The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 03/04/2014 PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 4, 2014 THE CLAM BAY COMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION WILL MEET TUESDAY, MARCH 4 AT 1 :00 M AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DR., NAPLES, FL. AGENDA The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1 . Roll call 2. Agenda Approval 3. Audience comments 4. Discussion of draft of engineering-related documents for management plan 5. Discussion of draft version 4.1 of management plan 6. Discussion of idle speed/no wake zone revised ordinance and slow speed/minimum wake signs in Clam Bay 7. Renewal of Turrell-Hall annual Clam Bay contract 8. Funding for Clam Bay expenses 9. Other 10. Adjourn ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO ONE (1) MINUTE PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT (239) 597-1749. VISIT US AT HTTP://PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. 2/28/2014 4:37:57 PM March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Design Criteria prepared by Humiston&Moore,Engineers,2/28/2014) Clam Pass Maintenance dredging Design Criteria Draft Report March 2014 Prepared by Humiston &Moore Engineers Contents Clam Pass Maintenance dredging Design Criteria 1 Background 2 Governing factors for Inlet Channel Stability 3 Bay Tide Range 4 Physical monitoring data analysis 4 Section A Inlet Channel 4 Section B Flood Shoal 5 Section C Outer Flood Shoal 6 Channel Length 7 Ebb shoal 7 Summary and Recommendations: 8 Page 1 of 29 March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Design Criteria prepared by Humiston&Moore,Engineers,2/28/2014) Background This report provides an overview of the governing factors to establish design criteria for future maintenance dredging for Clam Pass. These factors are based on the physical nature of Clam Pass and monitoring data of the inlet evolution. Clam Pass is a small wave dominated inlet on the southwest coast of Florida that provides a tidal connection to 500 acres of wetland preserve. The relatively small tidal prism of Clam Bay provides a critical balance between tidal flow in and out of the inlet channel and littoral processes moving to the inlet.This affects the inlet hydraulic efficiency over time,especially when littoral transport rates are high due to periods of high wave energy. During the 1990's, Clam Pass was subject to channel migration as well as closure, and frequent dredging was necessary to keep the inlet open. In 1999 Collier County, in cooperation with the community of Pelican Bay which borders Clam Bay, implemented The Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan. The purpose of the plan was to provide more sustainable tidal flushing of the wetland preserve by keeping Clam Pass open longer.The plan included dredging the inlet channel and parts of the extensive flood shoals which had accumulated sand over many years. Those interior shoals, when present, reduce the tidal prism by obstructing tidal flow to bay areas beyond the immediate vicinity of the inlet.The combined effect of The Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan resulted in significant increase of the tidal prism relative to conditions prior to the 1999 dredging. The plan also included monitoring and maintenance dredging which occurred at approximately 4 year intervals.As a result,the inlet remained open for 12 years, and the areas of stressed or dying mangroves recovered. Clam Pass requires maintenance dredging. Following the 1999 dredging maintenance dredging occurred in 2003, 2007 and 2013 based on the 10 year permit and design template established in the 1999. The most recent maintenance dredging in 2013 took place following inlet closure in late 2012. Following the passage of Tropical storm Debbie and Isaac and high energy wind and wave conditions during 2012,the inlet shoaled rapidly, resulting in inlet closure in September of 2012.The County obtained a state permit for the continued maintenance dredging of the inlet. Subsequently,the County,through the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD), obtained a federal permit to reopen the inlet, following the same channel template that had been permitted since 1999. This allowed the County to obtain the needed dredging permits to reopen the channel in a relatively short time with limited conditions. One major condition required all dredged sand to be placed upland of Mean High Water. The inlet reopening was completed in April 2013 and tidal exchange between the bay and the Gulf of Mexico was restored to near design levels. The complete closure of the inlet in late 2012 resulted in the collapse of its ebb shoal onto the beach and a relatively large volume of sand was pushed onshore by waves. The collapse of the ebb shoal and presence of large volumes of sand at the adjacent shoreline provided additional challenges to the hydraulic stability of Clam Pass. Page 2 of 29 March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Design Criteria prepared by Humiston&Moore,Engineers,2/28/2014) Governing factors for Inlet Channel Stability The inlet channel is one part of a larger tidal inlet system where the inlet connects the bay system to the gulf of Mexico. The tidal flow through flood and ebb tides interacts with active beach wave and sediment transport that influence the stability of a tidal inlet. The morphologic features of a tidal inlet include ebb shoal,flood shoal and inlet channel. Figure 1 illustrates these three features.The flood shoal includes the sand shoals on the bay side of the inlet channel. The flood shoal is less dynamic than the gulf side of the inlet as it is influenced mainly by tidal flow and sheltered from the varying wave conditions on the open coast side.The ebb shoal features can be explained as sand bar features forming a delta on the open coast side of the inlet.The ebb shoal delta shields the inlet channel from waves and provides pathways for sand transport along the coast to bypass the channel without shoaling the inlet closed. A stable inlet system requires an ebb shoal feature that prevents rapid shoaling at the inlet mouth. The inlet channel maintains its flow cross section through tidal flow that scours the channel to required flow area while the waves are moving large amounts of sand along coast. The stability and dynamics of a tidal inlet is based on the balance of the two forces of tidal flow versus wave induced current and sand transport. The direction of wave action plays a significant role in the shape and dynamics of the inlet features. Clam Pass is critically stable but subject to shoaling and therefore requires periodic maintenance dredging to prevent inlet closure. The relatively small bay area compared to other estuaries in southwest Florida provides adequate tidal flow to keep the pass open under typical conditions. The narrow nature of the flood shoal area, surrounded by mangrove forest limits the flood shoal capacity to maintain an equilibrium volume and bypass additional sand to the gulf and bay waters. The accumulation of sand over long periods of time, especially within the flood shoal and inlet channel resistance to the flow. This additional resistance causes a reducingtion in the tidal range within the bay and consequently reduces the flow through the pass. Reduced flow through the pass may be detrimental to the pass remaining open. Maintenance dredging to restore the flow rates to stable magnitude is needed prior to reaching such shoaling conditions. The design criteria aim to establish guidelines for the inlet stability to assist in determining needs for maintenance dredging. Design objectives also aim to minimize dredging to essential maintenance needed to maintain an open inlet and protect the valuable environmental resources by restoring flushing and to allow natural evolution of the inlet morphological features. The analysis of hydraulic and physical monitoring data of the Clam Bay system collected since 1998 to date were used to evaluate the governing parameters for the inlet hydraulic stability. The monitoring data for clam pass indicate that the dynamic nature of the pass is consistent with that of a wave- dominant small tidal inlet where the inlet channel and ebb shoal morphologic features (sand bodies) may change shape following sustained wave and wind conditions. During the summer months, persistent winds and waves from the southwest causes the inlet channel and ebb shoal to migrate to the north. The fall and winter wave climate is predominately from the northwest direction which, pushes the pass to southward. The seasonal variation of wind/wave energy windows and the temporal cycle of the tides result in the shifting of the channel entrance and morphologic features around the inlet entrance. Recently collected monitoring data shows the pass to be hydraulically stable, with an adequate flow cross section to maintain the pass open. The data also show the dynamics of the inlet channel and ebb shoal features. Page 3 of 29 March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Design Criteria prepared by Humiston&Moore,Engineers,2/28/2014) The monitoring data was used to analyze the inlet dynamics and hydraulic stability using the recent post dredging data and previous annual monitoring data. Bay Tide Range The existing hydraulic monitoring program provides water level measurements at several stations within the bay system.The hydraulic monitoring data provides a record of the tidal range in the bay which is an indicator to the tidal prism or volume of water flowing through the pass at each tidal cycle. In this analysis a review of ratios of the bay tidal range to that of the gulf tide is used as the monitoring indictor to the flow through the pass. Figure 2 shows a definition sketch illustrating the tidal ranges for the gulf and bay.The bay tidal range is typically smaller than that of the gulf tide due to flow resistance through the inlet channel and shoal features.The figure also shows the locations of two of the bay tidal gages that are used in this analysis to represent the bay tide range. Figure 3 shows a plot of the annual ratios of bay to gulf tide from 1998 to date. The figure indicate that when the inlet was hydraulically stable the ratio between the bay and gulf tide was between 0.6 to 0.7 over 90%of the time. The data also shows that prior to 1999 dredging when the inlet was unstable and in 2012 prior to the inlet closure,this ratio was below 0.5 Physical monitoring data analysis In addition to the hydraulic monitoring program, analysis of the physical monitoring data is used to characterize the flow areas and shoaling within the channel and flood shoal areas. The physical monitoring data includes bathymetry surveys of the inlet channel, flood shoal and ebb shoal features. The data analysis includes evaluation of the flow cross-section areas in three main sections of the dredging template, sections A, B and C. Figure 4 shows the dredge template and the three monitoring segments. Section A represents the inlet channel, Section B represents the seaward part of the flood shoal and Section C represent the bay side part of the flood shoal. The analysis included evaluation of the cross section of flow below mean high water and volume of sand within each segment. The cross section of flow was computed at each survey station spaced approximately 50 feet apart. The average and minimum cross section areas were used as indicators of the physical condition of the flow area through each of the three segments.The cross section areas were compared to the design cross section area of 2013 dredging and the inlet conditions in 2004 and 2008. The 2008 and 2004 inlet conditions were used as a background benchmark for inlet conditions near equilibrium as the 2004 and 2008 survey were completed 2 years and 16 months following the 2002 and 2007 dredging event respectively. These conditions represent the inlet at stable conditions after the post dredging adjustment at a phase where no dredging was needed and the tidal hydraulic parameters were at stable ranges. Section A Inlet Channel The indicators used in this analysis include average and minimum cross section area and total volume of sand within section A. Figure 5 shows the change of average flow cross- section area below mean high water for section A in 2013. The figure covers the time period from Jan 2013 to 7 months post dredging. This includes pre dredging conditions when the inlet was closed, how the average cross section evolved immediately following dredging, to 4 months and 7 months post dredging. The figure also shows the 2013 cross Page 4 of 29 March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Design Criteria prepared by Humiston&Moore,Engineers,2/28/2014) section area relative to the 2004 and 2008 average cross sections and the 2013 design cross section area.The data indicate that following the inlet opening in 2013 the average cross section shoaled below the design area while the inlet morphologic features were forming. After the initial adjustments the cross section area increased to above the design area and 2008 conditions but below the 2004 conditions. . Figure 6 shows the change of the minimum flow cross section area below mean high water for section A in 2013. The figure also shows the change in minimum cross section area relative to the 2004 and 2008 minimum cross sections and the 2013 design cross section area. The data indicate that following the inlet opening the minimum cross section shoaled then got larger in the 4 and 7 months following dredging. The minimum cross section area remained smaller than the design cross section area. However,the channel cross section recovered to the range of the 2008 minimum flow area. Figure 7 shows the change in total volume of sand accumulated in the dredge template during 2013.The figure shows that the section A dredge template has accumulated sand within the dredge cut. It should be noted however that the channel migrates and meanders within in the vicinity of the dredge cut.Thus, this indicator should not be used as a measure of critical conditions of the channel. Figure 8 shows a table of the design criteria parameters for section A with comparisons to post dredging measurements Section B Flood Shoal The cross section area of flow through the flood shoal in section B is an important indicator of the flow exchange between the bay and inlet and the flow efficiency to maintain the tidal range within the bay. Figure 9 shows the change of average flow cross section area below mean high water for section B in 2013. The figure covers the time period from Jan 2013 representing pre dredging conditions when the inlet was closed and how the average cross section evolved immediately following dredging to 4 and 7 months post dredging. The figure also shows the change of cross section area relative to the 2004 and 2008 average cross section areas and the design template area dredged in 2013. The data indicate that following the inlet opening the average cross section shoaled below the design area while the inlet morphologic features were forming. After the initial adjustments the cross section area increased to near the design area. The cross section area was larger than 2004 and 2008 conditions throughout the post dredging monitoring. Figure 10 shows the change of the minimum flow cross section area below mean high water for section B in 2013. The data indicate that following inlet opening the minimum cross section shoaled to a level similar to the 2008 conditions. Following the initial post dredging adjustment the minimum cross section area of flow at the 4 and 7 month post dredging conditions became larger than the conditions of 2004 and 2008. Figure 11 shows the change in total volume of sand accumulated in the dredge template during 2013. The figure shows that over 5,000 cubic yards of sand were dredged from section B. Over the 7 months since dredging approximately 3,000 cubic yards have accumulated in section B. Most of that volume Page 5 of 29 March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Design Criteria prepared by Humiston&Moore,Engineers,2/28/2014) shoaled in the first 3 months as part of the initial adjustments post dredging. The amount of material accumulated in section B is greater than the conditions of 2004 and 2008. Figure 12 shows a table of the design criteria parameters for section B with comparisons to post dredging measurements Section C Outer Flood Shoal section C represents the outer(bay side)flood shoal area of Clam Bay which is also junction in the Clam Bay system where flow from the north and south tributaries connects to the pass. Restriction of this area below design levels may reduce the tidal ranges in the bay system and therefore reduce tidal flow through the pass. Only part of section C was dredged in the 2013 maintenance dredging. This analysis was limited to the dredged part of section C. Figure 13 shows the change of average flow cross section area below mean high water for the dredged part of section C in 2013. The figure covers the time period from January 2013 to 7 months post dredging. This illustrates pre dredging conditions when the inlet was closed, how the average cross section evolved immediately following dredging, and 4 months and 7 months post dredging. The figure also shows the 2008 average cross section area and the design template area dredged in 2013.The data indicate that since section C was partially dredged the average cross section remained below the 2008 conditions. The data also shows that the average cross section area in the dredged part of section C is similar to the 2008 conditions. Figure 14 shows the change of the minimum flow cross section area below mean high water for section C in 2013. The data indicate that since section C was partially dredged the average cross section remained below the 2004 and 2008 conditions. The data also shows that initial shoaling reduced the minimum cross section area as some sediment was transported from the un-dredged area into the dredged area. After the initial adjustments the cross section area increased to near the design area but remained in similar range to that of 2004 and 2008 conditions. Figure 15 shows the change in total volume of sand accumulated in the dredge porition of section C during 2013. The figure shows that over 2,000 cubic yards of sand were dredged from section C. Over the 7 month period since dredging, approximately 1,500 cubic yards have accumulated in section C. Most of that volume shoaled in the first 3 months as part of the initial adjustments post dredging. The accumulated material in the dredged part of section C is greater than the conditions of 2004 and 2008. Figure 16 shows the change in total volume of sand within all of section C including the part that was not dredged in 2013. The figure illustrates the relative amount of dredging to the totoal volume within the template and comparison to the volumes within the template for 2004 and 2008 conditions. Figure 17 shows a table of the design criteria parameters for section C with comparisons to post dredging measurements Page 6 of 29 March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Design Criteria prepared by Humiston&Moore,Engineers,2/28/2014) Channel Length The channel length is an important factor in the inlet stability parameters. A longer inlet channel will provide greater resistance to flow. Higher flow resistance will reduce the tidal range and increase the phase lag with the gulf tide. Figure 18 shows a selection of aerials showing clam pass from 2004 to 2013.The figure shows the range of channel orientation and change in channel length and beach width on both side of the inlet during that period. Figure 19 shows a plot of the approximate channel length measured at the center line of the channel through section A from open coast to beginning of section B.The plot shows the dredged channel length of approximately 250 feet. Pre-dredging conditions typically show a channel length of over 500 ft. The data shows the channel length meandered to over 600 feet in length before the inlet closed in 2012. Figure 20 shows a table of the design criteria parameters for section C with comparisons to post dredging measurements and mapping of the channel evolution since reopening in April 2013. Ebb shoal The size and shape of the ebb shoal is key factor to the stability of the inlet and helps keep the pass open when facing storms and big wave events. The ebb shoal delta provides sheltering to the channel and sand bypass pathway around the inlet without filling the pass closed. The shape and volume of the ebb shoal are additional indicators to the stability of the pass Figure 21 shows a table for the ebb shoal design criteria parameters and monitoring measurements since reopening in April 2013. Page 7 of 29 March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Design Criteria prepared by Humiston&Moore,Engineers,2/28/2014) Summary and Recommendations: This draft provides the main interrelated inlet stability indicators to be monitored for the management of Clam Pass. The inlet design criteria include "design" and "target" ranges to be observed for the following parameters; Bay Tidal Range, Average and Minimum Cross Section Flow Area, Volume of Shoaled Material within the template, Channel Length and Ebb Shoal Size and Area. The following monitoring measures are recommended to be included in the inlet management plan. 1. It is recommended to continue to monitor the tide range in the bay on monthly basis to understand the level of hydraulic stability of the system. Based on previous tidal data monitoring records, inlet flow stability can be indicated when the tidal range ratio remains above 0.6. if the monthly tidal range ratio drops below 0.6 but above 0.5,further monitoring is needed to observe monthly trends. If the range drops below 0.5 or displays a downward trend for three consecutive months, then physical monitoring surveys should be done promptly to evaluate potential shoaling areas that could be impeding the tidal flow. 2. The physical monitoring data is important to quantify the flow areas and shoaling throughout the dynamic parts of the system. It is recommended to continue to monitor the physical changes in the pass at 6-month intervals under stable hydraulic monitoring indicators. If tidal monitoring data show relative tidal ranges in the critical range, field observation while continuing to monitor the tidal range for the following month are necessary. If the hydraulic monitoring indicates a continued trend down towards the unstable range, then additional physical monitoring should be done as an emergency survey to quantify shoaling areas and examine need for maintenance dredging. 3. The design criteria identified in this report should be used as indicators to the level of stability for the pass. When dredging is deemed necessary, it is recommended to follow the design cross section areas as stated in the design range with considerations to existing conditions at the time. Page 8 of 29 v v („. a0 N N y a) a) C 0) G W .,.. ».»_... .. ,.._.....w... ._ ,___.,._».................,... ..... _.»._ ..,.._. O a. O ots O C •� O co i o >, a) N as 0- op 2 c CI- • En .,.-"I''.,?... � ;''''''I--", ; ''11.,.:-*."- o0.)v m>m GO 0 co E co <a c _,,-‘ , * ,I, .., ' r ,... _ . ,,,..„:„.,,..,,,,..'T..,-*',,,:r. ',^" .„..,' , ni * ', -cc cl- o (i) OD o (T1 va U s . ' Q jeE in . If 'a a E co ,rm v a) ao w - Ant-",i-r,'i,ei\N-;E6.'i,." t, , .., ;q,t,...t.E.,c —',..„,,,:. . ., -..:-. --, . -P[4-,..,,,,, ', stri,.. ,.- .. - .400o,;,,, - 7 -41, 1\ - is li"..,- .4 . ., .,,, -f! ,„„*!,..,i.r-t,7., zs La,r.,,-,f-. 'till .,,-,-., l'--.),-)-->,------ay. ,'-'1',..,,-..ez,:— :‘,.0,.‘,.*„.„-..:,- --..,'...,-..;,- ,--. -,---,,,,,_ _..i-!-`i.,-..,:: 1. '-:-..,k.;- '",?r,_,,,r,r4g, ""s; .rte t rJ` � , RSt : , • C as _ `, W 5' '6 E ';+ rte ,°' -- ...� ,�. _t( cv..'�'` `'§".,�•.�-, 1 {a� ��k ori "" _R, --.�.�.�.-. . C a '�N N O Z �_ U >, • N 0 • (6 0 0- m i c a 41 a3 C13 C N N a> U in .4--P. w c . rn o 8° rn o I i cv U i1:\ � i i T Q QS U m c N H f6 m c 1 m 0 c �+ I 4 v j m { co o rn . ' m N N I Cr- Q3 tlD c — ! x C co 2 U fB 73 ' N i ia. E , , ,, , ,. „ , ---,. 4_,„ „ . , , ,, ., f9 ? , ,C d, , v /! c ,. i dq i i1 t i i "'""m:F.„. A C ` ce i 0 ' i 0 v To v a) u co co Nr-1 Ir- o a) 1 kb cM ,i 0 a- N N ■ ® oN c °5 o c • to 5 N o f - 0 a• = co O • a) -0 N 0 TN asi as a IIm ;mnc� ® �' a co cm o N 0_ • c N V co "0O o Cu o N 0 >' I O c as a• U N - E N N a co a) a 8 co CC 'C +J O I > a CD 0m N E ro c U a ma, •, rri an ow♦ a- 'a to Ll. to Ql o `� _ v-rwv,� �• Ql O o O o O O o CrO 00 O O O O O O O O O 0 api1 lInD of ogea a2uea apila2e.iand lenuuv a ' -= ' . ''s = ' ,=" Q- I `."'. * : ' ai C44 04 E2 a) a) ...„ „ = - = = •. --6 , c w ,,,. ,--, '« ' . Ei. 0 0 , . . « ‘' .6 '''''' =:,'.':i'-:‘'*.i - -'1 ‘:.+:•,::- N, ''' .'-'s- *47,;':,i..1-:.' , 0 4' ''' .0) -4:- 4 0‘...,,,,,1%, ',''"4. ,.:44 C.I.N • ' L'4=, E . t:' D q:,:,'‘. 0:=1.'..? " '** , (i) I V''''' 4: '.1-tii:**4 • ,,tz..!... -Co' 4,,,,;,-‘::: ,.. 1° - ' „-,.:, , • n -0 ,,,...- 4.‘ :7:1/4**,==!if:'=":71'..4::,=;' , '.` ' ' =*`•. ',=T '',.',;'''' cV 4— Cat)) E12 '.4: 1):4'. :7 !:?)\-: , ?.4-.4..,: - ,,,,,,,, ,•,...... cv >.• ci. +., g 2 , i....-tve-kil.' A:...,....'"-it4)...„ ,----:- .),.,--,-",*4' 0 0, - „woos. E o o tz • -'-°-,tt.t. -<tt.<',......t.,.: 0 i•-- On = a) (1) „, \ . .- - 0/3 2 g) ,.. .c ,.. —(7) ' 0 .,,.., 0 ' 0 0) 43(= ? 11-:- c E .6) 4 .,., E -0 4., co 1. t .- 03 o ;- .:* 4. 03 c ro . . .1.1/4,- 1. (1. E c .*1 -,..= ',,,' Ca (U (_) G ...._ CD ca \=., * '5.'• i'filAttk *-Xst4.-"414''''',.4,;=,1= e , _. ' k- -.- . . 1.- 0 cn ''‘ ci - al ''' -1-,' *.*I'''"it*3-*'.''' 17- •'Av cu -it<'44- -,. <.<ts it,,,at.-,t 0 E ,... -, , - ,!' *' tw (`-a• a3 ---`,,,,-. f -:-Irss,,,„*4 - *:- u_ '* ; .,* -' . - '* V . , . , - 4/Xfttlt ' '44 ' ' ' # - -•:* ,. .- ...,, . = , ', .._ v 0 v hl r o r, N C O C CO 17 0 N CU u v+ u LD N , m N O ^ o C O C1 O V utio N Wrsi OD CD on R E 0 • •• Q 10 G Q 0 i m 5 I g 05 1 ON ON rV N rn H ° ! I o p• E 1 I I I o m I 1 r+ • S Q I1 w�e C 1 1 en m a 1 0.1 0 CO 2j a d 1 nr cuim 0 1 ago Q m . i I • c a 0 RI O w I I N o •aa)iii L' I 0 0) to ,5 a) U Q I I �O I ° D) o) 1 I N ° ca cn O u 1 I Q m U o u. 1 0 I0- co CO• 8LA- ` I I 0 0 A 11 rn mo a' p I ! hl 0 U ✓ (73I 1 "' u a) N N CU I I • N c N I I rn o " E N • • N v 2 U 0 iv VI 1 I as U I I I, • c v 1 $ a 1 1 N 1 1 rn 0 °_' ! 030 II " I I • I I N 0 N r 0 O N O 0 0 ON o kW O 0 Vtd Ln tOD (3}bs)MHN^^o1aa eaad uolpes ssaD v v o orq N C `-1 O 1 CO •u i C .- N Ql y, .Y N a) o y m C 0 '"4 O O ev �j 7 C O N a) C C ,-i oo I 0 O O C N N' NN m •a-) 0 I 0 .5 N t I N U > Q 1 ' O I 0 I \ CIS m N I, I O Qrss U `° 1 Zi • N I D_ U 1 a) CO ( o m a) 1 u N s.. ' m N o N o) amid Q 1 N :: 1 N CI N O ) 0 1 Q a> co o U- I o a. m 20 EO ' I o CO 0 C 0 0 --(.5C 0 I I N o -co .4 • ++ I I a, N N U W N LQ- �, 2 E N m 2 U vs as N U I N U 1 ( - 2 1 m o I 7 as N .1z � I I N 1-10 N r ' 0 0 0 0 o ty o ui m m N .�.,, v (4 bs)MH W Mo1a9 easy uol�3as ssoa� v 0 N CO a N ,•..I CVN0 N r1 C M CO `\'1 ,--i C 0 O 111 N N N N I I M C I o N to o w 1 r-I b j I 1 U T I 1 0 yv I 1 - � CO Q M O R N C e-I m 0 I 1 c o I U •` 1 M Q. •c a) r I w N 1 p w .� (I ♦ 1 N Q � o +0.+ CO 0 al • E •a a I ia) n o 1 m 1"-• I 1 N o ra in c o E co Q1 I I 1O E V to I- m I v to R vCNI u) i I I - o13 ` 0 U I I• • C e I 1 Co • a) (OU Q1 C • 1-1 co Ooviii;' >°^(NI 512a'o;� N O p N O p 00 O O O O p (AD)a;epdwa j alma up 4uawlpes w cu to To 414 EE)� OI 2 ,...,..','..J:'4,--u.Awl...-.....b- ,v,....1.4" .,,,,,„,0047 4., V:, as .TCQ en NI C6 CO 7-7 � U / O co1;5 L 0 U a).21Nn fop L� WNm 01 ,...._4.° O °I O LtNN cu p 0 cTv COm U m fvE cmQ- a. tn tu- C foUc a) yo NN =fl t.?sV .E /Y - 0.0 4.0 0 0 ba v O oU 6/ O Nmm "0 m v> mV Q 3 ao 4-4 LL 4-) C U 0 0 0 0.0 cQ Q. +-, '� O E E N 0 c mLo r-I v N0CO cV N .--i N C '� O C O ani u c 0' N m w VI o rsi O 2.o a) U a) a) cVN O CO OD @ Cyp C99 CO y •in a) a) •'-4 C I ® > a) > > i Q 0 Qp QvO o m m co O O O 10 m m b N I N N N N o > _ 0 1 ! 1 i 0 o• >. CO I• I I I I 0 1 `� I 1 T � •0 m co. • m u 1 1 0 c29 N N i ! 0 U •c v a. .O - U 1 ! opo m N ! r c1 1 "5Q Q • ! V-• rn ® m N cc 1 0 CO N O E •c •• (N E 2 I ! C CO Ao u. i l `� a m � p I o o_ E co co • I m E C 1 .0 U � 0-zr cc I o 0 o2 c.� i I O CV ri,d: C5O CV •1 I u' a a 1• vi cco ca 2 0 O N • 1 1 c ino o rsi U U • I i OO 11 m @ a) 1 1 a 1 1 m of I I N 5 1 I koto N ii I I 1 • N O N N pO N 0 0 0 0 8 ,••i O '� O o Oin .c Q m N 00 (K bs)MHW mops east uol;gas ssoa3 C? v o 1-1 0 N O CO (V CNA .-1c `i d O a) a) U O o a U C h m tO W j 0 0 ili v, N o o o 11 o 7 rqN A .1Oa - - � C II N• ° II .� ri . N 6 .- O O N N .m-1 a o II 0 hi ✓ > CO II I : :c h 0 co• m mco +�+ II m d u .( m cap coan 0 m D •a d _ \ N .- O a) 0 ICL 17- CO p C II N o rn �'u) L ; a a d I m 3 O Q N O 0 0 D 3 O TQ 1.1. 01-4 LL — a)CO cg y— I w- rn E m �_ I c CL U w I m 0 c 0 1 v _ o N an v d N .1 `n U iE N E m al o N V _ \ 'c r-- Z \ ` m 7 C m �� N o Il 4 ri 4 N .-i 0 N . ppi r r n 0csi 0 O p O O O O O .-i n k.0111 Cr m N . *- (4 bs)MH W moue REIN uoR3as ssoa) v 0 N Tr CO N N O N N .--1 0) C 01 00 v .-1.5, p p ` IN CNI CV C O 8 g o i ! 71 E. N M l 1 _ \ 0.1 • I . Cea N •y o � 'j N o � � I m = ( 1 m csl Z a 0 uj m ( ! m \ m a C I I o CO N = Q II U (0 � }0 I1 N r ' M CO CL W 1 O mU V) _ N O w .� I • I 1 - u amici cp � ! � o\o cn I E E . ..�0) cri N (13 QI p a 4. IN wU ' • - D n~ CD CO m E ' ! t.o -a U c I v rn v '� I •� o f0 0.0 d o L ' • m c N N va CI � ! _ � V •� I \ +�+ m U GJ cu I I N 1 . E o I40 Z m a, sp 1I m 11 21 ni to 7 I I mo .-t u. • 11 N N p O O N O p 00 O p N E- (AD)a;eldwaj a paJc ul;uawlpag 0 +., EL) m 0 ro cu E o to Q c 'ED. ... ' -o , 111‘ EL)< . -c) 4 - '1. ED 41 <801, .,..v, o o +., ,. 0 . ...... 's7- . C m ra cl. .*..m 0 EE --,..1*--__ ----ic.. L - 4-, ...... 0 •—, Ei CL1 0 CD 0 () ..., .0 0 >, I , c, 0 0 (-Ni § CU M 0 0 0 -0 E Tx Lf) m m in co 2 Ln 0 c >, co z E - Ln 0 C) w 0 o -;-_. u .,_ 0 0- C C1) 0 CO > F.". 0 CV (2 '= s.- 0 0) 4-- a) 0 I.- 0- (U C t2J-' 0 0 E a) 0 .— a) 0, 4-1 ro ,._ -- , U ,........ r-,- ro E - 0.) CU f••1 0 cs- E -0 CO 0 92 CD 0000 0 , , 14 0 Ln m a) ("4 r—I al ° 0 C •s= co E A (.) E 2 %... 2 m as a) itme) b.!) F6 cu P o u) C - 03 0 = 4.0 mi E 4.,) t—I fa CZ ,....... ta) rsi 0 0 0 112 ,, }a 0 Ln — 3 Ln to (D L() 1 Ir. in tto Ln N 0 > LD 4—) 4-1 V) .,' V) +-) 0 vase .4...., C +J ) 0... V) V) C 0 V 0 0 0 0 0- ci E c u 4-I .V1,---- (SUt7;(313 CL"CD ril:3- MLO E E r(N-1 v 0 N 0 00 N N N .--1 1-1 N N C O c 0O W V N t em-i N = aa) 0 N 00 0 O c ca a) rq t I °° u °° °° ,--I P- O O v 'a, v m w V- 1 1 > al > Q O M o = C I I o 0 0 0 oN V T 0 I N N N N _ I _ n � I I 1 o alo. d I 1 I 2,_)m a 1 1 m as as ai o ▪ w: "0 1 1N U V L C Q 1 . 1• 0 0 oa)0' 1 . 1 I I a, o • N CI) p a) I II i I o O N '� I' N Ip N To E I N to o m y I o p N m 0 `rLL N m Nc I 0 as V •C• - I 1 m C o '3 I - NN u N N1 N o w d h 2U m OOD O CO 1 I o t.- . ,._., O 1 411m Q C 1 I O 1 I re). • c.'' 1 I 0 '"' 01 cn 1 I - N m Oo n 1 I �- 6 N ri 0 N e e . e e n ... � O O O O O O O N o O tn O O O O a1 (}}bs)MHW moieg easy UOl;Oas SSOJD m \ \ CO § o a .47. •2 / ) \ - IN \ , . C \ E E / \ ■ • E % EE ^ f f | ! ` \ 71 0 \ \ E U I i ® m@ 3rn ,o C I I/ \ G & 5 - N E in ■ _ $ 7 •| E • ® n U | > . ( 2 \ a) _ V) I j \ O | § \ CI_ .C.. - _ 00 = I . g a % | { a / \ G . iii • co lb• G g 2 C | I . 7 \ • \� *I | • § E U 1 U j / a) , iI \ |I . VI cn | I \ C L. | ! / V ■ ! en I I 4 | \ / @ : | ' il I \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ v \ } te (4 b)MHw mgae_a uome_ol } } v: "Zr.' 0 N .� CO1-1 N 0 N N En .\-1 ami m oo v 81 8 8 N N N C LU U i ICO I' o o C I 1 _ � 2 0 N N CNS }1 ' • .--1 OC V 1I y toI I o = 0 II o U ry z C 1111 i - n 1\\\ CD co 0 1 I C m2 C co ex 1 I 0 C a O U .c a I ' v U13 I i rsi - o V) a) w .�' b0 ! a 00 03 5 1 I a I cu °, i 1 E or 0 I m I— .. • a) I ON 13 N COCD 111) I I N o v o C I LO N E C Q. Ini v = I o a oI • m •__ N _ 0 V-- (13 a I 'a a) I 4• 0 ' S.. m a) C I • o E C I 1 OJ (i) I I >0,1 ° E I 1 CO G I I m .�-I > I I o a, I I I • tD csi 120o I (N .--i 0 N r. o Q O `8 O O 8 0 N N N -4 O In -, (AD)e3eldwal e2paJo ul;uawlpas v O CO (-.1. N 'gr O a) N a) N c a) rl W .mm CO .4. 4-1 0 8 N IN 0 1 ! ti c41$ • 1 1CV _O c N 0 E N a = V I .I z.o C 1 m vi t' •0 1 1 0 m CO N CO U I I o` CO (.1) 1 1 '" .V 'c 64•) a 0 I 1 0 U — I 1 .--i U .c c — co o 'H Q • 1 i 0 �o 1 • U P rn QJ 1 coo v E 0 I co . I N m 4-0 a 1 ! Cr) CO co a) o ai CO`—° aci 4.4 IN E 1— 1 1in 0 al CV ~ o 1to 44- O � 'C 1 1• 0 co s co Cii a �' i ! o ,c a O. E 1 m m m to • I .I 2 0 1 1 ,mi a • • E 1 1cv 0 r. 1 1 m 1 1 1 ! m us I 1 t-4 ''' N aJ 1 1 l0 3 • I I CV N H O O O N I. O O 00 O O n V O p $ O N m N 1.4 (Ad)e4eldwaj a pejC Of 3uawlpas ` v o N ` N '. W 4 3*w %\ Ei p • 0 •0 O ^ I—` Qa s e .0 c R. 'f..' a) i....� z 3 a, c � w � a E m a Ti. 1 O c 0 0 0 0 U •� t Z .(' > I— .3R 0 '`‘.' LD d' O 0 a) 0 w .m w o a) a. a) E m ,c m 0 0)O N w > # ___ LC) N N m 0 " 0 N C 0 v m000111 V d'0 �M d d' m en v m 2 E co 2U C _0 U U N O % 4— a;, N LI) .+7,-,.., . M LL b.0 OD . v v L -0 4--+ M n ) 0 ,f o o 0_ Lar.)) n �J 0 � E N v - O o_ o_ M LD 0 30 rD < ro rD I� s !.. 71/ .':,ti:,-. I ,,.,'''' 7\ 1,,,,-„zitt4,..,..., 4,:"•'-' 00 ', ti � O 1/ PI, t,. 00 �+ �T d r xxr44 m, ,.. -11 1-' .ii„iiiiii7 OD L :, te ; °� d 77 CO co o t 3 0 Co O a N ��».. w N A N N In N CD N cn N co crtz ED rD va p) N ,< -''-'' , ' - : ' ' - ''. N o Dredged a coo co o D � -11 co C) D- 2.. °: Y�I N rs., N N ONJ t`. 1—, o O. 2 —. � C Dredged 0 o o' c 4 Qo t 0 NO m s N.n , co v r a s Ei O + ', g� aweM Channel Length(feet-approximate) i-, N (JJ A VI a) J p., F\-+ O O O O O O O O 40.N O O A Ui N NJ dII oo C N C 0 -' 0 (D Ui N 0 0 F- N O Q D o _ a) N 0- -0 o > O m lo 3 N) D 0K O) 0O 13 v N co 'a 3 3- m N Q v-" N - X y N O Q? W 3• v A O m O � l� co N to D I 2) 3 co n CO N r-r V ^ CD C' l 1 CO D O O tDJ p 7 U = 5' 3 co M fD o m rD cnO —1 I—, r cc -i• m- f� � � m� - N D O 1"f N' N O -p = Cp CO -C D) v Q N A N - p = 2 C13, C NJ ao N . N O y O. n O > 20 O N N O A (3 NJ O o w m N O co co N iil N N N N V co NJN NJ O O ? _,A -.44,* a 12 t z& . w , C co m , ' .- ----- ..-iliticL.1., ' ? ‘4,11,-,,":;'-:.:,,,,,,et4:-U 04 m �rxx�, op EN m U Tycr '# a.3 ..�;, --'' ±ji ___ 1_ ' £j ca U Y_ a. c_ t U E (4 � CD 2U t o cv ,13 as to c N v Ei_, O U cn m v 0 . 0 OQ 0 O - n x 0 0 N n M m crLi — I I 40 ._LL N .)-J C p U O 0 �. t'DU 4_, Q Q a) ' o E E N '-F m w co �� R .y ,,.� .r1 40 fr Li., . . - • .. ,.. ...'.--,, ' /7::)' :.'''. N ----;..,,,,,--":::::,., .(7., �N+ > .y C G U T i N N N C. QCT Co• N E a a. C U .m c O 0 O m E O •tp a N 0°-) m N =NM O O v cv (6• N SL L N m to S2 " NO O i� a 03• c W v) Q c -I O O N Cr) co m U v M u >. O O o O O O C.5 t N Ln O O W VT,) t!3 r-I 0 0 l� ,i0 N o c w 16. C CU x ,± o 0 V9 W W 0 0 N d' bA I.T. 4—, 4-1 V) 4-1 N C 4-i 4...r N C 0 V) cn 0 O 0 0 0 Q. U 4_, Q Q O E E N CL a. f'n to .ice CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction Purpose of the Clam Bay NRPA Management Plan. Development of the Clam Bay NRPA Management Plan Role of Pelican Bay Services Division 2.0 Clam Bay Location, Setting,And Historical Overview Maps, description of Pelican Bay and the estuary system Natural history of the system and pass Historical time line of the system Time line of Clam Bay NRPA establishment 1995 mangrove die-off and related causes Restored characteristics of Clam Bay 3.0 Resource Descriptions Soils Topography Climate Natural Communities Exotic Species Listed Species Other Wildlife Species Hydrology Water Quality Archaeological Resources Inlet Dynamics Recreational Use 4.0 Authorized Construction Activities List of permits and work undertaken to date 5.0 Management Goal and Objectives Management action/work required,performance criteria and monitoring, responsible entities,timeframe 1. Maintain and protect the native floral and faunal communities within the Clam Bay NRPA 2. Protect archaeological sites within the Clam Bay NRPA 3. Ensure recreational activities are environmentally compatible within the Clam Bay NRPA 4. Ensure the estuary has adequate tidal and freshwater flows to maintain ecological health within the Clam Bay NRPA 5. Monitor, maintain, and where possible and economically feasible, enhance water quality within the Clam Bay NRPA CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 1.0 Introduction Purpose of the Management Plan The purpose of this management plan will be to provide guidance and direction for the management of the Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA). This plan will form the basis by which future management decisions can be made by identifying the appropriate management techniques necessary to protect, preserve, maintain and monitor the natural resources and their uses within the Clam Bay NRPA. This plan, in addition to providing a brief historical perspective of activities undertaken within this system, will identify management goals and objectives; develop methods to achieve these goals and objectives; and develop implementation, assessment, and evaluation strategies that strive to balance resource protection with recreational use. While the 1998 Restoration and Management Plan focused on mangrove health and recovery, this plan will address all floral and faunal components of the NRPA, not just the mangroves. The Plan will draw from the 1998 Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan, input from multiple interested stakeholders, and the findings of 15 years of biological and hydrographic monitoring activities within the system, to outline goals and objectives for future management and maintenance of the ecosystems throughout Clam Bay. The Clam Bay NRPA Management Plan and any subsequent revisions shall be submitted to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) for approval. Once approved by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners and relevant regulatory agencies, this Plan will supersede all others and will serve as the primary guidance tool for future permitting and other management activities necessary to protect, preserve, maintain, and monitor resources within the system. Development of the Management Plan Turrell, Hall & Associates served as the principal consultant for the management plan. This consultant firm has a long history of work in the Clam Bay NRPA and was responsible for the implementation the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan(1998)that resulted in the successful restoration of Clam Bay's mangrove forest. The coastal engineering firm of Humiston& Moore, Inc. provided input and monitoring data for the 2014 Management Plan relative to Clam Pass and the dredging activities and templates. The PBSD Clam Bay Committee consists of members of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board,which is an advisory board to Collier County's Board of Commissioners, met regularly in 2013 and 2014 and provided input and direction to the consultants. Additional regular input was provided by representatives of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida; the Mangrove Action Group; and the local Calusa Group of the Sierra Club. All Committee and Board meetings were properly noticed, open to the public, and allowed audience participation. 1 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Input was also solicited via notices to area businesses, government officials and employees, condominium associations, and individuals who regularly use Clam Bay. These representatives were invited to participate in two meetings held in the spring of 2013. They were also notified in , 2014 that a draft of the management plan was available on the PBSD's website and they were invited to send their comments to the PBSD's office. (A list of these area people/organizations is on p. .) Pelican Bav Services Division Turrell, Hall &Associates Chairman Tim Hall—Project Manager 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 302 3584 Exchange Ave Naples,FL 34108 Naples,Fl 34104 (239) 597-1749 (239) 643-0166 Humiston&Moore Engineers Brett Moore—Project Manager Mohammed Dabees—Project Engineer 5679 Strand Court Naples, FL 34110 (239) 594-2021 2 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Role of the Pelican Bay Services Division In order for the management and maintenance of the Clam Bay NRPA to be successful, coordination between a myriad of local, state, and federal agencies and concerned citizen's groups is required. The Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD)has undertaken that role for most of the past fifteen years. The PBSD is a dependent special district known as the Pelican Bay Municipal Services Taxing and Benefit Unit. It was formed pursuant to Chapter 125 of the Florida Statutes and was formally enabled by the Collier County Commission pursuant to Ordinance numbers 90-111 and 91-22. These ordinances were replaced in 2002 by Ordinance 2002-27 which further clarified the basis and role of the MSTBU and PBSD Board. This MSTBU was created to, among other things,provide for the maintenance of conservation and preserve areas within Pelican Bay. This responsibility was undertaken diligently from 1998 to 2009 and resulted in the implementation of the previous 1998 Management Plan and the recovery of the mangrove die-off areas. Per action by the Collier County commissioners, the responsibility for many of the monitoring and maintenance activities associated with the Clam Bay was given to the Collier County's Coastal Zone Management Department from 2009 to 2012. In 2013, the Collier County BCC returned responsibility for the monitoring and maintenance of the system to PBSD via Ordinances 2013-19 and 2013-61. It is under the PBSD's direction that this current management plan has been written. While the MSTBU is a dependent special taxing and benefit district,the PBSD is an arm of Collier County government and makes recommendations to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC). The PBSD implements its defined responsibilities within the Pelican Bay community; sets its own budget and agenda; and regularly submits them to the BCC for approval. The BCC has regularly approved the Clam Bay management activities and authorized the development of this Clam Bay NRPA Management Plan. The PBSD's effective working relationship with the BCC is expected to continue as the PBSD serves as the official manager of the 2014 Management Plan which is consistent with Ordinances 90-111, 2002-27, 2013-19, and 2013-61 of Collier County. The PBSD will direct this Management Plan and have the responsibility for its implementation and operation over time. As such, the PBSD will plan and implement defined management activities with BCC approval whose purpose will be to protect, maintain and monitor the natural communities and ecological integrity of the Clam Bay NRPA. The PBSD has several attributes which already make it a logical guiding force in the management and maintenance of Clam Bay. The PBSD: • Is located within the Clam Bay drainage basin; • Has an advisory board made up of residential, and business members within Pelican Bay; • Garners fiscal support collected from local special assessments (non ad valorem taxes); 3 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 • Is accessible by the public due to its local governing board and advertised public monthly meetings; • Has demonstrated a long-term commitment to the Clam Bay NRPA and a successful track record regarding its preservation, restoration and maintenance over the past fifteen years. These attributes give PBSD the knowledge and expertise in matters of local concern and, in particular, the problems, opportunities and interests of local residents as they relate to the Clam Bay ecosystem. Its relationship to the BCC gives it an additional level of access to technical expertise and oversight that will be necessary to assure that the Management Plan, as contemplated in this document, is fully implemented in the field. As part of its responsibilities, the PBSD will assemble and distribute various technical reports and assessments as required under the Management Plan, as well as coordinate with the other public and private groups interested in Clam Bay. The PBSD is organized for and designed to maintain both its knowledge of the Clam Bay resources and to generate public support for the same. PBSD will insure that the general public, residents in Pelican Bay, PBSD consultants, and representatives from government agencies with jurisdiction over Clam Bay each have on-going involvement and input into the Management Plan as appropriate. 4 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 2.0 Overview of the Clam Bay NRPA The Clam Bay NRPA is a 570-acre estuarine system consisting of sandy beaches, shallow bays and creeks, seagrass beds, mangrove forests, and Clam Pass on the west coast of Collier County in southwest Florida. The Clam Bay system is part of the Cocohatchee-Gordon River Transition, referred to by Collier County Department of Natural Resources as Coastal Zone II. It is one of the few remaining estuarine systems in the Cocohatchee-Gordon River Drainage System. Historically, Clam Bay was tidally connected to the Gulf of Mexico via Wiggins pass to the north, Doctor's Pass to the south, and centrally located Clam Pass (Collier County, 1994, Tropical Biolndustries, 1978). These connections were eventually severed with the development of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Seagate Drive in the 1950s. Today,the system includes three primary bays; Outer Clam Bay(southernmost), Inner Clam Bay (central), and Upper Clam Bay (northernmost), connected by a series of tidal creeks and connected to the Gulf of Mexico by Clam Pass. The community of Pelican Bay abuts the northern and eastern edges of the system, while the Seagate and Naples Cay communities abut the southern portion of the system. This s stem is an im I ortant natural and recreational resource for local residents and visitors. The Clam Bay system is bounded on the north by Vanderbilt Beach Road and the Bay Colony portion of the Pelican Bay development, to the south by Seagate Drive, and the Seagate and Naples Cay developments, to the east by the Pelican Bay development and to the west by the Gulf of Mexico and the Strand enclave of the Pelican Bay development. Pelican Bay is predominately a residential community consisting of private single-family homes, villas, and both high and low-rise condominium units. The community also includes a 27-hole golf course, common areas with meeting rooms, tennis courts, beach park facilities, emergency services facilities, and commercial areas with shopping and hotels. The 2,104-acre Planned Unit Development (PUD) was approved in 1977 as a partnership between Collier Enterprises and Westinghouse Communities. It was one of the first developments in Florida required to save fragile coastal wetlands and associated ecosystems (Urban Land Institute, 1981). The development of Pelican Bay had a limited impact on the wetlands themselves (approximately 94 acres in total with about 78 of those acres located in the northwestern corner of the property) leaving the mangrove forest intact and preserved around the bays. As mitigation for these wetland impacts, the 570 acre preserve area, including the 35 acre beach park, was donated to Collier County and eventually became the NRPA which is in place today. Development of Pelican Bay required a stormwater management system designed to spread runoff along the eastern edge of the Clam Bay estuary (Collier County Report 1996). A four to six foot high and 2 Y2 mile long berm separates the developed portion of Pelican Bay from the estuary lying to the west of the development, but numerous culverts through the berm discharge water to a swale system along the eastern perimeter of Clam Bay. The eastern edge of Pelican Bay is about 12-14 feet above sea level at US 41, sloping in an east-west direction to about 2 feet 5 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT Pelican Bay ServPLANices Di(DRAFT)vision March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 near the berm. Six drainage basins operate on a gravity system to slowly move surface water into the receiving area of Clam Bay. Naples Cay is a high rise development consisting of 8 multi-storycondominium buildings. The community also includes pools, tennis courts, approximately 33 acres of park and preserve areas, and two canoe and kayak launching piers. The first building started in Naples Cay in the late 1970's and the last was completed in 2002. Stormwater management is accomplished through several internal detention areas before water flows into Outer Clam Bay. The Seagate community is composed of single family residences. The community was first laid out in the 1950's and still has a few undeveloped lots. Because development of this community occurred so early, there is. no community-wide stormwater management system in place. Seagate is the only community adjacent to the Clam Bay NRPA that is allowed under the County Manatee Protection Plan to have motorized vessels and the associated boat docks. Clam Bay was designated a Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) by Collier County in 1995 (See below for more details on the NRPA history). The purpose of the NRPA designation is to protect endangered or potentially endangered species and to identify large connected intact and relatively unfragmented habitats, which may be important for these listed species (Collier County Growth Management Plan, Future Land Use Element). 5 , to �` x .�'• 4 xeR,p: ° n, s$ r 3 k" r R * 1° % r . » . d'.1,41-400: +� ? ys ti44 -.++ ,,rte '#r *'�. 4. f e ,10 ;t j;v, Y, �# ' eV*,}t1'f �4:Y'. w a., a .< Y * t 1,1"a : ,l, .,,,,.„ v ry 4.. t�.'.xs!Q'k' 4 »•.,"-'s3 `y r r €. ,. mai io .,- ti,:: ` " s� r ret 1 :71i „ A r 1 a %`f� r , s. ' -i '' .,.�, '� tea. ^` '' ti1F4 1 „,41 OUTER ottrie w ` # ” kot CLAM 447% PER C..v. CLA'.' BAY �k+uM ' 1 FASB s 6 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Clam Bay NRPA Vital Statistics Total acres: Approx. 570 acres Beaches: Approx. 1.5 miles Beach Park: Approx. 35 acres Mangrove: Approx. 420 acres Open Water: Approx. 115 acres Latitude and Longitude of Pass: N 26° 13' 11", W 81°49' 01" Section, Township, Range: Sec. 32 & 33, Twp 48S, Rng 25E, & Sec. 4, 5, 8, &9, Twp 49S, Rng 25E Water Body Identification(WBID) 3278Q1 Clam Pass is a small, marginally stable inlet that has migrated north and south along the shore over the years. Prior to dredging, average water depths of Clam Pass were -2.5' to -1.0', and its width ranged from 30-50' (Collier County, 1994). The Pass remains the primary source of tidal exchange for the Clam Bay system, but it is restricted by sediment deposits just inside the pass and in the long meandering tidal creeks surrounded by mangrove forests. 7 CLAM BAYNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 ' , 4. *•: t * Vi►+ ie 'lb .q,, . ♦ ` S� ,t ,h '44f.7,-;.`,...):,1„..„1„......4 f � f: y 41., k'.4 T,,, i. Ir....4,040.4* . ,f,pf t ,t,.\% ,,, ., r„ *; F , tai y . D. i .y ' " e.i l . Alin ),,, z en a aF c��M `_ '' '^ - r Moto �A4Y ',.+, # r ,-'� 't ." $r .Fo.. (,,,,t,... --, , ,.., t .0.)titt'"'*tkOkyi-#"4 ' + 7 ,` ' t •y ::',"*. „hiz4v,44,,,..,,:,-......u.,..,.1 Lt i k - 1 ; . , ,,,--:— sor-,. ..., . ., .., -. 13,.., railew, ;t .,. 1 .,''.'.1.':.i.' '.. #,,:,,,*it .' . ' ...t....31041. moi„ �, a'. •L 4 x� t r ., _ - fir , <... \"' # S i44 _.... ...... tE t,.,1014,- .1'". . x 4a.+...-e—...L S. ` .". Ye.A%Yr Approximate extent of Clam Bay NRPA boundary. 8 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Natural History Prior to development, the entire coastline of south Florida would have resembled the Clam Bay ecosystem with meandering mangrove lined waterways buffering sandy barrier islands and natural terrestrial communities. Unique within the heavily developed coastal community of Collier County, the Clam Bay estuarine system is a valuable resource for wildlife (particularly juvenile marine species and birds) as well as residents and visitors to the area who enjoy the recreational opportunities the system offers such as photography, kayaking, fishing, walking, swimming,bird watching, and beach going. The system is a mixture of mangrove-lined tidal creeks, mangrove forests, shallow bays and tidal passes, seagrass beds, tidal flats, sandy beaches and brackish interior wetlands. It consists of approximately 420 acres of mangroves and some 115 acres of shallow, open water bays, as well as a 35 acre beachfront parcel (Clam Pass Beach Park) and approximately 1.5 miles of sandy beach. A man-made water management berm now divides natural and developed portions where historically mangrove forest would have transitioned gradually into the mesic coastal hammocks and upland pine scrubs that made up the now developed portions of the Pelican Bay community. A brief overview of these important habitat types, their key characteristics and value is provided in the Resource Description Section(Section 3.0)of this Plan. Historical Overview Historically, Clam Pass was a small part of a large system of relatively shallow waterways and interconnecting wetland communities extending from Lee County to Doctor's Pass. Anecdotal evidence suggests that small boating activities took place within many of these interconnected areas. During the 1950's this system was isolated from adjacent mangrove lined creeks and bays by the construction of Seagate Drive to the south and the construction of Vanderbilt Beach Road to the north. The practical effect was to leave Clam Pass as Clam Bay's only connection to the Gulf. The Clam Pass opening has moved over its lifetime up and down the shoreline, influenced by major storm events and by man's alteration of the tidal prism and drainage basin that feeds the Pass. A detailed discussion of the Pass, as well as aerial photographs of the Pass over time, is provided in Section 3.0 of this Plan. To properly understand and successfully implement proposed management objectives, actions and events which have lead to the current situation in Clam Bay should be described. The following time lines are intended as background information and as a factual recount based on anecdotal evidence,press reports,published and unpublished reports. 9 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Time Line of important events within the Clam Bay System 1920 A dirt road is built by Forest Walker running from the north-east to south portion of Pelican Bay, a forerunner of US 41. 1950 Clam Bay ecosystem is part of a connected system of barrier islands, mangrove forest, passes and waterways. The orientation of the beaches and passes would have changed seasonally and with storms. 1952 Vanderbilt Beach Road is constructed, eventually severing connection with the Wiggins Pass system to the north. 1958 Seagate Drive is constructed as the Parkshore community is developed. Flow into and out of Venetian Bay to the south is severed. Vanderbilt Lagoon Outer Clam Bay Upper Clam Bay r-411L. • Venetian Bay Circa 1960 Aerial Photograph Circa 1952 Aerial Photograph 1972 Tri-County Engineering produces reports: • An Ecological Study of the Clam Pass Complex is published by Humm& Rehm • Hydrographic Investigation of the Clam Bay System Coral Ridge-Collier Properties, Inc. (a partnership between Westinghouse and Collier Properties) acquired the property and initiated development of Pelican Bay. 10 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 1974 Pelican Bay Improvement District is formed to manage common property in Pelican Bay and provide for long term sustainable infrastructure. 1976 Three, bi-directional 24-inch culverts are placed under Seagate Drive to provide hydrologic connection to Venetian Bay. Report"Environmental Assessment for Development Approval" is prepared for Pelican Bay. Clam Pass closed and was mechanically dredged by dragline to re-open the entrance; no records of quantities or dredge limits are available. 1977 Pelican Bay Planned Unit Development is approved, and construction commences. 1977-1979 Gee & Jensen Hydrographic Engineers conduct a series of tidal studies within the system and distribute "A hydrographic study of Clam Bay system" in 1978. 1978 Tropical Bio-Industries produce a report: Carbon Flows in portions of the Clam Pass estuarine system. Ecological assessment work by Tropical Bio-Industries for permitting of the north-west fill area, notes a small area of stressed and dead mangroves close to Upper Clam Bay. 1979 Environmental Assessment of the northwest fill area is distributed. Tropical Bio-Industries produce biological reports: • A comparative study of the water and carbon flows of Upper Clam Bay • Invertebrate Population Studies in the vicinity of Upper Clam Bay 1981 Clam Pass closed and was mechanically dredged by dragline to re-open the entrance; no records of quantities or dredge limits are available. WCI, the developers of Pelican Bay, transferred title to Clam Bay to Collier County with the stipulation that Clam Bay shall remain a conservation/preservation area in perpetuity. 1982 WCI deeded Clam Pass Park and Clam Bay to Collier County and in accordance with the Pelican Bay PUD, required the County to seek approval of WCI or its successors for any modifications to Clam Bay. 11 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 1983 Tropical Bio-Industries produce biological reports: • Fish populations of tidal ponds west of Upper Clam Bay • Populations of Melampus coffeus (Coffee bean snail) and Cerithidea scalariformis (Ladder hornsnail)west of Upper Clam Bay 1986 Collier County constructs a 2,900'boardwalk to provide access to the county park, south of Clam Pass. 1988 Clam Pass closes twice, first in the spring and again in the late fall after Tropical Storm Keith (November 23, 1988). 1989 Small areas of stressed and dying mangroves are noted by residents in the basin west of Upper Clam Bay and east of The Strand in Bay Colony. A Department of Natural Resources (DNR) interdepartmental memo highlights cause of the stress as "the lack of adequate water circulation resulting from the closure of Clam Pass". First emergency dredging permit received from DNR to re-open clogged Clam Pass, following memo by David Crewz to the DNR highlighting problems and danger if the Pass was not re- opened. Clam Pass was mechanically dredged to re-open. Approximately 700 cubic yards of material were removed from the mouth of the inlet and the south bend of the channel. Material was placed south of the Pass. Multiple closures of the inlet occurred during the construction process. 1990 Pelican Bay Improvement District becomes a dependent district of Collier County called the Pelican Bay Services Division. 1992 The area of dead mangroves is reported at 7 acres. 1994 20 acres of mangroves are reported dead. 1995 Clam Bay is approved by the Board of County Commissioners as Collier County's first Natural Resource Protection Area(NRPA). 12 CLAM BA YNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Clam Pass closes following a winter storm event. Emergency dredging permit issued allowing opening of the Pass, but no work farther back than 600 feet. Mechanical dredging is undertaken removing approximately 5,000 cubic yards of material from the entrance of the pass. 1996 Clam Pass closes following a winter storm event. Permits to open Clam Pass received from DEP and USACE. Mechanical dredging event carried out at the entrance of the Pass. In summer and fall blasting and hand excavation were permitted and completed in 1997. Mangrove die-off area estimated at 50 acres. 1997 Clam Pass, on the verge of closing following a winter storm event is mechanically dredged again under modification to 1996 Permits. Interior portions of the flood shoal were dredged to station 6+10. 1998 Clam Pass was on the verge of closing again following a winter storm event. A mechanical maintenance dredging event was carried out under modification to 1996 Permits. Interior portions of the flood shoal were dredged to station 6+10. Ten year permits received from FDEP and USACE for dredging Clam Pass and the interior channels. Included adjustments to the Seagate culverts and installation of hand dug channels throughout the system. Associated monitoring work and storm and freshwater studies were required. 1999 Dredging work associated with the CBRMP was implemented (Mgmt by PBSD) in the spring by Ludlum Construction Company. Hydraulic dredging of Cuts 1, 2, 3, and 4 were carried out. A 30 foot entrance cut was dredged. One way flap valves installed on Seagate culverts to allow flow from south to north. Staff at The Conservancy of Southwest Florida commences a 3-5 year study of mangroves, surface water level and elevation within the mangrove die-off area. 13 CLAM BA YNRPA MANAGEMENT AN Pelican Bay ServPLices D(DRAFT) ivision March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Ellicott Series 370HP Pum,ing Sand out of Clam Pass(1999) a.,�.. , r 1 e:. .l R� a • 2000 Hurricane Gordon impacts the area with no inlet closure. 2002 Hydraulic maintenance dredging of Clam Pass flood shoals between stations 3+10 and 18+00 (Mgmt by PBSD) completed to improve tidal circulation. The entrance of the pass was not dredged during this event. Flap valves on Seagate culverts removed due to insufficient head differential causing them to act as plugs instead of valves. Canoe trail markers permitted and installed throughout Clam Bay system. 2004 Hurricane Charley passes approximately 30 miles west of Clam Pass. A lot of sand was redistributed but the Pass did not close. Extensive limb and leaf loss was documented within the mangrove forest. 2005 Hurricane Wilma comes ashore about 30 miles south of Clam Pass. More limb and leaf loss is noted. Pass did not close. 14 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 144 Hurricane damaged mangroves along bay 2005 Same mangroves along bay 2007 2007 Hydraulic maintenance dredging of Pass and entrance channel was conducted between Stations 0+00 and 18+00. The entrance of the Pass was dredged at 80 foot width. (Mgmt by Collier County Coastal Zone Management Dept.). 2008 Tropical Storm Fay comes ashore about 30 miles south of Clam Pass. The area received over 10 inches of rainfall. Pass not affected. 2009 1998 FDEP and USACE permits for maintenance of the Pass expired after 1-year extensions. 2010 Permits issued to continue maintenance of hand-dug flushing channels throughout the system. 2011 White mangrove die-off was observed in central portion of the system and found to be caused by a bark beetle infestation of trees that had suffered cold temperature stress. Benthic Habitat Assessment study completed within the Clam Bay NRPA by the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. Study provides comprehensive mapping of benthic habitat compositions and distribution throughout the Clam Bay NRPA. 2012 Canoe trail markers and informational signage installed throughout Clam Bay. The mouth of Clam Pass moves to the north near the Pelican Bay Beach Store. The northern shoreline of the Pass is temporarily reinforced with the installation of concrete barriers. Impacts from tropical storms Debby and Isaac, along with numerous winter storm fronts caused the closure of the Pass. 15 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 2013 A single event mechanical dredge is carried out in March under DEP and ACOE permits with an entrance cut of 45 feet. Beach compatible material is placed north and south of the pass above the mean high water line. Development of a new Management Plan is initiated through stakeholder input and multiple public meetings. Time Line specific to the establishment of the Clam Bay NRPA 1976 Collier County Ord. 76-30 zoned coastal areas environmentally sensitive lands as ST(Sensitive Treatment) 1977 Approval of the Pelican Bay PUD (Ord. 77-18)by Collier County. The PUD identified 98 acres of coastal mangrove wetlands to be filled in for development while preserving 570 acres of ST lands as the Pelican Bay Conservation Area. (35 acres in the south and 5 acres in the north would become parks providing public beach access). 1981-82 Department of Army Permit(79K-0282) authorized the fill of the 78 acres of coastal wetlands(76 acres for residential development and 2 acres for public parking area). It required 570 acres including Upper, Inner, and Outer Clam Bays, and their adjacent wetlands to be conveyed to Collier County and to remain a conservation/preservation area in perpetuity for the use of the public. It also prohibited dredging Clam Pass except to keep it open to the Gulf of Mexico. 1988 The Pelican Bay Conservation Area (570 acres)was approved and recorded as FL-64P by Congress and became part of the Federal Coastal Barrier Resources System(CBRS). 1995 The Collier County Board of County Commissioners approved the County Natural Resources Department's recommendation to establish the County's first Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA); stipulating that that it would have the same boundaries as the Pelican Bay Conservation Area within the Pelican Bay PUD. The Collier County Manatee Protection Plan is approved. It contains the recommendation to establish an"Idle Speed/No Wake" zone throughout the Clam Bay/Clam Pass System. 1996 Collier County Ordinance 96-16: "The Clam Bay System Water Safety and Vessel Control Ordinance" is approved. It establishes that the Clam Bay System is an "Idle Speed/ No Wake" zone. 16 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 1998 The Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan(CBRMP) is developed, implemented, and managed by the PBSD and their consultants. FL Admin. Court Case No. 98-0324GM provided an interpretation that certain elements of the Collier County Growth Management Plan(Conservation and Coastal Management Element)require unequivocal protection of habitats within NRPAs which support existing and potential uses by wildlife. 2008 Public Law 110-419 was adopted identifying the Coastal Barrier Resource System, Clam Pass Unit, FL-64P to be entirely located within the existing boundaries of the Clam Bay NRPA. 2013 Work begins on new Clam Bay NRPA Management Plan under PBSD direction. 17 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 3.0 Resource Description and Assessment SOILS Based on the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) "Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida" (NRCS, 1998) there are 2 different soil types (soil map units) present within the NRPA boundary. It is important to understand that where the soil survey shows mapping units named for soil series, the units represent the dominant undisturbed soils in that landscape that existed predevelopment. The unit descriptions do not recognize or appropriately interpret the drastically disturbed nature of urban landscapes created after the soil survey was completed. t404 x POOP -40 +KAP v 4& Durbin and Wulfert mucks, frequently flooded (Map Unit #40), covers approximately 66% of the NRPA. These level,very poorly drained soils are most often found in association with tidal mangrove swamps. Mapped areas can consist entirely of either Durbin or Wulfert or any combination of the two soils. Individual areas are elongated and irregular in shape and range from 50 to 1000 acres. The slope is 0 to 1 percent. The permeability of the Durbin soil is rapid and the available water capacity is high. The permeability of the Wulfert soil is rapid and the available water capacity is moderate. The water table fluctuates with the tide and is within 12 inches of the surface most of the year. The soil is subject to tidal flooding. The natural vegetation within these areas consists of red, white and black mangroves. Canaveral-Beaches Complex (Map Unit #42) covers approximately 9% of the NRPA. This map unit consists of the nearly level, moderately well drained Canaveral soil on low ridges and beaches. Individual areas are elongated and irregular in shape and range from 20 to 300 acres. The slope is 0 to 2 percent. Typically, beaches consist of sand mixed with shell fragments and shells and are subject to frequent wave action. The permeability of the Canaveral soil is rapid to very rapid. The available water capacity is very low. In most years, the seasonal high water table is at a depth of between 18 to 40 inches for 1 to 4 months. This soil is subject to tidal flooding under severe weather 18 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 conditions. Natural vegetation consists of sea oats, sea grape, cabbage palm, and salt grasses. They are commonly invaded by exotics such as Australian pine and Brazilian pepper. TOPOGRAPHY Topography is shown below using a Light Detecting and Ranging map (LIDAR) obtained from Collier County. The elevations within the NRPA boundary range from +7.0 to -9.0 NAVD88. The surrounding lands are generally higher than the NRPA and generate the freshwater flows into the preserve. -, j..._.\\:„ -4, ---c. i S` y, 3 , � } .. 4 6t 7 }, . 1 ) .tY.� �� 1. e 1 ,.+ i c CI1 w*+ k }T' i 4- k 19 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 CLIMATE Clam Bay's climate falls within the USDA subtropical classification. There are essentially two seasons experienced. The wet season occurs in the summer, and the dry season occurs in the winter. Typical rainfall and temperature data are provided in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. In the summer the center of the trade winds shift north and moisture-laden breezes blow from the east or south-east. In winter the trade winds shift southward and the winds are less constant. Weather is then more influenced by fronts advancing from the northwest. This brings cooler conditions, although temperatures rarely reach freezing, due to the fact that they are being moderated by the surrounding waters. Cold fronts are typically preceded by winds from the southwest, which clock to the west then northwest as the front passes, with strong winds of 20-25 knots and cooler air. In general terms,winds are predominantly southeast during the summer and northeast during the winter. Historical meteorology for Clam Bay is based on data collected for 30 years (from 1981 to 2010) from the Naples Municipal Airport by the Florida Climate Center (NOAA & FSU). The following charts present meteorological statistics for temperature and precipitation. 1981-2010 TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION NORMALS GRAPH 110.0 100.0 90.0 *, r 80.0 • ,r.# ?0.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Jan Liar IA1ay Jul Sep Nov I } O Precip(in) 0 Min Tn'p(`F) 0 Avg Trip CFI 0 Max Ten() (`F) Table 4.1 20 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Temperature The monthly average temperatures range from 64.5°F to 83.2°F. The lowest monthly minimum temperature is 54.2°F while the highest monthly maximum temperature is 91.2°F. The data reflect a humid subtropical climate with a narrow fluctuation in air temperature. Precipitation Average annual rainfall for the Naples Municipal Airport NOAA station is documented at 51.89 inches. The data in the table indicates the highest rainfall occurs during the summer months of June, July,August, and September. 1981-2010 TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION NORMALS CHART I 0 Precip(in) 0 Min Tmp(°F) 3 0 Avg Tmp(CF) 0'Max Tmp(T) January 1.85 54.2 64.5 74.7 February 2.10 56.8 66.9 76.9 March 2.38 60.0 70 0 79.9 April 2.36 63.4 73.3 83.2 May 3.16 68.5 78.2 87.8 June 8.82 73.9 81 9 89.9 July 7.27 74.9 83.1 91 2 August 8.58 75.3 83 2 91.0 September 7.69 74.8 82 4 89.9 October 4 1 70 0 78.5 86 9 November 2.04 62 9 72 1 81 2 December 1,45 57 0 66 8 76.6 Table 4.2 21 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Winds Winds are predominantly easterly throughout the year, but with a tendency to become northeasterly from October to April and southeasterly from May to September. Wind speeds, not including storm events are, on average, below 10 knots. During the winter months when fronts move through, for a day or two at a time,winds out of the northwest to northeast may increase to about 25 knots. Sea breeze As the land surface around Naples and Clam Bay warms, the air above is heated. The warm air is less dense and tends to rise creating a lower air pressure over the land than the water. The cooler air over the water then flows inland creating a sea breeze. In the evening the reverse occurs and the cooler air over the land will flow back toward the water creating a land breeze. The incoming sea breeze acts as a lifting mechanism, resulting in the warmer air rising up to higher altitudes. This creates cumulus clouds that begin to build which leads to the development of afternoon showers and thunderstorms in the area. Storms Naples and Clam Bay specifically are within the Atlantic Tropical Cyclone basin. This basin includes much of the North Atlantic, Caribbean Sea, and the Gulf of Mexico. On average, six (6) to eight (8) tropical storms form within this basin each year. The hurricane season lasts from June 1st to December 1st. The formation of these storms and possible intensification into mature hurricanes takes place over warm tropical and subtropical waters. Eventual dissipation or sattir-Simpson Hurricane Scale modification, averaging seven (7) to eight (8) days later, typically Category Wind speed Storm surge occurs over the colder waters of the North Atlantic or when the mph ft) storms move over land and away from the sustaining marine (kms) environment. pow 131-155 13-48 Due to the destructive nature of these storms, landfall can result in (210-248) $` significant damage to upland development and facilities from storm 111-130 9-12 Three surge, waves, and wind. A good example of this would be (17a-2o9) (2.7-3.7) Two 9s-110 s-e Hurricane Wilma which formed in 2005. (154-177) (1.8-2.4) 74-95 4-5 A tropical storm is defined by maximum sustained winds from 35- one (119-153) (1.2-1.5) 64 knots (40-74 mph). A hurricane has maximum sustained winds Additional classifications that exceed 64 knots (74 mph). Hurricanes are classified into Teal `�� 0,1 different categories according to the Saffir-Simpson scale. sw" ° Hurricanes can also spawn severe weather such as tornadoes as they move inland. The table below lists the number of tropical storms and hurricanes that passed through or near Naples over the past 20 seasons including 1992 through 2012 as reported 22 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center and Hurricane City (www.hurricanecity.com). Analysis of the available information indicates that Naples, on average, is brushed or hit by a tropical storm or hurricane once every 2.71 years and is directly hit once every 7.05 years. Table 4.4 Number of Named Storms Passing through or near Naples Year #of Storms Names Strength closest to Naples 1992 1 Andrew Hurricane Cat.3 1993 0 1994 1 Gordon Tropical Storm 1995 1 Jerry Tropical Storm 1996 0 1997 0 1998 1 Mitch Tropical Storm 1999 1 Harvey Tropical Storm 2000 1 Gordon Tropical Storm 2001 0 2002 0 2003 0 2004 1 Charley Hurricane Cat. 3 2005 1 Wilma Hurricane Cat.2 2006 0 2007 0 2008 1 Fay Tropical Storm 2009 0 2010 0 2011 0 2012 0 2013 0 Hurricane Wilma image 11f1 /Cs x I IA 1' $$$ t 'r t., A 23 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 NATURAL COMMUNITIES In this Section, a natural community refers to the mix of plant and animal species that form the natural basis of the Clam Bay NRPA. A combination of factors including geology, climate, hydrology, soils, and anthropogenic influences determines the specific types of plants found in any given area. These plants are a major factor in what type of animal species that may be present. The Florida Department of Transportation's Land Use, Cover, and Forms Classification System(FLUCFCS 1999)has been used to identify the plant communities found within the Clam Bay NRPA. FLUCFCS Community Description Upland or % of Clam Bay Code Wetland NRPA 181 Swimming Beach Upland 5.95 186 Community Recreation Facilities Upland 0.40 322 Coastal Scrub Upland 3.98 428 Cabbage Palm Hammock Upland 0.45 540 Bays (with and without direct Wetland 23.16 connection to Gulf or Ocean) 612 Mangrove Swamp Wetland 64.60 642 Saltwater Marsh Wetland 0.04 651 Tidal Flat Wetland 1.44 911 Seagrasses** Wetland 0.84** ** included in the Bays(541)category Several other components of the Clam Bay NRPA ecosystem are also addressed below. These components include offshore hardbottom, oyster and other benthic faunal communities that are not specifically addressed in the FLUCFCS classification system. Additional historical information on the Clam Bay mangrove and seagrass habitats is included as appendices to the Plan. FLUCFCS Code 181 -Swimming Beach Beaches form when offshore sand deposits are moved landward by wave action usually during the spring and summer. Sand, which is stirred up as the wave breaks on the shore, drops out of suspension as the water moves up the beach face. Thus, the beach becomes gradually higher, wider, and steeper. In the wintertime, larger, higher energy waves associated with winter storms overflow the beach area and stir up the sand deposited earlier in the year. The sand is pulled off the beach as the wave recedes and is deposited in an offshore sand bar. If these two forces are in equilibrium, the beach area will be stable from year to year. However, naturally occurring factors such as storm events, littoral drift (lateral movement of sand because waves approach the beach at an angle), and offshore winds, upset this equilibrium and result in the ever shifting nature of the beach environment. Dunes form because of onshore wind action on beach sand. When wind speeds are sufficient, individual grains of sand start to roll and bounce along the surface. This windborne sand is transported 24 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 landward until the wind speed drops below that needed to move the sand. Coastal vegetation is critical for slowing wind speeds and causing sand to be deposited. Landward of the highest tides, pioneer or frontal zone sites are stabilized by sand trapping action of various rhizomatous grasses and low growing shrubs that are tolerant of salt spray. Only a few plant species can tolerate the stresses of a dune environment, particularly frontal dune sites. Foredune plants must be able to survive being buried by blowing sand, sand blasting, salt spray, salt water flooding, drought, heat, and low nutrient supply. Coastal plants colonizing the dunes are key players in trapping windblown sand and preventing coastal erosion as the first defense against heavy winds and surge of tropical storms. Many plant species that occur on dune areas have developed specific attributes to help them survive these harsh environments. These include high growth rates, dense root systems, low profiles, and high flower and seed production rates. Species common on the beaches olf the Clam Bay system include; Sea oats (Uniola paniculata), Seagrape(Coccoloba uvifera), and Railroad vine (Ipomoea pes-caprae). In addition to the 35-acre Clam Pass Beach Park, south of the pass, beach habitat also extends north all the way to Wiggins Pass. There is approximately 6,250 linear feet of shoreline north of Clam Pass to the south end of the Strand community and approximately 3,250 feet of shoreline south of the Pass to the north edge of the Naples Cay community. Shorebirds feed on marine invertebrates such as coquina clams and mole crabs at the water's edge and beaches are crucially important habitat for nesting sea turtles. This particular habitat has been monitored periodically in terms of width as part of the Collier County Beach renourishment program though no conclusive statements can be made about the floral or faunal details of the ecotone over the years. Large scale generalizations based on the annual aerial photographs can be made that the overall size, composition, and health of the habitat have remained relatively stable and, with the exception of the areas immediately adjacent to the Pass, are mostly unaffected by the status of the Pass. :,F41 il:terk4 ; 444,Itt, **' *4;;*' 't44),;i* it,at ;';;;;* 4 t L.4„,„; � � � -4.'4 . �, SFr � � � a 5 � SSM j €4 Beach habitat within NRPA Boundary 25 CLAM BA Y NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 FLUCFCS Code 322 -Coastal Scrub Landward of the frontal (Beach) zone area is the back dune zone (also often called the shrub or scrub zone), a portion of the dune that is more stable, has greater organic matter, and supports less salt tolerant grasses and shrubs as well as some trees. Many of the woody species found in coastal scrub are low growing and shrubby due to low nutrient and droughty conditions of sandy soils. High winds and salt spray often prune the terminal buds of the trees and shrubs growing on the dunes and result in salt-pruned, windswept canopies. Coastal scrub is represented by a conglomeration of coastal species generally found in a narrow band between the Mangrove forest and the beach areas. Species common on the beaches of the Clam Bay system include; Seagrape (Coccoloba uvifera), Cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), Buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus) and Spanish bayonet (Yucca aloifolia). This is an important habitat as it helps anchor the back dune sands and provides habitat for several listed plant and animal species including the gopher tortoise(Gopherus polyphemus). The primary management issues of concern in the coastal scrub are gopher tortoise habitat management and exotic vegetation control. { � pK.s `UF ,. s ar, 9 • tt 'P r ` ' :1'44;4 r " " „1 4�` , , . ,$ ° yrs, m •. TIP '.... -WI) i « *i ,£ z t sly .. ° F V *t.'; �, �,. t . r :,"i - .,,,it,, ''§'"ktt: "Tor,t's •..„ '' 14`.3 tik te Z.„ ttti,-,41W.' y, .w. ,,,,,i ,,,,,,,„„,,,,„ 0, ,,„ „,1),,,-, „. ( t''' ,t,, .Y.', ',", it,i*V I .''''' ' 4 .A.,,,, , , N.- '4? ':. ,. t t e( .1""tt i ",',A°1/;:t.,,t,if,t ,,,,:i"\;„'„ : :,'.;,,g.,..t." -,i , '•,,,:, 14,„,,,-.,t5Attts, , t '',,..,.!: t ,,. .,!",.7":" i.,,,t -t';' ' .t, `,- . s 'ta -Kt 0 i.P ' N,. f �yy++. „� ' u Y. 3` ` r ` i,� Y ` R *fi 441 t, e. « x � � < 26 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 °'- �' 15 "� -*p"'�. law. 'ar .4 ,� "- x`• "`.� .. z [ l''''*". w 4 ' H ' a {r a` ) ,yp arse' _ - ,� ,� .7.,,,,<:::?*.. a. 'S"�' c*,,,,,..4.„:-.;-, sn:, „, 1,,,,,,„.' ,44:*!..44. 1.54'J ifp>4, :4''.i.-4'A:'''' -,-.)vi;':-,..;,,S,,Itt. . .4(1. 4:::.,a4,4,4...„,.„ -, Avi„.....,-, .,-..;,-,r-.L.--,-,:, ,,,,, :21".'57-:.4. ''''''t fi `' 'r,". ' �r a, ' ,". a t,e"� s'�} Y x �- ''1' a aaa 3 Mete - ' , Scrub habitat within NRPA Boundary FLUCFCS Code 428-Cabbage Palm Hammock This forested zone is composed of the more protected dune vegetation farthest from the ocean. The Cabbage Palm. Hammock habitat is identified by the preponderance of cabbage palms (Sabal palmetto). It s generally found in pockets located between the mangrove forest and the coastal scrub or beach areas. Aside from the cabbage palms, sea grapes (Coccoloba uvifera), buttonwood, and several other hammock species such as wax myrtle and myrsine are common. A hammock is a habitat that is densely shaded by a canopy. of trees. Hammocks usually have a sparse groundcover that leaves the forest floor mostly open for anmals to travel through. Hammocks also provide a reprieve from the sun for animals and humans alike. In Clam Bay, this habitat is also susceptible to infestation by exotic vegetation such as Australian pine and Brazilian pepper which are addressed further on in this Section. The primary management issues for this habitat are exotic control and preventing destructive visitor access. ^ ye' s,: q t+.^r .�w:' ��y, a.. '+ e-.5w� Ae >. a ;-=; '�� x, -� °- J" t:"*s its a + 2F d 3 ` iN, NRPA Boundart� Palm habitat within 27 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 FLUCFCS Code 540—Bays (with and without connection to the Gulf) The Clam Bay NRPA contains the three larger bays associated with Clam Pass (Outer, Inner, and Upper) as well as the interconnecting shallow creeks and small open water areas. Second in extent of aerial coverage within the NRPA boundary, it is the bays and interconnections which serve as the life blood of the estuary. This open water habitat serves as the basis for many other communities. Seagrass beds, oyster bars, clam beds, and other benthic communities can all be supported to varying degrees with the open waters of the bays and interconnecting creeks. As outlined below, several of these communities are present within the Clam Bay NRPA and will be considered when deciding on management activities outlined within this Plan Multiple studies have indicated that the single most important thing that can be done to restore the health of the Clam Bay system is to improve the total tidal flushing capacity of the system (Tackney 1996; Lewis 1996; Wilson Miller, et al 1996; Turrell 1996.). The dredging conducted within the Pass and the interconnecting creeks, as well as the hand-dug flushing cuts, have been seen as the major contributing factors to the restoration of the mangrove forest community within the system (Turrell 2008; Humiston&Moore 2003). Tidal Pass Clam Pass is the only open water connection to the Gulf of Mexico for the Clam Bay NRPA. The exchange of seawater between Clam Bay and the Gulf is critical to the ability of the estuary to export organic matter, as well as to help regulate excess salt and freshwater. It also supplies oxygen rich water from the Gulf. In the absence of surface water circulation or tidal activity, estuarine habitats such as mangroves can slowly die due to deleterious changes in the sediment: 1) in the absence of oxygenated water, the sediments become anaerobic or anoxic, and 2) metabolic wastes and hydrogen sulfide accumulate in the anoxic sediment(CBRMP, 1998). Tides in the Gulf of Mexico are mixed, with the norm being two high tides and two low tides experienced per day and normal amplitude (range) of approximately 2 feet. The highest tides(springs) are experienced twice per lunar month at full and new moons when the gravitational pull on the earth's surface waters is greatest. Neap tides also occur twice per lunar month when the planetary (gravitational) influences of earth, moon and sun are perpendicular. 28 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 mil, a ►•"`rrrr�wiii • • Loe c,lam► ." 42w utu.+ur wwwww urs.1u.# w.ivaut W a4...T. .4.� . • •4 erefreMery,rCeirCecr.Yma a ry rl; ...a,.,,....— 8B8365688ilaar4,8 ' .6 pli$1!! _ 749 �' T r�R+�?NP lss#zA1�k DEMOMO■®■1oa■11R7Ck1■■100 ¢¢�SrW .,, �,�:.«aa rcassa:a�a $.174;160., ,.. c.. 44 0p@4, Z4'. 54•191 • Ma w 104.4, .. € COMM•, 4......................1..• CC _e x -11,, 0 ( AM.).*'s.'+ +'v')4401•Nbi:! 41C km Ce EE F`, ,er re G I.— • J ev etCO ° .A.A.M. .,,n.,.WJ_J_,.�JJ w_.,.,.a>.. 0 4 U T. i9 • `5u f ,ALL...t..../....1,..a ■ .., ,.. " 1.1- '..../ LJ t.— . ...© .� .-.-.:rte.-, ma�srm,rr. �c t, •`"` .:`r 8 8..„,..,,..._ 8 ,4 . Q 6 1133=0 3 YN'del 1'/011 29 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 It can be seen that the health of mangrove forests is directly related to the efficiency of the tidal pass. Clam Pass and its associated waterway is a very dynamic creek whose location has varied over time (Turrell 1995; Tackney 1996). Because of this, it is susceptible to outside events and can periodically close, such as has happened at least six times in the last 25 years. The following aerial photographs show how the Pass and its waterway have changed over the past 60 years. ' . !i - t 4 L. ,: ,.0,, , .•:„,,,...,,,,,,,„ r• ‘#, t 4-, , .. ,, . . , 'r � ,.. * 4. a, ti _ *. ,, 30 CLAM BA YNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 � i: I e -44 PASS 144444` v. •,4 0. � 1. 1 I � t� . CLAM '''''L'",� PASS 4q 1 2012 '. Tidal creeks are passageways for fish and marine invertebrates between the open waters of the Gulf and the protected embayments of Clam Bay. Manatees and turtles may also use the Pass. Scouring action of the fast flowing tide generally prevents colonization by seagrasses and other benthic plants and the substrate is typically sand and shell with the finer sediments carried in suspension and deposited just outside the mouth of the pass (the ebb shoal delta) or to the interior of the system on the incoming(flood)tide. Management concerns related to the bays and associated creeks include maintaining sufficient flow through them to accomplish flushing needs of the system, stabilization of the Pass without harming other components of the NRPA, and educating recreational users of the NRPA of the need to protect the shallow water habitats and the communities located therein. 31 CLAM BAY NRPA N DRA Pelican BayMANAGEMENT ServPLAices Di( visio March 4,201FT)n4 Ver.4.1 x�i t s s jit,'IV''4...,*-1'... �'� `-.4,!'.7.! i' �. a r to- " _ _*x. e.,:z. ', ° k �, ate,�`+ ' 4.4.000410. 1 ,3 *' R "''sem :: a. -,. 54 0 - ,.. � r. a , ,., :.,. .... � ..,..ate,.— Open T1'ater habitat within NRPA Boundary FLUCFCS Code 612—Mangrove Swamps (Forest) Mangroves are salt tolerant trees that grow in tidal areas of the tropics and are legally protected for their ecological value, with such functions as; • Providing habitat for marine, terrestrial and avian wildlife. • Protecting coastal areas from storm surges and coastal erosion. • Improving water quality by acting as a natural filter for land based freshwater run-off. • Forming the basis of a highly productive estuarine food chain which includes many commercially valuable species. • Enhancing the atmosphere by absorbing Carbon Dioxide and reducing greenhouse gasses. Approximately 65% of the Clam Bay NRPA is composed of the three most common mangrove species in Florida. Namely, red mangroves (Rhi:ophora mangle), black mangroves (Avicennia germinans), and white mangroves (L.aguncularia racemosa) make up the mangrove forests within the Clam Bay NRPA. All three species have special biological adaptations to cope with salt and unstable, mucky, low oxygen soils that result from the tidal, hence continually waterlogged, environment. The dominance of mangroves in tidal areas is a function of these adaptations and their abilityto out- compete other wetland plants. Tidal flushing allows nutrients to be distributed within the forest and provides for the transportation of dead leaves, twigs, etc. As this material decays, it becomes food for marine life. It is this mangrove detritus which is consumed by the many organisms at the base of the food chain and which in turn create the next level of the food chain necessary to support the fish populations that characterize the mangrove community. Special attention has been given to the mangrove communityin the past because of the die-off which occurred between 1991 and 1997 (though stress in the community was documented as far back as the late 1970's). The die-off affected black and red mangroves initially but eventually ended up encompassing some white mangroves as well. More details on the recent history of the mangrove management are provided in Appendix 1 included with this plan. 32 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,20141 Ver.4. Red Mangroves Red mangroves(Rhrzophora mangle) are recognized by their tangle of reddish looking prop roots, long cigar shaped seedlings and their large, pointed evergreen leaves. Red mangroves flower all year but reach maximum propagule production during the late spring and early summer months. They are typically the most seaward of the three species with the prop roots and vertical drop roots providing support, small pores on the trunks called lenticels allow oxygen exchange via air as the waterlogged soils become rapidly oxygen depleted. Salt is excluded from the plants cells through a process called ultra-filtration in the roots. The characteristic )ropagules germinate on the parent tree and drop and float for up to a year, finally becoming heavier at one end so that when encountering a suitable substrate they are ready to root upright. The mass of prop and drop roots forms extensive surface area under water for attachment of sessile, filter feeding marine species (such as sponges, tunicates and mollusks) as well as hiding places for juvenile fish. Birds, butterflies, insects and mammals find home and food within the canopy. . II .,*,, . - lat , , . r a ,�* K kap ;" • ;,,,,'1 '-*.,,s4 e.#. ` fit, gyp^ 4-..,,,,, Ri.,,*,:;,,, P #��a .. R,', . „, , , � � 3 .�it..-„:.-.„ .-' , ,. '� a Alt . ., Red Mangroves and Fropagules (inset) 33 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,201 Ver.4.1 Black Mangroves Black mangroves (Avicennia germinans) are typically found a little further inland and key identification features include the snorkel like pneumatophores which radiate upwards out of the soil from the base of the trunk, agrey-black rough bark and slightly pointed, oval leaves which are silvery with salt deposits on the undersides. The pneumatophores play an important role in oxygen exchange and unlike the red mangroves, which keeps salt out of body cells through filtration in the roots; the black mangrove excretes salt out of the backside of the leaves. They are also reliant on adequate tidal exchange but lack the supporting prop roots that typify the red mangrove. Small white flowers and lima bean shaped propagules are typically apparent during the late spring and early summer months. Black mangroves are cryptoviviparous as the embryo develops within the fruit while on the parent plant. When these propagules fall from the parent tree, they are able to float for a short period before rooting in the mucky soil. - ,-I .,,,':1(1 . , ° rtibi „, iir i lAtr-A ,,":-..r-- ';.- I.,,,,:r., - t .,1,1 1 *,' 'b. -1 r ' W i' IV* Cp i' ttiff:/' rit4 4rt°+' tr.,, , .,i,,_ ,,,,, ,,,..,30.,‘ , 1,•.1 4 "I i' [Alt' '' ''''' . „.* ' .'', A ,1 fl-1 l* '4441.' .4. . ::;,41,Z, .‘,7,,, .. .f.: g 51 s*** I t..ti .. .t . . -.' I*. .': 4 I Ant .)0?' ' i'4 I 'TS; )-4i1'' k k **c'*.*:%8t IA ' , )) f...„,,,t,-;,,m,%.6 . ,., !1`,. ..,--. .i. fi4, 1 A' ko- ins § j f {# Wt S * 14 17 ` ' IT,ITT,4,,4-4.'% ,,,44 a s" , _ y '° �'' '47 "r µ. J's .'° ,. ;r' /7 r. �;` L � ��,-fit �.. ,kit - ,- .,,-.. t s ,.y :s*. ' .Virtilita,N4ti,:' s : '.%44.„,* 4 , 1 ' `mss . ' 4., 4 . , ,,, , ti. t 'te ,�` xti ' _ Black Mangrove Pneu, ,, ,,,.,- matophores 34 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 White Mangroves White mangroves (Laguncularia racemosa) are the third mangrove species and are often found further inland than the other two species (although zonations described are typical they can frequently vary). Since they often occur in drier areas, white mangroves do not exhibit the adaptations to soft, anaerobic soil of the other species. The bark is characteristically grooved and furrowed and leaves are oval, mid- green and leathery with two small glands on the petiole at the base of each leaf. White mangroves also flower in the spring and early summer and the small seedlings have the shortest floating dispersal stage of the three species. White mangroves are semi-viviparous and germinate inside the fruit during the approximately five day dispersal,but not while attached to the parent plant ; ON''''‘'4,--1111!;1113 lor ' - A ' '''..il` ' i ;:-. ',,'':,, 'r k y ` '1 ' r. ? ' l*t„ if .4,,,,,, I -t a `-. ma',+ Sod j ne.e. Se ' pv�N `. 'r White Mangrove leaves and fruit 35 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 The mangrove communities are composed of both riverine (along the creeks) and basin forest components. The species composition of mangroves within these two community components is very distinctive. Riverine mangrove areas are almost exclusively composed of red mangroves within the Clam Bay NRPA while all three species, along with buttonwood are found in the forest component. Riverine (Creeks)Mangroves On the waterward edges of small islands and the tidal creeks, passes and estuarine waterways that make up the Clam Bay system, a fringe of red mangroves will be found growing up to 25 feet in height. This zone can be just one or two trees in depth or extend landward for some distance, depending on topography. The habitat provided by the prop roots of these red mangroves is of great importance to many fish and other aquatic organisms. Forests The majority of the Clam Bay mangrove habitat is low-lying basin forest where the dominant mangrove species varies between red, white, and black throughout the forest habitat. This forest community was the habitat affected by the mangrove die-off. The hand dug flushing channels were constructed throughout this community to increase the flushing capacity through tidal inundation. Associated plants within the mangrove habitat include Buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus), the succulent groundcovers Saltwort (Balls maritime) and. Glasswort (Salicornia cervicornis), (especially where a fallen tree provides a break in the canopy and light penetration to the forest floor) and, further inland and closer to freshwater sources, the Leather fern(Acrostrichum danaefolia). _ ,Ckti r » n, .<. 7 4 Art,WS10iN,144 f 5 � �'d�"CS,: • ,, ,.a, � � ��w �� . n 3?`�""s� y}J 5,.,: +T� -� .&,. x�. .,e m �....,1..v..v „v�'.4va..;.„:z,u .......,, ..a.a.. .-�., u.. . ,.,. .,., a. . ,a+aW ✓ Mangrove habitat within NRPA Boundary FLUCFCS Code 642 - Salt Marsh At the interface between forested mangrove areas and the water management berm are depressional areas that have become colonized by aquatic freshwater plants such as cattails (Typha latifolia), Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana), Bulrush (Scirpus californicus), Needlerush (Juncus romerianus) and Leather fern (Acrostichum danaeifolium). Wildlife such as otters (Lutra canadiensis), alligators 36 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 (Alligator mississippiensis), various turtles, and wading birds can be commonly observed. These areas require regular maintenance to prevent the spread of nuisance and exotic plant species and ensure optimal functioning and interface between the natural mangrove forest and the development water management system. � 4 R € „ ,,;17,...: f ” ...:.....t* "o'ti .. y + �� t4. � � � � c. *R ) * 4 1,4., ^ # „I'S . } 0 livr,.... i.,-, „ r.. 6.4Atte,_ k ¢,A --.0,3„:„ .._t_.....„ g 1 %.1 „,„,,,,:,i, „,, ....-: - : -.40 .. ,,,i.-2(.. A " # „:„ .„,,,,v-,...„..:-,!-:, ::,;,::„:s � � �� ., � � V4 " 6 f . w... :��,. ; _+ M „.. 7 �.:� �i.,:ii"a` : ,,„,,,d -,i „.. . ,,i`.,*c».-.„a :«, .r uza w„ ., .,-,._.., Marsh habitat within NRPA Boundary FLUCFCS Code 651 -Tidal Flats Tidal flats are flat bottomed, sub- or intertidal habitats that lack an oyster or seagrass community and are located inside the outer coastal margin. The two most significant environmental characteristics that control a flat's infauna(benthic organisms that live within the substrate) and epifauna (benthic animals that live on the surface of a substrate) are: the height of the substrate relative to mean sea level and the sedimentary consistency of the substrate. The position relative to mean sea level dictates whether the habitat is emergent (in air) for part of a tidal cycle or how deep below the water it is. This latter characteristic controls other physical water quality measures, such as dissolved oxygen, the frequency and duration of hypoxic events, and light penetration. Firmness of the substrate affects the capacity to support an epifauna by both supporting the organism on the substrate and permitting the burrowing of the infauna. The sand and mudflats of Clam Bay are rich feeding grounds for many species of fish and wading birds. These organically rich sediments support a variety of mollusks, worms and invertebrates that scavenge detritus or, in the case of many bivalve mollusks, extend siphons at high tide and filter vast quantities of water. Birds such as a variety of herons, ibis, egrets and spoonbills pick through the sediment for the invertebrate food sources. The dredging of the pass associated with the 1998 Restoration and Management Plan resulted in an increase of exposed tidal flats within the southern portion of the system. Increased tidal range resulting from the dredging allowed more area to be periodically exposed during the tidal cycle. Some of the area that had supported seagrasses prior to the dredging work were converted into the tidal flats 37 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 by the increased range and reduced phase lag. Management concerns related to the tidal flats include the templates established for the dredging, the resultant currents that could be expected as a result of dredging, and the frequency of disturbance. t N..,,,.., � ,; -t i, .i,, :‘, ,.. '-„„,„„r4:. ; % . --,„, ,- cr' g 'At 0. *. :'1"!.4'. -' -47.1.1-=".0"4,:',- - -- " a a. s _ s � , � �. <` mss y 65?adad ,c,:1-,,,,,l',„'„, 4 s �. „---S'� .;,r,'---- it .,, vk k€ „,..,azo Flat .zay, . \,germ f e u..,. ,n. v,+ee -'dam. Tidal lhabitat within NRPA Boundary FLUCFCS Code 911 - Seagrass Beds Seagrasses are flowering marine plants of shallow, tropical regions. With a creeping growth form connected by horizontal rhizomes they sense to trap and anchor sediment. Both the grass blades themselves and the surface area they represent provide food and attachment for marine species. Seagrass beds are renowned for their value as nursery habitats and are legally protected. Several areas within the Clam Bay system host Seagrass beds specifically Outer Clam Bay and. waterways just inside Clam Pass. Three species are commonly found in these Clam Bay waters; the largest Turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum) with flat strap shaped leaves, the smaller shoal grass (Halodule beaudettei (fka wrightii)) with narrow, flat blades and Paddle grass (Halphila decepiens) with the smallest,paddle shaped leaves. Shoal grass is by far the most common though a small area of turtle grass has persisted since the original 1998 dredging. Paddle grass is much more ephemeral in nature and diligence is required to be able to locate it during the time frames when it is present. 38 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT AN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Divisi014 on March 4,2 Ver.4.1 tt ` s � -� '. sa.�f" a .% .:.'''..,., am, .."-„eitko: i-'.-. 4:.it .4i'iiit , *A.' " s - - I. '''''*-a,--' '314,%----*''''4ff- -''' "t W :f' 1r ' ''''' ,`"'.4*. ''*.,-*Ig'-t`f..''..''., 44411 aFP -+: . -A- , f <_ m Shoal grass (Halodrsle beaudettei)along interior channel south of Clam Pass ADD OTHER SEAGRASS SPECIES PHOTOS Seagrasses rely on good light penetration to enable photosynthesis and are sensitive to reduced tidal water quality. Growing in shallow regions they are also vulnerable to physical damage by boats. A variety of marine algae can be associated with grass species, differing in the lack of a true rooting and vascular system. Several species of both brown and green alga have been observed. seagrass coverage in Clam Bay has varied over time but has always been found predominately in Outer Clam Bay and the waterway between this bay and Clam Pass. A 1994 Collier County report estimated seagrass coverage at approximately 10 acres. Pre-dredge surveys conducted in 1999 estimated coverage at about 5.13 acres. Annual monitoring of seagrass beds along the monitoring transects have estimated coverage from a low of approximately 1.2 acres in 2003 to the current estimate of 2.85 acres from the 2013 survey. It should be noted that the coverage estimates are taken from along the survey transects only and do not account for other scattered grasses that may be located elsewhere in the system. Management concerns related to seagrasses include direct impacts due to recreational use and potential dredging templates, turbidity and water quality concerns related to flushing (too much or too little) and stormwater inputs, and algal infestations due to nutrient increases. A history of the seagrass monitoring efforts in Clam Bay is included in the Appendix 2 attached to this report. 39 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 d' x ` -' ,-« i * - ^i.``+4,". �, ' *: �,.:c ''� i F ,' �' % 1' . - `` " ii, ' ''{ t « � 8w g �r - Z . t ,''' , u' ' , ,� i , , . „r . ., ., , ,s,,,,'F-!''.." '':4'..'4-,I*,:t''''jijt:ls..'°'.':'.7..':'I'X--.,:4'-f17,,*;, '''''-'"'-. ''' ''',74%;7:11'4'.:- —\ - im`fv": ' :1:.'"- ''''''''''' '• { Seagrass habitat within NRPA Boundai Other Benthic Habitats Oyster Bars Oysters (Croassostrea americana) are filter-feeding bivalves, which were once common within the tidal creeks of Clam Bay (Humm and Rehm 1972). Oysters play a significant role in shaping the environment in which they live by forming a hard structure upon which an intricate biological community is built. Similar to coral reefs, oyster reefs are `biogenic' (formed by the accumulation of colonial animals) and provide structure and surface area for numerous other temporary and permanent species. Providing complex habitat structure is the most fundamental of ecosystem services that oysters provide. The structure provides a place for algae and non-mobile invertebrates to attach, as well as a place for mobile invertebrates and fishes to be protected from predators. Although the relationships between sportfish and oyster habitats are not as well studied as in other estuarine habitats such as seagrass beds, they are considered essential fish habitat. The numerous ecosystem services provided by oysters can be summarized into three general categories: habitat provision, water quality improvement, and shoreline stabilization. Oyster reefs provide habitat to a diverse array of flora and fauna. The role of oyster habitat to the estuarine food chain is highly significant, as discussed in the previous paragraph. Through their feeding process oysters filter large quantities of water which transfers energy and material from the water column to the benthic community, subsequently reducing turbidity and water column nutrients. Through bio- deposition, nutrients are made available to the flora and fauna which comprise the complex oyster bar food web. Additionally, oyster reefs stabilize sediments, shorelines and adjacent habitats by buffering wave energy, further aiding water quality. Deteriorating conditions related to closure of Clam Pass is thought to have resulted in the disappearance of oyster bars in the system (REFERENCE); though some re-occurrence has been 40 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 observed to the south of the pass in the last few years during seagrass transect monitoring. Oysters have been documented around the perimeter of Outer Clam Bay in past years monitoring efforts. A 2011 benthic habitat assessment conducted by the Conservancy of Southwest Florida found living oyster clusters in the upper reaches of Upper Clam Bay (a single cluster), in the tributary between Outer and Inner Clam Bays (a single cluster), and throughout the shoreline of Outer Clam Bay. Management concerns related owthusngare similar to the seagrass concerns, namely protection from recreation users,water qualityto , and grflhi . �'� r `. 4..,„7„,,,,,,,,,,,...1 ,".:.,, , , ,, , ,, ..., ,.,,,,,_ —, .., ,, ...„,,i,„ „,,,... .,„,e '1c g g 8 Other bivalve mollusks In addition to oysters,the 2011 benthic habitat assessment conducted by the Conservancy of Southwest Florida also found two other bivalves within the Clam Bay system. The pointed Venus clam (Anomalocardia auberiana) and the stout razor clam (Tagelus plebeius) were both observed. Turrell, Hall and Associates benthic surveys found several beds of southern hard clams (Mereenaria campechiensis) also present within the system. These mollusks are generally found within the shoal and tidal flat areas of the system and could be susceptible to impact during dredging or other disturbance operations. Management concerns would be protection from recreational users,water quality, flushing, and dredging. ADD Polychaete Worms per KW Hardbottom Communities Another important marine habitat marginally associated with the estuarine system is the hard bottom reef community found just seaward of Clam Pass. In about 10-15 feet of water a variety of sponges, stony corals, gorgonians, fish and associated invertebrates can be found within a system of rocks and ledges. Outcroppings of similar habitat type occur along the length of Collier County and are a little known resource of regional significance. 41 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 \ i"r S4 - a�f Y a \ ��\,''.4",',*.,- a � 2 f f A �=� �° y} ` ar -+ V44, ..,.5 ,. a y i. w 14 > r - 4 6 : � v a #4'...,., ,"444c.,!'jiMil,..-.AkiiptIp5.44,4,:;.--;!:"4... ,,,,,,135„,,,,,, .,-...,,,,,,,,,,. , Hardbo.ttom outcrop off of Clam Pass Collier County has mapped this resource through side scan sonar surveys in 2005 and 2009 as part of its beach renourishment project. The information received from the County shows that the landward edge of this habitat is located approximately 250 to 300 feet offshore from the Pass.,#, <"�,C _- �s, e+ ate.• e .« ,xg' t :# °" w �z14f �1 3Y sr.e t >;::.Q,..,, # ,,.�, 6. ms`s err 3 -1 44 a itilt. ti r * CLAM BAY INNER UPPER CLAM BAY Management concerns related to this habitat include recreation use and potential turbidity impacts resulting from dredging or other management activities within the Clam Bay NRPA. Invasive, Non-native and Problem Species In an ecological context, an invasive species is one that is aggressive in growth and expansion of range and tends to dominate other appropriate native species. Its establishment and dominance can cause widespread harm to an ecological system by altering the species composition, susceptibility to fire and hydrology of an area. Non-indigenous species (i.e., non-native or exotic species)are those that have 42 CLAMBAYNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 been introduced purposefully or accidentally to an area outside their normal range. The characteristics of some of these species(high rate of growth/reproduction,no natural predators, easily dispersed, able to out-compete native species)make them invasive. Some indigenous species(a species whose natural range included Florida at the time of European contact circa 1500 AD or a species that has naturally expanded or changed its range to include Florida)may also become invasive. Invasions by native and non-native species often follow an alteration to ecosystem function, disruption of the food web, large- scale fragmentation of an ecosystem and/or disturbance(e.g.,clearing, fire,drought,etc.)of an area. While some native species may become invasive,the establishment and dominance of non-native species is of particular concern. The exotic species documented within the NRPA and those that have a potential to occur within the NRPA are discussed in the following section. Invasive and Problem Plant Species The Florida Exotic Pest Plan Council(FLEPPC)maintains a list of exotic plans that have been documented to(1)have adverse effects on Florida's biodiversity and plant communities, (2)cause habitat loss due to infestations, and(3)impact endangered species via habitat loss and alteration. To date, 9 non-indigenous plant species have been detected within the Clam Bay NRPA which are listed by FLEPPC as Category I exotics. FLEPPC defines Category I plants as those that alter native plant communities by displacing native species, change community structures or ecological functions,or hybridize with natives. Category II plants have increase in abundance or frequency but have not yet altered Florida plant communities to the extent shown by Category I species. These definitions do not rely on the economic severity or geographic range of the problem,but rather on the documented ecological damage caused by these plants(FLEPPC 2013). FLEPPC Category I plants observed within the Clam Bay NRPA boundary: - Brazilian Pepper(Schinus terrebinthifolius) - Melaleuca(Melaleuca quinquenervia) - Australian Pine(Casuarina equisetifolia) - Beach Naupaka(Scaevola taccada) - Earleaf Acacia(Acacia auriculiformis) - Shoebutton Ardisia(Ardisia elliptica) - Air Potato(Dioscorea bulbifera) - Lantana(Lantana camara) - Old World Climbing Fern(Lygodium microphyllum) Methodology outlining the management activities that will be used to treat exotics is found in Chapter 5 of this Plan. LISTED SPECIES Smalltooth Sawfish (Pristis pectinata) A juvenile smalltooth sawfish was observed in 2008 in the connector creek between Inner and Outer Clam Bays. Smalltooth sawfish are found in the tropical and subtropical Atlantic Ocean. In the western Atlantic they have historically ranged from New York to Brazil, including the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea. Habitat destruction and overfishing have succeeded in eradicating the smalltooth 43 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 sawfish from the majority of its former range. Consequently, it survives in small pockets throughout its current range. The last remaining population in U.S. waters is off south Florida, a small remnant of a population that once ranged from New York to Texas. This sawfish primarily occurs in estuarine and coastal habitats such as bays, lagoons, and rivers. It does at times occur in deeper waters, however, and may make crossings to offshore islands. It can tolerate freshwater. This fish is easily recognized by its flattened body and wing-like pectoral fins. The mouth is located ventrally, the eyes are positioned dorsally. The "saw" is approximately 25% of the body's total length. It is widest at the base,with teeth more broad than long, and spaced apart. The tips of the teeth are sharp, becoming blunt over time. Dorsally, it is brownish or bluish gray body with a white underside. The maximum length recorded is 24.7 feet(7.6 m); however, a length of 18 feet(5.5 m)is considered average. The average lifespan for the smalltooth sawfish is unknown. On April 1, 2003 the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service placed the smalltooth sawfish on the Endangered Species List, making it the first marine fish species to receive protection under the Endangered Species Act. Florida has also designated critical habitat areas to further protect its habitat. Mangrove Rivulus (Rivulus marmoratus) This small fish has not been identified within the Clam Bay system in previous surveys or field work but the mangrove habitat is appropriate and they could be present in the upper reaches of the mangrove forest. The mangrove rivulus is primarily a saltwater or brackish water species, with limited occurrence in freshwater. Within the Everglades and along Florida's west coast, this fish occurs in stagnant, seasonal ponds and sloughs as well as in mosquito ditches within mangrove habitats. The mangrove rivulus is able to survive in moist detritus without water for up to 60 days during periods of drought, anaerobic,or high sulfide conditions. This fish can reach a maximum size of 2 inches (5 cm) in length, however it is more commonly observed at lengths between 0.4-1.5 inches (1.0-3.8 cm). The head and body are maroon to dark brown or tan, with small dark spots and speckling on the body, particularly the sides. The dorsal surface is always darker than the creamy ventral surface. The color of the body is reflective of the habitat, with light coloration in areas of light colored sediments and darker coloration in environments with dark leaf litter substrates. A large dark spot surrounded by a band of yellow is located at the upper base of the caudal fin in hermaphroditic individuals. Males lack this dark spot and have a red-orange cast to their flanks and fms. The mangrove rivulus was once listed as a threatened species in the Gulf of Mexico. However,recently additional surveys have revealed the existence of numerous populations. In Florida it has been downlisted to a species of special concern. In 1999, it was submitted by the National Marine Fisheries Service as a candidate for protection under the Endangered Species Act. As of yet, it has not been officially listed as endangered or threatened. The main threat to the survival of the mangrove rivulus is habitat degradation and destruction as well as exposure to pollutants. Disturbances that alter salinity and temperature as well as vegetation cover may also reduce naturally occurring populations. 44 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta) Loggerhead sea turtles have been documented nesting on beaches within the Clam Bay NRPA. Loggerheads are circumglobal, occurring throughout the temperate and tropical regions of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans. They are the most abundant species of sea turtle found in U.S. coastal waters. In the Atlantic, the loggerhead turtle's range extends from Newfoundland to as far south as Argentina. During the summer, nesting occurs primarily in the subtropics. Although the major nesting concentrations in the U.S. are found from North Carolina through southwest Florida, minimal nesting occurs outside of this range westward to Texas and northward to Virginia. Adult loggerheads are known to make extensive migrations between foraging areas and nesting beaches. During non-nesting years, adult females from U.S. beaches are distributed in waters off the eastern U.S. and throughout the Gulf of Mexico,Bahamas, Greater Antilles, and Yucatan. Loggerheads were named for their relatively large heads, which support powerful jaws and enable them to feed on hard-shelled prey, such as whelks and conch. The top shell (carapace)is slightly heart- shaped and reddish-brown in adults and sub-adults,while the bottom shell (plastron) is generally a pale yellowish color. The neck and flippers are usually dull brown to reddish brown on top and medium to pale yellow on the sides and bottom. In the southeastern U.S., mating occurs in late March to early June and females lay eggs between late April and early September. Females lay three to five nests, and sometimes more, during a single nesting season. The eggs incubate approximately two months before hatching sometime between late June and mid-November. Loggerheads occupy three different ecosystems during their lives: beaches (terrestrial zone), water (oceanic zone), and nearshore coastal areas("neritic" zone). Because of this,NOAA Fisheries and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) have joint jurisdiction for marine turtles, with NOAA having the lead in the marine environment and USFWS having the lead on the nesting beaches. The loggerhead turtle was first listed under the Endangered Species Act as threatened throughout its range on July 28, 1978. In September 2011,NMFS and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed 9 Distinct Population Segments of loggerhead sea turtles under the ESA. The population in our Northeast Atlantic Ocean Segment is listed as endangered. The agencies are currently proposing Critical Habitat designations on several areas which contain a combination of nearshore reproductive habitat, winter area,breeding areas, and migratory corridors. The Clam Bay NRPA is contained within the LOGG-N- 27 segment of this proposed critical habitat area. Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) Gopher tortoises and their burrows are found along the coastal strand portions of the Clam Bay NRPA. The range of the tortoise includes southern portions or Alabama, South Carolina, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Georgia as well as most of Florida. Gopher tortoises are one of the few species of tortoise that dig burrows. These burrows can be up to ten feet deep and 40 feet long, and are as wide as the length of the tortoise that made it. In addition to 45 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 providing the tortoise a home, it has been documented that as many as 350 other species also use the burrows including the indigo snake,Florida mouse, gopher frog and burrowing owl. Gopher tortoises can live 40 to 60 years in the wild and average 9 to 11 inches in length. These tortoises are superb earth-movers, living in long burrows from 5 to 45 feet long and up to 10 feet deep that offer refuge from cold, heat, drought, forest fires and predators. The burrows maintain a fairly constant temperature and humidity throughout the year and protect the gopher tortoise and other species from temperature extremes, drying out, and predators. The mating season generally runs from April through June and gestation for the eggs is between 80 and 100 days. The shell or"carapace" of the gopher tortoise is mostly brownish gray and the underside of the shell, or "plastron," is yellowish tan. Their front legs are shovel-like which helps them when digging their burrows. The gopher tortoise has been regulated in Florida since 1972 and has been fully protected since 1988. Despite the afforded protection, gopher tortoise populations throughout the state have declined. As a response to the continuing decline of the species,a new management plan was drafted and approved in September 2007 as a precursor to reclassifying the gopher tortoise from a "species of special concern" to a "threatened species." The threatened status was approved and went into effect on November 8, 2007. West Indian Manatee Manatees have been sighted on numerous occasions within the Clam Bay NRPA boundaries. Manatees can be found in shallow, slow-moving rivers, estuaries, saltwater bays, canals, and coastal areas — particularly where seagrass beds or freshwater vegetation flourish. Manatees are a migratory species. Within the United States, they are concentrated in Florida in the winter. In summer months, they can be found as far west as Texas and as far north as Massachusetts, but summer sightings in Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina are more common. Manatees are large, gray aquatic mammals with bodies that taper to a flat, paddle-shaped tail. They have two forelimbs, called flippers, with three to four nails on each flipper. The average adult manatee is about 10 feet long and weighs between 800 and 1,200 pounds. They eat a large variety of submerged, emergent, and floating plants and can consume 10-15% of their body weight in vegetation daily. Because they are mammals, they must surface to breathe air. They rest just below the surface of the water, coming up to breathe on an average of every three to five minutes. It is believed that one calf is born every two to five years, and twins are rare. The gestation period is about a year. Mothers nurse their young for one to two years, during which time a calf remains dependent on its mother. Protections for Florida manatees were first enacted in 1893. Today, they are protected by the Florida Manatee Sanctuary Act and are federally protected by both the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act PLANT SPECIES-List to be added based on FLUCFCS Mapping 46 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 ANIMAL SPECIES The following lists of species have been observed within the Clam Bay NRPA and the adjacent Pelican Bay development areas. These lists are not all inclusive but represent a wide array of the species found within and adjacent to the Clam Bay NRPA habitats. Aquatic Invertebrates—Add from Conservancy Report Fish COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Atlantic needlefish Strongylura marina Barracuda Sphyraena barracuda Bay anchovy Anchoa mitchilli Blacktip Shark Carcharhinus limbatus Blue crab Callinectis sapidus Cowfish Acanthostracion quadricomis Flounder Paratichthys alb!gutta Gray snapper Lu janus griseus Great barracuda Sphyraena barracuda Gulf killifish Fundulus grandis Inshore Iizardfish Synodus foetens Killifish spp. Fundulus spp. Leatherjacket Oligoplites saurus Longnose killifish Fundulus simitis Mangrove snapper Lu janus griseus Mullet Mugil cephalus Mutton snapper Lutjanus anatis Needlefish Strongylura marina Permit Trachinotus falcatus Pigfish Orthopristus chrysoptera Pinfish Lagodon rhomboides Pipefish Syngnathus spp. Puffer Sphoeroides parvus Sailfin molly Poecilia latipinna Sand perch Diplectrum bivittatum 47 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Scaled sardine Harengula pensacolae Sea robin Prionotus scitulus Sheepshead Archosargus probatocephal Sheepshead minnow Cyprinodon variegatus Silver jenny Eucinostomus gula Smalltooth Sawfish Pristis pectinata Snook Centropomus undecimalis Spot Leiostomus xanthurus Spotfin mojara Eucinostomus argenteus Spotted seatrout Cynoscion nebulosus Tidewater silverside Menidia peninsulae Triggerfish Batistes capriscus White grunt Haemulon plumierii Whiting Menticirrhus tittoratis Reptiles and Amphibians COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Banded water snake Nerodia faciata faciata Black racer Coluber constrictor Common garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis Eastern coachwhip Masticophis flagellum Mangrove salt marsh water snake Nerodia clarkii Mud snake Farancia abacura Red rat snake Elaphe guttata guttata Ring-necked snake Diadophis punctatus Yellow rat snake Elaphe obsoleta American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis Brown anole Anolis sagrei Brown basilisk lizard** Basiliscus vittatus Cuban knight anole** Anolis equestris Eastern glass lizard Ophisaurus ventralis Green anole Anolis carolinensis 48 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Southeastern five-lined skink Eumeces inexpectatus Cuban treefrog Osteopilus septentrionalis Eastern narrow-mouthed toad Gastrophryne carolinensis Eastern spadefoot toad Scaphiopus holbrookii Giant marine toad** Rhinella marina aka Bufo marinus) Green treefrog Hyla cinerea Oak toad Anaxyrus quercicus Southern leopard frog Lithobates sphenocephalus Southern toad Bufo terrestris Squirrel treefrog Hyla squirella Chicken turtle Deirochelys reticularia Florida box turtle Terrapene carolina bauri Florida redbelly cooter Pseudemys nelsoni Florida snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina osceola Florida softshell turtle Apalone ferox Gopher tortoise Gopherus polyphemus Green sea turtle Chelonia mydas Loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta Penninsula cooter Pseudemys peninsularis Pond(yellowbelly) slider Trachemys scripta scripta Striped mud turtle Kinosternon baurii Birds COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME American avocet Recurvirostra americana American coot Fulica americana American kestrel Falco sparverius American oystercatcher Haematopus palliatus American Robin Turdus migratorius Anhinga Anhinga anhinga 49 CLAM BA YNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Barred owl Strix varia Belted kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon Black skimmer Rynchops niger Black vulture Rynchops niger Black-and-white warbler Mniotilta varia Black-bellied plover Pluvialis squatarola Black-crowned night heron Nycticorax nycticorax Black-necked stilt Himantopus mexicanus Blue jay Cyanocitta cristata Blue-gray gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea Boat-tailed grackle Quiscalus major Brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis Brown thrasher Toxostoma rufum Budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus Caspian tern Hydroprogne caspia Cattle egret Bubulcus ibis Chuck-will's-widow Caprimulgus carolinensis Common grackle Quiscalus quiscula Common ground-dove Columbina passerina Common moorhen Gallinula chloropus Common nighthawk Chordeiles minor Common snipe Gallinago gallinago Common tern Sterna hirundo Common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas Double-crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus Dowitcher long-billed Limnodromus scolopaceus Dowitcher short-billed Limnodromus griseus Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens Dunlin Calidris alpina Eastern screech owl Megascops asio Eurasian collared dove Streptopelia decaocto European starling Sturnus vulgaris Fish crow Corvus ossifragus 50 CLAM BAYNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Forster's tern Sterna forsteri Glossy ibis Plegadis falcinellus Gray catbird Dumetella carolinensis Great blue heron Ardea herodias Great crested flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus Great egret Ardea alba Great horned owl Bubo virginianus Greater yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca Green heron Butorides virescens Green-winged teal Anas crecca Herring gull Larus argentatus Hooded merganser Lophodytes cucullatus House sparrow Passer domesticus Killdeer Charadrius vociferus Laughing gull Leucophaeus atricilla Least sandpiper Calidris minutilla Limpkin Aramus guarauna Little blue heron Egretta caerulea Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus Magnificent frigate bird Fregata magnificens Mangrove cuckoo Coccyzus minor Merlin Falco columbarius Mocking bird Mimus polyglottos Mottled duck Anas fulvigula Mourning dove Zenaida macroura Muscovy duck Cairina moschata Northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis Northern gannet Morus bassanus Northern parula Parula americana Northern waterthrush Seiurus noveboracensis Osprey Pandion haliaetus Painted bunting Passerina ciris Palm warbler Dendroica palmarum Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus 51 CLAMBAYNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Pied-billed grebe Podilymbus podiceps Pilleated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus Piping plover Charadrius melodus Prairie warbler Dendroica discolor Purple gallinule Porphyrula martinica Red knot Calidris canutus Red-bellied woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus Red-breasted merganser Mergus serrator Reddish egret Egretta rufescens Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis Red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus Ring-billed gull Larus delawarensis Roseate spoonbill Platalea ajaja Royal tern Sterna maxima Ruby-throated hummingbird Archilochus colubris Ruddy turnstone Arenaria interpres Sanderling Calidris alba Sandwich tern Sterna sandvicensis Semipalmated plover Charadrius semipalmatus Snowy egret Egretta thula Spotted sandpiper Actitis macularia Swallow-tailed kite Elanoides forficatus Tri-colored heron Egretta tricolor Turkey vulture Cathartes aura Western sandpiper Calidris mauri White ibis Eudocimus albus White pelican Pelecanus erythrorhynchos Willet Catoptrophorus semipalmatus Wood stork Scolopax minor Yellow-bellied sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius Yellow-crowned night heron Nyctanassa violacea Yellow-rumped warbler Dendroica coronata Yellow-throated warbler Dendroica dominica 52 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Mammals COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Big brown bat Eptesicus firscus Bobcat Lynx rufus Bottle-nosed dolphin Turciops truncatus Brazilian free-tailed bat Tadarida braziliensis Coyote Canis latrans Eastern gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis Eastern mole Scalopus aquaticus Feral domestic cat Felis catus Florida Black bear Ursus americanus floridanus Gray fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus House mouse Mus musculus Marsh rabbit Sylvilagus palustris Nine-banded armadillo Dasypus novemcinctus Raccoon Procyon lotor River otter Lutra canadensis Roof rat Rattus rattus Virginia opossum Didelphis virginia West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus HYDROLOGY Hydrological regime, sometimes referred to as the surface water or surficial hydrology, in simple terms describes the long term spatial variation in the water depths and period of inundation within a wetland system. This is because the surficial hydrology has both horizontal and vertical components and provides key ecological functions to the mangrove forest. (Lewis,pers. comet. 2008) With respect to the horizontal component, incoming water (both tidal and surface water run-off) into an estuary brings with it nutrients, dissolved oxygen, and marginally lower salt concentrations. Conversely, the outgoing water leaving a mangrove wetland (through tidal exchange) removes metabolic waste products (e.g., carbon dioxide and toxic sulfides) and excess salt. The vertical component refers to incoming water that percolates down into the sediment and root zone, and the sediment drainage, on a falling tide,which removes metabolic wastes and excess salt. 53 CLAMBAYNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 It is the inflow and outflow of sea water that is critical to the ability of the estuary to manage these two ecological functions and as such dissipate salts,organic matter and freshwater. It follows that anything that affects the system and alters the ability of the system to perform these functions, will, in most instances, cause stress to the system and, at some point in time, result in the death of the system, or portions of it. Hydrologic studies indicate that the tidal flushing capacity of Clam Bay prior to the restoration dredging was limited and almost insignificant in Upper Clam Bay. The preliminary hydrographic assessment of the Clam Bay system prepared by Tackney & Associates, Inc. (August 1996) demonstrated rather dramatically that there was a significant reduction in tidal range between the middle boardwalk and Inner Clam Bay. Tackney described the flow in that area as "measurably reduced" and "very inefficient". This connecting tidal creek is the key conduit for tidal input and outflow to the northern reaches of the Clam Bay system. And its constriction and the ancillary constriction of tributaries connection to it, impact the quantity and quality of the flushing that can occur in Inner and Upper Clam Bay. Another key aspect of the surficial hydrology is the vertical location of the water level elevation relative to the sediment elevation. Specifically, the mean low water (tide) elevation has to be sufficiently lower than the sediment elevation in order for sediments to drain during low tide. A persistent high surface water elevation stops sediment drainage and results in anoxic sediment and the accumulation of toxic waste products. The absence of meaningful exchange was certainly a contributor to the significant degradation of the mangrove system within Clam Bay. (Tackney 1996; Lewis pers. comm. 2008). In this context Tackney observed that even in the absence of rainfall, the average water surface elevations for the inner and upper bays were higher than the average surface elevation for the Gulf. Analysis of the tidal data indicated that average water surface elevations in the Inner and Upper Clam Bays were both elevated above the average Gulf water surface elevation by approximately 0.2 feet. This indicated that the tidal range in Inner and Upper Clam Bays was muted and that the system was receiving significant additional water through runoff and restricted capacity to drain additional inflow. In fact, during portions of the Tackney study no tidal fluctuation was noted in the Upper Clam Bay and only marginal tidal effects were observed in Inner Clam Bay. The reduced tidal ranges were also accompanied by relatively large phase lags. The phase lag is the average time delay measured in hours and minutes between the occurrence of slack(high or low) water in the Gulf of Mexico and the measurement stations. It is affected by both the distance between measurement stations and the amount and quality of hydraulic resistance of the connecting channel. The longer the distance and the higher the resistance,the more pronounced one would expect the phase lag to be. In the upper bays, high and low waters generally occurred over three hours later than the Gulf tides. These conditions indicate that the tidal creeks connecting the interior bays are hydraulically very inefficient. As a result, the upper bays are prone towards extended periods of flooding as a result of freshwater runoff and the inability of the system to drain efficiently. During Tackney's field studies of May 1996, rainfall of approximately 4 inches in three days was adequate to flood the Upper Clam Bay 54 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 above high tide levels and sustain this flooded condition for over two days. Accordingly,he concluded that the creeks and bays that serve to connect the Inner and Upper Bays were significantly less efficient in the ebb tide stage than they were in the flood stage. Studies undertaken by both Lewis Environmental Services, Inc. and Turrell & Associates, Inc. would support this conclusion. (Turrell 1995). Finally, an additional attribute of the system that is directly related to tidal prism and the quantity of inflow and outflow is the question of inlet stability. Inlet stability refers to a tidal inlet's capacity to adequately scour out deposited sediments and prevent inlet closure. For a given wave environment, inlet stability is governed primarily by the volume of water (tidal prism) carried by the inlet. To remain stable, an inlet must have the characteristic that a temporary constriction in cross sectional area produces an increase in current velocities adequate to scour out the constriction. To function without mechanical intervention,the system must generate a sufficient volume of water on the ebb tide to scour out the inlet naturally, otherwise the inlet will, over time, continue to close. This is particularly true during periods of high wave activity and low tidal ranges. (Turrell 1995; Tackney 1996). The six closures of Clam Pass that have occurred in the past twenty-five years indicate that stability of Clam Pass is marginal. (Turrell 1995; Tackney 1996,Hummiston 2010). Freshwater Component Under predevelopment conditions, much of the area's rainfall was held on the surface of the land in sloughs and other low areas. This water would either slowly filter through the soil to recharge the shallow aquifer or move through the mangrove community to the bay. Less than ten inches of the approximately 53 inch average rainfall is estimated to have been lost from the uplands east of Clam Bay as surface runoff. The storage capabilities of the land thus moderated surface flows, preventing extremely high flow rates during the rainy season and serving to maintain surface flow and groundwater flow during the dry season. (FDER 1981). The development of Pelican Bay had limited fill impact to the Clam Bay system, but it did modify the pattern of freshwater entering the Clam Bay system. (Wilson, Miller et.al. 1996). The stormwater management system as designed, permitted and implemented at Pelican Bay employs a series of detention ponds, swales and culverts to regulate the discharge of run-off into Clam Bay. Discharge occurs almost continuously along the eastern perimeter of the conservation area. Run-off from the northern end of Pelican Bay is collected and discharged into Upper Clam Bay. Irrigation water for 27 holes of golf and landscaping in Pelican Bay is approximately 3.0 MGD which approximates 26 inches per year of additional rainfall equivalent, (Wilson, Miller et.al., 1996). When added to the average rainfall for South Florida of approximately 53 inches per year, the local area has an effective rainfall of approximately 80 inches plus annually. This is significant,particularly when viewed in the context of predictable storm events that have the potential for altering the amount of average rainfall entering the Clam Bay system. The "Pelican Bay Water Management System — Stormwater Detention Volume and Water Budget Analysis" (Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc. April, 1996) describes the water management system as being divided into six watersheds or drainage systems. Rainfall, including irrigation, reaches the ground and either seeps into the ground or runs off to a stormwater detention area within each system. The stormwater detention plan for Pelican Bay has a standard, permitted design capacity to hold the 55 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 first inch of stormwater during a 25-year storm event. The stormwater is detained for flood protection and water quality treatment. Stormwater discharge is controlled by a series of weirs designed such that the post-development stormwater run-off rate does not exceed pre-development rates. Stated differently, the system is designed to discharge stormwater in the development portion of Pelican Bay in the same manner that it discharged stormwater prior to development. The stormwater discharge exits the weir system for a final release into Clam Bay. Stormwater runoff from an additional 130 acres of watersheds, outside of Pelican Bay, contributes an additional and significant volume of discharge to Clam Bay. This water represents 7.9% of the total stormwater discharge to Clam Bay. 56 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4, Ver.4.1 � � _,,,,,i,,,-,;'-',3 al �. ,� {,� m it '` y " . D `' 'N^Vii`3yp ' z + . f/J #s ' "'s • ! fs r` •1ia.j f CDD C., '"b4 \--4,;-„,''''.... ,-.,..,.' ',,,..k?...;71-1>-:1*—•,...,- v, s1/4:', tq ¢'"rip+ _1 0 tv llY / a # e?;. x - lk. riro...... ,,,,::;..,,,,ip, , . .,,,,;...,4„,..,,z,•,,, z 4 t ;,,, . is, a . ,,.. .,,.,;:„,...„,„.,..r,....4., ,,.... t..,...„1,.. 1,,,...„#ri....., 7 t,.': *} ,?-t-t-,, . ... - ,, A.,,,.„.,„,..,..,.,,, ,,.. 4.0i.- -;,- 44%.vi I? IiHfil.4:;'.,9' 4„,""a -r,.cio` 't„,---'*.k\.14,-,.!'i-"-. R .' "h k.,, peg Y, A •W ,,•`" . : �S .„.„).Ar. . „:-- ,i , 01 ft kiiii71: .': ' ii.',- :4,..sik-,;4:*'-c'..,111,'.,:"Zt,..'....t,..7.'';7!'-',L.„7--,:- -.1,,,i-:§! ..',K111*ii'''',i':. ., '0'. 'ilk-,Z.,inii:',z,;,i`';ort`.4.,'_'''',.1/2.a.#, ;1`''''''' .-1.,-;--fk,.. 1.7.41°:::' " -_ ...if 7‘11,,,t., .. .t.',.iir,..!::4,.:44. ,,i1J--' ',,,.4..,--; ......,„. 1 - s-i9g ,..,„:„,,„,:...,,-,,,,,-,_„ -_ ,,, ;i '"_ ' v.°1 i b�iR q3`1 :'vv :-•;' „..A 4 � r #; j,k,,,..,,.....!:!„.1„.„,..t.,!,..,„.,7„:11::„,„,:s44.1 ,„,t, Approximate locations of Drainage Basins within the Pelican Bay Development(photo is oriented with north tip and west to the left). 57 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 As the area of Pelican Bay to the east has undergone development, it has increased the impervious surface area, with a concomitant increase in surface runoff, which is eventually discharged to Clam Bay. The daily irrigation water volume enhances the saturation of the uplands which reduces their ability to accommodate rainfall volume, thus effectively increasing surface and groundwater discharge. Groundwater discharge can be commonly observed throughout-the eastern side of Clam Bay and is discernable as a very slight sheet flow. Where this water encounters a discharge system, even one that is not operating at peak efficiency (from an engineering, not historical, standpoint), such as Outer Clam Bay, excess water is effectively removed from the system. However, in the northern section, sheet flow was not efficiently removed due to lack of flow through the forest. Thus, it accumulated, increasing soil saturation and raising the mean water table elevation, and apparently overwhelming the black mangrove's anaerobic soil/gas exchange mechanisms. Mangroves in these areas became stressed and died. WATER QUALITY During the initial environmental permitting of Pelican Bay, the agencies required water quality testing within the Pelican Bay subdivision and the Clam Bay estuary to help evaluate the impact of development on Clam Bay. The water quality-testing program was first implemented by Pelican Bay Improvement District (PBID) starting in the early 1980's. In 1991, PBID became the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD), a dependent Division of Collier County. PBSD continued the testing program after 1991. PBSD is currently the responsible entity for the testing program. The water quality testing is performed at several sample points within Pelican Bay and Clam Bay. The sample point locations are shown on the exhibit below. There are currently nine sampling locations within Pelican Bay and Clam Bay. Sample points W-7 (located in the creek near the north Foundation boardwalk), W-6 (located in the creek near the south Foundation boardwalk), W-1 (located near the kayak launch area at the southern end of Outer Clam Bay), North Seagate (located on the north side of the Seagate Culverts between Venetian Bay and Outer Clam Bay), and Upper Clam Bay(located at the very north end of Upper Clam Bay) are within Clam Bay, which are categorized as Class II waters by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). The remaining five sampling points are PB-13, E PB-13, PB-11, Glenview, and St. Lucia, are located in the stormwater treatment portion of the property(Class III waters)within Pelican Bay. Water quality sampling is conducted within the Clam Bay system on a monthly basis. The samples are collected by PBSD staff and transported to the Collier County Pollution Control laboratory for processing. Parameters sampled and collected, include; • Field pH • Field Temperature • Field Salinity • Field D.O. • Ammonia • Carbon- Total Organic 58 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 • Chlorophyll a • Copper* (added to the parameter suite in 2013) • Nitrate-Nitrite(N) • Nitrite (N) • Nitrogen-Total Kjeldahl • Orthophosphate (0PO4) • Pheophytin • Phosphorus- Total • Residues-Filterable (TDS) • Silica(SiO2) *. s tip, 4 at* � - ,w°' '� ;rye ..a �..� �� ,r ..� 4.1.*: 4,..ctet_.,t, :.,._.� � ' i�:�s�. -e iti pols' t;'.41.1:::-Zi, 'lrtilil:llj;ktdgtiliv't', ',4Atlllil!00t't, '41.1, 1-1;1:*;:(4, ! : -...-i'd*L; .-: -:,:tf:',''' ,,,,?7'"!---'1,...". '', ..�' .,..40-:::1':40,A404�� a' * '. "E � , , a -„,,,,,..„5„, .,..,..-,,. ../..,,:. ,„„,, ,, ,,," ,, ,,,„,,,,,_ ,...., tt.A.t 1,..c..L. , ir, It ,,..,,,, T. il":‘;.43; SX:,V'".4 at. ..-"4:1'''°, '.!'..4",t° *T.-' "' e44,,,.....vitc. . 0. .„,....,,, . or, ,.„;$4,„,: ,‘,....:,,irt.... ..4,to 0:,...„..,47.., 4 i atz. vp,,,,Ito. iik„.,,t, ,. 44 . �,(g -t„.474,- .ste..11 ',..0 „40, .."1**'41 .1 4,..,t,litt,,,,, .. .7_4„Iri..,..„.::::li.,,::..:c .`-`,. -4::.-,:V0-44'!: ..,..n.r.....4 44 ii171.4,1 glik;"47 ".' ek t.Ili r..0414,..,,,,, rt'y, g sfi /• .P:orYt , xt , „:„.,„.-,...,,,,„„1, il _ I ,,,,, ii, ...1+ s # zII. s -- a4.: i i„,:,.,./ ,,_- - w., ,. .4§1i. ,:.,-,,ii, ..„)._ !cif i.-41 Sampling Locations Water quality sampling results of nutrient loading seem to indicate that the development sto.rm.water management system is doing its job. No evidence of nutrient loading has been observed within the Class II waters though several spikes and elevated nutrient(N and P) levels have been observed from the testing locations along the berm. It is believed that the spikes observed are correlated with fertilizer application within the community. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)conducted water quality sampling within the Clam Bay NRPA in 2012. Based on their sample results, FDEP had made an initial determination that Clam Bay could be impaired for both Dissolved Oxygen and Copper. Subsequent coordination between FDEP, PBSD,the Pelican Bay Foundation, and involved consultants, FDEP made a determination that the oxygen levels in Clam Bay were natural and the system was not listed as impaired for DO. CHECK IF Site specific nutrient criteria were established. 59 CLAMBAYNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 FDEP did determine that the system was impaired for copper and was placing the system on the Everglades West Coast verified list for copper with a medium TMDL priority(5 to 10 years for TMDL development). Subsequent copper testing undertaken by PBSD has also shown periodic elevated levels of copper within the Clam Bay Class II waters. FDEP acknowledged that the Pelican Bay community was working on an upland stormwater and nutrient management program that was designed to reduce nutrient and copper inputs into the stormwater system. Once completed, this program can be given to FDEP for review and if satisfied with the anticipated reduction of copper resulting from the implementation of the plan,the system could be removed from the impaired list. While the upland nutrient management plan is not part of this NRPA Management Plan, PBSD will work closely with the Pelican Bay Foundation to coordinate and share information, and to integrate management decisions and activities into this Plan where appropriate. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES The Florida Division of Historical Resources Master Site File lists three known archaeological sites within the Clam Bay NRPA boundary. All three are located within the mangrove forest habitat. Two of the sites(CR476 and CR547)are located north of the Pass and south of Inner Clam Bay. The third site(CR576)is located south of the Pass and north of the Clam Pass Park boardwalk. Site CR476 is identified as a prehistoric campsite and shell midden possibly supporting the use of several cultures dating from 8500 B.C. to A.D. 1700. Sites CR547 and CR576 are identified as shell middens which were in use between 1000 B.C. and A.D. 1700. All three of the sites are within the mangrove forest and outside of the footprint of any previous or future anticipated dredging activities. INLET DYNAMICS—To be added from Engineer's report(s) RECREATIONAL USE The Clam Bay NRPA provides a variety of opportunities for recreation such as walking,kayaking, canoeing,paddle boarding, swimming, fishing, and snorkeling. Many Collier County residents and visitors enjoy the natural environment of the preserve. Recent stakeholder input as well as prior reports supports the use of the Clam Bay NRPA for recreational endeavors. It is important that all who participate in recreational activities within the system do no harm to the unique flora and fauna. Clam Bay's dense forest of mangroves significantly limits walking in the preserve. Most walkers seeking to enjoy the rich natural environment of Clam Bay use the three boardwalks that cross the 60 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 preserve and provide access to the beach. Residents and guests of Pelican Bay residents use the northern and middle boardwalks. The southern most boardwalk is open to the public and accessed from the parking lot at the south end of the system. Trams are used on all three boardwalks to transport those choosing not to walk on the boardwalk to the beach. Kayaks and canoes are used by those wanting to enjoy the natural setting and serenity of Clam Bay's waterways. There is a public launching area adjacent to the parking lot at the south end of the bay, and there is also a private launch for Pelican Bay residents on the northern boardwalk. The canoe/kayak trail is clearly designated by canoe trail markers from Outer Clam Bay to Upper Clam Bay. Fishing and swimming are also popular pastimes. Fishing can be done from the boardwalks and canoes or by wading into the water. Swimming is usually confined to the beach areas,but some swimmers and waders, if conditions permit, venture into Clam Pass. The operation of motorized watercraft in Clam Bay is restricted by Collier County Ordinance 96-16 that requires vessels with motors to travel at idle speed with no wake throughout the Clam Bay system. The relatively shallow waterways of the system, in conjunction with the boardwalk heights, limit the size and drafts of motorized watercraft. The residents of the Seagate neighborhood immediately south of Outer Clam Bay have historically utilized motorized watercraft in Clam Bay but this use is still subject to the County ordinance. Violation of the ordinance is a civil infraction for which a fine may be levied. Occasionally motorized vessels, including jet-skis or other personal watercraft,have been reported to be in violation of the ordinance. Efforts to identify and report violators will continue to insure that Clam Bay is not only a safe place for all its users,but that its unique environment is protected. In the future should any adverse effects on Clam Bay's natural resources or water quality be found to be related to motorized watercraft, additional management options will be explored to ameliorate these adverse effects. EFFORTS TO AMEND ORDINANCE OR REMOVE ABOVE 61 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 4.0 Authorized Construction Activities List of permits for work undertaken to date and relevant legal framework Eighteen years ago, Collier County processed a permit to dredge limited areas of Clam Pass to facilitate the movement of tidal water in and out of Clam Bay. The FDEP permit for this activity was issued on March 28, 1996 with the companion USACOE permit being issued on April 2, 1996. The FDEP permit was modified on April 10, 1996 with the authorized work being undertaken and completed on April 17, 1996. The practical effect of implementing this Permit was to reopen the Pass, but it was clear that without a more comprehensive strategy, this effort, standing alone, would not revitalize the Clam Bay ecosystem. A permit to improve the channel flow within defined areas of the Clam Bay system by a combination of blasting and hand excavation was issued on June 26, 1996. The work was undertaken and completed in two segments. The first channels were opened in August 1996 and the second channels were opened in November 1996. The results of these two initiatives were positive in that measurable improvements in tidal flow were discernible and with that have come improved conditions for natural re-vegetation. A permit was issued on January 5, 1997 to construct a portable pump and pipe system as an interim measure to divert freshwater within the Clam Bay system to the Gulf while a more permanent solution contemplated by the construction of an outfall structure was reviewed. Although this plan was never implemented and is no longer considered, it envisioned two pumps that would be operational when the water surface elevation within Clam Bay exceeded a specified threshold. The plan anticipated the direct discharge of excess water into the Gulf with the expectation that this system would augment the natural discharge through the tidal mechanism after severe storm events. Subsequently, Collier County authorized the pursuit of a ten-year permit to allow the County, or its designee(which in this case was the Pelican Bay Services Division),to maintain Clam Pass in an open condition. The application, as filed, did not address any other issues affecting the operational characteristics of Clam Bay and essentially mirrored the 1996 Permit described in the first paragraph above. Agency comments and concerns which arose as part of the permit review led to the creation of the 1998 Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan. The Plan addressed agency concerns at the time and included provisions for adding one-way flap gates to the Seagate culverts, dredging within three sections of the creek north of Clam Pass, a network of hand dug channels throughout the forest area, in addition to the dredging of the Pass. This permit was issued in 1998 and the Management Plan created in support of the permit has been the guiding document for the maintenance activities undertaken in the Clam Bay system since then. It is anticipated that DEP and USACOE 10-year permits will be sought in conjunction with this new Management Plan. The permits will allow for ongoing maintenance and/or enhancement activities to continue along with occasional, modest removal of material by dredging within a discreet area of Clam Pass in order to maintain the existing tidal regime within the system. Any changes to the submitted dredging scope or other new management initiatives will be reviewed by the PBSD Board and Collier County Commissioners before seeking any additional permit(s) which may be necessary for the 62 CLAM BA YNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 modified activities. Additional investigations which may be undertaken at a later date to look at, for example, faunal investigations, more in-depth water quality concerns, or other issues that may arise as a result of stakeholder discussions could also necessitate permitting which will have to be reviewed by the PBSD and BCC prior to any such permit applications being submitted. This Management Plan is specifically tasked to maintain the improvements and benefits already realized and to insure that the restoration success observed to date is continued. Dredging for navigation or beach renourishment will not be done. The following list contains more details related to existing and historical permits issued for the Clam Bay system. Permit Details South Florida Water Management District Surface Water Permit No.: 11-00065-S Date of Issue: August 10, 1978 Expiration Date: Operational phase doesn't expire Project Description: To construct and operate water management systems 1 and 2 serving 539 acres of residential lands discharging by westerly sheet flow to Inner, Outer, and Upper Clam Bays. Department of Environmental Regulation Construction Permit/Certification No.: 11-50-3769 Date of Issue: May 23, 1979 Expiration Date: May 15, 1984 Project Description: To provide construction sites for residential development in a planned community by: placing approximately 700,000 cy of clean upland fill material onto approximately 94 plus acres of submerged lands of waters of the state landward of the line of mean high water. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Permit No.: 00754929 Date of Issue: November 18, 1981 Expiration Date: November 18, 1984 Project Description: This permitted the filling of 75±acres of mangrove wetlands north, east and west of Upper Clam Bay and south of Vanderbilt Beach Road. Department of Environmental Regulation Modification Permit No.: 11-50-3769 Date of Issue: December 23, 1981 Expiration Date: November 18, 1986 Project Description: This modification extended the expiration date of the permit to November 18, 1986. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Permit No.: 79K-0282 Date of Issue: August 2, 1983 Expiration Date:November 18, 1986 Project Description: This was an extension of the permit authorizing the filling of 75± acres of mangrove wetlands north, east and west of Upper Clam Bay and south of Vanderbilt Beach Road, plus approximately 2 acres of mangroves at the existing Collier County beach access at Vanderbilt Beach 63 CLAM BA YNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Road. The request was reviewed and no objections were raised to the proposed work schedule; therefore,the completion date of the permit was extended for 2 years until November 18, 1986. South Florida Water Management Plan Modification of Surface Water Management Permit No.: 11- 00065-5 Date of Issue: December 15, 1983 Date of Expiration: Operational phase doesn't expire Project Description: Approved modifications to 1) Revise system V, drainage area 3. 2) Construction and operation of water management system number VI. Department of Environmental Regulation Permit/Certification No: 110974055 Date of Issue: September 12, 1985 Expiration Date: September 11, 1987 Project Description: To construct approximately 2900 linear feet of 10' wide public access elevated boardwalk and pier with a 6' wide navigation access lift gate in Outer Clam Bay. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Permit No.: 86IPT-20328 Date of Issue: December 18, 1986 Expiration Date: December 18, 1991 Project Description: Discharge±2.3 acres of clean fill to construct an access road. Department of Environmental Regulation Modification Permit No.: 11-50-3769 Date of Issue: January 7, 1987 Expiration Date: December 18, 1991 Project Description: This permit modification extended the expiration date and reduced the amount of fill in the area extending south along the coastal edge from approximately 13 acres, as permitted, to 2.43 acres in order to construct a linear access road(for The Strand in Bay Colony). Department of Environmental Protection Permit/Certification No: 112659015 Date of Issue: March 14, 1995 Expiration Date: March 14, 2000 Project Description: Re-establish the connection between the Gulf of Mexico to the Clam Bay system, by dredging from the mouth of Clam Pass and spoiling the sand over an upland beach site. Collier County Ordinance No: 96-16 Date of Issue: April 9, 1996 Expiration Date: n/a Project Description: To impose idle speed/no wake zones in the Clam Bay system. Department of Environmental Protection Permit/Authorization No.:0128463-001-JC Date of Issue: July 06, 1998 Expiration Date: July 06, 2008 Project Description: This Permit authorized activities to improve the hydrodynamics of, and thus restore and manage,the Clam Bay ecosystem. 64 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Permit No.:199602789(IP-CC) Date of Issue: August 11, 1998 Expiration Date: July 08, 2008 Project Description: This Permit authorized the following works: 1) Replacement of Seagate Drive Culverts and installation of one-way check valves on the culverts (pages 45 — 50 of the CBRMP). 2) Clam Pass main channel dredging for Cuts 1, 2, 3 and 4(pages 49—65 of the CBRMP). 3)Excavation and maintenance of Interior Tidal Creeks(pages 65—71 of the CBRMP). Department of Environmental Protection Permit Modification DEP Permit No:0128463-001-JC Date of Issue: December 15, 1998 Expiration Date: July 06, 2008 Project Description: This permit modification authorized: 1) an alternative to upland spoil disposal area for Cut#1; 2) an increase in the width of the channel Cut#4 through Clam Pass; and 3)alternative pipeline corridors between the dredge cuts and the disposal areas. Department of Environmental Protection Permit Modification for Permit No: 0128463-001-JC Date of Issue: February 16, 1999 Expiration Date: July 6,2008 Project Description: Authorize minor revisions to the mangrove trimming procedures pursuant to site verification. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Modification#1 for Permit No.:199602789 (IP-CC) Date of Issue: February 26, 1999 Expiration Date: July 08, 2008 Project Description: This application requested a modification to: 1) discharge the dredge material from Cut#1 to new disposal area identified as an upland parking area; 2) increase the width of channel Cut #4; 3) remove native vegetation and excavate a portion of upland Disposal Site #2; 4) remove native vegetation and excavate a portion of upland Disposal Site #3. Issues 1 & 2 were found to be insignificant and the permit was modified. The requests regarding issues 3 & 4 were not approved at this time. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Modification#2 for Permit No.:199602789 (IP-CC) Date of Issue: March 08, 1999 Expiration Date: July 08, 2008 Project Description: This application requested a modification to: 1) discharge the dredge material from Cut#1 to new disposal area identified as an upland parking area; 2) increase the width of channel Cut #4; 3) remove native vegetation and excavate a portion of upland Disposal Site #2; 4) remove native vegetation and excavate a portion of upland Disposal Site #3. The proposed modification to widen channel Cut#4 is to be done without any additional seagrass impacts. Based on the review and coordination with FWS,the permit was modified in accordance with these requests. 65 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Department of Environmental Protection Permit Modification for Permit No: 0128463-001-JC Date of Issue: May 19, 1999 Expiration Date: May 28, 1999 Project Description: Re-grade beach fill material during the marine turtle nesting season to remove pockets of fine silty material and to remove an escarpment which may interfere with nesting marine turtles. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission File No: 2003-0511-016BS for Permit No: CO- 016 Date of Issue: March 24, 2000 Expiration Date: n/a Project Description: This Permit granted approval for placement of canoe trail markers in Clam Bay. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers for Permit No: 200001076(NW-EF) Date of Issue: April 13,2000 Expiration Date: February 11,2002 Project Description: Approved the installation of 32 waterway markers for a canoe trail in the Clam Bay system. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Modification#3 for Permit No.:199602789 (IP-CC) Date of Issue: May 05,2000 Expiration Date: July 08, 2008 Project Description: This application requested modifications to the monitoring and reporting schedule referenced on page 93 (Biological Monitoring) of DA Permit (CBRMP). The request was to submit annual reports instead of semi-annual reports. The permit was modified as requested. Department of Environmental Protection Permit for Permit No: CO-732 Date of Issue: October 25, 2002 Expiration Date: October 25,2003 Project Description: Perform dune and beach restoration, and plant salt-tolerant native dune vegetation in association with interim maintenance dredging event. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Permit No.:199602789(IP-CC)Extension Date of Issue: May 8,2008 Expiration Date: July 08, 2009 Project Description: This Permit authorized the extension of the expiration date for a period of one year. Department of Environmental Protection Permit/Extension No. 0128463-001-JC Date of Issue: June 5, 2008 Expiration Date: July 06, 2009 Project Description: This modification extends the expiration date for a period of one year. 66 CLAM BA YNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Department of Environmental Protection Permit No: 11-0128463-005 Date of Issue: December 17,2010 Expiration Date: December 17,2015 Project Description: Continue maintenance activities to the hand-dug channels in the Clam Bay system originally permitted under Permit No. 0128463-001-JC. Department of Environmental Protection Permit No: 11-0295193-004 Date of Issue: November 2, 2011 Expiration Date: November 2, 2016 Project Description: Install 32 canoe trail markers and informational signage. Department of Environmental Protection Permit No: 0296087-001-JC Date of Issue: August 14, 2012 Expiration Date: August 14, 2022 Project Description: Restore the alignment of Clam Pass to the previously approved location and conducting periodic maintenance dredging of a portion of the Clam Pass Channel in order to maintain tidal exchange between Clam Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion Activity Code No: 41420-2010-CPA-0395 Date of Issue: February 22, 2013 Expiration Date: n/a Project Description: FWS analysis of the potential effects of the dredging of the Pass on the threatened piping plover (Charadrias melodus), threatened loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), endangered Hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricate), leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), green (Chelonia mydas), and Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) sea turtles, and the endangered West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus). Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Permit No: SAJ-1996-02789 (NWP-WDD) Date of Issue: February 28,2013 Expiration Date: March 18, 2017 Project Description: Dredging from Clam Pass and tidal creek to restore tidal exchange into Clam Bay. Department of Environmental Protection Permit Modification to Permit No: 0296087-002-JN Date of Issue: March 1, 2013 Expiration Date: August 14, 2022 Project Description: Modification to re-open Clam Pass 67 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 5.0 Management Plan Goal and Supporting Objectives The following goal and supporting objectives for the management of the Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection Area were developed in accordance with the directives of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and the Pelican Bay Services Division, which serves as an advisory board to the BCC. The goal and supporting objectives were formed in conjunction with stakeholder input and are based on the management issues present in the preserve as well as the purposes for which the land is held in public trust. The document goal and supporting objectives set forth in this plan should not appreciably change over time but the management techniques and activities proposed may be modified based on ongoing coordination with stakeholder and user groups or when management objectives are not being met. Management concerns are addressed in the following sections along with the management techniques or activities proposed for addressing those concerns. The ability to implement specific goal objectives presented in this plan will be based on funding and staffing availability. The following framework was identified during the stakeholder and PBSD committee meetings. GOAL The goal of the Clam Bay NRPA Management Plan is to maintain, protect, and monitor the native floral and faunal communities. Thereby ensuring natural resource protection and long- term sustainability by incorporating, evaluating and prioritizing all relevant information about the estuary into a cohesive management strategy, that allows for recreational activities within its boundaries, while protecting the long-term health of the ecosystem and its natural and historical resources. Objectives to support this goal include: 6. Maintain and protect the native floral and faunal communities within the Clam Bay NRPA 7. Protect archaeological sites within the Clam Bay NRPA 8. Ensure recreational activities are environmentally compatible within the Clam Bay NRPA 9. Ensure the estuary has adequate tidal and freshwater flows to maintain ecological health within the Clam Bay NRPA 10.Monitor, maintain, and where possible and economically feasible, enhance water quality within the Clam Bay NRPA These objectives were formed to allow for adaptive management, whereby the compilation and analysis of all data will occur holistically and provide direction to adjust strategies to better achieve the goal. 68 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Objective 1 - Maintain and protect the native floral and faunal communities within the Clam Bay NRPA A. Maintain healthy,native floral and faunal populations i) Identify and Plan: a. Identify flora and faunal resources to monitor b. Establish methods for monitoring c. Determine if a baseline study for the resource has been completed or if one is needed d. Define an appropriate monitoring schedule ii) Report and Analyze: a. Document monitoring results b. Analyze data c. Compare data to baseline conditions d. Determine if anthropogenic habitat enhancements are appropriate (nest boxes, planting, etc) e. Determine implications on current management methods iii) Adapt and Act: a. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective b. Implement adaptions to management B. Protect Listed Species i) Identify and Plan: a. Identify, locate and determine status of listed flora and fauna species and associated habitat types b. Identify vulnerable listed species and potential problem areas c. Compile existing and baseline data (including population trends, potential threats, and past incidents) d. Establish methods for monitoring e. Define an appropriate monitoring schedule ii) Report and Analyze: a. Assess listed species and compare data to baseline b. Document threats,harassment,and/or damage c. Analyze trends d. Determine implications on current management methods iii) Adapt and Act: a. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective b. Implement adaptions to management 69 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 C. Remove Exotic and Nuisance Flora and Fauna i) Identify and Plan: a. Identify and locate exotic,non native and nuisance species b. Establish methods for monitoring c. Define an appropriate monitoring schedule ii) Report and Analyze: a. Assess status of exotics and nuisance species b. Track changes in type and extent c. Determine if removal action is required iii) Adapt and Act: a. Remove Category I and II invasive exotic species and nuisance species (if appropriate) b. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective c. Implement adaptions to management D. Develop an integrated resource management strategy to interpret research results and configure modeling tools for implementing a conservation strategy i) Identify and Plan: a. Define a suite of indicators to detect changes in the ecosystem and response(s) to that change b. If appropriate, develop an ecosystem model that incorporates system drivers ii) Report and Analyze: a. Report and analyze model results b. Assess biological and physical characterizations of the estuary c. Verify model predictions with actual collected data iii) Adapt and Act a. Identify missing components b. Plan future research c. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective 70 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Objective 2-Protect archaeological sites within the Clam Bay NRPA Develop an effective management approach to maintain and conserve known archeological sites and their associated artifact assemblage from vandalism, exotic vegetation,erosion and other forms of degradation i) Identify and Plan: a. Identify the historical studies on record with the Florida Division of Historical Resources(DHR)that have been completed to date b. Allow archeologists interested in conducting further investigations to do so in conjunction with DHR c. Establish methods for monitoring(photo stations,transects, etc.) d. Define an appropriate monitoring schedule ii) Report and Analyze: a. Document monitoring results, identifying any signs of deterioration b. Compare data to baseline conditions iii) Adapt and Act a. Report any new findings to DHR Master Site Files b. Develop methods to discourage vandalism and/or disturbances(if necessary) c. Plan future research should new technologies allow opportunities d. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective e. Implement adaptions to management 71 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Objective 3 - Ensure recreational activities are environmentally compatible within the Clam Bay NRPA A. Enable the public to make informed decisions when recreating by increasing their ability to act responsibly when enjoying the coastal community ecosystem i) Identify and Plan: a. Identify and locate existing permitted signage, publications and interpretive exhibits that educate the public about the system and stewardship b. Define an appropriate monitoring and updating schedule for permitted signage, publications and interpretive exhibits c. Establish methods for tracking trends of public use, law enforcement citations and incompatible uses ii) Report and Analyze: a. Document monitoring and tracking results b. Analyze data c. Determine if any activities resulted in damage to natural resources d. Track changes in signage permitting process and enforceability e. Determine implications on current management methods iii) Adapt and Act: a. Repair or replace damaged signage b. Update or add to existing permitted signage, publications and interpretive exhibits(if necessary and/or able) c. Promote and encourage traditional, low impact recreational uses d. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective e. Implement adaptions to management B. Increase active stewardship by promoting the value of coastal resources i) Identify and Plan: a. Catalog educational signage and printed materials b. Identify potential partner/volunteer organizations and personnel c. Establish methods for planning and performing volunteer efforts (including clean-up,monitoring, educational tours, etc.) d. Develop methods to discourage vandalism and resource disturbance ii) Report and Analyze: a. Document data,results, and events b. Analyze data c. Determine if any activities resulted in damage to natural resources d. Track changes in signage permitting process and enforceability e. Determine implications on current management methods 72 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 iii) Adapt and Act: a. Repair or replace damaged educational signage b. Update or add to educational signage and printed materials (if necessary and/or able) c. Promote and encourage volunteer and partnering efforts d. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective e. Implement adaptions to management C. Maintain opportunities for low-impact public use i) Identify and Plan: a. Define Collier County (Parks and Rec) and PBSD upkeep responsibilities regarding public access and areas b. Establish methods for inspecting and maintaining public access and areas c. Develop methods to relay public concerns, as well as issues with public access and areas, back to Collier County (Parks and Rec) and to ensure action/follow up ii) Report and Analyze: a. Document concerns and maintenance issues b. Analyze data iii) Adapt and Act: a. Coordinate with Collier County(Parks and Rec)to refine interactions and doling of responsibilities b. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective c. Implement adaptions to management 73 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Objective 4 - Ensure the estuary has adequate tidal and freshwater flows to maintain ecological health within the Clam Bay NRPA A. Identify the minimum tidal flow necessary to ensure a healthy ecosystem. Provide sufficient tidal exchange to maximize benefits while minimizing negative environmental impacts. i) Identify and Plan: a. Establish adequate long-term key hydrological and biological guidelines to sustain ecosystem health b. Identify conditions that prompt further investigation into whether or not to dredge Clam Pass c. Plan for stakeholder meetings to address the need for a 10 year dredging permit d. Establish methods for monitoring the Pass and internal waterways, including (bathymetry,tide gauge data, and biological data) e. Define appropriate monitoring schedules ii) Report and Analyze: a. Document data collected to monitor the Pass and internal waterways b. Analyze data in conjunction with biological data to determine if any action is necessary 1. Evaluate if dredging is necessary to prevent ecological damage to estuary 2. Determine if recent hydrologic surveys indicate significant shoaling 3. Assess the probability that the situation is unable to naturally rectify itself iii) Adapt and Act: a. If action is appropriate, design and develop a dredging template with consideration of resources b. Attain authorization from agencies c. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective d. Implement adaptions to management B. Ensure appropriate freshwater inputs and drainage i) Identify and Plan: a. Determine quantity, quality and timing of adequate freshwater inputs b. Develop methods and schedule for assessing watershed flow c. Establish methods and schedule of assessing hand dug channels ii) Report and Analyze: a. Document status of hand dug channels and identify areas of impoundment b. Assess current watershed flow and compare to data from prior years and per- development c. Prioritize maintenance needs within hand dug channels 74 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 d. Determine implications on current management methods iii) Adapt and Act: a. If needed, conduct prioritized maintenance on hand dug channels b. Attain necessary authorization from agencies c. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective d. Implement adaptions to management 75 CLAMBAYNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Objective 5- To restore,enhance and maintain with water quality within the Clam Bay NRPA A. Develop a long-term water quality program that assesses physical, chemical and biological processes to ensure a sustainable healthy environment for all users i) Identify and Plan: a. Establish a water quality monitoring program that incorporates historical data to assess water quality b. Ensure that this program complies with FDEP guidelines and standards, addresses the Site Specific Criteria previously approved by the State, and complies with Objectives 4 and 5 c. Continue monthly water quality sampling in accordance with FDEP Standard Operating Procedures d. Develop a plan to track the quality of freshwater and saltwater inputs within the watershed e. Explore partnership opportunities to address water quality concerns ii) Report and Analyze: a. Complete quarterly reports detailing water quality data b. Assess results and compare to past data c. Assess results in conjunction with biological data d. Determine if any parameters are outside of tolerances or presenting trends e. Determine probable cause if deterioration occurs iii) Adapt and Act: a. Develop and enact solutions to restore healthy water quality b. Identify changes to methods to better achieve objective c. Implement adaptions to management B. Promote comprehensive programs for controlling water pollution from point and nonpoint sources i) Identify and Plan: a. Determine how and to what degree water quality within the Clam Bay NRPA is influenced by land use (including hydrologic restoration) b. Identify best management practices geared at reducing storm water pollutant loads c. Continue with plan to reduce or eliminate Copper Sulfate usage within Pelican Bay storm water lakes ii) Report and Analyze: a. Assess monthly water quality sampling results b. Assess upland stormwater sampling results when available 76 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 c. Analyze data to determine if efforts have resulted in a reduction in nutrient and/or pollution parameters of freshwater inputs iii) Adapt and Act: a. Refine strategies to achieve both reduction of nutrients and pollutants and to achieve compliance with FDEP standards b. Implement adaptions to management 77 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Clam Bay NRPA Management Plan Amendments Studies within the Clam Bay Estuary as well as in other similar local ecosystems are either ongoing or expected to occur within the asked for time frame of this document. The Management Plan is not expected to be a static document and ongoing research and data collection related to water quality; hydrographic changes in the various areas of the system;benthic community health;mangrove community health; exotic and nuisance vegetation control; and public education will be conducted and/or collected. Conclusions,recommendations, or alternative management activities that come about as a result of studies conducted outside of the scope of this management plan will be examined and considered by the Pelican Bay Services Division and its consultants. Those modification that are found to be viable,pertinent, and economically feasible alternatives or additions allowed under the scope of this plan will be added to the plan. Those changes in management activities or new work items that are outside of the scope of the Plan but are considered important or practicable by the Pelican Bay Services Division and its consultants will be submitted to DEP and the ACOE for consideration and inclusion into this Management Plan. 78 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 Clam Bay NRPA Management Plan Bibliography 1. Gee&Jensen Engineers,Architects and Planners, Inc., 1978,Hydrographic Study Clam Bay System Collier County,Florida for Coral Ridge-Collier Properties Inc.,report. 2. Tri-County Engineering,Inc., 1971,Tidal Datum Plane Determination for the Collier Company. 3. Davis,R.A. Jr.,Gibeaut,James C., 1990,Historical Morphodynamics of Inlets in Florida: Models for Coastal Zone Planning, Technical Paper. 4. Department of Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering, Florida Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station,University of Florida, 1970, Proposed Navigation Entrance to Clam Bay on Marco Island,Collier County,Marco Island Development Corporation,technical paper. 5. February 1979,Environmental Assessment Northwest Fill Area for Pelican Bay,Turrell& Associates, Inc.,technical paper. 6. Devlin, Donna J., Gore,Robert H.,Proffitt, C. Edward, 1987,Preliminary Analyses of Seagrass and Benthic Infauna in Johnson and Clam Bays, Collier County, Florida,Natural Resources of Collier County Florida,technical paper. 7. Devlin,Donna J., Collier County Beach Renourishment Project: A Survey of the Marine Benthos,technical paper. 8. Heald, Eric J., Tabb, Durbin C., Roessler,Martin A., Beardsley, Gary L., Ward, Gerlad M., Durrance, Dallas H.,Yeend,John S., 1978, Carbon Flows in Portions of the Clam Pass Estuarine System, Collier County, Florida,Tropical Biolndustries Company and Gee and Jenson, Engineers-Architects-Planners, Inc., technical paper. 9. 1994, Clam Bay Natural Resources Protection Area Management Plan Draft,Collier County Natural Resources Department,technical paper. 10. Worley,Kathy, Hennig,Markus,July 2000, Clam Bay Mangrove Projects: Interim Summary of Statistical Results, The Conservancy of Southwest Florida,technical paper. 11. Benedict,Mark A., Harvey,Judson W., Curran, Maura E., 1983,Part 1 Beach Management Planning and Implementation Strategies at the Local Level,Natural Resources of Collier County Florida,technical paper. 12. Benedict,Mark A.,Harvey,Judson W., Curran,Maura E., 1983, Part II The Beach in Collier County: A Model in Southwest Florida,Natural Resources of Collier County Florida,technical paper. 79 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 13. Benedict, Mark A., Harvey, Judson W., Curran,Maura E., 1983,Part 3 A Resource Management Program for the Coastal Barriers of Collier County Florida,Natural Resources of Collier County Florida, technical paper. 14. October 1990,Collier County Sand Source and Environmental Report Phase II Hard Bottom Characterization, Continental Shelf Associates, Inc.,technical paper. 15. Hartwell, Richard W.,Hatcher,James M., Grabe, Stephen,August 1994, Clam Bay Natural Resources Protection Area(NRPA), Collier County Environmental Services Division, Publication Series NR-SP-94-01,technical paper. 16. Dean, R.G., O'Brien,M.P., December 1987,Florida's West Coast Inlets Shoreline Effects and Recommended Action, Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Department and Division of Beaches and Shores Department of Natural Resources,technical paper. 17. Heald, E.J.,Roessler M.A., Beardsley, G.L., 1979,Litter production in a Southwest Florida Black Mangrove Community, Reprint from Proceedings of the Florida Anti-Mosquito Association 50th Meeting,Abstract. 18. May 1970, Coastal Engineering Study of the Proposed Clam Pass Improvement, The Collier Company,Department of Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering,technical paper. 19. Sarkar, Chiranjib K.,October 1972, Hydrographic Investigation of the Clam Bay System,Tri- County Engineering,Inc., Technical paper. 20. June 1979,A Comparative Study of the Water and Carbon Flows of Upper Clam Bay,Tropical Biolndustries and Missimer and Associates, Inc., technical paper. 21. Heald, Eric J.,Roessler,Martin A., December 1979, Invertebrate Population Studies in the Vicinity of Upper Clam Bay, Collier County,Florida, Tropical Biolndustries,technical paper. 22. Heald,Eric J., July 1983,Populations of Melampus coffeus and Cerithidea scalariformis West of Upper Clam Bay, Collier County,Florida, Tropical Biolndustries,Inc.,technical paper. 23. Heald,Eric J., July 1983, Fish Populations of Tidal Ponds West of Upper Clam Bay Collier County,Florida,Tropical Biolndustries,technical report. 24. Crewz, David W., 1989, Clam Pass Park mangrove damage, Department of Natural Resources Interoffice Memorandum. 25. Wanless, Harold R., Risi, J. Andrew,July 1996, Observations on Barrier Beach Stratigraphy and Groundwater Flow in the Vicinity of the Mangrove Die Off Adjacent to the Strand, Pelican Bay, Collier County, Florida, Collier County Natural Resources Department,technical report. 26. Wanless, Harold R.,February 1975,Report on the Beaches of Naples,Florida, technical report. 80 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 27. Hawkins,Mary Ellen, Obley, Ross P.,"Pelican Bay-Visit and Revisit."Urban Land Vol. 40, No 11., (December 1981)21-27. 28. Lorenz, William,D. Jr., January 1996, Clam Bay NRPA Nutrient Reduction Program Draft, technical report. 29. Scott, Will, December 1993, "Water,Water...Everywhere what you may not know about Pelican Bay's innovative water management system."Draft-memorandum,ABB. 30. Heald, Eric J., January 1972,Investigation of Fluctuations in the Clam Bay System, Tri-County Engineering,Inc and Tropical Biolndustries,technical report. 31. Acquaviva, Daniel J., October 1993, Responses to Development of Regional Impact Questions Number 14 and 17 Pelican Marsh Community,North Naples,Florida,ViroGroup Inc./Missimer Division,technical paper. 32. Davis,Richard A Jr., Gibeaut,James,January 1990, Historical Morphodynamics of Inlets in Florida: Models for Coastal Zone Planning. Department of Geology,University of South Florida,technical report. 33. Knapp, Michael S., Burns, Wm. Scott, Sharp,Timothy S. Preliminary Assessment of the Groundwater Resources of Western Collier County.Florida. Technical publication#86-1. February 1986. 34. "Modification of Permit No. 11-00065-S Pelican Bay."Pelican Bay Improvement District Staff Report. March 1983. 35. Preliminary Hydrographic Assessment Clam Bay Systems. Tackney&Associates, Inc.,August 1996. 36. Hole,Montes& Associates,Inc.,Post,Buckley, Schuh&Jernigan,Inc. Water Management Plan Construction Permit Application for Systems 4 and 5. Pelican Bay Improvement District, September 1982. 37. Goodrick, Robert L. "Pelican Bay—Environmental Considerations,permit No. 11-00065-S." Memorandum to file,January 15, 1982. 38. Hermanson, George H. "Proposed Modifications to Drainage Area 3, System No. V." Hole, Montes &Associates, Inc., January 28, 1988. 39. "Modification of Permit No. 11-00065-S Pelican Bay."Pelican Bay Improvement District Staff Report, 1983. 81 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 40. Florida. South Florida Water Management District. In Reply to Request for Modification of Surface Water Management Permit No. 11-00065-S."October 19, 1978. 41. Stanley W. Hole and Associates, Inc.,Post,Buckley, Schuh&Jernigan,Inc. Water Management Plan Permit Application. Pelican bay Improvement District,April 1978. 42. Florida. Collier County Environmental Services Division Inlet Management Resources. Bibliography. 43. Florida. South Florida Water Management District. Application No. 04718-C for Surface Water Management Permit Staff Report. August 1978. 44. Post, Buckley, Schuh&Jernigan, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Planners. Engineering Report Water Management System VI for the Pelican Bay Improvement District. February 1984. 45. Wilson, Miller, Barton&Peek,Inc. Pelican Bav/Clam Bay Water Management System Contributing Areas. CAD drawings. October 1998. 46. Coral Ridge-Collier Properties, Inc.Pelican Bay A Planned Residential Community. 47. Florida. Natural Resources of Collier County Florida. Part 5 Coastal Zone Management Units: Atlas. 1984. 48. Suboceanic Consultants Inc.Naples Beach Study Report. University of Florida Coastal Engineering Archives. August 1980. 49. Wilson, Miller, Barton& Peek, Inc. Pelican Bay Mangrove Investigation,Pelican Bay Water Management System-Stormwater Detention Volume and Water Budget Analyses. April 1996. 50. Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. Collier County Sand Source and Environmental Report Phase I Hard Bottom Mapping. Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc, October 1990. 51. Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division. Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan. Florida Environmental Resource and Joint Coastal Permit Application,Federal Dredge and Fill permit Application. April 1997. 52. Missimer and Associates, Inc. Subsurface Water and Carbon Floes to Portions of the Clam Pass Estuarine System, Collier County,Florida.Technical report,March 1979. 53. The Collier Company. Coastal Engineering Study of the Proposed Clam Pass Improvement. Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station, College of Engineering, University of Florida. May 1970. 54. Crewz, David W. Florida. Department of Natural Resources. Clam Pass Mangrove Damage. Interoffice Memo, May 1989. 82 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 55. Wilson,Miller, Barton&peek, Inc. Figure 1 Existing Stormwater Flows on an Outgoing Tide (Diagrammatic). Map of Clam Bay. 56. Wilson, Miller,Barton&Peek,Inc. Figure 2 Proposed Expedited Conveyance Plan of Stormwater Flows on an Outgoing Tide(Diagrammatic). Map of Clam Bay. 57. Acquaviva,Daniel J. Site Specific Investigations to Obtain Hydrologic Information for the Design of Horizontal Well Systems at Pelican Bay,Naples,Florida. Water Resource Solutions, Inc., September 1999. 58. Hole, Montes& Associates, Inc. "Evaluation of an Onsite Irrigation Water Source."The Pelican Bay Improvement District,April 1984. 59. Post,Buckley, Schuh&Jernigan,Inc. Hydrology and Geology of a Proposed New Well Field Site in North Collier,Florida. For the Pelican Bay Improvement District,March 1978. 60. Obley,Ross P., letter to Jim Ward. July 1999. 61. Gee&Jenson Engineers,Architects&Planners, Inc. "Pelican bay System VI Drainage."April 1983. 62. Wilson,Miller,Barton&Peek,Inc. "Pelican Bay."Memo to file. May 1987. 63. Florida. "Aquatic Plant Management Annual Operations Report."Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Aquatic Plant Management. January 1999. 64. Florida. "Agreement for Delivery and use of Treated Wastewater Effluent for Spray Irrigation." Official record of Collier County,Florida. Interoffice Memo. August 1996. 65. Florida. Department of Environmental Protection. "Aquatic Plant Management Permit." January 1999. 66. Davis, Richard A., Hine, Albert C., Bland,Michael J. "Midnight Pass, Florida: Inlet Instability Due to Man-Related Activities in Little Sarasota Bay."Coastal Sediments `87,May 1987. 67. Metz, Charles. "More than Mangroves at Stake."April 1997. 68. Florida. South Florida Water Management District. "Request for Modification of Surface Water Management Permit No. 11-00065-S." Staff Report. October 1978. 69. Florida. South Florida Water Management District. "Water Use Permit." June 1998. 83 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN(DRAFT) Pelican Bay Services Division March 4,2014 Ver.4.1 70. Hartman,P.K. "Excavation Permit No. 59.156."Collier County Water Management Department letter,March 1983. 71. Fox, Lloyd II. "Collier County-DW Spray Irrigation-Unrestricted Public Access(Residential) Groundwater Monitoring."Department of Environmental Regulation, State of Florida, letter. May 1987. 72. Florida. South Florida Water Management District. "Water Use Permit Staff Report."June 1978. 73. Florida. South Florida Water Management District. "Surface Water Management Staff Review Summary."April 1992. 84 ��; ate * � w .-r-, f �E •. , i .141 � . <41 lip r. i ^�� ' k s W U) w CCS 1111111 y a W Q 6 ;Vol" W EY 111111 r 0 Lz #z � ` e 7; i. DS N ts Z / f S f !'tow O Z -Q w . • • 111 A 11111 (1) )11 1_I_ �'�` Y - CL CO iiill e lC Cw o 63 . t CI mss ' b o 0 1( cns CI9 °' + w Y N 0) C"j. } .. • r J .k �r r 0.. i�. to �` :� � � O Zc cNo /f iC: t r �,` C 4 Yin. { ..f -� W U ..e'er.—"iir 54- 1.s.".;t �it' i , Q W Y N W ,� i Y Q z ct b A � � t SAM' � � � 0... � � � �--� 0 ii. c «' o 0 2 N 4 1 i , 4, , 1 j 11.1 •j4. a Vie' Z S o ct (� 5re� s Q Z W s W 2 a s 1( 0 a- . .. ..'".4,r,..t -;,,- 414014, , li 3,,N* !,,,,,,, ..,..< '`45, A w% ‘0410,01441.1-- , , t ,„„ 41, .„ - ..5...i. 4 �./� r `V #vs }• Y`•a'1T ��.�.� ` VJ O It GI., s CJ + v � .. a CI a o CA Z + 1 s ;•Y .F d W .Q Q M P �' ��' " � i , � � cc3 U 7.._ " UhY � ' tYzs tee+ 4 1 ,Nt1 Y E' r q ' f y` !~ Bryn t" ,TTI: + Z Z mt CC �s `- t t tir W Q ca o ct U � a�w a 4•�rfR W [� a >� �1 �} t� t� `' f 5 b'� � S ' !h5U.31i'''r A''- 7 9 t Vit 4 'il '': .m a. T. a P:\9845 Clam Bay\Drawings\SHEET\MANATEE-SIGNS\2073_MANATEE_SIGNS.dwg MANATEE ZONES Z't 8!2(114 RANOIJONES March 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Bay Potential Speed Zones per 327.46 FS (prepared by Tim Hall) 327.46 Boating-restricted areas.-- (1) Boating-restricted areas,including,but not limited to,restrictions of vessel speeds and vessel traffic,may be established on the waters of this state for any purpose necessary to protect the safety of the public if such restrictions are necessary based on boating accidents,visibility,hazardous currents or water levels,vessel traffic congestion,or other navigational hazards. (a) The commission may establish boating-restricted areas by rule pursuant to chapter 120. (b) Municipalities and counties have the authority to establish the following boating-restricted areas by ordinance: 1. An ordinance establishing an idle speed,no wake boating-restricted area,if the area is: a.Within 500 feet of any boat ramp,hoist,marine railway,or other launching or landing facility available for use by the general boating public on waterways more than 300 feet in width or within 300 feet of any boat ramp,hoist,marine railway,or other launching or landing facility available for use by the general boating public on waterways not exceeding 300 feet in width. b.Within 500 feet of fuel pumps or dispensers at any marine fueling facility that sells motor fuel to the general boating public on waterways more than 300 feet in width or within 300 feet of the fuel pumps or dispensers at any licensed terminal facility that sells motor fuel to the general boating public on waterways not exceeding 300 feet in width. c.Inside or within 300 feet of any lock structure. 2. An ordinance establishing a slow speed,minimum wake boating-restricted area if the area is: a.Within 300 feet of any bridge fender system. b.Within 300 feet of any bridge span presenting a vertical clearance of less than 25 feet or a horizontal clearance of less than 100 feet. c.On a creek,stream,canal,or similar linear waterway if the waterway is less than 75 feet in width from shoreline to shoreline. d.On a lake or pond of less than 10 acres in total surface area. 3. An ordinance establishing a vessel-exclusion zone if the area is: a. Designated as a public bathing beach or swim area. b.Within 300 feet of a dam,spillway,or flood control structure. (c) Municipalities and counties have the authority to establish by ordinance the following other boating- restricted areas: 1. An ordinance establishing an idle speed,no wake boating-restricted area,if the area is within 300 feet of a confluence of water bodies presenting a blind corner,a bend in a narrow channel or fairway,or such other area if an intervening obstruction to visibility may obscure other vessels or other users of the waterway, Page 1 of 2 March 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Bay Potential Speed Zones per 327.46 FS (prepared by Tim Hall) 2. An ordinance establishing a slow speed,minimum wake,or numerical speed limit boating-restricted area if the area is: a.Within 300 feet of a confluence of water bodies presenting a blind corner,a bend in a narrow channel or fairway,or such other area if an intervening obstruction to visibility may obscure other vessels or other users of the waterway. b.Subject to unsafe levels of vessel traffic congestion. c.Subject to hazardous water levels or currents,or containing other navigational hazards. d.An area that accident reports,uniform boating citations,vessel traffic studies,or other creditable data demonstrate to present a significant risk of collision or a significant threat to boating safety. 3. An ordinance establishing a vessel-exclusion zone if the area is reserved exclusively: a. As a canoe trail or otherwise limited to vessels under oars or under sail. b. For a particular activity and user group separation must be imposed to protect the safety of those participating in such activity. Any of the ordinances adopted pursuant to this paragraph shall not take effect until the commission has reviewed the ordinance and determined by substantial competent evidence that the ordinance is necessary to protect public safety pursuant to this paragraph.Any application for approval of an ordinance shall be reviewed and acted upon within 90 days after receipt of a completed application.Within 30 days after a municipality or county submits an application for approval to the commission,the commission shall advise the municipality or county as to what information,if any,is needed to deem the application complete.An application shall be considered complete upon receipt of all requested information and correction of any error or omission for which the applicant was timely notified or when the time for such notification has expired.The commission's action on the application shall be subject to review under chapter 120.The commission shall initiate rulemaking no later than January 1,2010,to provide criteria and procedures for reviewing applications and procedures for providing for public notice and participation pursuant to this paragraph. (2) Each such boating-restricted area shall be developed in consultation and coordination with the governing body of the county or municipality in which the boating-restricted area is located and,when the boating- restricted area is to be on the navigable waters of the United States,with the United States Coast Guard and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. (3) It is unlawful for any person to operate a vessel in a prohibited manner or to carry on any prohibited activity,as defined in this chapter,within a boating-restricted area which has been clearly marked by regulatory markers as authorized under this chapter. (4) Restrictions in a boating-restricted area established pursuant to this section shall not apply in the case of an emergency or to a law enforcement,firefighting,or rescue vessel owned or operated by a governmental entity. History.--s.7,ch.63-105;s. 1,ch.65-361;ss.25,35,ch.69-106;s.23,ch.78-95;s.7,ch.81-100;s.27,ch.99- 245;s. 16,ch.2000-362;s.13,ch.2009-86. Page 2 of 2 March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Renewal of Turrell-Hall annual Clam Bay contract Page 1 of 2 TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES, INC. MARINE& ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 3584 Exchange Avenue,Suite B•Naples,Florida 34104-3732•(239)643-0166•Fax 643-6632•thall @turrell-associates.com June 2,2011 RECEIVED JUN 0 7 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division PELICAN BAY BERMES Dit Mr.Kyle Lukasz 801 Laurel Oak Drive,Suite 605 Naples,FL 34108 Re: Proposal for Professional Environmental Services Clam Bay Biological Studies(Contract 10-5571)-Fiscal Year 2010-2011 Dear Mr.Lukasz: Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc.is pleased to provide you with this proposal for environmental services. Based on the Request for Proposal and the newly issued County contract(10-5571),we propose to continue annual biological monitoring of Clam Bay with the following scope of services. Task I-Annual Biological Monitoring to include sampling and photographs Lump Sum$22,250.00 Task II-Seagrass Monitoring of outer Clam Bay and nearby channels Lump Sum$4,680.00 Task III-Tidal Data Collection,Analysis and Hydrographic Reporting Lump Sum$28,750.00 Task IV- Water Quality Data Analysis to include coordination of data from PBSD,data input and annual analyses to compare past and present trends Lump Sum$5,520.00 Task V-Water Level Data Collection to include installation and downloading Lump Sum$9,770.00 Task VI- Annual Report Preparation and Submittal Lump Sum$11,215.00 Task VII- Annual Report Presentation Lump Sum$3,600.00 Task VIII-Hand Dug Channel Inspection and Maintenance to include both verifying channel stability and oversight of maintenance events if the channels are filling-in Lump Sum$10,400.00 Task IX-Additional consulting services,meeting attendance,site investigation and research field observation and reports Time and Materials(Not to Exceed)$15,000.00 Reimbursable Expenses $1,000.00 I Lump Sum Total $96,185.00 Time and Materials Total $16,000.00 March 4,2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Renewal of Turrell-Hall annual Clam Bay contract Page 2 of 2 June 2, 2011 -- ------ Terrell,Hall &Associates,Inc. Page 2 TURRELL,HALL&ASSOCIATES,INC FEE SCHEDULE Principal/Professional Engineer $185.00/hr. Senior Ecologist $175.00/hr. Senior Engineer $145.00!hr. Engineer III $105.00/hr. Staff Engineer(II) $ 95.00/hr. Project Manager $125.00/hr. Senior Biologist $105.00/hr. Senior Marine Biologist $105.00/hr. Staff Biologist $ 90.00/hr. Marine Biologist $ 90.00/hr. AutoCAD Technician $ 85.00/hr. Field Technician $ 75.00/hr. Project Coordinator $ 70.00/hr. Administrative Assistant $ 50.001 hr. Boat $45.00!hr. Expert Witness/Engineer $275.00!hr. Expert Witness/Biologist $250.00/hr. Aircraft $250.00/hr. Boat $45.00/hr. Gheenoe $20.00 I hr. 4-Wheeler $20.00/hr. Mileage $0.45/mile Hypack $45.00/hr. J)escrintion Unit Price 8 V2 X 11 Color Copies <10=$0.80; 210=$0.60; 2100=$0.50 81/2X 14 Color Copies <1,0=$1.25; 210=$1.00; 2100=$0.90 11 x 17 Color Copies <10=$1.60; 210=$1.40; 2100=$1.20 24 X 36 Plot <10=$5.00; 210=$4.00 24 X 36 Aerial Plot $15.00 ea. 24 X 36 Photo Paper Plot $20.00 ea. Other Items as billed by our Vendors: Conference Calling Postage Courier Service Overnight Deliveries Rev.12/6/10 Okek a., '-E z y cs y er 2013 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board 5. Watercraft violating County Ordinance G46 Page 1 of 5 _J • I ORDINANCE NO.96- 16 rte` c • AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO VESSEL CONTROL AND WATEI�' 9 • SAFETY IN TUE CLAM BAY SYSTEM;PROVIDING FOR INTENT ,32,02122 •ND PURPOSE;PROVIDING TITLE AND CITATION;SETTING L.; N ^�a ^a 'TII APPLICABILITY;PROVIDING FOR VESSEL SPEED , I hO R , ylLATION; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING r, ) ' Q� 49 PENT\\LTIES;PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT;PROVIDING • r FOIA ONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY;AND PROVIDING W'c, �AN�EPFECTIVE DATE. i " +CZP WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 327.60, Florida Statutes, has the legal authority to adopt this Ordinance to impose idle speed zones on waterways in the unincorporated • areas of the County;and WHEREAS,the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan,adopted by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners on May 23, 1995,has identified the Clam Bay System as an idle • • speed zone;and • • WHEREAS, it is necessary that the speed and operation of vessels located in the Clam , Bay System as specified herein be controlled m order to protect manatees and their habitat;and • WHEREAS,the Clam Bay System has been designated as a Natural Resource Protection Area in Collier County;and • WHEREAS, it is in the interest for the safety and welfare of the canoeing public, kayakers,and small boat operators,that certain controls and regulations be enacted to reduce risk and injury to the canoeing public,kayakers,and small boat operators and ensure the enjoyablity of these natural resources by the general public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY • COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,that: ' SECTION ONE: INTENT AND PURPOSE !' It is the intent and purpose of this Ordinance to protect and promote the health,safety and ,• • welfare of the public, including residents and visitors to Collier County and in particular to the • Clam Bay area by providing reasonable regulation to the operation of vessels as defined. It is further intended that this ordh ance shall be liberally construed to effect such intent and purpose. i SECTION TWO: TITLE AND CITATION '• • •• • This Ordinance shall be known and be cited as the"Clam Bay System Water Safety and Vessel Control Ordinance."• I SECTION THREE: APPLICABILITY ' ' This Ordinance shall apply to and be enforced on all the waters of the following described • Restricted Areas: I. The Clam Bay System including Upper Clam Bay, Inner Clam Bay, Outer Clam • Bay,and Clam Pass. The restricted areas are as specified on the map attached hereto as"Exhibit A. . 2. Reserved. • I September 5,2013 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board 5. Watercraft violating County Ordinance 96-16 Page 2 of 5 MEN- MEM ftir� • SECTION FOUR: VESSEL SPEED REGULATION Except during an emergency or operation by an official of the government while engaged in official business,the operation of any vessel in excess of idle speed,as defined herein,in or on any waters of the Clam Bay System is hereby prohibited and is a violation of this Ordinance. Said V • prohibition is effective and enforceable provided the"no wake" area is designated by regulatory marker,signage,buoy,or any other notice of the"no wake"status. The locations of such notices shall be placed at the discretion of the County Staff. All such notices posted by the County are official notices of the County. It is no defense to a violation of this Ordinance to allege that the Defendant did not observe notice of the"no wake"status of the waters of the Clam Bay System. • SECTION FIVE: DEFINITIONS For the purposes of this Ordinance,the following words are defined as follows: A. IDLE SPEED means the minimum speed through or over the surface of the water that will allow the vessel operator to maintain steerage of the vessel. B. OPERATE means to be in control of the speed of a vessel traveling over or in water. C. VESSEL means a motor propelled and/or artificially propelled boat, sailboat, barge,airboat or other watercraft used or capable of being used as a means of transportation of one(I)or more persons over or in the water, whether propelled by wind, propeller, or forcing flow of water by propeller or impeller,or otherwise. Vessel does not include a canoe,kayak,or similar small minimum wake type vessels provided the vessel is then being propelled only by paddle and not by motor,pump,or sail. "Vessel"does not include seaplane. { SECTION SIX: PENALTIES I Each violation of this Ordinance is a civil infraction. If a Citation of Violation is not contested and is paid in full and on time, the fine shall be Fifty dollars ($50.00) for the first violation within any six (6) month period, and one hundred dollars ($100.00) for a second violation by the same person within any one(1)year period. If the fine is not paid in full and on time,the Court may impose a fine of up to five hundred dollars($500.00)plus court costs and any other costs and/or fees authorized to be imposed by the Court by Florida Statutes. As an alternative means of enforcement, violations of this Ordinance may be referred to the Collier County Code Enforcement Board. • SECTION SEVEN: ENFORCEMENT V I The provisions of this Ordinance shall be enforced by any member of any duly authorized • law enforcement agency or officers having enforcement jurisdiction in Collier County, Florida. Civil Citations may be used to notify the defendant of allegations of violations of this Ordinance. $ • SECTION EIGHT: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY • In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other applicable law,the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of the Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction,such portion shall be deemed a separate,distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. September 5,2013 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board 5. Watercraft violating County Ordinance 96-16 Page 3 of 5 .a>rarr SECTION NINE: INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County,Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such,and the word"ordinance"may be changed to"section, "article," or any other appropriate word. • SECTION TEN: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Secretary of State. o I. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,Florida,this 91 1 day of /274,Z , 1996. ATTEST: • BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT•E.BROCK,Clerk OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA • 0 :7:/ • 62 • G% _ By: /�"` a :r C.NORRIS hairman . • A roved as to form and This ordinance filed with the PP Secretory of Stole's Office the • legal sufficiency: aadoy of G.f9^•�. /991 ! • and }iii.. �2i.•e: 'his daY l9L i Thomas C.Palmer "" "' i i,' . Assistant County Attorney 1 • TCP/mrb • bo rdinanealwatasaretya$ .1. 1 I: ; D , M-k d 4- C., P 1-2,3b A.et-h. CfaA4 CLAM PASS RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN c dAtof - BATHYMETRIC MONITORING REPORT NO. 9 November 2008 1. Summary The Clam Pass Restoration and Management Plan was implemented in 1999 to improve flushing of the Clam Bay System and the surrounding 500 acre mangrove preserve. Additionally, the flood tidal shoal and some of the interior waterways were dredged at the same time to improve the hydraulic efficiency of the inlet and increase the tidal prism. The improved tidal prism means more water goes in and out of Clam Pass on each tidal cycle and this larger volume of water generates stronger currents in the inlet which help to keep the inlet open and maintain the flushing improvements. Since the 1999 dredging, each annual monitoring report has shown that implementation of the dredging element of the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan has significantly improved tidal exchange throughout the bay system. The maintenance dredging of the flood shoals in January 2002 was shown to be beneficial to maintaining the improved tidal prism. In order to maintain the improved tidal exchange, the 2006 monitoring report recommended dredging of the entrance of the pass, and a portion of the flood shoal. That dredging was completed during the winter of 2007. The scope of work for the 2007 dredging was limited to Cut #4 between stations 0+00 to 18+00, which includes the inlet entrance and nearby portions of the,flood shoal. No other dredging was done in any of the interior channels; stations18+28 through 35+37 of Cut 4, Cut#1, Cut#2, or Cut#3. Nine years after the initial dredging in 1999, and after two maintenance dredging events completed in 2002 and 2007, the monitoring data show the average cross sectional flow . area through the inlet has been maintained at two to three times the cross sectional area prior to the 1999 dredging. Additionally, the tidal ranges and phase lags continue to show that the bay system is flushing more effectively than prior to the 1999 dredging. The tidal data show that flow through the inlet is still significantly stronger than the pre- 1999 conditions. The waterways leading to Outer Clam Bay, however, have more efficient tidal exchange than waterways that connect Inner Clam Bay and Upper Clam Bay. If it is concluded that additional improvements to the flushing of Inner Clam Bay and Upper Clam Bay are needed, straightening and widening the existing narrow meandering waterways would accomplish this. There has been ongoing discussion about expanding the dredging to include the ebb shoal for the purpose of obtaining additional sand for nourishment of the Clam Pass Park beach. The monitoring has shown that the beach fill placed in 1999 eroded rapidly, which may have been in part due downdrift effects from the wider cut which was dredged in 1999. The width of the cut was reduced for the 2002 dredging to try to reduce downdrift effects. Although the beach south of the inlet continued to erode, it did so at a much lower rate than was observed after the 1999 dredging. There was significant onshore movement of sand from the ebb shoal to the beach south of the inlet in 2005 as evidence that natural bypass that was interrupted by the 1999 dredging has been restored, and the April 2007 shoreline at R-43 was only-6' landward of the 1998 pre-fill position. The monitoring therefore appears to indicate that minimizing the amount of dredging of the ebb shoal and dredge cut across the beach helps preserve natural bypass at the inlet and minimizes potential impacts to the park beach. The park beach width, however, was inadequate in 1998, and remains so today. To further evaluate the potential for using Clam Pass as a sand source for restoring the park beach, the 2007 dredge cut was expanded to the 1999 limits. This provided additional sand for placement on the park beach, and is providing another opportunity to observe beach response to the wider dredging limits. This approach of determining the optimum amount of material that can be obtained from Clam Pass for beach restoration should be evaluated very carefully because a common impact from extensive dredging of inlet ebb shoals, as well as the cumulative impact of regular maintenance dredging, is increased erosion of adjacent beaches. . • 1 • • 2 II I I II 2. Introduction This report was prepared to fulfill the requirements of Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) permit 0128463-001-JC and presents the 9th set of monitoring data element of the Clam Bay Restoration i collected following implementation of the dredging it and Management Plan in April 1999. Previous monitoring ts of numbered dredging has been reported in "Clam Pass Bathymetric Monitoring in Reports" Pass in fulfillment of Special i II document,dredging events and rates of shoaling This is the final monitoring report required I' Permit Condition 10 contained in the DEP p by the permit, however, it is anticipated that the permit will be rebnewe because the1s th intent of local interests to maintain the flushing Clam Bay important element of managing � Furthermore, continued monitoring this dynamic system. ■ 3.Background and Scope ail I � Due to the dynamic nature of Clam Pass and the Clam Pass in the spngng the oftevery year the Clam Bay system, Collier County had dredged from 1995 to 1999. Several of these dredging were necessary been conducted reopen to 1999 dates and permit references under which dredging are presented in earlier monitoring reports. In 1999, the pass was dredged under JCP as part of the implementation of the Clam Bay Restoration and permit 0128463-001-JC, portions of the flood shoals and inner channels Management Plan,which included dredging p �, �, i to improve the hydraulic stability of the inlet andthe cuts which were dredged as part of Clam Bay and Inner Clam Bay. Figure 1 shows Restoration and Management Plan. most recent maintenance dredging of Clam Pass was completed in April 2007. The 3 The m was at the inlet's entrance, from stations 0+00 to area that required maintenance dredging 18+00, which is the most rapidly shoaling area t Cut 2007 #3, and St lions � dredging did not include any of the interior channels of Cut#1 18+28 to 35+37of Cut#4. This report presents the results of the August 2008 mon forgo reporof inlet et lus t l he immediate vicinity, which has been covered by previous e this report includes an expanded scope of of the to cover the work study area, whack showes the loeationshof inner channels. Figure 1 is a location map the four dredge cuts of 1999 and the locations of the beach profiles surveyed at the DEP reference monuments. . 4. Inlet Monitoring Figure 2 shows the approximate channel alignment as defined by the National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) 0.0' contour for the October 1998, January 2007 preconstruction, on, and April 2007 post construction surveys overlaid With 2007 ma 2008 ante dredge e�v�ent the eighty foot wide dredge cut that was implemented is also shown for reference. entrance. This There has often been a tendency toward northward te Borth Howeverhthe outer ebb shoal is an indication of littoral transport being toward and channel across the ebb shoal are typically oriented to the southwest which is 3 4" 444 : 4 40 till 1 :� _ 46, 4 'UPPER CLAM BAY It , , �i , _ Thr CUT#1r- :; m�+ a �rte?'..' ,--..� `t* , _i' ?mss �. £ M � � ' •- NORTH BEACH -A.7.51-4' ., z i� `'�7�. , FACILITY F��'�, �� ' :FACILITY TIDE GAUGE x.'";, '` ::ifiz 2 440' . t 117.4i1/2.0,1-441%. 1.., INNER CLAM BAY Y GULF : OF MEXECO . i , r1 CUT#2 _ f Y n< %''CUT3 FACILITY:SOUTH BEACH ' � ' ,'TIDE GAUGE �< °° k s, i ' ,it_.- , '`' • di CLAM *BAY >. x —41 .14 - 4 CZAM )P"; munii,��' ," 47:4.4 iii i ` NAPLES GRAND y 42 c' _ i. BOARDWALK .: \" R TIDE GAUGE;° 1206' 0 �6D' 1260' � '� CLAM PASS " �'' COUNTY PA � y , AY?. �� ` OUTER CLAM B SCALE: 1' = 1200' ,,,,,,----,,t': a+ *r vim r" "y= 9 '�' ° d°' Vex �' AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN iV ,44'....,4 " a� IN JANUARY 2008 AND IS PROPERTY OF ° `'� � *; �.-44`,.�, �' .il COLLIER COUNTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE " :. 4, c WI_ HITMISTON CLAM PASS &1VIOORE DREDGE CUT SITE PLAN 5s79 STRAND COURT _ NAPLES, FL 34110 ENGINEERS FOR: COLLIER COUNTY FAX: (239) 594-2025 cO sra DATE: 10/02/0$ FELE: SITEPLAN SCALE: 1"=120D' PHONE: (239) 594-2621 rnGirnrnira{;acscv www.humistonandmoore.com allorcRai,r,rw J08.i3078 DATUM: NONE FIGURE: 1 4 . ,.m. n \ \ ..,„...'\'''''''''''''' "''''''''''11. ; '''''''''''%''*''''''' ';''' 'l'' fir:Km gill)csi°1 ?‘k:i %," ' \ 1 .1 ' ,, V ', i �,/� .v e --- �. ta..�N "-4*:**,14111°At,;14.%4„..•it':',* s 44 <' C r"�°,- LDQs[S 3 viitA gg - ,f , - 4." .- '-,,,rtf: 44-, -*$‘ 'g.‘" -4'l',411 ----- 1 0 II ..!'t. - 7.-t-,: ' '''.; '',''' % 1,"*":"7"' :1,41 :,.:°71; -,/w',.*!4(' 44•"'* **.' I- ,•-**--- "` a `fi i ° , iwt ;rrtv Z W --� ,� ` a4,0,4*, ..h" ,� ., �, 2. as x _ .. t J.� La - UAiii4 > , '' UOQ J Q cl TA 2+37.5 2 U CO M O LO V1- CO p � � O la3 ~ O O STA 2+00 N m 4 STA 1+75 0 Q u_ a 41 sr - C/2STA 1+50 z Owwz STA 1+25 f:4(4 E-I Ea � iiirjr 0 �C, ZM STA 1+00 � Wz°0 =w i'--14 ''-..1-"t,. g" 55 STTAA 00++5705 m t1n r� a / SSTTAA00++2O5DJi il 76. / ZJU O0 _a W 1-Z- y v ocD O0t ws Q i-L z JD O ZU d. Z Q0a oo • Et 00 -J Oa W UWI- I H- Wm0tt U) -J Z 0_ CL o m oU r II • o0 9 J X CO rn N N C7 a D I-1- W - in „-etS � 5 consistent with a transport direction to the south, consistent with what is commonly reported to be a predominant southward transport for the Collier County coastline. Net transport in this area is, however, small relative to the directional transport, so that the net direction is subject to reversals depending on predominant seasonal and annual direction of wave energy. With the net transport being in a subtle balance between north and south, the effects of wave refraction around the ebb shoal are most likely responsible for northward migration of the inlet entrance even though the outer portion of the ebb shoal and channel orientation indicate that the predominant net transport direction is to the south. Figure 2 also shows that the inlet width was approximately forty feet wide in the pre- dredging condition of 1998 and 2007, which along with the cross sections in Appendix D - indicate that a larger dredge cut is not sustainable as an equilibrium condition due to the limited volume of tidal prism flowing through this inlet. 5. Inlet Cross Sections The channel cross section plots for the entrance of Clam Pass, the flood shoal, and interior channel within Cut #4 are presented in Appendix D. For evaluation of shoaling patterns, Figures D-1 through D-27 show the November 1999 post dredging survey in comparison to the two most recent monitoring surveys from April 2007 and August 2008. Clam Pass is a relatively small inlet with a relatively small tidal prism, and therefore has limited tidal energy to generate currents strong enough to scour sand from the channel. Because of this, inlet ebb shoal dynamics are predominately wave induced rather than tidally induced, and the inlet has therefore been susceptible to migration or even closure. However, due to improvements made in 1999, the inlet has been maintained through dredging at approximately 4 year intervals with little indication of potential for closure. The. 2007 maintenance dredging included the entrance channel and the flood shoals just inside the entrance. The dredging therefore also maintained the cross sectional area flow in the flood shoals inside the inlet to allow more efficient tidal exchange, and stronger tidal currents. The stronger currents increase the inlet's natural ability to scour sand from the channel which reduces maintenance costs. The figures in Appendix D show that the cross sectional area of flow on stations 0+00 to 18+00 has decreased between April 2007 and August 2008, except for station 11+00. The decrease in cross sectional area is the result of the inlet readjusting to its equilibrium cross sectional area. Comparison of the 2007 dredging cross.sectional area and the succeeding 2008 monitoring survey shows the median decrease of the cross sectional area to be 36% with significantly higher decreases occurring near the entrance of the channel. Though these decreases are significant, they are similar to changes that have occurred subsequent to previous maintenance dredging of this inlet. Table 1 shows changes that have occurred in each station's cross sectional area subsequent to each dredging event since 1999, based on the succeeding year's monitoring survey. Each dredging event has been followed by a significant reduction in cross sectional area, particularly for the most dynamic part of the channel seaward of Station 3+00. Table 1 also shows that the shoaling rates were higher after the 1999 and 2007 dredging events than they were after the 2002 dredging. This may be attributed to the dredging of a wider entrance channel cut template in 1999 and 2007, whereas a narrower cut closer to equilibrium dimensions was dredged in 2002. The purpose of the narrower cut in 2002 was to avoid post dredging readjustment that has a tendency to erode adjacent beaches. 6 CD C T To" p) N 15 < () COO Q (D.CA O CDr, CD CD CD ',TN 0) CD <- V CO CA CD . i , i CO O N N N M CO CD O N C7 CO up r co O CO r CD CO 4 O r CD uo co V C,CI O Cn LCD o O N C7 M L C D V N r OD r r M V co r „nu:. P. r r V, N , Q N CV N O, OO C7 N N N O O ' ' I I I ' tn0CL. N • O V r- c U o 0 N iii >ri) C 1 m O) O ((pp t� OD �y oa • O co N 7- N V N .r-- O� CO r N.CO M u7 V CD O r- V' N N CU coN ,r ,- CO COO CD vo V0' 0 CD CO l0fi N O SCD EU N CO 63 COM > 8 C4 V Q V r r r r r CO r r N N N N M CO V CC) CO CD CO UD V V M r r r N CO N N CO CO N N Q N � ON O 0 m >' , C !6 Q) m c N O< O 4fCD V) O 01.0 CD h- CD VD M CA V- CA r O M Cr) CO CO t, V-Cn O CO V M V CA V C/) 0 0 m CO CO CO CI) 0) M CO 0 V CO V M V N rn A CO M CO CO N O C- CO r CO , . , . , CC) V CI) CD NO N O C`r C` C, C` CO CO CO CO CO CO CO C` CO (C) CO N CO N CO V V) CD r, CD CO CO 'V Cr CO CO V '0 V CO N c - 8 < 'c'-• r- 0 o U o NI 0 . CI C T CO C ,,*p) (D E d d CU 0 00 V Cr V MCO Q7 CD OD OON MNM V O O NCD CO Cn� t- Cn CP o MO co-to N co CAO N O m N (V N M , O , C.0) V 7- V (O t- M V CD , N , i r v , r- ry CD r M C'7 V C➢ 0)C O • ' _ U) '5 -ao U N O U 00 O N raU U 7 m C9 TO) a o B • _w • O Vp Cl h Cr CO O CO O CO N ONO r, V r, CO CA CO CO 0 N CCS CO O CO CON CD CA NV Q C) CO N O CO O O O r CO O 7- N N O , CO ti r r) CO o N 977 C, O N N O , ' , , , C, M M ti CD 01 M CO N r r 7- r N N r r TV N N V Cf) O n CO CD VD O N O C() V uT CD N N L- C O p Q 0 CN O GO n T C CO0 H O C Lll m 'O O 4- CO) 0` OO ODNN CO0) N D CO CO CO C, CO CO Cf) Q N N CO CO O) CO CO C,O CC) U) Cr O CA V CO CD (A ID O O N CD O O COC J CON V M t, O O CA Cr C) O C) V CD N- O CO Q Cr CO CA CD O CD O O C,O CD C, C,O (3)r- ' ' O 2 N O f6 'V M N CO CO N N N N N N 7- CO CD CO N N N N Cl V CO C` C` CO C, N- O r co CO r CO r, CD CD Cf)'V N C'l'r%N N O D a o < l O a N U I C 4- 8 0 0) N N . C Q) C9 _C T I 0- CY R lT C) E O o N m CD • OQDC7 CAO V Mt, � (A CO N. [15 ft- I, CD r` O MM Ceq 71 7t ' N T NCO ' (9 CD °I , ' 1.0 ' , , NCDw 0,CO M U Cn• m O 0 '' M C'} M N r N K N O N L Q.N OU o)'o O U om { • C6 .. _ SI 6 Q 76 m @ a., c o > O f, f, CD N O tO CD (A r, M O CD NO CO CO NCO Q 47 CD Cn N N Q •0 CO• (n O OO CA I-- CD r CON COO V N. NCO N CO CO 7- N ' CO CO CrCO V V CO V CO CD'V r- C)N ON CO VN•) NN U O N Ql CV r r r r r r r r r r r r r T.T. r r r CO 8 NQ CDN U 0 U as c as 'EA c • -a o ^ CD CO 4D 4D Q• ti r co M In co CA cco co v q , >1r' CDO CD CO CO N CD CT V OCO CD N CD CD NCDO N r, r- M CO •NNN r , ./ . , I NCD VCOOC 0 V N CO O CO r, CO O N CD C V 1,coO to ((pp CO O • m lD ID lf] to Q V M M N N CO N Q CD Q N r OCD M O O M lrl N N N r r r N V If) [f) ID tf) to to Cf) V V V M M r O Q EL CO U) O 00 O 000000 7-°) AO 00 00 53 0 C N O CD CD O Cn p pp 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. pp O g p + O + + + i- + + 0 + O O 8N CD r, ON CD C+ OnO CD CD 0 CilCD CD I. (O + + + + + + + + + M + O. + + + +} T. + + + + + + + r N N V Q n r` co 0 O O O O 7- r r r N N CO CO):.V V CD Cn CO CO C`.� CO CO CA Orr .-- r r r r r .--r r r r r r r r.- UY p • -J J C.7 I I The cut width was increased for the 2007 dredging in order to evaluate the potential of using Clam Pass as a source of additional sand for placement on the Clam Pass Park beach, with respect to whether or not the wider cut caused noticeable impacts to adjacent beaches. 11, Channel cross sectional flow area, illustrated in Table 1, represents an important indication of the stability of the inlet. The most active region of Cut#4, in terms of sand transport and Shoaling, is divided into three segments to evaluate the general conditions of cross sectional area and shoaling, as defined below and illustrated in Figure 3. Segment# Station Limits A 0+00 to 3+00 B 3+65 to 6+10 C 6+60 to 18+00 Segment A is the most active zone which includes the cut across the ebb shoal and the beach. Segment B includes the portion of the flood shoal closest to the inlet. The channel is wider in Segment C, which may be considered the inner portion of the flood shoal, and current velocities are therefore lower in this segment. The lower current velocities allow shoaling to occur here when sand is pulled into the inlet on flood tide, yet due to the greater width, a significant amount of sand can accumulate in Segment C before it presents a flow restriction to the system. Segment A is typically the most dynamic because it crosses the littoral zone. Rapid shoaling may occur here during periods of high wave energy when high littoral transport rates along the beach move sand into the inlet at a faster rate than the rate at which tidal, ' currents are capable of scouring it back out. Over time strong tidal currents may scour some of that sand out tithe channel,particularly during a storm surge, or spring tide which is the part of each month when tidal currents are the strongest. To some extent the same is true for Segment B because sand scoured from A on a flood tide is carried into B and C. Segment C has the largest cross section and therefore the slowest currents, and sediment that reaches this interior part of the flood shoal therefore tends to accumulate there until it is dredged. Dredging that keeps C open helps to maintain the strong tidal currents that are capable of scouring sand out of A and B. The cross sectional areas have been averaged within each segment for the surveys as shown in Table 2. Table 2 and Figure 4 illustrate the cross sectional variability that occurs from shoaling, which decreases the cross section, and scour which opens it back up again. Note that the cross sectional area for A and B fluctuates about the 200 square feet level, indicating that this is close to the equilibrium cross sectional area. Segment C, however, shows a tendency for the cross section to steadily decrease following a dredging event. If the cross sectional area of C gets down to the 200 square feet level, there is not enough tidal energy to overcome the frictional resistance to flow through a channel of the combined lengths of A, B, and C, and all three segments may continue to shoal and the potential for inlet closure increases. 8 . . , _ .„, • •. v, _ _ . • v',4, • .4 /s>. ' 1x sp ;co�G// �0 06-'10 \ . i s�,4f'x�xr0"f0:\ 0 xd \` x� Y /0°X`TO 4° 6 00 xl 4 ,,.,1k 0\ I 1 SSP R _ .t + CSTA 10+OD ,• ,akg0 . \STA 9+SD _ ___STA 9+0 V••°# 18+70 fit`"1 �\ r _. ETA 8+50 .. ' �` -� STA g+00 T �� "".�� 19+21 z, STA,7+50 IF:' c a. vv .1I,)1 E r 1 . 20+82 4 ' S� ?�. \� ��ii : - CUT #4 . 0 Jr 4.. • Y T O0 • o• ma. 7-4+65 r VY` t ? SEA OF }, x,y �� R i , �x6 /. I 4 CLAM`PASS COUNTY PARK 1 r �, 3 1+53 . 32+6� k_. 3L+ M8 ' ,. ..,� - -� ; ---- ..„7"--- 34+23 g422 300 c " SCALE: 1" " 40 e AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHt � t ' IN JANUARY 2008 AND IS COLLIER COUNTY APPRAISER'S°' IHUMISTONWill MOOCLAM PASS I2E SEGMENTS A, B, & C 5679 STRAND COURT F,NGINEERS FOR: COLLIER COUNTY NAPLES, FL 34110 FAX: (239) 594-2025 (OASfAt DATE: 10/02/08 FILE: 1-4 Dredge SCALE: 1"=300' PHONE: (239) 594-2021 ENGINWI NG{3ESGN www.humistonandrrloore.com AND Plimia tit* JOB:13078 DATUM: NONE FIGURE: 3 9 I In this analysis, the channel width is measured at 0.0 ft. NGVD, and the cross sectional area is calculated from the area bound by the bottom profile and 0.0 NGVD elevation. The 0.0 NGVD contour is used as a common datum for shoreline positioning. For reference purposes, mean high water (MHVV) for this area is +1.5 feet above NGVD, mean tide level is +0.5 feet above NGVD, and mean low water(M LW) is—0.5 feet below NGVD1. I Table 2 Average Cross Sectional Areas within Active Portion of Cut#4 ' Clam Pass Monitoring 1998 to 2008 Date of Description of Survey Avg. Area (ft2) Avg. Area (ft2) Avg. Area (ft) Survey Segment A Segment B Segment C 10/1998 Pre-dredge 93 74 92 04/1999 Post dredge 417 359 402 05/2000 13-month monitoring 180 198 360 02/2001 22-month monitoring 185 205 no data 09/2001 Post Tropical Storm Gabrielle 298 243 312 12/2001 Pre-maintenance dredge 301 240 342 02/2002 Post maintenance dredge 296 399 no data 04/2002 36-month monitoring 276 , 317 558 06/2003 50-month monitoring 177 186 537 11/2003 Post storm 270 212 510 05/2004 61-month monitoring 210 260 443 06/2005 74-month monitoring, 156 215 331 07/2006 87-month monitoring 345 165 345 - 04/2007 96-month post dredge 580 485 483 08/2008 112-month monitoring 213 226 396 Note: Description of survey interval is in reference to completion of the April 1999 dredging. Post dredging surveys are underlined. All three segments were dredged in 1999. Only segments B and C were dredged during the January 2002 maintenance dredging. Following the maintenance dredging in 2002, Segment A experienced shoaling in response to high wave energy. The shoaling took the form of a sand spit that grew across the inlet entrance from the south causing the inlet entrance to migrate north approximately 400 feet. In October 2002 scour from tidal currents during an elevated storm tide reopened Segment A along the dredged channel alignment. This is an example of how the increased tidal prism and stronger tidal flow resulting from the 1999 dredging has been effective in maintaining the average channel cross section above the pre-dredge condition which existed in 1998. The most recent monitoring data collected in April 2008 shows the average cross sectional area in each of the three segments has decreased since the last monitoring data set was collected in April 2007. As stated previously, the decrease in cross sectional area of flow is the result of in-filling from the inlet returning to an equilibrium cross section area. The elevations of Mean High Water(MHW)and Mean Low Water(MLW)are based on DEP Special Report No. 87-2, Predicted Open Tidal Datums for the Florida Lower Gulf Coast, Balsillie, 1987, and discussions with the DEP Bureau of Survey and Mapping. 10 Figure 4 presents a time series plot o 9 p p of the average cross sectional areas from Table 2. This Figure illustrates that the cross sectional areas of all three segments were close to the levels that existed prior to the previous dredging in 2002, and that the cross section area of flow was increased significantly by the 2007 maintenance dredging. As occurred after previous dredging events, the significant increase of cross sectional area of flow from dredging sections A and B is followed by a rapid reduction of cross sectional area as the channel dimensions adjust back toward an equilibrium condition. A listing of individual cross sectional areas for each station is presented in Table 1. The cumulative shoaling illustrated in Figure 4 was summarized in previous reports and is also discussed below for convenience, because this describes how the increased tidal prism helps the inlet maintain itself, and how this process is affected by storm events. The summary below was updated to include the most recent monitoring interval: April 1999 to May 2000: Following the comprehensive dredging completed in April 1999, shoaling occurred in all three segments. This indicates that all three of these segments are within the active littoral portion of the inlet system. For Segment A, approximately 50% of the shoaling occurred within the dredge cut, the remainder represents material which accumulated in the ebb shoal or on the beach adjacent to the dredge cut. Practically all of the shoaling occurred within the dredge cut limits in segments B and C. May 2000 to February 2001: During this time period shoaling continued in Segment A yet at a slower rate, probably because the inlet cross sectional area was near an equilibrium condition where tidal currents were able to scour sand from the channel at approximately the same rate that wave action deposited sand in the channel. Segment B showed very little volumetric change. Segment C was not surveyed as part of the February 2001 survey. In general, the flattening of the cumulative shoaling curve indicates that segments A and.Q , appear to be close to aqujlibrium. September 14, 2001: This survey was done to document the:effects of Tropical Storm Gabrielle. The increased cross section in Segment A shows that in spite of storm waves that would tend to push sand into the inlet, strong tidal currents associated with the elevated storm tide scoured sand out of the inlet entrance. This also restored the entrance channel to the straight alignment that had been dredged as a design element of the Restoration and Management Plan. This is a direct indication of successful establishment of improved inlet hydraulics from the 1999 implementation of the dredging element of the Restoration and Management Plan. February and August 2001 to September 2001: Impacts of tropical storm Gabrielle are evident within each segment. The inlet channel in the seaward Segment A was scoured and enlarged due to strong currents accompanying the storm surge as discussed above. Segment B remained essentially the same; however, some of the sand scoured from Segment A during Gabrielle was carried into the inlet and deposited on the inner shoal in Segment C. This contributed to the increase in sand volume in Segment C for this monitoring interval. It should be understood that Segment C is dredged to a much larger channel flow cross section than the entrance channel, so that a substantial amount of sand can accumulate in Segment C before it begins to adversely affect inlet hydraulics. This area is designed to act as a deposition basin for sand carried into the inlet and becomes a source of sand for beach nourishment when inlet dredging becomes necessary. 11 DREDGE DREDGE RECOUNTS A,�I STORM TROPICAL ILOIEtm MAW STORM DREDGE SEGMENTS AMA 600 - N v ( P E 500 - ' 400 - 1, I I I Q a / Q 300 - I s ` 1 Z Lil N 200 - I II: � 0 W 0 in I G I v) o 100 - U ix 0 U I 0 4 • 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 600 I t 500 - a ek 400 - CO mu ,{ I a /� F- o0 300 - ►� I z r- w, p 200 - 1� W in I I v CI I N 0 100 - D: , ' >. '! U 0 , 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 600 I I I r 500 w 400 P U z a I V- 0 300 ! / I w U 0 M y 200 I I I I th oo 100 CO K 0 0 ., , ,�....,,,..., 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 �2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 • FIGURE 4. AVERAGE CROSS SECTION AREA OF FLOW ' IN CUT #4 SEGMENTS A, B, and C • 12 September 2001 to December 2001: A pre-dredge survey was conducted in December 2001. This survey showed shoaling in Segment A subsequent to the scour which occurred during tropical storm Gabrielle. This shoaling represents reestablishment of the shoal volume which was diminished due to onshore transport during the storm. A slight reduction in volume was evident in segments B and C over this time. These changes probably represent redistribution of sand along the channel from tidal currents. A decrease in sand volume in Segment C is unusual but may be explained as the result of changes in the shape or location of the channel because the shoal geometry which formed under impacts of the storm is likely to be different from the geometry that conforms to normal tidal flow. December 2001 to February 2002: Segments B and C were dredged during this interval. This was maintenance dredging to prevent accumulation from reaching levels that could adversely affect inlet hydraulics and the self scouring capability of the inlet. Approximately 11,500 cubic yards of sand were dredged from these two segments. The sand was used to mitigate beach erosion on the county park south of the inlet. To minimize impacts to adjacent beaches, Segment A was not dredged except for a small amount of dredging that was necessary to get the dredge in the inlet. January 2002 to February 2002: Segment A channel cross section remained stable due to the scour action of improved hydraulics resulting from the dredging of segments B and C. February 2002 to June 2003: Gradual shoaling occurred in all three segments similar to the time period following the 1999 dredging. June 2003 to November 2003: An elevated storm tide impacted the area, and sand was again scoured from segments A and B. Some of this sand was carried in the inlet and deposited in Segment C. November 2003 to May 2004: Minor shoaling occurred in segments A and C with minor scouring in Segment B. There were no significant storm events, and these changes should be considered normal redistribution of sediments along the channel from tidal currents. May 2004 to June 2005: Gradual shoaling occurred in all three segments. Some of the shoaling in Segment A was the result of formation of a sand spit growing into the inlet from the south side, resulting in northward migration of the inlet. June 2005 to July 2006: Shoaling occurred in segments B and C, but there was a decrease of sand volume in Segment A. The decrease of material in Segment A is probably related to the 2005 Gulf Hurricane Season, during which there were periods of extreme waves and tidal elevations. These conditions resulted in a general lowering of the elevation of the flood shoal due to onshore movement of sand, and potentially scour due to higher current velocities associated with higher tide elevations. An increase in beach width on the south side of the inlet indicates that the onshore movement of sand from the flood shoal benefited the park beach to the south. Since a significant amount of the material in the ebb shoal probably came from beaches to the north, this onshore movement-is actually part of the normal inlet sand bypass process. This also illustrates that the bypass process is weather dependent and therefore may be highly variable from one period to the next. The lower tidal velocities in Segment C are less effective at scouring sand from the channel, resulting in more rapid accumulation of sand in Segment C under storm conditions. The project was designed this way, because sand can accumulate in Segment 13 C for a longer period of time before the channel becomes restricted to a point where inlet hydraulics may be adversely affected. July 2006 to April 2007: Segments A, B, and C were dredged during this time interval. The dredging of Clam Pass inlet and interior channel was essentially preventative maintenance, removing sand from all three segments to prevent accumulation from reaching levels that could adversely affect inlet hydraulics and the self scouring capability of the inlet entrance or Segment A. Approximately 21,000 cubic yards of material were dredged from the Clam Pas between January 22, 2007 and April 26, 2007. The sand was placed on the beach south of the inlet. This maintenance dredging included a modification, by request of the county, to increase the width of the dredge cut from stations 0+00 to 2+37.5. It is anticipated that the increase of the dredge cut at the entrance will have little if any improvement to the tidal flushing of the Clam Pass tidal system, because the wider cut results in a cross section that is larger than the equilibrium section area, and it is therefore expected to fill in quickly. However, the additional sand removed from the pass did allow for more material to be placed on the county park beach just south of the pass, and monitoring of the effects of the wider cut on adjacent beaches may be used in planning future maintenance operations. April 2007 to August 2008: The rapid reduction of the cross sectional area within segments A and B can be attributed to the inlet readjusting to its natural equilibrium cross sectional area. Segment C cross sectional area also decreased but at a slower rate. This is similar to what has occurred after previous dredging and is considered to be the natural shoaling of the flood shoals occurring at a normal rate. 6. Interior Channels Interior channel cut locations are shown on Figure 1. The cuts that were selected for dredging in 1999 were identified as channel sections which presented restrictions to flow in comparison to other channel sections within the bay system. Appendices A, B, and C include a detailed site plan for each dredge cut, cross sections at nominal intervals along each cut, and illustration of the channel cross sectional area at each station from post-dredge and the two most recent surveys. This information shows that the cross sectional area was significantly improved by the 1999 dredging, and all but a few specific locations within dredge cuts 1, 2, and 3 have changed very little since the dredging (not more than 10% of variation of flow in cross section since 1999 for each cut). This illustrates the difference between the stability of the interior channel cuts and the dynamic inlet entrance. The entrance channel is exposed to high littoral sand transport rates, and the interior channels are not. Dredging of the interior channels contributed to the improved hydraulic efficiency of the bay system and the inlet; however, it is not anticipated that the interior channels will require dredging as frequently as is anticipated for cut#4 in the in the immediate vicinity of the inlet. Since the shoaling rate in the less dynamic inner areas has shown to be very slow, they do not need to be surveyed as frequently as the more dynamic areas of cut#4. 14