The Determination of Minimum Flows for Sulphur Springs, Tampa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

DRAFT and possibly even high sulfide concentrations in waters discharging to the spring run. No dissolved oxygen measurements were made in the spring run when the gates were open, and it is not known to what extent that discharge from the pool became oxygenated in the spring run. Similarly, there are no sulfide data for the spring pool or run on which to make reasonable inferences. If the gates need to be opened in the future, there should be plans to mechanically aerate the spring discharge if this is shown to be a problem. In sum, it is not possible to evaluate to what degree hypoxia during 1999 and 2000 may have been a factor in the change in invertebrate community composition of the spring run. It is reasonable to conclude, however, that the dramatic salinity changes that occurred would have affected at least some of the less euryhaline invertebrate species in the spring run. The potential effect of different minimum flows on the invertebrate community in the spring run is discussed in Chapter 5. 3.8 Fish populations in the spring run The species composition of the fish community that inhabits Sulphur Springs Run is closely linked to fish populations in the Lower Hillsborough River. Fish populations in the river have been described in two reports related to the use of the Hillsborough River for water supply. The first study by Water and Air Research and SDI Environmental Services (WAR/SDI 1995) collected fish data in the lower river on a monthly basis for two years during 1991 -1993. Life stages that were collected included egg, larval and juvenile stages collected by 500 micron mesh plankton nets, and juvenile and adult stages collected by seines. A second major investigation of the fish fauna of the lower river is currently ongoing as part of the Hydrobiological Monitoring Program (HBMP) for Tampa Bay Water, a regional Water Supply Authority. The HBMP is being conducted by the principal firm PBSJ, Inc., with participation by the University of South Florida College of Marine Science and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s Florida Marine Research Institute. Data collection for this project began in May of 2000 and is scheduled for at least a few more years. Although the distribution of collection sites is different than the WAR/SDI study, this study similarly collects both ichthyoplankton and juvenile life stages throughout the lower Hillsborough River on a monthly basis. Results from this study for the years 2000 – 2002 were presented in a year three interpretive report by PBSJ (2003). Both the WAR/SDI and PBSJ reports presented extensive information on other biological communities (e.g. vegetation, benthic invertebrates) in the Lower Hillsborough River, but included no sampling in Sulphur Springs Run. However, in 2000, the District funded a study of the fish fauna in Sulphur Springs Run by the University of Florida that was conducted in conjunction with the invertebrate studies described in Section 3.7.3.2. University staff have sampled fishes in the spring using seines seven times since May 3 - 22
DRAFT 2000. The results from three sampling events during the spring and summer of 2000 are presented in the report by Allen et al (2001), which includes information on the design and methods used in this project. Complete data for the other four sampling trips will be presented in report to be published in 2005. However, the number of individuals of each species collected during these sampling trips have been provided to the District and are presented in Table 3-2 of this report. The fish fauna in Sulphur Springs Run is comprised of many of the same species that are common in the upper reaches of the lower Hillsborough River, and includes both freshwater and estuarine species. In general, the dominant fishes in the spring run are species that are commonly found in low salinity areas of tidal rivers or coastal marshes, such as the silversides (Menidia spp.), rainwater killifish (Lucania parva), sheephead minnow (Cyprinodon varigaetus), menhaden (Brevortia sp), sailfin molly (Poecilia latipinna), and hogchoker (Trinectes maculatus). The silversides and rainwater killifish were particulary abundant in the early collections. Two species of Tilapia that were collected in the spring have also been collected in the lower river. These are species that are native to South Africa that were unintentionally introduced to Florida waters. They are often seen in the spring run, building and guarding large nests that are visible from the shoreline. Estuarine/marine species that were less common in the spring run included the Atlantic needlefish (Strongylura marina), bay anchovy (Anchoa mitchilli), ladyfish (Elops saurus), and two species of mojarras. A number of freshwater fish species were found in the spring run. The mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki) is a widely distributed fish in freshwater lakes and rivers, but also is frequently collected in low salinity areas of tidal creeks and rivers. Mosquitofish were abundant in the spring run during the first three sampling events, with 56 to 216 individuals reported. The sailfin molly (Poecillia latipinna) is also common to both fresh waters and tidal creeks, as has a fairly broad salinity tolerance. This species was mainly collected during the first three sampling events, including dry (May) and wet (September) conditions during the year 2000. The remaining freshwater fishes collected in the spring run are species that are commonly most abundant and widespread in fresh water, including the bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), bluefin killifish (Lucania goodei), Florida gar (Lepososteus platyrinchus), redear sunfish (Lepomis microlophus), and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). None of these species were collected during the no-flow, high salinity conditions during the 2000 drought. Two species (bluefin killifish and Florid gar) were collected during low-flow conditions during July 2001, while the other species (bluegill, largemouth bass, redear sunfish, and Seminole killifish) were collected only during periods of normal flow in the fall of 2001 and 2002. The total number of species that inhabited the spring run varied between 5 and 13 species on the different sampling dates. There was no apparent relationship between the number of species and the rate of springflow. Comparatively large numbers of 3 - 23
Page 1 and 2:
The Determination of Minimum Flows
Page 4 and 5:
DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tab
Page 6:
4.5 Goal 1 - Minimize the incursion
Page 10 and 11:
DRAFT LIST OF FIGURES Chapter 2 - P
Page 12 and 13:
Fig. 3-13 Fig. 3-14 Fig. 3-15 Fig.
Page 14 and 15:
Fig. 5-7 Fig. 5-8 Fig. 5-9 Fig. 5-1
Page 16 and 17:
Acronyms and Definitions DRAFT AMO
Page 18 and 19:
DRAFT Executive Summary The Southwe
Page 20:
DRAFT below 19 feet NGVD of 1929. T
Page 24 and 25:
CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND OF
Page 26 and 27:
DRAFT water, or aquifer, provided t
Page 28:
DRAFT one the indicators were the f
Page 31 and 32:
DRAFT The spring and its run lie in
Page 33 and 34:
DRAFT Figure 2-3. Recent photograph
Page 35 and 36:
2 - 6 DRAFT
Page 37 and 38: DRAFT -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 0.4 4
Page 39 and 40: DRAFT 10.0 Yrly_Pumpage.grf 15 Annu
Page 41 and 42: DRAFT 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 35 D
Page 43 and 44: DRAFT Figure 2-14. Return flow stru
Page 45 and 46: DRAFT 40 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Ju
Page 47 and 48: DRAFT due to withdrawals for public
Page 49 and 50: DRAFT Figure 2-19 . Temporal trend
Page 51 and 52: DRAFT Figure 2-20. Temporal trends
Page 53: DRAFT In comparison to specific con
Page 57 and 58: DRAFT average daily withdrawals for
Page 59 and 60: DRAFT Figure 2-25. Average specific
Page 61 and 62: DRAFT withdrawal rate of 31 cfs dur
Page 63 and 64: DRAFT Table 2-2. Sulphur Springs su
Page 65 and 66: DRAFT These plots indicate that his
Page 67 and 68: DRAFT CHAPTER 3 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCE
Page 69 and 70: DRAFT 3 Run_Riv_Stg.grf Water Surfa
Page 71 and 72: DRAFT 3.4 Salinity in the spring ru
Page 73 and 74: DRAFT 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Page 75 and 76: DRAFT pumping events resulted in sa
Page 77 and 78: DRAFT As discussed in Section 2.5.3
Page 79 and 80: DRAFT tolerate and are frequently f
Page 81 and 82: DRAFT Appendix B are color coded to
Page 83 and 84: DRAFT habitat in the lower river pr
Page 85 and 86: DRAFT The FWC using a modified stra
Page 87: DRAFT increased with a return to no
Page 91 and 92: DRAFT species (10 to 13) were colle
Page 93 and 94: DRAFT 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
Page 95 and 96: DRAFT . 1000.00 100.00 10.00 1.00 0
Page 97 and 98: DRAFT 3.9.2 The effects of flows fr
Page 99 and 100: DRAFT Data from the Tampa Bay Water
Page 101 and 102: DRAFT EPCHC Period of Record Data L
Page 103 and 104: DRAFT 35 30 1996 1997 1998 1999 200
Page 105 and 106: 7 DRAFT Elevation (m) 1 0 -1 -2 -3
Page 107 and 108: 8 24 25 29 DRAFT Figure 3-20, 3-21
Page 109 and 110: DRAFT Figure 3-22 HBMP & EPCHC 2000
Page 111 and 112: DRAFT of the river between the dam
Page 113 and 114: DRAFT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 11
Page 115 and 116: DRAFT The HBMP project (PBSJ 2003)
Page 117 and 118: DRAFT xanthurus) red drum (Sciaenop
Page 119 and 120: DRAFT as manatees seek fresh water
Page 121 and 122: 1999 2000 2001 2002 DRAFT 35 TmpSS_
Page 123 and 124: DRAFT Platt Street 1974-2002 Columb
Page 125 and 126: DRAFT Median and minimum water temp
Page 127 and 128: DRAFT Figure 3-31 1999 2000 2001 20
Page 129 and 130: DRAFT Figure 3-33 2001 2002 2003 20
Page 131 and 132: DRAFT CHAPTER 4 TECHNICAL APPROACH
Page 133 and 134: DRAFT The sum of these consideratio
Page 135 and 136: DRAFT It is the conclusion of this
Page 137 and 138: DRAFT criteria. The
Page 139:
DRAFT reach of the river 50 meters
Page 142 and 143:
DRAFT of the dam. The experiments w
Page 144 and 145:
DRAFT Salinity incursions above the
Page 146 and 147:
DRAFT Figure 5-3. A - D. Box and wh
Page 148 and 149:
DRAFT The results of the vertical p
Page 150 and 151:
DRAFT Sulphur Springs < 33 cfs, Hil
Page 152 and 153:
DRAFT Other breakpoints in the data
Page 154 and 155:
DRAFT 40 Percent of Observations -
Page 156 and 157:
DRAFT It is possible that infrequen
Page 158 and 159:
DRAFT The effects of tide stage on
Page 160 and 161:
DRAFT medians rise to near -0.2 fee
Page 162 and 163:
DRAFT Sulphur Springs < 33 cfs, Hil
Page 164 and 165:
DRAFT Sulphur Springs on salinity d
Page 166 and 167:
7 29 DRAFT Elevation (m) 0/0cfs 1 0
Page 168 and 169:
23 24 24 25 25 29 DRAFT Figures 14,
Page 170 and 171:
DRAFT Viewed strictly from the infl
Page 172 and 173:
DRAFT water removed would fluctuate
Page 174 and 175:
DRAFT euryhaline, there were also m
Page 176 and 177:
DRAFT 01/90 01/93 01/96 01/99 01/02
Page 178 and 179:
DRAFT the intent of that condition
Page 180 and 181:
DRAFT included inflows to the model
Page 182 and 183:
DRAFT Flows for Sulphur Springs wer
Page 184 and 185:
DRAFT ∆T represents the differenc
Page 186 and 187:
DRAFT Figure 25 Temp (C) 22 Histori
Page 188 and 189:
DRAFT Figure 26 Temp (C) 24 22 Hist
Page 190 and 191:
DRAFT Similar to the coldest period
Page 192 and 193:
DRAFT 5.7. Consideration of future
Page 194 and 195:
DRAFT Culter, J. 1986. Benthic Inve
Page 196 and 197:
DRAFT Shafland, P. L. and K. J. Foo
Page 199 and 200:
APPENDIX A (from Chapter 2) Time se
Page 201 and 202:
Sulphur Springs Water Quality 1991-
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209:
Page 213 and 214:
Appendix B. Presence of macroinvert
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217:
Page 220 and 221:
Appendix C. Percent composition of
Page 222 and 223:
Appendix C. Percent composition of
Page 225 and 226:
APPENDIX D (from Chapter 3) Percent
Page 227 and 228:
APPENDIX D. Percent composition of
Page 229 and 230:
APPENDIX D. Percent composition of
Page 231 and 232:
APPENDIX E (from Chapter 3) Abundan
Page 233 and 234:
BARE SAND FILAMENTOUS ALGAE COMBINE
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239:
Page 242 and 243:
APPENDIX F - HILLSBOROUGH RIVER TEM
Page 244 and 245:
Appendix G Daily values for mean, m
Page 247:
APPENDIX H (from Chapter 5) Time se
Page 253:
Experiment Number 6
Page 257 and 258:
Appendix I Daily values for minimum
Page 259 and 260:
28FEB2000 9.8 0.0 1.9 9.7 7.8 . 18.
Page 261 and 262:
12FEB2001 14.0 3.5 1.7 4.6 2.9 1.1
Page 263:
----------------------------------
show all

The Determination of Minimum Flows for Sulphur Springs, Tampa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?