TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Bill A Mixed Blessing For Protection Groups

ADVERTISEMENT

By FRANK SARGEANT Outdoors columnist

The Tampa Tribune

Published: June 8, 2008

A bill to protect seagrasses by levying fines on boaters who carelessly run over the flats, House Bill 7059 is drawing fire from some environmental groups because Rep. Will Kendrick tacked on a provision that says developers may cut channels through some grass beds if they agree to "mitigate" the damage by restoring an equivalent amount of seagrass elsewhere.

Environmental groups are understandably nervous about the latter provision in an otherwise good bill, because they say it would open the door for developers to create waterfront homes, docks, marinas and boat ramps in areas that are now off-limits because of seagrass proximity.

To some extent, the caution is justified. Though Florida has some 2 million acres of seagrass, and here in Tampa Bay we now have an increasing seagrass coverage thanks to improved water quality, overall these shallow nursery areas are at risk because of runoff and other problems created by nearshore development. Opening the door for more waterfront development is risky for seagrasses and mangroves - to say nothing of insurance companies.

Damage from boats is also a consideration; when boats run in water that is too shallow, their props can dig a "wheel ditch" that destroys hundreds of yards of grass in seconds. The primary purpose of the bill was to levy fines on those who run over the grass and cause damage, with fees from $50 to $1,000.

While there have already been a few special cases where damaging seagrasses drew fines, the bill and the publicity it would engender would likely make far more boaters aware that they not only should avoid seagrass areas, but also they must if they wish to avoid expensive citations.

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of flats anglers who routinely run across flats they know are too shallow, blowing out grass roots in a shower of mud wherever they pass. It takes years for these areas to regrow naturally.

The money from the fines would go toward repairing flats that are damaged. Some of the technology for this effort has made great strides in recent years, with Jim Anderson of Ruskin one of the chief researchers. Anderson devised a boat that can replant large plots of grass in short order, almost like seagoing sod, and also developed what he calls "sediment tubes" designed to exactly fill in a prop track so seagrass can quickly regrow.

"Right now, one of the big problems in seagrass restoration is funding," Anderson said. "HB 7059 would provide some of the money that's needed to do some projects that can't be paid for at present."

The problem with the bill would seem to be more that it makes no provision for added enforcement in seagrass areas needing protection. There are already thousands of acres of seagrasses in "no motor" or "slow" zones, yet many flats boats routinely run through these shallow areas, paying no attention to the signs. The reason is that they know there is virtually no chance a Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission officer or other law enforcement officer will be on hand to spot them.

There's also a bizarre rule on Tampa Bay that exempts a few guides and crabbers, giving them permission to run in no-motor zones at speeds up to 25 mph, apparently on the theory that seagrass killed by guides and crabbers regrows more rapidly than that killed by recreational anglers.

Mitigation sounds like a good plan in theory. In practice, it sometimes does not work. The ugliest case is at Port Manatee, where port officials dangled a new boat ramp in front of anglers in return for support in digging up the bay bottom to make more shipping berths. But the deal was that the seagrass destroyed had to be mitigated by more grass growing on nearby sand areas, this before the new boat ramp could be built. But the grass resolutely refused to regrow. Today, roughly a decade later, anglers are still shut out of the Piney Point ramp, and odds are that they will never gain access there now because of port security concerns. But Port Manatee has its new berth space.

State regulators in general favor the bill, noting that the mitigation section says "may" instead of "shall." In legislative terms, there is a world of difference, and each case of potential mitigation would be reviewed by environmental agencies. But whether the good promised by the fines and hopefully reduced boat prop damage would be outweighed by the potential for more waterfront development and resulting seagrass damage is not clear. Personally, I'd rather see the legislators try again, and next time keep a sharper focus on the issue.

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT