• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Preface
 Introduction
 The model
 Conventional disposal of tires:...
 Long run benefits of tire disposal...
 Building an artificial reef with...
 Long run costs and productivity...
 Potential benefits to anglers and...
 Conclusions and recommendations...
 Bibliography






Group Title: Technical paper ;, no. 1
Title: Benefit-cost study of Pinellas County artificial reefs
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00072263/00001
 Material Information
Title: Benefit-cost study of Pinellas County artificial reefs
Series Title: Technical paper
Physical Description: 44 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Hanni, Eila, 1936-
Matthews, Heyward H
Florida Sea Grant College
Publisher: State University System of Florida Sea Grant College Program, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville FL
Publication Date: [1977]
 Subjects
Subject: Artificial reefs -- Cost effectiveness -- Florida -- Pinellas County   ( lcsh )
Fish habitat improvement -- Cost effectiveness -- Florida -- Pinellas County   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (p. 44).
Statement of Responsibility: by Eila Hanni, Heyward H. Matthews.
General Note: "The information contained in this paper was developed under the auspices of the Florida Sea Grant College Program, with support from the NOAA Office of Sea Grant, U.S. Department of Commerce, grant number 04-7-158-44046."
General Note: "May 2, 1977."
Funding: This collection includes items related to Florida’s environments, ecosystems, and species. It includes the subcollections of Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit project documents, the Sea Grant technical series, the Florida Geological Survey series, the Howard T. Odum Center for Wetland technical reports, and other entities devoted to the study and preservation of Florida's natural resources.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00072263
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: aleph - 000447241
oclc - 27055103
notis - ACK8535

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title Page 1
        Title Page 2
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents
    Preface
        Preface
    Introduction
        Page 1
    The model
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
    Conventional disposal of tires: The short run
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
    Long run benefits of tire disposal in Toytown
        Page 13
    Building an artificial reef with tires and culvert: The short run
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Volume of materials handled
            Page 16
        The physical facilities and equipment
            Page 17
            Page 18
        Estimating fixed costs
            Page 19
        Estimating variable costs
            Page 20
        Costs of creating a M2 of reef bottom
            Page 21
    Long run costs and productivity of the clearwater artificial reef
        Page 22
        Projected costs of reef building
            Page 22
            Page 23
            Page 24
        Productivity of the reef
            Page 25
        Fish habitat generation
            Page 26
            Page 27
        Fish counts
            Page 28
            Page 29
            Page 30
    Potential benefits to anglers and divers
        Page 31
        Sunday anglers
            Page 31
            Page 32
            Page 33
        Sports anglers
            Page 34
            Page 35
        Sports Divers
            Page 36
            Page 37
            Page 38
        Shark anglers
            Page 39
        Optimum reef size
            Page 39
            Page 40
    Conclusions and recommendations for further study
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
    Bibliography
        Page 44
Full Text













BENEFIT-COST STUDY OF PINELLAS COUNTY
ARTIFICIAL REEFS

BY
Eila Hanni
University of South Florida


Heyward H. Matthews
St. Petersburg Junior College


Florida Sea Grant

Technical Paper



















BENEFIT-COST STUDY OF PINELLAS COUNTY


ARTIFICIAL REEFS

BY

Eila Hanni
University of South Florida


Heyward H. Matthews
St. Petersburg Junior College








The information contained in this paper was
developed under the auspices of the Florida Sea Grant
College Program, with support from the NOAA Office of
Sea Grant, U.S. Department of Commerce, grant number
04-7-158-44046. This document is a Technical Paper
of the State University System of Florida Sea Grant
College Program, 2001 McCarty Hall, University of
Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611. Technical Papers
are duplicated in limited quantities for specialized
audiences requiring rapid access to information,
which may be unedited.







Technical Paper No. 1
May 2, 1977











TABLE OF CONTENTS



Page

INTRODUCTION....................................... 1

THE MODEL ......................................... 2

CONVENTIONAL DISPOSAL OF TIRES: The Short Run..... 7

LONG RUN BENEFITS OF TIRE DISPOSAL IN TOYTOWN...... 13

BUILDING AN ARTIFICIAL REEF WITH TIRES AND CULVERT:
The Short Run...................................... 14
Volume of Materials Handled........................ 16
The Physical Facilities and Equipment.............. 17
Estimating Fixed Costs ........................... 19
Estimating Variable Costs.......................... 20
Costs of Creating a M of Reef Bottom............... 21

LONG RUN COSTS AND PRODUCTIVITY OF THE CLEARWATER
ARTIFICIAL REEF..................................... 22
Project'?d Costs of Reef Building ................... 22
Productivity of the Reef ........................... 25
Fish Habitat Generation............................ 26
Fish Counts.............. ....................... 28

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO ANGLERS AND DIVERS............ 3.
Sunday Anglers ................. ................... 31
Sports Anglers ..................................... 34
Divers..................... ........................... 36
Shark Anglers ...................................... 39
Optimum Reef Size.................................. 39

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY.. 41













PREFACE

This investigation was carried out in conjunction with a cooperative

investigation of biological, political and socioeconomic aspects of the

Clearwater Artificial Reef. The project is headed by F. T. Manheim

and H. Mathews and is jointly sponsored by Florida State University

System Sea Grant and Pinellas County.

The authors wish to thank the participating agencies for a great

deal of time and effort spent in providing data and explaining the mode

of operation relevant for this study. Special thanks go to Jim Shinholscr,

Director of Mosquito Control, and Connie Fernandez, of the office staff,

without whose help this report could not have been undertaken. David H.

M. Holihan, Chief of Sanitation Disposal for the City of St. Petersburg,

guided the authors through the intricacies of Toytown operations in

general and tire burial in particular. William Burchfield, Harbor Master

at the Clearwater Marina, was of great help in providing insights into

fishing operations in the Tampa Bay area. The barge captain and crew

were consulted numerous times on technicalities of transporting reef

materials. Rhonda Shaffer produced most of the final typescript.

Two graduate assistants, Don Schug from Marine Science, and Clifford

Mangano from Economics, helped a great deal in data collection and cal-

culations. The various versions of the paper were ably criticized by

F. T. Manheim, John C. Briggs and Don Schug. But naturally, the re-

sponsibility for any remaining errors and shortcomings rests with the

authors.


E. A. H.
H. M.








INTRODUCTION

Used tires are commonly thought to have few economic uses. In fact,

until recently, most communities merely hauled their tires to the dumps to

be buried along with other garbage and they were thought to represent just another

cost attached to the modern motorized way of life. But old tires do have

alternative uses. Experiments have been carried out in Pennsylvania to

separate rubber from the tire base and to recycle the rubber. Old tires are

seen as building blocks in fashionable patio gardens and on children's play-

grounds. Until new air pollution regulations came into effect, tires were

also burned in orange groves to prevent a freeze. Of particular interest in

this study, tires are now used to build artificial reefs to attract algae,

corals, and sponges along with fish and crustaceans that provide recreational

angling and diving.

A preliminary analysis of tire disposal in the Tampa Bay area revealed

that locally there are two principal ways of disposing of tires. They are

dumped in public disposal grounds, such as Toytown in St. Petersburg, and

provide filled land for future public parks. Or they are transported to previously

barren sand bottom locations in the Gulf of Mexico to provide favored habitat for

fishes and other kinds of marine life. The present study is designed to

assess the benefits and costs associated with these two ways of converting

old tires into public goods.

In general, a public project is deemed beneficial and worth undertaking if

the present value of its estimated benefits exceed the costs, and the necessary

resources to invest in the project are forthcoming. A choice between several alter-

native projects to be undertaken with limited or fixed resources falls upon the

project whose benefit-cost ratio is the highest.

The traditional way of disposing of tires in landfills creates benefits

that may or may not be deemed sufficient to cover the disposal costs. Few,






-2-


if any, figures have been produced on the benefit-cost ratios of dumps

taking into account their suitable long-term end uses, such as parks.

For example, it takes an old city resident or an expert in the history of

garbage disposal in St. Petersburg to know that the Woodlawn Recreational

Complex on 16th Street North, bounded by 13th and 17th Avenues, was an old

city dump. Nobody has estimated the ultimate benefits and costs.

The first task, then, is to study the dumps. To that effect, a short

term and long term analysis of the Toytown sanitary landfill will be under-

taken. In the short run the output of the landfill is tons of garbage buried.

In the long run, garbage becomes an input into the production of acres of

filled land. Appropriate demand and supply schedules will constitute the

framework in terms of which the actual production, benefit, and cost figures

will be evaluated.

The new way of tire disposal generates ocean bottom covered by tires

(also by culvert and concrete rubble) and surface areas for marine animals

to feed on and enjoy shelter. The ultimate benefits consist of personhours

of fishing and diving generated by the reef. In this study, the benefits and

costs of the Clearwater Reef will be assessed, since this project has the

best data history. In the short run the output of the reef operations is

tons of tires and culvert dropped on the ocean bottom. In the long run, these

serve as inputs into the production of personhours of fishing and diving.

Again appropriate demand and supply schedules will be developed to provide the

framework for the quantitative assessment of production, benefits, and costs.

The general model in whose terms benefits and costs will be assessed

will be briefly outlined next.

THE MODEL

A general model is adopted here which will allow tle estimation of actual

and potential benefits and costs; even though the outputs of the alternative






- 3-


projects are subject to different pricing policies in the short and long run

and vary by the type of project.

As regards Toytown, in the short run an unlimited volume of disposal

services will be offered to county residents at a fixed price calculated

to cover costs. From an analytical point of view, the market can be charac-

terized by a frequently shifting vertical demand schedule for disposal and

by a normally shaped average cost schedule with equilibrium occurring where

the demand schedule intersects theaverage cost schedule. This pattern is

illustrated in Figure 1.
P !
\ D2
Figure 1 TC'
"--_ATC'
TC


q

The long term output of filled land appears to sell appreciably below

the marginal cost of filling land with garbage, as indicated by sales data

on similar filled land adjacent to the dump. This configuration is illustrated

in Figure 2.


Price LMC
Figure 2 price L
per
acre LATC




PO -
acres of land generated

As regards the Clearwater Artificial Reef, the demand for it as a disposal

site in the short run is passive, derived demand that does not depend on price,

and the quantity supplied is a function of costs, given a limited, although

not completely fixed budget. Demand schedule is vertical at the quantity

supplied. .Price is indeterminate. See Figure 3.





-4-

D
Price \ /MC
Figure 3 Prie
per ,
M2 \

S. ATC


M2 of ocean bottom generated

The long term output of personhours of fishing and diving is provided

to a segmented market free of user charges but subject to various trans-

portation and equipment costs to be borne by the beneficiaries. Costs are

determined by the short run costs of dropping the materials plus the long

run productivity of the reef. Figure 4 illustrates this case.

Price
per
Figure 4 day
day MC






3 DT

personhours of fishing
Both long run cases represent underpricing cases. It has been recently

argued1 that evaluative criteria that rely on marginal cost pricing in the

case of underpriced public products do not lead to efficient resource

allocation. A consistency between evaluation criteria and pricing criteria

is needed. To this effect a model of efficient resource allocation in the

case of underpriced public products is adopted here. It is based on models


1G. E. Mumy and S. H. Hanke, "Public Investment Criteria for Underpriced
Public Products", American Economic Review, Sept. 1975, pp. 712-719.





-5-


developed by Mumy and Hanke, and elaborated by Miller. A summary is

presented below.

Price maximum willingness to pay
Figure 5 per
unit marginal willingness to pay schedule
marginal cost of capacity schedule

P1 average willingness to pay



Pm I maximum quantity demanded at
P2 f / I- price Pm

0 Q* quantity per year

Since price is not used as an allocator of demand, it is assumed that

each consumption unit has an equal probability of being satisfied, and, thus,

satisfaction probability is not a function of the willingness to pay, by and

large. In the case of reefs and parks, delivery would presumably be on the

first come, first serve basis. Expected gross benefits are not necessarily

equal to the area under the demand curve but the product of the average demand

price over the quantities from zero to the number of demanded consumption

units satisfied and the quantity purchased. Costs are the area under the

marginal cost of capacity curve up to the quantity provided (and purchased).

Optimum capacity is reached, when average demand price equals marginal cost

of capacity.2
3
Following Miller's recommendations judgmental demand curves will be

developed to calculate the average willingness to pay. The demand curves

are assumed to be linear. Virtually no user demand is assumed to exist when


J. R. Miller, "On the Use of Unit Day Values in the Evaulation of Site-
Specific, Water-Based Recreation Benefits". A paper presented at the Southern
Economic Association Meetings in Atlanta, Nov. 1976. 18 pp.

Mumy and Hanke, op. cit., pp. 714-716.

Miller, op. cit., pp. 8-9. Operating costs are assumed to be zero. That
is a good ;!i';roximation in the cases on hand; see pp. 39.






-6-


the price of a service reaches the range of a more expensive substitute.

Thus, in the case of Sunday anglers, for example, who normally either fish

in their own small boats or utilize party boats, hiring a charter boat is

assumed to represent such a high priced alternative. In the case of Toytown

land, it is adjacent, distinctly superior but still non-residential land.

Demand is at its maximum when fishing and diving sites are physically so

crowded every day when weather is good enough that those who come last have

no room either to fish or to dive. For Toytown, a second point on the demand

schedule will be established on the basis of quantities of similar land

currently sold. The marginal cost of capacity is the increase in total costs

due to the expansion of public product capacity by one unit, in the present

case one acre of land or one M2 of ocean bottom. These long run marginal cost

curves will be developed from budget data and from data on imputed cost compo-

nents secured from other sources. Zero operating costs are assumed.

Figure 5 depicts a situation where Q* is the equilibrium quantity of the

product. Benefits to consumers equal the area OplAQ* and the associated costs

are P2AQ*O. Benefit-cost ratio exceeds one. A greater quantity is produced

than would be suggested by the (inefficient) marginal cost pricing principle.

Less would be produced if the marginal cost of capacity schedule intersected

the average willingness to pay line to the left of the demand schedule,

even though the benefit-cost ratio would still be above one. If the marginal

cost of capacity schedule in its entirety lies above the average willingness

to pay line, costs would exceed benefits and the project would not be under-

taken at all.

The above analytical framework will be applied to calculation of actual

benefit-cost ratios of the two ways of disposing of tires, landfill and

artificial reef. Included in the costs are the usual private cost components





-7-


that any business firm would incur. But since some of the resources were

secured at below opportunity cost eitherr below market prices or free),

imputation was utilized to arrive at the full costs. The conventional

breakdown of costs into fixed costs and variable costs was utilized.

CONVENTIONAL DISPOSAL OF TIRES: The Short Run

The primary disposal site of old tires in Pinellas County is the

Toytown landfill, although tires are still accepted, albeit reluctantly,

also in the County dump, Largo and Clearwater dumps. Companies that dispose

of tires in significant numbers know that they should be brought to Toytown;

they bear the cost of hauling tires to disposal sites. The county charges

its dump users a flat rate of $4.00 a ton no matter what the composition of

the garbage. Since the county can designate the disposal sites, the users

must bear whatever the costs of hauling tires to public disposal sites are,

unless they_find private uses at lower costs.

The present cost of operating the Toytown dump (exclusive of research and de-

velopment expenditures) is $3.00 a ton (on the average).2 Large quantities of tires

brought to the dump during the last two years have been piled up outside and they

await shipment to the Artificial Reef. Only tires that cannot be readily separated

from other garbage are still buried. It is estimated that the current stock amounts

to 40,000 tires, whereas the total number transported to the reef from the entire

county since spring 1974 is 122,000. The total accumulation converts to roughly

730 tons a year, which represents only 0.2 percent of the annual 330,000 ton utiliza-

tion of the Toytown dump; which in turn represents 60 percent of the tonnage of all

the county dumps. A more systematic separation and accounting for tires shipped to



The minimum charge is $2.00 per one half ton.

"See Table 2, p. 12.










the reefs will probably double this figure. A study by the Tampa Bay Regional Plan-

ning Councill estimated that in 1974, 480,000 passenger car tires were discarded in
2
Pinellas County. At 18 pounds per tire, and with a 10% allowance for reuse2, about

3,800 tons of garbage is generated. If 90 percent of these were brought to Toytown,

they would represent 1.1 percent of its annual disposal volume. A conservative

figure of 0.5 percent is used here.

These figures, together with a detailed breakdown of the various costs

associated with the Toytown landfill operation, allow the estimation of the

total and marginal costs of dumping tires in the landfill. Annual data will

be used. To obtain the aggregate costs, annual figures since 1969/70 fiscal

year will be analyzed. Phase I of Toytown will end November 1977 at which

time the conversion to a park will begin. This phase consists of 165 acres.

Phase II 70 acres is estimated to end in December 1981. If resource

recovery, such as extensive use of grinding machines, comes earlier, the dump

may also close earlier. Here costs and benefits up to fiscal year 1980/81

will be considered.

Costs will be analyzed in three categories: land, other fixed costs,

and variable costs. The fixed costs of the land fill consist of the imputed

rental value of the 235 acres, in their initial condition at the time

Toytown landfill was opened. Toytown opened in 1959, originally as a disposal

site for brush and building materials. It was converted into a full-scale

sanitary landfill in 1969. This study estimates land values since 1969.


Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, Tampna Bay Area-Wide Solid Waste
Mana cement and Resource Recovery St Idy Phase 11. Technical and Management
Report, St, Petersburg, Florida, February 1976, pp. 63, 74.
2Not all tires end up at the dump. Some 10% are roused. R. B. Stone,
C. C. Buchanan, and F. W. Steinle, Jr., Scrajp Tires as Artificial Reefs,
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, SW-.119, 1974, p. 2.





-9-


Since Toytown is on county land, the imputed value of land was arrived

at by obtaining the cost of similar, adjacent private land. According to

records of real estate sales of similar land, kept in the Tax Assessor's

Office, the 1969 value was estimated at $1,650 an acre. This land, without

any further improvements, increased at an annual rate of 35 per cent between

1969 and 1974.1

Thus the initial imputed cost of land in 1969 was $387,750 for 235

acres. If the land had simply been held, instead of being converted into a

land fill, and had been sold in 1974, its value would have been $1,738,684.

The value of the land in intervening years was obtained by loglinear inter-

polation. A nine per cent return on land was imputed as the rental cost.

However, additional expenditures were incurred when the land was "improved"

by adding garbage'to it. These expenditures were divided into fixed costs and

variable costs. Fixed costs in the short run consist of the depreciation

of the machinery, contractual maintenance costs, insurance costs, administra-

tive costs, environmental control costs, such as water measurements, overhead

personnel costs, i.e., expenditures on equipment and personnel that would be

incurred in a budget year even if there was a drastic decline in the dumping

volume. Variable costs equal total costs minus fixed costs, and consist

mostly of labor costs and fuel costs. Since the city had repair contracts

on most of the landfill equipment, variable costs consist largely of labor


Based on a sale of a 40 acre piece 200 yards from Toytown in 1969.
The same piece was resold in 1974.
2
The City of St. Petersburg depreciated its equipment on a straight
line and original cost basis except in 1974/75 and 1975/76 when estimated
current costs were used.





- 10 -


costs. Marginal costs represent the cost of disposing each additional ton

of garbage or the change in variable costs per unit of output. Since prac-

tically no overtime labor or part-time employees were used, marginal costs

are equal to average costs.

The history of the three principal categories of costs for the Toytown

landfill operation was traced and estimates prepared of their likely future

values. Apart from the rental costs of land already discussed, budget figures

were available for all components except that the costs of incinerator

operations excluded in 1969/70 had to be estimated (they were available for

1970/71). Current costs were converted into constant 1974 costs by utilizing

the aggregate price index of service costs and the unit costs of full-time

labor paid out of the Sanitation Fund of the City of St. Petersburg in the

relevant years.

The costs were projected to 1980/81 on the following conservative

growth assumptions. Value of fixed costs will increase 15 per cent a year,

while the service price index will increase by 8 per cent. Labor costs will

increase by 10 per cent a year, of which 7 per cent represents wage increases.

Land prices will increase only 9 per cent a year. When Phase I closes at

the end of 1976/77 fiscal year, imputed land rental goes down by 70 per cent,

but other costs are not affected.

The results of these calculations are given in Table 1. The per ton

costs are given in Table 2.

These calculations yield costs per ton that average $2.51 over the life

of the dump. The conservative cost estimates projected for 1976/77 1980/81

produce declining costs per ton, whereas up to 1975/76 per ton costs increased

in every year except 1970/71 and 1972/73. These costs underestimate the

ultimate costs of garbage disposal also, for another reason. The dump requires





TABLE 1. ANNUAL COSTS OF TOYTOWN SANITARY LANDFILL OPERATIONS


3 4
FIXED COSTS, excl. LAND LABOR COSTS LAND "RENTAL" TOTAL COSTS

Fiscal Current Price In Constant Current Price In Constant Imputed Price In Constant Current Price In Constant
Year Value Index Prices Value Index Prices Rent' Index Prices Price Index Prices

1969/701 $284,898 79.9 $285,970 $ 80,415 58.9 $136,528 $ 34,897 30.1 $156,481 $255,312 54.5 $578,979

1970/711 143.110 84.4 169.560 116.934 61.3 190.757 47.112 40.6 156.481 307.156 59.4 516,798

1971/72 256,134 87.6 292,390 114,866 70.0 206,951 63,600 54.9 156,481 464,600 70.8 655,822

1972/732 229,865 91.5 251,220 213,734 77.9 274.370 85,861 74.1 156,481 529,460 77.6 682.071
2
1973/74 348.144 100.0 348,144 232,896 100.0 232,896 115.912 100.0 156.481 696,952 94.5 737,521

1974/752 400,132 109.5 365,417 277.950 102.2 271,967 156,481 109.0 156,481 834.563 105.1 793.865

1975/762 569.685 118.2 481,967 378,342 114,1 331,588 170.565 118.8 156.481 1,118,592 115.4 970,036

1976/77 655,138 127.7 513,029 412.176 120.3 342,623 185.916 129.5 156,481 1,253.230 123.9 1.012.133

1977/78 753,408 137.9 546.344 449,394 124.2 361,831 60.644 141.2 43.000 1,263,446 132.8 951,175

1978/79 866,420 148.9 581,880 490,333 128,2 382.475 66,266 153.9 43,000 1,423,619 141.3 1,007,355

1979/80 996,383 160.8 619,641 545,366 132.3 412,219 72.230 167.7 43,000 1,603,980 149.2 1,074,860

1980/81 1,145.840 173.7 659,666 584,903 136.7 427.873 78,730 182.8 43.000 1,809,473 160.0 1.130.539


1
Excludes incinerator costs, includes costs of operating the compost and the open dump.
2
Excludes costs of recycling operations.
3127 of the entire budget added as administrative and insurance costs.
4Includes the wages of Emergency Jobs personnel assigned to the landfill in 1975/76 and
Source: Annual Budgets of the City of St. Petersburg.


assumed to continue.






- 12 -


TABLE 2. TOTAL DISPOSAL COSTS PER TON
IN 1974 PRICES


Costs per E
Total Costs Tonnage Ton B


1969/70
1970/71
1971/72
1972/73
1973/74
1974/75
1975/76
1976/77
1977/78
1978/79
1979/80
1980/81

"Scrap value" of
land in 1977
Aggregate Costs


$ 578,979
516,798
655,822
682,071
737,521
793,865
970,036
1,012,133
951,175
1,007,355
1,074,860
1,130,539
$10,111,154
297,635
$10,408,789


156,300
250,369
286,040
322,695
314,305
313,486
325,661
360,000
400,000
434,000
471,000
511,000
4,144,856


$3.70
2.06
2.29
2.11
2.35
2.53
2.98
2.81
2.38
2.32
2.28
2.21



2.51


estimated Tire
urial Costs


$ 3,184
2,842
3,607
3,750
4,057
4,370
5,335
5,567
5,232
5,541
5,911
6,218
$56,614
1,488
$57,102


continuous maintenance even after it is closed because of odor problems, rodent

problems, methane gas problems and mosquito breeding problems. The costs of

burying tires are above average for two reasons. When there are hoavy rainfalls

that wash away sand, all materials but especially tires have to be covered

up a second time. In 1974, these additional costs were estimated to represent

about 13 per cent of the variable costs. The costs of tire burial are also

higher than those of other garbage because tires work their way up to the top

of the fills far easier than any other components and need to be covered more

than once even in the absence of heavy rainfalls. Tires also produce a "spotugv"

land surface in later years. A 10 per cent adjustment was made to the unit

costs on account of these factors.





- 13 -


LONG-RUN BENEFITS AND COSTS OF TIRE DISPOSAL IN TOYTOWN

Tires were assumed to represent 0.5% of the annual tonnage at Toytown.

If tires had continued to be buried there, these costs would thus have

increased from about $2,600 in 1969/70 to $6,200 in 1980/81 yielding an

aggregate cost figure of $57,102.

Assuming an interest rate of seven per cent the 1969/70-72/73 tire

burial expenditures were compounded at that annual rate and the 1974/75-80/81

expenditures were discounted at the same rate to arrive at the 1974 present

value of all expenditures on tires. They came to a total of $50,177. Since

the tire tonnage handled was estimated at 19,800, this yields a present value

cost of $2.53 per ton on tires. Assuming tires weigh 18 lbs. each, this

represents 2.2 million tires, a cost of two cents per tire.

Tire volume and weight remain the same for an indefinite time, whereas

other types of refuse would probably be reduced by 50% in weight and volume

in 10 years.2 Therefore, tire volume at the closing of the dump was assumed

to represent twice as high a percentage of total volume as at dumping time,

or 1.0 per cent of the total of 235 acres, or 1.70 acres in 1976/77 and .70

acres in 1980/81. The alternative cost principle was utilized to estimate

the benefits of this land. This kind of filled land now exists near the land

fill and currently sells anywhere from $800 to $1500 an acre and has, for all

3
intents and purposes, not changed in value since 1952. Most of this filled

land dates back to the land boom of the 1920s and the subsequent depression in

which the county acquired the land in tax foreclosures. /


This rate is approximately what has recently been recommended for the
evaluation of Federal public projects.
2
Estimated; by D. M. M. Holihan, Chief of Sanitation Disposal in St.
Pet ersburg.

3Mr. Bumiller, County Engineering Office, estimated that lots of 2 to 5
acres have been selling for $200 to $400 since 1952. These lots have no access;
neither would the closed dump.






- 14 -


All sales of such land in the area for the last three years were surveyed

to estimate that 6.5 acres is the quantity demanded annually at the market

price of $1,400 per acre. This information was utilized to establish one point

on the judgmental demand schedule. The highest price considered acceptable to

the buyers was set equal to $6,000, the price of distinctly superior land in

Evergreen Acres that was still not good enough to erect any type of permanent

structure (none.can be erected on the filled dump land). 2.4 acres were thus

estimated to confer total benefits of $3,964.

The benefit-cost ratio is thus $3,964/50,177 or 0.079. Clearly, tires

should not be buried if there are any more economical methods of disposing of

them.

BUILDING AN ARTIFICIAL REEF WITH TIRES AND CULVERT: The Short Run

Pinellas County entered a new phase of service activity in March 1974

when it assumed responsibility for reef building in the adjacent coastal

waters. The City of Clearwater had been engaged in the same activity on ;i

smaller scale for about two years previously. But in Spring 1974 a large

barge was purchased jointly by the county and eight coastal cities. The City

of Clearwater had been building the Clearwater Reef about 3 miles off Clear-

water Beach. This site was the first target of the county project also, but

in subsequent years other sites have been developed from Tarpon Springs to

St. Pete Beach and into Tampa Bay. These reef sites are located off the

main municipalities of Pinellas County on sand bottoms that were formerly

barren of productive marine life. The enclosed map shows all the act un and

planned locations to date.

The project was assigned to the Mosquito Control Division as a separate

activity, although the funds came initially from the General Fund of the county.

In subsequent years the project has had a budget of its own, but ; substantial






x KEY
S AR I IF ICIAI. It[ E LOCA 1011

A CHANNEL MARKER LOCATION
SANCLOTE ANCHORAGE
Soutlh Entlrace Marker I

IIURRICANE PASS
Entrance Mrker 2

O DUNEDIN PA'S Entrance

SCLEARWATER PASS
Ertrance Bell Marker 1

JOHNS PASS
Entrance Marker (JP)

O PASS-A-GIIILLE CHANNEL I
Entrance Marker buoy 2

Ssr. PETERn RURG MUNICIPAL PIER

All settings are in magnetic degrees.
All distances are in nautical miles.


RUBE ALLEN
(PINELLAS
NUMBER 11
REEF


INDIAN
SHORES
REEF


MADEIRA
BEACH
REEF


N






I 0 I 2 3
NAAUTICAL MitllS


ARTIFICIAL

LOCATION


REEF

MAP


1ARPON
SPRINGS


DUNEDIN
REEF


BEACH REEF


nm






- 16 -


amount of resources has been drawn from other county government agencies.

The present study will attempt to analyze all the costs incurred to obtain

costs per square meter of ocean bottom covered.

Volume of Materials Handled

When the Reef project was initiated by the City of Clearwater, only tires

were used as the building material. At first, individual tires were laid,

but soon a bundle of four tires became -he standard unit. More recently,

tires have been split and bundled to stacks of 30 split tires in each one of

the two forks of a forklift, and, further, three of these loads tied together

to a 6 times 30 split halves per drop. Concrete culvert was not dropped until

when the county took over the project. At that time concrete culvert had become

available from local construction projects. Concrete rubble came from tlir'e so

old Gandy Bridge, the old Corey Causeway Bridge and the old Courtncy Campbell

Bridge. The Clearwater Reef was the destination of rubble from the Courtney Camp

bell Causeway Bridge. In addition, some construction companies made occasional

donations to the county of old pipe and culvert for the reef. Such donations

qualify as bona fide charitable contributions and are tax deductible.

Overall the following quantities of materials have been hauled to the

different reefs.]


TABLE 3. QUANTITIES OF TIRES AND PIPE HAULED TO THE REEFS



Fiscal Tires, Concrete Pipe, Steel Pipe,
Year Number Tons Tons

1973/74 5,7982 31 30
1974/75 42,796 1665 32
1975/76 74,173 1756 28
Source: Budget Preparation Data, Mosquito Control



1Unfortunately, the rubble was so widely scattered at the sea bottom as to
be of little value as shelter for aquatic life.

2About 72,000-tire,- deposited before the county program started.






- '17 -


The Physical Facilities and EcuipRment

As soon as the decision was made to acquire a barge for transporting tires

and other materials off shore to the reef, no more tires were buried in the

Toytown or other sanitary landfills of the county. Three areas have been set

aside for accumulating the tires and culvert: an acre site at the entrance

to Toytown landfill, established in 1974; a 75' x 300' staging area in Clearwater

behind the Seminole Street boat launch site, originally established by the City

of Clearwater in 1972 and leased to Pinellas county in 1974; and a 75' x 265'

staging area in the Southwest corner of the Corey Causeway to St. Petersburg

Beach right behind the St. Petersburg municipal water treatment plant, established

in Fall 1975.

The two staging sites receive tires, culvert and concrete rubble not only

from the various dumps but also directly from interested individuals, companies,

and public agencies. A barge was acquired for transporting the materials.

Initially, materials were loaded onto the barge exclusively from the Clearwater

staging area. In Fall 1975, a new dock of 10 ton capacity was built at the

St. Pete site and it now offers considerably better facilities. A major

advantage is deep enough water so that loading does not have to await a high

tide as in Clearwater. The barge is berthed at the Clearwater Marina and

usually makes one-day trips to the Clearwater site. When taking materials

from the St. Pete site, the barge is berthed at the dock, making one trip a

day. It takes longer to load tires at the St. Pete site because of the

-limitations of dock space; at the Clearwater site, the entire seawall serves

as a loading area. There is no appreciable difference on loading times for culvert.

1Under ideal tide and weather conditions, only one trip in a 10 hour day is
possible trom tie ulearwater site to the nearest reef, the Clearwater reef. A round-
trip to Clearwater Reef takes 2.5 hours, plus fuel and salaries. An average roundtrip
to all reefs takes 4.5 hours. Trips from tne South staging area require longer travel
and loading times, exclusive of loading and unloading, which takes another 3 hours
and tne total costs come to $180.






- 18 -


At each one of these sites, tires are either punched or split, and

bundled ready for lifting into the barge. Up until Fall 1974, punching was

used exclusively. Punching holes in the tires takes longer, and the bundles

require ballast; split tires require no ballast. Splitting enables more

concise packing of the tires and thus easier transportation. Punching is

now used as a back-up system only. The normal rate of splitting is about

500-600 tires per day per machine, although 800 a day could be reached with

better utilization of equipment and more efficient labor. (In fact, the

manufacturer claims a capacity of 125 tires per hour.) The punching rate is

700 a day.


The tires and culvert are loaded with a large crane aboard the barge from

the two staging sites. Mosquito Control provided the crane in spring 1974 from its

surplus stock. It was fully depreciated and no longer served a useful purpose as a

piece of mobile equipment at Mosquito Control because of the poor condition of its

undercarriage. But in stationary use on the barge maintenance costs are acceptable.

Other equipment besides tire splitters and a tire punch, includes two fork lifts

for moving the tire bundles in the staging areas, a Lo-Boy heavy duty vehicle for

transporting culvert, one truck for moving the tires from Toytown to the other

sites, and one pick-up truck.1 Most tires are still delivered to Toytown, although

some dealers and salvage companies are delivering them directly to the staging sites.

They are offered an incentive to do this: unlike delivering to Toytown, there is-

no service charge per ton.



The barge itself is equipped with two 150 horsepower engines and

complete navigational equipment. Its capacity is 68 short tons, net. Average

load in seas of less than four feet is 34-40 tons of tires; culvert can be


Some small tools and equipment are also included in variable costs.






- 19 -


carried only iu seas of less than three feet. In addition, there is a consid-

erable amount of diving equipment aboard for use in delivery, reef sight

surveys and maintenance.

Estimating Fixed Costs

Fixed costs consist of two categories: the wear and tear of equipment

over time as measured by depreciation, and other costs not related to the

volume of operations, mainly overhead labor costs, insurance, land rental

and office expenses. In cases where the Artificial Reef Project purchased

equipment, expert estimates of the life of each piece of equipment were

obtained and depreciation schedules were established on a straight line and

original cost basis. In the case of rented equipment or equipment carried in other

than the basic budgets, similar information was gathered. If rental charges were

judged not to reflect the full costs, imputation was resorted to. Purchase

price and life of similar equipment or sites were used to represent the

opportunity cost concerned. The following figures were obtained.2

TABLE 4. FIXED COSTS OF ARTIFICIAL REEF CONSTRUCTION




1973/74 1974/75 1975/76

Barge $ 2,143 $ 2,143 $ 2,143
Docks 1,452 1,452 2,290
Equipment on barge 460 559 599
Sites 7,413 7,642 14,694
Heavy equipment 208 743 3,252
Tire cutting equipment -- 348 660
Diving equipment 138 328 393
Overhead labor costs 13,590 13,905 11,390
Insurance 1,790 1,990 2,115
Telephone fixed charge 138 331 662
Total 27,332 29,441 38,198
Of which: in other budgets 9.646 10,904 11,999
imputed 11,998 12,098 16,466
Artificial Reef Budget 5,688 6.439 9,733



None of the equipment is on service contract, unlike Toytown equipment.

The annual capital expenditures from which these fixed costs are allocated
areI listed in Table 8, p. 24.







- 20 -


It appears that a relatively small portion of the fixed costs of the

Artificial Reef Project are found in the Reef Budget itself. Many of the

equipment costs and overhead labor costs are in other budgets, whereas no

rental was paid for most of the sites and a rental cost of nine per cent of

the estimated 1974 value of the sites was imputed. Sites, labor, insurance

and telephone fixed costs are calculated in 1974 prices; capital equipment

costs are not so adjusted, but most of them were actually purchased in 1974.

Estimated Variable Costs

Variable costs consist mainly of equipment maintenance and operation, and

labor costs. The major maintenance of the equipment was provided by the motor

pool and the dry dock at what appear to be close to market prices. They

charged for materials and labor. Mileage charges on rented equipment fell

considerably short of the average running costs per mile by equipment category

as estimated by the county. Therefore, the latter were used as imputed values.

Detailed operating costs were available for all purchased equipment; estimates

from other budgets were obtained for rented equipment.

Labor costs cover personnel budgeted by a number of different departments:

the Department of Mosquito Control, the Artificial Reef Project, and Emergency Jobs

Program. Mosquito Control personnel initially operated the tire cutter at Toytown,

the tire trucks and the dragline for the barge. Since Fall 1975, Emergency

Jobs personnel, funded by the Federal Government, have taken over the duties

of preparing the tires and operating a truck. A total of seven is currently

employed. Only the rest of the personnel, especially the barge operator and

three divers are paid out of the budget of the Artif.icial Reef pr-oper.


This figure could be improved by estimating appreciation of land since
1974.






- 21 -


TABLE 5. VARIABLE COSTS OF ARTIFICIAL REEF CONSTRUCTION


1973/74 1974/75 1975/76

Wages (incl. fringe benefits), contract
services, commissions and fees 1 $13,359 $57,768 $107,884
Supplies, small tools and communications 1,371 4,086 6,645
Travel 2,997 -- 245
Equipment maintenance & operation 7,619 20,615 26,224
Total 25,346 82,465 140,992
Of which: in other budgets 3,772 33,557 77,401
imputed -
Artificial Reef Budget 21,574 48,912 63,597
In 1974 prices 25,346 80,690 123,569

Costs of Creating a M2 of Reef Bottom

The simplest short run output measure of reef construction is taken to

be M2 of Reef bottom covered by tires, culvert and other reef material.2

Accordingly, unit cost figures given in Table 6 were obtained.


TABLE 6. AVERAGE AND MARGINAL COSTS OF REEF BOTTOM GENERATION PER M2
CLEARWATER REEF, CONSTANT PRICES


M2 of
Reef Bottom Total Average Total Marginal Costs
Generated Costs Costs per M2 Per M2


1973/74 923 52,678 57.07 26.56
1974/75 2,963 106,859 36.06 18.78
1975/76 5,928 162,535 27.42 26.93
1976/77 7,257 198,319 27.33



If punched tires had been the sole source of reef materials, or if split tires

only had been used, and the costs of dropping each type of treated tire are assumed

identical, then the entire annual reef generation would have required the following

quantities of "raw" tires and would have resulted in unit costs shown in Table 7.


1No adjustment was made for free telephone calls to Tampa.

2For a fuller discussion, see the section on Fish Habitat Generation, pp. 25-26.





- 22 -


TABLE 7. THEORETICAL VALUE ADDED PER TIRE TAKEN TO REEF


2
M of Bottom Punched Split Costs per
Fiscal Year Generated Tires Tires Punched Tire Split Tire


1973/74 923 6,052 19,229 8.70 2.74
1974/75 2,963 19,430 61,729 5.50 1.73
1975/76 5,928 38,872 123,500 4.18 1.32


The alternative cost of the disposal--burying tires in the Toytown dump--is

about two cents per tire.3 It is thus obvious that whether punched or split tires are

used, tire "burial" in the artificial reef brings costs of an entirely different

order of magnitude. If reefs are to be preferred, they will have to demonstrate

benefits as fishing and diving sites rather than as alternatives to dumps.

LONG RUN COSTS AND PRODUCTIVITY OF THE CLEARWATER ARTIFICIAL REEF

Projected Costs of Reef Building

In its initial stages, the Reef Project enjoyed the benefits of surplus

equipment transferred from other county units, such as the crane and a fork

lift, and the utilization of other equipment that had already been depreciated

down to scrap value by other departments, such as a truck. In the projections

it was assumed that a full market price of new equipment would be paid for

replacements. Two sets of fixed cost projections were prepared based on:

(1) sustaining the present plant and equipment, (2) adding sufficient equip-

ment to enable the most expensive piece of equipment the barge to be

efficiently utilized. According to the first alternative, equipment deprecia-

tion and overhead labor costs of $40,756 a year, in 1974 prices, should be

expected until 1982/83, when replacement of the fork lifts would raise the total

to $42,417.


1 2
.1525 M per punched tire.

20.048 M2 per split tire.

3
p. 13.





- 22 -


TABLE 7. THEORETICAL VALUE ADDED PER TIRE TAKEN TO REEF


2
M of Bottom Punched Split Costs per
Fiscal Year Generated Tires Tires Punched Tire Split Tire


1973/74 923 6,052 19,229 8.70 2.74
1974/75 2,963 19,430 61,729 5.50 1.73
1975/76 5,928 38,872 123,500 4.18 1.32


The alternative cost of the disposal--burying tires in the Toytown dump--is

about two cents per tire.3 It is thus obvious that whether punched or split tires are

used, tire "burial" in the artificial reef brings costs of an entirely different

order of magnitude. If reefs are to be preferred, they will have to demonstrate

benefits as fishing and diving sites rather than as alternatives to dumps.

LONG RUN COSTS AND PRODUCTIVITY OF THE CLEARWATER ARTIFICIAL REEF

Projected Costs of Reef Building

In its initial stages, the Reef Project enjoyed the benefits of surplus

equipment transferred from other county units, such as the crane and a fork

lift, and the utilization of other equipment that had already been depreciated

down to scrap value by other departments, such as a truck. In the projections

it was assumed that a full market price of new equipment would be paid for

replacements. Two sets of fixed cost projections were prepared based on:

(1) sustaining the present plant and equipment, (2) adding sufficient equip-

ment to enable the most expensive piece of equipment the barge to be

efficiently utilized. According to the first alternative, equipment deprecia-

tion and overhead labor costs of $40,756 a year, in 1974 prices, should be

expected until 1982/83, when replacement of the fork lifts would raise the total

to $42,417.


1 2
.1525 M per punched tire.

20.048 M2 per split tire.

3
p. 13.





- 23 -


But it should be noted that at present the different "plants" of the

Project do not operate at full capacity. The barge captain estimates that with

proper dock facilities the barge should be able to make three trips per week to

the reefs. Allowing for 10 weeks of repairs and bad weather, this would still

result in 126 trips a year in lieu of the current total of 70, or an increase

of 80%.

The biggest bottleneck, however, lies in the tire splitting operations.

This is mainly a production problem, not an equipment problem or plant problem.

If the two tire splitters were operated eight hours a day at the rate of 100

tires per hour (80% of the capacity estimated by the manufacturer) 48 weeks a

year (and the tire punch would not be used at all), a total output of 384,000

tires would result, instead of the current output of 74,000. Since the barge

can carry an average load of 35 to 40 tons, at 18 lb. per tire, a load represents

about 4,000 tires. The potential annual output of 384,000 tires would thus

require about 96 trips to the reefs. On two thirds of the total trips in 1974/75,

the barge load consisted exclusively of culvert. Assuming that the volume of

culvert operations remains unchanged, the barge could actually take 79 trips with

tires. Thus 82% of the potential output of 384,000 tires could be handled.

Thus full utilization of the present barge capacity would require both a new

dock and the utilization of more efficient labor in the tire splitting operations

or an increase in the number of tire splitting machines. In the alternative

calculations a new dock in the Clearwater site and one new tire cutter were

assumed. The new dock in Clearwater that would be needed is estimated to re-

quire capital expenditures of $66,660 ($50,000 in 1974 prices). The tire cutter

would cost $4,000.

The composition and life of the new dock setup was assumed to be the same as

that of the old, including imputations, the fixed costs would rise to $43,890 in

1976/77, continue at that level for five years and rise to $45,550 in 1982/83.






- 24 -


In all these calculations it should be noted that doubling of the present

tire splitting capacity and efficient utilization of this capacity would be

required to effectively dispose of all tires generated in the county. Thus

the supply of tires is unlikely to become an effective constraint to the

operations.

Implied in the above two sets of fixed cost estimates are annual capital

expenditures given in Table 8. Because of the long lives of the structures,

benefits from the investments will be derived over many years to come.


TABLE 8. HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
IN 1974 PRICES




Current Level of Expanded
Operations Maintained Operations


1973/74 149,662
1974/75 12,306
1975/76 121,011
1976/77 3,824 60,979
1977/78 2,669 2,669
1978/79 90 90
1979/80 1,633 1,663
1980/81 3,795 3,795
1981/82 543 543
1982/83 3,422 3,422


Estimates of future variable costs are prepared on the basis of the second,

higher, fixed cost alternative. With the efficiency of the men operating the

equipment assumed to remain unchanged, about a 50 per cent increase in EmCrgency

Jobs personnel would be required to operate the new tire cutter with its atten-

dant chore of transporting additional tires. Electricity, gasoline and oil

costs would also rise by 50 per cent. On this basis, and utilizing 1974 prices,

an annual variable cost figure of $155,080 was projected for 1977/78-1982/83.





25 -

To obtain the present value of all these costs up to 1980/81 in 1974, a

seven percent interest rate was used. The costs of the county project came to

$1,007,682. To this figure were added the estimated cost of $40,000 incurred by

the City of Clearwater in dropping 72,0001 tires in 1972-74, and $49,200 grant

from the State of Florida Division of Recreation to yield a total present value

of $1,096,882.

Productivity of the Reef

To establish the supply of fish available for recreational activity,

several technological relationships were studied. First, estimates were

prepared on the amount of fish habitat area generated by reef construction.

Subsequently, the value of this habitat to fishes was established by fish counts.

No literature on productivity of similar reefs was available to determine inter-

mediate and sustained yields from the habitat. Questionnaires and interviews

with anglers on-the site and charter and party boat captains and diving clubs

were utilized to determine how many anglers and divers of different types the

estimated yield can theoretically support.


1See p. 16.




-26-


Fish Habitat Generation

Two alternative hypotheses regarding the contribution of tires and culvert to

habitat formation were considered. First, how many fish are attracted to the area

and find feeding material depends on how large an area of the sea bottom is covered.

The coverage by tires is about two feet high and that by culvert six to eight feet,

but according to this hypothesis, the difference in the height and the nature of the

coverage is inconsequential. The second hypothesis maintains that the new surface

area generated by culvert and tires is the most relevant. input variable in the pro-

duction function for fish,l because it determines the amount of food for fish, and

the available shelter. Thus two different sets of habitat calculations would be

required.

The amount of ocean bottom covered was relatively easy to establish. The dim-

ensions of the culvert dropped were accurately recorded. The area covered was estab-

lished as the length times the diameter of the culvert, on the assumption that the

culvert lie on its side partially covered on both sides with maximum width set by

the diameter of the pipe. One half of a barge load is carefully placed in a pile

some 6 to 10 feet high and approximately 40 feet in diameter. Then the remaining

culvert is placed off the opposite side of the barge, giving 30 to 40 feet of sep-

aration between clumps. On subsequent trips, this 30 to 40 feet separation is main-

tained. This continuation more closely imitates a natural reef. All punched tire

units were dropped to lie horizontal; 30" diameter of the tires became the width and

the 8" thickness of each of the four tires the length of the unit. Thus it was
2
estimated that a unit of four punched tires covered an area of .61 m A split

tire bundle usually consisted of 30 tires packed on a forklift with 42.5" forks,
2
covering a total area of 1.45 m



John G. Carlisle, Jr., Charles II. Turner and Earl E. Ebert, "Artificial
Habitat in the Marine Environment," Cal ifornia Dlpartment of Fish and Came,
Fish Bulletin 124, p. 38.






- 27 -


The amount of surface area generated was more complicated to estimate.

Culverts were treated as cylinders with inner and outer surfaces. The inner and

outer diameters of the culvert cylinders and the length of the pipes were measured

and the surfaces calculated accordingly. Tests were run on how deeply the culvert

sank into the gulf bottom, and adjustments were made to the submerged surface

area available to the fishes.

Tire surfaces were calculated separately for the punched tires and the split

tires. For punched tires the surface could be calculated essentially the same

way as for culvert, since both the inner and outer surfaces were available for

fish habitation. The split tires, however, were bunched so tightly outer surface

upon inner surface that we estimated that only the outer surface and 40% of the

inner surfaces of the entire stack of tires remained available. Therefore,

measurements were made of the inner and outer diameters, and the number and width

of tires in the stack and the adjusted surfaces were calculated. Because of

a total lack of comparable fish counts, development of this hypothesis had to

be postponed.

Overall, it was estimated that the following amount of ocean bottom has been

built into a reef each year.

TABLE 9. SQUARE METERS OF REEF BOTTOM GENERATED




Punched Split
Fiscal Culvert Tire Units Tire Units Total
Year All Clearwat er All Cearwater All Clearwater A Al Clearwa-ter


1973/74 55 55 11,848 11,8482 -- -- 11,903 11,903
1974/75 1,652 1,221 221 74 1,525 1,409 2,963 2,704
1975/76 2,082 51 396 238 3,450 260 5,928 549


The calculations already performed will be presented in the final report by
Don Schug.

includes an estimated 18000 bundles deposited by the City of Clearwater
program before June 17, 1974.





-28-


Fish Counts

Fish counts have been taken at the artificial reef locations on several

occasions between Fall 1975 and Fall 1976, although not yet in sufficient

numbers to allow adjustment for seasonal fluctuations. Separate coverages are

available for split tire bundles, punched tire units, and culvert. Three types

of censuses were conducted: total counts of fishes on isolated habitat "patches,"

transect counts, and poison sample counts. Numbers only were obtained from the

first two censuses; weight and length measurement were collected from the poison

samples. In transect counts one diver counted all fishes observed within an

approximate one meter wide band while a second diver followed behind holding a

current meter mounted on a board. The number of current meter revolutions was

recorded for each transect swam and later converted to distance travelled based

upon calibrated runs along a 22 meter transect. Visual estimates were also prc--

pared about the percentage of bottom covered by artificial reef materials in the

transect. The transect fish counts given below refer to densities per meter of

covered area (center holes of tires are assumed to be covered areas), i.e., if a

17 meter transect is 75% covered, it is equivalent to 13 meters of 100% covered

transect. The behavioral assumption underlying this conversion is that the fish

population is generated and maintained entirely by the covered substrate rather

than by the adjacent natural habitat.

Taking together the habitat patch, transect and poison counts, yielded the

following average numbers of species and the number of individual fishes per

square meter of 100% covered bottom area in the three types of artificial
2
environments.


1Gregory Smith, "Comparative Efficacy of Artificial and Natural Gulf of
Mexico Reefs as Fish Attractants," Unpublished paper, St. Petersburg, Fl., 1976.

At one station both a habitat patch count and a poison count,was conducted.
The latter represented 84% of the former, a rather satisfactory accuracy.





-29


TABLE 10. RESIDENT FISH COUNTS/m2

-- -- ~-

Number of Species Number of Individuals

Punched Tire Units .42 2.63
Split Tire Bundles 2.57 18.71
Culvert 3.00 9.00
Combinations 1.38 7.38


Because of the limited number of the fish counts, only resident fish populations have

been estimated. Estimates of migrant fish-Spanish mackerel, kingfish, and snook-

could not be obtained.

The above productivity figures per unit were used to calculate -the entire

resident fish population on the Clearwater reef. The results are given in

Table 11. After the first year, the age of the reef is of little consequence in

1
these calculations, because it was found that it takes only about a year, depending

on the season, for the game fish population of artificial reef to reach its clinax

population without migration from adjacent reef areas. Subsequent variations

occur in response to normal seasonal and weather patterns.

A knowledge of fish counts taken from time to time without knowledge of

either the rates at which fish population under similar circumstances normally

grows or about fish catches over a period of time from a known population, does

not enable determination of the removals that would still permit maximum

sustained yield. The one pertinent species on which a growth study has been

carried out is the red grouper2, but this species does not spend its entire

life cycle at such reefs. Taus no sustained yield figures can be presented.


Hleyward II. Mathews, History of Publicly Fundcd Artificial Reefs of Pinellas
County. Manuscript, p. 6.

2Martin A Moe, Jr., Biolowy of tlhe Red cGrouper Epinenholus morio (Valenciennes)
irom tile Eastern Gulf of Mexico, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Professional
Paper Series Number 10, Dec. 1969, Marine Research Laboratory, St. Petersburg, Fl.












TABLE 11. PRODUCTIVITY OF CLEARWATER REEF


i. .
1 Person-day
Culvert Punched Tire Units Split Tire Bundles Fish Of Fishing

Square
Fish Meters Fish Square Fish Square
Per Sq. of Per Sq. Meters Per Sq. Meters of
Meter of Culvert Total Meter of of Units Total Meter of Bundles Total Grand
Transect In Place Fish' Transect In Place Fish Transect In Place Fish Total


1973/74 9.00 55 495 2.63 11,848 31,160 18.71 --- --- 31,655 5,275

1974/75 9.00 1,276 11,484 2.63 11,922 31,354 18.71 1,410 26,381 69,219 11,536

o
1975/76 9.00 1,327 11,943 2.63 12,160 31,980 18.71 1,670 31,246 75,169 12,528 1


Reported for year of initial size;
catchable size a year later.


user days in Table 13 calculated on the basis of fish of





- 31 -


Projections of resident fish population were made on the basis of the new

reef bottom generated with the projected expenditures. Since the only new

equipment introduced was a tire splitter, it was assumed that the output of split

tires increases accordingly, i.e., by about 50 per cent. It was assumed further,

for purposes of simplification, that all new materials will be deposited on the

Clearwater Reef. Thus all benefits of the program can be evaluated in terms of

that reef alone. The following figures were obtained.

TABLE 12. PROJECTED PRODUCTIVITY OF CLEARWATER REEF


M of Artificial
Reef Bottom Total
In Place Fish

1976/77 20,810 176,306
1977/78 26,175 276,685
1978/79 31,540 377,064
1979/80 36,905 477,443
1980/81 42,270 577,822


POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO ANGLERS AND DIVERS

There is no unique relationship between the productivity of a reef and the

benefits derived from fishing or diving on a reef, because different people derive

different satisfaction from the same activity. Surveys of anglers' attitudes toward

the benefits of the reefs led us to form four categories of beneficiaries: (1)

"Sunday" anglers, (2) sports anglers, (3) divers, and (4) shark anglers.1

Sunday_Anglers

Sunday anglers are usually retirees or families fishing on weekends. A

relatively large number of women and children is involved. Small boats of 16

to 18 feet or half-day party boats are most commonly used by this group.

Sunday anglers consider a day well spent at sea even if catches are relatively


It was also revealed that the charter boats almost invariably have a limit to
the amount of fish the customers are allowed to take home. The rest is sold at local
fish markets. The benefits of these sales are excluded from our benefit calculations.
And so are all secondary benefits, such as increased tourist trade.





- 31 -


Projections of resident fish population were made on the basis of the new

reef bottom generated with the projected expenditures. Since the only new

equipment introduced was a tire splitter, it was assumed that the output of split

tires increases accordingly, i.e., by about 50 per cent. It was assumed further,

for purposes of simplification, that all new materials will be deposited on the

Clearwater Reef. Thus all benefits of the program can be evaluated in terms of

that reef alone. The following figures were obtained.

TABLE 12. PROJECTED PRODUCTIVITY OF CLEARWATER REEF


M of Artificial
Reef Bottom Total
In Place Fish

1976/77 20,810 176,306
1977/78 26,175 276,685
1978/79 31,540 377,064
1979/80 36,905 477,443
1980/81 42,270 577,822


POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO ANGLERS AND DIVERS

There is no unique relationship between the productivity of a reef and the

benefits derived from fishing or diving on a reef, because different people derive

different satisfaction from the same activity. Surveys of anglers' attitudes toward

the benefits of the reefs led us to form four categories of beneficiaries: (1)

"Sunday" anglers, (2) sports anglers, (3) divers, and (4) shark anglers.1

Sunday_Anglers

Sunday anglers are usually retirees or families fishing on weekends. A

relatively large number of women and children is involved. Small boats of 16

to 18 feet or half-day party boats are most commonly used by this group.

Sunday anglers consider a day well spent at sea even if catches are relatively


It was also revealed that the charter boats almost invariably have a limit to
the amount of fish the customers are allowed to take home. The rest is sold at local
fish markets. The benefits of these sales are excluded from our benefit calculations.
And so are all secondary benefits, such as increased tourist trade.






modest. Questionnaires administered to anglers in small private boats at the

reef site and interviews with captains of half-day party boats indicated that

half a dozen fish per person per trip made the anglers so satisfied that they

said they would come back later. According to the charter boat captains,

considerable variation existed between local customers and out-of-county customers,

on one hand, and men vs. women and children, on the other. Out-of-county

customers were satisfied with relatively fewer fish, whereas local anglers who

were familiar with typical catches in the area were more demanding. Women and

children were generally satisfied with smaller catches than men. The size of the

fish did not seem to make much difference in this group. It was assumed that

the maximum rate Sunday anglers were willing to pay is equal to the average charter

boat rate per person of $40, since charter boats are clearly a more expensive

substitute and are normally not used for bottom fishing at the reefs. Since no

current data were available on the costs of anglers going out in their own boats,

the market price paid per person in half-day party boats was taken as the marginal

benefit of these trips. Inquiries at several operators established the prevail-

ing half-day rate at $8.00 per person, including bait and tackle. The full-day

rate is $15.00.

The maximum number of user days demanded at zero cost was determined by the

minimal satisfaction derived from going out to the reef. This limit is reached

when weather is acceptable, (80 per cent of the time on the average2), but the site

is so crowded that there is no room for boats to maneuver (about 80 boats3). With

four persons per boat, these assumptions yield a total annual demand of 92,160 user

days. On these assumptions, the following demand schedule was obtained.


Local residents are estimated to constitut-e about 80 per cent of anglers
at the Clearwater Reef, according to on-site survey:: conducted by our group in
Summer Fall, 1976.

2Expert estimate in December February and early March weather is good only
half the time, whereas in mid-summer it is almost always good.

3The buoys indicate the maximum dimensions of the reef; anglers have no way
of knowing how much of the bottom area is actually covered by reef material.
Therefore, the invariant area marked by the buoys is used throughout.







Figure 6. Potential Reef
Fislhing Demand by $40 C
Sunday Anglers

average willingness to pay
$20
B A



o 92,160 user days
The area under the demand curve OQAB equals $1,843,200. These would be the

annual benefits if there were enough fish to satisfy all Sunday anglers that the

site can accommodate at the rate of about six fish per person and no transporta-

tion and equipment costs. The annual benefits per year started much lower in

1973/74 when the numbers of resident fish were small but increased as construction

progressed. Assuming that it takes one year for the reef to internally produce

fish of catchable size and further assuming that any fish caught is equally satis-

factory--an extremely optimistic assumption--, we obtained the following annual

figures on the maximum number of user days and benefits in the Sunday angler

category supported by the Clearwater Reef, through its expected construction

period.1
TABLE 13. MAXIMUM AVAILABLE USER DAYS AND BENEFITS
FOR SUNDAY ANGLERS. CONSTANT PRICES


Undiscounted Discounted
User Days Benefits Benefits

1973/74 4,150 162,265 162,265
1974/75 5,275 204,960 191,551
1975/76 11,662 436,975 381,671
1976/77 12,655 471,462 384,854
1977/78 29,384 988,037 753,766
1978/79 46,114 1,382,959 986,032
1979/80 62,844 1,656,882 1,104,051
1980/81 79,573 1,809,092 1,126,613
Total 5,090,803


Costs for individual years as well as for the entire assumed construction

period were calculated in two parts: reef construction costs and boat rental

and equipment costs to the anglers. These figures as well as the resultant

benefit cost ratios are given in Table 14.

1No allowance is made for substitution between fishing/diving at the artificial reef
and similar activities elsewhere, because even the largest total represents only
a small part of recreational fishing in the county.


- j -






-34-

TABLE 14.BENEFITS AND COSTS OF CLEARWATER REEF TO SUNDAY ANGLERS

AT FULL UTILIZATION OF AVAILABLE FISH


Discounted
User Days Benefits


Discounted
Construction Boat Rental and
Costs 1) Equipment Costs


1973/74 4,150 83,000 52,678 62,250 114,928
1974/75 5,275 98,600 90,880 73,949 164,829
1975/76 11,536 201,680 13,158. 151,260 164,418
1976/77 12,528 204,540 161,890 153,400 315,290
1977/78 31,785 485,670 151,383 363,950 515,333
1978/79 51,052 729,314 141,656 546,986 688,642
1979/80 70,312 937,493 132,213 703,120 835,333
1980/81 89;572 1,116,160 18,570 837,150 855,720
1981/82 92,160 1,072,880 --- 804 660 804,660
Total for
Construction
Period 4,929,337 762,428 3,696,725 4,459,153


1) Excludes about $140,000 depreciated value of the plant at the end of the construction period for most
of which alternative uses can be found..









Even during the construction period a favorable benefit-cost ratio results.

When construction ceases in 1981, the benefits remain but only the user costs of

boat and equipment rental are incurred and the marginal, discounted benefit cost

ratio rises to 1.33. Given the extremely long life of the reef, the average of

the marginal ratios will asymptotically approach the same value.

Sports Anglers

Sports anglers either go out in their own bigger boats (21-25 feet) or

charter a boat that accommodates up to six anglers. Sports anglers usually

time their trips with reported good seasons, such as the Spanish macrkerol and kingl'fisfl

runs. Charter boats take anglers to the reefs only during trolling seasons, nol

for bottom fishing. The satisfaction of a sport fishing party depe'iids on Ithe

kind and size of fish. Typically 30-40 Spanishi mackerel per licharLter boat invites


Total
Discounted
Costs


Benef
-- '




-35-


return trips, whereas only 15-20 kingfish are required for the same result.

100-200 lbs. of grouper also makes a good fishing day. But one of the captains

stated that variability of satisfaction is great: a true sports fisherman is

happy even if he doesn't c;tch any; after all, the fish don't bite all the time.

There may be so many forage fish at the artificial reef that the fish

just don't care for your bait. (Our divers have confirmed this on several occasions.)

Even though trolling boats do not limit themselves to the covered area or

even to the marked reef area, as a rule, the charter boat captains show a pre-

ference for the general reef area rather than ordinary sand bottom. In prin-

ciple, migratory pelagic fish like kingfish and Spanish mackerel can be found

anywhere there are menhaden, sardines, and other similar forage fish. Even

though the large pelagic fish are not primarily dependent upon reefs, the juv-

eniles do consistently congregate over reef areas rather than over sand bottoms.1

Thus at tnis stage, it was simply assumed that during the trolling seasons

the demand by sports anglers saturates the reef area at the market price of

chartering a boat with fishing gear.

Some 25 charter boats operate from the Clearwater Marina and another dozen

or so from other marinas within easy reach of the reefs already established. Our

survey of a sample of captains at the Clearwater Marina on a cold and windy

November morning when small craft warnings deterred activity at sea revealed that

the average daily charter rate is $175 including bait and tackle, and the average

load is 4.5 persons. Thus the market price was set at $39 per person. Since

for all intents and purposes there are no superior alternatives to a fully equipped

charter boat, the maximum rate that would drive use to zero was established as

the highest charter boat rate, estimated at $220 a day or $49 per person. On the

assumption that a 21 foot boat is used for 10 days of sports fishing a year (no

other use)with standard trolling equipment and 4.5 persons aboard, anralternative

cost figure of $37.44 per person per trip, in 1977 prices, was obtained.


10ur divers have repeatedly observed this phenomenon within a few days after
reef material has been deposited.




-36-


The trolling season usually lasts about 2 weeks in spring and in fall.1

Another two weeks was included in summer for snook fishing. With an adjustment

for good weather 80% of the time in spring and fall, 100% of the time in summer,

a total of 42 user days per boat was obtained. The reef becomes crowded with

only 20 larger moving boats on it. With 4.5 persons per boat, a total number
of user days generated at $39 per day comes to 3,780. The potential market demand

is described in Figure 7. C

$49

Figure 7. Potential Reef
Trolling Demand by Sports $24.50 average willingness to pay
Anglers ~B .




0 3,780 user days


The area under the demand curve equals $900,375.



Sports Divers

There are a number of diving clubs and charter boats in the area which

take groups of divers out in the Gulf. Information gathered from these clubs

and from individual operators indicated that $29 per person was usually charged

for a full-day excursion, including scuba gear. This figure thus represents the

travel costs (marginal user costs). The most expensive guide charged $40. A good

diving day does not have to result in any fish catch at all. This is especially true

of beginner divers who represent the typical diver group at the reef. Not all these

divers carry spear guns with them and even those who do are often satisfied with

watching the fish rather than catching them.




But in Fall 1976, for example, there were no kingfish runs on the reefs
perhaps because of the sudden onset of cold weather that cooled the shallow waters
rapidly and made the kings migrate south in deeper waters.





-37-


Only about six diving boats can be accommodated on the reef at any one time,

because of the requirement that all boats stay at a safe distance from underwater

divers. With six persons per boat in good weather and acceptable temperatures

(25% diving in four winter months, 50% diving in fall and spring and 90% of

the remaining time), a total of 7,560 user days is generated by capacity use. Thus

the area under the demand curve comes to $302,400. Figure 8 depicts the potential

market demand and marginal user costs.

Figure 8. Potential Diving $40 C
Demand

average willingness to pay
$20
B A




0 7,560 user days

Since watching marine life rather than catching fish represents diving bene-

fits, the supply of diving recreation is related directly to the amount of reef

bottom covered. The intended size of the reef is 63,000 m2. Clusters of

material are placed on it, with open spaces in between. For simplicity's

sake it is assumed that the intended open space equals intended coverage. On

that basis, the reef would yield the potential annual diver benefits shown in

Table 15.

If the reef was used to its maximum exclusively by divers, irrespective

of average boat and equipment charges, the annual marginal benefit cost ratios

of the order of 0.37 would result. With 7,560 user days, the marginal ratio

would change to 0.7 a year after construction ceases. With the practically

indestructible nature of the reef, benefits offset by boat and equipment

rental would continue to accrue until the entire benefit cost ratio would

asymptotically approach 0.69. Clearly, unsatisfactorily small benefits would

result if the reef was devoted exclusively to divers rather than to Sunday anglers.












TABLE 15. DIVING BENEFITS AND COSTS WITH FULL CAPACITY UTILIZATION


Intended
% of
Reef
Available

34.8

37.8

46.3

48.1

71.1

94.2

100.0

100.0


User
Days

2,631

2,858

3,500

3,636

5,375

7,122

7,560

7,560


Undiscounted
Benefits

52,620

57,160

70,000

72,720

107,500

142,440

151,220

151,220


Discounted
Benefits

52,620

53,421

61,190

59,360

82,061

101,021

100,764

94,147


Discounted
Construction
Costs

52,678

90,880

13,158

161,890

151,383

141,656

33,633

-0-


Discounted
Boat Rental
and Equipment
Costs

76,299

77,460

88,880

102,350

118,989

146,481

146,089

136,513


Total
Discounted
Costs

128,977

168,340

102,038

264,240

270,372

288,137

198,292

136,513


1973/74

1974/75

1975/76

1976/77

1977/78

1978/79

1979/80

1980/81


Marginal
Benefit-
Cost
Ratio

0.41

0.32

0.60

0.22

0.30

0.35

0.51

0.69


--


--


- -------







-39-


Shark Anglers

The fourth group of beneficiaries, the shark anglers, does not compete at

all with the other groups, because they go out at night. Their demand schedule

has a maximum willingness to pay point at $49, the same as the sports anglers.

The market price, however, is only $25 per person. (Apparently, the charter

boats' practice resembles marginal cost pricing). If they go out as often as

weather permits in charter boats, their demand is otherwise similar to that of

sports anglers except that the boat density at night should be assumed lower,

10 at a maximum, for safety reasons. The potential market demand and user

costs are depicted in Figure 5.

Calculation of benefit cost ratios faces the same obstacles as in the

case of sports anglers. Sharks are not resident reef animals, and the extent

to which they are attracted to the reef by forage fish is difficult to ascetain.

Therefore, only the user days demanded at average demand price and at marginal

cost price were calculated. (See Table 16 below).

Optimum Reef Size_

Our model led us to conclude that optimum capacity is reached when average

demand price equals marginal cost of capacity and operations. For Sunday anglers

the entire reef should be built. If other users had to bear all the costs of

reef construction, the benefits derived would not justify these costs.

A summary of the benefits yielded annually to the two principal users is

presented in Figure 9. The best use of the reefs is for bottom fishing by

Sunday anglers. This use yields a potential marginal benefit cost ratio of

about 1.33 at optimum reef size. Potential benefits to divers converge toward

0.69 marginal ratio. The reef is already too large for exclusive use by divers

and shark anglers.







-39-


Shark Anglers

The fourth group of beneficiaries, the shark anglers, does not compete at

all with the other groups, because they go out at night. Their demand schedule

has a maximum willingness to pay point at $49, the same as the sports anglers.

The market price, however, is only $25 per person. (Apparently, the charter

boats' practice resembles marginal cost pricing). If they go out as often as

weather permits in charter boats, their demand is otherwise similar to that of

sports anglers except that the boat density at night should be assumed lower,

10 at a maximum, for safety reasons. The potential market demand and user

costs are depicted in Figure 5.

Calculation of benefit cost ratios faces the same obstacles as in the

case of sports anglers. Sharks are not resident reef animals, and the extent

to which they are attracted to the reef by forage fish is difficult to ascetain.

Therefore, only the user days demanded at average demand price and at marginal

cost price were calculated. (See Table 16 below).

Optimum Reef Size_

Our model led us to conclude that optimum capacity is reached when average

demand price equals marginal cost of capacity and operations. For Sunday anglers

the entire reef should be built. If other users had to bear all the costs of

reef construction, the benefits derived would not justify these costs.

A summary of the benefits yielded annually to the two principal users is

presented in Figure 9. The best use of the reefs is for bottom fishing by

Sunday anglers. This use yields a potential marginal benefit cost ratio of

about 1.33 at optimum reef size. Potential benefits to divers converge toward

0.69 marginal ratio. The reef is already too large for exclusive use by divers

and shark anglers.





-40-


0
S 1.6



u
J 1.2
*Hr

1.0


0.8


0.44


o.k


0.2


0.0
00 3/ 74/75 75/76 76/77 77/78 78/79 7.9/60 80/81

Year
Fig. 9. A summary of marginal annual benefit cost
ratios for Sunday anglers (light) and divers (dark).


I





-41-


If marginal cost pricing were assumed, demand would have become satisfied

at the level of 57,603 user days for Sunday anglers by 1979/80 and before 1974

for all other users. Thus construction of the Clearwater Artificial Reef

beyond its assumed size in 1975/76 would be justified only if Sunday anglers

were its only daytime users; additional benefits from night-time use would

accrue to shark anglers.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

The present report has assessed the costs and potential benefits of

artificial reefs and compared those with other modes of disposing of the pri-

mary raw material, tires. Although tires can be buried quite cheaply in land-

fills, in the long run they can be more beneficially used in reef construction

that yields recreational benefits for centuries to come. It is expected that

the reef population will reach its sustained level in about two years but will

endure an estimated 1,000 years if the reef is build with tires and practically

forever if built with culvert, provided that annual maintenance of the buoys

of the order of $500 is undertaken.
/
An interdisciplinary study like this one which has to rely heavily on

nature's biological technologies in the conversion of tires to catchable fish

1
There are very few marine bacteria capable of decomposing synthetic rubber.






-42-


suffers from the uneven state of art between the disciplines of economics and

biology. Even though an economist does not have the expertise to fill many

of the gaps in the biological knowledge, the benefit cost framework developed

above enables the indication of areas where data are lacking or deficiencies

exist and thus further research is called for.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, all the benefits assessed have been

potential, i.e., realizable benefits rather than actual benefits. The first

order of business is to study the actual benefits today and to project bene-

fits into the future. Substantial work on interviews of anglers, charter boat

captains, diving clubs and boat owners in general is under way currently and

more is needed in the next few years to chart the user pattern. Reconncnda-

tions as to how the potential benefits can be realized should then be possible.

A number of technological transformations of tires to fish rest on an ex-

ceedingly narrow data base. A systematic study of the layouts of various reef

materials, the bottom area covered and the reef surface area generated should

be undertaken. Fish counts, especially poison counts, need to be multiplied.

It has been suggested2 that the height of the reef is very important in deter-

mining the size of the fish that inhabit it. The present study had no suitable

data available to test that hypothesis, but such data should be collected. The

more general hypothesis that it is the amount of surface area rather than the

reef bottom area that determines reef productivity could not be tested either

because the few fish counts were not conducted with such differentiation in


1Don Schug, Graduate Assistant in MNarine Science, will prei;ent his fnJudtin;'
in the final report.
2
Richard Stone, "General Introduction to Artificial Reefs," Proceedings of
Sport Fishing Seminar, November 18-39, 1971, Jekyll I: 1 land, Geor-gia, Seminar
Series No. 1, p. 2.





-43-


mind. A study of the algae on the reefs and their relationship to productivity

of catchable fish would greatly enhance our understanding of why productivities

of different kinds of reefs differ.

No life cycle studies have been conducted on any of the fish that typically

inhabit the reefs. Such a study of the white grunt, the most common species

of sports fish on the reefs, would be most valuable. Even more demanding would

be studies of the role of the reef in the life cycles of the migratory fish like

kingfish and Spanish mackerel.

Reef building activity is going on all along the Suncoast. The costs of

reef building are of an entirely different order of magnitude than the costs of

burying tires in landfills. Reef construction expenditures are voluntary and

postponable. Their merits should be evaluated in comparison with the merits of

other discretionary private and local government expenditures before decisions

are made. Cost effective techniques of reef construction are not well known by

the many volunteer groups that now advocate and support reef construction. A

series of conferences in the various counties should be offered by a group of

experts to interested local officials and private groups in order to reduce the

chance of costly mistakes and to speed up the construction of other potentially

equally beneficial artificial reefs. Since substantial amounts of public funds

also support reef construction, the public has a similar right to know and

should be kept informed of the opportunities available to them as well as of

the associated costs.





-44-


Bibliography


Carlisle, John G., Jr.; Turner, Charles H.; and Ebert, Earl E. Artificial
Habitat in the Marine Environment. California Department of Fish and
Game, Fish Bulletin 124, 1964. 93 pp.

Mathews, Heyward.H. History of Publicly Funded Artificial Reefs of Pinellas
County. Manuscript, 1976. 9 pp.

Miller, Jon R. "On the Use of Unit Day Values in the Evaluation of Site-
Specific, Water Based Recreation Benefits." Paper presented at the
Southern Economic Association Meetings, Atlanta, Georgia, November
1976. 15 pp.

Moe, Martin A., Jr. Biology of the Red Grouper Epinephulus morio (Valenciennes)
from the Eastern Gulf of Mexico. St. Petersburg: Florida Department of
Natural Resources, Marine Research Laboratory, Professional Paper Series
Number 10, 91 pp.

Mumy, Gene E. and Hanke, Steve H. "Public Investment Criteria for Underpriced
Public Products." American Economic Review, September 1975. pp. 712-719.

Smith, Gregory B. "Comparative Efficacy of Artificial and Natural Gulf of
Mexico Reefs as Fish Attractants." St. Petersburg, Florida, 1976.
(Mimeographed) 14 pp.

Stone, Richard B. "General Introduction to Artificial Reefs," Proceedings
of Sport Fishing Seminar, November 18-19, 1971, Jekyll Island, Georgia.
Wilmington, N.C.: Coastal Plains Center for Marine Development Services,
1972. pp. 1-3.

Stone, Richard B.; Buchanan, Chester C.; and Steinle, Frank W., Jr. Scrap
Tires as Artificial Reefs. Environmental Protection Agency, 1974. 33 pp.

Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, Tampa Bay Area-wide Solid Waste Management
and Resource Recovery Study Phase II. Technical and Management Report.
St. Petersburg, Florida. February 1976. 461 pp.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs