identification, ofpotentially impaired waterbodies in the Everglades West Coast Basin. ThisAssessment Report presents the results of additional data gathered duringPhase 2 of the cycle. The report contains a Verifi ed List of impaired waters(Table 4.2 in Chapter 4) that has been adopted by Secretarial Order andsent to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval.TMDLs must be developed by 2007 and implemented for these waters.The Verified List also constitutes the Group 1 basin-specific 303(d) list ofimpaired waters, so called because it is required under Section 303(d) of theClean Water Act. The Noteworthy in Chapter 1 describes the contents ofthis report, by chapter.In the Everglades West Coast Basin, state, federal, regional, and localagencies and organizations are making progress towards identifying problemsand improving water quality. Through its watershed managementactivities, the Department works with these entities to support programsthat are improving water quality and restoring and protecting ecologicalresources. The Department’s TMDL Program will be closely associatedwith such efforts as the Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program’s(CHNEP) Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP),the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), SouthwestFlorida Water Management District’s (SFWMD) Estero Bay WatershedAssessment, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s (USACOE) SouthwestFlorida Feasibility Study.Not only do stakeholders in the basin share responsibilities in achievingwater quality improvement objectives; they also play a crucial role in providingthe Department with important monitoring data and informationon management activities. These stakeholders include the communities ofNaples, Ft. Myers Beach, Marco Island, Golden Gate, Bonita Springs, andEverglades City; Lee, Collier, and Hendry Counties; SFWMD; SouthwestFlorida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC); Estero Bay Agency on

10Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastBay Management; Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission(FWC); Florida Department of Agriculture; Seminole and MiccosukeeIndian Reservations; Conservancy of Southwest Florida; Southwest FloridaWatershed Council; CHNEP; and Responsible Growth ManagementCoalition.During the next few years, considerable data analysis will be done toestablish TMDLs for impaired waters in the Everglades West Coast Basin,establish the initial allocations of pollution loads needed to meet thoseTMDLs, and produce a Basin Management Action Plan (B-MAP) toreduce the amount of pollutants that cause impairments. These activitiesdepend heavily on the active participation of the water management district,local governments, businesses, and other stakeholders. The Departmentwill work with these organizations and individuals to undertake orcontinue reductions in the discharge of pollutants and achieve the establishedTMDLs for impaired waterbodies.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Reviewof Florida’s Amended Section 303(d) ListOn June 11, 2003, the EPA released a Decision Document based on itsreview of the Department’s amendments to Florida’s 1998 Section 303(d)list. The EPA found that the Department’s Group 1 update substantiallymet the intent of Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and partiallyapproved the submission.Applying its own evaluation methodology, the EPA proposed listing80 additional waterbody segments/pollutants for public comment byJuly 18, 2003. Under this methodology, approximately half of the addedwaters failed to meet water quality criteria for dissolved oxygen (DO),but no causative pollutant could be identified. Florida law precludes theDepartment from including such waters on its Verified List of impairedwaters until the causative pollutant is known. The majority of the remainingwaters were added to the list based on a different interpretation of themethodology for assessing potential impairment for bacteria. The Departmentagreed to apply this alternative methodology when assessing the nextgroup (Group 2) of waterbodies for bacteria.The consequence of having the EPA add waters to Florida’s Section303(d) list is that the EPA would be obligated to propose TMDLs for thesewaters. However, the EPA has proposed assigning a “low” priority forTMDL development for these waterbodies, thus providing the Departmentan opportunity to investigate them further. Information on the status ofFlorida’s amended Section 303(d) list can be found on the EPA’s Web siteat http://www.epa.gov/region4/water/tmdl/florida.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast11Summary of FindingsThe Department’s assessment shows that 14 waterbodies or waterbodysegments in the Everglades West Coast Basin are impaired and requirethe development of TMDLs. The following paragraphs summarize, byplanning unit, impairments by waterbody types and the primary pollutants.Planning units are smaller areas within the basin that provide a moredetailed geographic basis for assessment, reporting, and planning activitiesunder the watershed management approach.Estero Bay Planning UnitThe Estero Bay (EB) planning unit consists of a total of 19 waterbodysegments, each classified as stream, lake, estuary, or coastal, which delineatethe series of tributaries that flow into Estero Bay proper. Of these 19segments, 7 require TMDLs, all of which are due in 2007. The parametersof concern identified for TMDL development here include DO, nutrients,fecal coliforms, and copper.Southwest Coast Planning UnitThe Southwest Coast (SWC) planning unit consists of a total of 44waterbody segments. The segments are mostly classified as stream, lake,estuary, or coastal. This planning unit covers the middle portion of theEverglades West Coast Basin and addresses the sheet flow of water throughthe basin and out into the gulf. Of the 41 segments in this planning unit, 7require TMDLs, all of which are due in 2007. The parameters of concernidentified for TMDL development here include DO, nutrients, and bacteria(in shellfish).Inner Drainage Area Planning UnitThe Inner Drainage Area (IDA) planning unit consists of a total ofeight waterbody segments. These are mainly classified as stream segments,with only one being given an estuary classification. This planning unitaddresses the hydrology in the eastern portion of the Everglades West CoastBasin. No TMDLs are required as no parameters of concern were verifiedfor impairment. There are a number of parameters here that have beenplaced on the Department’s planning list, which include DO and mercury(in fish tissue). Additional data collection efforts in this area may resultin some of these parameters being verified for impairment, thus leading toTMDL development.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast13Table of ContentsChapter 1: Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Purposes and Content of the Assessment Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17The Watershed Management Cycle in the Florida Department ofEnvironmental Protection’s South District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Chapter 2: Basin Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Chapter Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Basin Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Surface Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Surface Water Quality Classifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Special Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Outstanding Florida Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Surface Water Improvement and Management Priority Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Minimum Flows and Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Ground Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Aquifers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Ground Water Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Water Resource Caution Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30Ground Water–Surface Water Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30Watershed Management Activities and Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Historical Watershed Management Issues and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Tamiami Trail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Residential Development, Roads, and a Jetport to Nowhere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Citrus Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Ongoing Issues and Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Agricultural Best Management Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Big Cypress Basin Watershed Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Comprehensive Conservationand Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Environmental Impact Study (EIS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Estero Bay Watershed Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Lee County Conservation 20/20 Land Acquisition and Stewardship Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Lower West Coast Water Supply Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Preservation 2000/Florida Forever . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Southwest Florida Feasibility Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Stakeholder Forums. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Management Conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Governor’s Commission for the Everglades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Southwest Florida Watershed Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Water Quality Monitoring Consortium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41Chapter 3: Surface Water Quality Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Chapter Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Sources of Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44Attainment of Designated Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Integrated Report Categories and Assessment Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

14Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanning Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48Update on Strategic Monitoring and Data-Gathering ActivitiesDuring Phase 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Assessment by Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Estero Bay Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51General Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Water Quality Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Permitted Discharges and Land Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Ecological Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56Fish Consumption Advisories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58Water Quality Improvement Plans and Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59Southwest Coast (West Collier) Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59General Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59Water Quality Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60Permitted Discharges and Land Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65Ecological Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65Fish Consumption Advisories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66Water Quality Improvement Plans and Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66Inner (East Collier) Drainage Area Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67General Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67Water Quality Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67Permitted Discharges and Land Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69Ecological Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69Fish Consumption Advisories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71Water Quality Improvement Plans and Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72Chapter 4: The Verified List of Impaired Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73Identification of Impaired Waters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Review of Florida’s AmendedSection 303(d) List. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74The Verified List of Impaired Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75Pollutants Causing Impairments ................................................................................... 75Estero Bay Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75Southwest Coast Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80Inner Drainage Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82Adoption Process for the Verified List of Impaired Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83Chapter 5: Monitoring Priorities and TMDL Development,Allocation, and Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Stakeholder Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Prioritization of Listed Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86TMDL Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88Schedule for TMDL Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89TMDL Allocation and Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89Initial Allocation of Pollutant Loadings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89Implementation Programs and Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91NPDES Permits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92Domestic and Industrial Wastewater Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92Florida Stormwater/Environmental Resource Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92Local Land Development Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92Best Management Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93Other Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93Development of Basin Management Action Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast15TablesTable 2.1: Historical and Projected Population Growth by County in the Everglades WestCoast Region (1980 to 2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Table 2.2: Acreage of Agricultural Production by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Table 2.3: OFWs in the Everglades West Coast Basin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Table 2.4: Historical Timeline of Environmental Issues and Activities in the EvergladesWest Coast Basin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32Table 3.1: Summary of Data Providers in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44Table 3.2: Designated Use Attainment Categories for Surface Waters in Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46Table 3.3: Categories for Waterbodies or Waterbody Segments in the 2002 Integrated Report . . . . 47Table 3.4: Planning Units in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Table 3.5: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Estero Bay Planning Unit . . . . . . 54Table 3.6:Table 3.7:Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Southwest CoastPlanning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Inner Drainage AreaPlanning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70Table 4.1: Schedule for Development and Adoption of the Group 1 Verifi ed Lists. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74Table 4.2: The Verifi ed List of Impaired Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76Table 5.1: Stakeholder Involvement in the Total Maximum Daily Load Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86Table 5.2: Priorities for TMDL Development in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87Table 5.3: Schedule for TMDL Development in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90Table 5.4: Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permittees in the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . 91FiguresFigure 1.1: Schedule for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle in the Department’sSouth District, Basin Groups 1 through 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Figure 2.1: Geopolitical Map of the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Figure 2.2: Surface Water Resources of the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Figure 3.1: Sources of Data for the Everglades West Coast Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Figure 3.2: Locations and Boundaries of Planning Units in the Everglades West Coast Basin. . . . . . . 50Figure 3.3: Composite Map of the Estero Bay Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52Figure 3.4: Composite Map of the Southwest Coast Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61Figure 3.5: Composite Map of the Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68Figure 4.1: Waters on the Verifi ed List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast17Chapter 1: IntroductionPurposes and Content of theAssessment ReportThe Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department)is implementing a statewide watershed management approach for restoringand protecting water quality and addressing Total Maximum Daily Load(TMDL) Program requirements. Under Section 303(d) of the federalClean Water Act and the 1999 Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA)(Chapter 99-223, Laws of Florida), TMDLs must be developed for allwaters that do not meet their designated uses (such as drinking water, recreation,and shellfish harvesting) and are thus defi ned as impaired. A TMDLis the maximum amount of a given pollutant that a waterbody can assimilateand remain healthy, such that all of its designated uses are met.TMDLs will be developed, and the corresponding reductions inpollutant loads allocated, as part of the watershed management approach,which rotates through the state’s 52 river basins over a 5-year cycle. Extensivepublic participation from diverse stakeholders in each of these basinswill be crucial throughout the different phases of the cycle.A Status Report published during Phase 1 of the watershed managementcycle provided a Planning List, or preliminary identification, ofpotentially impaired waterbodies in the Everglades West Coast Basin. Acopy of the report can be found at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/stat_rep.htm.This Assessment Report, which updates the information in the StatusReport, incorporates data collected from the Department’s strategic monitoringand gathered from other agencies and groups during Phase 2 of thewatershed cycle. The report contains a Verifi ed List of impaired watersrequired by the FWRA and Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act,for which TMDLs must be developed and implemented (see Noteworthyfor a description of the Assessment Report’s contents by chapter). Based onthe assessment results, in the Everglades West Coast Basin, 14 waterbodiesor waterbody segments require the development of TMDLs.This report is intended for distribution to an audience of potentialstakeholders, including decision makers from federal, state, regional, tribal,and local governments; public and private interests; and individual citizens.The report follows the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)guidance for meshing Clean Water Act requirements for Section 305(b)water quality reports and Section 303(d) lists of impaired waters. Thisintegrated water quality assessment is used to identify the status of datasufficiency, the potential for impairment, and the need for TMDL developmentfor each waterbody or waterbody segment in the basin.A description of the legislative and regulatory background for TMDLdevelopment and implementation through the watershed managementTotal MaximumDaily LoadThe maximum amount of agiven pollutant that a waterbodycan assimilate withoutexceeding applicable waterquality standards.

18Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastapproach, and a brief explanation of the TMDL Program, are availablein Appendix A. Background information on the Department’s TMDLProgram, the process of TMDL development and implementation, listsof impaired and potentially impaired waters, and assessments for otherparts of the state are available at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/index.htm.The Department has adopted the Verified List of impaired waters inaccordance with the FWRA and the Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR)(Rule 62-303, Florida Administrative Code [F.A.C.]). The EPA has alsoapproved this list as the current 2002 303(d) list of impaired waters for thebasin, so called because it is required under Section 303(d) of the CleanWater Act.The first 303(d) list, which was required by the EPA in 1998, is tobe amended annually to include additional basin updates. Florida’s 1998303(d) list included a number of waterbodies in the Everglades West CoastBasin. Tables 3.5 through 3.7 in Chapter 3 list, by planning unit, waterson the 1998 303(d) list.The Assessment Report also serves as the basis for the biennial waterquality assessment or 305(b) report (a requirement under Section 305[b] ofthe federal Clean Water Act).The Watershed Management Cycle inthe Florida Department of EnvironmentalProtection’s South DistrictFigure 1.1 shows the order in which the watershed management cyclewill be implemented in the Department’s South District basin groups.These groups are identified according to a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)classification system using hydrologic unit codes.The Everglades West Coast, a Group 1 basin, was the fi rst to undergoa preliminary assessment in 2000 and is the subject of this AssessmentReport. A preliminary assessment for the Group 2 basin, CharlotteHarbor, was initiated in 2001. The Group 3 basin, Caloosahatchee, wasassessed on a preliminary basis in 2002. Similarly, preliminary assessmentsfor the Group 4 and Group 5 basins, Fisheating Creek and the FloridaKeys, will be initiated in 2003 and 2004, respectively. In 2005, the cyclewill resume with the Group 1 basin, Everglades West Coast.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast19Figure 1.1: Schedule for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle in the Department’s SouthDistrict, Basin Groups 1 through 5

20Water Quality Assessment Report:Everglades West CoastContents of This ReportNoteworthy• Chapter 1: Introductionbriefly characterizes thepurpose and content of theAssessment Report anddescribes how the watershedmanagement cycle will beimplemented in the Department’sSouth District.• Chapter 2: Basin Overviewcharacterizes the basin’s generalsetting, water resources,major water quality trends,and historical watershed managementissues and activities.• Chapter 3: Surface WaterQuality Assessment discussesbasinwide water quality trendsand provides, by basin planningunit, an evaluation ofwater quality, a discussion ofpermitted discharges and landuses, a summary of ecologicalpriorities and problems, andan overview of water qualityimprovement plans andprojects.• Chapter 4: The Verified Listof Impaired Waters containsthe Verified List of impairedwaters, discusses documentationof reasonable assurance,lists pollutants causing impairments,provides listings basedon other information indicatinga nutrient imbalance,and describes the adoptionprocess for the Verified List.• Chapter 5: Monitoring Prioritiesand TMDL Development,Allocation, and Implementationdiscusses stakeholderinvolvement, TMDL developmentand initial allocations,the prioritization of listedwaters, the schedule for TMDLdevelopment, TMDL allocationand implementation, andthe development of a BasinManagement Action Plan.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast21Chapter 2: Basin OverviewChapter SummaryThis chapter discusses the general basin setting, principalwaterbodies, surface water quality classifications andspecial designations, surface water and ground waterinteractions, major water quality trends, and historicalwatershed management issues and activities in theEverglades West Coast Basin.

22Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastBasin SettingThe Everglades West Coast Basin, in the southwestern Florida peninsula,extends northward from Everglades National Park to the edge of theCaloosahatchee River Basin, and east from the Gulf of Mexico to the verywestern edge of Miami-Dade and Broward Counties. The basin includessouthern Lee and Hendry Counties, all of Collier County, and very smallslivers of western Miami-Dade, Broward, and northern Monroe Counties.Figure 2.1 shows the principal geopolitical features in the Everglades WestCoast Basin. This report does not discuss Miami-Dade, Broward, andMonroe Counties because the portions of the basin within those countiesare very small, swampy, and sparsely populated.The Everglades West Coast Basin is characterized by mangrovedominatedestuaries along the coast, with salt marsh habitats occurringlandward of the mangrove zone. The area contains the largest mangroveswamps in the state. The interior parts of the region show remnants ofprehistoric shorelines forming sand ridges, interspersed with pine-palmettoflatwoods and large wetland strands. The region may have contained thestate’s greatest acreage of hydric pine fl atwoods, which have significantecological and hydrological value.A major feature of the Everglades West Coast Basin is its many protectednatural areas that provide a rich diversity of habitat and nativeanimal life including a number of federally threatened and endangeredspecies. Significant conservation lands include Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary,Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, Florida Panther NationalWildlife Refuge, and the Big Cypress National Preserve. Please referto Appendix B for supplementary information on the basin’s ecology.Additional ecological information can also be found in the Status Report athttp://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/stat_rep.htm.One important aspect of the Everglades West Coast Basin is its largescale,“planned” residential development projects such as Golden GateEstates (GGE), constructed in the 1960s. During this process, much ofthe land was dissected by freshwater and estuarine residential canals, roadswere constructed, and lots were platted and sold as residential home sites.Many of those platted lots still lie vacant.The Everglades West Coast Basin is subdivided into three planningunits, which provide a more detailed geographic basis for assessment andreporting. They are Estero Bay, Southwest Coast (West Collier), andthe Inner (East Collier) Drainage Area, which are described in detail inChapter 3.PopulationOriginally occupied for many centuries by the Calusa Indians andtheir ancestors (from 500 to 1500 A.D.), the Everglades West CoastBasin began modern colonization in the late 1870s, although the populationremained small for many decades because of constant flooding. Inrecent years, the coastal areas of the basin have had the highest growthrate in Florida. From 1980 to 1990, the regional population grew by 65percent. From 1990 to 2000, it increased another 42 percent. The Naples

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast23metropolitan area is among the fastest growing in the United States.Figure 2.1 depicts major communities in the basin, and Table 2.1 listshistorical and projected population growth by county.Table 2.1: Historical and Projected Population Growth by County in the Everglades WestCoast Region (1980 to 2010)County 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020Collier 85,791 152,099 251,377 343,500 441,600Hendry 18,599 25,773 36,210 45,800 55,500Lee 205,266 335,113 440,888 539,300 642,200Total 311,636 512,985 728,475 930,610 1,141,320Source: Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council.Land UseLand use in the Everglades West Coast Basin is primarily urban alongthe Gulf Coast, while agriculture, conservation land uses, and some mineralextraction (oil drilling) dominate the interior.This basin has one of the state’s highest rates of land conversion toagriculture, primarily to citrus. In the 1980s, irrigated agricultural acreagein Collier and Lee Counties increased by 99 and 35 percent, respectively.Projected increases in citrus acreage for Collier, Hendry, and Lee Countiesfrom 1990 to 2010 are 150, 100, and 50 percent, respectively (South FloridaWater Management District [SFWMD], 1992). In fi scal year 1997–98,Collier, Hendry, and Lee Counties had a combined total of 147,650 acresof land in citrus crops. Other important crops include sugarcane, bellpeppers, tomatoes, watermelon, squash, and cucumbers (Table 2.2).Table 2.2: Acreage of Agricultural Production by CountyCrop Collier County Hendry County Lee CountyCitrus 35,655 100,124 11,871Sugarcane — 71,000 —Tomatoes 8,350 4,075 1,770Bell Peppers 1,700 3,900 —Watermelon 1,700 2,600 1,000Squash 900 — 1,150Cucumbers 550 1,100 —Source: Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 1999.Cattle ranching is also extremely important in the region. In 1999,Florida ranked third among the states east of the Mississippi River andtwelfth nationally in the number of beef brood cows at 973,000 head.Hendry County is Florida’s third leading county in beef cattle production,with 97,000 head. Lee and Collier Counties also have beef cattle, with acombined herd of 22,000 head.In spite of human impacts, the basin still supports large areas containingdiverse natural communities and species. Fifty-nine percent of the

24Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastFigure 2.1: Geopolitical Map of the Everglades West Coast Basinbasin’s lands are preserved as conservation areas. While most of these landsare in public ownership, the National Audubon Society owns one majorconservation area, the Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary. The major conservationareas found within or adjacent to the Everglades West Coast Basin are• Big Cypress National Preserve (729,000 acres)• Cape Romano–Ten Thousand Islands Aquatic Preserve(53,913 acres)• Collier-Seminole State Park (7,271 acres)• Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (23,370 acres)• Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary (10,895 acres)• Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve (11,300 acres)• Estero Bay State Buffer Preserve (9,757 acres)• Everglades National Park (1,507,850 acres)• Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park (70,376 acres)• Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (26,529 acres)• Koreshan State Historic Site (193 acres)• Lovers Key State Recreation Area (1,616 acres)

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast25• Picayune Strand State Forest (65,436 acres)• Rookery Bay Aquatic Preserve & National Estuarine ResearchReserve (70,000 acres)• Ten Thousand Islands National Wildlife Refuge (19,650 acres)It is important to note that some of the above-referenced conservationlands contain substantial amounts of submerged acreage. Also, the EvergladesNational Park is only slightly within and mostly borders the easternedge of the Everglades West Coast Basin. Acreage numbers for these conservationlands were obtained from Jue et al. (2001).Surface Water ResourcesThis section briefly describes and characterizes major surface water andground water resources. It also summarizes historical, current, and proposedwatershed management activities.The natural surface hydrology of South Florida has resulted from theinteraction of the region’s subtropical climate with its topography andgeology. The topography of the Everglades West Coast Basin is relativelyflat, ranging from sea level to 25 feet above sea level, with higher elevationsof 25 to 42 feet on the Immokalee Rise, a sandy ridge in the northeasternportion of the basin. This ridge also separates the Caloosahatchee Riverdrainage from that of the Big Cypress Swamp.The basin contains several physiographic regions—including, fromeast to west, the Everglades, Immokalee Rise, Big Cypress Spur, SouthwesternSlope, Reticulate Coastal Swamps, and Ten Thousand Islands.The main divisions are the Everglades, the sandy flatlands (ImmokaleeRise), the Big Cypress, and the coastal areas. Because these divisions oftenmerge gradually into one another, their boundaries are indistinct. TheEverglades are generally wet throughout the year, except where drained.The sandy flatlands are low-lying, poorly drained lands, with many shallowsand- bottomed ponds, although the portions on higher terraces are gentlyrolling. The Big Cypress is flat and poorly drained, with thin marly ormucky-sandy soils and bare areas of solution-riddled limestone.The Everglades West Coast Basin was once part of the huge Evergladesecosystem, in which slowly moving sheet flows of water drained to theAtlantic Ocean, Florida Bay, and Gulf of Mexico. Under natural conditions,water flow in the basin generally moved south to southwestwardfrom the Immokalee Rise, providing fresh water to the estuaries along thesouthwest coast. As canals and levees were built to control flooding anddrain large areas for agricultural and residential use, hydrologic connectionsamong different parts of the Everglades ecosystem were severed. Today, thenatural freshwater sheet-flow patterns have been significantly altered, resultingin drought conditions and major fire hazards during the dry season andexcessive stormwater runoff during the wet season. Consequently, salinitypatterns have changed, nutrient loadings have increased, and the numbersof seagrasses, fisheries, and shellfish have been reduced.Sources ofInformationA substantial portion of theinformation in this chapteris adapted from the FloridaDepartment of Agricultureand Consumer Service’sFlorida Agricultural Factsdocument, the Department’sSouth Florida Water QualityProtection Program, theSFWMD’s Water ManagementPlan, the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers’(USACOE) Central and SouthernFlorida (C&SF) ProjectComprehensive ReviewStudy and its SouthwestFlorida Feasibility Study, andthe U.S. Geological Survey(USGS) publication TheSouth Florida Environment—A Region Under Stress. TheReferences section containsa complete listing of theliterature used to compilethis report.MarlyClay or mixture of calciteor dolomite usually withfragments of seashells.

26Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastFigure 2.2 shows the locations of the largest waterbodies in the basin.A more detailed discussion in Chapter 3 provides information on eachplanning unit.Surface Water Quality ClassificationsFlorida’s water quality standards program, the foundation of the state’sprogram of water quality management, designates the “present and futuremost beneficial uses” of the waters of the state (Section 403.061[10],Florida Statutes [F.S.]). Water quality criteria for surface water and groundwater, expressed as numeric or narrative limits for specific parameters,describe the water quality necessary to maintain these uses. Florida’s surfacewater is classified using the following five designated use categories:Class IClass IIClass IIIClass IVClass VPotable water suppliesShellfi sh propagation or harvestingRecreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy,well-balanced population of fi sh and wildlifeAgricultural water suppliesNavigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no statewaters currently in this class)Under Rule 62-302.400, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), theEverglades West Coast Basin contains no Class I or Class V waters. Thefollowing waters are listed as Class II:• Cocohatchee River• Wiggins Pass• Connecting waterways—from Wiggins Pass south to OuterDoctors Bay• Dollar Bay• Inner and Outer Clam Bay• Inner and Outer Doctors Bay• Little Hickory Bay• Tidal bays and passes—Naples Bay and south and easterly throughRookery Bay and the Ten Thousand IslandsThe remainder of the state waters in the basin are Class III unlessspecifically designated as Class IV waters. Class IV waters consist of allsecondary and tertiary canals or ditches wholly within agricultural areasbehind a water control structure permitted by the water management districtunder Sections 373.103, 373.413, or 373.416, F.S. Figure 2.2 depictssurface water classifications in the basin.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast27Figure 2.2: Surface Water Resources of the Everglades West Coast Basin

28Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastSpecial DesignationsOutstanding Florida WatersTable 2.3 and Figure 2.2 list and depict the Outstanding FloridaWaters (OFWs) in the Everglades West Coast Basin. OFWs are designatedfor “special protection due to their natural attributes” (Section 403.061,F.S.). These waters are listed in Rule 62-302.700, F.A.C. The intent ofan OFW designation is to maintain ambient water quality, even if thesedesignations are more protective than those required under the waterbody’ssurface water classification. Most OFWs are associated with managed areasin the state or federal park system, such as aquatic preserves, national seashores,or wildlife refuges. Other OFWs may also be designated as “SpecialWaters” based on a finding that the waters are of exceptional recreational orecological significance and are identified as such in Rule 62-302, F.A.C.Surface Water Improvement and Management Priority WatersOn February 13, 2003, the SFWMD Governing Board adopted aresolution naming Lower Charlotte Harbor a Surface Water Improvementand Management (SWIM) priority water. This designated area includesEstero Bay, which is within the Everglades West Coast Basin. In 1987,the Florida legislature created the SWIM Program to restore waterbodies.The initial legislation identified 7 priority water bodies—Lake Apopka,Tampa Bay, Indian River Lagoon, Biscayne Bay, Lower St. Johns River,Lake Okeechobee, and the Everglades. Today, SWIM plans have beendeveloped for 30 waterbodies statewide. The SWIM Program addresses awaterbody’s needs as a system of connected resources, rather than isolatedwetlands or waterbodies. The state’s 5 water management districts and theTable 2.3: OFWs in the Everglades West Coast BasinCountyHendryLeeCollierCollier andMonroeLocationNoneKoreshan State Historic SiteEstero Bay State Aquatic & Buffer PreserveEstero Bay (Special Waters)Estero Bay Tributaries and AcquisitionsLovers Key State Recreation AreaBarefoot Beach AcquisitionsDelnor-Wiggins Pass State Recreation AreaWiggins Pass/Cocohatchee River System (Special Waters)Rookery Bay State Aquatic PreserveRookery Bay National Estuarine Research ReserveRookery Bay AcquisitionsCollier-Seminole State ParkCape Romano-Ten Thousand Islands State Aquatic PreserveFakahatchee Strand Preserve State ParkFlorida Panther National Wildlife RefugeSave Our Everglades AcquisitionsBig Cypress National PreserveEverglades National Park

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast29Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) work withfederal, state, and local governments and the private sector to develop andimplement SWIM plans to restore damaged ecosystems, prevent pollutionfrom runoff and other sources, and educate the public.Minimum Flows and LevelsUnder the District Water Management Plan (DWMP) for theSFWMD, the Estero River and tributaries are designated as priority waterbodiesfor the development of minimum flows and levels (MFLs).To help determine the amount of water that is available for humanuse from a particular source, the district must determine each waterbody’sMFL. Under the Florida Water Resources Act (Section 373, F.S.), an MFLis the limit at which further water withdrawals will cause significant harmto the water resources of the area and the related natural environment.Lakes and aquifers have minimum levels. Minimum flows are set for riversand streams.Ground Water ResourcesAquifersThere is a complex sequence of hydrostratigraphic units representingall three aquifer systems in this basin. The most productive aquifersare the surficial and Hawthorn aquifer systems, especially in northeasternCollier and southwestern Hendry Counties (Herr and Shaw, 1989). Thesurficial aquifer system provides significant quantities of potable water fordomestic and agricultural uses in Lee, Hendry, and Collier Counties. Theintermediate aquifer system serves as a source of drinking and irrigationwater in Lee and Hendry Counties (Herr and Shaw, 1989) and is only usedfor irrigation in Collier County. Although the Floridan aquifer system iscapable of high yields, it is too mineralized (high salinity and hardness)for most uses in Lee, Collier, and Hendry Counties. The Upper Floridanaquifer discharges ground water at a rate of 0–2 inches per year throughoutthe basin and does not contain areas of high recharge (Fernald andPurdum, 1998).Ground Water UsageThe SFWMD has the largest freshwater withdrawals when comparedto the other water management districts in Florida. Comparing statewidefreshwater utilization, SFWMD uses close to or more than half ofthe total freshwater withdrawals statewide for public supply (47 percent),agricultural self-supplied use (68 percent), and recreational irrigation (67percent). Withdrawals have increased in the SFWMD due to increases inirrigated acreage and population. The projected ground water and surfacewater use in the year 2020 is expected to dramatically increase in this basin(SFWMD, 1998). The increased population and agricultural demands areexpected to cause ground water levels to decline.

30Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastWater Resource Caution AreasThe SFWMD has designated the entire Everglades West Coast Basinas Water Resource Caution Area (WRCA). Under Section 373.036, F.S.,and Rule 62-40.520(1), F.A.C., each water management district in thestate must identify areas in which potential water shortages, considerablereductions in water levels, saltwater intrusion, or other degradations mayoccur within 20 years and develop management plans to address theirwater resource problems. In these areas, existing and anticipated sourcesof water and conservation efforts may not be adequate to supply water forall existing legal uses, reasonably anticipate future needs, and sustain waterresources and related natural systems. Five constraints are considered inestablishing these WRCAs:• Impacts to native vegetation, primarily wetlands;• Impacts to minimum flows and levels, primarily spring flows;• Impacts to ground water quality in terms of increased saltwaterintrusion;• Impacts to existing legal users; and• Failure to identify a source of supply for future development.The designation prohibits new or expanded use of the Floridan aquiferfor nonpotable supplies (Fernald and Purdum, 1998). Rule 62-40, F.A.C.,also requires the reuse of reclaimed water from domestic wastewater treatmentfacilities in these areas, if feasible.Ground Water–Surface Water InteractionsIn the Everglades West Coast Basin there are two surficial aquifers—the water table and lower Tamiami, which are separated by a leaky confiningzone (Tamiami confining beds). The water table aquifer is underunconfined conditions and ground water flow follows the topography of theland. The highest water levels are in the northeast (the Immokalee Rise),where the land surface elevations are high, and the lowest levels occuralong tidal streams or at the major outflow boundaries along the coastalmargin. Therefore, ground water flows through the surficial aquifer systemin a southwesterly direction (like surface water) with potentiometric highsfor both the water table and “lower Tamiami” aquifers occurring near theImmokalee Rise. Generally, precipitation, especially along the ImmokaleeRise, provides recharge to the surficial aquifer in Lee and Collier Counties.The natural north-south sheet flow of both surface and surficial groundwater has been impeded by the construction of the Tamiami Trail highwaythat bisects the Big Cypress National Preserve.The proximity of the surficial aquifer system to the ground surface, thelack of a confining layer, high recharge, relatively high permeability, and ahigh water table in most areas all increase the ground water vulnerabilityto contamination. This is of concern since the surficial and intermediateaquifers are used for most ground water purposes in this basin. Theintermediate and Floridan aquifer systems are not as threatened by surfacecontamination but, due to lower permeabilities and transmissivitiescan be affected by well pumping. Relict seawater can get trapped in an

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast31aquifer during deposition or as the result of high sea levels. This usuallyoccurs in low-permeability sediments or confined aquifers that are notreadily influenced by direct freshwater recharge. This is the case for bothcoastal Collier County and beneath Lake Okeechobee. Since mineralizationof aquifer waters increases with depth, excessive pumping can cause anupward flow of poorer quality water from deeper aquifers in areas such asCollier County. Additionally, both Lee and Collier Counties are locatedon the Gulf Coast, where ground water quality is threatened by saltwaterintrusion.Watershed Management Activities andProcessesConditions in and around the Everglades West Coast Basin havechanged dramatically in the last century. Historically, long periods offlooding and hurricanes made most of the Everglades region inhospitable todevelopment. To accommodate agricultural and urban development andto combat floods, the natural hydrologic system was extensively modifiedbeginning in the last century. As canals and levees were built to controlflooding and drain large areas for agricultural and residential use, hydrologicconnections among different parts of the Everglades ecosystem weresevered.In more recent times, management plans and activities have beenimplemented in the basin to reduce or eliminate discharges of pollutedwater from urban and agricultural areas and to protect, preserve, andrestore special areas. The following section describes historical, current,and ongoing activities and processes that initially caused and now seek toaddress water quality problems. Table 2.4 provides a historical timeline ofenvironmental issues and activities that have taken place in the EvergladesWest Coast Basin.Historical Watershed Management Issues and ActivitiesA number of significant events, including the following, have contributedgreatly to ecological and hydrologic modifications in the region.Tamiami TrailThe construction of the Tamiami Trail, begun in 1916, initiated thedrainage process in the Everglades West Coast Basin. Between 1921 and1923, Barron Collier’s Tamiami Road Building Company purchased 90percent of the land in southern Lee County (which later became CollierCounty). The Tamiami Trail, completed in 1928, crossed the statethrough the swamps of the Everglades and Big Cypress, linking Tampawith Miami. The road’s construction forever altered the natural sheet flowof water through the Everglades/Big Cypress system. Upon completion ofthe trail, the Big Cypress became easily accessible and economic exploitationbegan. Lumbering boomed in the 1930s and 1940s. Ditching anddraining occurred in the Fakahatchee Strand to build tramways to take thelogs out of the swampland forests. In 1943, Florida’s fi rst oil- producing

32Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 2.4: Historical Timeline of Environmental Issues and Activities in the EvergladesWest Coast BasinYear Issues and Activities1865–1895 Farmers colonized the Allen (Barron) River area after the Civil War, creating Everglades City.Ranchers and citrus farmers began colonizing the Immokalee area in the late 1880s. Cyrus ReedTeed, a religious visionary, established the Koreshan community along the banks of the Estero Riverin 1894.1904–1907 Napoleon Bonaparte Broward was elected governor of Florida on a promise to drain the Evergladesin 1904. The Florida legislature created the Everglades Drainage District in 1907, publicly fundingdrainage and flood control projects.1913–1916 The “District,” established in 1913, was the first of several that carried out drainage projects in southFlorida. The General Drainage Act of 1913 authorized adjacent landlords to establish drainagedistricts to drain and “reclaim” their lands. The construction of Tamiami Trail began in 1916.1920–1929 Barron Collier’s Tamiami Road Building Company acquired large tracts of land in Collier and southernLee Counties from 1921 to 1923. Drainage of the Big Cypress began with the construction of theBarron River Canal and the Turner River Canal. The Tamiami Trail was completed in 1928. Majorhurricanes flooded South Florida from 1922 to 1928, killing many people.1943–1949 Florida’s first oil-producing well was drilled in 1943, north of the Big Cypress Swamp nearSunniland. Everglades National Park opened in 1947. Two more hurricanes and floods hit SouthFlorida in 1947. The existing canal network was unsuccessful in alleviating flood conditions. Congresspassed the Flood Control Act of 1948, authorizing the Army Corps of Engineers to create ahuge, multistage flood control project in South Florida. The Florida legislature created the Centraland Southern Florida (C&SF) Flood Control District in 1949 to operate and maintain the massiveproject. Most of the virgin stands of cypress were logged in the Big Cypress during the 1940s.1950–1969 Drainage of the Big Cypress continued as land development and speculation schemes blossomed,including the Golden Gate Estates (GGE) canal drainage system. Jetport plans were unveiled forthe swamp’s eastern edge in 1968, and construction began in October 1968. Governor Claude Kirktemporarily halted construction in 1969. One two-mile runway was already completed. Friends ofthe Everglades formed to oppose the jetport in the same year.1970–1974 President Richard Nixon killed the jetport project on January 15, 1970. One of Florida’s worstdroughts occurred in 1970–71 and the C&SF Flood Control District ordered cutbacks in agriculturalwater withdrawals. Congress passed the federal Clean Water Act in 1972. The Big Cypress Swampwas designated as an area of critical state concern in 1973. Congress set aside about 40 percent ofthe Big Cypress Swamp (570,000 acres) in 1974 as a National Preserve, a new category of federallyprotected lands.1979–1988 The Florida legislature established the Conservation and Recreation Lands (CARL) Program and theSave Our Rivers (SOR) Act in 1979 and 1981, respectively. The SOR Program authorized the watermanagement districts to purchase lands along rivers. Governor Bob Graham initiated the Save theEverglades Program in 1983, which laid the groundwork for a federal-state-regional partnership torestore the natural functions of the Everglades ecosystem. Congress passed the Big Cypress PreserveAddition Act in 1988, which added 146,000 acres to the preserve.1990–1996 The Florida legislature adopted Governor Bob Martinez’s Preservation 2000 (P-2000) program in1990, which provided funds for the CARL and SOR land acquisition programs. Congress passed theEverglades and South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Act in 1996 to restore the water quality andbasic hydrologic patterns in the entire Everglades ecosystem.1997–2001 The Florida legislature established Forever Florida in 1999, which replaced P-2000. This newprogram provides $300 million per year for preservation and restoration efforts. The 1999 C&SFrestudy recommended to Congress that a hydrologic feasibility study be conducted for southwestFlorida.2002–2003 January through April of 2002, a mysterious area of “black water” was observed expanding over 700square miles of Florida Bay south of the Everglades West Coast Basin. The area was first detectedon satellite photos in December of 2001. The “black water” was later determined to be a diatombloom originating from offshore. On February 13, 2003, the SFWMD Governing Board adopted aresolution naming Lower Charlotte Harbor a SWIM priority water. The designation includes EsteroBay. On March 25, 2003, the Governor and Cabinet approved the acquisition of 710 acres of additionalland for the Estero Bay Buffer Preserve, thereby expanding the buffer preserve to 9,757 acres.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast33well was drilled just north of the Big Cypress Preserve in Sunniland.Today there still are oil-producing wells in Big Cypress, and the fi ll roadscreated to serve the industry affect the region’s hydrology.Residential Development, Roads, and a Jetport to NowhereMajor urban areas such as Naples, Marco Island, and Golden Gateunderwent intensive development in the 1960s as freshwater and saltwaterswamps were ditched, drained, and fi lled to create residential sub divisions.Of particular note was the construction of the Golden Gates Estates(GGE), advertised as “the largest subdivision in America.” This massivereal estate project decimated the Picayune Strand, a freshwater cypressswamp just west of the Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve in the greater BigCypress ecosystem. Covering 173 square miles, with 813 miles of roadsand 183 miles of canals, the GGE drainage system lowered water levels inthe western side of Big Cypress by two feet (McPherson and Halley, 1996).Land parcels, most of which were still too swampy to build on, were soldsight-unseen to about 50,000 purchasers all over the world in the 1960sand 1970s. Florida’s reputation for real estate chicanery was certainly notimproved by the GGE land scam.Also occurring at the same time was the Big Cypress Jetport debacle.Led by Miami-Dade County, the construction of the facility was promotedas essential to the area’s economic well-being. The jetport, about 50 milesfrom downtown Miami in western Miami-Dade/eastern Collier County,was to cover 39 square miles of swampland. At four times the size of thecurrent Miami Airport, it would have been by far the largest airport in theworld. The imminent construction of this airport galvanized a group oflocal environmentalists to form the Friends of the Everglades. Concernedabout wetland destruction and contamination from aviation fuels, theFriends of the Everglades managed to convince Governor Claude Kirk andsubsequently the Nixon administration to halt the project. The threat thatthe project posed to the Everglades National Park watershed sparked theestablishment in 1974 of the Big Cypress National Preserve, a new categoryof federally protected lands. One two-mile runway of the jetport was completed,however, and is currently used for pilot training.Citrus IndustryWhile citrus production has historically been concentrated in the centralportion of the state, a series of severe freezes during the 1980s resultedin the migration of citrus acreage southward. Hendry County, not originallyin the citrus belt, now has the third highest citrus acreage in Florida.Citrus traditionally requires drier soils to grow well. The agricultural landsin the Everglades West Coast Basin are suboptimal for citrus productionbecause of high water tables and must often be drained. The drainage ofthese agricultural lands lowers ground water levels and further affects thehydrology, structure, and function of area wetlands.

34Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastOngoing Issues and ActivitiesMuch of the progress in the Everglades West Coast Basin for developingwater quality restoration plans and implementing watershed andwater quality improvements is attributable to coordinated local, state, andregional efforts. Many plans share common goals, and their implementationis based on various groups playing critical roles in planning, funding,managing, and executing projects. The Department continues to coordinateits efforts with these entities to obtain data, strengthen monitoringactivities, and exchange information through periodic meetings. Therestoration initiatives described below will have major positive effects onthe basin’s water quality.Agricultural Best Management PracticesThe Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA) authorizes theDepartment and the Florida Department of Agriculture and ConsumerServices (DACS) to develop interim measures and agricultural best managementpractices (BMPs) to address nonpoint sources. The existingauthority for BMPs is provided in legislation on nitrates and ground water(Section 576, F.S.), the Lake Okeechobee Protection Program (Section373.4595, F.S.), Agricultural Water Conservation (Section 570.085, F.S.),and Florida Right to Farm Amendments (Section 823.14, F.S.). WhileBMPs are adopted by rule, they are voluntary if not covered by regulatoryprograms. If they are adopted by rule and the Department verifies theireffectiveness, then implementation provides a presumption of compliancewith water quality standards.Over the last several years, DACS has worked with agriculturists, soiland water conservation entities, the University of Florida’s Institute of Foodand Agricultural Sciences, and other major interests to promote agriculturaloperational efficiency by implementing BMPs that can also achieve waterquality and water conservation objectives. In addition, programs have beenestablished and are being developed to create a network of state, local, federal,and private sources of funds for developing and implementing BMPs.Agricultural BMP practices and programs under way in the EvergladesWest Coast Basin include the following:• Guide for Producing Container Grown Plants. This manual,published in 1995 by the Southern Nurserymen’s Association,includes irrigation and fertilization BMPs for the container cultivationof nursery plants. It was produced through a cooperative effortbetween the University of Florida, Auburn University, TennesseeTech University, and Virginia Tech. Since the manual is not Florida-specific,an effort is currently under way to use the document indeveloping a Florida-specific manual.• BMPs for Blended Fertilizer Plants in Florida. The manual forblended fertilizer industrial operations, published in October 1997,was cooperatively produced by the Florida Fertilizer and AgrichemicalAssociation, DACS, and the Department.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast35• BMPs for Agrichemical Handling and Farm EquipmentMaintenance. Recently revised and reprinted, this manual givesproducers guidance on hazardous materials, proper pesticidehandling, and the proper disposal of waste products. It was cooperativelyproduced in 1998 by DACS, the Department, and severalindustry associations.• Water Quality BMPs for Cow/Calf Operations. Many cattleoperators statewide have been trained in using this manual andapplying BMPs. The Florida Cattlemen’s Association and severalstate, federal, and local agencies developed the manual, which waspublished in 1999. Copies were printed and distributed in 2000using EPA Section 391 grant funds.• Aquaculture BMPs. As directed by the 1998 Florida legislature,DACS worked cooperatively with industry, state agencies, and theenvironmental community to develop a comprehensive BMP manualfor aquaculture. Florida law requires that the Department adopt themanual by rule and provides regulatory exemptions under Sections373 and 403, F.S., for growers who implement BMPs and are certifiedby DACS’s Division of Aquaculture. The manual, which wasprinted and distributed in 2000, has been adopted by rule.• Florida Green Industries BMPs for Protection of WaterResources in Florida. This manual provides BMPs for professionalturfgrass and landscape managers. Published in 2002, it was developedthrough a cooperative effort by Florida Green Industries (anindustry association); the Department; DACS; the Florida Departmentof Community Affairs; and the St. Johns, South Florida, andSouthwest Florida Water Management Districts.• Ongoing BMP Initiatives. DACS’s Office of Agricultural WaterPolicy expects to produce in the next year draft manuals on rowcrops (generally applicable statewide), equine or horse farms (applicableto both small landowner operations and concentrated facilities),and ornamental nurseries.Big Cypress Basin Watershed PlanSponsored by the Big Cypress Basin Board, a subdivision of SFWMD,the Big Cypress Watershed Plan will develop a guide for future capitalproject construction and operation of the water management facilitiesin the Big Cypress Basin. To meet the plan’s objective, a comprehensiveevaluation has been proposed for the surface water and ground water flowcharacteristics of the western Collier County region as a singular watershed.Under the proposal, a regional hydrologic-hydraulic routing model will bedeveloped as a tool for evaluating alternatives for improved water managementstrategies. The study will incorporate surface hydrology, the hydraulicsof the canal network, and general land use data at various spatial scales.

36Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastIt will integrate the dynamic processes that have influenced the overallhydrology and ecology of the Big Cypress Basin region. The model willhelp to evaluate alternative strategies for effective managing of water andrelated land resources to achieve the following goals:• Maintain or improve levels of flood protection in the developed anddeveloping areas consistent with the Collier County ComprehensivePlan.• Restore historical surface water flow characteristics on conservationand public lands.• Improve water retention and aquifer recharge potential.• Reduce threats of saltwater intrusion.• Reduce the effects of excessive freshwater discharges on downstreamestuaries.• Enhance natural system functions and values on publicly owned andconservation lands.Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program ComprehensiveConservation and Management PlanThe program, sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), is a partnership of citizens, elected officials, resource managers, andcommercial and recreational resource users collaborating to address diverseresource management concerns over the 4,400-square-mile watershed. Acooperative decision-making process was used to produce a ComprehensiveConservation and Management Plan (CCMP), which outlines priorityactions that should be taken to improve the water quality and ecologicalintegrity of the greater Charlotte Harbor watershed. The Charlotte Harborprogram gets most of its funding from the EPA, with some limited supportfrom local and regional governments. The only portion of the EvergladesWest Coast Basin within the jurisdiction of the Charlotte Harbor studyarea is the Estero Bay planning unit.Comprehensive Everglades Restoration PlanThe Central and Southern Florida (C&SF) Project was first authorizedin 1948 to provide flood control, water control, water supply, and other servicesto an area that stretches from Orlando to Florida Bay. Although theproject has performed its intended purposes, it also contributed to an unintendeddecline in the south Florida ecosystem. As a result, a comprehensivereview study (“The Restudy”) was conducted to investigate structural andoperational modifications to the C&SF Project to achieve the following:• Improve the quality of the environment;• Improve aquifer protection;• Improve the integrity, capability, and conservation of agriculturaland urban water supplies; and• Maintain current levels of flood protection.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast37The Restudy, conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(USACOE) and SFWMD, resulted in the Comprehensive Everglades RestorationPlan (CERP), which was transmitted to Congress on July 1, 1999.Two notable projects planned for this basin are the hydrologic restorationof Southern Golden Gates Estates (GGE), and the restoration of LakeTrafford.Environmental Impact Study (EIS)In 1997, with encouragement from citizens’ groups, the JacksonvilleDistrict of the USACOE began an environmental impact study of partsof Lee and Collier Counties. To gather information, the USACOE wasassisted by the Alternatives Development Group, made up of people fromdiverse backgrounds, including proponents of development, agriculture,and conservation. It also received help and advice from representatives offederal, state, and local governments. At various stages, citizen input wasalso solicited at public meetings. In the future, when the USACOE makespermitting decisions in the study area, it will consider the stewardship ofwetlands and cumulative impacts.Estero Bay Watershed AssessmentSponsored by SFWMD, the Estero Bay Watershed Assessment willdefine water quality and freshwater quantity objectives or pollutant loadreduction goals (PLRGs) for the bay and develop tools to evaluate theeffects of watershed management techniques. The assessment will resultin a comprehensive Estero Bay research plan, based on management goalsfor the estuary, and will develop land and water management strategies toachieve the water quality and quantity objectives for the bay. Activitiesinclude• A physical description of major features and current managementpractices.• The identification of water trends.• The identification and ranking of potential pollution problem areas.• The development and compilation of data for a watershed model toevaluate management scenarios.• Recommendations for basin-specific management strategies toachieve water quality improvements.Lee County Conservation 20/20 Land Acquisition and StewardshipProgramIn 1996, voters approved a referendum to raise real property taxes tofund the purchase of environmentally sensitive lands to be placed in publictrust for preservation. The Lee County Board of County Commissionerssubsequently created the “Conservation 20/20” Land Acquisition and StewardshipProgram to fulfi ll voter directives. The purpose of the program isto acquire, preserve, and restore environmentally critical or sensitive landsin Lee County. Over $11 million per year is generated for the acquisitionof properties of willing sellers. Each proposal goes through a rankingprocess based on environmental significance, water resource value, manage-

38Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastment potential, contiguity to other preserve areas, development potential,and selling price. As of March 31, 2002, $47.50 million was spent toacquire 40 parcels of land totaling 7,550 acres.Lower West Coast Water Supply PlanThis state-required regional water supply plan by SFWMD serves asa guide for addressing future water demands in southwest Florida. Theplan establishes a framework around which future water use decisions forthe Lower West Coast (LWC) Planning Area can take place. The LWCPlanning Area includes all of Lee and Collier and portions of Hendry andMonroe Counties. The plan seeks to accomplish the following:• Develop a comprehensive water conservation program,• Quantify the ground water resources available,• Quantify the potential reclaimed water available,• Quantify the regional irrigation system water available,• Quantify the seawater potential available,• Quantify the water storage potential available,• Quantify the regional and local water retention available,• Quantify the water potential available in reservoirs,• Quantify the surface water potentially available,• Reassess the Caloosahatchee hydrology, and• Address MFLs.Preservation 2000/Florida ForeverThe Florida legislature established Preservation 2000 (P-2000) as afunding source for the Conservation and Recreational Lands (CARL),Save Our Rivers (SOR), Florida Communities Trust, and Florida Fish andWildlife Conservation Commission’s (FWC) land acquisition programs.P-2000 and related programs have been requested to fund some of thesensitive land purchases in the Everglades West Coast Basin. In the springof 1999, as P-2000 was about to expire, the legislature established FloridaForever to take its place. Under this program, $300 million per year willbe available for preservation and restoration efforts.Southwest Florida Feasibility StudyThe Southwest Florida Feasibility Study was born out of The Restudy’srecommendations for the C&SF Project to Congress in July 1999. TheRestudy, which only assessed water resource issues as they related to theCaloosahatchee Basin on the west coast, recognized that other hydrologicwatersheds in southwest Florida have not been comprehensively studied.Thus, the restudy recommended a feasibility study to identify southwestFlorida’s water resource conditions and to develop potential solutions toproblems. The USACOE and SFWMD are conducting the SouthwestFlorida Feasibility Study.The study area includes all of Lee County, most of Collier and HendryCounties, and portions of Charlotte, Glades, and Monroe Counties. Itencompasses approximately 4,300 square miles and includes 2 major drainagebasins. The northern boundary includes the Caloosahatchee River and

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast39corresponds to the jurisdictional boundary between the South Florida andSouthwest Florida Water Management Districts in Charlotte County. Theeastern boundary delineates the divide between the Big Cypress Swampand the Everglades system.The study will determine the feasibility of making structural, nonstructural,and operational modifications and improvements in the region in theinterest of environmental quality, water supply, and other purposes. It willdevelop a comprehensive regional plan of action to address• The health of aquatic and upland ecosystems;• The quantity, quality, timing, and distribution of water flows;• The agricultural, environmental, and urban water supply;• The sustainability of economic and natural resources;• Flood protection; and• Fish and wildlife, biological diversity, and natural habitat.The Southwest Florida Feasibility Study will be accomplished usinga two-phase process. The fi rst phase (scoping), paid for by the federalgovernment, quickly identifies problems and opportunities and potentialsolutions in an area. The second phase (feasibility), conducted withSFWMD, will develop alternative solutions in more detail so that Congresscan authorize and fund a viable plan.Stakeholder ForumsThe stakeholder forums listed below have been instrumental in designingor shaping many of the aforementioned restoration initiatives.Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Management ConferenceThe program, sponsored by the EPA, is a partnership of citizens,elected officials, resource managers, and commercial and recreationalresource users collaborating to address diverse resource managementconcerns over the 4,400-square-mile watershed. The program is led by adirector and a management conference of four committees (Policy, Management,Technical Advisory, and Citizen Advisory) and several technicalsubcommittees (Water Quality, Habitat Conservation, and HydrologicAlterations). A cooperative decision-making process was used to producea CCMP, which outlines priority actions that should be taken to improvethe water quality and ecological integrity of the greater Charlotte Harborwatershed. The Charlotte Harbor program gets most of its funding fromthe EPA, with some limited support from local and regional governments.The only portion of the Everglades West Coast Basin within the jurisdictionof the Charlotte Harbor study area is the Estero Bay planning unit.Estero Bay Agency on Bay ManagementThe Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management (ABM) is a nonregulatoryadvisory group borne out of a settlement agreement between the FloridaBoard of Regents and petitioners opposed to the site of the new FloridaGulf Coast University in Fort Myers. The ABM was created to overseethe maintenance of the natural resources of Estero Bay. The signatories to

40Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastthe settlement agreement are the South Florida Regional Planning Council,Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC), FloridaDepartment of Community Affairs, Florida Board of Regents, Florida GulfCoast University, and several private citizens. The ABM, which meetsmonthly, has more than 40 members, who are appointed by the regionalplanning council. The settlement agreement required the ABM to producethe State of the Bay Report. It has also created a map targeting specificlands for public acquisition and has implemented an outreach/educationfunction. Currently, members are reviewing work plans for Phase 2 of theSFWMD’s Estero Bay Watershed Assessment. Finally, they are reviewingland use permits and writing a Section 319 grant application for a stormwaterretrofit feasibility study.Governor’s Commission for the EvergladesEstablished by Governor Jeb Bush in June 1999 to follow in thefootsteps of the previous Governor’s Commission for a Sustainable SouthFlorida, the Governor’s Commission for the Everglades continues to serveas the advisory body to the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration TaskForce. Its other charges are as follows:• Evaluate the USACOE’s restudy implementation progression.• Evaluate the region’s overall water conservation efficiency.• Recommend actions for integrating the needs of farmworker, lowincome,and rural communities with Everglades restoration.• Develop a demonstrable benefit/cost analysis for a restudy-relatedissue in a rural area.• Restore, manage, and protect the natural resources of the Everglades.• Enhance sustainable and environmentally compatible developmentto sustain the regional economy and a healthy Everglades system.• Create sustainable agriculture programs.• Allocate natural resources to support natural and human systems.South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task ForceEstablished in 1993 to coordinate interrelated federal programs andfoster communication and cooperation in ecosystem restoration efforts, thetask force has the goal of achieving restoration, preservation, and protectionof the ecosystem while promoting a sustainable South Florida. It presentlyconsists of seven federal and two state agencies, along with one regionalagency; two local governments; and two tribal governments. Its activitiesinclude involvement in the implementation of CERP.Southwest Florida Watershed CouncilEstablished in 2001, the council is a community-based effort to establisha watershed forum for the combined geographic area of the EvergladesWest Coast and Caloosahatchee Basins. Its mission is to “protect, conserve,manage, and/or restore the land and water resources of the Caloosahatcheeand Big Cypress watersheds through participation and cooperationof all stakeholders in consensus building, planning, and decision makingto meet the economic, natural, and cultural needs for this and succeeding

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast41generations.” The council membership represents agency, academic,development, and environmental interests, as well as the interests of privatecitizens.Water Quality Monitoring ConsortiumRecommended by the Big Cypress Science Plan Steering Committee (asubset of the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force), the consortiumwas initiated in 1998 to provide a forum for exchanging informationand improving coordination among the agencies and organizationsmonitoring water quality in the Big Cypress region. The consortium hassince expanded to include Lee County and the Charlotte Harbor ecosystem.Its mission is to implement a comprehensive regional water qualitymonitoring program through a collaborative effort, using standardizedquality assurance protocols. Plans include (1) centralized geographic informationsystems that map sites and parameters and (2) a shared water qualitymonitoring database. The consortium will also conduct training classesin the STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) database (the EPA’s water qualitydatabase) and has expressed an interest in assisting the Department andEPA in assessing and identifying impaired waterbodies.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast43Chapter 3: Surface Water Quality AssessmentChapter SummaryThis chapter presents the results of an updated assessmentof surface water quality in the Everglades WestCoast Basin. The primary purpose of this assessment isto determine if waterbodies or waterbody segments areto be placed on the Verified List of impaired waterbodies.The listing will be in accordance with evaluation thresholdsand data sufficiency and data quality requirements inthe Identification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR)(Rule 62-303, Florida Administrative Code [F.A.C.]). Theresults of the assessment will be used to identify waters inthe basin for which Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)will be developed.The chapter describes the planning units in the basin asa basis for the assessment. A section on each planningunit contains a general description and summary of keywater quality indicators (such as nutrients, chlorophyll a,dissolved oxygen [DO], and microbiological parameters).Permitted discharges, land uses, ecological status, andwater quality improvement plans and projects are summarizedfor each planning unit. The discussion noteswhere applicable surface water quality criteria have beenexceeded and summarizes the report’s findings in maps,noting potentially impaired waterbodies in each planningunit. The chapter also contains background informationon sources of data and on designated use attainment, andexplains the state’s integrated water quality assessmentprocess.While potentially impaired waters and their causativepollutants are identified, it is not within the scope of thisreport to identify discrete sources of potential impairments.Information on the sources of impairment will bedeveloped in subsequent phases of the watershed managementcycle, including TMDL development and implementation.Appendix A contains a discussion of the

44Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastlegislative and regulatory background for TMDL development and implementation.Appendix C provides additional information on reasonableassurance. The methodology used to develop the Verified List is providedin Appendix D. The complete text of the IWR is available at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/amendedIWR.pdf.Sources of DataThe assessment of water quality in the Everglades West Coast Basinincludes an analysis of quantitative data from a variety of sources, some ofwhich are readily available to the public. These sources include the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Legacy and “new” STOrage andRETrieval (STORET) databases, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), andthe Florida Department of Health. The STORET databases contain waterquality data from a variety of sources, including the Florida Department ofEnvironmental Protection (Department), water management districts, localgovernments, and volunteer monitoring groups. Appendix D contains adetailed description of STORET and the methodology used to develop thePlanning and Verified Lists, based on the IWR.Table 3.1 summarizes the individual data providers who contributedto the IWR 2002 Database for the Everglades West Coast Basin for theperiod of record used in this assessment. Figure 3.1 contains a pie chartshowing the amount of data provided by each source.The Department’s Bureau of Watershed Management created the IWR2002 Database to evaluate data in accordance with the methodology prescribedin Rule 62-303, F.A.C. For the Verified List assessment, the dataevaluation period of record is 7.5 years. Table D.2 in Appendix D showsthe periods of record for the Verified Lists in the first basin rotation cycle.Data collected between January 1, 1995, and June 30, 2002, were evaluatedto establish the Verified List for the Everglades West Coast Basin (IWR2002 Run 8.2).Table 3.1: Summary of Data Providers in the Everglades WestCoast BasinData Provided for VerifiedList PurposesData Owners(Jan 1995–June 2002)United States Geological Survey (USGS) 642National Park Service 698Florida Department of Environmental Protection 19082Collier County Pollution Control 27874Florida Department of Health 2150Lee County Environmental Lab 59673Florida LakeWatch 154South Florida Water Management District 52598Save the Bay Association 2344

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast45Save the BayAssociation 1.42%United States GeologicalSurvey 0.39%National ParkService 0.42%Florida Department ofEnvironmentalProtection 11.55%South Florida WaterManagement District31.84%Collier County PollutionControl 16.87%Florida Lake Watch.09%Florida Department ofHealth 1.3%Lee CountyEnvironmental Lab36.12%Figure 3.1: Sources of Data for the Everglades West Coast BasinAttainment of Designated UseWhile the designated uses of a given waterbody are established usingthe surface water quality classification system described previously, it isimportant to note that the EPA uses slightly different terminology in itsdescription of designated uses. Because the Department is required to provideuse attainment status for both the state’s 305(b) report and the state’s303(d) list of impaired waters, the Department uses EPA terminology whenassessing waters for use attainment. The water quality evaluations anddecision processes for listing impaired waters that are defined in Florida’sIWR are based on the following designated use attainment categories:Aquatic Life Use Support-Based AttainmentPrimary Contact and Recreation AttainmentFish and Shellfish Consumption AttainmentDrinking Water Use AttainmentProtection of Human Health

46Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 3.2 summarizes designated uses assigned to the various surfacewater classes.Table 3.2: Designated Use Attainment Categories for SurfaceWaters in FloridaDesignated Use Attainment Category Used in ImpairedSurface Waters Rule EvaluationAquatic Life Use Support-Based AttainmentPrimary Contact and Recreation AttainmentFish and Shellfish Consumption AttainmentDrinking Water Use AttainmentProtection of Human HealthApplicable Florida SurfaceWater ClassificationClass I, II, and IIIClass I, II, and IIIClass IIClass IClass I, II, and IIIUnderstanding theTerms “Pollutant”and “Pollution”For purposes of the TMDLProgram, pollutants arechemical and biologicalconstituents, introduced byhumans into a waterbody,that may result in pollution(water quality impairment).There are other causes ofpollution, such as physicalalteration of a waterbody(for example, canals, dams,and ditches). However,TMDLs are established onlyfor impairments caused bypollutants (a TMDL quantifieshow much of a given pollutanta waterbody can receiveand still meet its designateduses).Waterbodies that are verifiedimpaired due to specified pollutants,and therefore requirea TMDL, are listed underCategory 5 in the IntegratedAssessment Report; waterbodieswith water qualityimpairments due to othercauses, or unknown causes,are listed under Category4b. Although TMDLs arenot established for Category4b waterbodies, thesewaterbodies still may beaddressed through a watershedmanagement program(for example, the KissimmeeRiver restoration).Integrated Report Categories andAssessment OverviewThis Assessment Report contains a preliminary evaluation of waterbodiesthat fall into Integrated Report Categories 1 through 3 (Table 3.3).Because not enough recent data on chemistry, biology, and fish consumptionadvisories have been collected, currently only a few waterbodiesor waterbody segments statewide fall into Category 1 (attaining all uses).In particular, fish tissues in many waterbodies statewide have not beentested for mercury. Out of the 68 waterbodies or waterbody segments inthe Everglades West Coast Basin, there are none that are in Category 1.More waterbodies and segments statewide fall into Category 2 (attainingsome uses but with insufficient data to assess completely) than Category1 (attaining all uses), because monitoring programs can sometimesprovide sufficient data for partially determining whether a designated usein a particular waterbody is attained. Eight waterbody segments in thebasin fall into Category 2.However, most waterbodies in the state fall into Category 3 (havinginsufficient data). In the Everglades West Coast Basin, the breakdown ofwaterbodies or segments in Category 3 is as follows:• Category 3a—21 segments for which no data are available to determinetheir water quality status;• Category 3b—10 segments with some data, but not sufficient datafor making any determinations; and• Category 3c—18 segments that are potentially impaired based on thePlanning List criteria.Several potentially impaired (Category 3c) waters fail to meet waterquality standards for DO, or show signs of biological stress or nutrientimpairment. According to the IWR, specific pollutants causing DOexceedances or biological stress, or an underlying nutrient imbalancecreating an imbalance in flora or fauna, must be documented for a

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast47Table 3.3: Categories for Waterbodies or Waterbody Segments in the 2002 Integrated ReportCategory Description Comments1 Attaining all designated uses If use attainment is verified for a waterbody or segmentthat was previously listed as impaired, the Departmentwill propose that it be delisted.2 Attaining some designated usesand insufficient or no informationor data are present to determine ifremaining uses are attained3a3b3c3d4a4b4cNo data and information arepresent to determine if anydesignated use is attainedSome data and information arepresent but not enough to determineif any designated use isattainedEnough data and information arepresent to determine that one ormore designated uses may not beattained according to the PlanningList methodologyEnough data and information arepresent to determine that one ormore designated uses are notattained according to the VerifiedList methodologyImpaired for one or more designateduses but does not requireTMDL development because aTMDL has already been completedImpaired for one or more criteriaor designated uses but doesnot require TMDL developmentbecause impairment is not causedby a pollutantImpaired for one or more designateduses but does not requireTMDL development because thewater will attain water quality standardsdue to existing or proposedpollution control measures5 One or more designated usesare not attained and a TMDL isrequiredIf attainment is verified for some designated uses of awaterbody or segment, the Department will proposepartial delisting for the uses attained. Future monitoringwill be recommended to determine if remaininguses are attained.Future monitoring will be recommended to determine ifdesignated uses are attained.Future monitoring will be recommended to gather sufficientinformation and data to determine if designateduses are attained.This indicates a waterbody or segment is potentiallyimpaired for one or more designated uses. Thesewaters will be prioritized for future monitoring to verifyuse attainment or impaired status.This indicates that a waterbody or segment exceedsVerified List evaluation criteria and may be listed asimpaired at the end of Phase 2 of the watershed managementcycle. However, the data have not yet beenfully evaluated and the waters have not been formallyverified as impaired. This category is not applicable tothe Assessment Report. Waters that pass the VerifiedList criteria at this stage of the process are placed inCategory 5.After a TMDL for the impaired waterbody or segment isapproved by EPA, it will be included in a Basin ManagementAction Plan to reduce pollutant loading towardattainment of designated use(s).This category includes waterbodies or segments thatare impaired because of naturally occurring conditionsor pollution. The impairment is not caused byspecific pollutants. (See sidebar on previous page fora discussion of the difference between pollution andpollutants.)Other pollutant control mechanisms designed to attainapplicable water quality standards within a reasonabletime frame are in place.Waterbodies or segments in this category are impairedfor one or more designated uses by a pollutant orpollutants. Waters in this category are included onthe basin-specific Verified List adopted by the Department’sSecretary as Florida’s impaired waters list andsubmitted to the EPA as Florida’s 303(d) list of impairedwaters at the end of Phase 2.

48Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastwaterbody or segment to be listed as impaired. Sometimes these conditionscannot be linked to a causative pollutant, and sometimes they may reflectnatural background conditions.Currently, there are no waterbodies in the basin that are designated asbeing in Category 4. This category includes those waterbodies/segmentsthat are impaired but do not require a TMDL for one of three reasons:(1) a TMDL has already been developed (Category 4a); (2) the impairmentis not attributable to a pollutant or pollutants but is due to other alterationsto the waterbody (Category 4b); or (3) there is reasonable assurance thatthe designated use of an impaired waterbody will be restored by a pollutantcontrol measure.Finally, 15 waterbodies in the basin are in Category 5. These waterbodies,which have been determined to be impaired, are on the VerifiedList of impaired waters adopted by the Department’s Secretary and willrequire TMDLs. Chapter 5 of this report discusses in detail the waters inthis category.Planning UnitsThe Everglades West Coast Basin encompasses approximately 3,177square miles and a complex hydrologic system. To provide a moredetailed geographic basis for assessing and reporting on water quality,and for carrying out planning activities under the watershed managementapproach, the Department subdivided this area into smaller planning units.Planning units help organize information and management strategiesaround prominent watershed characteristics.Water quality assessments were conducted on individual waterbodysegments within planning units. Each waterbody segment is assigned aunique waterbody identification number (WBID). Waterbody segmentsare the assessment units or polygons that the Department has historicallyused to define waterbodies in inventorying and reporting water quality tothe EPA under Section 305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act. The sameWBIDs are the assessment units identified in the Department’s lists ofimpaired waters submitted to the EPA in reports under Section 303(d) ofthe Clean Water Act.The Everglades West Coast Basin contains three planning units: EsteroBay, Southwest Coast (West Collier), and Inner (East Collier) DrainageArea. Table 3.4 describes these planning units, and Figure 3.2 showstheir locations and boundaries. The remainder of this chapter providesa general description of each planning unit, information on land use andpotential point sources of pollution, water quality assessments for individualwaterbody segments, and summaries of ecological issues and watershedquality improvement plans and projects.Appendix E of this report provides a water quality summary byplanning unit, contains a list of water quality monitoring stations, theintegrated assessment summary, and trend data. Appendix F includes

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast49Table 3.4: Planning Units in the Everglades West Coast BasinPlanning UnitEstero BaySouthwest CoastInner DrainageAreaDescriptionThe Estero Bay planning unit covers about 288 square miles within the basin, andis divided into 19 waterbody (WBID) units. There are 65 sampling stations withinthe Estero Bay unit.The Southwest Coast planning unit stretches over approximately 904 squaremiles of the Everglades West Coast Basin and is divided into 45 WBIDs. Themajority of the Southwest Coast unit lies in Collier County, with small portionsin Lee and Hendry Counties. There is a total of 215 sampling stations within thisunit from which data have previously been collected.The Inner Drainage Area planning unit covers approximately 1,985 squaremiles of the Everglades West Coast Basin and is divided into 8 WBIDs. The unitincludes portions of Collier, Hendry, Monroe, and Broward Counties. Thereis a total of 58 sampling stations within this unit from which data have beenpreviously collected.summary information by planning unit for permitted wastewater treatmentfacilities, Superfund sites, and permitted landfill facilities in the basin.Appendix G lists Level 1 land uses by planning unit.Update on Strategic Monitoring and Data-Gathering Activities During Phase 2To determine the status of surface water quality in the Everglades WestCoast Basin, chemistry data, biological data, and, if available, fi sh consumption,beach closure, and shellfish-harvesting advisories were evaluatedto determine impairment. Data from strategic monitoring and datagatheringactivities during Phase 2 of the watershed management cycle wereincluded. A detailed description of the methodology used to develop thePlanning and Verified Lists is available in Appendix D.It should be added that a highly motivated effort was made specificallywithin the Everglades West Coast Basin to collect data not already incorporatedin the Department’s assessment. Through coordination with theDepartment’s District staff and local agencies, a large number of previouslyunrealized data points were successfully added to the assessment. Thisconsisted mainly of data sets provided by Lee and Collier Counties. Theaddition of this data provided quite a positive effect on the authenticity andaccuracy of the verification process, one with which both the Departmentand local agencies are thoroughly satisfied.Appendix E contains the integrated water quality assessment summary(Table E.1), the water quality monitoring stations used in the assessment(Table E.2), and data on water quality trends (Table E.3). Appendix Flists permitted wastewater treatment facilities in the basin that dischargeto surface water, Appendix G lists Level 1 land use by planning unit, andAppendix H provides pollutant loading estimates.

50Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastFigure 3.2: Locations and Boundaries of Planning Units in the Everglades West Coast Basin

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast51Assessment by Planning Unit• Estero Bay Planning UnitGeneral DescriptionThe Estero Bay planning unit includes Estero Bay, which is a shallow,subtropical lagoon (11,317 acres) separated from the Gulf by barrier islands.Seagrass beds are common in the bay, but high turbidity restricts seagrassesto shallow depths. The Estero and Imperial Rivers and Spring, Mullock,and Hendry Creeks, although small, are the major tributaries in this area.The Estero Bay Basin was, and in many areas still is, typical of low, flat,southern Florida lands dominated by wetlands and characterized by slow,sheet-flow drainage patterns. In the past, the naturally dispersed water patternsdistributed nutrients over broad areas of wetland vegetation. Seasonalfluctuations in flow from rainfall created the necessary salinity regime inEstero Bay for good estuarine productivity. Increasing development in the1960s led to changes in the natural river systems around Estero Bay, alteringfreshwater inflow patterns.Coastal areas in this planning unit are rapidly being developed inresponse to a continuing influx of new residents. Retirement, tourism,and the service industries drive the economy. In addition, the region has anew state university (Florida Gulf Coast University), founded in 1997 andan international airport (Southwest Florida International Airport). Theinterior population is low, and the land use is primarily in cattle, vegetable,and citrus farms.Population centers include the coastal towns of Bonita Springs, Estero,Fort Myers Beach, and San Carlos Park. Bonita Springs, south of theImperial River, is the planning unit’s main population center, with 32,727people (SWFRPC, 2003). The oldest community is Estero, which wascolonized in 1894 by Cyrus Reed Teed, a religious visionary. He broughthis followers (the “Koreshan”) from Chicago to settle along the banks ofthe Estero River. Four remaining members deeded the settlement to thestate in 1961, and it is now preserved as the Koreshan State Historic Site.Figure 3.3 is a composite map of the planning unit that shows potentiallyimpaired waters and potential point sources of pollution.Water Quality SummaryThe Estero Bay planning unit covers about 288 square miles (notincluding coastal WBIDs) and was initially divided into 9 assessment units,as presented in the EWC Group 1 Status Report (November, 2001).Due to a petition fi led by the Responsible Growth Management Coalition(RGMC), which represents coastal interests in southwest Florida, somechanges were made to the waterbody segments being assessed. The petitionindicated in part that the segments representing the tributaries flowinginto Estero Bay, which were all initially classified as freshwater segments,did not accurately reflect the estuarine portions of those tributaries. Asthe assessment of the data provided can vary dramatically depending onthe waterbody type designation of the segment itself, it was suggested that

52Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastFigure 3.3: Composite Map of the Estero Bay Planning Unit

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast53the tributary segments be redrawn to allow for representation of both theestuarine and freshwater aspects of these tributaries.This then led to a resegmentation effort, which resulted in five of thefreshwater tributary segments being split to create five additional segments,which were then classified as estuarine. This also resulted in a divisionof the stations previously being assessed together. Data for stations nowlocated within the new estuarine segments were assessed against the appropriatecriteria provided in 62-302 F.A.C.Also, the Everglades West Coast Status Report had not provided a segmentfor Estero Bay proper, which had remained unassessed. For the purposesof better understanding the effects of the hydrology of this region onthe bay, into which most of the water flows, Estero Bay was delineated as asegment and stations within it were assessed as per the IWR requirementsfor this report. Finally, 4 newly introduced coastal segments were added toallow for the assessment of the marine areas with which the surface watersof the planning unit interact. The Estero Bay planning unit now consistsof a total of 19 waterbody segments.A significant portion of the planning unit lies in Lee County, with asmall percentage in Collier County. The Estero River, Imperial River, andSpring Creek all lie within the planning unit and are the major tributariesdraining into Estero Bay. Warm, slow-moving estuarine waterbodies suchas these have naturally low water quality characteristics, such as low DO.As a result, they may be more susceptible to water quality impacts fromhuman activities. These tributaries also provide minor freshwater flows toEstero Bay, and their naturally low-flow characteristics make them vulnerableto varying water quality, volume, and seasonal inputs (EPA, 2000).The construction of canals in the region has contributed to increased surfacewater flow, thus decreasing aquifer recharge. This results in increasedsaltwater intrusion into aquifers in the area.Table 3.5 summarizes the water quality assessment status of allwaterbody segments in the planning unit and shows that seven waterbodysegments are impaired by chlorophyll a, copper, DO, and fecal coliforms.Permitted Discharges and Land UsesPoint Sources. There is only one facility permitted to discharge tosurface waters in this planning unit. (See Noteworthy for a definition ofpoint sources.)Facility ID Facility Name DescriptionFL0145190 Three Oaks DomesticWastewater WastewaterTreatment TreatmentFacility Plant (WWTP)(WWTF)PermittedCapacityMGD1,357 1.5DesignCapacityMGD

54Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 3.5: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Estero Bay Planning UnitWBID3258A3258B3258B13258C3258C1WaterbodySegmentEstero BayWetlandsHendryCreekHendryCreek MarineEstero BayDrainageEstero BayDrainageMarineType 1 Class 2 Concern1998 303(d) ListWaterbody Parameters ofData Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria 3PotentiallyImpaired (Cat.3c) for ListedParametersVerifiedImpaired (Cat.4a, 4b, 4c, or5) for ListedParameters 4Not Impaired(Cat. 2)for ListedParametersEstuary IIIM Nutrients N/A N/A Chlorophyll a,DO, Fecal Coliforms,TurbidityStream IIIF Nutrients, DO N/A Chlorophylla, DOEstuary IIIM Nutrients, DO Copper, Lead DO, Chlorophylla, FecalColiformsStream IIIF NPS Survey Cadmium Chlorophylla, DOCopper, Fecal 5Coliforms, Lead,Turbidity, ZincTurbidity, Zinc 5Arsenic, Copper,Fecal Coliforms,Lead, Turbidity,ZincEstuary IIIM NPS Survey DO N/A Chlorophyll a,Fecal Coliforms,Turbidity, Zinc3258D Estero River Stream IIIF N/A DO N/A Chlorophyll a,Copper, FecalColiforms, Lead,Turbidity, Zinc3258D13258E3258E1Estero RiverMarineImperialRiverImperialRiverMarineEstuary IIIM N/A N/A Chlorophylla, Copper,DO, FecalColiformsStream IIIF DO, Nutrients N/A DO, ChlorophyllaEPA’s 305(b)/303(d) IntegratedReportAssessmentCategory forWBID 5253c3cTurbidity, Zinc 5Copper, FecalColiforms, Lead,Turbidity, ZincEstuary IIIM DO, Nutrients DO Copper Chlorophyll a,Fecal Coliforms,Turbidity, Zinc3258F Oak Creek Estuary IIIM N/A N/A N/A N/A 3b3258G Tenmile Stream IIIF N/A DO N/A Chlorophyll a, 3cCanalCopper, Lead,Fecal Coliforms,Turbidity, Arsenic,Zinc3258H Spring Creek Stream IIIF DO, Nutrients DO N/A Chlorophyll a,Copper, Lead,Fecal Coliforms,Turbidity, Zinc3c3258H1Spring CreekMarineEstuary IIIM DO, Nutrients N/A Chlorophylla, Copper,DOFecal Coliforms,Turbidity, Zinc555

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast55Table 3.5 (continued)WBIDWaterbodySegmentType 1 Class 2 Concern1998 303(d) ListWaterbody Parameters ofData Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria 3PotentiallyImpaired (Cat.3c) for ListedParametersVerifiedImpaired (Cat.4a, 4b, 4c, or5) for ListedParameters 4Not Impaired(Cat. 2)for ListedParameters3258I Estero Bay Estuary IIIM N/A N/A N/A Chlorophyll 2a, DO, FecalColiforms,Turbidity3258X Lakes Park Lake IIIF N/A N/A N/A N/A 3b8060 Estero Bay Coastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A N/A 3bGulf8060A Bowditch Coastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A Fecal Coliforms 3aPark8060B Lynn Hall Coastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A Fecal Coliforms 3aPark8060C Lovers KeyState ParkCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A Fecal Coliforms 3aNotes:EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) IntegratedReportAssessmentCategory forWBID 51The designation “stream” includes canals, rivers, and sloughs. The designation “lake” includes some marshes.2The state’s surface water classifications are as follows:Class I: Potable water suppliesClass II: Shellfish propagation or harvestingClass III: Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlifeClass IV: Agricultural water suppliesClass V: Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in this class)3The EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report categories are as follows:1—Attains all designated uses;2—Attains some designated uses;3a—No data and information are available to determine if any designated use is attained;3b—Some data and information are available, but they are insufficient for determining if any designated use is attained;3c—Meets Planning List criteria and is potentially impaired for one or more designated uses;4a—Impaired for one or more designated uses and the TMDL is complete;4b—Impaired for one or more designated uses but no TMDL is required because the impairment is not caused by apollutant;4c—Impaired for one or more designated uses, but no TMDL is required because a proposed pollution control measureprovides reasonable assurance that the water will attain standards in the future; and5—Water quality standards are not attained and a TMDL is required.4Parameters in italics are in Category 4 (a, b, or c) waters that do not require TMDL development5The 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 isassigned a category based on the highest category assigned to an individual parameter. For example, if WBID 9999 has totalcoliforms as Category 5, fecal coliforms as Category 3c, and coliforms-shellfish as Category 2, the single assessment call forthe WBID is Category 5.F = Fresh waterM = MarineNA = Not applicable, i.e., there are no parameters listed.

56Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastNonpoint Sources. Based on land use summary information,wetlands and forested area make up a little over 50 percent of the planningunit’s total area. Land uses by urban development and agriculturetotal almost the same area, at approximately 20 percent each. Urbanand agricultural land uses can be associated with nonpoint discharges ofpollutants and eroded sediments (see Noteworthy for a definition of nonpointsources).Ecological SummaryEcological Resources. A number of waters in the Estero Bayplanning unit are designated as Outstanding Florida Waters (OFWs):Koreshan State Historic Site, Estero Bay State Aquatic and Buffer Preserve,Estero Bay and Estero Bay tributaries, Josslyn Island, and Lovers Key StateRecreation Area.Estero Bay’s shoreline and islands are fringed with mangroves, andits shallow water contains seagrass beds that provide valuable nursery andfeeding habitat for many species of birds, reptiles, fi sh, and crustaceans.Numerous endangered and threatened species are found in and aroundthe bay, including the manatee, loggerhead turtle, bald eagle, Big Cypressfox squirrel, red-cockaded woodpecker, and snowy plover. In addition toroosting areas and rookeries for wading bird species such as brown pelicans,tricolored herons, snowy egrets, and great egrets, the area contains nestingand perching areas for bald eagles. Loggerhead turtle nesting areas aredocumented around the mouth of the Imperial River.A significant natural area in this planning is the Corkscrew Swamp.Corkscrew Swamp contains one of the largest nesting colonies of endangeredwood storks in the country. Populations of these large wadingbirds have dropped because drainage canals have lowered the water table,decreasing the areas of wet pine flatwoods and wet prairies where theyforage. Other endangered species found within this planning unit includethe Florida panther, Florida black bear, Big Cypress fox squirrel,red-cockaded woodpecker, and the Everglades population of theSouthern mink.Ecological Problems. To present ecological concerns more effectively,this section describes the issues specific to larger areas in the planning unit,rather than those within smaller, individual assessment units.Estero Bay’s shoreline, a part of the Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve, isprotected from development by a buffer preserve ranging from a quarterof a mile to a mile wide. The area’s population is growing, however, anddevelopment pressure continues. Inland, urbanization has increased withina corridor extending from Fort Myers to Naples between Estero Bay andInterstate 75. As a result, some of the historical marsh and mangrove communitiesbordering the rivers in the planning unit have been lost to development.A network of drainage canals in the greater Fort Myers area andin smaller communities along the coast to the south has increased the flowof fresh water, which includes contaminated urban and agricultural runoffto Estero Bay. Between San Carlos Park and Vanderbilt Beach Estates

NoteworthyWater Quality Assessment Report:Everglades West Coast57Information on Point Sources in Planning UnitsPoint sources contributing pollutionto surface water or groundwater originate from discrete,well-defined areas such as a facilitydischarge from the end of apipe, a disposal well, or a wastewatersprayfield. Point sourcesgenerally fall into two majortypes: domestic wastewatersources (which consist of sewagefrom homes, businesses, andinstitutions) and industrial wastewatersources (which includewastewater, runoff, and leachatefrom industrial or commercialstorage, handling, or processingfacilities). Landfills, hazardouswaste sites, dry cleaning solventcleanup program (DSCP) sites,petroleum facility discharges, anddelineated ground water contaminationareas are also consideredpoint sources. These sites havethe potential to leach contaminantsinto ground water andsurface water, but the impacts aredifficult to quantify.A detailed assessment ofwater quality in the basins for thepurpose of TMDL developmentrequires identification of thesource(s) of waterbody impairment.As part of the preliminaryassessment, information wasgathered on permitted facilitiesthat discharge wastewater andlandfills and other point sources.Appendix F lists the basin’sdomestic and industrial surfacedischarge facilities, along withtheir design flows, by planningunit. It also lists landfills or solidwaste facilities by planning unit.Environmental RemediationEnvironmental remediationactivities cover a broad spectrumof cleanup programs. Theseinclude state-managed hazardouswaste, dry cleaning, andpetroleum cleanup programs,as well as the federal Superfundand Resource Conservation andRecovery Act (RCRA) programs.These programs are designedto remediate ground water andsoil contamination that pose athreat to public health and theenvironment.The National Priorities List(NPL) is a consolidated list of theuncontrolled hazardous wastesites that pose the greatest threatto public health or the environment.Sites are listed on the NPLupon completion of a preliminaryassessment, site inspection, andhazardous ranking system evaluationto determine their potentialfor adverse impacts and priorityfor corrective action. The EPASuperfund program administersthe cleanup of NPL sites.The Department’s state-fundedcleanup program administers thecleanup of contaminated hazardouswaste sites when enforcementaction taken against aresponsible party is unsuccessfulor when no responsible party isidentified.Delineated Ground Water Contamination AreasThe Department’s DelineationProgram was establishedin response to the discoveryof ground water contaminatedby ethylene dibromide (EDB),a soil fumigant used in thirtyeightFlorida counties to controlnematodes in citrus groves androw crops. The program nowincludes ground water contaminatedby other pesticides,industrial solvents, and nutrients.The coverage of delineatedareas in this program is notintended to include all sourcesof contaminated ground water inFlorida. The Delineation Programis designed to ensure theprotection of public health overconsumption of potable groundwater supplies and to minimizethe potential for cross-contaminationof adjacent ground waterresources.The Delineation Program’sprimary responsibilities are to• delineate areas of knownground water contamination,• implement a water wellconstruction permitting/application process thatrequires stringent water wellconstruction standards, and• require well water testing aftercompletion of the water wellto ensure the potable qualityof the water source.Any newly constructed waterwells in delineated areas, andexisting water wells found to becontaminated, are remediated byinstalling individual water treatmentsystems or by connectingthe users to public water supplysystems.Nonpoint Sources and Land UsesRainfall generates stormwaterrunoff. As it flows over the landand through the ground, runoffmay carry nonpoint source pollutionfrom many different sourcesto lakes, rivers, and estuaries in awatershed, and into ground watersupplies. Nonpoint sources alsoinclude atmospheric depositionand leaching from agriculturallands, urban areas, and unvegetatedlands. The pollutants inrunoff often include fertilizers,bacteria, metals, sediments,petroleum compounds, andmetals.

58Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastBermsElongated ridges.EutrophicationA process by which awaterbody becomes rich indissolved nutrients, oftenleading to algal blooms,low dissolved oxygen, andchanges in communitycomposition. Eutrophicationoccurs naturally, but can beaccelerated by human activitiesthat increase nutrientinputs to the waterbody.along Interstate 75, sheet flows have been obstructed by a series of bermsand dikes. These have affected inland water tables and wetland hydroperiodsin a large area and have also increased freshwater flows to the bay.Other significant impacts have come from wetlands destruction,shoreline alterations, and the construction of causeways that have alteredwater circulation patterns. Contamination from nutrients (nitrogen andphosphorus), suspended solids, and turbidity has increased, as has thedeposition of muck. As a result, eutrophication is accelerating. Red tideoutbreaks occur periodically; the algae produces a toxin that can harmwildlife and humans.There is anecdotal evidence that the bay’s seagrass beds and fisherieshave declined significantly since the 1960s because of increased turbidity,low DO levels, and the altered timing of freshwater flows. Seagrassesare an extremely important indicator of overall surface water quality andecosystem health. These grass flats are found in shallow waters, usuallyno deeper than six to eight feet. Any factors that reduce light penetrationaffect seagrass productivity, including the growth of algae and epiphytes(fueled by excess nutrients in wastewater and stormwater runoff), andturbidity from sediment resuspension. Seagrasses are also vulnerable todamage from boat propellers.Seagrasses support an interlinked community of diverse marine organisms,including algae, worms, mollusks, benthic organisms, sea turtles, andwaterbirds. They are an important feeding ground for the manatee, andthey also provide valuable shelter and nursery and juvenile habitat for manycommercial and recreational fish and shellfish such as spotted seatrout,snook, red drum, shrimp, and bay scallop. The grasses help to stabilizeshifting sands on the bottom of the bay, increase water clarity by trappingfine bottom sediments, and reduce nutrient levels in the water.Sediments in some areas of Estero Bay are contaminated with heavymetals such as cadmium, lead, and zinc. These contaminants can releasetoxins for years as the sediments are disturbed and redistributed by naturalprocesses and human activities. In high enough concentrations, they canbe damaging or deadly to aquatic life and can affect human health.Estero Island, a barrier island that lies west of Estero Bay, is heavilydeveloped. The town of Fort Myers Beach, at the northern end ofthe island, is a center for tourist and recreational activities, and there arenumerous boat ramps and marinas in the area that support commercial andrecreational fishing. All of these activities have the potential to degradewater quality through contaminated runoff, petroleum spills, and rawsewage discharges from boats.Fish Consumption AdvisoriesThere are no freshwater fish consumption advisories in this planningunit. There are, however, the following marine fish consumptionadvisories:

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast59Fish Species Waterbody AdvisoryShark (greater than 43 inches) All Coastal Waters No ConsumptionKing Mackerel (greater than All Coastal Waters No Consumption39 inches)Shark (less than 43 inches) All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionKing Mackerel (33 to 39 All Coastal Waters Limited Consumptioninches)Spotted Seatrout (greater All Coastal Waters Limited Consumptionthan 20 inches)Little Tunny All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionCobia All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionGreater Amberjack All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionBluefish All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionCrevalle Jack All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionWater Quality Improvement Plans and ProjectsWater quality improvement projects for the Everglades West CoastBasin are presented in Chapter 2. For this planning unit, no managementplans or projects complying with the Department’s guidance for reasonableassurance have been provided for the 2002 list of impaired waters.Waters will not be placed on the Verified List if the Departmentreceives reasonable assurance that existing or proposed projects and/or programsare expected to result in the attainment of water quality standards orconsistently improve water quality over time. Chapter 4 and Appendix Ccontain additional information on the requirements for reasonableassurance.• Southwest Coast (West Collier) Planning UnitGeneral DescriptionThe Southwest Coast (West Collier) planning unit, which stretchesover approximately 904 square miles (not including coastal WBIDs),lies mostly in Collier County, with small portions in Lee and HendryCounties. The single most conspicuous feature of the Southwest Coastplanning unit is the expansive system of canals constructed during the1960s for the GGE land development project. The GGE canals channeldrainage from approximately 200,000 acres into the Gordon River, NaplesBay, and Faka Union Bay. Impacts from the canal system include theoverdrainage of surface waters, lowered ground water levels, altered drainagepatterns, reduction of habitats, and declines in agricultural potential.The construction of the GGE has dramatically lowered the ground watertable and changed salinity regimes in coastal areas of the planning unit.Current water quality in the region’s rivers and bays is undoubtedly linkedto these major hydrologic changes. Other significant named waterbodiesin the planning unit are the Cocohatchee River and Canal, Faka UnionCanal, Gordon River, Haldeman Creek, Henderson Creek, Lake Trafford,Rookery Bay, and Tamiami Canal.Population centers include Naples, Marco Island, Golden Gate, andGoodland. Naples is the largest population center, with 20,727 people

60Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast(SWFRPC, 2003). Naples started out as a small fishing village andbeachside resort for the wealthy in the late 1880s, and underwent intensivedevelopment in the 1960s. Although Marco Island was settled in the 1870sand only officially became a city on August 27, 1997, recent archeologicalexcavations indicate habitation by the Calusa Indians and their ancestorsfrom 500 to 1500 A.D. Today the coastal area abounds in commercialand residential development and is fueled by a tourist- and service-basedeconomy.Figure 3.4 is a composite map of the planning unit that shows potentiallyimpaired waters and potential point sources of pollution.Water Quality SummaryThe Southwest Coast planning unit was initially divided into 24 subbasins,as presented in the Everglades West Coast Status Report (November2001). For the purposes of this report, the Southwest Coast has had anumber of segments added to it. These are specifically coastal segmentsthat lie on the western edge of the planning unit. These segments allow forassessment of the marine areas with which the surface waters of the planningunit interact. A total of 20 coastal segments were added, and so theSouthwest Coast planning unit now consists of 44 waterbody segments.The other segments in the planning unit are classified as streams, lakes,or estuaries. There are 12 subbasins classified as streams, which total about81.5 miles of surface waters. Although these waterbodies are classified as“streams,” most are canals. The planning unit contains an extensive networkof canals and water control structures to facilitate flood control, sincethe area’s topographic relief is low.Aside from the newly introduced coastal estuarine segments, theSouthwest Coast planning unit also includes 10 land-based estuarine subbasins,which cover approximately 141.8 square miles and contain about46.2 miles of surface waters. In addition to this, there are 2 subbasins classifiedas lakes. They total about 3.5 square miles and contain 3.1 squaremiles of surface waters.Table 3.6 summarizes the water quality assessment status of allwaterbody segments in the planning unit. The table and figure show thatseven waterbody segments in this planning unit are impaired. An integralpart of the assessment of this planning unit lay with the introduction of alarge set of surface water quality data, which was provided to the Departmentby Collier County, the effects of which were quite evident. Whereasonly four segments were found to be potentially impaired in the EvergladesWest Coast Status Report in 2001, Table 3.6 now indicates that sevensegments have been verified impaired. Also, waterbodies in this planningunit that previously had either no data, or insufficient data for any assessment,had valuable sample points added to them, allowing for verificationof both impairment or non-impairment for a number of parameters. Theadditional data continued to be useful, as it aided in identifying a numberof parameters as potentially impaired and as candidates for placement onthe Planning List.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast61Figure 3.4: Composite Map of the Southwest Coast Planning Unit

62Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 3.6: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Southwest Coast Planning UnitWBID3259A3259BWaterbodySegmentCocohatcheeRiverCocohatcheeRiver CanalWaterbodyType 1 Class 2 1998 303(d)List ParametersofConcernStream II DO, BOD,ColiformsData Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria 3VerifiedPotentiallyImpaired (Cat.3c) for ListedParametersImpaired (Cat.4a, 4b, 4c, or5) for ListedParameters 4Not Impaired(Cat. 2)for ListedParametersEPA’s 305(b)/303(d)Integrated ReportAssessment Categoryfor WBID 5Mercury (in DO Turbidity 5fish tissue)Stream IIIF N/A N/A DO Arsenic,Cadmium,Chlorophyll a,Copper, Lead,Turbidity, Zinc3259C Gordon River Stream IIIF DO, BOD,Coliforms,Nutrients3259D3259E3259FGordon RiverCanalHendersonCreek CanalGolden GateCanalDO,ColiformsN/A Chlorophyll a,TurbidityStream IIIF N/A N/A DO Chlorophyll a, 5TurbidityStream IIIF N/A N/A DO Turbidity 5Stream IIIF N/A DO N/A Chlorophyll a,Turbidity3259G Naples Bay Estuary IIIM Nutrients Chlorophylla3259HHendersonCreek Canal53c3cN/A N/A 3cStream IIIF N/A DO N/A Chlorophyll a,Turbidity3259I West Collier Stream IIIF N/A DO N/A Chlorophyll a, 3cTurbidity3259J Rookery Bay Estuary II N/A N/A N/A N/A 3b3259K Runoff toGulfStream IIIF N/A N/A N/A N/A 3b3259L3259M3259N3259O3259P3259QBlackwaterRiverRunoff toGulfRunoff toGulfFaka UnionCanalFergusonRiverCenter ofOuter ClamBayStream IIIF N/A N/A DO Chlorophylla, FecalColiforms,Turbidity5Estuary II N/A N/A N/A DO, Fecal 2Coliforms,TurbidityEstuary II N/A N/A N/A DO, Fecal 2Coliforms,TurbidityStream IIIF N/A DO N/A Chlorophyll 3cv, FecalColiforms,TurbidityEstuary II N/A N/A N/A DO, Fecal 2Coliforms,TurbidityEstuary IIIM N/A N/A N/A N/A 3a3c

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast63Table 3.6 (continued)WBID3259R3259S3259TWaterbodySegmentRunoff toGulfRunoff toGulfLake Avalon,Mid-LakeWaterbodyType 1 Class 2 1998 303(d)List ParametersofConcernData Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria 3VerifiedPotentiallyImpaired (Cat.3c) for ListedParametersImpaired (Cat.4a, 4b, 4c, or5) for ListedParameters 4Not Impaired(Cat. 2)for ListedParametersEPA’s 305(b)/303(d)Integrated ReportAssessment Categoryfor WBID 5Estuary II N/A N/A N/A DO, FecalColiforms,Turbidity2Estuary II N/A N/A N/A N/A 3bLake IIIF N/A N/A N/A N/A 3b3259W Lake Trafford Lake IIIF DO,Nutrients3259X Drainage toCorkscrew3259Y VanderbiltWaterway3259Z Little HickoryBay8061 SouthwestCoast Gulf 18061A Little HickoryIsland Park8061B Bonita BeachPark8061C Lely BarefootBeach8061D WiggansPass North8061E WiggansPass StatePark8061F VanderbiltBeach8062 SouthwestCoast Gulf 2Turbidity TSI DO, Fluoride,Mercury(in fishtissue), FecalColiforms,TotalColiformsStream IIIF N/A DO N/A N/A 3cEstuary IIIM N/A N/A N/A N/A 3bEstuary IIIM N/A N/A N/A N/A 3bCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A N/A 3aCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A Fecal3aColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A N/A 3a8062A Clam Pass Coastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A DO, FecalColiforms8062BParkshoreBeachCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiforms8062C Doctors Pass Coastal IIIM N/A DO N/A DO, FecalColiforms8062DLowdermilkPark BeachCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiforms8062E Naples Pier Coastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiforms53a3a3a3b3a23a3c3a3a

64Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 3.6 (continued)WaterbodyWBID Segment8063 SouthwestCoast Gulf 38063A GordonsPass8064 SouthwestCoast Gulf 48064A TigertailBeach8064B ResidenceBeach8064C CaxambasPark8065 SouthwestCoast Gulf 5Notes:Data Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria 3VerifiedWaterbodyType 1 Class 2 1998 303(d)List ParametersofConcernPotentiallyImpaired (Cat.3c) for ListedParametersImpaired (Cat.4a, 4b, 4c, or5) for ListedParameters 4Not Impaired(Cat. 2)for ListedParametersEPA’s 305(b)/303(d)Integrated ReportAssessment Categoryfor WBID 5Coastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A N/A 3aCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A DO, Turbidity,FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A N/A FecalColiformsCoastal IIIM N/A N/A Bacteria (inshellfish)Arsenic,DO, FecalColiforms,Turbidity1The designation “stream” includes canals, rivers, and sloughs. The designation “lake” includes some marshes.2The state’s surface water classifications are as follows:Class I: Potable water suppliesClass II: Shellfish propagation or harvestingClass III: Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlifeClass IV: Agricultural water suppliesClass V: Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in this class)3The EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report categories are as follows:1—Attains all designated uses;2—Attains some designated uses;3a—No data and information are available to determine if any designated use is attained;3b—Some data and information are available, but they are insufficient for determining if any designated use is attained;3c—Meets Planning List criteria and is potentially impaired for one or more designated uses;4a—Impaired for one or more designated uses and the TMDL is complete;4b—Impaired for one or more designated uses but no TMDL is required because the impairment is not caused by apollutant;4c—Impaired for one or more designated uses, but no TMDL is required because a proposed pollution control measureprovides reasonable assurance that the water will attain standards in the future; and5—Water quality standards are not attained and a TMDL is required.4Parameters in italics are in Category 4 (a, b, or c) waters that do not require TMDL development5The assessment categories listed in this column represent the status of each WBID as a whole, based on multiple parameters.The hierarchy for assigning these categories is Category 5, then 4, then 3c, then 2, and then 3b; that is, each WBID isassigned a category based on the highest category assigned to an individual parameter. For example, if WBID 9999 has totalcoliforms as Category 5, fecal coliforms as Category 3c, and coliforms-shellfish as Category 2, the single assessment call forthe WBID is Category 5.F = Fresh waterM = MarineNA = Not applicable—i.e., there are no parameters listed.3a23a3a3a5

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast65Permitted Discharges and Land UsesPoint Sources. There are five facilities in this planning unit permittedfor surface water discharge.Facility ID Facility Name DescriptionFL0026271 City of Naples Wastewater Domestic Wastewater TreatmentTreatment PlantPlantFL0141356Collier County SouthRegional WRFDomestic Wastewater TreatmentPlantFL0141399 Collier County north WRF Domestic Wastewater TreatmentPlantFL0141704 Port of the Islands – South Domestic Wastewater TreatmentPlantFLG830224 Pick KWIK #154 Petroleum Cleanup GP (longterm)PermittedCapacityMGD10 108 813.5 8.50.2 0.2N/ADesignCapacityMGDN/ANonpoint Sources. Based on land use summary information, almost60 percent of land use in the planning unit consists of wetlands, with agriculturethe second most prominent land use at about 18 percent. Urbanland use ranks third, although it is heavily concentrated along the coastline.Although urban and agriculture are the main human land uses in thisplanning unit, some lands that are zoned as agricultural may actually beswamps. Agricultural and urban land uses can be associated with nonpointdischarges of pollutants and eroded sediments.Ecological SummaryEcological Resources. Of the three planning units in the EvergladesWest Coast Basin, the Southwest Coast contains the largest number ofOFWs. The designation applies to• Barefoot Beach acquisitions• Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Recreation Area• Wiggins Pass Estuarine Area and the Cocohatchee River system• Rookery Bay State Aquatic Preserve• Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve• Rookery Bay acquisitions• Collier-Seminole State Park• Cape Romano–Ten Thousand Islands State Aquatic Preserve• Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve• Florida Panther National Wildlife RefugeNumerous threatened and endangered species are found in the SouthwestCoast, including black bears, Florida panthers, and wading birdspecies such as the little blue heron, snowy egret, tricolored heron, whiteibis, and brown pelican. The extensive shoreline and islands along theSouthwest Coast planning unit contain mangrove swamps and seagrassbeds that provide valuable nursery and feeding habitat for many species ofbirds, reptiles, fish, and crustaceans.

66Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastEcological Problems. Lake Trafford, which provides importanthabitat for wildlife, including numerous migratory bird species, has beenseverely impaired by agricultural, urban, and septic tank runoff. Problemsexist with algal blooms and weed growth, and fi sh kills occur periodically.Because the lake comprises the headwaters of the Corkscrew SwampSanctuary, the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed, and the FakahatcheeStrand system, the potential exists for contaminated water to affectecological resources in a large area.Although a number of areas immediately along the coast are protectedfrom development, the region’s population is growing and developmentpressure continues. Just inland from the coast, urbanization has increasedin a corridor extending from Fort Myers to Naples between Estero Bayand Interstate 75. The Golden Gate Canal system east of Naples channelsfreshwater drainage from about 200,000 acres into the Gordon River,Naples Bay, and Faka Union Bay. It has altered sheet flows of water,decreased wetland acreage, and lowered ground water tables. By increasingfreshwater flows to coastal areas, the canal system has altered the salinityregimes on which estuarine productivity depends. In Naples Bay, waterquality has been further degraded because of urban stormwater runoff andshoreline alterations, particularly the construction of a large network offinger canals bordered by residential development in the southern part ofthe city.Fish Consumption AdvisoriesThere are no freshwater fish consumption advisories in this planningunit. There are, however, the following marine fish consumptionadvisories:Fish Species Waterbody AdvisoryShark (greater than 43 inches) All Coastal Waters No ConsumptionKing Mackerel (greater than All Coastal Waters No Consumption39 inches)Shark (less than 43 inches) All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionKing Mackerel (33 to 39 All Coastal Waters Limited Consumptioninches)Spotted Seatrout (greater All Coastal Waters Limited Consumptionthan 20 inches)Little Tunny All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionCobia All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionGreater Amberjack All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionBluefish All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionCrevalle Jack All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionWater Quality Improvement Plans and ProjectsWater quality improvement projects for the Everglades West CoastBasin are presented in Chapter 2. For this planning unit, no managementplans or projects complying with the Department’s guidance for reasonableassurance have been provided for the 2002 list of impaired waters.Waters will not be placed on the Verified List if the Departmentreceives reasonable assurance that existing or proposed projects and/or

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast67programs are expected to result in the attainment of water quality standardsor consistently improve water quality over time. Chapter 4 andAppendix C contain additional information on the requirements for reasonableassurance.• Inner (East Collier) Drainage Area Planning UnitGeneral DescriptionThe Inner (East Collier) Drainage Area planning unit covers approximately1,985 square miles and includes portions of Collier, Hendry,Monroe, Broward and Miami-Dade Counties.Most of the lands in the Inner Drainage Area planning unit are in theBig Cypress National Preserve, an area of low fl atlands containing cypresstrees, pine forests, and wet and dry prairies. Other lands include the SeminoleIndian Reservation and a portion of the Miccosukee Indian Reservation.Significant waterbodies include the Barron River Canal, TamiamiCanal, and L-28 Canal.Population centers in the Inner Drainage Area include Immokalee inthe northwestern corner and Everglades City/Chokoloskee in the southwesterncorner of the planning unit. Cattle ranchers and citrus farmers fi rstsettled in Immokalee in the late 1880s. Today it is a major source of wintervegetables, citrus, and cattle for the United States. The Calusa Indians,who built a large shell mound on Chokoloskee Island, inhabited EvergladesCity/Chokoloskee many centuries ago. The area’s fi rst permanent whiteresidents were farmers who settled along the Allen River (now the BarronRiver) just after the Civil War. They had to eke out a living on the banksof the river, the only naturally high ground in the region.In 1923, Barron G. Collier made Everglades City the headquarters forhis Tamiami Trail road-building company. Although many constructionjobs were lost in 1928 when the Tamiami Trail was completed, commercialfishing grew. Sponge fishing flourished in the 1940s, shrimping in the1950s, and stone crabbing in the 1960s. Today the region’s economy stillrelies on commercial fishing as well as recreational fishing and tourism.Although not economically significant, small quantities of oil and gas havebeen produced in this region since 1943.Figure 3.5 is a composite map of the planning unit that shows potentiallyimpaired waters and potential point sources of pollution.Water Quality SummaryThe Inner Drainage Area planning unit of the Everglades West CoastBasin is divided into 8 subbasins consisting of 7 stream subbasins and 1estuarine subbasin. The stream subbasins contain about 90.2 miles of surfacewaters, most of which are canal systems. The northern portion of theunit is mainly flat agricultural land, requiring canal structures to direct theflow of water for irrigation. The Barron River, the most prominent of thesestructures, runs almost the entire length of the unit, and contains a numberof adjoining control structures to regulate flows in the watershed.The southern portion of the Inner Drainage Area unit, part of the BigCypress National Preserve, is almost entirely wetlands. The one estuarine

68Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastFigure 3.5: Composite Map of the Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast69subbasin, along the coast, is about 10 square miles and has about 6.6 milesof surface waters.Table 3.7 summarizes the water quality assessment status of all waterbodysegments in the planning unit. Waterbodies represented by these datainclude the C-139 Canal, Barron River Canal, Tamiami Canal, L-28 Interceptor,Feeder Canal, and the L-28 Gap. The table and figure indicate thatno waterbody segments within this planning unit are considered impairedper the Verified List Methodology; however, most of the segments indicatepotential impairments for DO and fish consumption advisories for mercuryin fish tissue. It is important to note that since the area is predominantlyswampy, the low DO is probably a consequence of swamp discharge, whichis naturally low in DO.Permitted Discharges and Land UsesPoint Sources. There are three facilities permitted for surface waterdischarge in this planning unit.Facility ID Facility Name DescriptionPermittedCapacity MGDFl0027618 City of Everglades, City Domestic WWTP 0.115 0.115WWTFN/AN/AFLG910751 Handy Food Store #91 Petroleum CleanupGP (long term)FLG910977 Davis Oil Company/Davis Service CenterPetroleum CleanupGP (long term)N/ADesignCapacity MGDN/ANonpoint Sources. Based on land use summary information, about70 percent of the planning unit comprises wetlands, and a little over 21percent is agricultural area. Urban land use is very low, at only about 0.4percent of the planning unit, indicating that the area is very sparsely populated.Agricultural and urban land uses can be associated with nonpointdischarges of pollutants and eroded sediments.Ecological SummaryEcological Resources. OFWs in this planning unit include slivers ofthe Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Fakahatchee Strand StatePreserve, Everglades National Park, and all of the Big Cypress NationalPreserve.The overwhelming ecological feature in this planning unit is the BigCypress Swamp, a flat, forested, low-lying region, on the western sideof the Everglades. The swamp is called “big” because of its size—morethan 2,400 square miles (1.5 million acres)—not because of the size of itscypress trees. More than half of the surface water flowing to the Evergladescomes from the swamp. Although it is somewhat higher in elevation thanthe Everglades, Big Cypress is mostly inundated with water for more than300 days out of each year. Unique forests of mixed bald cypress and royalpalms have developed along channels in the limestone; in higher areas, pineand hammock forests predominate. In other areas of the swamp, dwarfcypress savannas and open prairies grow on thin soils of marl and sand ontop of the limestone. Epiphytic plants are abundant in forested areas. TheBig Cypress National Preserve, managed by the National Park Service,

70Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 3.7: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary for the Inner Drainage Area Planning UnitWBIDWaterbodySegmentType 1 Class 2 Concern1998 303(d) ListWaterbody Parameters ofData Evaluation under the Impaired Surface Waters Rule Criteria 3PotentiallyImpaired (Cat.3c) for ListedParameters3255 C-139 Stream IIIF N/A DO, Fish(mercury)Verified Impaired(Cat. 4a, 4b, 4c,or 5) for ListedParameters 4N/ANot Impaired(Cat. 2)for ListedParameters 4EPA’s 305(b)/303(d)Integrated ReportAssessment Categoryfor WBID 53c3261ABarron RiverCanalEstuary IIIM N/A Cadmium, Fish(mercury) ,MercuryChlorophyll a,Turbidity3c3261B3261CTamiamiCanalBarron RiverCanal3261D TamiamiCanal3266 L-28InterceptorStream IIIF DO, Cadmium,Copper,Mercury (infish tissue)DO, Fish(mercury)Stream IIIF N/A DO, Fish(mercury)Copper, Arsenic,Cadmium,Chlorophylla, Iron, Lead,Turbidity,UnionizedAmmonia, ZincChlorophyll a,Fluoride, TotalColiforms,Fecal Coliforms,TurbidityStream IIIF N/A N/A N/A 3aStream IIIF DO, Nutrients,Mercury (infish tissue)DO, Fish(mercury)3267 FeederCanal3269 L-28 Gap Stream IIIF DO DO, Fish(mercury)Notes:Turbidity,UnionizedAmmoniaStream IIIF N/A N/A N/A 3aTurbidity,UnionizedAmmonia1The designation “stream” includes canals, rivers, and sloughs. The designation “lake” includes some marshes.2The state’s surface water classifications are as follows:Class I: Potable water suppliesClass II: Shellfish propagation or harvestingClass III: Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlifeClass IV: Agricultural water suppliesClass V: Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in this class)3The EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report categories are as follows:1—Attains all designated uses;2—Attains some designated uses;3a—No data and information are available to determine if any designated use is attained;3b—Some data and information are available, but they are insufficient for determining if any designated use is attained;3c—Meets Planning List criteria and is potentially impaired for one or more designated uses;4a—Impaired for one or more designated uses and the TMDL is complete;4b—Impaired for one or more designated uses but no TMDL is required because the impairment is not caused by a pollutant;4c—Impaired for one or more designated uses, but no TMDL is required because a proposed pollution control measure providesreasonable assurance that the water will attain standards in the future; and5—Water quality standards are not attained and a TMDL is required.4Parameters in italics are in Category 4 (a, b, or c) waters that do not require TMDL development3c3c3c3c

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast71Table 3.7 (continued)5The assessment categories listed in this column represent the status of each WBID as a whole, based on multipleparameters. The hierarchy for assigning these categories is Category 5, then 4, then 3c, then 2, and then 3b; that is, eachWBID is assigned a category based on the highest category assigned to an individual parameter. For example, if WBID9999 has total coliforms as Category 5, fecal coliforms as Category 3c, and coliforms-shellfish as Category 2, the singleassessment call for the WBID is Category 5.F = Fresh waterM = MarineNA = Not applicable—i.e., there are no parameters listed.makes up only 729,000 acres of this area, and is home to numerous threatenedand endangered species including black bears, Florida panthers, andwading bird species.Ecological Problems. In 1943, Florida’s first oil-producing well wasdrilled just north of the Big Cypress Preserve in Sunniland. Today therestill are oil-producing wells in Big Cypress, and the fi ll roads created toserve the industry affect the region’s hydrology.Expanding agricultural development in the north-central portion ofthe planning unit is associated with increased freshwater drainage andnutrient contamination that could degrade water quality flows to BigCypress National Preserve. Pollutants of concern include excessive nutrients,coliform bacteria, biochemical oxygen demand, mercury, and lowlevels of DO.The L-28 Interceptor Canal contains elevated nutrient levels and lowlevels of DO. Water quality in the Feeder Canal that flows to Big Cypressis poor.Fish Consumption AdvisoriesThe following freshwater fish consumption advisories occur eitherwithin or adjacent to the eastern edge of this planning unit:Location County Fish Species AdvisoryBig Cypress Preserve, Turner River Canal, Collier, Largemouth bass, bowfin, Limited Consumptionand Collier and Loop Road culverts Monroe and garL-28 Tieback Canal Collier Largemouth bass, bowfin,gar, and warmouthLimited ConsumptionPortions of canals L-1, 2, 3, and 4 drainingthe Everglades Agricultural AreaWater Conservation Area 3 (outside ofbut immediately adjacent to the easternedge of the Inner Drainage Area)Shark River Drainage (outside of butimmediately adjacent to the eastern edgeof the Inner Drainage Area)Water Conservation Area 3HendryMiami-Dade,BrowardMiami-Dade,MonroeMiami-Dade,BrowardLargemouth bass, bowfin,gar, and warmouthWarmouth, oscar, yellowbullhead, mayan cichlid, andspotted sunfishLargemouth bass, bowfin,and garLargemouth bass, bowfin,and garLimited ConsumptionLimited ConsumptionNo ConsumptionNo Consumption

72Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastThe following marine fish consumption advisories occur within themarine portion of this planning unit:Fish Species Waterbody AdvisoryShark (greater than 43 All Coastal Waters No Consumptioninches)King Mackerel (greater than All Coastal Waters No Consumption39 inches)Shark (less than 43 inches) All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionKing Mackerel (33 to 39 All Coastal Waters Limited Consumptioninches)Spotted Seatrout (greater All Coastal Waters Limited Consumptionthan 20 inches)Little Tunny All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionCobia All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionGreater Amberjack All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionBluefish All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionCrevalle Jack All Coastal Waters Limited ConsumptionWater Quality Improvement Plans and ProjectsWater quality improvement projects for the Everglades West CoastBasin are presented in Chapter 2. For this planning unit, no managementplans or projects complying with the Department’s guidance for reasonableassurance have been provided for the 2002 list of impaired waters.Waters will not be placed on the Verified List if the Departmentreceives reasonable assurance that existing or proposed projects and/or programsare expected to result in the attainment of water quality standards orconsistently improve water quality over time. Chapter 4 and Appendix Ccontain additional information on the requirements for reasonableassurance.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast73Chapter 4: The Verified List of ImpairedWatersPublic ParticipationThe public was encouraged to participate in the process of developingand adopting the Verified Lists of impaired waters for the six Group 1basins across the state. Basin-specific draft Verified Lists of waters thatmet the requirements of the Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR) weremade available to the public on July 12, 2002. The lists were placed onthe Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s (Department) TotalMaximum Daily Load (TMDL) Web site, at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl, and were also sent on request to interested parties by mail orvia e-mail.Citizens were given the opportunity to comment on the draft listsboth in person and/or in writing. Eight public meetings were held acrossthe state to encourage public participation on a basin-by-basin basis. TheDepartment also accepted written comments for 45 days beginning July 12,2002, and ending August 26, 2002.Following the public meetings for the Group 1 basins, which took placebetween July 19 and July 25, 2002, revised draft lists were made availableto the public on August 7, 2002. The public had the opportunity to commenton these revised lists either in writing and/or at a final public meetingin Tallahassee. Comments received by August 26, 2002, were consideredin preparing the revised draft lists. Comments on any of the lists wereaccepted and considered throughout the full comment period.Table 4.1 lists the schedule for the development and adoption of theGroup 1 Verified Lists, including the public meetings. The schedule for theEverglades West Coast Basin is highlighted in boldface type. Appendix Icontains documentation provided during the public comment period.The final basin-specific Verified Lists developed through the publicparticipation process were adopted by Secretarial Order during the week ofAugust 26–30, 2002, and were submitted to the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) on October 1, 2002, as the state’s current 303(d) listof impaired waters. On March 11, 2003, the Secretary signed a new Orderamending the Group 1 Verified Lists.

74Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 4.1: Schedule for Development and Adoption of the Group 1 Verified ListsDateJuly 12, 2002July 19, 2002July 22, 2002July 22, 2002July 23, 2002July 24, 2002July 24, 2002July 25, 2002August 7, 2002August 14, 2002August 26, 2002August 26–30,2002October 1, 2002March 11, 2003Scheduled ActivityPublication of Draft Verified List and Beginning of Public Comment PeriodPublic Meeting at Marco Island on the Statewide Verified List for All Group 1 BasinsPublic Meeting in Tallahassee on the Ocklockonee and St. Marks BasinsPublic Meeting in Live Oak on the Suwannee River Basin (Including the Aucilla,Coastal, Suwannee, Waccasassa, and Orange Creek Basins)Public Meeting in Leesburg on the Ocklawaha River and Orange Creek BasinsPublic Meeting in St. Petersburg on the Tampa Bay BasinPublic Meeting in Belle Glade on the Lake Okeechobee BasinPublic Meeting in Fort Myers on the Everglades West Coast BasinPublication of Revised Draft ListPublic Meeting in Tallahassee on Revised Draft List for All Basins, and PublicComments and Input from Prior Public MeetingsFinal Deadline for Receiving Public CommentsAdoption of Verified List by Secretarial OrderSubmittal to EPA as State’s 303(d) List of Impaired WatersVerified List Amended by Secretarial OrderIdentification of Impaired WatersWaters on both the Verified and Planning Lists must meet specificthresholds and data sufficiency and data quality requirements in Rule62-303, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). Appendix A describes thelegislative and regulatory background for the development of the Planningand Verified Lists. Appendix D contains a detailed methodology thatdescribes the criteria and thresholds required for both lists under the IWR.Any waters that do not have sufficient data to be analyzed in accordancewith the requirements of the IWR will remain on the 1998 303(d)list of impaired waters maintained by the EPA. These waters are notde listed. They will be sampled during the next watershed managementcycle so that their impairment status can be verified.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Review of Florida’sAmended Section 303(d) ListOn June 11, 2003, the EPA released a Decision Document based on itsreview of the Department’s amendments to Florida’s 1998 Section 303(d)list. The EPA found that the Department’s Group 1 update substantiallymet the intent of Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and partiallyapproved the submission.Applying its own evaluation methodology, the EPA proposed listing80 additional waterbody segments/pollutants for public comment byJuly 18, 2003. Under this methodology, approximately half of the addedwaters failed to meet water quality criteria for dissolved oxygen (DO),but no causative pollutant could be identified. Florida law precludes theDepartment from including such waters on its Verified List of impairedwaters until the causative pollutant is known. The majority of theremaining waters were added to the list based on a different interpretationof the methodology for assessing potential impairment for bacteria. The

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast75Department agreed to apply this alternative methodology when assessingthe next group (Group 2) of waterbodies for bacteria.The consequence of having the EPA add waters to Florida’s Section303(d) list is that the EPA would be obligated to propose TMDLs forthese waters. However, the EPA has proposed assigning a “low” priorityto these waterbodies, thus providing the Department an opportunityto investigate them further. The section on “Prioritization of ListedWaters” in Chapter 5 provides additional details on the criteria for high-,low-, and medium-priority waters. Information on the status of Florida’samended Section 303(d) list can be found on the EPA’s Web site at http://www.epa.gov/region4/water/tmdl/florida.The Verified List of Impaired WatersTable 4.2 contains the Verified List of impaired waters for the EvergladesWest Coast Basin, and Figure 4.1 shows waters on the VerifiedList. For presentation purposes, the entire watershed for the listed water ishighlighted. However, only the main waterbody in the assessment unit hasbeen assessed, and other waters in the watershed may not be impaired.Pollutants Causing ImpairmentsEstero Bay Planning UnitThere are 65 sampling stations within the planning unit. The majorityof surface waters here are described as estuarine systems, which cover a totalof 47.2 square miles. The Lakes Park (WBID 3258X) assessment unit isthe sole lake in this area and it has an estimated area of 1.0 square mile.Estero Bay Planning Unit Waterbody SegmentsSegment and WBID#Estero Bay Wetlands (3258A)Hendry Creek (3258B)Hendry Creek Marine (3258B1)Estero Bay Drainage (3258C)Estero Bay Drainage Marine (3258C1)Estero River (3258D)Estero River Marine (3258D1)Imperial River (3258E)Imperial River Marine (3258E1)Oak Creek (3258F)Tenmile Canal (3258G)Spring Creek (3258H)Spring Creek Marine (3258H1)Estero Bay (3258I)The Lakes Park (3258X)Estero Bay Gulf (8060)Bowditch Park (8060A)Lynn Hall Park (8060B)Lovers Key State Park (8060C)TypeEstuarineStreamEstuarineStreamEstuarineStreamEstuarineStreamEstuarineEstuarineEstuarineStreamEstuarineEstuarineLakeCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastal

76Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 4.2: The Verified List of Impaired WatersPlanningUnitEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayWBID3258B3258B3258B13258B13258B13258C3258C3258D13258D1Water BodySegmentHendryCreekHendryCreekHendryCreekMarineHendryCreekMarineHendryCreekMarineEstero BayDrainage(MullockCreek)Estero BayDrainage(MullockCreek)Estero RiverMarineEstero RiverMarine1998 303(d)Parametersof ConcernParametersIdentified Usingthe 2002ImpairedSurface WatersRulePriorityfor TMDLDevelopmentProjectedYear for TMDLDevelopmentWaterBody TypeCommentsStream DO DO Low 2007 DO met verificationthreshold per IWR.biochemical oxygendemand (BOD) andnutrients are the causativepollutant.Stream Nutrients Nutrients(chlorophyll a)Estuary Nutrients Nutrients(chlorophyll a)Low 2007 Chlorophyll a met theverification thresholdper IWR indicating anutrient impairment.Medium 2007 Chlorophyll a met theverification thresholdper IWR indicatinga nutrient impairment.Both nitrogenand phosphorus areidentified as causativepollutants.Estuary DO DO Medium 2007 DO met the verificationthreshold per theIWR. Nutrients areindicated as a causativepollutant.EstuaryFecalColiformsMedium 2007Stream DO Medium 2007 DO met verificationthreshold per IWR.BOD is the causativepollutant.StreamEstuaryNutrients(chlorophyll a)Nutrients(chlorophyll a)Estuary Copper Medium 2007Medium 2007 Chlorophyll a met theverification thresholdper IWR indicatinga nutrient impairment,with nitrogenand phosphorus bothbeing the causativepollutants.Medium 2007 Chlorophyll a metthe verificationthreshold per theIWR. Both nitrogenand phosphorus areidentified as causativepollutants.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast77Table 4.2 (continued)PlanningUnit WBIDEstero 3258D1BayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBayEsteroBaySouthwestCoastSouthwestCoast3258D13258E3258EWater BodySegmentEstero RiverMarineEstero RiverMarineImperialRiverImperialRiver3258E1 ImperialRiver Marine3258H1 SpringCreekMarine3258H13258H13259A3259BSpringCreekMarineSpringCreekMarineCocohatcheeRiverCocohatcheeRiver Canal1998 303(d)Parametersof ConcernParametersIdentified Usingthe 2002ImpairedSurface WatersRulePriorityfor TMDLDevelopmentProjectedYear for TMDLDevelopmentWaterBody TypeCommentsEstuary DO Medium 2007 DO met the verificationthreshold per theIWR. Nutrients areidentified as the causativepollutants.EstuaryFecalColiformsMedium 2007Stream DO DO (Low) 2007 DO met verificationthreshold per IWR.Both nitrogen andphosphorus are indicatedas the causativepollutants.Stream Nutrients Nutrients(chlorophyll a)Estuary Copper Medium 2007Estuary Nutrients Nutrients(chlorophyll a)Estuary Copper Medium 2007(Low) 2007 Chlorophyll a met theverification thresholdper IWR indicatinga nutrient impairment,with nitrogenand phosphorus bothbeing the causativepollutants.Medium 2007 Chlorophyll a metthe verificationthreshold per theIWR. Both nitrogenand phosphorus areidentified as causativepollutants.Estuary DO DO Medium 2007 DO met the verificationthreshold per theIWR. Nutrients areindicated as the causativepollutant.Stream DO DO Low 2007 DO met verificationthreshold per IWR andnitrogen is the causativepollutant.Stream DO Medium 2007 DO met the verificationthreshold per theIWR. BOD is indicatedas the causativepollutant.

78Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 4.2 (continued)PlanningUnit WBIDSouthwest3259DCoastSouthwestCoastSouthwestCoastSouthwestCoastSouthwestCoast3259E3259L3259WWater BodySegmentGordonRiver CanalHendersonCreek CanalBlackwaterRiverLakeTrafford8065 SouthwestCoast Gulf 5N/A 8999 Florida GulfCoast1998 303(d)Parametersof ConcernParametersIdentified Usingthe 2002ImpairedSurface WatersRulePriorityfor TMDLDevelopmentProjectedYear for TMDLDevelopmentWaterBody TypeCommentsStream DO Medium 2007 DO met the verificationthreshold per theIWR. BOD is indicatedas the causativepollutant.Stream DO Medium 2007 DO met the verificationthreshold per theIWR. BOD is indicatedas the causativepollutant.Stream DO Medium 2007 DO met the verificationthreshold per theIWR. Phosphorus isindicated as the causativepollutant.Lake Nutrients Nutrients(Trophic StateIndex-TSI)CoastalCoastalBacteria (inshellfish)Mercury (infish tissue)Low 2007 TSI met verificationthreshold perIWR. Nitrogen andphosphorus are bothcausative and limitingpollutants.Medium 2007 Listed based onchange in shellfishharvesting classification(downgradedfrom approved toconditional).Medium 2011 Age of data verifiedto be within last 7.5years. Confirmedrecent data for coastalfish advisory formackerel. Includesnearshore areas inWBIDs 8060, 8061,8062, 8063, 8064, and8065.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast79Figure 4.1: Waters on the Verified List

80Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastThe Estero River, Imperial River, and Spring Creek are the majortributaries that drain into Estero Bay. Warm, slow-moving estuarinewaterbodies such as these often have naturally low DO and are vulnerableto varying water quality, volume, and seasonal inputs. As such, these systemsmay then be more susceptible to water quality impacts resulting fromhuman activities.Within the Estero Bay planning unit, there are 15 subbasins and 4coastal segments. Of these, 7 were found to have verified exceedances ofwater quality criteria for at least 1 parameter. A list of the subbasins withexceedances is provided in the following table. Only stations with datafrom 1995 to 2001 were used.Impaired Subbasin Summary for the Estero Bay Planning UnitWBID SubbasinAreain Sq.MilesStationsUsed TypeParametersNot MeetingStandards3258B Hendry Creek 0.83 2 Stream Nutrients, DO3258B13258C3258D1Hendry CreekMarineEstero BayDrainageEstero RiverMarine10.81 1 Estuarine Nutrients, DO,Fecal Coliforms1.73 7 Stream Nutrients, DO8.55 4 Estuarine Nutrients,Copper, DO,Fecal Coliforms3258E Imperial River 16.46 5 Stream Nutrients, DO3258E1 Imperial River 6.67 2 Estuarine Copper, DOMarine3258H1 Spring CreekMarine4.61 2 Estuarine Nutrients, DO,CopperSouthwest Coast Planning UnitThere are a total of 215 sampling stations within this planning unit.This planning unit contains 24 subbasins and 20 coastal segments. Twelvesubbasins are classified as streams, containing a total of about 81.5 miles ofsurface waters. It should be noted that although these waterbodies are classifiedas streams, they are mainly canal systems used to facilitate the flowof water for urban and agricultural purposes. This is necessary due to thelow topographic relief in the area. The Southwest Coast planning unit hasbeen heavily developed in terms of water control structures.Part of the Southwest Coast unit lies along the coast of the Gulf ofMexico, and so it includes 12 estuarine subbasins, which cover approximately141.8 square miles and contain about 46.2 miles of surface waters.There are also 2 subbasins in this unit that are classified as lakes. In total,they are about 3.5 square miles in area, and contain 3.1 square miles ofsurface waters.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast81Southwest Coast Planning Unit Waterbody SegmentsSegment and WBID#Cocohatchee River (3259A)Cocohatchee River Canal (3259B)Gordon River (3259C)Gordon River Canal (3259D)Henderson Creek Canal (3259E)Golden Gate Canal (3259F)Naples Bay (3259G)Henderson Creek Canal (3259H)West Collier (3259I)Rookery Bay (3259J)Runoff to Gulf (3259K)Blackwater River (3259L)Runoff to Gulf (3259M)Runoff to Gulf (3259N)Faka Union Canal (3259O)Ferguson River (3259P)Outer Clam Bay (3259Q)Runoff to Gulf (3259R)Runoff to Gulf (3259S)Lake Avalon (3259T)Lake Trafford (3259W)Drainage to Corkscrew (3259X)Vanderbilt Wway (3259Y)Little Hickory Bay (3259Z)Southwest Coast Gulf 1 (8061)Little Hickory Island Park (8061A)Bonita Beach Park (8061B)Lely Barefoot Beach (8061C)Wiggans Pass North (8061D)Wiggans Pass State Park (8061E)Vanderbilt Beach (8061F)Southwest Coast Gulf 2 (8062)Clam Pass (8062A)Parkshore Beach (8062B)Doctors Pass (8062C)Lowdermilk Park Beach (8062D)Naples Pier (8062E)Southwest Coast Gulf 3 (8063)Gordons Pass (8063A)Southwest Coast Gulf 4 (8064)Tigertail Beach (8064A)Residence Beach (8064B)Caxambas Park (8064C)Southwest Coast Gulf 5 (8065)TypeStreamStreamStreamStreamStreamEstuarineEstuarineStreamStreamEstuarineStreamStreamEstuarineEstuarineStreamEstuarineEstuarineEstuarineEstuarineLakeLakeStreamEstuarineEstuarineCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastalCoastal

82Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastOf the 24 subbasins and 20 coastal segments in the Southwest Coastplanning unit, 7 were found to have verified exceedances of water qualitycriteria for at least 1 parameter. A list of the subbasins with exceedancesis provided in the table below. Only stations with data from 1995 to 2001were used.Impaired Subbasin Summary for the Southwest Coast Planning UnitWBIDSubbasinArea in Sq.MilesStationsUsedTypeParameters Not MeetingStandards3259A Cocohatchee River 10.31 8 Stream DO3259B Cocohatchee River Canal 1.93 29 Stream DO3259D Gordon River Canal 20.12 9 Stream DO3259E Henderson Creek Canal 20.63 7 Stream DO3259L Blackwater River 41.00 18 Stream DO3259W Lake Trafford 3.41 14 Lake Nutrients (TSI)8065 Southwest Coast Gulf 5 99.10 19 Coastal Bacteria in ShellfishInner Drainage AreaThe Inner Drainage Area planning unit is divided into 8 subbasins.There are 44 sampling stations within this unit from which data has beenpreviously collected.This planning unit contains 7 stream subbasins, and only 1 estuarinesubbasin. The stream subbasins contain about 90.2 miles of surface waters.Most of the waters in these stream subbasins are canal systems. The northernportion of this unit is mainly flat agricultural land, requiring canalstructures to direct the flow of water for irrigation purposes. The BarronRiver is most prominent in the Inner Drainage Area unit, as it runs downalmost the entire length of the unit and has a number of control structuresalong it that aid in regulating water flow within the Everglades West CoastBasin.The southern portion of the Inner Drainage Area unit is part of theBig Cypress National Preserve and is almost entirely wetland area. The oneestuarine subbasin in this unit is located along the coast, is about 10 squaremiles in area, and has about 6.6 miles of surface waters.Inner Drainage Area Planning Unit Waterbody SegmentsSegment and WBID#TypeC-139 (3255) StreamBarron River Canal (3261A) EstuarineTamiami Canal (3261B)StreamBarron River Canal (3261C) StreamTamiami Canal (3261D)StreamL-28 Interceptor (3266) StreamFeeder Canal (3267)StreamL-28 Gap (3269) Stream

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast83There are eight subbasins in the Inner Drainage Area planning unit.Of these, none were found to have verified exceedances of water qualitycriteria for at least one parameter. Only stations with data from 1995 to2001 were used.Adoption Process for the Verified List of Impaired WatersThe Verified List must be submitted in a specific format (Rule 62-303.710, F.A.C.) before being approved by the order of the Department’sSecretary. The list must specify the pollutant and concentration causingthe impairment. If a waterbody segment is listed based on water qualitycriteria exceedances, then the list must provide the applicable criteria.However, if the listing is based on narrative or biological criteria, or impairmentof other designated uses, and the water quality criteria are met, theVerified List is required to specify the concentration of the pollutant relativeto the water quality criteria and explain why the numeric criterion is notadequate.For waters with exceedances of the DO criteria, the Department mustidentify the pollutants causing or contributing to the exceedances and listboth the pollutant and DO on the Verified List.For waters impaired by nutrients, the Department is required to identifywhether nitrogen or phosphorus, or both, are the limiting nutrients,and specify the limiting nutrient(s) in the Verified List.The Verified List must also include the priority and schedule forTMDL development established for a waterbody segment as required byfederal regulations, and must note any waters that are being removed fromthe current Planning List. In future watershed management cycles, the listmust also note waters that are being removed from any previous VerifiedList for the basin. Chapter 5 discusses the development of TMDLs, includingthe prioritization process.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast85Chapter 5: Monitoring Priorities and TMDLDevelopment, Allocation, and ImplementationStakeholder InvolvementThe Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA) requires the FloridaDepartment of Environmental Protection (Department) to work closelywith stakeholders to develop and implement Total Maximum Daily Loads(TMDLs). In addition, the Allocation Technical Advisory Committee(ATAC) report discussed later in this chapter includes recommendationsthat rely heavily on stakeholder involvement.Stakeholder involvement in the TMDL process will vary with eachphase of implementation to achieve different purposes (Table 5.1).The Department will work cooperatively with a number of key stakeholdersto develop, allocate, and implement TMDLs in the Everglades WestCoast Basin. These stakeholders include the following:• Cities and Towns—Naples, Bonita Springs, Golden Gate, Fort MyersBeach, Marco Island, Everglades City, Chokoloskee• Counties—Lee, Collier, Hendry• Regional Agencies of State—South Florida Water ManagementDistrict (SFWMD), Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council(SWFRPC), Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management (ABM),Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program (CHNEP)• State of Florida Agencies—Fish and Wildlife ConservationCommission (FWC), Department of Agriculture and ConsumerServices (DACS)• Tribes—Seminole Indian Tribe of Florida, Miccosukee Indian Tribeof Florida• Non-Governmental Organizations—Conservancy of SouthwestFlorida, Southwest Florida Watershed Council, Responsible GrowthManagement Coalition

86Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 5.1: Stakeholder Involvement in the Total Maximum Daily Load ProgramWatershed Management CyclePhase 1:Preliminary EvaluationPhase 2:Strategic Monitoringand AssessmentPhase 3:Development andAdoption of TMDLsPhase 4:Development of BasinManagement Action PlanPhase 5:Implementation of BasinManagement Action PlanNature of Stakeholder InvolvementClose coordination with local stakeholders to conduct a preliminarybasin water quality assessment; inventory existingand proposed management activities; identify managementobjectives and issues of concern; develop a strategic monitoringplan; and produce a preliminary Status Report thatincludes a Planning List of potentially impaired waters.Cooperative efforts between the Department and localstakeholders to collect additional data; get data intoSTORET; complete water quality assessment; producea final Assessment Report that includes a Verified List ofimpaired waters for Secretarial adoption; and provide anopportunity for stakeholders to document reasonable assurance(for Department review) that existing managementplans and projects are adequate to restore water qualitywithout the establishment of a TMDL.Coordination with stakeholders to discuss TMDL modelframework, including model requirements, parameters to bemodeled, model endpoints, design run scenarios and preliminaryallocations; communication of science used in theprocess; and public workshops for rule adoption of TMDLs.Broad stakeholder participation in developing a Basin ManagementAction Plan (B-MAP) (including detailed allocationsand implementation strategies), incorporating it into existingmanagement plans where feasible; public meetings duringthe planning process.Emphasis on implementing the B-MAP, other voluntarystakeholder actions, and local watershed managementstructures; Department will continue to provide technicalassistance, fulfill oversight responsibilities, and administerNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)point and nonpoint source permits.Prioritization of Listed WatersBecause TMDLs cannot be developed for all listed waters during asingle watershed management cycle, waterbodies will be prioritized usingthe criteria in the Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR) (Rule 62-303.500,F.A.C.). The rule states that when establishing the TMDL developmentschedule for waters on the Verified List, the Department will prioritizeimpaired waterbody segments according to the severity of the impairmentand its designated uses, taking into account the most serious water qualityproblems, most valuable and threatened resources, and risks to humanhealth and aquatic life.Table 5.2 lists priorities for TMDL development for waterbody segmentsin the Everglades West Coast Basin. Impaired waters are prioritizedas high, medium, or low priority.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast87Table 5.2: Priorities for TMDL Development in the Everglades West Coast BasinPlanning UnitWaterbody IdentificationNumber (WBID)Parameters of ImpairmentPriority for TMDLDevelopmentEstero Bay 3258B DO LowEstero Bay 3258B Nutrients (chlorophyll a) LowEstero Bay 3258B1 Nutrients (chlorophyll a) MediumEstero Bay 3258B1 DO MediumEstero Bay 3258B1 Fecal Coliforms MediumEstero Bay 3258C DO MediumEstero Bay 3258C Nutrients (chlorophyll a) MediumEstero Bay 3258D1 Nutrients (chlorophyll a) MediumEstero Bay 3258D1 Copper MediumEstero Bay 3258D1 DO MediumEstero Bay 3258D1 Fecal Coliforms MediumEstero Bay 3258E DO LowEstero Bay 3258E Nutrients (chlorophyll a) LowEstero Bay 3258E1 Copper MediumEstero Bay 3258H1 Nutrients (chlorophyll a) MediumEstero Bay 3258H1 Copper MediumEstero Bay 3258H1 DO MediumSouthwest Coast 3259A DO LowSouthwest Coast 3259B DO MediumSouthwest Coast 3259D DO MediumSouthwest Coast 3259E DO MediumSouthwest Coast 3259L DO MediumSouthwest Coast 3259W Nutrients (TSI) LowSouthwest Coast 8065 Bacteria (in shellfish) MediumSouthwest Coast 8999 Mercury (in fish tissue) MediumHigh-priority waters are as follows:• Waterbody segments where the impairment poses a threat to potablewater supplies or human health.• Waterbody segments where the impairment is due to a pollutantregulated by the Clean Water Act and the pollutant has contributedto the decline or extirpation of a federally listed threatened or endangeredspecies, as indicated in the Federal Register listing the species.Low-priority waters are as follows:• Waterbody segments that are listed before 2010 because of fishconsumption advisories for mercury (due to the current insufficientunderstanding of how mercury cycles in the environment).• Human-made canals, urban drainage ditches, and other artificialwaterbody segments that are listed only due to exceedances of thedissolved oxygen (DO) criteria.

88Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast• Waterbody segments that were not on the Planning List but wereidentified as impaired during Phase 2 of the watershed managementapproach and were included on the Verified List, unless the segmentmeets the second high-priority criterion.• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has also proposedassigning to this category the list of additional waterbody segmentsthat the agency developed using its own evaluation methodology,until the Department has had the opportunity to investigate thesewaterbodies further.All segments not designated high or low priority are medium priority;these will be prioritized based on the following factors:• The presence of Outstanding Florida Waters (OFWs).• The presence of waterbody segments that fail to meet more thanone designated use from among aquatic life, primary contact andrecreation, fish and shellfish consumption, and drinking water andprotection of human health.• The presence of waterbody segments that exceed an applicable waterquality criterion or alternative threshold with a frequency of greaterthan 25 percent at a minimum confidence level of 90 percent.• The presence of waterbody segments that exceed more than oneapplicable water quality criterion.Administrative needs of the TMDL program, including meeting aTMDL development schedule agreed to with the EPA, basin prioritiesrelated to the Department’s watershed management approach, and thenumber of administratively continued permits in the basin.TMDL DevelopmentDuring Phase 3 of the watershed management cycle, TMDLs will bedeveloped for both point and nonpoint sources of pollution in impairedwaterbodies and will be adopted by rule at the end of this phase.TMDL development involves determining the maximum amount ofa given pollutant that a waterbody can assimilate and still meet the applicablenumeric or narrative water quality criterion for the pollutant. Inmost cases, this “assimilative” capacity will be determined using computermodeling (both hydrodynamic and water quality models) that predicts thefate and transport of pollutants in the receiving waters. Modeling for thetypical TMDL will include model setup, calibration, and verification, followedby a variety of model runs that determine the assimilative capacity ofthe water under worst-case conditions.State law and federal regulations require that TMDLs include a marginof safety (MOS) that takes into account “any lack of knowledge concerning

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast89the relationship between effluent limitations and water quality.” The EPAhas allowed states to establish either a specific MOS (typically some percentageof the assimilative capacity) or an implicit MOS based on conservativeassumptions in the modeling. To date, the Department has elected toestablish an implicit MOS based on predictive model runs that incorporatea variety of conservative assumptions (they examine worst-case ambientflow conditions and worst-case temperature, and assume that all permittedpoint sources discharge at their maximum permitted amount).It is important to note that TMDLs will be developed only for theactual pollutants causing the impairment in the listed waterbody. These arecalled the “pollutants of concern.” In Florida, the most commonly listedpollutants of concern are nutrients, sediments, and coliforms. TMDLs willnot be developed for those impairments that are not due to pollutant discharges—forexample, natural conditions, physical alterations such as damsand channelization, or changes in the flow of the water. In other cases, awaterbody may be deemed potentially impaired based on bioassessmentdata or toxicity data. In these cases, the Department must determine theactual pollutant causing the impairment before a TMDL can be developed.Schedule for TMDL DevelopmentTable 5.3 lists the schedule for TMDL development in the EvergladesWest Coast Basin by planning unit.TMDL Allocation and ImplementationInitial Allocation of Pollutant LoadingsThe FWRA requires that a TMDL include “establishment of reasonableand equitable allocations . . . among point and nonpoint sources . . . .”The Department refers to this as the “initial allocation,” which is adoptedby rule. For the purposes of allocating the required pollutant loadings, theterm “point sources” primarily includes traditional sources such as domesticand industrial wastewater discharges. Recent EPA guidance requiresstates also to include as point sources those stormwater systems that arecovered by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)stormwater permit. However, NPDES-permitted stormwater dischargesare not subject to the same types of effluent limitations, cannot be centrallycollected and treated, and typically have not invested in treatment controlsto the same degree as traditional point sources. Nonpoint sources includeintermittent, rainfall-driven, and diffuse sources of pollution associatedwith everyday human activities, including runoff from urban land uses,agriculture, silviculture, and mining; discharges from failing septic systems;and atmospheric deposition.These point and nonpoint definitions do not directly relate to whethera source is regulated. Some nonpoint sources such as stormwater systemsare permitted under the regulatory programs of the Department orwater management districts, while others, such as agricultural stormwaterdischarges, are not. This distinction is important because implementation

90Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable 5.3: Schedule for TMDL Development in the Everglades West Coast BasinWaterbodyPlanning UnitIdentificationNumber (WBID)Parameters of Impairment`TMDL DevelopmentScheduleEstero Bay 3258B DO 2007Estero Bay 3258B Nutrients (chlorophyll a) 2007Estero Bay 3258B1 Nutrients (chlorophyll a) 2007Estero Bay 3258B1 DO 2007Estero Bay 3258B1 Fecal Coliforms 2007Estero Bay 3258C DO 2007Estero Bay 3258C Nutrients (chlorophyll a) 2007Estero Bay 3258D1 Nutrients (chlorophyll a) 2007Estero Bay 3258D1 Copper 2007Estero Bay 3258D1 DO 2007Estero Bay 3258D1 Fecal Coliforms 2007Estero Bay 3258E DO 2007Estero Bay 3258E Nutrients (chlorophyll a) 2007Estero Bay 3258E1 Copper 2007Estero Bay 3258H1 Nutrients (chlorophyll a) 2007Estero Bay 3258H1 Copper 2007Estero Bay 3258H1 DO 2007Southwest Coast 3259A DO 2007Southwest Coast 3259B DO 2007Southwest Coast 3259D DO 2007Southwest Coast 3259E DO 2007Southwest Coast 3259L DO 2007Southwest Coast 3259W Nutrients (TSI) 2007Southwest Coast 8065 Bacteria (in shellfish) 2007Southwest Coast 8999 Mercury (in fish tissue) 2011of the allocations to nonpoint sources outside the authority of regulatoryprograms will require cooperation from dischargers to voluntarily implementbest management practices (BMPs).While a “detailed allocation” ultimately will be necessary to fullyimplement a TMDL, a key goal of the initial allocation is to assign responsibilityfor pollutant reductions between point and nonpoint sources. Forpoint sources, allocations will be implemented through the Department’sNPDES wastewater and stormwater permitting programs. The implementationof nonpoint source reductions will be done through a combinationof regulatory and nonregulatory processes.Initial allocations of pollutant loadings will also be made to historicalsources (e.g., the phosphorus-laden sediments at the bottom of a lake) andupstream sources (those entering into an impaired waterbody). Upstreamsources include sources from outside of Florida, and these sources willreceive reduced allocations similar to in-state sources.The FWRA provided direction for the allocation of TMDLs anddirected the Department to provide guidance on the allocation processby establishing an ATAC, consisting of representatives of key stakeholder

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast91groups. The committee’s report recommended a three-step process fordeveloping initial allocations and addressed detailed allocations for nonpointsources, stakeholder involvement, the use of BMPs, and other TMDLimplementation issues (Department, February 1, 2001). A copy of theATAC report can be found at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/Allocation.pdf .Implementation Programs and ApproachesThe FWRA designates the Department as the lead agency in coordinatingthe implementation of TMDLs and provides examples of the kindsof programs and approaches through which TMDLs may be carried out,including the following:1. Permitting and other existing regulatory programs (Table 5.4 liststhe municipal NPDES stormwater permittees in the Everglades WestCoast Basin);2. Nonregulatory and incentive-based programs, including BMPs,cost sharing, waste minimization, pollution prevention, and publiceducation;3. Basin Management Action Plans (B-MAPs) developed under theFWRA;4. Other water quality management and restoration activities—forexample, Surface Water Improvement Management (SWIM) plansapproved under Section 373.456, Florida Statutes (F.S.);5. Pollutant trading or other equitable economically based agreements;6. Public works including capital facilities; or7. Land acquisition.These programs and approaches will be carried out at local, regional,state, and possibly federal levels. TMDL implementation will requireextensive stakeholder involvement throughout the state, and, in some cases,between Florida and other states. The following are programs that will beimportant to TMDL implementation.Table 5.4: Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permittees in theEverglades West Coast BasinBay Creek Community Development DistrictBayside Community Development DistrictCity of Bonita SpringsEast Mulloch Water Control DistrictFlorida Department of TransportationGateway Service DistrictLee CountySan Carlos Estates Drainage DistrictThe Brooks Community Development DistrictTown of Fort Myers Beach

92Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastNPDES PermitsAll point sources that discharge to surface water bodies require aNPDES permit. These permits can be classified into two types: domesticor industrial wastewater discharge permits, and stormwater permits.NPDES permitted point sources may be affected by the developmentand implementation of a TMDL. All NPDES permits include “reopenerclauses” that allow the department to incorporate new discharge limitswhen a TMDL is established. These new limitations may be incorporatedinto a permit at the time of TMDL implementation or at the next permitrenewal, depending on the timing of permit renewal and workload. ForNPDES Municipal stormwater permits, the Department intends to insertthe following statement once a B-MAP is completed:The permittee shall undertake those activities specified in the(Name of Water Body) Basin Management Action Plan in accordancewith the approved schedule set forth in the B-MAP.Domestic and Industrial Wastewater PermitsIn addition to NPDES-permitted facilities, all of which discharge tosurface waters, Florida also regulates domestic and industrial wastewaterdischarges to ground water via land application. Since ground and surfacewater are so intimately linked in much of the state, reductions in loadingsfrom these facilities may be needed to meet TMDL limitations for pollutantsin surface waters. If such reductions are identified in the BMAP, theywould be implemented through modifications of the existing state permits.Florida Stormwater/Environmental Resource PermitsFlorida was the first state in the country to require the treatment ofstormwater from all new development with the implementation of thestate’s stormwater treatment rule in 1982. Today, except in the area servedby the Northwest Florida Water Management District (NWFWMD),new development projects receive an environmental resource permit thatcombines stormwater flood protection, stormwater treatment, and wetlandprotection/mitigation into a single permit. These permits are designedto obtain 80 percent average annual load reduction of total suspendedsolids. This level of treatment may need to be increased, depending onthe allocation of load reductions, especially for nutrients. For example, theSJRWMD recently has adopted basin specific criteria for the Lake ApopkaBasin. These criteria require the phosphorus loading from new developmentnot to exceed predevelopment phosphorus loading.Local Land Development CodesSince structural stormwater treatment practices can only achieve certainlevels of load reductions, and because aquatic ecological impacts oftenare associated with the change in hydrology that accompanies urban development,local land development codes that promote “low impact development”are an important component of restoring impaired waters. Localcodes may need to be reviewed to determine what changes can be made topromote developments that minimize impervious surfaces (e.g., reduced

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast93street widths, use of pervious pavements), promote protection of vegetation,promote protection and restoration of riparian buffers along streams andlakes, and adopt the principles of the Program Florida Yards and Neighborhoodsin local landscaping codes.Best Management PracticesTypically, Best Management Practices (BMPs) refer to a practice orcombination of practices that, based on sound science and the best professionaljudgment available, are determined to be the most effective and practicablemeans of reducing nonpoint source pollution and improving waterquality. Both economic and technological considerations are included inthe evaluation of what is practicable. BMPs may include structural controls(such as retention areas or detention ponds) or nonstructural controls (pollutionprevention source controls such as street sweeping or public education).Many BMPs have been developed for urban stormwater to reducepollutant loadings and peak flows. These BMPs accommodate site-specificconditions, including soil type, slope, depth to ground water, and the designationof receiving waters.Unfortunately, emphasis on BMPs to reduce nonpoint source pollutionfrom agricultural operations really has not been widespread until passage ofthe FWRA. Recognizing that the development and adoption of BMPs maytake several years, the legislature authorized the use of Interim Measures(IMs) during the BMP development process for agricultural operations. Inessence, IMs are a set of logical conservation practices designed to reduceagricultural nonpoint pollution using current knowledge and best professionaljudgment. These practices will evolve into more formal BMPs asbetter scientific data on their effectiveness is obtained. Once the FloridaDACS adopts BMPs, the Department is charged with verifying their effectivenessin reducing agricultural nonpoint source pollution. Once verifi ed,agricultural operations that have implemented adopted BMPs will receivea waiver of liability or presumption of compliance similar to that granted adeveloper who obtains an environmental resource permit.Other ApproachesThe success of implementing nonpoint source TMDL load allocationswill require variety, creativity, and stakeholder commitment to watershedmanagement and personal stewardship. In addition to BMPs, other possiblestrategies for meeting TMDLs, restoring water quality, and preventingfurther degradation of Florida’s watersheds include cost sharing, wasteminimization, pollution prevention, new approaches to land use design anddevelopment, and pollutant trading. The Department will assemble a technicaladvisory committee to assist in the development of a pollutant-tradingrule, which must be reviewed by the legislature prior to its adoption. TheDepartment will also seek advisory input on TMDL allocation and implementationissues from local, regional, and statewide stakeholder groups.

94Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastDevelopment of Basin ManagementAction PlansThe FWRA authorizes the Department to develop B-MAPs forimplementing TMDLs. The ATAC recognized that these plans should bedeveloped with extensive stakeholder input. It also recognized that beforedeveloping a plan, the Department should involve affected stakeholders indiscussions to build consensus on detailed allocations based on the initialallocations.The B-MAPs would contain final allocations among the affected parties,strategies for meeting the allocations, schedules for implementation,funding mechanisms, applicable local ordinances, and other elements. Incases where stakeholder consensus could not be reached on detailed allocationsand/or a B-MAP within a reasonable time, the Department woulddevelop the allocations.Once a B-MAP is developed, the Department will make it availablefor public review and comment. The template for the B-MAPs is underdevelopment; the plans are likely to include a description of both regulatoryand nonregulatory approaches to meeting specific TMDLs.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast95ReferencesBarbour, M. T., J. Gerritsen, and J. S. White. 1996. Development of theStream Condition Index (SCI) for Florida. Prepared for the FloridaDepartment of Environmental Protection. Owings Mills, MD: TetraTech, Inc.Copeland, R. 2001. Draft General Discussion for Each Group 1 AssessmentReports for Year 2000. Florida Department of Environmental ProtectionGround Water Protection Section. Technical Document 2001–01.Cox, J., R. Kautz, M. MacLaughlin, and T. Gilbert. 1994. Closing theGaps in Florida’s Wildlife Habitat Conservation System. Tallahassee:Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.Davis, S. M., and J. C. Ogden, Eds. 1994. Everglades: The Ecosystem andIts Restoration. Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press.DeFede, J. 2000. “Destiny’s Child—The Battle over Homestead is DéjàVu All Over Again.” Miami New Times. Available:http://www.miaminewtimes.com/issues/2000-12-21/defede.html.DuBar, J. R. 1958. “Stratigraphy and Paleontology of the Late NeoceneStrata of the Caloosahatchee River Area of Southern Florida. ” FloridaGeological Survey, Geological Bulletin No. 40.Duke University Wetlands Center Web site. Available:http://www.env.duke.edu/wetland/big_cyp.htm.Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management. 2000. State of the Bay Report.Fort Myers: Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council.Everglades City Web site. 2000. History of the Everglades. Available:http://www.evergladesonline.com/history.Fernald, E. A., and E. D. Purdum, Eds. 1998. Water Resources Atlas ofFlorida. Tallahassee: Institute of Science and Public Affairs, FloridaState University.Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 1999. FloridaAgricultural Facts.Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 2001. A Report to theGovernor and the Legislature on the Allocation of Total Maximum DailyLoads in Florida. Tallahassee, Florida: Bureau of Watershed Management,Division of Water Resource Management.Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 2000. South FloridaWater Quality Protection Program—Draft. West Palm Beach: SoutheastDistrict. Compact Disc.Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 1998. Florida WaterQuality Assessment—305(b) Report. Tallahassee.Florida Division of Forestry. 2001. Picayune Strand State Forest Web site.Available: http://www.fl -dof.com/Fm/stforest/picayune.Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Web site. FishConsumption Health Advisories. Available:http://floridaconservation.org/fishing/health.html.Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Web site. Florida’sEndangered Species, Threatened Species, and Species of Special Concern,Offi cial Lists. Available: http://www.state.fl.us/fwc/pubs.

96Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastFlorida Natural Areas Inventory Web site. Available: http://www.fnai.org.Florida Outdoors Parks and Preserves Web site. Available: http://www.florida-outdoors.com/bigc.htm.Florida State University. Florida’s Mercury Menace and Mercury in TheirMidst. Available: http://www.research.fsu.edu/researchr/fallwinter97/features/mercury.html.Fort Myers News-Press. 1999. Newcomers Guide—SouthwestFlorida. Available: http://www.news-press.com/newcomers99/community.html.Friedemann, M., and J. Hand. 1989. Typical Water Quality Values forFlorida’s Lakes, Streams, and Estuaries. Tallahassee: Florida Departmentof Environmental Regulation.Gerritsen, J., B. Jessup, E. Leppo, and J. White. 2000. Development ofLake Condition Indexes (LCI) for Florida. Prepared for the FloridaDepartment of Environmental Protection. Owings Mills, MD: TetraTech, Inc.Great Outdoor Recreation Pages. 2001. Destinations: Big Cypress NationalPreserve. Available: http://www.gorp.com/default.htm.Green, R. C., K. M. Campbell, and T. M. Scott. 1990. Core DrillingProject: Lee, Hendry, and Collier Counties. Florida Geological Survey,Open File Report 37.Healy, H. G. 1975. Potentiometric Surfaces and Areas of Artesian Flow ofthe Floridan Aquifer of Florida, May 1974. Florida Bureau of Geology,Map Series 73.Herr, J. W., and J. E. Shaw. 1989. South Florida Water ManagementDistrict Ambient Groundwater Quality. West Palm Beach: SouthFlorida Water Management District Technical Publication 89-1.Hulbert, J. L. 1990. A Proposed Lake Condition Index for Florida.Tallahassee: Florida Department of Environmental Regulation.Jue, S., C. Kindell, and J. Wojcik. 2001. Florida Conservation Lands 2001.Florida Natural Areas Inventory. Tallahassee, FL.Klein, H., 1952. Ground Water Resources of the Naples Area, CollierCounty, Florida, Report of Investigations No. 11. Tallahassee: FloridaGeological Survey.Klein, H., Lichtler, W. F., and Schroeder, M. C., 1964. Geology andGround-Water Resources of Glades and Hendry Counties, Florida,Report of Investigations No. 37. Tallahassee: Florida GeologicalSurvey.Knapp, M. S., W. S. Burns, and T. S. Sharp. 1986. Preliminary Assessmentof the Ground Water Resources of Western Collier County, Florida.South Florida Water Management District Technical Publication 86-1,Part 1.McConnell, D. 1998. January 15th—This Date in Environmental History.The Good Earth Web site, Department of Geology, University ofAkron. Available: http://newmedia.avs.uakron.edu/geology/ge/cal/jan/jan15.htm.McCormack, F., J. K. Lewis, T. Swihart, W. Hinkley, and G. W.Willson, Jr. 1984. “Emerging Issues and Conflicts.” In E. A. Fernaldand D. J. Purdum, Eds. 1998. Water Resources Atlas of Florida.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast97Tallahassee: Florida State University, Institute of Science and PublicAffairs.McCoy, H. J., 1972. Hydrology of Western Collier County, Florida,Report of Investigations No. 63. Tallahassee: Florida GeologicalSurvey.McCoy, H. J., 1967. Ground Water in the Immokalee Area, CollierCounty, Florida, Information Circular No. 51. Tallahassee: FloridaGeological Survey.McPherson, B. F., and R. Halley. 1996. The South Florida Environment—A Region Under Stress. National Water Quality Assessment Program,U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1134.Maddox, G. L., J. M. Lloyd, T. M. Scott, S. B. Upchurch, and R. E. Copeland,Eds. 1992. Florida Ground Water Quality Monitoring Program–Volume 2, Background Hydrogeochemistry. Florida Geological Survey,Special Publication No. 34.Mendenhall, W., R. L. Scheaffer, and D. D. Wackerly. 1981. MathematicalStatistics with Applications, Second Edition. Boston, MA:Duxbury Press.National Atmospheric Deposition Program/National Trends Network(NADP/NTN) Web site. Available: http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/.National Wildlife Federation. 2001. Big Cypress National Preserve—Florida Everglades. Available: http://www.nwf.org/everglades/bigcypress.html.Parker, G. G., and C. W. Cooke. 1944. Late Cenozoic Geology of SouthernFlorida with a Discussion of the Groundwater. Florida GeologicalSurvey Bulletin 27.Pielou, E. 1997. Mathematical Ecology. New York: John Wiley andSons, Inc.Purdum, E. D., L. C. Burney, and T. M. Swihart. 1998. “History ofWater Management.” In E. A. Fernald and D. J. Purdum, Eds. 1998.Water Resources Atlas of Florida. Tallahassee: Institute of Science andPublic Affairs, Florida State University.Puri, H. S., and R. O. Vernon. 1964. Summary of the Geology of Florida.Florida Geological Survey Special Publication 5 (revised).Randazzo, A. F., and D. S. Jones, Eds. 1997. The Geology of Florida.Gainesville: University Press of Florida.Ross, L. T. 1990. Methods for Aquatic Biology. Florida Department ofEnvironmental Regulation. Technical Series 10(1):1–47. Tallahassee.Schroeder, M. C., D. L. Milliken, and S. K. Love. 1954. Water Resourcesof Palm Beach County, Florida. Florida Geological Survey Report ofInvestigations No. 13.Scott, T. M. 1992. A Geological Overview of Florida. Florida GeologicalSurvey Open File Report No. 50.Scott, T. M. 1988. Lithostratigraphy of the Hawthorn Group (Miocene) ofFlorida. Florida Geological Survey Bulletin No. 59.Scott, T. M., J. M. Lloyd, and G. Maddox, Eds. 1991. Florida’s GroundWater Quality Monitoring Program—Hydrogeological Framework.Florida Geological Survey Special Publications No. 32.

98Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastSinclair, W. C., and J. W. Stewart. 1985. Sinkhole Type, Development, andDistribution in Florida. Florida Geological Survey Map Series 100.Smith, K. R., and K. M. Adams. 1988. Ground Water Resource Assessmentof Hendry County, Florida. South Florida Water Management DistrictTechnical Publication 88-12, Part 1.South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force. 2001. SouthwestFlorida/Big Cypress Project Coordination Team (also known as PCT 5)Web site. Available: http://www.sfrestore.org/pct/sw/index.html.South Florida Water Management District. 2000. District Water ManagementPlan: Governing Board Draft. West Palm Beach.South Florida Water Management District. 1999. Estero Bay WatershedAssessment—Phase 1. Available: http://www.sfwmd.gov/org/exo/ftmyers/report-text/index.html.South Florida Water Management District. 1998. Big Cypress BasinWatershed Plan. West Palm Beach, FL.South Florida Water Management District. 1998. District Wide WaterSupply Assessment. West Palm Beach, FL.South Florida Water Management District. 1992. Water Supply Needs andSources: 1990–2010. West Palm Beach, FL.Southeastern Geological Society, Ad Hoc Committee on Florida HydrostratigraphicUnit Defi nition. 1986. Hydrogeological Unit of Florida.Florida Geological Survey Special Publication 28.Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Website. 2003. Total Populationand Population Projections. Available: http://www.swfrpc.org/Economic%20Data/popul.htm.Southwest Florida Water Quality Monitoring Consortium Web site. 2001.Available: http://wqc.ces.fau.edu/.Staats, E. 1997. “Undoing a Subdivision. The Everglades—AnOnline Tour through the River of Grass.” The Naples Daily News.Available: http://www.naplesnews.com/special/everglades/politics/subdivision.html.U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and South Florida Water ManagementDistrict. 2000. Central and Southern Florida Project, Southwest FloridaFeasibility Study—Draft.U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and South Florida Water ManagementDistrict. 1999. Central and Southern Florida Project, ComprehensiveReview Study, Final Integrated Feasibility Report and ProgrammaticEnvironmental Impact Statement.U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Environmental Impact Statementon Improving the Regulatory Process in Southwest Florida, Lee andCollier Counties, Florida.U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Demographic Profiles. Available:http://censtats.census.gov/cgi-bin/pct/pctProfi le.pl.U.S. Geological Survey. 2000a. The South Florida Environment—A Region Under Stress. Available: http://sflwww.er.usgs.gov/publications/circular/1134/esns/geo.html.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast99U.S. Geological Survey. 2000b. The South Florida Environment—A Region Under Stress. Available: http://sflwww.er.usgs.gov/publications/circular/1134/esas/index.html.Wedderburn, L. A., M. S. Knapp, D. P. Waltz, and W. S. Burns. 1982.Hydrogeologic Reconnaissance of Lee County, Florida—Part I: Text.South Florida Water Management District, Technical Publication82-1.White, W. A. 1970. Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula. FloridaGeological Survey Geological Bulletin No. 51.

Water Quality Assessment Report September 2003Everglades West Coast AppendicesTABLE OF CONTENTSAppendix A: Legislative and Regulatory Background on the WatershedManagement Approach and the Implementation of TMDLs.................................. 103Federal and State Legislation on Surface Water Quality and TMDLs.............................................103Determining Impairment Based on the State’s Impaired Surface Waters Rule...............................105Implementing TMDLs........................................................................................................................107Table A.1: Basin Groups for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle, byDepartment District Office .......................................................................................109Table A.2: Basin Rotation Schedule for TMDL Development and Implementation—Nine Year Cycle ........................................................................................................109Figure A.1: Five-Year Rotating Basin Cycle in the Department’s Six Districts......................110Table A.3: Potentially Affected Stakeholders and Actions To Achieve TMDLs .......................111Appendix B: Supplementary Ecological Information in the EvergladesWest Coast Basin ...................................................................................................... 112Ecoregions ..........................................................................................................................................112Figure B.1: Ecoregions and Subecoregions in the Everglades West Coast Basin...................113Natural Communities .........................................................................................................................114Table B.1: Natural Communities in the Everglades West Coast Basin....................................116Threatened and Endangered Species .................................................................................................117Table B.2: Listed Species in the Everglades West Coast Basin ................................................118Table B.3: Imperiled (non-listed) Species in the Everglades West Coast Basin .......................120Appendix C: Information on Reasonable Assurance .............................................. 121Background.........................................................................................................................................121Current Rule Text Relating to Evaluation of Pollution Control Mechanisms..................................122Responsible Parties for Reasonable Assurance Demonstration........................................................122Time Frame for Development of Documentation .............................................................................123What It Means To Be Under Local, State, or Federal Authority......................................................123Time Frame for Attaining Water Quality Standards.........................................................................123Parameter-Specific Nature of Demonstration....................................................................................124Information To Consider and Document when Assessing Reasonable Assurance in the IWR.......124Water Quality–Based Targets and Aquatic Ecological Goals ..........................................................125Interim Targets ...................................................................................................................................126Averaging Periods for Water Quality Targets...................................................................................126Estimates of Pollutant Reductions from Restoration Actions...........................................................126New Sources/Growth .........................................................................................................................126Examples of Reasonable Progress .....................................................................................................127Long-Term Requirements ..................................................................................................................127Appendix D: Methodology for Determining Impairment Based on theImpaired Surface Waters Rule................................................................................. 128

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

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 103Appendix A: Legislative and Regulatory Background on theWatershed Management Approach and theImplementation of TMDLsFederal and State Legislation on Surface Water Quality and TMDLsClean Water ActCongress enacted the Clean Water Act in 1972 with the goal of restoring andmaintaining the “chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters” (33U.S.C. § 1251[a]). The ultimate goal of the act is to eliminate the “discharge of [all]pollutants into navigable waters” (33 U.S.C. § 1251[a][1]).Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act requires states to report biennially to the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on their water quality. The 305(b) assessmentreport provides information on the physical, chemical, biological, and cultural features ofeach river basin in Florida. This initial assessment provides a common factual basis foridentifying 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 ascience-based methodology for assessing water quality and an accurate picture of thewaters that are most impaired or vulnerable to contamination.Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to submit to the EPA lists ofsurface waters that do not meet applicable water quality standards and establish totalmaximum daily loads (TMDLs) for each of these waters on a schedule. A pollution limitis then allocated to each pollutant source in an individual river basin.A TMDL represents the maximum amount of a given pollutant that a waterbody canassimilate and meet all of its designated uses (see the sidebar on Florida’s surface waterquality classifications for a listing of these classifications). A waterbody that does notmeet its designated use is defined as impaired.SIDEBAR: FLORIDA’S SURFACE WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONSFlorida’s water quality standards program, the foundation of the state’s program of water qualitymanagement, designates the “present and future most beneficial uses” of the waters of the state(Section 403.061[10], F.S.). Water quality criteria, expressed as numeric or narrative limits forspecific parameters, describe the water quality necessary to maintain these uses for surfacewater and ground water. Florida’s surface water is protected for five designated useclassifications, as follows:Class IClass IIClass IIIClass IVClass VPotable water suppliesShellfish propagation or harvestingRecreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balancedpopulation of fish and wildlifeAgricultural water suppliesNavigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently inthis class)

104 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastFlorida Watershed Restoration ActIn 1998, the EPA settled a lawsuit with the environmental group Earthjustice overFlorida’s TMDL Program. The Consent Decree resulting from the lawsuit requires allTMDLs on the state’s 1998 Section 303(d) list of impaired waters to be developed inthirteen 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 importantrole that TMDLs play in restoring state waters, the 1999 Florida legislature enacted theFlorida Watershed Restoration Act (Chapter 99-223, Laws of Florida). The act clarifiedthe Department’s statutory authority to establish TMDLs, required the Department todevelop a methodology for identifying impaired waters, specified that the Departmentcould develop TMDLs only for waters on a future state list of impaired waters developedusing this new methodology, and directed the Department to establish an AllocationTechnical Advisory Committee to address the allocation process for TMDLs. The actalso declared Lake Okeechobee impaired and, as required under the TMDL ConsentDecree, allowed the state to develop a TMDL for the lake (see the sidebar for adescription of the legislation’s major provisions).SIDEBAR: THE FLORIDA WATERSHED RESTORATION ACTThe 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 todefine impaired waters) by rule.• Requires the Department to verify impairment and then establish Verified Lists for eachbasin. The Department must also evaluate whether proposed pollution control programs aresufficient 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 legislationrequires the Department to establish “reasonable and equitable” allocations of TMDLs, butdoes not mandate how allocations will be made among individual sources.• Requires that TMDL allocations consider existing treatment levels and managementpractices; the differing impacts that pollutant sources may have; the availability of treatmenttechnologies, best management practices (BMPs), or other pollutant reduction measures; thefeasibility, costs, and benefits of achieving the allocation; reasonable time frames forimplementation; the potential applicability of moderating provisions; and the extent thatnonattainment is caused by pollution from outside Florida, discharges that have ceased, oralteration to a waterbody.• Required a report to the legislature by February 2001 addressing the allocation process.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 105• Authorizes the Department to develop basin plans to implement TMDLs, coordinating with thewater management districts, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,the Soil and Water Conservation Districts, regulated parties, and environmental groups inassessing waterbodies for impairment, collecting data for TMDLs, developing TMDLs, andconducting at least one public meeting in the watershed. Implementation is voluntary if notcovered by regulatory programs.• Authorizes the Department and the Florida Department of Agriculture and ConsumerServices to develop interim measures and BMPs to address nonpoint sources. While BMPswould be adopted by rule, they will be voluntary if not covered by regulatory programs. Ifthey are adopted by rule and the Department verifies their effectiveness, then implementationwill provide a presumption of compliance with water quality standards.• Directs the Department to document the effectiveness of the combined regulatory/voluntaryapproach and report to the legislature by January 1, 2005. The report will includeparticipation rates and recommendations for statutory changes.Determining Impairment Based on the State’s Impaired Surface Waters RuleSection 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act and the Florida Watershed RestorationAct describe impaired waters as those waterbodies or waterbody segments that do notmeet applicable water quality standards. “Impairment” is a broad term that includesdesignated uses, water quality criteria, the Florida antidegradation policy, and moderatingprovisions (see the sidebar below for explanations of these terms).The state’s Identification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule (Rule 62-303, F.A.C.) wasdeveloped in cooperation with a Technical Advisory Committee and adopted by theFlorida Environmental Regulatory Commission on April 26, 2001. It provides a sciencebasedmethodology for evaluating water quality data in order to identify impaired waters,and it establishes specific criteria for impairment based on chemical parameters, theinterpretation of narrative nutrient criteria, biological impairment, fish consumptionadvisories, and ecological impairment. The rule is available athttp://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/AmendedIWR.pdf.The Impaired Surface Waters Rule also establishes thresholds for data sufficiency anddata quality, including the minimum sample size required and the number of exceedancesof the applicable water quality standard for a given sample size that identify a waterbodyas impaired. The number of exceedances is based on a statistical approach designed toprovide greater confidence that the outcome of the water quality assessment is correct.Waters that are identified as impaired through the Impaired Surface Waters Ruleare prioritized for TMDL development and implementation.

106 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastSIDEBAR: EXPLANATION OF TERMS• Designated uses, discussed in an earlier sidebar, comprise the five classifications applied toeach of the state’s surface waterbodies.• Water quality criteria comprise numeric or narrative limits of pollutants.• The Florida Antidegradation Policy (Rules 62-302.300 and 62-4.242, F.A.C.) recognizesthat pollution that causes or contributes to new violations of water quality standards or to thecontinuation of existing violations is harmful to the waters of the state. Under this policy, thepermitting of new or previously unpermitted existing discharges is prohibited where thedischarge is expected to reduce the quality of a receiving water below the classificationestablished for it. Any lowering of water quality caused by a new or expanded discharge tosurface waters must be in the public interest (that is, the benefits of the discharge to publichealth, safety, and welfare must outweigh any adverse impacts on fish and wildlife orrecreation). Further, the permittee must demonstrate that other disposal alternatives (forexample, reuse) or pollution prevention are not economically and technologically reasonablealternatives to the surface water discharge.• Moderating provisions (provided in Rules 62-302.300[10], 62-4 and 62-6, F.A.C., anddescribed in Rules 62-302.300, 62-4.244, 62-302.800, 62-4.243, F.A.C., and Sections403.201 and 373.414, F.S.) include mixing zones, zones of discharge, site-specific alternativecriteria, exemptions, and variances. These provisions are intended to moderate theapplicability of water quality standards where it has been determined that, under certainspecial circumstances, the social, economic, and environmental costs of such applicabilityoutweigh 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 themethodology prescribed in the Impaired Surface Waters Rule, to determine whetherwaters are potentially impaired. Waters found to be potentially impaired are included ona Planning List for further assessment under Sections 403.067(2) and (3), F.S. Asrequired by Subsection 403.067(2), F.S., the Planning List is not used to administer orimplement any regulatory program. It is submitted to the EPA for informational purposesonly.The second step is to assess waters on the Planning List under Section 403.067(3),F.S., as part of the Department’s watershed management approach (described in thefollowing section). The Department carries out additional data gathering and strategicmonitoring, focusing on these potentially impaired waters, and determines—using themethodology in Part III, Rule 62-303.400, F.A.C.—if a waterbody is, in fact, impairedand if the impairment is caused by pollutant discharges.An Assessment Report is produced containing the results of this updated evaluationand a Verified List of impaired waters. The criteria for the Verified List are morestringent than those for the Planning List. The Department is required to developTMDLs for waters on the Verified List under Subsection 403.067(4), F.S. A watershed

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 107management plan (called a Basin Management Action Plan) to reduce the amount ofpollutants that cause impairments must also be produced and implemented.The Verified List is adopted by Secretarial Order in accordance with the FloridaWatershed Restoration Act. Once adopted, the list is submitted to the EPA for approvalas the state’s Section 303(d) list of impaired waters for the basin.Implementing TMDLsThe Watershed Management ApproachThe Department's statewide approach to water resource management, called thewatershed management approach, is the framework for implementing TMDLs as requiredby the federal and state governments. The approach does not focus on individual sourcesof pollution. Instead, each basin is assessed as an entire functioning system, and aquaticresources are evaluated from a basinwide perspective that considers the cumulativeeffects of human activities. Water resources are managed on the basis of naturalboundaries, such as river basins, rather than political or regulatory boundaries. Federal,state, regional, tribal, and local governments identify watersheds not meeting clean wateror other natural resource goals and work cooperatively to focus resources and implementeffective strategies to restore water quality. Extensive public participation in thedecision-making process is crucial.The watershed management approach is not new, nor does it compete with or replaceexisting programs. Rather than relying on single solutions to water resource issues, it isintended to improve the health of surface water and ground water resources bystrengthening coordination among such activities as monitoring, stormwatermanagement, wastewater treatment, wetland restoration, land acquisition, and publicinvolvement.By promoting the management of entire natural systems and addressing thecumulative effects of human activities on a watershed basis, this approach is intended toprotect and enhance the ecological structure, function, and integrity of Florida’swatersheds. It provides a framework for setting priorities and focusing the Department’sresources on protecting and restoring water quality, and aims to increase cooperationamong state, regional, local, and federal interests. By emphasizing public involvement,the approach encourages stewardship by all Floridians to preserve water resources forfuture generations.The watershed approach is intended to speed up projects by focusing funding andother resources on priority water quality problems, strengthening public support,establishing agreements, and funding multiagency projects. It avoids duplication bybuilding on existing assessments and restoration activities and promotes cooperativemonitoring programs. It encourages accountability for achieving water qualityimprovements through improved monitoring and the establishment of TMDLs.

108 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastThe Watershed Management CycleAs part of the Department’s watershed management approach, TMDLs will bedeveloped, and the corresponding pollutant loadings allocated, as part of a watershedmanagement cycle, which rotates through the state’s fifty-two river basins over a nineyearperiod. The cycle’s five phases are as follows:• Phase 1: Preliminary Watershed Evaluation. For each river basin, a Status Reportis developed, containing a Planning List of potentially impaired waters that mayrequire the establishment of TMDLs. The report characterizes each basin’shydrologic, ecological, and socioeconomic setting as well as historical, current, andproposed watershed management issues and activities. It also contains a preliminaryevaluation of major water quality parameters, water quality issues by planning unit,an evaluation of ecological resources, and basinwide pollutant loading trends relatedto land uses. At the end of Phase 1, a Strategic Monitoring Plan is developed.• Phase 2: Strategic Monitoring and Assessment. Additional data are collectedthrough strategic monitoring and uploaded to STORET. The data are used to verifywhether potentially impaired waters in each basin are impaired and to calibrate andverify models for TMDL development. At the end of Phase 2, an AssessmentReport 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 willadopt the Verified List by the Department through a Secretarial Order and submit itto the EPA as the state’s Section 303(d) list of impaired waters.• Phase 3: Development and Adoption of TMDLs. TMDLs for priority impairedwaters in the basin will be developed and adopted by rule. Because TMDLs cannotbe developed for all listed waters during a single watershed management cycle due tofiscal and technical limitations, waterbodies will be prioritized using the criteria in theIdentification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule, Rule 62-303, F.A.C.• Phase 4: Development of Basin Management Action Plan. A Basin ManagementAction Plan will be developed for each basin that specifies how pollutant loadingsfrom point and nonpoint sources of pollution will be allocated and reduced, in orderto meet TMDL requirements. The plans will include regulatory and nonregulatory(i.e., voluntary), structural and nonstructural strategies, and existing managementplans will be used where feasible. The involvement and support of affectedstakeholders in this phase will be especially critical.• Phase 5: Implementation of Basin Management Action Plan. Implementation ofthe activities specified in the Basin Management Action Plan will begin. Thisincludes carrying out rule development as needed, securing funding, informingstakeholders and the public, and monitoring and evaluating the implementation of theplan.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 109To implement the watershed cycle, the state’s river basins have been divided into fivegroups within each of the Department’s six districts statewide, and each district willassess one basin each year. Table A.1 shows the basin groups for implementing thecycle in the Department’s districts, and Figure A.1 shows these groups and the rotatingcycle in the districts. Table A.2, which lists the basin rotation schedule for TMDLdevelopment and implementation, shows that it will take nine years to complete one fullcycle of the state.The watershed management cycle is an iterative, or repeated, process. One of its keycomponents is that the effectiveness of management activities (TMDL implementation)will be monitored in successive cycles. Monitoring conducted in Phase 2 of subsequentcycles will be targeted at evaluating whether water quality objectives are being met andwhether individual waters are no longer impaired. The Department also will track theimplementation of scheduled restoration activities, whether required or voluntary, toensure continued progress towards meeting the TMDLs.Table A.1: Basin Groups for Implementing the Watershed Management Cycle, by DepartmentDistrict OfficeDistrict Group 1BasinsNorthwest Ochlockonee-St. Marks RiversGroup 2BasinsApalachicola-Chipola RiversNortheast Suwannee River Lower St. JohnsRiverCentral Ocklawaha River Middle St. JohnsRiverSouthwest Tampa Bay Tampa BayTributariesSouth Everglades WestCoastCharlotte HarborSoutheast Lake Okeechobee St.Lucie-LoxahatcheeRiversGroup 3BasinsChoctawhatcheeRiver and Bay andSt. Andrews BayUpper St. JohnsRiverSarasota Bay andPeace-MyakkaRiversCaloosahatcheeRiverLake WorthLagoon/PalmBeach CoastGroup 4BasinsPensacola BaySt. Marys-NassauRiversKissimmee RiverWithlacoocheeRiverFisheating CreekSoutheast UrbanCoastGroup 5BasinsPerdido River andBayNortheast CoastLagoonsIndian RiverLagoonSprings CoastFlorida KeysEvergladesTable A.2: Basin Rotation Schedule for TMDL Development and Implementation—Nine Year CycleYEAR 00 01 01 02 02 03 03 04 04 05 05 06 06 07 07 08 08 091 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Group 1 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PHASE 5 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4Group 2 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PHASE 5 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3Group 3 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PHASE 5 PHASE 1 PHASE 2Group 4 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PHASE 5 PHASE 1Group 5 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PHASE 5

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

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 111Pollutants can enter a waterbody through point source discharges (generally from aspecific facility) or nonpoint discharges (e.g., stormwater runoff, septic tanks).Government agencies, businesses, organizations, and individuals who contribute to thesedischarges will be asked to share the responsibility of attaining TMDLs through loadallocations (the amount of a specified pollutant allotted for discharge) that are based onan 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 TMDLsPotentially Affected StakeholdersMunicipal stormwater/wastewater programsCommercial developers, homebuilders, individualhomeownersMunicipal and industrial wastewater treatment facilities,NPDES-permitted facilitiesFarming and silviculture operationsFederal, regional, state agencies; regional and local waterquality coalitionsActions To Achieve TMDLReduce and treat urban stormwater runoff throughstormwater retrofits, replacement of septic tanksImprove development design and construction, enhancebest management practices, replace septic tanksReduce pollutant loadings from permitted dischargesReduce and treat runoff through best managementpracticesCarry out waterbody restoration projectsFor additional information on the Department’s Watershed Management Program andTMDLs, please contact the following basin coordinators:• Southwest Florida, Lake Okeechobee and the Fla. Keys, Pat Fricano (850) 245-8559• Southeast Florida and Ochlockonee-St. Marks Basins, Rick Hicks (850) 245-8558• Northwest and Central Florida, Mary Paulic, (850) 245-8560• Northeast Florida and Suwannee Basin, John Abendroth (850) 245-8557• West Central Florida and Tampa Bay Region, Tom Singleton (850) 245-8561For information on establishing and implementing TMDLs, contact Jan Mandrup-Poulsen at (850) 245-8448. Additional information is available on the Department’s Website at www.dep.state.fl.us/water/watersheds/index.htm.

112 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastAppendix B: Supplementary Ecological Information in theEverglades West Coast BasinEcoregionsThe Everglades West Coast Basin straddles the Southern Coastal Plain and SouthernFlorida Coastal Plain ecoregions, and encompasses the Southwestern Florida Flatwoods,Big Cypress, and Southern Coast and Islands subregions (Figure B.1). Ecoregions areregions of relative ecological homogeneity for factors such as climate, physiography,geology, soils, and vegetation. The Southwestern Florida Flatwoods subregion ischaracterized by pine flatwoods, extensive areas of pasture and rangeland, cabbage palmhammocks, and marshes. The Big Cypress subregion is a flat, poorly drained plain withvegetation consisting of pine flatwoods, cypress swamps, grasslands, and marl prairie.The Southern Coast and Islands subregion includes the low coastal areas of TenThousand Islands and Cape Sable. Only small quantities of fresh water are available, andsoils are primarily marshy and swampy, with some rock outcrops. Standing water, tidalsloughs, open lagoons, low beach ridges, vermetid reefs, and sediment islands covermore than half of this subregion.SIDEBAR DEFINITION: VERMETIDLittle tunnels made and cemented together into rock-like reefs by colony dwelling worms.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 113Figure B.1: Ecoregions and Subecoregions in the Everglades West Coast Basin

114 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastNatural CommunitiesThe Everglades West Coast Basin is characterized by mangrove-dominated estuariesalong the coast, with salt marsh habitats occurring landward of the mangrove zone. Thearea contains the largest mangrove swamps in the state. The interior parts of the regionshow remnants of prehistoric shorelines forming sand ridges, interspersed with pinepalmettoflatwoods and large wetland strands. The region may have contained the state’sgreatest acreage of hydric pine flatwoods, which have significant ecological andhydrological value. In spite of human impacts, the basin still supports large areascontaining diverse natural communities and species.Lake Trafford, the largest lake in Florida south of Lake Okeechobee, lies inland fromthe coast. The lake forms the headwaters of Corkscrew Swamp and Fakahatchee Strand,and provides important habitat for migrating birds. Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary,managed by the National Audubon Society, contains tracts of old-growth cypress forest.Fakahatchee Strand is a gently sloping channel in the limestone plain that underliesthe region. About 20 miles long and 3 to 5 miles wide, it forms part of the main drainageslough of the Big Cypress Swamp and contributes water to the tidal swamps andmangrove estuaries of the Ten Thousand Islands. This subtropical swamp has NorthAmerica’s largest concentration and richest variety of orchids, as well as abundantepiphytes and many rare ferns and bromeliads. It also contains the country’s largeststand of native royal palms and the only cypress/royal palm forest.Big Cypress Swamp, a flat, forested, low-lying region, lies just west of theEverglades. It is called “big” because of the swamp’s size—more than 2,400 squaremiles (1.5 million acres)—not because of the size of its cypress trees. More than half ofthe surface water flowing to the Everglades comes from the swamp. Although it issomewhat higher in elevation, Big Cypress is mostly inundated with water for more than300 days out of each year. Unique forests of mixed bald cypress and royal palms havedeveloped along channels in the limestone; in higher areas, pine and hammock forestspredominate. In other areas of the swamp, dwarf cypress savannas and open prairiesgrow on thin soils of marl and sand on top of the limestone. Epiphytic plants areabundant in forested areas. The Big Cypress National Preserve, managed by the NationalPark Service, comprises 728,000 acres of this area.Along the Gulf Coast of the basin, there are extensive marine and estuarinecommunities. The northwestern side of the basin contains Estero Bay, a long, narrow,and relatively small estuarine system of about 15 square miles. To the south of EsteroBay lie two smaller bays: Wiggins and Naples Bay. Still farther south are a number ofmuch larger bays and estuaries: Rookery Bay, the Marco Island Estuary, Faka UnionBay, Fakahatchee Bay, Chokoloskee Bay, and Cape Romano–Ten Thousand Islands.With a few exceptions, the natural communities along this stretch of Florida’s southwestcoast are relatively undisturbed.Of the 2,054,891 acres in the Everglades West Coast Basin, wetlands comprise 52percent. Major wetland types include cypress swamp (522,736 acres), freshwater marsh(358,833 acres), mangrove swamp (67,748 acres), hardwood swamp (59,008 acres), andshrub swamp (35,858 acres). Coastal salt marsh is the smallest wetland community type,with 24,689 acres.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 115Disturbed community types comprise 27 percent of the basin. Grass and agriculturalland occupy the largest area (312,531 acres), followed by barren land (139,448 acres) andshrub and brush (100,140 acres). Exotic (upland) plant communities take up 1,026 acres.Uplands comprise 19 percent of the basin’s total area. Predominant upland types arehardwood hammock (155,742 acres), pinelands (142,988 acres), dry prairie (more than71,111 acres), and mixed hardwood pine (26,619 acres). Other upland communities suchas coastal strand, oak scrub, and tropical hammock occupy 1,045 acres. Uplandcommunities contribute organic matter and nutrients to surface waters, supporting themicroorganisms that form the base of the food web. They buffer surface waters from theeffects of human activities, such as contaminated urban and agricultural runoff.Open water occupies 1.72 percent of the basin (35,369 acres) including inlandfreshwater lakes, ponds, rivers, creeks, canals, and brackish and saline waters. Table B.1lists the acreage and percentage of the natural and disturbed community types in the basinand describes their principal characteristics.

116 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable B.1: Natural Communities in the Everglades West Coast BasinCategory Community Area in Percent ofCharacteristicsType Acres Total AreaUpland1 Coastal strand 12 0.00 Occurs on well drained sandy coastlines and includestypically zoned vegetation of upper beach, nearby dunes, orcoastal rock formations2 Dry prairie 71,111 3.46 Large treeless grasslands and shrublands on very flat terraininterspersed with scattered cypress domes, cypress strands,isolated freshwater marshes, and hammocks3 Pinelands 142,988 6.96 Includes north and south Florida pine flatwoods, southFlorida pine rocklands, scrubby flatwoods, and commercialpine plantations. Cypress domes, bayheads, titi swamps,and freshwater marshes are commonly interspersed inisolated depressions.6 Oak scrub 819 0.04 Hardwood community consisting of clumps of low-growingoaks interspersed with white sand. Occurs in areas of deep,well-washed sterile sand.7 Mixedhardwood pine8 Hardwoodhammock9 TropicalhammockWetland10 Coastal saltmarsh11 Freshwatermarsh26,619 1.30 Southern extension of the Piedmont southern mixedhardwoods, occurring mainly on clay soils of the northernPanhandle. Also includes upland forests in which a mixtureof conifers and hardwoods dominate overstory155,742 7.58 Includes major upland hardwood associations that occurstatewide on fairly rich sandy soils.214 0.01 Cold-intolerant hardwood community with very high plantdiversity that occurs on coastal uplands in extreme southFlorida. It is characterized by tropical trees and shrubs atthe northern edge of their range, which extends into theCaribbean.24,689 1.20 Herbaceous and shrubby wetland communities that includecordgrass, needlerush, and transitional or high salt marshes,occurring statewide in brackish waters along protected lowenergy estuarine shorelines.358,833 17.46 Wetland communities dominated by wide assortment ofherbaceous plant species growing on sand, clay, marl, andorganic soils in areas where water depths and inundationregimes vary.12 Cypress swamp 522,736 25.44 Regularly inundated communities that form forested bufferalong large rivers, creeks, and lakes, or occur indepressions as circular domes or linear strands. Stronglydominated by bald cypress or pond cypress.13 Hardwoodswamp59,008 2.87 Association of wetland adapted trees, composed either ofpure stands of hardwoods or hardwood-cypress mixture.Occurs on organic soils and forms forested floodplain ofnonalluvial rivers, creeks, and broad lake basins.15 Shrub swamp 35,858 1.74 Dominated by low-growing, woody shrubs or small trees,usually found in wetlands changed by natural or humanperturbations such as altered hydroperiod, fire, clear-cuttingor land clearing, and siltation.16 Mangroveswamp67,748 3.30 These dense, brackish water swamps, usually dominated byred, black, and white mangroves, occur along low-energyshorelines and in protected, tidally influenced bays ofsouthern Florida. This community is composed of freezeintoleranttree species that are distributed south of a linefrom Cedar Key on the Gulf coast to St. Augustine on theAtlantic coast.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 117CategoryCommunityTypeArea inAcresPercent ofTotal AreaCharacteristicsOpen water18 Water 35,369 1.72 Open water areas of inland lakes, ponds, rivers, andstreams and brackish and saline waters of estuaries, bays,and tidal creeks.Disturbed19 Grass andagricultural land20 Shrub andbrush21 Exotic plantcommunities22 Barren andUrban landTOTAL 2,054,891312,531 15.21 Upland communities with very low-growing grasses andforbs. Intensively managed sites such as improvedpastures, lawns, golf courses, road shoulders, cemeteries,or weedy fallow agricultural fields.100,140 4.87 Includes different situations where natural uplandcommunities have recently been disturbed and arerecovering through natural successional processes.1,026 0.05 Upland and wetland areas dominated by invasive non-nativetrees that have invaded native plant communities.139,448 6.79 Unvegetated areas such as roads, beaches, active stripmines, borrow areas, cleared land on sandy soils, and urbanareas (rooftops, parking lots, etc.).Threatened and Endangered SpeciesThe Everglades West Coast Basin contains a rich diversity of native animal life,including a number of federally threatened and endangered species. These include fourreptiles (American alligator, American crocodile, loggerhead turtle, and eastern indigosnake), seven birds (Cape Sable seaside sparrow, Florida scrub jay, crested caracara,bald eagle, wood stork, red-cockaded woodpecker, and snail kite) and two mammals(Florida panther and West Indian manatee). Of all listed (federal and state) andimperiled species, three quarters of them use or live in the basin’s various freshwater,saltwater, and/or wetland communities. Tables B.2 and B.3 contain a complete list ofimperiled (state listed and nonlisted) species in the basin.

118 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable B.2: Listed Species in the Everglades West Coast BasinScientific Name* Common Name FederalProtectionStatusStateProtectionStatusFISHRivulus marmoratus Mangrove rivulus N LSAmphibians andReptilesAlligator mississippiensis American alligator T(S/A) LSCaretta caretta Loggerhead turtle LT LTCrocodylus acutus American Crocodile LE LEDrymarchon corais couperi Eastern indigo snake LT LTGopherus polyphemus Gopher tortoise N LSRana capito Gopher frog N LSBIRDSAjaia ajaja Roseate spoonbill N LSAmmodramus maritimus Cape Sable seasideLELEmirabilissparrowAphelocoma coerulescens Florida scrub jay LT LTAthene cunicularia floridana Florida burrowing owl N LSCaracara plancus Crested caracara LT LTCharadrius alexandrinus Snowy plover N LTColumba leucocephala White-crowned pigeon N LTEgretta caerulea Little blue heron N LSEgretta thula Snowy egret N LSEgretta tricolor Tricolored heron N LSEudocimus albus White ibis N LSHaliaeetus leucocephalus** Bald eagle LT LTMycteria americana Wood stork LE LEPelecanus occidentalis Brown pelican N LSPicoides borealisRed-cockadedLELTwoodpeckerRostrhamus sociabilis Snail kite LE LEplumbeusRynchops niger Black skimmer N LSSterna antillarum Least tern N LTMAMMALSFelis concolor coryi Florida panther LE LEMustela vison Everglades mink N LTSciurus niger avicennia Mangrove fox squirrel N LTUrsus americanus floridanus Florida black bear N LTPLANTSAcrostichum aureum Golden leather fern N LEAndropogon arctatus Pine-woods bluestem N LTAsclepias curtissii Curtiss’ milkweed N LEAsplenium auritum Auricled spleenwort N LEAsplenium serratumAmerican bird’s nestNLEfernBurmannia flava Fakahatchee burmannia N LECampylocentrumRibbon orchid N LEpachyrrhizumCampyloneurumNarrow-leaved strapNLEangustifoliumfernCampyloneurum costatum Tailed strap fern N LE

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 119Scientific Name* Common Name FederalProtectionStatusStateProtectionStatusCatopsis berteroniana Powdery catopsis N LECatopsis floribunda Many-flowered catopsis N LECatopsis nutans Nodding catopsis N LEChamaesyce cumulicola Sand-dune spurge N LECheilanthes microphylla Southern lip fern N LECheiroglossa palmata Hand fern N LECtenitis sloanei Florida tree fern N LECyrtopodium punctatum Cow horn orchid N LEEncyclia cochleata var. Clamshell orchid N LEtriandraEncyclia pygmaea Dwarf encyclia N LEEpidendrum blancheanum Acuna’s epidendrum N LEEpidendrum nocturnum Night-scented orchid N LEEpidendrum strobiliferum Pendant epidendrum N LEGlandularia maritima Coastal vervain N LEGlandularia tampensis Tampa vervain N LEGossypium hirsutum Wild cotton N LEGuzmania monostachia Fakahatchee guzmania N LEHuperzia dichotoma Hanging clubmoss N LEIonopsis utricularioides Delicate ionopsis N LEJacquemontia curtissii Pineland jacquemontia N LELantana depressa var. Gulf Coast Florida lantana N LEsanibelensisLechea cernua Nodding pinweed N LTLepanthopsis melanantha Tiny orchid N LELinum carteri var. smallii Carter’s large-floweredNLEflaxMaxillaria crassifolia Hidden orchid N LEMicrogramma heterophylla Climbing vine fern N LEOncidium undulatum Mule ear orchid N LEPeperomia glabella Cypress peperomia N LEPeperomia obtusifolia Blunt-leaved peperomia N LEPleurothallis gelida Frost-flower orchid N LEPolyrrhiza lindenii Ghost orchid N LEPteroglossaspis ecristata Giant orchid N LTRoystonea elata Florida royal palm N LEStylisma abdita Scrub stylisma N LETillandsia flexuosa Banded wild-pine N LETillandsia pruinosa Fuzzy-wuzzy air plant N LETrichomanes holopterum Entire-winged bristleNLEfernTripsacum floridanum Florida gama grass N LEVanilla phaeantha Leafy vanilla N LE* Species listed in boldface type use or live in freshwater, saltwater, and/or wetland communities.** Proposed for federal delisting because of the species’ recovery.LE—Listed as Endangered.LT—Listed as Threatened.T(S/A)—Threatened due to similarity of appearanceLS— Listed as Species of Special Concern.N—Not currently listed, nor currently being considered for listing.

120 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable B.3: Imperiled (non-listed) Species in the Everglades West Coast BasinScientific Name*AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILESCommon NameCrotalus adamanteusEastern diamondback rattlesnakeSceloporus woodiFlorida scrub lizardBIRDSArdea albaGreat egretButeo brachyurusShort-tailed hawkCoccyzus minorMangrove cuckooDendroica discolor paludicola Florida prairie warblerElanoides forficatusSwallow-tailed kitePicoides villosusHairy woodpeckerPlegadis falcinellusGlossy ibisSterna sandvicensisSandwich ternVireo altiloquusBlack-whiskered vireoMAMMALSCorynorhinus rafinesquiiRafinesque’s big-eared batMustela frenata peninsulaeFlorida long-tailed weaselPLANTSElytraria caroliniensis var. angustifolia Narrow-leaved carolina scalystemForestiera segregata var. pinetorum Florida pinewood privetGalactia pinetorumPineland milk pea* Species listed in boldface type use or live in freshwater, saltwater, and/or wetland communities.Sources: Florida’s Endangered Species, Threatened Species, and Species of Special Concern, OfficialLists, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, http://www.state.fl.us/fwc/pubs; Marois, KatherineC., Tracking List of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants and Animals and Natural Communities ofFlorida (Tallahassee: Florida Natural Areas Inventory, June 1999); Ashton, Ray E. (Ed.); Rare andEndangered Biota of Florida (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1992); Wunderlin, Richard P., Guideto the Vascular Plants of Florida (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998).

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 121Appendix C: Information on Reasonable AssuranceTO:FROM:Interested PartiesMimi Drew, DirectorDivision of Water FacilitiesDATE: September 2002SUBJECT:Guidance for Development of Documentation To ProvideReasonable Assurance that Proposed Pollution ControlMechanisms Will Result in the Restoration of Designated Uses inImpaired WatersThe purpose of this memo is to describe the types of information that should beconsidered, and subsequently documented, when evaluating whether there is sufficientreasonable assurance that:1. Proposed pollution control mechanisms (typically described in watershedmanagement or restoration plans) addressing impaired waters will result in theattainment of applicable water quality standards (designated uses) at a clearly definedpoint in the future, and2. Reasonable progress towards restoration of designated uses will be made by the timethe next 303(d) list of impaired waters is due to be submitted to the EPA.There are many site-specific issues related to determining whether reasonableassurance has been provided. Accordingly, this document describes the elements orissues that should be considered when evaluating a submittal or when documenting thebasis for the Department’s decision, rather than attempting to establish specific criteria onwhat constitutes reasonable assurance.It should be noted that the term “reasonable assurance” is used throughout manyDepartment programs and rules, and this guidance specifically addresses the issuesrelated to the “reasonable assurance” provided by proposed pollution controlmechanisms. This guidance should not be used to evaluate the meaning of reasonableassurance in other contexts, particularly in permitting decisions.BackgroundThe Impaired Surface Waters Rule (IWR), Rule 62-303, F.A.C. (Identification ofImpaired Surface Waters), establishes a formal mechanism for identifying surface watersin Florida that are impaired (do not meet applicable water quality standards) by

122 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastpollutants. Most waters that are verified as being impaired by a pollutant will be listed onthe state’s 303(d) list pursuant to the Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA) andSection 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. Once listed, Total Maximum Daily Loads(TMDLs) will be developed for the pollutants causing the impairment of the listedwaters. However, as required by the FWRA, the Department will evaluate whetherexisting or proposed pollution control mechanisms will effectively address theimpairment before placing a water on the state’s Verified List. If the Department candocument there is reasonable assurance that the impairment will be effectively addressedby the control measure, then the water will not be listed on the final Verified List (otherimpaired waters that will not be listed include waters with TMDLs and waters impairedby pollution).Current Rule Text Relating to Evaluation of Pollution Control MechanismsThe rule text addressing the evaluation of proposed pollution control mechanisms isas follows:Rule 62-303.600, Evaluation of Pollution Control Mechanisms2. Upon determining that a waterbody is impaired, the Department shall evaluatewhether existing or proposed technology-based effluent limitations and otherpollution control programs under local, state, or federal authority are sufficient toresult in the attainment of applicable water quality standards.• If, as a result of the factors set forth in (1), the waterbody segment is expected toattain water quality standards in the future and is expected to make reasonableprogress towards attainment of water quality standards by the time the next 303(d) listis scheduled to be submitted to EPA, the segment shall not be listed on the VerifiedList. The Department shall document the basis for its decision, noting any proposedpollution control mechanisms and expected improvements in water quality thatprovide reasonable assurance that the waterbody segment will attain applicable waterquality standards.Responsible Parties for Reasonable Assurance DemonstrationIt is ultimately the Department’s responsibility to assure adequate documentation inthe administrative record whenever the Department decides to not list an impairedwaterbody segment for a given pollutant. This documentation will be very importantbecause the Verified Lists will be adopted by Order of the Secretary and third parties willbe provided an opportunity to challenge, via an administrative hearing, all listingdecisions (both those listing a water and those to not list a water for a given pollutant).However, the Department expects that local stakeholders will often offer to prepare thenecessary documentation to demonstrate reasonable assurance that proposed control

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 123mechanisms will restore a given waterbody. The Department will provide guidance tostakeholders on what information is needed and how it should be submitted.Time Frame for Development of DocumentationThe Department plans to prepare basin-specific Verified Lists as part of its watershedmanagement cycle, which rotates through all of the state’s basins over a five-year, fivephasedcycle 1 . During the first phase of the cycle, the Department will assess waterquality in the basin and prepare a draft Planning List of potentially impaired waters. TheDepartment and interested parties will then have approximately one year (Phase 2) tomonitor waters on the planning list and prepare documentation, as appropriate, to providereasonable assurance that impaired waters will be restored. The Department will reviewsubmittals from interested parties during Phase 2, before adopting the Verified List forthe basin containing the waterbody segment in question.What It Means To Be Under Local, State, or Federal AuthorityBoth the FWRA and the IWR require that the pollution control programs underconsideration be “under local, state, or federal authority.” A pollution controlprogram will be considered "under local, state, or federal authority" if the programis subject to or required by a local ordinance, state statute or rule, or federal statuteor regulation.Programs will also be considered under local, state, or federal authority if theyare subject to a written agreement, signed by both local stakeholders and at leastone governmental entity, that includes measurable goals, performance criteria,benchmarks, and back-up corrective actions to assure the further progress of theprogram. It is important to note that these written agreements do not need to beenforceable for nonregulated nonpoint sources.Many nonpoint sources are currently outside of the regulatory programs of EPA, theDepartment, and the water management districts, and reductions at these nonpointsources will be voluntary. In fact, pollution control mechanisms for these nonpointsources would be voluntary even if a TMDL were developed. As such, these agreementsmay provide the same level of reasonable assurance that can be provided for a TMDLimplementation plan as long as they maintain the Department’s enforcement capabilityover all point sources involved.Time Frame for Attaining Water Quality StandardsThe FWRA and the IWR do not establish a specific time limit by which waters mustattain applicable water quality standards or designated uses. However, the pollutioncontrol mechanisms or watershed restoration plan must provide reasonable assurance thatdesignated uses will be met at some time in the future. As such, the documentation1 Federal regulations currently call for state 303(d) lists every two years, but Florida plans to submit annual updatesbased on the basin-specific Verified Lists.

124 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastsubmitted to the Department must provide a specific date by which time designated usesare expected to be restored. In cases where designated uses will not be met for manyyears, the documentation should also provide justification as to why the specified time isneeded to restore designated uses.Parameter-Specific Nature of DemonstrationFor the Department not to place an impaired waterbody segment on the Verified List,reasonable assurance must be provided for each pollutant that has been documented to becausing impairment of the waterbody segment. However, some entities, including theDepartment, may want to provide reasonable assurance addressing only selectedpollutants, which could result in the Department not listing the waterbody segment forthose pollutants, but still listing it for others. In this event, TMDLs will only bedeveloped for the remaining listed pollutants.Information To Consider and Document when Assessing ReasonableAssurance in the IWRTo provide reasonable assurance that existing or proposed pollution controlmechanisms will restore designated uses, the following information should be evaluatedand documented for the Administrative Record:3. A Description of the Impaired Water—name of the water listed on the VerifiedList, the location of the waterbody and watershed, the watershed/8-digit catalogingunit code, the NHD identifier (when they become available), the type (lake, stream, orestuary) of water, the water use classification, the designated use not being attained,the length (miles) or area (acres) of impaired area, the pollutant(s) of concern (thoseidentified as causing or contributing to the impairment), and the suspected ordocumented source(s) of the pollutant(s) of concern.• A Description of the Water Quality or Aquatic Ecological Goals—a description ofthe water quality–based targets or aquatic ecological goals (both interim and final)that have been established for the pollutant(s) of concern, the averaging period forany numeric water quality goals, a discussion of how these goals will result in therestoration of the waterbody’s impaired designated uses, a schedule indicating wheninterim and final targets are expected to be met, and a description of procedures (withthresholds) to determine whether additional (backup) corrective actions are needed.• A Description of the Proposed Management Actions To Be Undertaken—namesof the responsible participating entities (government, private, others), a summary andlist of existing or proposed management activities designed to restore water quality,the geographic scope of any proposed management activities, documentation of theestimated pollutant load reduction and other benefits anticipated from implementation

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 125of individual management actions, copies of written agreements committingparticipants to the management actions, a discussion on how future growth and newsources will be addressed, confirmed sources of funding, an implementation schedule(including interim milestones and the date by which designated uses will be restored),and any enforcement programs or local ordinances, if the management strategy is notvoluntary.• A Description of Procedures for Monitoring and Reporting Results—adescription of the water quality monitoring program to be implemented (includingstation locations, parameters sampled, and sampling frequencies) to demonstratereasonable progress; quality assurance/quality control elements that demonstrate themonitoring will comply with Rule 62-160, F.A.C.; procedures for entering allappropriate data into STORET; the responsible monitoring and reporting entity; thefrequency and format for reporting results; the frequency and format for reporting onthe implementation of all proposed management activities; and methods forevaluating progress towards goals.• A Description of Proposed Corrective Actions—a description of proposedcorrective actions (and any supporting document[s]) that will be undertaken if waterquality does not improve after implementation of the management actions or ifmanagement actions are not completed on schedule, and a process for notifying theDepartment that these corrective actions are being implemented.Water Quality–Based Targets and Aquatic Ecological GoalsSome of the most important elements listed above are the requirements to providewater quality–based targets or aquatic ecological goals and a discussion on how resultantpollutant(s) reduction targets/goals will result in restoration of designated uses. Somepeople have expressed concern about these targets because they equate a waterquality–based restoration target with a TMDL (thus assuming a “Catch 22” that a TMDLis needed to make a demonstration that a TMDL is not needed). However, as is also thecase for TMDLs, water quality–based targets can take many forms, and need not be aresult of a complex hydrodynamic/water quality model.In some cases, there may be sufficient historical data (paleolimnological data,loadings from periods predating the impairment, or baseline data for Outstanding FloridaWaters 2 , for example) that could be used to determine an appropriate water quality target.In other cases, simplified modeling (including regression analysis) may allow forconservative estimates of the assimilative capacity that could then be used as the basis forrestoration goals. And, finally, a water quality target may have been developed thatwould be scientifically equivalent to (or act as the basis for) a TMDL, but the target hasnot been administratively adopted as a TMDL. In each of these cases, a sound waterquality target could be used to evaluate whether the proposed pollution control2 Baseline data would be data for the year prior to designation of the OFW.

126 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastmechanisms will sufficiently reduce loadings to meet the assimilative capacity of thewater in question and result in attainment of designated uses.Interim TargetsBecause it will usually take many years to restore fully the designated uses of animpaired water, interim water quality targets will often be needed to measure whetherreasonable progress is being made towards the restoration of designated uses. Examplesof such interim targets are provided in the last section of this document, but site-specificmeasures are also encouraged.Averaging Periods for Water Quality TargetsWhile the averaging period for water quality–based targets should be consistent withhow the underlying standard is expressed, they can often be expressed in a variety ofways and need not be expressed as “daily loads.” Annual averages or medians are oftenappropriate for some parameters, but shorter-term (seasonal, for example) averages maybe necessary if the impairment is limited to specific seasons or parts of the year. Multiyearaverages may be appropriate in limited circumstances where there is naturally highvariation of the water quality target.Estimates of Pollutant Reductions from Restoration ActionsIt will often be difficult to estimate precisely the pollutant reductions that will resultfrom specific restoration activities. This is particularly true for the implementation ofbest management practices (BMPs). However, to provide reasonable assurance that aBMP or other restoration action will reduce loadings of the pollutant of concern to a levelthat will restore the water’s designated uses, documentation should address how thereductions were calculated, including providing documented values from the scientificliterature for reductions attributed to similar management actions. If the expectedreductions are expressed as a range, the midpoint of the range should be used as the basisfor estimating reductions, unless documentation is provided supporting the use ofdifferent removal efficiencies in this specific application.New Sources/GrowthAnother key element is the discussion on how future growth and new sources will beaddressed. Restoration goals must address possible increased loadings of the pollutant ofconcern that are anticipated due to population growth or land use changes in contributingwatersheds, both from point and nonpoint sources. This will be particularly important forwaters impaired by nutrients, given that so many Florida watersheds are faced withcontinuing urban, residential, and agricultural development that results in increasednutrient loading from stormwater, septic tanks, and wastewater discharges.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 127Examples of Reasonable ProgressThe determination of whether there will be reasonable progress towards attainment ofwater quality standards will be very site- and pollutant-specific. Documentation shouldbe provided supporting specific progress towards restoration of the designated uses of theimpaired water. Possible examples of reasonable progress include, but are not limited tothe following:• A written commitment to implement controls reducing loadings within a specifiedtime frame from watershed stakeholders representing at least 50 percent of theanthropogenic load of the pollutant(s) of concern;• Evidence of at least a 10 percent reduction (or alternatively, a percent reductionconsistent with meeting the water quality target by the specified date) in annualanthropogenic loading of the pollutant(s) of concern;• Evidence of at least a 10 percent decrease (or alternatively, a percent decreaseconsistent with meeting the water quality target by the specified date) in the annualaverage concentration of the pollutant(s) of concern in the water;• Bioassessment results showing there has been an improvement in the health of thebiological community of the water, as measured by bioassessment procedures similarto those used to determine impairment and conducted in similar conditions; or• Adoption of a local ordinance that specifically provides water quality goals, restrictsgrowth or loads tied to the pollutant(s) of concern, and provides an enforcementoption if the proposed management measure(s) are not implemented as required.Reasonable progress must be made by the time the next 303(d) list is due to besubmitted to EPA, which is currently every two years. EPA has contemplated changingthe listing cycle to every four or five years, and the IWR was specifically worded toallow a longer time frame for requiring reasonable progress in the event that the listingcycle changes.Long-Term RequirementsIf at any time the Department determines that reasonable assurance and reasonableprogress are not being met, the order adopting the Verified List will be amended toinclude the waterbody on the Verified List for the pollutant(s) in question. Additionalreasonable progress must be made each time a waterbody is considered for listing underRule 62-303, F.A.C. (every five years).If you have any questions about this guidance memo, contact Daryll Joyner of theDepartment’s Bureau of Watershed Management in Tallahassee at 850-245-8431.

128 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastAppendix D: Methodology for Determining Impairment Basedon the Impaired Surface Waters RuleIn implementing the watershed management approach, the Department relies onenvironmental data collected by a variety of organizations. Effective project planning,sampling design, raw data review, and data analysis are essential to making accuratedeterminations of impairment and to TMDL development and implementation.The Impaired Surface Waters RuleTo identify impaired waters in each of the state’s river basins, the Departmentevaluates water quality data using the science-based methodology in the ImpairedSurface Waters Rule (Identification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule, Rule 62-303,F.A.C.). The rule establishes specific criteria and thresholds for impairment, in additionto data sufficiency and data quality requirements. The methodology described in the ruleis based on a statistical approach designed to provide greater confidence that the outcomeof the water quality assessment is correct. The complete text of the Impaired SurfaceWaters 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 theDepartment will follow the methodology in Rule 62-303.300, F.A.C., to develop aPlanning List of potentially impaired waters to be assessed under Sections 403.067(2)and (3), F.S. The methodology for developing the Planning List includes an evaluationof aquatic life use support, primary contact and recreational use support, fish shellfishconsumption use support, drinking water use support, and protection of human health.Data older than ten years cannot be used to evaluate water quality criteria exceedancesfor the Planning List. As required by Section 403.067(2), F.S., the Planning List will notbe used to administer or implement any regulatory program, and is submitted to the EPAfor informational purposes only.After further assessment, using the methodology in Part III, Rule 62-303.400, F.A.C.,the Department will determine if waters on the Planning List are, in fact, impaired and ifthe impairment is caused by pollutant discharges. These waters are placed on a VerifiedList. 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 Listwill be adopted by Secretarial Order and forwarded to the EPA for approval as Florida’sSection 303(d) list of impaired waters. The Department will develop TMDLs for thesewaters under Section 403.067(4), F.S.Attainment of Designated Use(s)While the designated uses of a given waterbody are established using the surfacewater quality classification system described previously, it is important to note that theEPA uses slightly different terminology in its description of designated uses. Because theDepartment is required to provide use attainment status for both the state’s 305(b) reportand the state’s 303(d) list of impaired waters, the Department uses EPA terminology

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 129when assessing waters for use attainment. The water quality evaluations and decisionprocesses for listing impaired waters that are defined in Florida’s Impaired SurfaceWaters Rule are based on the following designated use attainment categories:Aquatic Life Use Support-Based AttainmentPrimary Contact and Recreation AttainmentFish and Shellfish Consumption AttainmentDrinking Water Use Attainment and Protection of Human HealthTable D.1 summarizes designated uses assigned to the various surface water classes.Table D.1: Designated Use Attainment Categories for Surface Waters in FloridaDesignated Use Attainment Category Used inImpaired Surface Waters Rule EvaluationApplicable Florida Surface Water ClassificationAquatic Life Use Support-Based AttainmentClass I, II, and IIIPrimary Contact and Recreation AttainmentClass I, II, and IIIFish and Shellfish Consumption AttainmentClass IIDrinking Water Use AttainmentClass IProtection of Human HealthClass I, II, and IIISources of DataThe assessment of water quality for each basin statewide includes an analysis ofquantitative data from a variety of sources, many of which are readily available to thepublic. These sources include the EPA’s Legacy and “new” STOrage and RETrieval(STORET) databases, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Department, the FloridaDepartment of Health (DOH), the water management districts, local governments, andvolunteer monitoring groups.Historically, the Department carried out statewide water quality assessments usingdata available in the EPA’s Legacy STORET Database; STORET makes upapproximately 60 percent of the statewide data used in the 2002 Impaired Surface WatersRule assessment. The Legacy STORET dataset is a compilation of data collected bynumerous organizations that uploaded their data directly to the national databasemaintained by the EPA until 1999. The Legacy STORET Database can be accessed athttp://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/storet/index.htm.In 2000, the EPA created a “new” STORET Database that included modernizedfeatures designed to provide an improved repository for data (see the new STORETWebsite at www.epa.gov/storet/). However, because of software difficulties associatedwith batch uploading of data to the modernized STORET, the data being uploaded to thenational repository decreased dramatically, and lingering problems have temporarilyreduced STORET’s importance as a statewide data source. Modernized STORETcomprised only about 5 percent of the statewide Impaired Surface Waters Rule 2002Database.Approximately 35 percent of the data used in the 2002 Impaired Surface Waters Ruleassessment was uploaded from individual organizations that for various reasons were notable to enter their data into the national database. The organizations providing the largestdatasets include the South Florida, Southwest Florida, and St. Johns River water

130 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastmanagement districts; the USGS; and the University of Florida LakeWatch volunteermonitoring group. Several of these databases are readily available to the public via theInternet: South Florida Water Management District at http://www.sfwmd.gov/, USGShttp://www.usgs.gov/ and Florida LakeWatch http://lakewatch.ifas.ufl.edu/.The Impaired Surface Waters Rule 2002 Database was created to evaluate datasimultaneously in accordance with the Impaired Surface Waters Rule methodology forevery basin in the state, based on the appropriate data “window.” For the Verified Listassessment, the window is 7.5 years (for the Impaired Surface Waters Rule 2002Database), and the Planning List assessment window is 10 years. Table D.2 shows theperiods of record for the Verified and Planning lists in the first basin rotation cycle.The evaluation of water quality in the state’s basins also includes some qualitativeinformation. These sources are described in the Status Reports and Assessment Reportsfor each basin.Table D.2: Data Used in Developing the Planning and Verified Lists, First Basin Rotation CycleBasin Group Reporting Period of Data Record Used in ImpairedSurface Waters Rule EvaluationGroup 1 Planning List January 1, 1989 – December 31, 1998Verified List January 1, 1995 – June 30, 2002Group 2 Planning List January 1, 1991 – December 31, 2000Verified List January 1, 1996 – December 31 2002Group 3 Planning List January 1, 1992 – December 31, 2001Verified List January 1, 1997 – December 31, 2003Group 4 Planning List January 1, 1993 – December 31, 2002Verified List January 1, 1998 – December 31 2004Group 5 Planning List January 1, 1994 – December 31, 2003Verified List January 1, 1999 – December 31, 2005Notes: Typically, a 10-year data record is used for the development of the Planning Lists, and a 7-year record is used forthe Verified Lists. If necessary, however, the data record for the Verified listing can be extended by up to 6 months tocomplete a monitoring period that will provide sufficient information to make a listing determination. This 6-monthextension applies to the development of the Impaired Surface Waters Rule 2002 Database.MethodologyTo determine the status of surface water quality in individual river basins in Florida,three categories of data—chemistry data, biological data, and fish consumptionadvisories—were evaluated to determine potential impairments.Aquatic Life Based AttainmentTo determine the status of surface water quality in individual river basins in Florida,three categories of data—chemistry data, biological data, and fish consumptionadvisories—were evaluated to determine potential impairments. The Impaired SurfaceWaters Rule follows the principle of independent applicability. A waterbody is listed forpotential impairment of aquatic life use support based on exceedances of any one of fourtypes of water quality indicators (numeric water quality criteria, nutrient thresholds,biological thresholds, and toxicity data).

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 131EXCEEDANCES OF NUMERIC WATER QUALITY CRITERIAThe chemistry data from STORET used in evaluating impairment were also used forpreparing the state’s 2000 305(b) report. The stations were determined to be ambientsurface water quality stations, and water quality information from point sources or wellswas purposely excluded. Stations were classified as one of five waterbodytypes—spring, stream, lake, estuary, or blackwater—based on criteria described in the305(b) report. The data included the following parameters:Metals βNutrientsConventionalsArsenic, aluminum, cadmium, chromium VI, chromium III,copper, iron, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver,thallium, and zincChlorophyll a for streams and estuaries, and Trophic StateIndex (TSI) (chlorophyll a, total nitrogen, and totalphosphorus) for lakesDissolved oxygen (DO), fecal coliforms, total coliforms,pH, unionized ammoniaThe requirements for placing waters on the Planning List included a minimum of 10temporally independent samples from the ten-year period of 1991 through 2000, unlessthere were 3 exceedances of water quality or 1 exceedance of an acute toxicity criterionin a three-year period. The screening methodology for the Verified List requires at least20 samples from the last five years preceding the Planning List assessment. Anexceedance, meaning that water quality criteria or standards are not met, is recorded anytime the criterion is exceeded by any amount. An exceedance for DO, however, meansthat a waterbody does not meet the dissolved oxygen criterion, rather than an actualexceedance of the criterion.To determine if a water should be placed on the Planning List for each parameter, thechemical data were analyzed using a computer program written to assess the data, basedon 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 Excelspreadsheet. Second, because the full complexity of the pH criterion could not beprogrammed, the incomplete listings for pH are not included. They will be furtherexamined while additional data are collected during Phase 2 of the watershedmanagement cycle. Data analysis and statistical summaries of WBIDs, waterbody types,and parameters obtained from the STORET Database were conducted using Access, SASstatistical software, and ArcView GIS applicationsThe data for metals and conventional parameters were compared with the statesurface water quality criteria in Rule 62-302.530, F.A.C. (Identification of ImpairedSurface Waters Rule). The rule contains a table of sample numbers versus exceedances.β Although arsenic and selenium are not true metals according to the periodic table of elements, they are considered tobe metalloids by the EPA and are treated as metals for water quality purposes.

132 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastA waterbody was placed on the Planning List if there was at least 80 percent confidencethat the actual criteria exceedance rate was greater than or equal to 10 percent. To beplaced on the Verified List, at least a 90 percent confidence rate was required.EXCEEDANCES OF NUTRIENT THRESHOLDSThe state currently has a narrative nutrient criterion instead of a numeric value fornutrient thresholds. The narrative criterion states, “In no case shall nutrientconcentrations of a body of water be altered so as to cause an imbalance in naturalpopulations of aquatic flora or fauna.” The Impaired Surface Waters Rule provides aninterpretation 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 awaterbody should be assessed further for nutrient impairment.The rule also consider other information that indicates an imbalance in flora or faunadue to nutrient enrichment, such as algal blooms, excessive macrophyte growth, adecrease in the distribution (either in density or aerial coverage) of seagrasses or othersubmerged aquatic vegetation, changes in algal species richness, and excessive dieloxygen swings.Potential nutrient impairment was evaluated by calculating annual mean chlorophyll avalues for estuaries and streams and the TSI for lakes. For lakes, the TSI was calculatedusing chlorophyll a, total phosphorus, and total nitrogen measurements. Direct evidenceof imbalances of flora and fauna in waterbodies was also considered in the evaluation ofnutrient impairments.In estuarine areas, a water was considered nutrient enriched if the annual meanchlorophyll a values were greater than 11 µg/L or if annual mean chlorophyll a valuesincreased by more than 50 percent over historical values for at least two consecutiveyears. For streams, a water was considered nutrient enriched if the annual meanchlorophyll a values were greater than 20 µg/L or if the annual mean increased by morethan 50 percent over historical values for at least two consecutive years.A lake with a mean color greater than 40 platinum cobalt units (PCUs) wasconsidered nutrient enriched if the annual mean TSI exceeded 60. A lake with a meancolor less than or equal to 40 PCUs was considered nutrient enriched if the annual meanTSI exceeded 40. In addition, a lake was considered nutrient enriched if there was anincrease in TSI over the 1989 to 2000 period or if TSI measurements were 10 units higherthan historical values.EXCEEDANCES OF BIOLOGICAL THRESHOLDSBioassessments were carried out for streams, lakes, canals, and rivers using theImpaired Surface Waters Rule as guidance and following the Department’s standardoperating procedures, which provide definitions and specific methods for the generationand analysis of bioassessment data. These are referenced in the individual bioassessmentdata tables contained in the Status Reports. The purpose behind using a bioassessmentmethodology in surface water characterizations is that biological components of theenvironment manifest long-term water quality conditions and thus provide a betterindication of a waterbody’s true health than discrete chemical or physical measurements

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 133alone. Similar to water quality criteria, bioassessment methods involve the identificationof a biological reference condition, based on data from unimpaired or least impactedwaters in a given region.For the Planning and Verified list assessments, the reference condition data were usedto establish expected scores, ranging from best to worst, for various measures ofcommunity structure and function, such as numbers or percentages of particular speciesor feeding groups. Data on community structure and function from waters of unknownquality in the same region as reference waters were compared with the expected scores ofmetrics to evaluate their biological integrity.Metrics (e.g., number of taxa, percent Diptera, percent filter feeders) were usedindependently and as an aggregated group called an index. Indices have advantages overindividual metrics in that they can integrate several related metrics into one score thatreflects a wider range of biological variables. A number of bioassessment metrics andindices 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 inthe bioassessments analyzed for the Planning and Verified Lists. The data included sitesdesignated as test and background sites for National Pollutant Discharge EliminationSystem (NPDES) fifth-year inspections, but excluded data from effluent outfalls fromdischarging facilities or data from monitoring sites not clearly established to collectambient water quality data. Because site-specific habitat and physicochemicalassessment information (e.g., percent suitable macroinvertebrate habitat, water velocities,extent of sand or silt smothering, and riparian (see the sidebar definition) buffer zonewidths) was not available at the time of reporting, it was not included. However, thisinformation is instrumental in pinpointing the causes for failed bioassessment metrics andwill be included in future reporting.SIDEBAR DEFINITION: RIPARIANOf, 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 theDepartment’s Biological Database (SBIO) and the EPA’s STORET Water QualityDatabase, where it could be substantiated that the data were generated in compliance withthe bioassessment standard operating procedures in Rule 62-303.330, F.A.C.The data from these databases are used without regard to the randomness of samplesite selection. The general period of record for data used in the analysis of lotic (moving)waters was January 1, 1991, through December 31, 1998. The period of record for dataused in the analysis of lentic (still) waters was June 21, 1995, through December 31,1998. The June 21st date corresponds to the inception of the Department’s currentstandard operating procedures for sampling lakes (FS-7640). For the purposes of theStatus Reports, the seasons are defined as follows: winter (1/1–3/31), spring (4/1–6/30),summer (7/1–9/30), and fall (10/1–12/31). Wet seasons are generally spring and

134 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastsummer, and dry seasons are fall and winter, although conditions can vary in the state asa whole.LAKE CONDITION INDEXThe scoring of the individual metrics of the Lake Condition Index (LCI), exceptpercent Diptera, was performed according to the following formula:100(B/A) where A = the 95 percentile of the reference population and B = observedvalueFor percent Diptera, the following formula was used:100 (100-B)/(100-A) where A = the 95 percentile of the reference population and B =observed valueAn average LCI score was calculated by averaging the scores of the six metrics in themethod: total number of taxa; total number of taxa belonging to the ordersEphemeroptera, 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 inFlorida accurately (> 20 PCUs), they have been excluded from bioassessments. A pooror very poor rating based on the average score constituted a failed bioassessment, basedon the Impaired Surface Waters Rule.STREAM CONDITION INDEXA total Stream Condition Index (SCI) score was calculated by adding the scores ofthe seven metrics in the method, i.e., total number of taxa; total number of taxa belongingto the orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT taxa); percentChironomid taxa; percent dominant taxa; percent Diptera; percent filter feeders; andFlorida Index. A poor or very poor rating based on the total score constituted a failedbioassessment, based on the Impaired Surface Waters Rule. The Status Reports containdefinitions and specific methods for the generation and analysis of bioassessment data.BIORECONTo 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 threemetrics failed to meet thresholds, the water was deemed “impaired” based on theImpaired Surface Waters Rule.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 135BIOLOGICAL INTEGRITY STANDARDQuantitative data, generated through the use of Hester-Dendy artificial substratesamplers, were used to calculate Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index scores for pairedbackground and test sites, as specified in the Biological Integrity Standard of Rule 62-302.530(11), F.A.C. One failure of the standard meant that a waterbody segment waslisted as potentially impaired.EVALUATION OF TOXICITY DATAAlthough the Impaired Surface Waters Rule describes the use of toxicity data for theassessment of aquatic life-based attainment, no ambient toxicity data are available forassessment and this metric was not used.Primary Contact and Recreation AttainmentFor Class I, II, or III waters, a waterbody was potentially impaired if the followingcriteria were met:• The waterbody segment did not meet the applicable water quality criteria forbacteriological quality,• The waterbody segment included a bathing area that was closed by a local healthdepartment or county government for more than one week or more than onceduring a calendar year based on bacteriological data,• The waterbody segment included a bathing area for which a local healthdepartment or county government issued closures, advisories, or warnings totalingtwenty-one days or more during a calendar year based on bacteriological data,• The waterbody segment included a bathing area that was closed or had advisoriesor warnings for more than twelve weeks during a calendar year based on previousbacteriological data or on derived relationships between bacteria levels andrainfall or flow.Bathing area closures were also considered in determining attainment of use.Fish and Shellfish Consumption AttainmentFor Class I, II, or III waters, a waterbody was potentially impaired if it did not meetthe applicable Class II water quality criteria for bacteriological quality, or if a fishconsumption advisory had been issued. Fish consumption advisories were based on theFlorida Department of Health’s “limited consumption” or “no consumption” advisoriesfor surface waters because of high levels of mercury in fish tissue. In addition, for ClassII waters, waterbody segments that had been approved for shellfish harvesting but weredowngraded to a more restrictive classification were listed as potentially impaired.

136 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastDrinking Water Attainment and Protection of Human HealthFor Class I waters, a waterbody was potentially impaired if it did not meet theapplicable Class I water quality criteria.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 137Appendix E: Water Quality Summary for the Everglades West Coast BasinTable E.1: Integrated Water Quality Assessment Summary, by Planning Unit, for the Everglades West Coast BasinParametersPlanning Unit WBID Waterbody SegmentIdentifiedWaterbody Class 1 1998 303(d)Integrated Priority 3 ProjectedforUnder theYear forParameters ofAssessment TMDLType2001 ImpairedConcernCategory 2TMDLDevelopmentSurfaceDevelopmentWaters RuleEstero Bay3258AESTERO BAYWETLANDSESTUARY 3M NUTR N/A 2 N/A N/AEstero Bay 3258B HENDRY CREEK STREAM 3F NUTR, DOEstero BayEstero BayEstero Bay3258B13258B13258CHENDRY CREEKMARINEHENDRY CREEKMARINEESTERO BAYDRAINAGEESTUARY 3M NUTR, DONutrients(Chlorophyll),DONutrients(Chlorophyll),DO, FecalColiform5 Medium 20075 Medium 2007ESTUARY 3M Copper, Lead 3c N/A N/ASTREAM 3F NPS surveyNutrients(Chlorophyll),DO5 Medium 2007Estero Bay3258CESTERO BAYDRAINAGESTREAM 3F Cadmium 3c N/A N/AEstero Bay 3258C1ESTERO BAYDRAINAGE MARINEESTUARY 3M NPS survey DO 3c N/A N/AEstero Bay 3258D ESTERO RIVER STREAM 3F N/A DO 3c N/A N/ACommentsChlorophyll metverificationthreshold perIWR indicating anutrientimpairment.Chlorophyll metverificationthreshold perIWR indicating anutrientimpairment.Both nitrogenandphosphorousare identified ascausativepollutants.DO metverificationthreshold perIWR. BOD is thecausativepollutant.

138 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanning Unit WBID Waterbody SegmentEstero Bay3258D1ESTERO RIVERMARINEWaterbodyTypeClass 1ESTUARY 3M N/A1998 303(d)Parameters ofConcernEstero Bay 3258E IMPERIAL RIVER STREAM 3F NUTR, DOParametersIdentifiedUnder the2001 ImpairedSurfaceWaters RuleNutrients(Chlorophyll),DO, Copper,Fecal ColiformsNutrients(Chlorophyll),DO,IntegratedAssessmentCategory 2Priority 3 forTMDLDevelopmentProjectedYear forTMDLDevelopment5 Medium 20075 Low 2007Estero Bay 3258E1IMPERIAL RIVERMARINEESTUARY 3M Copper 5 Medium 2007Estero Bay 3258E1IMPERIAL RIVERMARINEESTUARY 3M NUTR, DO DO 3c N/A N/AEstero Bay 3258F OAK CREEK ESTUARY 3M N/A N/A 3b N/A N/AEstero Bay 3258G TENMILE CANAL STREAM 3F N/A DO 3c N/A N/ACommentsChlorophyll metverificationthreshold perthe IWR.Nutrients areidentified ascausativepollutants.Chlorophyll metverificationthreshold perIWR indicating anutrientimpairment.Both nitrogenandphosphorousare identified ascausativepollutants.Estero Bay 3258H SPRING CREEK STREAM 3F NUTR, DO DO 3c N/A N/AEstero Bay3258H1SPRING CREEKMARINEESTUARY 3M NUTR, DONutrients(Chlorophyll),Copper, DO5 Medium 2007Estero Bay 3258I ESTERO BAY ESTUARY 3M N/A N/A 2 N/A N/AChlorophyll metverificationthreshold perIWR indicating anutrientimpairment.Both nitrogenandphosphorousare identified ascausativepollutants.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 139Planning Unit WBID Waterbody SegmentWaterbodyTypeClass 11998 303(d)Parameters ofConcernParametersIdentifiedUnder the2001 ImpairedSurfaceWaters RuleIntegratedAssessmentCategory 2Priority 3 forTMDLDevelopmentProjectedYear forTMDLDevelopmentEstero Bay 3258X LAKES PARK LAKE 3F N/A N/A 3b N/A N/AEstero Bay 8060 ESTERO BAY GULF COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3b N/A N/ACommentsEstero Bay 8060A BOWDITCH PARK COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/AEstero Bay 8060B LYNN HALL PARK COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/AEstero Bay8060CLOVERS KEY STATEPARKCOASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/AInterdrainageAreaInterdrainageAreaInterdrainageAreaInterdrainageAreaInterdrainageAreaInterdrainageAreaInterdrainageAreaInterdrainageAreaSouthwest CoastSouthwest Coast3255 C-139 STREAM 3F N/A3261ABARRON RIVERCANALESTUARY 3M N/A3261B TAMIAMI CANAL STREAM 3F3261CBARRON RIVERCANALSTREAM 3F N/AFISH, DO,CADMIUM,COPPERDO, Fish(mercury)DO, Fish(mercury)DO, Fish(mercury)MercuryDO, Fish(mercury)3c N/A N/A3c N/A N/A3c N/A N/A3c N/A N/A3261D TAMIAMI CANAL STREAM 3F N/A N/A 3a N/A N/A3266 L-28 INTERCEPTOR STREAM 3F NUTR, FISH, DO DO 3c N/A N/A3267 Feeder Canal STREAM 3F N/A N/A 3a N/A N/A3269 L-28 GAP STREAM 3F DO3259A3259ACOCOHATCHEERIVERCOCOHATCHEERIVERDO, Fish(mercury)3c N/A N/ASTREAM 2 COLI, BOD, DO DO 5 Medium 2007STREAM 2 Fish (mercury) 3c N/A N/ADO metverificationthreshold perthe IWR andnitrogen is thecausativepollutant.

140 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanning Unit WBID Waterbody SegmentSouthwest Coast3259BCOCOHATCHEERIVER CANALWaterbodyTypeClass 1Southwest Coast 3259C GORDON RIVER STREAM 3FSouthwest CoastSouthwest Coast3259D3259EGORDON RIVERCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANAL1998 303(d)Parameters ofConcernParametersIdentifiedUnder the2001 ImpairedSurfaceWaters RuleIntegratedAssessmentCategory 2Priority 3 forTMDLDevelopmentProjectedYear forTMDLDevelopmentSTREAM 3F N/A DO 5 Medium 2007COLI, NUTR, BOD,DODO, Coliforms 3c N/A N/ASTREAM 3F N/A DO 5 Medium 2007STREAM 3F N/A DO 5 Medium 2007Southwest Coast 3259FGOLDEN GATECANALSTREAM 3F N/A DO 3c N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259G NAPLES BAY ESTUARY 2 NUTRNutrients(Chlorophyll)3c N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259HHENDERSON CREEKCANALSTREAM 3F N/A DO 3c N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259I WEST COLLIER STREAM 3F N/A DO 3c N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259J ROOKERY BAY ESTUARY 2 N/A N/A 3b N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259K RUNOFF TO GULF STREAM 3F N/A N/A 3b N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259L BLACKWATER RIVER STREAM 3F N/A DO 5 Medium 2007Southwest Coast 3259M RUNOFF TO GULF ESTUARY 2 N/A N/A 2 N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259N RUNOFF TO GULF ESTUARY 2 N/A N/A 2 N/A N/ACommentsDO metverificationthreshold perthe IWR andBOD is indicatedas the causativepollutant.DO metverificationthreshold perthe IWR andBOD is thecausativepollutant.DO metverificationthreshold perthe IWR andBOD is thecausativepollutant.DO metverificationthreshold perthe IWR andphosphorous isthe causativepollutant.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 141Planning Unit WBID Waterbody SegmentWaterbodyTypeClass 11998 303(d)Parameters ofConcernParametersIdentifiedUnder the2001 ImpairedSurfaceWaters RuleIntegratedAssessmentCategory 2Priority 3 forTMDLDevelopmentProjectedYear forTMDLDevelopmentSouthwest Coast 3259O FAKA UNION CANAL STREAM 3F N/A DO 3c N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259P FERGUSON RIVER ESTUARY 2 N/A N/A 2 N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259QCenter of Outer ClamBayouESTUARY 2 N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259R RUNOFF TO GULF ESTUARY 2 N/A N/A 2 N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259S RUNOFF TO GULF ESTUARY 2 N/A N/A 3b N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259TLAKE AVALON MID-LAKELAKE 3F N/A N/A 3b N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259W LAKE TRAFFORD LAKE 3F NUTR, DO Nutrients (TSI) 5 Low 2007Southwest Coast 3259W LAKE TRAFFORD LAKE 3F NUTR, DO Turbidity 3c N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259XDRAINAGE TOCORKSCREWSTREAM 3F N/A DO 3c N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259Y VANDERBILT WAY ESTUARY 3M N/A N/A 3b N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 3259Z LITTLE HICKORY BAY ESTUARY 3M N/A N/A 3b N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8061SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 1COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8061ALITTLE HICKORYISLAND PARKCOASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8061B BONITA BEACH PARK COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8061CLELY BAREFOOTBEACHCOASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8061DWIGGINS PASSNORTHCOASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3b N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8061EWIGGINS PASSSTATE PARKCOASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8061F VANDERBILT BEACH COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8062SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 2COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8062A CLAM PASS COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 2 N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8062B PARKSHORE BEACH COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8062C DOCTORS PASS COASTAL 3M N/A DO 3c N/A N/ACommentsTSI metverificationthreshold perthe IWR.Nitrogen andphosphorousare bothcausative andlimitingpollutants.

142 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanning Unit WBID Waterbody SegmentWaterbodyTypeClass 11998 303(d)Parameters ofConcernParametersIdentifiedUnder the2001 ImpairedSurfaceWaters RuleIntegratedAssessmentCategory 2Priority 3 forTMDLDevelopmentProjectedYear forTMDLDevelopmentSouthwest Coast 8062DLOWDERMILK PARKBEACHCOASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8062E NAPLES PIER COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8063SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 3COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8063A GORDONS PASS COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8064SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 2 N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8064A TIGERTAIL BEACH COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8064B RESIDENCE BEACH COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8064C CAXAMBAS PARK COASTAL 3M N/A N/A 3a N/A N/ASouthwest Coast 8065Southwest Coast 8999SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5FLORIDA GULFCOASTCOASTAL 3M N/ABacteria (inshellfish)5 Medium 2007ESTUARY 2 N/A Fish (mercury) 5 Medium 2011CommentsListed based onchange inshellfishharvestingclassification(downgradedfrom approvedto conditional).Data verified tobe within the last7.5 years.Confirmedrecent data forcoastal fishadvisory formackerel.Includesnearshore areasin WBIDs 8060,8061, 8062,8063, 8064, and8065.1 The state’s surface water classifications are as follows:Class I: Potable water suppliesClass II: Shellfish propagation or harvestingClass III: Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlifeClass IV: Agricultural water suppliesClass V: Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in this class)

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 143F = Fresh water M = Marine2The EPA’s 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report categories are as follows:1 – Attains all designated uses;2 – Attains some designated uses;3a – No data and information are available to determine if any designated use is attained;3b – Some data and information are available, but they are insufficient for determining if any designated use is attained;3c – Meets Planning List criteria and is potentially impaired for one or more designated uses;4a – Impaired for one or more designated uses and the TMDL is complete;4b – Impaired for one or more designated uses but no TMDL is required because the impairment is not caused by a pollutant;4c – Impaired for one or more designated uses, but no TMDL is required because a proposed pollution control measure provides reasonableassurance that the water will attain standards in the future; and5 – Water quality standards are not attained and a TMDL is required.3 Priorities were retained from the 1998 303(d) list (i.e., High or Low), but High, Medium and Low are used for newly listed waters identified under theIWR. Dates and priorities placed within parentheses indicate a TMDL is scheduled under the terms of the consent decree between EPA and Earthjustice,but for which sufficient information is lacking to assess the waterbody using the IWR.NA = Not applicable, i.e., there are no parameters listed.

144 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable E.2: Water Quality Monitoring Stations Used in the Assessment, by Planning Unit, for the Everglades West Coast BasinNote: BD – Year sampling began (19**)ED – Year of most recent sample (19**)PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.Estero BayESTERO BAYWETLANDSESTERO BAYWETLANDS3258A 21FLCHAREBV001 Matanzas Pass/San Carlos Is/DEP dock 1998 2000 2963258A 21FLEECOEB-11 South of mantanzas Pass 1995 2001 570HENDRY CREEK 3258B 21FLEECOHENDGR11 HENDRY CREEK- US 41 1995 2001 2136HENDRY CREEK 3258B 21FLEECOHENDGR20 HENDRY CREEK- Gladiolus East 1995 2001 1770HENDRY CREEKMARINE3258B1 21FLEECOHENDGR30 HENDRY CREEK- Gladiolus West 1995 2001 1756ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE 3258C 21FLEECO46B-9GR MULLOCK CREEK- US 41 1995 2001 1770ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE 3258C 21FLEECO46B-L6GR MULLOCK CREEK- US 41 and Hickory Rd. 1995 2001 1377ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE 3258C 21FLEECOSIXMILE1 SIX MILE CYPRESS- Buckingham Rd. 1995 2001 1447ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE 3258C 21FLEECOSIXMILE2 SIX MILE CYPRESS- I-75 1995 2001 1647ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE 3258C 21FLEECOSIXMILE3 SIX MILE CYPRESS- Six Mile Slough 1995 2001 1619ESTERO BAY DRAINAGE 3258C 21FLFTM 28020262FTM Estero River at East Broadway 2001 2002 24ESTERO BAY DRAINAGEMARINE3258C1 21FLEECO10MIGR10 TEN MILE- Park Rd. 1995 2001 1439ESTERO RIVER 3258D 21FLEECO47A-40GR ESTERO RIVER- Alico Rd. 1995 2001 1431ESTERO RIVER 3258D 21FLEECO47A-28GR ESTERO RIVER- Three Oaks Blvd. 1995 2001 1254

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 145PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.ESTERO RIVER 3258D 21FLEECO47B-11GR HALFWAY CREEK- US 41 1995 2001 1751ESTERO RIVER MARINE 3258D1 112WRD 262552081485703 L-2308 1999 1999 2ESTERO RIVER MARINE 3258D1 21FLEECO47A-4GR ESTERO RIVER- Riverwoods Plantation rec. area 1995 2001 1855ESTERO RIVER MARINE 3258D1 21FLEECO47A-15GR ESTERO RIVER- US 41 1995 2001 1877ESTERO RIVER MARINE 3258D1 112WRD 262552081485702 46S25E33 L -2295 LEE CO ROADS ESTERO 2000 2000 1IMPERIAL RIVER 3258E 21FLFTM 28020264FTM Imperial River at Orr Rd in Bonita 2001 2002 57IMPERIAL RIVER 3258E 21FLEECOIMPRGR90 IMPERIAL RIVER- Corkscrew Rd. 1995 2001 951IMPERIAL RIVER 3258E 21FLEECOIMPRGR70 IMPERIAL RIVER- I-75 1995 2001 470IMPERIAL RIVER 3258E 21FLEECOIMPRGR51 IMPERIAL RIVER- Leitner Creek @ Goodwin Rd 1995 2001 1767IMPERIAL RIVER 3258E 21FLA 28020244 IMPERIAL RIVER AT ORR ROAD 1998 1998 16IMPERIAL RIVERMARINEIMPERIAL RIVERMARINE3258E1 21FLEECOIMPRGR30 IMPERIAL RIVER- US 41 1995 2001 19713258E1 21FLEECOIMPRGR41 IMPERIAL RIVER- Oak Creek @ Pennsylvania 1995 2001 1770TENMILE CANAL 3258G 21FLEECO10MIGR60 TEN MILE- Crystal Dr. 1996 2001 1066TENMILE CANAL 3258G 21FLEECO10MIGR20 TEN MILE- Tamiami Weir 1995 2001 1282TENMILE CANAL 3258G 21FLEECO10MIGR91 TEN MILE- Suspected ind. Pt. Souce 1995 2001 1285TENMILE CANAL 3258G 21FLEECO10MIGR80 TEN MILE- Colonial 1995 2001 1284TENMILE CANAL 3258G 21FLEECO10MIGR50 TEN MILE- Daniels Rd. 1995 2001 1366TENMILE CANAL 3258G 21FLEECOSIXMILE4 SIX MILE CYPRESS- Daniels Rd. 1995 2001 1750

146 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.TENMILE CANAL 3258G 21FLEECOSIXMILE5 SIX MILE CYPRESS- Daniels Pkwy near “Sunharvest” 1995 2001 1964TENMILE CANAL 3258G 21FLFTM 28020260FTM Ten Mile canal at north end of Old US41 2001 2002 26TENMILE CANAL 3258G 21FLEECO10MIGR40 TEN MILE- Six Mile 1995 2001 1282SPRING CREEK 3258H 21FLA 28020243 SPRING CREEK AT POWER LINE CROSSING 1998 1998 21SPRING CREEK 3258H 21FLFTM 28020263FTM Spring Creek in Bonita 2001 2002 58SPRING CREEK 3258H 21FLEECO48-25GR SPRING CREEK- Old 41 @ Spring Creek 1995 2001 1691SPRING CREEK MARINE 3258H1 21FLEECO48-10GR SPRING CREEK- US 41W. @ Bay Creek Dr. 1995 2001 1739SPRING CREEK MARINE 3258H1 21FLEECO48-15GR SPRING CREEK- US 41S. @ Spring Creek 1995 2001 1757ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-04 Near mouth of Spring Creek 1995 2001 570ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLSFWMROOK470 Central Estero Bay, R2 1999 2000 120ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-01 Big Hickory Pass 1995 2001 569ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-03 East of Squaw Creek inside Bay 1995 2001 816ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLSFWMROOK466 New Pass 1999 2000 120ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-05 Squaw Creek road 1995 2001 570ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-06 New Pass 1995 2001 570ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-07 Johnson Fish Camp 1995 2001 570ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-08 Big Carlos Pass 1995 2001 570ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-09 Coon Key 1995 2001 570

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 147PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-10 Julies Island 1995 2001 570ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-13 Near mouth of Estero river 1995 2001 570ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-14 West of Mound Key 1995 2001 570ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLEECOEB-02 Near Mouth of Imperial River 1995 2001 570ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLSFWMROOK468 Big Carlos Pass Bridge 1999 2000 120ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLCHAREBV006 Estero Bay/Marker G 51 2000 2000 89ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLCHAREBV005 Estero Bay/Pelican Bay Nature Park Pier 1998 2000 271ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLCHAREBV004 Estero Bay/Carl Johnson Park Boat Ramp 1998 2000 284ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLCHAREBV003 Estero Bay/1 st sm island W of Estero R mo 1998 2000 223ESTERO BAY 3258I 21FLSFWMROOK469 Coon Key, R2A 1999 2000 120ESTERO BAY GULF 8060 21FLSFWMRD8 CALOOSAHATCHEE WATER QUALITY MONITORING STATION 2000 2000 371ESTERO BAY GULF 8060 21FLSFWMROOK471 Point Ybel, R8 1999 2000 120BOWDITCH PARK 8060A 21FLDOH LEE146 BOWDITCH PARK 2000 2002 62LYNN HALL PARK 8060B 21FLDOH LEE147 LYNN HALL PARK 2000 2002 62SouthwestCoastLOVERS KEY STATEPARK8060C 21FLDOH LEE148 LOVERS KEY STATE PARK 2000 2002 60COCOHATCHEE RIVER 3259A 21FLSFWMROOK467 Wiggins Pass Bridge 1999 2000 113COCOHATCHEE RIVER 3259A 21FLCOLLCOCOREST East side of Vanderbilt Drive bridge as where it c 1996 1996 22

148 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.COCOHATCHEE RIVER 3259A 21FLCOLLCOCOHOSP Bridge at intersection of Collier?s Reserve and Co 1997 1998 54COCOHATCHEE RIVER 3259A 21FLSFWMCOCAT41 Cocohatchee River at US 41 2000 2001 157COCOHATCHEE RIVER 3259A 21FLSFWMBC13 Downstream of weir in Immokalee Rd. Canal west of Palm 2000 2001 181COCOHATCHEE RIVER 3259A 21FLA 28030009 COCOHAT R SR 865 A BR 1995 1995 15COCOHATCHEE RIVER 3259A 21FLA 28030036 COCOHAT R US 41 BR 1995 1995 31COCOHATCHEE RIVER 3259A 21FLCOLLIMPGC Imperial Golf Course outflow along power line 1997 1998 66COCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANAL3259B 21FLCOLLCORKN Bridge just south of County line and USGS gauging 1997 1998 653259B 21FLFTM 28020265FTM Cocohatchee River at Immokalee Rd and Palm River B 2000 2002 363259B 21FLSFWMBC14 Immokalee Rd. Canal at intersection of Palm River Blvd 2000 2001 2073259B 21FLSFWMCORKS Southern most bridge on tram road in Corkscrew Swamp S 2001 2001 263259B 21FLSFWMCOCEOF31 COCOHATCHEE CANAL AT S.R. 846 _ MILEEAST OF S 2000 2001 2463259B 21FLSFWMBC25 Bridge just east of Oil Well Grade Rd. on CR 858 in Ca 2000 2001 2013259B 21FLCOLLORANGETR Bridge at intersection of Orange Tree canal and Ra 1996 1997 673259B 21FLCOLLKEAISS Bridge on CR858, 3.5 miles east of Everglades Blvd 1995 1995 1453259B 21FLSFWMFAKA858 South side of bridge at Faka Union Canal and CR858 2000 2001 1863259B 21FLCOLLCORKS Southern most bridge on tram road in Corkscrew Swa 1997 1998 1103259B 21FLCOLLCORKSW Canal along tram road at southwest corner of Corks 1997 1998 643259B 21FLCOLLVICLAK Southwest corner of Victoria Lake subdivision 1997 1998 66

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 149PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.COCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANALCOCOHATCHEE RIVCANAL3259B 21FLCOLLWCOCO2 Bridge on North WWTP entrance road from Immokalee 1997 1998 653259B 21FLCOLLWCOCORIV Upstream side of first amil gate on south side of 1997 1998 543259B 21FLCOLLWILSON846 Immokalee Rd. Canal at intersection of Wilson Rd 1997 1998 413259B 21FLCOLLECOCORIV Upstream side of second amil gate on south side of 1997 1998 543259B 21FLSFWMBC26 Intersection of 951 Canal and Immokalee Rd. Canal (“CO 2000 2001 1713259B 21FLSFWMCOCPALM Bridge at intersection of Palm River Drive and Coconut 2000 2001 2513259B 21FLCOLLQUAILCK Immokalee Rd. Canal at intersection of entrance rd 1998 1998 153259B 21FLSFWMCORKN Bridge S. of USGS gauge n on tram rd. to Little Corksc 2001 2001 263259B 21FLSFWMECOCORIV E. BRANCH OF COCOHATCHEE RIVER AT S.R. 846 NEAR 2000 2001 2733259B 21FLSFWMCORK@846 Bridge at intersection of Corkscrew Canal and CR846 2000 2001 2033259B 21FLCOLLCOCPALM Bridge at intersection of Palm River Drive and Coc 1997 1998 643259B 21FLCOLLNNAPLES South side of amil gate at junction of North Naple 1997 1998 663259B 21FLCOLLCOCEOF31 Bridge at intersection of Euclid Ave. and Cocohatc 1995 1998 2353259B 21FLCOLLPIPERS Immokalee Rd. Canal at east entrance to Piper?s Pa 1997 1998 463259B 21FLSFWMBC15 Airport Rd. Canal at entrance to Sam’s Club 2000 2001 2723259B 21FLSFWMCORKSW Canal along tram road at southwest corner of Corkscrew 2001 2001 263259B 21FLCOLLCOCAT951 Intersection of 951 Canal and Immokalee Rd. Canal 1997 1998 41GORDON RIVER 3259C 21FLSFWMBC4 Dwnstrm. Weir in Golden Gate Canal across from Bear’ 2000 2001 249

150 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.GORDON RIVER 3259C 21FLCOLLDOCTORS Where Harbour Drive bridge crosses Moorings Bay 1996 1996 42GORDON RIVER 3259C 21FLFTM 28030047 GORDON R ABOVE WIER 951 2000 2002 35GORDON RIVER 3259C 21FLCOLLGORDONRIV Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Pkwy and Gor 1995 1998 222GORDON RIVER 3259C 21FLCOLLROCK62 Located at junction of Rock Creek and Harbor Lane 1996 1996 48GORDON RIVER 3259C 21FLSFWMBC2 Just inside the mouth of Rock Creek 2000 2001 215GORDON RIVER 3259C 21FLSFWMBC3 Gordon River Ext. at mouth of canal leading to Main Po 2000 2001 240GORDON RIVER CANAL 3259D 21FLCOLLGGC10 Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and Sa 1996 1997 77GORDON RIVER CANAL 3259D 21FLCOLLGREEN@SB Bridge at intersection of Green Canal and Santa Ba 1996 1996 28GORDON RIVER CANAL 3259D 21FLCOLLMGG03@32 Bridge at intersection of Main Golden Gate Canal # 1996 1997 54GORDON RIVER CANAL 3259D 21FLCOLLGGCAT31 Bridge at intersection of Airport Rd and Golden Ga 1995 1998 261GORDON RIVER CANAL 3259D 21FLCOLLARS@896 Bridge at intersection of Airport Rd. Canal South 1996 1997 90GORDON RIVER CANAL 3259D 21FLSFWMGGCAT31 NO DESCRIPTION AVAILABLE FOR THIS STATION 2000 2001 246GORDON RIVER CANAL 3259D 21FLCOLLARN@VAND Bridge at intersection of Airport Rd. Canal North 1996 1997 67GORDON RIVER CANAL 3259D 21FLCOLLD2886 I-75 Canal (D2) at Golden Gate Pkwy 1996 1997 70GORDON RIVER CANAL 3259D 21FLCOLLAIRPORT886 Bridge at intersection of Airport Rd & Golden Gate 1996 1997 78HENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANAL3259E 21FLCOLLI75C@VAN Upstream of weir at intersection of I-75 Canal and 1996 1997 803259E 21FLCOLL9CN@GGBL Bridge at intersection of 951 Canal North and Gold 1996 1997 673259E 21FLCOLLGCB01@20 Bridge at intersection of Green Canal #01 and 20t 1996 1997 67

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 151PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.HENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANAL3259E 21FLSFWMBC23 Bridge at intersection of Main Golden Gate Canal and C 2000 2001 2453259E 21FLCOLLGCB02@SUN Bridge at intersection of Green Canal #02 and Suns 1996 1997 673259E 21FLCOLLGGCAT951 Bridge at intersection of Main Golden Gate Canal a 1996 1997 673259E 21FLCOLLGGC14 Bridge at canal crossing on Green Blvd. West of SR 1996 1997 76GOLDEN GATE CANAL 3259F 21FLCOLLCYPR@GGB Bridge at intersection of Cypress Canal and Golden 1996 1997 66GOLDEN GATE CANAL 3259F 21FLCOLLGGC@WHITE Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and Wh 1996 1997 64GOLDEN GATE CANAL 3259F 21FLCOLLGGC@858 Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and CR 1996 1997 92NAPLES BAY 3259G 21FLKWAT021NAPLESBAY-31 2001 2001 12NAPLES BAY 3259G 21FLCOLLNBAY24 Naples Bay at Marker 24 1996 1996 45NAPLES BAY 3259G 21FLKWAT021NAPLESBAY-11 2001 2001 12NAPLES BAY 3259G 21FLSFWMBC1 Channel marker 38 in Naples Bay 2000 2001 265NAPLES BAY 3259G 21FLKWAT021NAPLESBAY-21 2001 2001 12NAPLES BAY 3259G 21FLCOLLHALDNB Junction of Haldeman Creek and Naples Bay 1996 1996 48NAPLES BAY 3259G 21FLCOLLLELYICW First confluence of tidal creek at channel marker 1996 1996 52HENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANAL3259H 21FLCOLLHALDCRK Upstream of amil gate at intersection of US41 and 1995 1997 1813259H 21FLCOLLHENDCRK Gauging Station North of intersection of US41 and 1995 1998 3743259H 21FLSFWMLELY LELY CANAL AT U.S. 41 2000 2001 2003259H 21FLCOLLLANDFILL SW corner of Naples Landfill at outfall into Allig 1995 1995 58

152 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.HENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANALHENDERSON CREEKCANAL3259H 21FLCOLLLELY Bridge at intersection of US41 and Lely Main Canal 1995 1998 2343259H 21FLCOLLHEND951 Gauging station on CR951 canal south of intersecti 1995 1995 1443259H 21FLCOLLROCKE East side of Rock Creek bridge on Airport Rd 1996 1997 983259H 21FLCOLLROCKW Upstream of weir in canal entering Rock Creek at i 1995 1997 1803259H 21FLSFWMHALDCRK Upstream of amil gate at intersection of US41 and Hald 2000 2001 2233259H 21FLSFWMBC5 Bridge at intersection of Haldeman Creek and Bayshore 2000 2001 274WEST COLLIER 3259I 21FLSFWMBC12 Prairie Canal at the end of 82nd Ave. S.E. 2000 2001 185WEST COLLIER 3259I 21FLCOLLGGC@GGBE Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and Go 1996 1997 79WEST COLLIER 3259I 21FLCOLLGGC05@23 Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal #05 an 1996 1997 55WEST COLLIER 3259I 21FLSFWMBC9 Miller Canal at intersection of I-75 2000 2001 238WEST COLLIER 3259I 21FLCOLLLUCKYLAKE Lucky Lake near SW corner of Florida Panther Natio 1995 1995 49WEST COLLIER 3259I 21FLSFWMBC10 Faka Union Canal at intersection of I-75 (FAKAUC75) 2000 2001 262WEST COLLIER 3259I 21FLCOLLFAKAUC75 North side of overpass at intersection of Faka Uni 1995 1995 68WEST COLLIER 3259I 21FLSFWMBC11 Merritt Canal at intersection of I-75 2000 2001 257ROOKERY BAY 3259J 21FLCOLLJOHNSBAY Just inside southern entrance of Johnson Bay from 1995 1995 46ROOKERY BAY 3259J 21FLSFWMROOK461 Rookery Bay 1999 2000 120ROOKERY BAY 3259J 21FLCOLLHCKEST Near mouth of Henderson Creek as it enters Rookery 1996 1996 42TARPON BAY 3259J1 21FLKWAT021TARPONBAY-31 2001 2001 11

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 153PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.TARPON BAY 3259J1 21FLKWAT021TARPONBAY-11 2001 2001 12TARPON BAY 3259J1 21FLKWAT021TARPONBAY-21 2001 2001 11RUNOFF TO GULF 3259K 21FLCOLLHNDRCRK Approximately 1 mile northeast of the end of shell 1996 1996 42RUNOFF TO GULF 3259K 21FLCOLLSANDHILL Middle of Sandhill Bay 1996 1996 22BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLA 66299SEAS Blackwater River Channel Marker 11 1995 2000 473BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLA 66300SEAS Blackwater River Channel Marker 14 1995 2000 552BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLCOLLLMANOR2 Southernmost end of Lely Manor Canal 1995 1996 91BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLSFWMBC6 Downstream of weir in Henderson Creek south of US 41 E 2000 2001 188BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLCOLLTOMATO41 Gauging station near intersection of US41E and Tom 1995 1998 294BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLCOLLTAMBR55 South side of Bridge 55 on US41 East 1995 1995 137BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLCOLLTAMBR39 South side of Bridge 39 on US41 East 1995 1995 136BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLCOLLLMANOR Bridge at intersection of Lely Manor Canal and US4 1995 1996 90BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLCOLLMILLEXPO Pond on south side of side of U.S. 41E across from 1995 1995 46BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLSFWMBC21 Bridge #55 on US 41E (TAMBR55) 2000 2001 230BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLSFWMBC20 Bridge #52 on US 41E 2000 2001 234BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLSFWMBC19 Bridge #69 on US 41E 2000 2001 214BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLKWATBLACKWATER-31 2001 2001 10BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLSFWMBC22 Gauging Station North of intersection of US41 and Hend 2000 2001 213

154 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLKWATBLACKWATER-21 2001 2001 10BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLCOLLLMAIN2 Southernmost end of Lely Main Canal 1995 1996 88BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLSFWMBC18 Bridge #73 on US 41E 2000 2001 248BLACKWATER RIVER 3259L 21FLKWATBLACKWATER-11 2001 2001 10RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLA 66036SEAS Mouth of Pumpkin River 1995 2000 545RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLCOLLBLACKW Mouth of Blackwater River, in Collier Seminole Sta 1996 1996 46RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLA 66037SEAS Island E of Santina Bay 1995 2000 494RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLCOLLBLACKW13 Blackwater River at Channel Marker #13 1995 1995 46RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLCOLLEMARCOBY South of Bear Pt. Cove at deepening of East Marco 1995 1995 88RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLA 66020SEAS S tip of island due E of Goodland 1995 2000 527RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLCOLLLKMRCOSH Middle of eastern end of Lake Marco Shores 1995 1995 86RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLA 66303SEAS Buttonwood Bay entrance 1995 2000 552RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLA 66298SEAS SE corner of Palm Bay 1995 1999 272RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLA 66035SEAS Santina Bay western entrance 1995 2000 548RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLCOLLMARCPAS Mouth of flotilla passage adjacent to Marco Pass B 1996 1996 43RUNOFF TO GULF 3259M 21FLCOLLPORTAUPR Dock located behind 37 Ocho Rios Rd. in Port au Pr 1995 1995 46RUNOFF TO GULF 3259N 21FLKWAT021FAKAUNION-21 2001 2001 10RUNOFF TO GULF 3259N 21FLSFWMFAKAUPOI Faka-Union Canal at entrance to Port of the Islands Ma 2000 2001 276

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 155PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.RUNOFF TO GULF 3259N 21FLKWAT021FAKAUNION-31 2001 2001 10RUNOFF TO GULF 3259N 21FLA 66038SEAS Faka Union Channel Marker 19 1995 2000 509RUNOFF TO GULF 3259N 21FLKWAT021FAKAUNION-11 2001 2001 10RUNOFF TO GULF 3259N 21FLA 66077SEAS Faka Union Channel Marker 59 1995 2000 521RUNOFF TO GULF 3259N 21FLCOLLFAKAUPOI Faka-Union Canal at entrance to Port of the Island 1995 1995 72RUNOFF TO GULF 3259N 21FLCOLLFAKAUCAN Faka-Union Canal at Channel Marker #50 1995 1996 68FAKA UNION CANAL 3259O 21FLSFWMFAKA FAKA UNION CANAL AT U.S.41 NR COPELAND FLA. (W 2000 2001 182FAKA UNION CANAL 3259O 21FLSFWMBC8 Merritt Canal at east bend of "T" 2000 2001 177FAKA UNION CANAL 3259O 21FLCOLLFAKA Gauging station north of weir at the intersection 1995 1998 514FAKA UNION CANAL 3259O 21FLSFWMBC7 Faka Union Canal at west bend of "T" 2000 2001 178FAKA UNION CANAL 3259O 21FLA 66401SEAS Faka Union Channel Marker 23 1995 2000 524FAKA UNION CANAL 3259O 21FLCOLLFAKA858 South side of bridge at Faka Union Canal and CR858 1995 1995 150FERGUSON RIVER 3259P 21FLA 66007SEAS Mouth of Ferguson River 1995 2000 478FERGUSON RIVER 3259P 21FLSFWMGGC@858 Bridge at intersection of Golden Gate Canal and CR858 2000 2001 213RUNOFF TO GULF 3259R 21FLA 66114SEAS Mouth of Fakahatchee River 1995 2000 546RUNOFF TO GULF 3259R 21FLA 66111SEAS Middle of Fakahatchee Bay 1995 2000 453RUNOFF TO GULF 3259R 21FLA 66112SEAS West end of Fakahatchee Bay 1995 2000 501RUNOFF TO GULF 3259R 21FLA 66113SEAS Ruins at south end Fakahatchee Bay 1995 2000 554

156 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.LAKE AVALON MID-LAKE 3259T 21FLA 28030068 LAKE AVALON,MID-LAKE 1997 1997 32LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLKWAT021TRAFFORD3 2001 2001 4LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLCOLLLKTRAF7 Second canal south of the marina on the east side 1999 2002 532LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLKWAT021TRAFFORD1 2001 2001 4LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLCOLLLKTRAF2 Northwest corner of Lake Trafford, Immokalee 1996 2002 1510LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLKWAT021TRAFFORD2 2001 2001 4LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLCOLLLKTRAF1 Northeast corner of Lake Trafford, Immokalee 1996 2002 1514LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLCOLLLKTRAF3 Middle of Lake Trafford, Immokalee 1996 2002 1510LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLCOLLLKTRAF4 Southwest corner of Lake Trafford, Immokalee 1996 2002 1542LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLCOLLLKTRAF6 First canal south of the marina on the east side o 1999 2002 529LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLCOLLLKTRAF8 Canal furthest south of the marina on the east sid 1999 2002 534LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLA 28030024 LK TRAFF CENTER 1995 1995 16LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLA 28030025 LK TRAFF 50 OUT MARINA 1995 1997 166LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLGW 3496 LKTRAFRD 1998 2001 924LAKE TRAFFORD 3259W 21FLCOLLLKTRAF5 South end of Lake Trafford, Immokalee 1996 2002 1499DRAINAGE TOCORKSCREWDRAINAGE TOCORKSCREWDRAINAGE TOCORKSCREW3259X 21FLSFWMCORKSCRD Bridge at intersect Corkscrew Rd.& canal NE. of Corksc 2001 2001 203259X 21FLCOLLCORK@846 Bridge at intersection of Corkscrew Canal and CR84 1996 1997 673259X 21FLCOLLCORKSCRD Bridge at intersection of Corkscrew Rd. and canal 1997 1998 69

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 157PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.VANDERBILT WWAY 3259Y 21FLCOLLVBILT Mid-channel, opposite Tradewinds Avenue 1996 1996 44LITTLE HICKORYISLAND PARK8061A 21FLDOH LEE149 LITTLE HICKORY ISLAND PARK 2000 2002 61BONITA BEACH PARK 8061B 21FLDOH LEE150 BONITA BEACH PARK 2000 2002 61LELY BAREFOOT BEACH 8061C 21FLDOH COLLIER312 LELY BAREFOOT BEACH 2000 2002 45WIGGINS PASS NORTH 8061D 21FLDOH COLLIER314 WIGGINS PASS NORTH 2000 2002 53WIGGINS PASS STATEPARK8061E 21FLDOH COLLIER51 WIGGINS PASS STATE PARK 2000 2002 53VANDERBILT BEACH 8061F 21FLDOH COLLIER315 VANDERBILT BEACH 2000 2002 65CLAM PASS 8062A 21FLDOH COLLIER52 CLAM PASS 2000 2002 61CLAM PASS 8062A 21FLSTBASTATION 3 CENTER OF OUTER CLAM BAY 1995 1998 345PARKSHORE BEACH 8062B 21FLDOH COLLIER53 PARKSHORE BEACH 2000 2002 64DOCTORS PASS 8062C 21FLSTBAMOORINGS MOORINGS BAY BETWEEN DR. PASS & HARBOUR DR. 1995 1998 1009DOCTORS PASS 8062C 21FLDOH COLLIER54 DOCTORS PASS 2000 2002 61DOCTORS PASS 8062C 21FLSTBAGULF IN GULF N OF DOCTOR PASS 1995 1998 951LOWDERMILK PARKBEACH8062D 21FLDOH COLLIER55 LOWDERMILK PARK BEACH 2000 2002 64NAPLES PIER 8062E 21FLDOH COLLIER316 NAPLES PIER 2000 2002 62GORDONS PASS 8063A 21FLDOH COLLIER57 GORDONS PASS 2000 2002 31SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 48064 21FLSFWMROOK457 Big Marco River, R24 1999 2000 1208064 21FLSFWMROOK456 Rt. 951 Bridge, R26 1999 2000 120

158 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 4SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 48064 21FLSFWMROOK455 Capri Pass, R2A 1999 2000 1208064 21FLSFWMROOK454 Caxambas Pass, R4 1999 2000 1208064 21FLSFWMROOK451 Coon Key Pass, G3 1999 2000 1208064 21FLA 28030002 SMOKE HOUSE BAY N COLLIER BLV BR 1996 1996 138064 21FLCOLLROBBAYBR Bridge at intersection of Winterberry Dr. & Robert 1995 1995 448064 21FLCOLLGULLIVAN West side of Coon Key in Gullivan Bay 1995 1995 448064 21FLCOLLGOODBAY South side of westernmost overpass of C.R. 92 and 1995 1996 958064 21FLCOLLCOLLBAY 200 yards south of Channel Marker #6 in Collier Ba 1995 1995 488064 21FLA 66030SEAS Cape Romano 1995 2000 4318064 21FLA 66021SEAS Coon Key Pass Channel Marker 2 1995 2000 5268064 21FLA 66032SEAS West of Coon Key at Channel Marker 2 1995 2000 555TIGERTAIL BEACH 8064A 21FLDOH COLLIER310 TIGERTAIL BEACH 2000 2002 74RESIDENCE BEACH 8064B 21FLDOH COLLIER58 RESIDENCE BEACH 2000 2002 64CAXAMBAS PARK 8064C 21FLDOH COLLIER60 CAXAMBAS PARK 2000 2002 31SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 58065 21FLSFWMTTI74 Shell Key 1996 2000 7748065 21FLSFWMTTI73 Long Rock 1996 2000 7718065 21FLSFWMTTI71 White Horse Key 1996 2000 7748065 21FLSFWMTTI68 Panther Key 1996 2000 773

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 159PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5SOUTHWEST COASTGULF 5InterdrainageArea8065 21FLSFWMTTI67 West Pass 1996 2000 7748065 21FLSFWMTTI66 Indian Key 1996 2000 7738065 21FLSFWMTTI65 Indian Key Pass 1996 2000 7648065 21FLSFWMTTI64 Barron River 1996 2000 7768065 21FLA 66281SEAS Mouth of Fish Hawk Creek 1995 2000 5688065 21FLSFWMROOK452 Coon Key Light 1999 2000 1208065 21FLA 66302SEAS SW tip of Snag's Shoal 1995 2000 5578065 21FLA 66029SEAS SE tip of Snag's Shoal 1995 2000 5518065 21FLA 66028SEAS Southern tip of Turtle Key 1995 2000 4758065 21FLA 66187SEAS Fakahatchee Pass entrance 1995 2000 5578065 21FLA 66301SEAS Southern tip of Shell Key at marker 1995 2000 5678065 21FLA 66011SEAS Indian Key Pass Channel Marker 1 1995 2000 4658065 21FLA 66010SEAS Indian Key Pass Channel Marker 7 1995 2000 4678065 21FLA 66771SEAS Faka Union Channel Marker 15 1995 2000 5598065 21FLA 66031SEAS Coon Key Light 1995 2000 565C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13912C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13914C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTAT1999 2001 1161999 2001 121

160 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13913C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13906C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13911C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13910C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13909C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13908C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13915C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13907C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13905C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13901C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13904C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13903C-139 3255 21FLSFWMC13902C139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTATC139 BASIN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RESEARCHSTAT1999 2001 1161999 2000 361999 2001 1171999 2001 1071999 2000 481999 2001 1211999 2001 1211999 2001 861999 2001 1181999 2001 1191999 2001 1181999 2001 1211999 2001 113BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261A 21FLCOLLHALFCRK Adjacent to last channel marker heading into Halfw 1996 1996 78BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261A 21FLCOLLHALFCRK2 Adjacent to last channel marker heading into Halfw 1996 1996 22BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261A 21FLSFWMBARRIVN Off dock at Sheriff?s substation on corner of US 41 an 2000 2001 281BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261A 21FLCOLLBARRIVE Barron River, Channel Marker #35, near mouth of ri 1996 1996 42TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLCOLLAABR265 Bridge 030265 on the westbound lane of Alligator A 1995 1996 79

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 161PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLSFWMTAMBR105 NO DESCRIPTION AVAILABLE FOR THIS STATION 1995 2002 4314TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLSFWMMONROE Bridge 30096 at intersection of US41 and Loop Road 2000 2001 173TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A05 RACCOON POINT 1995 1995 43TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A04 MONUMENT ROAD 1995 1995 42TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLSFWMTAMBR90 Bridge 30090 on US41E 2000 2001 111TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A06 BRIDGE 105 1995 1995 41TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A07 BRIDGE 84 1995 1995 43TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A12 KISSIMMEE BILLY STRAND 1995 1995 43TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLSFWMGATOR Bridge 30105 on US41 East 2000 2001 185TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A10 GUM SLOUGH 1995 1995 39TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLSFWMBCWQA8 BRIDGE 83 1995 1995 5TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLSFWMBCWQA7 BRIDGE 84 1995 1995 5TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLSFWMBCWQA6 BRIDGE 105 1995 1995 5TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A08 BRIDGE 83 1995 1995 43TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLCOLLTAMBR90 Bridge 30090 on US41E 1995 1996 84TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A09 PINECREST HAMMOCK 1995 1995 38TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A11 ROBERTS LAKE STRAND 1995 1995 43TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 11NPSWRDBICY_A03 EAST CROSSING STRAND 1995 1995 40

162 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastPlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLCOLLTURNER Bridge at intersection of US41 and Turner River 1995 1998 231TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLSFWMBC17 Bridge #86 on US 41E 2000 2001 227TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLSFWMBC16 Bridge #84 on US 41E 2000 2001 236TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLCOLLTAMBR115 Bridge 30115 on US41E 1995 1996 76TAMIAMI CANAL 3261B 21FLCOLLMONROE Bridge 30096 at intersection of US41 and Loop Road 1995 1996 83BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261C 11NPSWRDBICY_A02 EAST HINSON MARSH 1995 1995 37BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261C 21FLCOLLCHKMATE Middle of Checkmate Pond, Fakahatchee Strand 1995 1998 237BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261C 11NPSWRDBICY_A13 MULLET SLOUGH 1995 1995 43BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261C 21FLSFWMOKALA858 Okaloacoochee Slough crossing on CR 858 2000 2001 225BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261C 11NPSWRDBICY_A14 DEEP LAKE STRAND 1995 1995 42BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261C 11NPSWRDBICY_A01 NORTH BEAR ISLAND 1995 1995 41BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261C 21FLSFWMBC24 Bridge #30211 on SR 29 approx. 3.1 miles north of I-75 2000 2001 214BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261C 21FLSFWMCHKMATE Middle of Checkmate Pond Fakahatchee Strand 2001 2001 16BARRON RIVER CANAL 3261C 21FLGW 3494 BARRNRVR 1998 2001 1069L-28 INTERCEPTOR 3266 21FLSFWML28I L28 INTERCEPTOR AT SR84 1995 2002 2679L-28 INTERCEPTOR 3266 21FLCOLLTIEBACK Bridge at intersection of Alligator Alley and L-28 1995 1998 280L-28 GAP 3269 21FLCOLLAABR278 Bridge 030278 on the westbound lane of Alligator A 1995 1996 80L-28 GAP 3269 21FLSFWMS190 ON L28I 2.5 MILES SOUTH OF SR833 1995 2002 3429

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 163PlanningUnitWBID Name WBID Station ID Station NameBeginDateEndDate#Obs.L-28 GAP 3269 21FLSFWML28IS L-28 INTERCEPTOR SOUTH AT COLLIER BORDER 1998 1999 410L-28 GAP 3269 21FLSFWML28IN SEMINOLE STATION ON L28 INTERCEPTOR 1997 1998 342

164 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable E.3: Water Quality Trend Data for the Everglades West Coast Basin

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 165

166 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 167

168 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 169

170 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastAppendix F: Permitted Facilities with Discharges to SurfaceWater in the Everglades West Coast Basin, by Planning UnitEstero BayFacility ID Facility Name Description PermittedCapacity,Millions ofGallons PerDay (mgd)FL0145190Three Oaks WastewaterTreatment FacilityDomesticWastewaterTreatment Plant(WWTP)StormwaterdischargeDesignCapacity(mgd)1.5Southwest CoastFacility ID Facility Name Description PermittedCapacity,Millions ofGallons PerDay (mgd)FL0026271FL0141356City of Naples WastewaterTreatment PlantCollier County South RegionalWastewater Reuse Facility(WRF)Domestic WWTPDomestic WWTPDesignCapacity(mgd)- 10StormwaterdischargeFL0141399 Collier County North Regional Domestic WWTP StormwaterWRFdischarge8.5FL0141704 Port of the Islands—South Domestic WWTP 0.2 0.2FLG830224 Pick Kwik #154 PetroleumCleanup GeneralPermit (GP)(long term)N/A8N/AInner Drainage AreaFacility ID Facility Name Description PermittedCapacity,Millions ofGallons PerDay (mgd)FL0027618 City of Everglades, CityWastewater Treatment FacilityDomestic WWTPFLG910751 Handy Food Store #91 PetroleumCleanup GP(long term)FLG910977 Davis Oil Company/Davis PetroleumService CenterCleanup GP(long term)DesignCapacity(mgd)0.115 0.100N/AN/AN/AN/A

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 171Appendix G: Level 1 Land Use in the Everglades West CoastBasin, by Planning UnitTable G-1: Level I Land Use in the Estero Bay Planning UnitLevel 1 Type Percentageof PlanningUnit1000 Urban 18.92000 Agriculture 20.73000 Shrub/Brushland 1.44000 Forested 21.15000 Water 1.76000 Wetlands 30.87000 Disturbed Land 2.68000 Utilites 2.8total 100Table G-2: Level I Land Use in the Southwest Coast Planning UnitLevel 1 Type Percentageof PlanningUnit1000 Urban 10.92000 Agriculture 17.93000 Shrub/Brushland 1.14000 Forested 9.85000 Water 1.56000 Wetlands 57.37000 Disturbed Land 0.58000 Utilities 0.9total 99.9

172 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable G-3: Level I Land Use in the Inner Drainage Area Planning UnitLevel 1 Attribute Percentageof PlanningUnit1000 Urban 0.42000 Agriculture 21.23000 Shrub/Brushland 1.74000 Forested 8.55000 Water 0.26000 Wetlands 67.47000 Disturbed Land 0.38000 Utilities 0.3total 100

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 173Appendix H: Pollutant Loading Estimates for the EvergladesWest Coast BasinEstimated Loadings in the Estero Bay Planning UnitIn 1999, the consulting firm PBS&J completed a study for the South Florida WaterManagement District (SFWMD), Estero Bay and Watershed Assessment, which defineddrainage basins (secondary basins) that were slightly dissimilar to those used by theDepartment. PBS&J subdivided these secondary basins into tertiary basins, numberingeach one. The load contributions of each tertiary basin with respect to urban runoff,agricultural runoff, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus were then calculated. Eachtertiary basin was then ranked against other basins within the watershed to highlight thehighest contributors of the four types of loads.This report presents the loading information from the earlier report, as it shows whichareas in the watershed are the main contributors of pollutants, despite differences in basindelineations. The following tables only list by rank the high-impact (the top 25 percent)tertiary basins. Tables H.1, H.2, H.3, and H.4 show, respectively, area-weighted urbanrunoff, agricultural runoff, total nitrogen loading, and total phosphorus loading.Table H.1: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay Watershedfor Area-Weighted Urban Runoff DischargeThe area-weighted urban runoff from the entire watershed is 0.39 (acre-feet/year)/acre (SFWMD, 1999).Secondary BasinTertiaryBasin #Area(acres)%UrbanLand Use%AgriculturalLand UseArea-Weighted UrbanRunoff (acrefeet/year)/acre)RankHendry Creek 6 449 63 7 1.76872 1Mullock Creek 4 3596 81 7 1.70483 2Tenmile Canal 4 153 67 0 1.63033 3Hendry Creek 10 2459 59 0 1.53293 4Hendry Creek 9 517 67 0 1.47858 5Tenmile Canal 1 129 67 0 1.40605 6Cow Creek 2 1864 61 0 1.31074 7Hendry Creek 8 863 66 7 1.28883 8Imperial River 1 3464 61 0 1.2763 9Estero River 4 124 64 0 1.23072 10Cow Creek 4 132 74 0 1.16561 11Tenmile Canal 7 404 47 0 1.06851 12Tenmile Canal 9 1266 53 24 1.03585 13Imperial River 5 202 63 0 1.0033 14Imperial River 3 1988 58 7 0.97173 15Tenmile Canal 11 2569 42 12 0.89831 16

174 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable H.2: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay Watershedfor Area-Weighted Agricultural Runoff DischargeThe area-weighted agricultural runoff from the entire watershed is 0.25 (acre-feet/year)/acre (SFWMD,1999).Secondary BasinTertiaryBasin #Area(acres)%UrbanLand Use%AgriculturalLand UseArea-WeightedAgricultural Runoff(acre-feet/year)/acre)Tenmile Canal 8 1,441 11 42 0.60592 1Six Mile CypressSlough 5 653 14 29 0.51273 2Imperial River 4 4,695 30 37 0.4629 3Imperial River 6 41,568 3 25 0.37922 4Estero River 8 27,647 16 27 0.37194 5Estero River 6 7,467 15 27 0.33781 6Tenmile Canal 6 1,728 44 28 0.33523 7Six Mile CypressSlough 6 1,968 13 27 0.33106 8Tenmile Canal 9 1,266 53 24 0.32244 9Six Mile CypressSlough 4 18,354 20 23 0.29188 10Estero River 7 248 46 24 0.28643 11Hendry Creek 5 1,874 27 29 0.28084 12Estero River 5 2,460 41 17 0.23157 13Six Mile CypressSlough 1 8,345 29 15 0.20212 14Estero River 3 2,699 14 15 0.18168 15Tenmile Canal 11 2,569 42 12 0.17701 16Rank

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 175Table H.3: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay Watershedfor Area-Weighted Annual Total Nitrogen (TN) LoadingThe area-weighted TN loading from the entire watershed is 7.0 (pounds/year)/acre (SFWMD, 1999).Secondary BasinTertiaryBasin #Area(acres)%UrbanLand Use%AgriculturalLand UseArea-Weighted TNLoad,(pounds/year)/acre) RankTenmile Canal 11 2569 42 12 13.0457 1Hendry Creek 9 517 67 0 12.0308 2Hendry Creek 10 2459 59 0 11.7398 3Hendry Creek 8 863 66 7 11.5284 4Mullock Creek 4 3596 81 7 11.513 5Spring Creek 6 545 40 0 11.3219 6Mullock Creek 5 290 53 0 11.0111 7Tenmile Canal 7 404 47 0 10.6779 8Imperial River 4 4695 30 37 10.5598 9Six Mile Cypress 5 653 14 29 10.3357 10SloughEstero River 2 72 0 0 10.2914 11Tenmile Canal 10 473 26 0 10.2542 12Tenmile Canal 4 153 67 0 10.0608 13Imperial River 1 3464 61 0 10.0056 14Hendry Creek 6 449 63 7 10.0011 15Hendry Creek 5 1874 27 29 9.7186 16

176 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastTable H.4: Relative Ranks of the Top 25 Percent of the Tertiary Basins in the Estero Bay Watershedfor Area-Weighted Annual Total Phosphorus (TP) LoadingThe area-weighted TP loading from the entire watershed is 1.56 (pounds/year)/acre (SFWMD, 1999).Secondary BasinTertiaryBasin #Area(acres)%UrbanLand Use%AgriculturalLand UseArea-Weighted TPLoad,(pounds/year)/acre) RankCow Creek 7 621 78 4 3.54578 1Tenmile Canal 11 2569 42 12 2.68013 2Spring Creek 6 545 40 0 2.6564 3Six Mile Cypress 5 653 14 29 2.63303 4SloughHendry Creek 5 1874 27 29 2.60596 5Spring Creek 5 88 91 0 2.51201 6Imperial River 4 4695 30 37 2.49547 7Mullock Creek 5 290 53 0 2.47242 8Estero River 7 248 46 24 2.44086 9Tenmile Canal 8 1441 11 42 2.41656 10Hendry Creek 8 863 66 7 2.38358 11Spring Creek 3 768 69 0 2.31095 12Tenmile Canal 9 1266 53 24 2.25442 13Spring Creek 2 868 63 0 2.20255 14Tenmile Canal 6 1728 44 28 2.16375 15Spring Creek 4 77 46 0 2.02751 16Estimated Loadings in the Southwest Coast Planning UnitCurrently, no loading information is available. A number of documents outline awatershed plan and model development in the area. Information will be added to thisassessment as it is made available.Estimated Loadings in the Inner Drainage Area Planning UnitCurrently, no loading information is available. A number of documents outline awatershed plan and model development in the area. Information will be added to thisassessment as it is made available.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 177Appendix I: Documentation Provided duringPublic Comment PeriodEPA’s COMMENTSAugust 26, 2002Daryll Joyner, Program AdministratorTotal Maximum Daily Load ProgramDepartment of Environmental ProtectionMail Station 35102600 Blair Stone RoadTallahassee, FL 32399-2400Dear Mr. Joyner:The Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 (EPA) has reviewed the FloridaDepartment of Environmental Protection’s (FDEP) draft 2002 303(d) list and offers thecomments listed below. It is our understanding that the 2002 list will be submitted as anamendment to the 1998 list for certain waterbodies in Group 1 basins and that all of thewaterbodies in Groups 2 through 5 will stay on the 1998 list until FDEP submits theappropriate amendments. Furthermore, as agreed during our August 14, 2002 meeting inTallahassee, the Group 1 waters on the 1998 list for which FDEP did not have sufficientwater quality data to meet the verification requirements of the Impaired Waters Rule(IWR) will also stay on the list.The following comments were developed using the verified and master lists thatwere made available for the public meeting held the morning of August 14, 2002.Specific comments are organized by the basins that FDEP now identifies as being inGroup 1. It is our understanding that Group 1 no longer includes the Alafia,Hillsborough, and Manatee Rivers.General Comments:1. Because FDEP did not propose the draft 303(d) list in a manner subject to review andapproval by EPA, the supporting information for the 303(d) list that is required by 40CFR §130.7 has not been reviewed. While states are not required to include all ofthis information for public review, it is required for EPA approval. FDEP mustinclude this information in the final submission in order for the 303(d) listamendment to be approveable. [Acknowledged. No response required.]

178 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast2. Based on the draft master lists, a significant number of waters in Group 1 basins willbe delisted from the 1998 list. In order for EPA to approve these delistings, FDEPmust provide good cause justification for each delisting (as described in 40 CFR§130.10(d)(7)(iv)). For example, any delistings based on natural conditions mustinclude documentation of the scientific bases for determining that natural conditionsexisted when the waterbodies were originally listed. We hope that our agencies willwork closely prior to the October 1 submittal deadline to reach agreement on whatconstitutes adequate supporting documentation for all of the delistings.[Acknowledged. The Department will provide supporting justifications, whereapplicable (see Attachment 1).]3. For Group 1 basins, the coliforms listings on the 1998 list appear to have beenreplaced in most cases by both fecal and total coliforms listings on the draft 2002master and verified lists. Explanations should be provided in the final 2002 listsubmission for cases where only a fecal or total coliforms listing was included insteadof both. [Acknowledged. The Department will provide explanations in the Commentfield, as applicable.]4. For a number of waters, FDEP intends to use the allowance provided in 40 CFR§130.7(b)(1)(iii) in lieu of including them on the 303(d) list. Adequatedocumentation must be provided in the final submission demonstrating that any“other pollution control requirements (e.g., best management practices) required bylocal, State, or Federal authority” are stringent enough to meet water quality standardsin the near future. [Acknowledged. Documentation is provided in Attachments 6 and7.]Everglades - West Coast Basins1. The following listings on the 1998 list were not included on either the 2002master or verified list for the Everglades basin. An explanation must be includedin the final submission regarding FDEP’s intentions for these waters.a. ENP Shark Slough (WBID 3289) - DO, nutrients, iron, and mercury (based onfish consumption advisory);b. ENP L-67 Culvert US41 (WBID 3289J) - DO and iron; andc. ENP Taylor Slough (WBID 3289K) - DO and iron.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 179RESPONSE: These three Everglades units are located in the Everglades NationalPark in the Everglades Group 5 basin and as such will be addressed during theGroup5 assessment period, beginning 2004. TMDLs are not due until 2007 underthe terms of the Consent Decree.Thank you for considering our comments. If you have any questions about ourconcerns, please feel free to contact Andrew Bartlett at (404) 562-9478.Sincerely,/s/Gail Mitchell, ChiefStandards, Monitoring & TMDL Branch

180 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastSTAKEHOLDER COMMENTSFormal Public Meeting Comments (Ft. Myers, FL., 7/25/02): Jim Beever, of Florida Fishand Wildlife Conservation Commission, Noel Andress, of the Pine Island CivicAssociation, and Tony Pellicer, representing Lee County Natural Resources, all madeformal comments at the Everglades West Coast Basin Public Meeting in Fort Myers.With the exception of the comment from Mr. Andress, the comments made at the meetingwere provided as written comments. Mr. Beever’s and Mr. Pellicer’s comments werenoted and addressed as part of the written comment responses, below.• The nutrient loading going on in Matlacha Pass is due to new agriculture in the area.[Noel Andress, Pine Island Civic Association]RESPONSE: The comment was acknowledged. The Department will consider thisinformation when scheduling future ambient monitoring in that area.Written Public Comments:• Why was Estero Bay on the verified list posted to the Internet on July 12 but thenremoved from the list as of the July 22 posting? [Carl P. Hoke, Estero CivicAssociation; Chad Gillis, Naples Daily News; David V. Willems, JohnsonEngineering, Inc.]RESPONSE: As of the July 12 posting of the verified list to the Internet, there were two segmentscalled Estero Bay, segment 3258A and segment 3258I. It was discovered later in the process thatsegment 3258A actually contains what is now referred to as Estero Bay Wetlands. Segment 3258Icontains Estero Bay proper. Segment 3258I (Estero Bay) has consistently met standards for nutrients(chlorophyll) throughout all of the Internet versions of the verified list, and continues to do so.Segment 3258A (now known as Estero Bay Wetlands) was listed for nutrients, dissolved oxygen andcopper in the July 12 list. As of the July 22 list update however, it was discovered that a water qualitymonitoring station had been erroneously assigned to segment 3258A, that actually was within segment3258G (Tenmile Canal). When the station in question was reassigned to 3258G, a significant amountof data went with it, resulting in the listing status of segment 3258A changing from verified for thesethree parameters to meeting standards for nutrients, being planning listed for dissolved oxygen and,having no data at all for the assessment of copper and lead. This effectively removed the only listingon the verified list for what had been previously known as Estero Bay.The reassignment of the station also caused changes to the listing for segment 3258G (Tenmile Canal).It became verified impaired for copper, planning listed for dissolved oxygen and it met standards fornutrients (chlorophyll). On August 4 a new running of the assessment algorithm was conducted withdata from additional contributors, and as a result, the listing status of segment 3258A (Estero BayWetlands) further changed from being planning listed for dissolved oxygen to meeting standards forthis parameter. Regardless of the name change from Estero Bay to Estero Bay Wetlands however,segment 3258A is meeting standards for all parameters assessed.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 181• The L-28 segment is listed on the [Everglades] West Coast list. It should be removedand listed on the Southeast Florida Coast . [Tony Pellicer, Lee County Government]RESPONSE: The FDEP basin groups do not align exactly with the USGS hydrologic units, thereforethere can be portions of several hydrologic units in any one basin group. The FDEP Everglades WestCoast basin includes portions of both the USGS Everglades West Coast and Southeast Florida Coasthydrologic units.• A number of requests were received for copies of the data used in the Group 1assessment of Estero Bay its tributaries. [(Tony Pellicer, Lee County Government;Michael Heyl, CDM; William Trey Beeson, CDM, Stephanie MacKenzie, Estero BayAquatic and State Buffer Preserves]RESPONSE: The data were provided as requested. Any additional data requests for the EvergladesWest Coast basin can be directed to Khurram Moiz, at (850) 922-6226 or by writing him atKhurram.Moiz@dep.state.fl.us. The IWR2002 database, from which our assessment is based, is verylarge. To speed up the process, requestors are advised to include in their requests a clear description ofthe areas of interest, period of records and/or parameters desired, as well as the desired data format andmedia (Excel, Access, hardcopy, CD, diskette, email, etc.).• Does FDEP maintain GIS coverages for station locations that are in STORET? Howmay I obtain the coverage? Please provide me with the list of Estero Bay planningunit stations and periods of record for each that were used to develop the verified listby waterbody. [Lisa Beever, CHNEP]RESPONSE: FDEP maintains GIS coverages for stations that are in STORET. An updated ArcViewshape file for all the stations in STORET may be obtained through Andrew McClenahan at (850) 921-9221 or by writing him at Andrew.McClenehan@dep.state.fl.us. Station lists for the Everglades WestCoast basin can be obtained by contacting Khurram Moiz, at (850) 922-6226 or by writing him atKhurram.Moiz@dep.state.fl.us. The GIS coverages and station lists were sent to Ms. Beever by Ms.Holli Brandt.• Estero Bay includes four distinct geomorphologic features for considering TMDLs.They include the Matanzas Pass, Fishtrap Bay, Estero Gulf-Influenced Bay andEstero Bay [map attached]. Water quality stations at the passes are more indicative ofGulf of Mexico water quality and should not be included in development of theverified list. The averaging of Estero Bay and Estero Gulf-Influenced Bay stationdata hides water quality problems that exist within Estero Bay Back. [James W.Beever III, Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management; Lisa Beever, CHNEP]RESPONSE: By dividing Estero Bay into four segments based on the geomorphologic characteristicsof the bay, the data for the entire bay would no longer be aggregated and assessed together, rather theanalysis would be done by segment. While this scheme might allow us to further focus on specificareas of the Bay in which impairments might lie, the specific locations of the proposed new segmentboundaries would be arbitrary and would not be consistent with how other waters were segmented.However, we are in the process of reconsidering our current waterbody segmentation scheme andwelcome input on alternatives that are amenable to the objectives of our assessments.

182 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast• We received numerous comments that questioned our assessment of the tributaries toEstero Bay. We also received comments regarding the waterbody types we hadassigned to the tributaries to the bay. (Lisa Beever, CHNEP; Gary A. Davis,Conservancy of Southwest Florida; Tony Pellicer, Lee County Government; MichaelHeyl, CDM; David Graham, Bonita Bay Group; James W. Beever III, Estero BayAgency on Bay Management; Chad Gillis, Naples Daily News; Bruce Boler, EPA;Catherine Corbett, CHNEP)RESPONSE: On the issue of waterbody type, the consensus among the comments was that many ofthe tributaries we classified as estuaries were in fact streams. Waterbody type dictates which waterquality criteria are applied to water quality data, and can presumably influence the outcome of ourassessments, so it is important that the type assigned to a segment is accurate as it relates to the databeing assessed. There are seven tributaries to Estero Bay: Estero Bay Wetlands (3258A), HendryCreek (3258B), Estero Bay Drainage (3258C), Estero River (3258D), Imperial River (3258E), TenmileCanal (3258G) and Spring Creek (3258H). We reanalyzed the waterbody types for each of thesewaterbody segments with data we had in our IWR database as of September 3, 2002. The method weused was a calculation of the median specific conductance value for each segment, using all availabledata, and application of a 5,000 mmhos/cm threshold for an estuarine classification. This method isconsistent with how our data analysis staff assigned the original waterbody type to these segments,however due to new data from various sources being added to the IWR database over the past severalmonths, some median specific conductance values are now below 5000 mmhos/cm. As a result, somesegments needed to be reclassified as streams rather than estuaries, which consequently changed thelisting status of some segments. The following is a segment-by-segment account of the changesprecipitated by the reanalysis of waterbody type in the tributaries to Estero Bay.1. Estero Bay Wetlands (3258A) was classified as an estuary originally and is still classified as anestuary. This segment met standards for nutrients (chlorophyll) consistently throughout all of thevarious updates to the verified list and continues to do so (no change in listing status).2. Estero River (3258D) and Tenmile Canal (3258G) were reclassified as streams. They have bothconsistently met standards for nutrients (chlorophyll) throughout all of the various updates to theverified list and continue to do so even with the new classification (no change in listing status).3. Imperial River (3258E) was reclassified as a stream. Estero Bay Drainage (3258C) was classified asa stream originally and is still classified as a stream. The reclassification of these segments as streamsdid not change their listing status and they were placed on the planning list. These segments met theverification threshold per the IWR for nutrients (for chlorophyll) prior to the reclassification; however,as neither nitrogen nor phosphorus were indicated as causative pollutants, these segments were initiallyplaced on the planning list for further investigation. By way of an amendment, these waters will beadded to the verified list as impaired for nutrients (chlorophyll).4. Hendry Creek (3258B) and Spring Creek (3258H) were reclassified as streams. These segments metthe verification threshold per the IWR for nutrients (chlorophyll) prior to the reclassification, howeverneither nitrogen nor phosphorus were indicated as causative pollutants, therefore these segments wereplaced on the planning list of potential impairment. The reclassification of these segments as streamsdid change their listing status, from potentially impaired to meeting standards for nutrients(chlorophyll).The reclassified segments (3258B, 3258D, 3258E, 3258G and 3258H) were also reassessed fordissolved oxygen and copper. The results of the reassessment for dissolved oxygen remainedunchanged, no fewer or greater number of verified impairments for dissolved oxygen were realized.There were changes with regard to copper however. Where hardness data were available for each

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 183copper data value, the equation in Rule 62-302.530(24) was applied. Where concomitant hardness datawere not available, a maximum hardness value of 400 mg/L was presumed and copper values > 38.656ug/L were deemed to be an exceedance. Using these procedures, a change from impaired to meetingstandards for copper was realized for all five reclassified segments.In reference to coliform exceedences in the tributaries of Estero Bay mentioned above, we offered thefollowing analysis on August 9, 2002:Hendry Creek (3258B) - In Run 4 there were 110 fecal coliform observations with 17 exceedences (16are needed for verification). In Run 5.1 there were 150 fecal coliform observations with 20exceedances (21 are needed for verification). Due to this change in total number of observations andexceedances, Hendry Creek’s status changed from verified impaired to meets standards. There wereinsufficient total coliform data in both runs for assessment.Estero Bay Drainage (3258C), Spring Creek (3258H), Estero River (3258D), Imperial River (3258E) -There were no changes in fecal coliform and chlorophyll status from Run 4 to Run 5.1, both meetstandards. There were insufficient total coliform data in both runs for assessment.• Many of our partners have identified fecal coliforms exceeding standards in thetributaries to Estero Bay. Please verify the fecal exceedances for Hendry Creek,Estero Bay Drainage, Spring Creek, Estero River, and the Imperial River watersheds.[Lisa Beever, CHNEP]RESPONSE: See previous response.• Most sampling for the Gordon River and Naples Bay that has been placed inSTORET is old. SFWMD has compiled results from recent samples on the GordonRiver upstream of U.S. 41 for 2000-2001 on its website(http://www.sfwmd.gov/org/ema/dfhydro/index.html). [Gary A. Davis, Conservancyof Southwest Florida]RESPONSE: FDEP’s assessments of impairment include all data from the SFWMD dbHydrodatabase which meet the spatial and temporal requirements of the IWR. Only data within the last 7.5years were used to assess waters for the verified list.• We received comments that questioned our assessment of Estero Bay proper. [JamesW. Beever III, Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management; Chad Gillis, Naples DailyNews]RESPONSE: Estero Bay is a Class III estuary in the FDEP Everglades West Coast Group 1 Basinand it is assigned a waterbody segment number of 3258I. Tributaries to Estero Bay include Estero BayWetlands (3258A), Hendry Creek (3258B), Estero Bay Drainage (3258C), Estero River (3258D),Imperial River (3258E), Tenmile Canal (3258G) and Spring Creek (3258H). The following discussioncovers Estero Bay (3258I) only.There were sufficient data from Estero Bay in the FDEP IWR2002 database as of September 3, 2002for assessment of chlorophyll, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform and turbidity levels per the ImpairedWaters Rule (62-303, F.A.C., IWR). These data were assessed with a computerized assessmentalgorithm programmed to the language and assessment requirements of the IWR (Run 6.1). Theresults of the September 3 analysis indicated that Estero Bay is meeting standards for all four of the

184 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coastabove parameters. It should be noted that, though background data were not available for turbidity,where there were no test values above 29 NTUs, it was assumed that State criteria for turbidity werebeing met.FDEP received numerous public comments following the first posting of the Group 1 verifiedimpairment lists on the Internet. Some of these comments proposed that Estero Bay is actuallyimpaired for nutrients, and more specifically, that chlorophyll levels have increased by more than 50%over historic levels (per Section 62-303.353 of the IWR). In response to public comments, weconducted a reanalysis of the data by hand using data from Run 6.1. Criteria shown in the IWR forassessing nutrient impairments were used in the analysis, as well as those in the FDEP chlorophyllguidance document titled Making and Using Chlorophyll Measurements Under the “Identification ofImpaired Surface Waters” Rule, dated March 21, 2002.The IWR specifies that estuaries or estuary segments shall be included on the planning list and/orverified list for nutrients if their annual mean chlorophyll levels for any year [within the assessmentperiod] are greater than 11 mg/L or if data indicate annual mean chlorophyll levels have increased bymore than 50% over historic levels for at least two consecutive years. The assessment periodestablished for all Group 1 waters, including Estero Bay, is 01/01/89 through 12/31/98 for the planninglist, and 01/01/95 through 06/30/02 for the verified list. This means that where annual meanchlorophyll values from Estero Bay exceeded 11 mg/L from 01/01/89 through 12/31/98, the Baywould be listed on the planning list. Where annual means exceeded 11mg/L from 01/01/95 through06/30/02, the Bay would be listed on the verified list. Further, if a historic chlorophyll level could beestablished, and annual mean chlorophyll levels in the planning list period or the verified list periodexceeded the historic level by more than 50% for two consecutive years, the Bay would be listed onthe planning list and/or verified list respectively.The IWR stipulates that annual means must include chlorophyll data from all four seasons of acalendar year. To be considered temporally independent, data must have been collected at least oneweek apart and originated from monitoring locations which were at least 200 meters apart. Samplestaken from the same location on the same day or within seven days of each other must be averagedtogether and considered as one data value for the location and week.The chlorophyll guidance specifies that a historic chlorophyll level shall be determined by averaging atleast 3 annual means from a five-consecutive-year period. If there is more than one five-consecutiveyearperiod of data available, the period selected shall be the one with the lowest annual means withinit. The calculation of a historic chlorophyll level is not restricted to any specific period of record. Itmay contain any number of years of data, of any age. In the case of Estero Bay, there were bothcorrected and uncorrected chlorophyll data available. For the analysis of historic versus currentchlorophyll levels, the chlorophyll guidance specifies that corrected data may be used to establishcurrent levels (those within the planning list and/or verified list periods) and corrected, uncorrected,unknown or pooled chlorophyll data may be used to establish historic levels.Annual mean chlorophyll values were calculated for Estero Bay by first calculating seasonal means,then by calculating annual means through averaging of the seasonal means. This was done for eachyear with at least one value in each season (there is also a requirement that there be at least 10 sampleswithin a ten-year period). Very limited raw data were available for the analysis, from legacySTORET, modern STORET or the dataset provided by Lee County. Data were available from onlyone station in legacy STORET (FDEP 28020117) and the data were old, from 1976 through 1979.Data were available from twelve Lee County stations (EB01-EB10, and EB13 and EB14) and theywere current (1998, 2000 and 2001). The data from the twelve Lee County stations constituted all ofthe data in modern STORET for Estero Bay. The results of the reanalysis concurred with our originalanalysis, Estero Bay is meeting standards for nutrients (chlorophyll) (Table 1). There are no annualmeans in either the planning list or the verified list periods which are greater than 11 mg/L. Further,

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 185based on the historic data shown in Table 1, there are no instances of individual annual means withinthe planning list or verified list periods that exceed the historic mean.Efforts will continue to obtain additional relevant water quality data from the appropriate assessmentperiods, which upon reanalysis, might reveal a different outcome. We will also continue to obtaincredible evidence of impairment related to nutrients for the Bay based upon other indicators, asspecified in section 62-303.350(1) of the IWR.Table 1. Estero Bay chlorophyll reanalysis results.Estero Bay Chlorophyll Historical Trends AnalysisCorrected Chlor. OnlyUncorrected Chla OnlyYear Season Chlor. Chla Annual Year Season Chlor.S l AS1998 Fall 4 1975 Fall 71998 Spring 9.35 1975 Spring 41998 Summer 7.05 1975 Summer 7lChlor. AnnualA1998 Winter 5.55 6.4875 1975 Winter 5.5 5.8752000 Fall 2.6 1976 Fall 4.32000 Spring 4.26 1976 Spring 3.22000 Summer 8.6 1976 Summer 5.42000 Winter 8.45 5.9775 1976 Winter 4 4.2252001 Fall 2.3 1977 Fall 7.852001 Spring 4.1 1977 Spring 35.72001 Summer 6.05 1977 Summer 7.952001 Winter 2.7 3.7875 1977 Winter 5.2 14.1751978 Fall 51978 Spring 10.951978 Summer 7.5

186 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastEstero Bay Chlorophyll Historical Trends AnalysisCorrected Chlor. OnlyUncorrected Chla Only1978 Winter 7.1 7.63751979 Fall 18.81979 Spring 3.851979 Summer 10.655-yearMean 5.41751979 Winter 4.7 9.55-yearMean 8.2825September 6, 2002• Regarding the inclusion of Mullock Creek on the verified list for dissolved oxygen,we request that the Department consider the nature of the sampling location whenevaluating the data. We do not believe the sample collected from a box culvert thatconveys water from a drainage ditch into a canal that intersects Mullock Creek(21FLEECO46B-9GR/Mullock Creek – US 41) can be representative of the qualityof water in Mullock Creek. [Bonita Bay Group]RESPONSE: The station in question is described as Mullock Creek upstream of the culvert at U.S.Highway 41.• It is not acceptable for the state not to list, for example, threatened waters or watersthat have been identified as impaired by data other than chemical water qualitysamples indicating exceedances of numerical standards. Similarly, the state must listthose waterbodies that can reasonably be expected to fail to meet [water qualitystandards] in the future due to, for example, a planned housing or industrialdevelopment. [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy of Southwest Florida]RESPONSE: The IWR establishes a methodology for assessing impairment based upon analysis ofwater quality data as measured against the criteria and standards in Rule 62-302, F.A.C.. In the case ofnutrients, Sections 62-303.350(1) and 62-303.450(2) of the IWR provide more flexibility to useinformation (“other information indicating an imbalance of flora or fauna due to nutrient enrichmentshall also be considered”), however, we do not believe there is sufficient information to indicate animbalance of flora or fauna at this time.As to listing waters that are expected to fail to meet standards in the future, Section 62-303.100(2) ofthe IWR states that subsection 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and Section 403.067, FS describeimpaired waters as those not [currently] meeting applicable water quality standards.

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 187• In developing its list of all threatened or impaired waters, the state must use “allexisting and readily available water quality-related data and information.” 40 CFR-130.7(b)(5). This data includes, at a minimum, waters identified in the most recentstate section 305(b) report at “partially meeting” or “not meeting” designated uses oras “threatened” waters calculated by models not to meet water quality standards; orwater “for which water quality problems have been reported”. [Gary A. Davis,Conservancy of Southwest Florida]RESPONSE: The state’s impaired waters list is consistent with the latest 305(b) report completed in2002. It should be noted that, as directed by EPA guidance, the Department has changed to theIntegrated Report format for both the 305(b) and 303(d) reporting.• Nor may the state refuse to list an impaired or threatened waterbody segment becauseif does not know the source of the pollutants causing the impairment. [Gary A.Davis, Conservancy of Southwest Florida]RESPONSE: Waters identified as impaired through the IWR assessment process are not excludedfrom the list because the source of pollutants is not known. In the case of impairments for dissolvedoxygen and nutrients, a final verification of impairment cannot be accomplished without identificationof the causative pollutant, however waters identified as such remain on the planning list until data canbe gathered that allows identification of a causative pollutant, until such time as it has been concludedthat the impairment is due to a naturally occurring condition.• Fish advisories should be used [in the assessment process]. Although the ImpairedWaters Rule contemplates the use of fish consumption advisories, the only advisoriesmentioned in the list of waters are mercury advisories. There are several other fishconsumption advisories in the region that have been issued due to localizedcontamination, such as bacterial contamination. These include parts of the GordonRiver and Naples Bay, as well as Estero Bay (for shellfish harvesting). Have theseother advisories been taken into account? [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy of SouthwestFlorida]RESPONSE: Section 62-303.370 spells out the criteria for use in assessing impairment based uponfish advisories. All waters with limited or no consumption fish consumption advisories issued by theDepartment of Health or other authorized government entity were listed. While the vast majority ofthe listings were based on advisories based on mercury in fish tissue, we included advisories for otherpollutants when available. We also included waters impaired by bacterial contamination if the waterdoes not meet the applicable water quality criteria for bacteriological criteria based on the IWRmethodology, or for Class II waters, if the water included an area that had been approved for shellfishharvesting by SEAS and subsequently downgraded in its classification.• There is no indication that the protection for Outstanding Florida Waters wereconsidered in developing the impaired waters list. [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy ofSouthwest Florida]

188 Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West CoastRESPONSE: There are no OFW-specific assessment criteria in the IWR, and as such, we evaluatedimpairment of OFWs just like any other state surface water. The only OFW-specific language in theIWR relates to the prioritization of OFWs for TMDL development. We believe our decision to notaddress OFWs with specific language is consistent with state standards and with the OFW Program ingeneral, which is implemented through the Department’s permitting program (rather than the TMDLprogram).• DEP should keep impaired waters on the Impaired Waters List until DEPdemonstrates that water quality standards are being met. In any event, it makes senseto retain these waters on the impaired list submitted to EPA while these challenges tothe Impaired Waters Rule are pending. [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy of SouthwestFlorida]RESPONSE: All waters on the 1998 303(d) list are retained on the list until either assessment per theIWR demonstrates standards are being met, it is determined there was a flaw in the original analysis,the impairment is conclusively determined to be due to a natural, unabatable condition, or a TMDL iscompleted.• I am unable to attend the July 25th public hearing on the new standards for deciding ifwaters are polluted. My interest is Estero Bay. I am adamantly opposed to anylowering of standards for the Estero Bay estuary. This body of water is undertremendous pressure from an onslaught of development around its perimeter, fromcondos, single-family home and hotels. Each new residence brings added run-off andits accompanying pollution from fertilizers, chemicals, and just general run-off. All ofthis pollution must, by its very nature, further degrade the waters. I would imploreyou to work to help improve the waters of Estero Bay so that our future generationscan enjoy it as a thriving estuary with lots of fish, amphibians, insects and birds. Andnot another "dead" zone as happens all to often when development interests prevailover ordinary citizens wishes. Good science tells us that if a body of water is already"impaired", allowing additional pollutants to be added must further impair it. Whichleads me to a logical conclusion. Every time we in SW Florida see a maneuver by agovernment agency to weaken standards, we wonder who in the developmentcommunity has prevailed for their own economic interests. All to often we find outlater, after the dirt deed is done. We see what damage is currently being done to theUS economy and to American's trust in their corporations and government. Corporategreed and a lack of "public conscience" allow these travesties to happen. When willthe government wake up to the fact that too much of our ecological future is on theline with each and every weakening of standards. When will reasonable governmentadministrators say "enough is enough" and not sell out to every political anddevelopment pressure that comes along. Southwest Florida and its coastline is anecological gem. Let's keep the "gem" shiny and say no to anything that will diminishit. [Marie Gargano, Citizen]

Water Quality Assessment Report: Everglades West Coast 189RESPONSE: State water quality standards for Estero Bay have not been lowered nor weakened, norare there any plans to do so. The State’s Impaired Waters Rule (Rule 62-303, F.A.C.) was designed toapply good science, in an objective and repeatable manner, to arrive at conclusions about theimpairment status of our surface waters. It is the intention of FDEP to continue the assessment of oursurface waters under the specifications of the Rule, and not bend under pressure from special interestgroups.• Not only must the state use all existing and available information, but also the statemust actively solicit such information from other agencies, the public and all possiblesources. 40 CRF 130.7(b)(5)(iii). [Gary A. Davis, Conservancy of SouthwestFlorida].RESPONSE: FDEP actively solicited all credible data from which conclusions can be drawn withregard to impairment of our surface waters, with the caveat that the data provided must meet theQA/QC requirements specified in the Impaired Waters Rule. All data provided to us for inclusion inour assessments were evaluated for compliance with the data requirements of the IWR and they wereused if possible. In most cases, contributed data were uploaded to the IWR database for automatedassessment. In some cases, due to the format in which data were received, hand analysis wasnecessary. Where there were unclear or missing pieces of information crucial to the assignment ofdata to the appropriate waterbody segment, attempts were made to retrieve the missing information.Where there were unresolved questions regarding the appropriate assignment of data or compliance ofdata with FDEP QA/QC requirements, the data were not used.

Florida Department of Environmental ProtectionDivision of Water Resource ManagementBureau of Water Management2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 3565Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400(850) 245-8561www.dep.state.fl.us/water