<%BANNER%>
Biennial report
ALL VOLUMES CITATION SEARCH THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00075929/00014
 Material Information
Title: Biennial report
Physical Description: v. : ill. ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida -- State Board of Conservation
Florida Geological Survey
Publisher: The Board
Place of Publication: Tallahassee
Creation Date: 1963
Publication Date: 1936-1968
Frequency: biennial
regular
 Subjects
Subjects / Keywords: Natural resources -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Conservation of natural resources -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Saltwater fishing -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Economic conditions -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
serial   ( sobekcm )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: Florida State Board of Conservation.
Dates or Sequential Designation: 1936/38-1967/68.
Numbering Peculiarities: Vols. for 1936/38-1959/60 called 3rd-14th.
Numbering Peculiarities: 6th (1943/44) bound with the 6th Biennial report of the Florida Geological survey.
Numbering Peculiarities: Biennium ending Dec.31.
General Note: 13th (1957/58) has a subtitle "Salt water fishing."
General Note: Vols. for 1961/62-1963/64 include biennial reports of the individual divisions of the Board of Conservation.
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 001589422
oclc - 01410803
notis - AHL3395
System ID: UF00075929:00014
 Related Items
Preceded by: Biennial report to State Board of Conservation
Succeeded by: Biennial report - Florida Department of Natural Resources

Full Text

Biennial

Report

1963-64


333
F43b


FLORIDA
BOARD OF CONSERVATION


'9 3/614


TALLAHASSEE


~S~i
14?"


I




a -.a


FLORIDA BOARD

OF

CONSERVATION



HAYDON BURNS
Governor


TOM ADAMS
Secretary of State


EARL FAIRCLOTH
Attorney General


RAY E. GREEN
Comptroller


BROWARD WILLIAMS
Treasurer


THOMAS D. BAILEY
Supt. of Public Instruction


DOYLE CONNER
Commissioner of Agriculture


RANDOLPH HODGES
Director of Conservation








COVER. President Johnson speaks to rain-soaked Floridians near Palatka
Feb. 27. 1964, after throwing switch to touch off blast to move the dirt as
construction starts on Cross Florida Barge Canal.


















Florida Board of Conservation


TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA

March 1, 1965





Honorable Haydon Bums, chairman
Florida Board of Conservation
Tallahassee, Florida.



Dear Governor Burs,

I herewith submit the biennial report covering activities of the six divi-
sions of the Florida Board of Conservation during the years 1963-1964.


Respectfully yours
Randolph Hodges, director










/%-I
C.^





Preface


The Board of Conservation is composed of the Governor, Secretary
of State, Attorney General, Comptroller, State Treasurer, Superintendent
of Public Instruction and Commissioner of Agriculture.


The Board is charged by law (Section 370.02, Florida Statutes) with
the duties of conserving and developing the natural resources of Florida
and administering the provisions of Chapters 370, 371, 373, 376, 377 and
378.


To carry out its responsibilities the Board is divided into six divisions:
Administration, Salt Water Fisheries, Water Resources and Conservation,
Waterways Development, Geology and Beaches and Shores.


The Director of Conservation acts as the agent of the Board in co-
ordinating and directing its activities in the discharge of its duties.


In this report the activities of the individual divisions during the
calendar years 1963 and 1964 are summarized. The report shows that
significant advances have been made in all fields in which the Board of
Conservation is responsible.


But most important has been the awakening of the citizens of
Florida to the necessity of full development and sound husbandry of
vast water and mineral resources of the State and with it wide public
support of the programs and goals of the Board of Conservation.













TABLE OF CONTENTS


Page

Preface 2

Letter of Transmittal 1

Division of Administration 5

Division of Salt Water Fisheries 13

Division of Water Resources and Conservation 44

Division of Beaches and Shores 60

Division of Waterways Development 69

Division of Geology 78



Illustrations

Black Gold 4

Improving on Nature 8

Florida's Favorite Pasttime 12

Red Tide Research 22

Water Waste 46

Storm Wrecks Beach .62

Feeding a Beach 64

Suwannee River Channel 73




3






Ii


L '


BLACK GOLD-Oil gushs from the discovery well of Sunoco Oil Co. in the
Felda Field in Hendry County. Two other producing oil wells already have been
brought in, and six are being drilled in the new field.


Lj


I # 1V
















DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION
FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
TALLAHASSEE


SECOND BIENNIAL REPORT

1963-1964



RANDOLPH HODGES
DIRECTOR











RESPONSIBILITIES
The Division of Administration has the duty and responsibility of co-
ordinating the activities of the various divisions, rendering such services as
can be centralized effectively, carrying out activities not specifically assigned
by law to one of the other divisions and any other responsibilities assigned by
the Board.
The Division of Administration also is charged with administering, co-
ordinating and enforcing weather modification (Sections 373.261-373.391)
and the archaeology statute (Chapter 376).
The Director of Conservation serves also as Director of the Division of
Administration.

ACTIVITIES
The primary goal of the Division of Administration as defined by statute
is to assure that the various divisions function as a team, each carrying out
its assigned duties with efficiency, and economy and without duplication of
services or overlapping of jurisdiction.
This goal largely has been reached during the past two years with the
Director of Conservation guiding and supervising the activities of all divisions,
clearly defining the jurisdiction and responsibilities of each and serving as
liason among the various divisions. This has eliminated the possibility of an
overlapping of jurisdiction inherent in the fields of water resources conserva-
tion, waterways development, and the geology of water.
Centralization of fiscal operations under the Division of Adminstration,
accomplished during the previous biennium, has been perfected during the
past two years. Property controls have been tightened.
Many accounting functions have been transferred to modern business
machines, resulting in substantial savings of time and money and lessening
the possibility of error.
With full responsibility for administration. of leases for the taking of dead
oyster shell from state-owned submerged lands assigned to the Division of
Administration in 1962, revenue from this source has shown a steady increase.
Net returns to the State from sale of dead oyster shell, which totaled $93,332
during fiscal 1960-61 and $145,107.72 for fiscal 1961-62, jumped to $212,871
in fiscal 1962-63 and $281,610 during fiscal 1963-64.
Added responsibility was given the fiscal office by the 1963 Legislature
when it amended the motorboat registration law to provide for annual regis-
tration of motorboats and decreed that the various counties should share in
the registration revenue. The fiscal office was given the duty of distributing to
the counties their share of the registration certificate tax revenue. Since the
new motorboat registration law became effective August 18, 1963, a total of
$595,673 has been distributed among the 67 countries. Another distribution
was scheduled early in 1965.












In addition, $450,000 was transferred from the Motorboat Revolving Trust
Fund to the Land Acquisition Trust Fund of the Outdoor Recreation program.
Tighter controls over recommendations to the Budget Commission for
releases from the Flood Control Account were established during 1964. Sec-
tion 378.04, Florida Statutes, provides that disbursements to Districts from the
Flood Control Account must have the approval of the Board of Conservation.
Prior to the creation of the Southwest Florida Water Management Dis-
trict and development of its program, the Flood Control Account serviced only
the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District. As a result, approval
by the Board of Conservation of requested disbursements from the Flood Con-
trol Account was handled as a routine ministerial function.
However, with the Southwest Florida Water Management District program
developed to the point that it, too, has need for and qualifies for funds from
the Flood Control Account, it became necessary for the Board of Conserva-
tion through the fiscal office of the Division of Administration to investigate
each request for disbursements. The Flood Control Account is limited and
it is the desire of the Board that available funds be spent to meet the most
immediate needs.
The policy of the department acting as a self-insurer on automotive,
marine and other equipment, inaugurated in July, 1962, was continued during
1963 and 1964. This has resulted in savings as losses to date have been less than
premiums formerly paid to casualty insurance companies.
Liability and workmen's compensation insurance contracts have been
awarded on competitive bids. The most recent policies purchased embrace
the so-called "retrospective plan," which should result in further savings in
this field.
The central purchasing procedures established during the previous bi-
ennium were strengthened during the past two years. Formerly, field employees
were issued requisition books and were permitted to make emergency pur-
chases of commodities or services to a maximum amount of $25.00. Under cur-
rent policy, only area supervisors are issued requisition books and all re-
quests for emergency purchases must be made by the area supervisor and have
the approval ot the purchasing agent.
Expense money available to the Conservation Patrol was budgeted among
the 10 law enforcement areas and no exception to these area budgets was
permitted without approval of the Director of Conservation.
Information and Education Services were stepped up substantially during
the past two years as increased public awareness of the need for conserving
Florida's natural resources brought heavy demands for information concerning
resources, conservation laws and regulations and sound conservation practices.
The I & E staff placed heavy emphasis on preparation and distribution of
educational material geared to the needs of school children. During the 1963-64
fiscal year 33 educational pamphlets were produced. An additional 14 were
produced during the final six months of 1964, and two others, including a
























A








"gt
^ .--ei--



































IMPROVING ON NATURE-Artificial fishing reefs have substantially im-
proved sports fishing along Flordia's coast. Here a barge-load of scrap auto bodies
is towed to the new Dixie County reef site for dumping.











comprehensive guidebook for salt water sports fishermen, were prepared for
publication early in 1965.
The I & E film library was augmented by purchase of a print of the film
"Troubled Waters," produced by the U. S. Senate's Committee on Water
Pollution. Purchase of this film, which deals with the.increasing water pollu-
tion problem throughout the nation, brought the number of educational films
in the Conservation Department library to 41.
Members of the I & E staff made 53 speaking appearances before civic
clubs, schools groups and sportsmen's organizations during fiscal 1962-63 and
31 others during the final six months of 1964. The Director of Conservation
augmented these educational speeches with more than 70 public speaking en-
gagements during the past two years.
The Florida Water News, a monthly publication dealing with water
resources and water conservation, increased its circulation from 1,300 to 1,700
during the two-year period.
Displays of education exhibits at various fairs, expositions and conven-
tions was a major part of the information and education activities. A new
exhibit for the Salt Water Fisheries Division was built to Department specifi-
cations and delivered in time for the opening of the 1964-65 fair circuit in
October, 1964.
The exhibit of the Division of Water Resources was renovated and re-
vised. An exhibit for the Division of Waterways Development was ordered and
delivery was anticipated early in 1965. This exhibit is a realistic working model
of the St. Johns Lock of the Cross Florida Barge Canal.
At the request of the State Development Commission, two Conservation
Officers were assigned to the Florida exhibit at the New York World's Fair
to help promote tourism.
Chapter 376 was implemented early in 1965 with the employment of a
state archaeologist to salvage artifacts and, other evidence of Florida's ancient
culture.
Weather modification activities were dormant during 1963 and 1964. Irving
P. Krick, Inc., of Denver, Colorado, renewed its permit for 1963 but was in-
active. On October 16, 1964, W. E. Howell Associates, Inc., of Lexington, Mass.,
advised of plans to undertake certain weather modification operations in
Florida. However, formal application for a permit to operate had not been
received at the end of 1964.
In September, 1963, the Outdoor Recreational Development Council made
available to the Board of Conservation $50,000 to be expended for construction
of small recreational projects such as artificial fishing reefs and boat launching
ramps in the salt waters of the State. The Division of Administration adminis-
tered this program.
In the interest of spreading the available money as far as possible and
to the benefit of as many people as possible, it was determined to disburse
the funds among interested coastal counties on a matching basis.












Twenty-seven of the coastal counties signified their intention of partici-
pating in the program, in which the Board agreed to match local expenditures
up to a maximum of $1,900.00.
As of December 31, 1964, projects had been completed in 10 counties and
matching funds contributed by the Board of Conservation. These projects in-
cluded: extension of a public fishing pier in Bay County; improvements to the
Haulover Inlet boat ramp in Dade County; construction of a boat ramp in
Palm Beach County; construction of an artificial fishing reef in Manatee
County; construction of an artificial reef in Sarasota County; construction of
a boat ramp in Indian River County; construction of an artificial fishing reef
in Taylor County; construction of an artificial fishing reef in Wakulla County;
construction of a boat ramp in Flagler County, and construction of an artificial
fishing reef in Brevard County.
It is anticipated that similar small recreational projects will be completed
or under construction in other coastal counties before the end of the 1964-65
fiscal year.
The Director of Conservation serves by statute as Chairman of the Florida
Boating Council and as a member of the Outdoor Recreational Planning Com-
mittee. He also by statute is a representative of Florida on the Gulf States
Marine Fisheries Commission and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commis-
sion. He has served also by designation of the Governor as Chairman of an In-
teragency Committee to Study Water Pollution. Secretarial and other services
required by the Director's membership on these Boards have been handled by
employees of the Division of Administration.
The Director of Conservation also is a member of the National Advisory
Council to the National Rivers and Harbors Congress and serves as Vice Chair-
man of the Committee on Recreation and Wildlife of the National Rivers and
Harbors Congress. Although these activities are not among the statutory duties
of the Director, they are of vital importance in promoting National support
for Florida's water-related public works program.











FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Administration
Statement of Actual Expenditures


For Fiscal Year, 1962-63


Department
General Administration ..............
Accounting & Personnel. .......
Purchasing........................ .............
Waterways Development...............................
STotal Expenditures...................... ............


Salaries
$ 23,938.04
22,457.96
9,408.18
15,337.30
$ 71,141.48


For Fiscal Year, 1963-64


Department
General Administration................... ..........
Accounting & Personnel.................................
P urchasing...................................................
Education & Information...............................
Airplane & Pilots....
Total Expenditures......................


Salaries

$ 44,654.48
28,086.60
9,769.92
13,344.92
4,140.00

$ 99,995.92


Other
Personal
Services Expenses
$ 797.25 $ 20,076.92
490.50 4,314.33
695.38 351.63
100.67 11,609.54
5,869.73
$ 2,083.80 $ 42,222.15


Operating
Capital
Outlay Total
$ 2,907.76 $ 68,436.41
1,230.05 34,121.48
373.17 11,190.10
2,528.44 27,583.57
10,009.73
$ 7,039.42 $151,341.29


Other
Personal
Services
$ 2,186.84


256.00
12,750.00
$ 15,192.84


Expenses
$ 3,946.78
458.89
531.44
5,725.04
$ 10,662.15


Operating
Capital
Outlay
$ 440.47
64.03
63.00
573.01
$ 1,140.51


Total
$ 30,512.13
22,980.88
10,258.62
34,385.35
$ 98,136.98






















-. ..S. -r -=


FLORIDA'S FAVORITE PASTTIME-Salt water fishing is one of the prime
reasons 13 million tourists vacation in Florida every year. Scores of public fishing
piers like that pictured make it easy to find fun and relaxation along the long
coast line. Betterment of sports fishing is a primary goal of the Conservation
Department.

12















DIVISION OF SALT WATER FISHERIES
FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
TALLAHASSEE



















SIXTEENTH BIENNIAL REPORT
1963-1964



RANDOLPH HODGES
DIRECTOR















RESPONSIBILITIES


It is the duty of the Division of Salt Water Fisheries to preserve, manage
and protect the marine, crustacean, shell and anadromous fisheries resources of
the State; to regulate the operations of all fisherman and vessels of this State
engaged in the taking of such fishery resources within or without the bound-
aries of State waters; to issue licenses prescribed by the Legislature for the
taking of fisheries products and the processing at sea or on shore within
Florida; to secure and maintain statistical records of the catch of each species
by various gear, by area and by other appropriate classifications; to conduct
scientific, economic and other studies and research, and to enter into contracts
for such studies and research, all of which shall be directed to the broad ob-
jective of managing the salt water fisheries in the interest of all the people of
the State, to the end that they shall produce the maximum sustained yield
consistent with the preservation and protection of the breeding stock.

The Division of Salt Water Fisheries is charged specifically with adminis-
tration, coordination and enforcement of the provisions of Sections 370.03-370.17,
Florida Statutes, and Chapter 371, the Florida Motorboat Law.











ACTIVITIES
Ten years ago the Division of Salt Water Fisheries was Florida's Conser-
vation Department. Today, it is one of six divisions operating under the super-
vision and direction of the Board of Conservation.
However, the Division of Salt Water Fisheries still employs the most
people, touches the public more intimately, and deals with a greater variety
and wider range of problems than any other segment of the Board.
Commercial fishing is one of Florida's great industries, with an annual
contribution to the State's economy in excess of $100 Million. Approximately
150,000 Florida citizens are engaged in the taking, processing, transporting and
marketing of fishery products.
Sports fishing not only provides millions of hours of wholesome recreation
for Florida residents, but is one of the principal lures that brings 13 million
out-of-state visitors to the State each year. It is estimated conservatively that
sports fishing pours $200 million a year into the general economy.
The population growth which has rocketed Florida up among the nation's
10 largest states continued throughout calendar 1963 and 1964. With this
fabulous growth, problems have developed in salt water fishing. However, the
problem of the past two years were much the same as those of the previous
decade.
Although progress has been made in most areas, Florida's salt water fishing
is paying the price of growth-motivated, indiscriminate dredge and fill pro-
jects of earlier years that destroyed vast areas of underwater feeding and
nursery areas for marine animals of importance to both the commercial and
sports fisheries.
Pollution of state waters increased as industrial expansion brought new
plants to pour additional wastes into the sea, as new shore-line subdivisions
sprang into being without adequate sewage treatment plants and as heavy
rains in many areas carried poisonous residues of pesticides into streams and
hence into the salt waters.
Fishing pressures increased as more and more people took to the salt
waters either to earn a livelihood or to seek recreation. The age-old conflicts
between commercial and sports fishermen were intensified in some areas as
increased fishing pressures resulted in smaller catches by individual sports fisher-
men.
The major tools of the Division of Salt Water Fisheries to meet its respon-
sibilities and problems are law enforcement and research.
Protection of Florida's marine resources is primarily a matter of enforce-
ment of the conservation laws. Development of the salt water fisheries is
basically a matter of research.











LAW ENFORCEMENT
During the past two years expanding duties and responsibilities with a
rigidly fixed law enforcement section of 88 officers, including area supervisors,
brought sharply into focus the need for an expanded force.
In addition to enforcement of the general salf water fisheries conservation
law, officers of the Conservation Patrol are responsible for the enforcement of
231 local laws dealing with the salt water fisheries.
Calls for community service received during the past two years were
more than double than for any previous period. Public disorders, natural
calamities, needs of citizens for assistance, and search and rescue on the seas
required diligent attention.
Forty-three officers of the Conservation Patrol were included in the special
police force sent by the Governor into St. Augustine during the racial distrub-
ance of the summer of 1964. The record of this special police force during
the tension-packed days and nights at St. Augustine was one in which every
Florida citizen can take pride. Law and order were maintained, not one major
casualty was suffered, and the rights of all persons were protected.
Three tropical stormes-Cleo, Dora and Isobel-following one another
in short spaces, again placed a heavy burden upon officers of the Conservation
Patrol. Thirty officers were rushed from other areas into Southwest Florida to
aid locally-assigned officers and other police agencies in maintaining law and
order, preventing looting, evacuating island and lowland residents and assist-
ing victims of the storms.
The Conservation Officers followed Cleo as it moved up the coast to the
Cape Kennedy area, returning to regular duties only after the hurricane had
broken up and moved back out to sea.
Three weeks later, Dora, the largest and most destructive hurricane to
strike Florida in a decade, slammed into the Northeast Coast along a wide
area extending from St. Augustine to Fernandina Beach. Sixty Conservation
Officers were on hand to assist local authorities in police and storm relief work.
The torrential rains and high tides over the entire northern half of the
state that accompanied Hurricane Dora brought serious flooding in many areas.
The City of Live Oak in Suwannee County was hit particularly hard, with
flood waters rising as high as 12 feet in the main downtown business section.
Crystal River and Homosassa Springs on the Gulf Coast were inundated
by up to three feet of water. The coastal community of Steinhatchee in Taylor
County was isolated, and all along the Gulf shoreline, from Homosassa Springs
to Carrabelle, and the banks of the great rivers of North Florida, like the
Suwannee and Santa Fe, residents were forced from their homes.
Fifty Conservation Officers worked around the clock assisting the flood
victims until the waters receded to safe levels.
Despite the many calls for community service, enforcement of the salt
water fisheries laws was strengthened. The Conservation Patrol, its authorized











strength increased only eight men by the 1963 Legislature, made 1,923 arrests
during fiscal 1963-64, compared with 1,275 in fiscal 1961-62. In addition, of-
ficers issued 5,380 official warnings for less flagrant violations during fiscal
1963-64.
This increased activity in policing the salt water fisheries was due in no
small part to improvements in the administrative organization and the com-
munications facilities of the Conservation Patrol
A realignment of the law enforcement areas on the East Coast in which
people replaced land area as the guideline in fixing area boundaries made for
better administration and better service to the people.
Law Enforcement Area Six, which formerly embraced Dade, Broward,
Palm Beach and Martin Counties, was realigned to include only Dade and
Broward Counties.
A new area, No. 10, was created to embrace Palm Beach, Martin, St.
Lucie and Okeechobee Counties. Volusia and Seminole Counties were shifted
from the Northeast Florida area, No. 8, to join in Area Seven with Brevard,
Indian River, Orange and Osceola Counties.
District headquarters offices to serve the public locally were established
in each of the 10 law enforcement areas. Formerly the Patrol operated district
offices only at Jacksonville in Area Eight, St. Petersburg in Area Four, and
Miami in Area Six.
Direct field supervision over law enforcement personnel in each area is
provided by a lieutenant. To tighten controls over the activities of the thin
and widely-scattered uniformed personnel in each area, one officer in each
district was designated an assistant supervisor with the rank of sergeant.
Short wave police radio transmitters were installed in each of the area
headquarters offices to provide an almost unbroken statewide communications
network.
During the latter months of 1964 short wave police radios were installed
in 27 Conservation Patrol boats, providing instant shore-to-ship and ship-to-
shore communication. It was anticipated that most patrol craft would be
radio-equipped before the expiration of the 1964-65 fiscal year July 1.
An important arm of the law enforcement force was the two department
airplanes. A single-engine Cessna 182 is assigned exclusively to law enforce-
ment patrol. A twin-engine Cessna 310 performs multiple duty of law enforce-
ment patrol, research survey and executive transportation.
However, despite administrative and equipment improvements that have
bolstered law enforcement activities, there is urgent need for a substantial
increase in law enforcement personnel.
With but 88 uniformed personnel to patrol a shoreline that stretches some
7,700 miles along the Gulf from the Alabama line to Dry Tortugas and Key
West and up the Atlantic to the Georgia line, law enforcement of necessity is
on a spot and selective basis.











Vast stretches of Florida's tidal waters are virtually unprotected against
the depredations of the conservation law violators. By shifting its limited
personnel from area to area to meet emergency situations, the Conservation
Patrol successfully has kept all major law enforcement fires under control, but
it has not been able to cope with scores of little brush fires that in their
aggregate constitute a dangerous threat to the invaluable fisheries resources of
the state.
The first test of a 1963 Legislative Act prohibiting fishing in Florida
territorial waters by boats owned or controlled by citizens of a communist-
dominated nation came in February, 1964.
A U. S. Coast Guard patrol apprehended four Cuban fishing vessels in
Florida territorial waters off Dry Tortugas. The Coast Guard notified the
Board of Conservation and turned custody of the four vessels and their crews
over to the Conservation Patrol.
Cuban Dictator Fidel Castro protested vigorously, bringing the United
States State Department into the case.
The final result: the captains of the four Cuban fishing vessels were
tried in a Florida court, convicted of violating the 1963 act, fined $500 and
released upon payment; the crewmen were released without penalty, the four
vessels were returned to their captains and crews and escorted from Florida
waters.
No further incidents of communist vessels fishing in Florida waters were
reported. However, Cuban and Russian trawlers were sighted upon occasion
passing near or through U. S. and Florida waters, which is permitted under
international law.
Agreement was reached with the U. S. Public Health Department and
the State Board of Health under which the Florida Conservation Patrol assumed
responsibility for patrolling waters, officially declared to be polluted, to pre-
vent the taking of oysters from the sullied waters.
A contract also was signed with the Civil Defense Organization under
which the Conservation Patrol assumed responsibility for patrolling inshore and
off shore waters during storms and other emergencies.
The contract also provided that the Board of Conservation marine labora-
tory at St. Petersburg set up a station for testing, maintaining and repairing
radio-active isotope devices, scintillation counters and other radiological
monitors.
Civil Defense will supply all equipment for the maintenance station with-
out charge and will pay 50 per cent of the cost of administration and personnel.
The advantage of the contract to the Board of Conservation is that its
execution makes the Board eligible to receive surplus property from the United
States, including laboratory and other scientific and marine equipment, and
gives the research staff full use of difficult-to-obtain and costly ultra-modern
scientific equipment.








ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
Section 370.021, Florida Statutes, grants the Board of Conservation author-
ity to adopt administrative rules necessary or convenient for the carrying out
of its duties, obligations, powers and responsibilities.
These administrative rules have the effect of law and their violation is
defined by statute as a misdemeanor.
The Division of Salt Water Fisheries has used this rule-making authority
sparingly during the past two years. The Director of Conservation as a matter
of policy does not recommend adoption of an administrative rule except upon
unanimous request of the Legislative Delegation of the area affected, except
to meet urgent conservation emergencies.
During 1963, administrative rules affecting the salt water fisheries adopted
by the Board included:
Authority for sports fishermen to take shrimp in Escambia County waters
for bait purposes only under permits issued by the Conservation Department.
Prohibiting the use of nets in Star Lake in Escambia County.
Permitting the use of nets heavier than provided by local law in Collier
County.
Extending the open season for commercial shad fishing in the St. Johns
River for 30 days.
Prohibiting net fishing within 300 feet of the Deerpoint Dam in the north
arm of St. Andrews Bay in Bay County.
Establishing fixed areas and dates for shrimping in Franklin County.
Prohibiting net fishing in certain areas of Hillsborough County during the
peak winter tourist season.
Administrative rules adopted during 1964 included:
Prohibiting taking of the game fish snook with snatch hooks in Pinellas,
Sarasota, Hillsborough and Palm Beach Counties.
Prohibiting the taking and/or sale of the game fish, striped bass, in Martin
and St. Lucie Counties.
Opening Franklin County waters to shrimping only when the shrimp
taken count less than 45 with heads on or 67 with heads off to a pound.

RESEARCH
The marine research program of the Division of Salt Water Fisheries
grew to new and higher stature during 1963 and 1964. Increased revenue from
sale of dead oyster shell, which finances the research program, permitted ex-
pansion of scientific and supporting personnel with resultant expansion of the
scope and diversity of the research work.
Of utmost significance to the research program was the gift to the de-
partment May 2, 1964, by L. C. Ringhaver of St. Augustine of a new 72-foot
shrimp boat. Acquisition of this boat gave the marine laboratory at St. Peters-
burg for the first time a vessel for offshore, deep-water studies.
Top priority in the research program during the past 18 months was given
to a special study of Red Tide. Ibis special study was directed by the 1963
Legislature, which appropriated $250,000 for the work. The special appropria-









tion enabled the Red Tide study to be carried out without detracting from
other vital phases of the research program.
Since the Board last sponsored research on Red Tide in 1955-57 the
scientific advancements in the understanding of marine micro-biology generally
have been substantial. Although many of these studies were not directed to-
ward the solution of a particular problem, but were aimed at establishing pure
knowledge, they have greatly advanced our ability to deal with a massive
practical problem. This, then, is one more instance of pure research, with
no particular problem to solve, providing real help in dealing with a specific
issue.
Our renewed studies in 1963-64 have shown a close relationship between
rainfall and subsequent runoff and Red Tide outbreaks. The correlation is not
perfect because other factors must also contribute. In their absence, high
amounts of runoff cannot act alone. Among these other factors are direction
and intensity of wind, temperature and sunlight.
In the laboratory, it was shown that iron together with organic material
to make it soluble were able to stimulate the growth of the causative organism.
(This work was performed under contract with the Board by Bill Wilson of
the F. S. U. Oceanographic Institute.)
This information prompted a review of data concerning water quality of
streams emptying into the recognized Red Tide area (southwest coast of
Florida). This perusal developed the significant fact that the principal streams
of the area were high in iron and in tannic acid.
As this survey was underway, Red Tide appeared in an area (Apalachee
Bay, North Florida) where it had not been previously reported and confirmed.
Previous reports of dead fish in that sector had been considered to be due
to thermoclines or other conventional causes. When lethal populations of
Gymnodinium breve were shown to exist, a comprehensive study of the area
was initiated. Here again, high iron and tannic acid contents were features
of all streams discharging into the area.
These facts are more meaningful when reference is made to the many
excellent "reports available from laboratories over the world establishing the
importance of iron and chelation in the nutrition of phytosynthetic single
celled organisms.
Efforts are being made to further elucidate the details of the theoretical
stimulation of blooms of G. breve by tannic acids (and associated organic
material) in conjuction with iron.
Full scale reports on all Red Tide research will be available by July 1,
1965. These will include articles on associated micro-organisms, including
bacteria. Salinity, temperature, sulfides and vitamin B 12 will also be summari-
zed. Certain aspects of biochemistry, carbohydrates and amino acids, will be
covered.
Work during the coming biennium will benefit from the use of the new
Research Vessel, Hernan Cortez, and will, accordingly, be able to comprehend
more of the offshore aspects than have been previously considered.
Summarizing activities and developments in the research program:










RED TIDE STUDIES
Chemistry
Vitamin B12 measurements indicated that a sufficient amount is normal-
ly present to support large concentrations of dinoflagellates. This conclu-
sion is supported by pertinent literature.
Attempts are being made to find a microorganism suitable for available
iron bioassay.
Routine samples are being analysed for sulphides, total iron, carbohy-
drates and amino acids. Salinities are titrated.
Phytoplankton
Diatoms and dinoflagellates are identified and density estimated on
routine samples over a 400 mile range of the west coast.
Artificial cultivation of prominent phytoplankton organisms consists of
isolation, preparation of bacteria-free cultures, mass cultures and develop-
ment of defined media for each species.
Bacteriology
Routine samples of rmud and water are checked weekly throughout the
Red Tide range for seasonal and ecological fluctuations in abundance of
the various species encountered.
FISHERIES
Oysters
Laboratory
Preliminary findings that glucose prolongs life has stimulated renewed
efforts to completely remove the possibility that bacterial growth, induced
by the added nutrient, was not a source of error. Experiments under way
presently should establish definitely if oysters can absorb dissolved glucose
in sufficient amounts to affect quality.
Rehabilitation
At the end of the 1963-64 fiscal year June 30, 1964, there were 246
oyster leases containing a total of 7,861 acres.
Approximately 25,000 bushels of oysters shells were planted in North
Bay near Panama City.
Nearly 65,000 bushels were planted in Apalachicola Bay.
Depuration
Studies were inaugurated during the year on the commercial purifica-
tion of shellfish from waters sullied by sewage pollution. Results were
encouraging and the research continues.
FISHES
Tagging and recovery studies state-wide were continued with a heavy
emphasis on offshore species.
Life history studies were made on the red grouper with particular
attention being paid to spawning.
A paper was prepared covering the potential dangers of accidental
introduction into Florida of the South American piranha and an annotated
check list was prepared covering all fishes in the ichthyological collection.






























W-9--


r


RED TIDE RESEARCH-Two members of the staff of the marine laboratory
at St. Petersburg. Karen Steidinger (standing) and Joanne Davis, seek through
a microscope to discover some of the mysteries of the massive fish killer, red tide.


5-


-- -r:


t


\\











EXPLORATORY FISHING
Algae
With some private support a survey was launched into the species and
abundance of algae in the waters of the west coast.
Several cruises inaugurated what is planned to be a long term pro-
ject to better identify, by species and quantity, the unrecognized resources
of Florida's offshore waters. Emphasis will be on various species of
spiny lobsters and fishes.
On May 2, 1964, a new 72 ft. shrimp boat, the Hernan Cortez, was
given to the Board of Conservation for offshore research.

SPINY LOBSTERS
Work continues on the possible Caribbean origin of Florida's spiny
lobster species. Efforts have been reactivated to attempt the rearing of
lobster larvae from .known parentage. Success will greatly advance our
ability to identify larvae captured offshore that presently cannot be named.
Studies on post larval ecology have been pursued at the Stuart Field
Station.

PLANKTON
A sorting section continues to select crab larvae, spiny lobster larvae,
fish larvae and immature shrimp from all plankton samples obtained in
offshore and inshore net sampling. Analysis has begun of all species
encountered except crab larvae. The latter will begin to receive attention
during the next fiscal year.

LIBRARY
Through exchange arrangements world-wide reprints and other publi-
cations continue to be received and accessioned. Books and periodicals
add to a growing supply of reference material.
SHRIMP
Two manuscripts were in preparation during the year. One, which
was to be published in January, 1965, deals with extensive studies carried
out for two years in northeastern Florida, including the St. Johns River.
The other is concerned with spawning and early life history of the pink
shrimp in the Tampa Bay area and offshore as far as 70 miles. The latter
will probably be published in the Spring of 1965.
Another vital responsibility of the research section is on-the-scene surveys
of proposed bulkhead lines and of areas where dredge and fill permits are
sought from the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund. These surveys
determine the likely effect of proposed dredge and fill projects on marine
resources.
The research staff also assists local interests in selecting sites for proposed
artificial fish havens and provides technical aid in their construction.











During the past two years, 76 bulkhead line and dredge and fill surveys
were made and finding reported to the Trustees. The Trustees, aware of the
importance of conserving our marine resources, have given great weight to the
recommendations of the Board of Conservation when determining whether
bulkhead lines and dredge and fill permits are to be approved.
In addition, staff biologists made 18 artificial fishing reef surveys and 21
studies of proposed harbor and navigation improvements during the period
January 1, 1963, through October 31, 1964.
Commercial Landings
Commercially-caught fish and shellfish landings at Florida ports during
1963 amounted to 186.2 million pounds. The fishermen received $27.7 million
for their catches.
The 1963 landings were approximately 725,000 pounds less than for 1962
and declined $3.2 million in value.
The leading species landed during 1963 were shrimp, black mullet (lisa),
menhaden and blue crabs.
Shrimp led in both quantity and value, with 39.4 million pounds for
which the fishermen were paid $14 million. Shrimp landings were about two
million pounds, or five percent, above 1962 landings.
Shrimp fishermen received 86 cents to 92 cents a pound for good quality
shrimp, counting 21 to 25 without heads to the pound, during the first six
months of 1963. Prices started to decline in mid-July because of heavy landings
at Texas and Louisiana ports. A low of 62 cents a pound for 21/25 count
shrimp was reached.
During October, between 80 and 90 Florida based shrimp boats stopped
fishing in protest against low prices being paid for their catches. The layoff
lasted about one week. Prices began to recover in December.
Black mullet (lisa) landings during 1963 totaled 36 million pounds.
However, the return to fishermen again was disappointing. The average price
paid per pound during the year was 5.2 cents. During the heavy fall run,
the price paid to fishermen dropped as low as one cent a pound.
Menhaden landing totaled 25.7 million pounds, about 25 percent lower than
in 1962. Menhaden is a non-food fish used primarily for fertilizer.
Blue crab landing totaled 21.7 pound with a value to the fishermen of
$1.1 million, representing a gain of nearly 20 percent over 1962. A total of
3.4 million pounds of cooked crabmeat was produced, with a wholesale value
of about $4 million.
The spiny lobster catch was 3.6 million pounds valued at $1.4 million to
fishermen. This was an increase of about 15 percent over 1962 figures.
Florida oyster production in 1963 was 4.4 million pounds, a decline of
13 percent from the 1962 record catch. Although demand for oysters was
considered only fair, prices were generally good throughout the year.
Processed fishery products in Florida during 1963 had a wholesale value
of $43.8 million.











Imports of fishery products continued to increase in 1963. During the
last nine months of the year more than 15 million pounds of fishery items
entered through the Port of Miami. Imports came from Europe, South America
and Japan.
Final figures on 1964 Florida landings will not be available until mid-
July, 1965. However, preliminary reports indicate that total landings again
will show a decline.
Menhaden landings were running about eight million pounds behind
1963 through the first 10 months of the year. Shrimp landings again showed
an increase during the first 10 months and probably will exceed 1963 landings
by some two million pounds.
Mackerel landings fell off sharply. This was due primarily to onslaughts on
fishermen's nets by sharks in the Hawk's Channel area off the Keys and up the
coast to the Naples vicinity. The sharks appeared off Florida in larger numbers
than ever previously reported.
High seas accompanying the 1964 hurricanes slowed fishing activity for
several weeks.
A reciprocal agreement under which Florida shrimpers may operate in
Mississippi waters without special license and Mississippi shrimpers may oper-
ate in Florida waters was signed with the State of Mississippi August 20, 1963.
This agreement is similar to those already in effect with Alabama, Louisiana,
Texas and North Carolina.
MARKETING AND PRODUCTION
One of the gravest, yet long-neglected, responsibilities of the Board of
Conservation is to maintain in sound health Florida's historically great seafood
industry.
Florida has few peers throughout the world in the quantity, quality and
variety of its seafood resources. But no branch of commerce is more aggres-
sively competitive than the seafood industry. Not only must Florida's seafood
industry compete against the products of our sister states, but foreign imports
have found increasing favor with the American housewife.
The Florida industry was in urgent need of a vigorous push in the market-
place. The 1963 Legislature recognized this basic economic fact by providing
that revenue from sale of dead oyster shells, previously earmarked exclusively
for biological research, could be used to finance a marketing promotion pro-
gram for the State's seafod industry.
In moving into this field, the Department had two alternatives. It could
start from taw, assembling a staff and developing an independent program,
Or it could take advantage of proven facilities and effect not only a sub-
stantial saving of money but also months of organizational and training work.
The latter course was chosen by the Conservation Director with the approval
of the Board.
Negotiations for a joint marketing program were concluded successfully
with the U. S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, already organized for market-











ing and promotion work, to carry out a nation-wide program in behalf of
Florida seafood products. The Board of Conservation, through the Division
of Salt Water Fisheries, made $15,000 available to the federal agency to help
finance this special Florida promotion program.
When funds became available, a fulltime marketing and promotion
specialist was employed by the Division. He already has organized a program
which will substantially increase the demand for Florida seafood.
The efforts of the U. S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries during the 1964
Christmas holiday season demonstrates the effectiveness of the joint marketing
program.
A video tape featuring stuffing the turkey with oysters was shown on
12 different television stations in the Southeastern states.
A special fisheries marketing bulletin on Florida seafoods was prepared
and sent to the printer. This bulletin will be distributed by both the Board
of Conservation and the federal agency.
Arrangements were made with the National Marketing Services Office
to develop color mats featuring shrimp and red snapper for national distribu-
tion to newspapers during Lent. Black and white food photographs and color
transparencies on snapper, shrimp and Spanish mackeral also were developed
for national distribution during the Lenten season.
Arrangements were made with the Georgia State Extension Service to list
black mullet (lisa) as a plentiful food in the Greater Atlanta area.
The Division's marketing specialist has been successful in stimulating
increased interest in canned lisa. An adequately-financed and experienced
canning firm has finalized plans for opening a lisa canning plant, and at
year's end another firm was expressing more than casual interest in entering
the lisa canning field.
A bright future appears for this delicious Florida product.
LICENSING
The license section of the Division issues wholesale and retail seafood
licenses, registers salt water commercial fishing boats and pleasure craft pro-
pelled by machinery in excess of 10 horsepower, and processes all applications
for transfers of boat registration certificates.
The licensing section also is responsible for compiling and forwarding to
the U. S. Coast Guard reports on boat registration figures and boating accident
reports filed with the Conservation Department.
During the 1962-1963 fiscal year 723 wholesale seafood dealer licenses
and 4,755 retail seafood dealer licenses were issued. The number of wholesale
seafood dealers rose to 813 for the 1963-64 fiscal year and retail seafood dealers
licenses increased to 4,830.
It is estimated that 850 wholesale and 4.900 retail seafood dealer licenses
will have been issued when the 1964-65 fiscal year ends June 30, 1965.
In addition to the wholesale and retail seafood dealer licenses, the licen-
sing section processed and issued 477 miscellaneous licenses and permits during











the 1962-63 fiscal year and 527 during the 1963-64 fiscal year.
A total of 15,949 commercial boats were registered during the 1962-63
licensing year. The number increased to 17,475 for the 1963-64 licensing year.
The 1963 Legislature amended the pleasure boat registration law to pro-
vide for annual registration of recreational craft. During the first licensing year,
ended June 30, 1964, a total of 121,652 pleasure boats were registered. In
addition, 27,067 pleasure boat registration transfers were processed.
The new licensing year for pleasure craft started July 1, 1964. Through
November, a total of 102,311 boats had been registered.
Published reports by the U. S. Coast Guard indicate that 217,000 boats
were registered in Florida as of June 30, 1964. The Coast Guard figure re-
flected the number of boat numbers assigned since Florida's motorboat regis-
tration law was first enacted in 1959. It did not take into account numbered
boats which had been destroyed, abandoned or never registered.
The figures of the Board of Conservation reflect only those motorboats
for which a registration fee was paid and a certificate issued during the
licensing year.
MOTORBOAT SAFETY
The success of the motorboat safety program carried out under policy
guides laid down by the Florida Boating Council is reflected in preliminary
statistics for 1964 which show 59 fatalities in Florida waters as a result of
boating accidents.
The 1964 figures compiled from formal boating accident reports filed with
the Conservation Department and press clippings have not been verified
completely. But they indicate that 20 fewer persons lost their lives in Florida
during the past year than during 1963 when 79 persons were known to have
lost their lives in boating mishaps.
Education continued during the past two years to be the principal enforce-
ment weapon, although arrests have been made in flagrant violations of the
safety provisions of Chapter 371, Florida Statutes.
One of the major educational tools is the safety inspection program
carried out by specially-trained two-man teams of conservation officers.
The 1963 Legislature authorized expansion of the boating safety inspection
program from two to six teams. The new teams were activated periodically
starting in August, 1963, with the sixth and final team put in the field early
in 1964.
Teams travel the waters of the state, inspecting pleasure craft for legally-
required safety equipment and giving boaters tips on safe operation. They
also check liveries, marinas and boat dealers to spread the water safety message.
During the 1963-64 fiscal year, the safety officers inspected 8,319 pleasure
craft. During the last six months of 1964, the teams inspected 5,379 pleasure
boats. It is anticipated that a total of 12,000 boats will have been inspected
by the close of the 1964-65 fiscal year June 30, 1965.











Boating safety literature was distributed to 325,000 persons during
fiscal 1963-64. Distribution of water safety literature during the last six months
of 1964 totaled 135,000.
More than 170 talks on boating safety were made during each of the
past two years to boating, sportsmen's and youth groups. Many of these talks
included the showing of water safety education films from the Department
library.













FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Salt Water Fisheries

Statement of Actual Revenues

Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
GENERAL REVENUE 1962-1963 1963-1964
Licenses and Permits
W wholesale Dealers License ........................................ $ 32,800.00 $ 39,500.00
Non-Resident Wholesale Dealers License .................... 1,400.00 2,300.00
Retail Dealers License ................ .................................. 47,390.00 48,040.00
Non-Resident Retail Dealers License ........................... 150.00 275.00
Alien Retail Dealers License ..... ............. ........... 100.00 150.00
Permit Stamps .......................... ............... 1,920.00 2,045.00
Bait Shrim p Perm its ................................................. ........ 262.00 284.00
Live Bait Shrimp Dealers ........................ ....... 75.00 150.00
Fish Camp Operators .................................. 34.00 32.00
Special Permits ................................. ........... 325.00 120.00
Alien Sponge License ..... ........................... 2,100.00 1,700.00
Total Licenses and Permits ............................................. $ 91,556.00 $ 94,596.00


Revenue from use of Money and Property, Leases,
R entals and Fees ................................................................ $ 6,651.65 $ 6,201.58

Miscellaneous
Overage ...................................... ......... 89.55 41.25
O their ........................ ...................................... .......................... 105.15 1,015.59
Total Miscellaneous ................................... $ 6,846.35 $ 7,258.42


TOTAL GENERAL REVENUE BEFORE ADJUSTMENTS ................. $ 98,402.35 $101,854.42

Less: Returned Checks .................................... ........... .... 157.00
Less: Refunds .................................... ........... 357.00 343.50
Total Adjustments ................. .................. $ 357.00 $ 500.50
TOTAL GENERAL REVENUE ...................... ... .............. $ 98,045.35 $101,353.92













FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Salt Water Fisheries

Statement of Actual Revenues

Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
MOTORBOATING REVOLVING TRUST FUND 1962-1963 1963-1964
Fees $ 3,677.75 $ 4,184.00
Motorboat Registration Certificates ...................... 33,549.05 939,023.10
Commercial Boat License 45,119.35 52,178.30
Non-Resident Commercial Boat License .................... 7,075.00 9,050.00
Non-Resident Commercial Fishing License ................ 10,475.00 11,600.00
Purse Seines License 450.00 625.00
Change of Ownership 22,338.95 28,742.25
Duplicates ... 1,702.00 1,729.00
Change of Classification 174.00
Overage 1,793.64 3,261.68
TOTAL MOTORBOATING REVENUE BEFORE ADJUSTMENTS ........ $126,180.74 $1,050,567.33

Less: Returned Checks ..... $ 2.00 $ 42.95
Less: Refunds ........ 1,696.60 7,871.80
Counties Share of Registration Certificates ................ 523,345.92
Total Adjustments ...................... ................. $ 1,698.66 $531,260.67
TOTAL MOTORBOATING REVOLVING TRUST FUND REVENUE .... $124,482.08 $519.306.66


MARINE BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH TRUST FUND
Royalties from Sale of Dead Shell .............................. $319,031.49 $384,515.15
Federal Grant 3,910.00
TOTAL MARINE BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH TRUST FUND REVENUE $322,941.49 $384,515.15

OYSTER AND CLAM REHABILITATION TRUST FUND
Miscellaneous Revenue $ 4,556.24


OYSTER CULTURE TRUST FUND
Receipts from Trustees of Internal Improvement Fund
Improvement Fund ................................... ......... ..... $ 48,640.00

GRAND TOTAL DIVISION OF SALT WATER FISHERIES .. $550,025.16 $1,053,815.73












FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Salt Water Fisheries
Statement of Actual Expenditures



For the Fiscal Year, 1962-63


Other Operating
Personal Outlay
Department Salaries Services Expenses Capital Total
General Administration......................................... $ 7,038.00 $ 1,881.00 $ 16,717.54 $ 10,128.37 $ 35,764.91
License Department.............................................. 19,310.97 1,378.50 1,551.47 22,240.94
Maintenance Department................................. 16,065.00 978.00 23,829.11 1,170.15 42,042.26
Research Department ..................................................19,260.00 156.00 9,539.93 282.20 29,238.13
Education & Information................ 5,277.97 898.75 17,642.25 2,069.22 25,888.19
, M ail Room ........ ................................ ....................... 7,939.20 1,271.15 12,309.06 1,671.23 23,190.64
Switchboard................................. 2,486.77 9,991.66 12,478.43
Airplane & Pilots Expense.................................. 2,100.00 18,821.01 1,057.95 21,978.96
Radio Communication...................... 4,527.09 3,064.50 7,250.10 14,841.69
Purchase of Equipment.......................................... 21,586.51 95,940.81 117.527.32
General Admin.-Law Enforcement ................... 11,128.57 18,558.27 4,423.26 34,110.10
Area I-Expense ......................... 31,822.08 10,315.37 42,137.45
Area II- Expense.................................................. 39,860.00 12,342.54 47.50 52,250.04
Area III-Expense .......... 34,468.94 13,799.49 48,268.43
Area IV- Expense........................... ................... 43,647.50 11,406.41 55,053.91
Area V-Expense.. .......................... 40,495.48 9,986.41 50,481.89
Area VI-Expense................ ..... .......................... 50,730.04 16,437.23 95.93 67,263.20
Area VII-Expense ... 28,859.31 7,330.82 36,190.13
Area VIII-Expense............. ....... 46,364.03 14,085.11 60,449.14
Area IX- Expense......... ................................ 25,635.76 9,712.99 35,348.75
Repairs due to Accidents....................................... 1,745.08 1,745.08
Gas & Oil Credit Card Purchases....................... 77,861.23 77,861.23
Boat Rental....................... 22,790.00 22,790.00
Insurance......................... 18,471.06 18,471.06
Total Expenditures $437,016.71 $ 6,563.40 $379,895.05 $124,136.72 $947,611.88












FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Salt Water Fisheries
Statement of Actual Expenditures



For the Fiscal Year, 1963-64


Department Other Operating
Personal Capital
Salaries Services Expenses Outlay Total

General Administration $ 8,153.13 $ 2,831.00 $ 13,121.89 $ 857.25 $ 24,963.27
License Department 29,694.75 769.50 6,616.90 99.45 37,180.60
Maintenance Department 17,444.40 136.00 15,633.39 970.69 34,184.48
Research Department 23,340.00 3,077.18 428.70 26,845.88
Mail Room.. 2,256.55 1,456.50 8,162.90 77.52 11,953.47
K Switchboard 3,696.00 11,166.91 14,862.91
Airplane & Pilots Expense 3,420.00 5,486.97 20,500.00 29,406.97
Radio Communication 1,736.00 2,704.85 7,827.40 12,268.25
Purchase of Equipment............... 1,525.73 54,540.50 56,066.23
General Admin.-Law Enforcement.................. 18,179.65 35,902.98 2,103.24 56,185.87
Area I-Expense 35,371.87 11,274.08 1,222.41 47,868.36
Area II-Expense 35,924.06 9,494.15 45,418.21
Area III-Expense 26,836.89 8,247.78 35,084.67
Area IV-Expense 43,446.82 11,577.68 55,024.50
Area V-Expense......... 35,421.37 10,370.51 1,634.25 47,426.13
Area VI-Expense 55,180.81 16,373.19 71,554.00
Area VII-Expense......... 23,994.27 6,463.12 431.15 30.888.54
Area VIII-Expense ... 45,847.97 12,231.80 298.00 58,377.77
Area IX-Expense 32,353.65 10,963.57 850.45 44,167.67
Repairs due to Accidents....................................... 612.00 612.00
Gas & Oil Credit Card Purchases....................... 85,645.37 85,645.37
Shop Inventory 270.86 270.86
Area X-Expense. 14,420.52 4,747.94 432.49 19,600.95
Insurance ............. 20,321.74 20,321.74
Total Expenditures $456,718.71 $ 5,193.00 $311,993.49 $ 92,273.50 $866,178.70














FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Salt Water Fisheries
Statement of Actual Expenditures
Marine Biological Research Trust Fund




For the Fiscal Year, 1962-63


Salaries


Other
Personal
Services


S General Administration.................... ........
S University of M iam i...........................................
B oat R ental......................... .............. .............
F S. U. Project ..............
D r. H utton's Project............................... .......
Mr. Woodburn's Project.............................
Mrs. Eldred & Mr. Martin's Project..................
L ib rary ............................................... ..........
M rs. Bravos' Project........................... .........
Mr. Moe's Project...
M r. Sims' Project......................... ............
Mr. Joyce's Project..................... ...........
Mr. Sherman's Project.............. .... .......
Mr. Havens' Project............................ ...........
Federal Grant.............................. .................
F. L ecuona............................
L. Gillespie.... ......
Administration of Dead Shell Leases................


$ 8,256.66 $ 2,686.25 $ 24,508.10
23,261.80 18,401.51
9,020.37
403.23 56.84
7,285.71 498.64
6,100.00 1,279.72
9,260.00 1,288.00 6,213.15
3,375.48 23.50 129.16
8,867.74 167.75 2,566.23
7,661.29 3,535.54
8,090.45 2,438.75 8,626.98
9,791.29 1,280.50 4,479.33
401.42 411.19
3,142.66 937.65
3,560.70
1,927.74 288.45
2,600.51 1,566.28
5,606.45 276.93


$ 3,380.14 $ 38,831.15
41,663.31
9,020.37
460.07
7,784.35
121.30 7,501.02
1,019.69 17,780.84
1,287.86 4,816.00
77.21 11,678.93
1,186.82 12,383.65
2,444.89 21,601.07
1,484.69 17,035.81
812.61
61.87 4,142.18
3,560.70
448.00 2,664.19
269.30 4,436.09
232.77 6,116.15


Total Expenditures ......................... $ 82,367.40 $ 31,549.78 $ 86,356.77 $ 12,014.54 $212,288.49


Department


Expenses


Operating
Capital
Outlay


Total


TO I


Administration of Dead Shell Leases .................












FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Salt Water Fisheries
Marine Biological Research Trust Fund
Statement of Actual Expenditures



For the Fiscal Year, 1963-64


Department


Salaries


General Administration.................................
University of Miami
Boat R entals......................................... .................
Florida State University Project.......................
Spiny Lobster at Stuart.......:..............................
Field Surveys.........................................................
Saint A ugustine................................ ...............
Pigeon Key............................ ..................
Spiny Lobster....
P lan k ton .......................................... .....................
L arval Fish....................................... ................
L library ................................................... ... ..............
F ish ............... .............................. ............. .. ...........
Exploratory Fishing......................................
O y sters.................................. ...............................
V itam in B -12..................................... ...............
A artificial Cultivation............................. ............
Red Tide........................ .................................
Statistics .....
M ain ten an ce..............................................................
Administration of Dead Shell Leases...............
F ees..................


Other
Personal
Services


$ 35,866.38 $ 465.00
2,124.12
290.32
680.00 188.00
6,400.00
7,538.71 702.50
1,849.33
7,660.00 148.00


3,840.00
10,410.00
4,570.00
7,460.00
1,404.83
6,200.00
1,740.00
5,100.00
5,374.35
4,982.07
6,588.98
8,027.10


1,408.00

162.00

144.00
81.00


Expenses


$ 17,174.21
1,776.97
2,250.00
245.25
3,455.36
1,306.54
2,396.48
1,393.11
2,895.86
274.93
620.89
176.25
3,877.25
567.21
2,989.79
1,653.21
522.92
888.45
2,846.01
1,454.47
427.50
3,417.54


Operating
Capital
Outlay Total
$ 17,393.81 $ 70.899.40
3,901.09
2,250.00
535.57
1,162.52 5,485.88
894.95 8,601.49
1,122.04 10,759.73
268.64 3,511.08
11,703.86
75.96 4,190.89
1,818.26 12,849.15
2,066.48 6,812.73
12,745.25
1,972.04
3,968.67 13,158.46
2,085.83 5,641.04
551.48 6,174.40
1,079.75 7,486.55
2,071.26 9,980.34
30.59 8,074.04
.8,454.60
3,417.54


Total Expenditures..................... $125,691.75 $ 5,712.94 $ 52,610.20 $ 34.590.24 $218.605.13


$125,691.75 $ 5,712.94 $ 52,610.20 $ 34.590.24 $218.605.13


Total E xpenditures..................................................












FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Salt Water Fisheries
Motorboat Trust Fund
Statement of Actual Expenditures



For the Fiscal Year, 1962-63


Salaries


Other
Personal
Services


Expenses


Operating
Capital
Outlay


Total


General Administration... $ 13,940.00 $ $ 12,000.73 $ $ 25,940.73
License Department........................................ .... 9,813.13 10,500.85 394.07 20,708.05
I. B. M Department............................................. 19,492.28 14,093.64 716.63 34,302.55
Motorboating Safety Program......................... 18,960.00 17,252.35 98.67 36,311.02
Total Expenditures................... ......... $ 62,205.41 $ $ 53,847.57 $ 1,209.37 $117,262.35




For Fiscal Year, 1963-64


Other Operating
Personal Capital
Department Salaries Services Expenses Outlay Total
General Administration..................... ...... $ 13,320.00 $ 1,899.50 $ 19,118.31 $ 2,614.61 $ 36,352.42
License Department 20,071.95 1,751.25 8,942.90 2,861.52 33,627.62
I. B. M. Department. 24,734.37 2,151.40 19,103.73 1,210.80 47,200.30
Motorboating Safety Program..................... 40,295.08 29,151.23 22,843.98 92,290.29
Total Expenditures.................... ...... ... $ 98,421.40 $ 5,802.15 $ 76,316.17 $ 28,930.91 $209,470.63


Department












LICENSES ISSUED AND BOATS REGISTERED
1962-1963
Retail Seafood Dealers Licenses .............................. 4,749
Non resident Retail Seafood Dealers Licenses 6
Wholesale Seafood Dealers Licenses ................. ....................... 709
Non-resident Wholesale Seafood Dealers Licenses 14
Wholesale Permit Stamps .. 757
Seafood Freezer Stam ps ................................................. 5
Duplicate Certificates 1,594
D uplicate D ecals ........................................................ 1,860
Transfers of Ow nership-Boats ..................... ......................... ............................ 19,482
Changes of Classification-B oats ...................................................................................... 174
Non-resident or Alien Commercial Fishing Licenses .......................................... 417
Non-resident or Alien Sponge Tax .......................................................................... 42
Special Purse Seine Licenses ............... .................... 18
Commercial Boats Registrations .. 15,949


LICENSES ISSUED AND BOATS REGISTERED
1963- 1964
R etail Seafood D ealers L licenses ................................................................................ 4,816
Non-resident Retail Seafood Dealers Licenses ....................... .. 14
W wholesale Seafood Dealers Licenses ...................................................... 790
Non-resident Wholesale Seafood Dealers Licenses ............ 23
W wholesale Permit Stamps ........................... .... ................ 801
Seafood Freezer Stam ps ........................................... 8
D uplicate C certificates ...................... ........................................ 1,630
D uplicate D ecals ............................................. 1,968
Transfers of Ownership ................... 27,067
Changes of Classification .................. 145
Non-resident or Alien Commercial Fishing Licenses ....... 468
Non-resident or Alien Sponge Tax ................... 34
Special Purse Seine Licenses ............................... ................... 25
Commercial Boat Registrations ............................... 17,475
Pleasure Boat Registrations 120,854




1963 CRAWFISH AND STONE CRAB DECLARATIONS



Pounds Pounds
Frozen Crawfish Frozen Stone Crabs
D ealers ................................ 942,444 D ealers ..... ...................... 4,248
Freezers ............................ 459,846 Freezers ...... .................. 2,040


Crawfish Tails Stone Crab Claws
Dealers ................................. 232,681% Dealers ........................... 41,711%
Freezers ...................:............ 178,698 Freezers ..... .................... 5,791%



Crawfish Meat Stone Crab Meat
D ealers ........ ................. 15,582 D ealers .......... ...............
Freezers .................................... 5,445 Freezers ......... 2,219



36













FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Salt Water Fisheries
Oyster Culture
Statement of Actual Expenditures




For the Fiscal Year, 1962-63


Department
General Administration
ca Total Expenditures ....................
-4


Salaries
$ 22,744.95
$ 22,744.95


For the Fiscal Year, 1963-64


Department
General Adm instration........................... ...........
Total Expenditures. ............


Salaries
$ 20,998.58
$ 20.998.58


Other
Personal
Services

$ 3,599.75
$ 3.599.75


Expenses
$ 7,901.77
$ 7.901.77


Operating
Capital
Outlay
$ 1,681.61 $
$ 1f68l1f1 $


Other
Personal
Services

$


Expenses
$ 12,146.64
$ 12,146.64


Operating
Capital
Outlay
$ 3,387.34
$ 3,387.34


Total

$ 38,278.93
$ 38,278.93


Total

34,181.71
341R1 71


I I I .


$ ,7901.77 341817




















FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Salt Water Fisheries
Oyster & Clam Rehabilitation Trust Fund
Statement of Actual Expenditures



SFor the Fiscal Year, 1962-63
co


Other
Personal


Operating
Cantnla.


Department Salaries Services Expenses Outlay Total
General Adminstration ........ $ $ 4,837.50 $ 981.51 $ 204.00 $ 6,023.01
Total Expenditures $ $ 4,837.50 $ 981.51 $ 204.00 $ 6,023.01














OYSTER LEASES
GRANTED DURING 1963
Number of Number of
County Leases Acres

B ay ................................................................ .............. 2................. 39.80

B revard ................ ............... ............................... 3 .................................... 162.92

C h arlotte .... ................................................ ....................32....... ............. ........... 939.09

D u v al ......................... .......................... 1....................................... 2 5.00

H illsborou gh .................................. ..... ........... .... 1....................... ................ 25.00

L ee .. .... ........... 1....................... ................ 1.19

Pinellas 1................. ........................ ...394.22

S t. J oh n s ............. ..................................... 1............... 55.00

S t. L ucie ................ .................. 2...................................... 24.40

V olusia ...... .................... 1....................................... 6.70

W akulla ................................................... ................. 2....................................... 27.08

W alton ....................................................... .. ... ........................... 60.06

T O T A L S ........................................ ................... .......... 65.................................. 1,760.46


OYSTER LEASES
GRANTED DURING 1964
Number of Number of
County Leases Acres

B revard .................................................. ........................ 4....................................... 48.21

C h arlotte ......................... 8 .......................................179.00

N assau ................... 1..................................... 96.20

P in ellas ............................................... .................. ........ 6 ..................................... 85.674

S t. Johns ................................................. ........... ........ 2....................................... 17.01

V olusia ..................... .............. .................. ................... ........... 24.42

W alton .......... .......... .. ...................... ............... 12.50

TO TA LS .............................. .......29................. .................463.014

39













1962-1963 PERMITS
C raw fish P erm its ..................................................................................... ................... 1,580
(Traps 187,292)
Dade County Bait Shrimp ............................................................................................ 34
Duval County Bait Shrimp ............................................................................ ...... 78
Escambia County Bait Shrimp .................................. ......................................... 35
Okaloosa County Bait Shrimp ...................... ....... ..................................... ....... 7
St. Johns C oun ty N et .............................................................................................. 2
St. Johns Bait Shrimp ............................................................................................... 151
Commercial Fisherman ..................................... ....................................... 131
Camp Operator ........................................................................................ 17
Bait Dealer ...................................... ..................................... ............. 3
Santa Rosa County Bait Shrimp ........................................................................ 33
Sound Bay Bait Shrimp ....... ............................................................................... 25
Dade County Silver Mullet ................ ........................................ ................... 18
Volusia & Flagler Counties Bait Mullet ........................................ ................ 10
S h ell S tock P erm its ............................................................... ...................................... 50
Special P erm its ....................... ................. ..... ................... .... 254
S cien tific ........................... ................. .............................. ....................... 116
E x h ib ition .................................. .................................................. 138
Oyster Dredge ...................................... ........... ........ 1
O yster P planting ............................................................................... ............................ 40
Bait Shrimp State Wide .......................................................................................... 173
Shrimp Landing Permits .. .................................................... .... 1,477
B ay C ou n ty ............................................... .......................................... ........ 42
B rev ard C ou n ty ................................................... ............... ....... .............. 2
Charlotte County ......................... 1
C itrus C county ................................................... 2
C lay C ou n ty .................................. ............................ 2
Collier County .. ............................................ 11
Dade County .............. .......................... 7
Duval County ........................................................ 76
Ecambia County ................................ .......................... 183
F rank lin C ou n ty ................................................................................................ 180
Gadsden County ........................................................................................ 1
G u lf C ou n ty ................................................................................................. 9
Hillsborough County ........................................................... 116
Indian River County ................................. ...... 1
Lee County .............................................. 46
Manatee County .................................................. ..................................... 4
M on roe C county ............................................... ............................................. 154
N assau C ou n ty .............................................. .............................................. 88
Okaloosa County ...................................................................................... 26
Pasco County ..................................................................... 1
P in ellas C ou n ty ........................................... .............................................. 8
S t. Joh n s C ou n ty ......................................... ............................................... 25
St. L ucie C county .............................................................. .......................... 1
S an ta R osa C ou n ty ....................................................................................... 34
Volusia County ........................................................... 10
W akulla C ou n ty ........................................... ............................................... 17
Walton County ................................................................... 15
Out of State ............................. 415
Alabama ................ .............. 139
G eorgia ........................................ ................................................ 105
L ou isian a ............ ............................................ 2
M ississip p i ...................................... ........................................... 1
N ew J ersey ............................................................. 2
N orth C arolina ................................. ......................................... 78
South Carolina ........................................................................ 53
T ex as ........................................................ .. 35
Pinellas County Net Permits ..................................................... 1,197
Pinellas County Commercial Fishermen ...... ......................... 677
TOTAL PERMITS ISSUED DURING 1962-63 ................ ................ ......... 5,842

40













1963-1964 PERMITS

C raw fish P erm its ................................................................................ ............1,853
(Traps 216,646)
Dade County Bait Shrimp .................................................................................. 41
Duval County Bait Shrimp ............. .............................. ........................... 83
Escambia County Bait Shrimp .......................................................................... 37
Okaloosa County Bait Shrimp .......................... .......................................... 5
S t. J oh n s C ou n ty N et .................................................................................................... 2
St. Johns Bait Shrimp .................................. ..... .............. 164
Commercial Fisherman ............................................................................. 142
C am p O p erator .................. ........................................................................... 16
B ait D ealer ................................ ................. ......... ............................ ....... 6
Santa Rosa County Bait Shrimp .......................... ............................ ............ 29
Sound B ay B ait Shrim p ............. ......................................... ... ................................ 27
Dade County Silver Mullet ....................... .6................ 6
Volusia & Flagler Counties Bait Mullet ........................................... ......... 7
S h ell S tock P erm its ........................................................... ...................................... 51
Sp ecial P erm its ................... ..... ........... ................. .. ............................................. 247
S c ie n tific ...................................................... .................................................... 9 5
E x h ib itio n ............................................................. ...... ......... ..................... 15 2
O y ster P lan tin g . ................................................................................... .............. ............. 76
Bait Shrimp State Wide .............................................. ............ 216
Shrimp Landing Permits ....................................................................................... 1,524
B ay C o u n ty ................................................. ................................................. 4 7
B rev ard C ou n ty ............................................ ............................................. 3
C h arlotte C ou n ty ......................................... ............................................. 2
C itru s C ou n ty ............................................. ................................................ 3
C la y C o u n ty ..................................................................................................... 1
C ollier C ou n ty .................................................................. ...................... 11
D ad e C ou n ty ............................................ ................................................ 9
D u v al C ou n ty ............................................... ............................................... 72
E scam bia C ou n ty ........................................ ................................................ 228
F ran k lin C ou n ty ................................................ .......................................... 230
G u lf C ou n ty ........................ ...................... ................................................ 10
H illsborough C county .............................................. .................. .............. 125
Indian River County ............................................. 2
L e e C o u n ty ........................................................................................................ 2 4
M an atee C ou n ty ........................................... .............................................. 2
M onroe C oun ty ......................................... ............................................. 130
N assau C ou n ty .............................................. .............................................. 87
O k aloosa C oun ty ....................................... ............................................ 29
P asco C ou n ty ............................................. ................................................ 4
P in ella s C ou n ty ............................................................................................... 8
S t. J oh n s C ou n ty .......... ................................... ......................................... 22
S an ta R osa C ou n ty ........ ....... .................................. ............................... 44
S arasota C ou n ty ............................................. ........................................... 1
V olu sia C ou n ty ........................................... ............................................. 29
W ak u lla C ou n ty ............................................. ............................................. 24
W alton C ou n ty ............................................. ............................................. 12
O u t o f S ta te ............................................... .............................................. 365
A lab am a ........................................................................................ 10 1
G eorg ia ... ....... ...... .... .. ... .. ....... ........ .................... ... 99
M ississip p i ............................................ .. .................................. 4
N orth C arolin a ................................ ......................................... 71
S ou th C arolin a ...................... ........................................................ 55
T ex as ...... .............. .... ............... ... ....... ................ .... 35
Pinellas County Net Permits .................................................................. .............. 909
Pinellas County Commercial Fishermen ................................ 663

TOTAL PERMITS ISSUED FOR 1963-64 .................................. ....................... 5,940









STATE BOARD OF CONSERVATION
REPORT OF ARRESTS FISCAL YEAR 1962-1963
DISPOSITION

Number of Estreated Nol-
County Arrests Guilty Bond Released Prossed Pending
D ade .................................. 119 73 2 3 ...... 41
Duval .................... 73 51 2 3 ...... 17
Hillsborough ....... 13 ...... 9 1 ...... 3
Pinellas ............................ 38 22 5 7 ...... 4
P alm B each .............................................................. 90 59 5 3 ...... 22
Volusia ............... 33 26 2 1 .... 4
E scam bia ................................................................... 41 26 4 1 3 2
Brow ard .......................... 40 28 2 1 ...... 9
M anatee ................. 2 ...... ...... 0.
Sarasota .......... 30 21 5 3 ...... 1
Sem inole .......... 6 3 ...... 2 ..... 1
Lee ......... 50 44 ...... 3 ...... 3
Brevard .................. .................... 23 13 5 .......... 5
St. Johns ................... 20 13 1 1 1 4
P u tn am ........................................... ................ 1 .... ... ...... 1
S Bay .. ..................... 35 5 1 7 ...... 22
J a ck son ...................................................................... 1 1 ......... 1
Pasco 5 .....3 ...1 1
SIndian R iver ........................................................... 24 8 8 1 ...... 3
Santa R osa .............................................................. 17 16 ......1 ...... 0
W alton ................................... 10 3 1 2 2 2
T ay lor ..................................................... .............. 7 2 3 1 ...... 1
M onroe ....................................................................... 206 129 32 10 2 33
N assau ................... ..................... 1 1 ........ ......... 0
M artin ..................................... ..................... 14 3 ...... 1 ...... 10
O k aloosa .................................. ........... 6 2 ...... 2 ...... 2
Citrus ........... 14 6 5 1 ...... 2
C lay ............................... 10 7 2 ............ 3
Washington 6 4 .................. 2
H olm es ..... 1 -1 .................. 0
D ixie .............. 5 ...... 5 .......... 0
Franklin ..................... 160 122 ...... 14 8 16
Flagler ......... 17 6 6 2 ...... 3
Collier 9 1 3 1 ...... 1
W akulla .............. 1....... 1 ..... 1 ............ 0
G ulf ........ 7 7 ........... ...... 0
TOTAL 1135 703 112 73 17 219
PERCENT OF TOTAL ... 100% 61.1% 9.9% 6.4% 1.5% 19.3%







STATE BOARD OF CONSERVATION
REPORT OF ARRESTS FISCAL YEAR 1963-1964
DISPOSITION
Number of Estreated Nol-
County Arrests Guilty Bond Released Prossed Pending
D ade ................... ................................................. 444 277 .... 11 3 133
D u val ....................................................................... 117 84 3 ...... 11 19
H illsborough ............................................ ....59 6 31 ...... 16 6
P in ellas ...................................................................... 115 91 14 ...... 2 8
Polk .. 10 5 .... .. ...... 5
Palm Beach ........... 204 157 5 5 9 28
V olusia ..................................... ........ 33 24 ...... ..... 4 5
Escam bia ...................... 60 43 2 ...... 14 1
Brow ard ......................... ...... 68 32 2 1 5 28
M antee ............... 11 3 ...... 1 ...... 7
Sarasota ..................... ........ ....... 42 28 5 3 3 3
S em in ole ................. .............. 2 .... ..... .......... 1
Lee ............................. ... .............. 57 53 ...... ...... 3 1
B revard ...................................... .... ................. 42 28 9 ...... ...... 5
S t. J oh n s ..................... .................... 38 28 ...... ...... 2 8
Putnam ... ............... .............. 11 8 1 ...... 1 1
B ay ........................ 48 8 ...... ...... 3 37
St. Lucie .. 18 11 2 ...... 3 1
S J ack son .......................................... 11 8 1 ...... ...... 2
P asco .......................... 5 ...... 3 ...... 1 1
H ardee ...................... 1 1
Indian River 40 19 12 ...... 5 4
Santa Rosa 16 13 ............ 1 2
W alton ............ 7 .......... ...... 2 5
Taylor ........... 9 2 2..... 5
Monroe 199 102 28 1 18 54
L evy ................. 5 1 1 ...... 1 2
Hernando ............................................ 3 3
N assau ........................................................................ 14 6 ...... ...... 2 6
M artin .................................................................... 29 22 1 ...... 6
Okaloosa ................. 27 13 3 1 5 5
C itrus ........................ .. ............................ 16 7 .. 9
Clay .. 18 4 4 1 1 8
Washington 7 4 1 ... 2
Dixie ....... 6 1 2 3
Okeechobee 9 I ...... 8
Franklin .... 71 34 ...... 15 3 19
Flagler 23 14 4 5
Collier ...................... 12 8 .4 0
Wakulla 8 3 2 2 1
G ulf ......3 1 ............... 2
TOTAL ............. 1918 1153 138 39 124 446
PERCENT OF TOTAL ............ 100% 60.1% 7.2% 2.0% 6.5% 23.3%
















DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION
FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
TALLAHASSEE


FOURTH BIENNIAL REPORT
1963-64


A. O. PATTERSON
DIRECTOR















RESPONSIBILITIES
The Division of Water Resources and Conservation is the arm of the Board
of Conservation responsible for administering Florida's water resources law.
The Division is charged with the management of Florida's water resources for
maximum beneficial utilization. To accomplish this the Division is directed to
conduct cooperative studies and research, to collect, compile and analyze data,
to cooperate with local, county, state and federal agencies, and to enforce the
artesian well-capping law.

A primary responsibility is keeping state officials, legislators, and the
people of Florida informed on the status of Florida's water resources. This
requires studies of water use and water needs; constant liaison with agencies
that withdraw water or impound, divert and store it; and the gathering and
analyzing of basic data from cooperating state and federal agencies. The Divi-
sion conducts specific water-use studies and obtains information on stream-
flows, lake levels, ground-water elevations and growth rates.

The Division also has the responsibility of guiding and coordinating the
activities of all flood control and water management districts. This effort has
moved forward during the biennium. A unity of effort has been achieved,
which is reflected in increased Federal appropriations for navigation and flood
control projects in Florida.

The 1963 Legislature specifically charged the Division to define and keep
current by continuing study areas of the state where salt-water intrusion is a
threat, or may become a treat to the fresh-water resources, and to report its
findings to boards of county commissioners and to the public. The Legislature
authorized the Board of Conservation, upon request of local political bodies,
to establish salt-water barrier lines along the seacoast. A basic requirement is
that a dam or lock shall be constructed in any artificial waterway crossing the
salt-water barrier line to prevent the movement of salt-water inland.

The 1963 Legislature also incorporated in the water resources law the
declaration of water policy adopted by the 1955 Legislature and changed cer-
tain provisions relating to creation of water regulatory districts. A new section
was added to the water policy which states that the allocation of water in a
fair and equitable manner is to the interest of the citizens of Florida. Water
regulatory districts may now be created by a water management district, as
well as the State Board of Conservation. The 1963 legislation provided for a
five-member water resources appeal board. The appeal board had not been
activated at the end of 1964.

































































WATER WASTE-The free-flowing, or wild, well is a critical problem in
Florida. Unless located and plugged many of them because of high mineral or
saline content will contaminate good quality shallow ground water. Pictured are
two of hundreds of wild wells in the state, still flowing unchecked.

46











WATER IN FLORIDA
Florida has ample supplies of ground water and surface water to fulfill
foreseeable needs, provided time and place problems can be solved. The pri-
mary source of water in Florida is the rain falling directly on the state. Sixty
percent of the rainfall occurs during the summer rainy season of June, July,
August and September. It has been computed that the average rainfall totals
150 billion gallons per day of water. Of this 65 billion gallons a day runs off
and 110 billion gallons a day evaporate or transpire. Inflow to the state from
Georgia and Alabama is measured at 25 billion gallons a day. This water is
constantly in motion. It may be rushing down a river to the sea, evaporating
from a quiescent lake or swamp or percolating through the soil and rocks.
To solve the time and place problems rainy season water must be stored
for later release.
Basically the problem is to protect Florida's residents, industries and lands
from destruction due to floods, while at the same time conserving water to
support a growing population, including related businesses and industries,
during the yearly dry seasons and abnormally dry years. This protection is
needed today, and provision must be made through planning for sufficient
water for the demands expected in the years ahead.
During the past two years Florida experienced below normal rainfall
over the lower half of the peninsula and above normal on the northern and
western sections. The average annual rainfall for 1964 was 56 inches com-
pared with a long-term average of 53 inches. This was an improvement over
the drought 49 inches per year of the preceding two years. However, rainfall
varied greatly in each year. The 1963 average rainfall was near 52 inches
reflecting slightly below normal state-wide rainfall, a continuation of the
1961-62 dry period. Rainfall was above normal during 1964, averaging 61
inches. Distribution by area was not as uniform in 1964 as during the pre-
ceding year. North and Northwest Florida averaged 20 inches above normal
and Tallahassee had in excess of 100 inches, the most in nearly 75 years of
record. In contrast, Fort Myers had less than 32 inches, a 100-year record low.
Florida felt the effects of four hurricanes (Table I), within a period
of seven weeks, a record. Striking the state was Hurricane Cleo, the first to
hit the southeast metropolitan coastal area since 1950. Northeast Florida ex-
perienced its first full-fledged hurricane since records began when Hurricane
Dora blew in from the Atlantic. Two other hurricanes of lesser intensity struck
in October.
Surface water conditions were reasonably good during the two-year per-
iod reflecting the improved rainfall conditions. Streamflow ranged from below
normal to excessive; excessive in north and northwest Florida. Record high
flows were recorded on the Santa Fe and Suwannee Rivers in 1964 as a result
of heavy rainfalls. A summary of surface-water and ground-water conditions
for the 1963 and 1964 water years (October 1 to September 30) is presented
in Figure 1.




















1964


GROUND WATER
ROSE \
FELL >- AVERAGE
FELL


Arm extending to left shows whether ground-water
level rose or fell during the water year.

Arm extending to right indicates ground-water
level at end of water year with relation to the
average.


STREAMFLOW



EXCESSIVE


I I

IN MEDIAN RANGE




DEFICENT


FIGURE I Surface- Water and Ground-Water Conditions in
Florida for the 1963 and 1964 Water Years


1963



... ... .. ... ..



..... .....
. . .











TABLE I
Hurricanes Striking Florida During 1964
Hurricane Date Path Rainfall (in.) Damage

Cleo Aug. 27-28 North along East Coast Dry, 1-4 Heavy
Dora Sept. 10-12 U-path, N. Fla.-S. Ga. Wet, 10-15 Heavy
Hilda Oct. 4-5 East on Ga.-Fla. Line Moderate 4-8 Light
Isbelle Oct. 14 Lower Peninsula, Moderate 5-6 Spawned
Gulf to Atlantic Tornadoes
Lake levels ranged from excessive in some areas early in 1963 to gener-
ally below normal at the end of the year. During 1964 levels improved and
were generally normal or above by December.
Ground-water levels also followed the rainfall pattern. Levels were near
normal or below normal over most of Florida during 1963. On almost all of
peninsular Florida levels in 1964 were near normal. In north Florida from the
Suwannee River to the Apalachicola River, levels were above normal. Ground-
water levels in the industrial-military areas (Pensacola, Fort Walton, Panama
City, Lakeland, and Jacksonville-Fernandina) were below normal.
With near normal conditions, public concern did not manifest itself to
any great degree during the biennium. Board of Conservation and water
management district officials, however, were concerned with developing
water-use and water-needs data, controlling artesian wells and salt-water in-
trusion, planning and constructing dikes, canals, dams and pump stations for
water management and flood control and urging the purchase of reservoir
storage sites as quickly as possible.

ACTIVITIES
Supervision of the water management authorities, the gathering of water-
use and water-needs data and the control of artesian wells and salt-water
intrusion were the principal areas of Division activity during the biennium.
SUPERVISION OF WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS
A 1963 amendment to the Water Resources Act (Chapter 373.174) gives
a unity of purpose to the state's water resources development through super-
vision of the Districts by the State Board of Conservation. The eight principal
water management authorities in Florida are shown in Figure 2.
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
Construction records were shattered during the 1963 and 1964 fiscal years.
More than $50.5 million in federal, state and district funds was expended on
the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project of which $47 million
was spent on capital outlay. The remainder was used for operation and main-





















































FIGURE 2


WrER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITIES OF FLORIDA


i. Dd Lo.. *Wo MoIopoW. Dldr1d
2. & wo Rlw Mlhority
3. machmo Cm" R-aotim and WoYr Co.ntion od Cooftl Aollodty
4 Sonfot Flordo Wo#o M.wag Didm
5 Sono Cnoot Rewot .d bwo Coo-"t. wnd C." Aothptwty
& Oklowd Boalh frtm Im and WoO. Con-ootlmn d ConfrM Autloott
7 Li. 0Pogd Rotlno Ond Won Cwnotion ond Cool Aftft
& OCntol and Sonuth Flooldo Flood Co," DistrtL











tenance. Levees, canals, spillways and dams, pumping stations and other
flood control works were constructed, lands, easements and rights-of-way were
purchased and bridges, utilities and other structures were relocated.
The District received more funds during these two fiscal years than
ever before. Federal funds totaled $30.3 million dollars and the state appro-
priation to the Flood Control Account was $10 million, most of which was
available to the C&SFFCD as the principal agency drawing on the account
during this biennium.
Works were completed in the major reaches of the Caloosahatchee River,
the Kissimmee River and on the largest lakes in the Upper Kissimmee River
Basin. The three large Everglades Water Conservation areas were substantially
completed and levee work around Lake Okeechobee was progressing. All of
these works will aid in providing better water storage and flood control. An
extensive outdoor recreation development program was underway through the
cooperation of interested local, state and federal groups.
The one area where the Flood Control Project has been stymied is the
Upper St. Johns River Basin, along the missile coast. Funds are needed to
acquire the water storage lands, a state responsibility before the Corps of
Engineers will undertake any portion of the work in this basin. A total of
177,000 acres of land, estimated to cost $27 million, is needed before the system
of levees, dams, canals and reservoirs can be completed. The C&SFFCD has
acquired 20,000 acres.

SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
During the 1963-64 biennium the programs of the Southwest Florida
Water Management District took on greater substance. The District staff
moved into a new limestone brick building at Brooksville, planning by the
11 basin boards was progressing and the Congress made an initial appropria-
tion of $200,000 on August 31, 1964, for planning of the $100 million Four
Rivers Basin water management project of the Corps of Engineers.
The Southwest Florida Water Management District was created by the
1961 Legislature to provide for the flood control and water conservation
needs of the west central portion of peninsular Florida, particularly the Green
Swamp recharge area in Polk County and the flood-prone Tampa Bay metro-
politan area. The District is made up of 11 basins, each having a local board
in charge of planning and providing for needed works within the basin
boundaries. The basin boards advise the District of their needs and the
District Board takes official action. Basin boundaries coincide with actual
watershed boundaries.
The District has assumed operating control over the works of the
Oklawaha River Basin Authority and the Lake Apopka Authority. It published
weekly lake and river stage reports for the Oklawaha, Withlacoochee and
Hillsborough Rivers and financed cooperative hydrological studies and data
gathering activities with the U. S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division.











Progress was made on water control projects in five basins. (1) Con-
struction of Peace River water control structures and stream snagging; (2)
Planning of an inflatable water-control dam for the Withlacoochee River at
Carlson's Landing between Citrus and Sumter counties. The dam will aid
in maintaining higher water levels in Lake Panasoffkee during periods of low
rainfall and will provide for the diversion of Withlacoochee River water into
the Tsala Apopka chain of lakes; (3) Preparation of right-of-way maps and
authorization of eminent domain proceedings to obtain the land for an outfall
canal from Lake Tarpon to Upper Tampa Bay. This is a salinity and flood
control project that will provide a surface outlet, block off under-ground dis-
charge from Lake Tarpon and possibly divert water from the Pithlachascootee
and Anclote Rivers. All of this will tie in nicely when the Upper Tampa Bay
Fresh Water Lake becomes a reality; (4) Preparation of final right-of-way
requirements for the Tampa By-Pass Canal from McKay to Buffalo Avenue.
This canal is a key segment in the flood control portion of the Four River
Basins Project of the U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers. It will divert part of
the flood flow from the Hillsborough River around Tampa; (5) Procurement
of a portion of the right-of-way for the widening and improving of the
Oklawaha River channel in Marion County downstream from the Moss Bluff
Lock and Dam.
Except for the $200,000 federal planning money and $36,000 from the
Flood Control Account for a bridge, the SWF Water Management District
has received no federal or state funds. District tax revenues have been
used for administration and planning. Basin tax revenues can be used only
for works in the particular basin. Most of the Basins-District funds are on
deposit for rights-of-way purchases, a basic requirement of the cooperative
federal flood control project.
Land acquisition needs loom large in the SWFWMD as they do with
the C&SFFCD.
WATER-USE, WATER NEEDS STUDIES
To manage effectively the water resources in Florida in order to support
the population and maintain the economy, it is essential to know where water
is being used, by whom and in what quantities. With good present and past
use data, projections of future use can be made. A study of the West Coast
Tributaries area was active during the biennium and two additional studies
were undertaken about mid-1964.
WEST COAST TRIBUTARIES STUDY
The Mid-Gulf Basin study was expanded from five counties to 18 counties
in cooperation with the Soil Conservation Service of the U. S. Department
of Agriculture. It embraces the Southwest Florida Water Management Dis-
trict and is identified as the Florida West Coast Tributaries Study. The ex-
panded study area resulted from the decision of the U. S. Department of
Agriculture to conduct a river basin study of the west central area of penin-
sular Florida.











The River Basin Investigation Section, SCS, has gathered agricultural
water-use data and is projecting future water needs for agriculture. Studies
are also being made on selected potential reservoir sites. The Division of
Water Resources has completed the field work and much of the office work
on the industrial and municipal water-use phase. The U. S. Geological Survey,
in cooperation with the Division of Geology and the SWFWMD, has increased
the network of data collection stations for surface and ground water. The
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission and the Florida State Board of
Health have cooperated by providing data in their fields of outdoor recreational
resources, water quality and water supply.
Report drafts are expected to be completed by July 1, 1965. A special
report on water used by golf courses in Florida was completed in August.
EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA STUDY
The East Coast of Florida, centering on the growth problems of Orlando
and the Cape Kennedy complex, is the area of study of the East Central
Florida Regional Planning Council. This is the planning organization of the
seven counties comprising the region. The Division of Water Resources is
aiding the Council in its overall social-economic planning by gathering data on
industrial water use. This study was begun in the Spring of 1964 and all
field work has been completed for the first phase. An interim report has
been prepared and additional data are being assembled for the first-phase
report.
SOUTHEAST AND EVERGLADES STUDY
Studies of the fresh-water supplies of southeast Florida were undertaken
by several agencies, local, state and federal. The study area comprises a large
part of the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District as well as ad-
jacent areas, including Everglades National Park. Concern of the National
Park Service about drought damage in the Everglades National Park brought
about the study. Both the U. S. Geological Survey and the U. S. Army Corps
of Engineers have three-year studies underway.
The Corps of Engineers is studying the water use and water needs. It
will also explore alternatives to the flood control plan should future require-
ments be determined to exceed the anticipated supply. The study will con-
sider the rights of both state and federal governments to allocate surface and
ground water, and the need for new state or federal legislation. The Corps
of Engineers study will cost $400,000; $75,000 was appropriated in fiscal 1964
and $137,000 in fiscal 1965. The Division of Water Resources is cooperating
in the study by obtaining municipal and industrial water-use data.
The U. S. Geological Survey started a $63,000, three-year study on July
1, 1964. This study will evaluate the total effect of the levees, canals, pump-
ing stations, spillways and water reservoirs created by the Flood Control Dis-
trict over the past 15 years. The changes in hydrology that have taken place
as a result of the construction and operation of these works will be carefully
evaluated. Cooperating in financing the study are the Flood Control District,











the counties of Broward, Dade and Palm Beach, and the cities of West Palm
Beach and Miami.
ARTESIAN WELL CONTROL
The Legislature recognized the need for stopping the waste of water from
uncontrolled artesian (wild-flowing) wells in the enactment of Section 373.031,
Florida Statues. This statute requires that all flowing artesian wells shall be
capped or equipped with a valve and the flow shall be limited to that
necessary for ordinary use. Field studies by the Division of Water Resources
have revealed that capping or valving does not always stop the flow of water.
Instead it may cause highly mineralized artesian water to flow into overlying
fresh-water aquifers. This occurs when the well is improperly constructed or
the casing is corroded. Proper plugging (filling the well with cement) is
usually the only satisfactory method of preventing flow or leakage and con-
tamination of the shallow fresh ground water or surface water.
Most of the problem wells have been found on the lower peninsula and
particularly in the coastal areas (Figure 3). The Gulf Coast from Sarasota to
Naples, has had especially acute problems due to expanding residential devel-
opment in an area of historically poor and inadequate fresh-water resources.
Considerable interest has developed in the plugging of wells in Collier,
Okeechobee, Lee and Sarasota counties.
When problems of salty wells increased in Sarasota County, the County
Commissioners adopted a well drilling code authorized under a local legislative
act. The code was developed through the cooperative efforts of the local well
drillers, county health department and the Division of Water Resources.
Excellent results have been obtained and this code is a model for other counties.
Each well plugged presents a special case. Individual specifications are
often necessary. Frequently an electric well log must be run to locate the
water-bearing zones and to evaluate the condition of the well casing. In most
cases, through the cooperation of the Division of Geology, electric well logs
have been run at no expense to the well owner. Plugging is accomplished
using neat cement, either as a continuous plug or alternately with clay plugs.
Frequently plugging must be done against a head of water of several feet.
During 1964, the State Road Department agreed to cooperate in the program
by requiring the plugging of all wells on State Road rights-of-way.
Many months of contact with local authorities and well owners has re-
sulted in activity in this field of Division responsibility that is most heartenir



































FIGURE 3

1963-1964
ARTESIAN WELL CONTROL PROGRAM

SWELLS PLUGGED, GROUTED OR CAPPED
WELLS CAPPED ONLY


I-t ?------ -I-,.
*. "J I I '

J- ----
"- \ ^ f "*
-.- I .. ..


A-


~pWI d~











TABLE II
1963-1964 Artesian Well Control Program

Wells Wells Wells Action
Plugged Rehabilitated Capped Pending
County (No.) (No.) (No.) (No.) Total

Brevard .............. 2 2
Manatee .............. 4 1 3 4 12
Sarasota .............16 23 4 1 44
Pinellas .............. 1 1
Collier ................- 1 2 3
Hendry .............. 1 8 9
Lee .- 23 27 50
St. Lucie ............ 3 3
St. Johns ............ 2 1 3
Volusia ............... 2 2

Total ..............23 24 39 43 129

SALT-WATER BARRIER LINES
Except along the northern state line, the state is surrounded by salt
water, and has long been faced with the possibility of salt-water intrusion into
coastal fresh-water supplies. With the rapid population growth and the ac-
companying increased demands for water, salt-water intrusion has become
a concern of many coastal cities and communities. Activities that lower the
fresh-water head, either through canal development or by withdrawal of fresh
water, make more imminent the intrusion of salt water.
All coastal counties in the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control
District have been urged by the District to adopt a salt-water barrier line.
Dade County established such a line several years ago and is enforcing it with
good results. Broward County was planning to establish a salt water barrier
line under provisions of a 1963 amendment to the Broward County Water
Resources Act.
At the request of the Crystal River-Homosassa River Basin Board of the
SWFWMD, the Division of Water Resources developed an ideal salt-fresh
water interface line for Citrus County. Aerial and field reconnaissances were
involved but only a limited amount of data was collected in a relatively short
time. Chloride determinations were made and a biological evaluation of fresh-
water salt-water organisms was prepared by the State Board of Health. This
line was not adopted as the barrier line by the Basin Board and action by the
Board of Conservation was postponed until more complete data are collected.
WATER REGULATORY DISTRICT
The Florida Board of Conservation in response to local requests created
a water regulatory district in Northwest Hillsborough County in 1961 and












held hearings in mid-1962 on proposed rules and regulations.
The 1963 Legislature amended the Water Resources Law as it pertained
to the creation of water regulatory districts to give local water management
districts jurisdiction concurrent with the Florida Board of Conservation. This
effectively removed the pending adoption of rules and regulations for the
Northwest Hillsborough Water Regulatory District from the immediate con-
trol of the Board of Conservation. The SWFWMD assumed jurisdiction, and
in 1964 rejected the proposed rules and regulations based on new data which
it said indicated regulation of the ground and surface waters was not an im-
mediate need.
SUWANNEE RIVER LOW-HEAD DAM STUDY
A low-head dam in the Suwannee River at Suwannee Springs was com-
pleted early in 1963. During the period the dam was functioning, water was
effectively retained, proving that low-head dams could provide navigable
depths for recreation boating at low-flow stages. Subsequent flood flows in
1963 and high stages throughout 1964 have prevented further studies.
NEEDS OF THE FUTURE
A number of areas of our water resources program have needs- that in-
crease in urgency with the passage of time.
A most acute problem is the financing the acquisition of water storage
lands necessary for development of the Upper St. Johns Basin in the Central
and Southern Florida Flood Control District and for the many projects of
the Southwest Florida Water Management District. As part of its share of
these federal projects, Florida is committee to furnishing the water storage
lands. The presently proposed projects will require more than 371,000 acres,
costing an upward spiraling estimate of 60 million dollars.
There are two growing problems, salt-water intrusion along Florida's
coastline and the control of artesian wells, that demand the best skills avail-
able in order to cope with them. Efforts to contain and correct these situa-
tions must be vigorously pushed before time runs out and the fresh-water
resource is irreparably despoiled.
Studies of the desirability of establishing a state-wide salt-water barrier
line as the guide line should be continued. A well drilling code is needed
and the capping law should provide for an active well-plugging program.
Even without large river valleys, Florida faces flood-plain type problems
resulting from man's encroachment on the river bottoms, flat marshlands and
around the many lakes. Public identification of flood-prone areas appears
desirable.
Geology-water resources studies should be increased to cover all of Florida.
And, the water-use, water-needs inventories should be expedited to guide
planning for tomorrow.
The right of the state to allocate scarce water resources must be pro-
tected.
The Water Resources Research Act of 1964, 88th Congress, is intended











to stimulate a program of water resources research at a state university. State
agencies should be encouraged to participate in the research and to conduct
field studies.
Water quality cannot be ignored when plans are made for the develop-
ment and utilization of Florida's water resources. It directly affects uses for
recreation, for municipal water supply, for industry, for agriculture and for
fish and game. It becomes increasingly evident that eventually a single agency
must provide control over both water quality and water use.
Much is happening in the broad area of multiple interests that is covered
by the blanket title of water resources. Florida must be prepared to meet
the challenge.











FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Water Resources & Conservation
Statement of Actual Expenditures

For the Fiscal Year, 1962-63


Salaries


Other
Personal


Operating
Capital


Department Services Expenses Outlay Total
General Administration.................................. $ 67,152.94 $ 1,788.63 $ 12,428.88 $ 172.24 $ 81,542.69
Ground Water Conservation ............................... 1,352.27 511.45 1,863.72
Suwannee River Dam ........................................... 500.35 309.00 809.35
Administration of Water Conservation
D districts ................................................. .... 168.86 168.86
Long-Range Water Resources Availability
S studies ................................................................... 2,342.32 320.83 2,663.15
Complaints and Emergencies .............................. 79.90 79.90
Florida W ater N ew s .............................................. 290.61 290.61
Public Information and Education ................... 403.22 4,485.45 251.19 5,139.86
Supervision of Flood Control Districts ............. 131.72 131.72
Total Expenditures ....................... .......... ..... $ 67,152.94 $ 2,191.85 $ 21,780.36 $ 1,564.71 $ 92,689.86


For the Fiscal Year, 1963-64
Other Operating
Personal Capital
Department Salaries Services Expenses Outlay Total
General Administration................................. $ 69,533.10 $ 1,754.00 $ 9,305.49 $ 1,336.90 $ 81,929.49
Ground W ater Conservation ................................ 535.19 535.19
Suw annee River Dam ........................................... 167.44 167.44
Long-Range Water Resources Availability
S tu dies ................................................................... 3,389.15 2,111.58 5,500.73
Florida W ater N ew s ................. ........................... 1,278.14 1,278.14
Public Information and Education ............... 847.13 11.50 858.63
Total Expenditures .. ... .................. ............... ...... $ 69,533.10 $ 1,754.00 $ 15,522.54 $ 3,459.98 90,269.62
















DIVISION
FLORIDA


OF BEACHES AND SHORES
BOARD OF CONSERVATION
TALLAHASSEE


FIRST BIENNIAL REPORT

1963-1964












RESPONSIBILITIES
The Division of Beaches and Shores was created by the 1963 Legislature
(Chapter 63-40) and charged with the duty of administering, coordinating and
enforcing all provisions of law relating to preservation, conservation and restor-
ation of beaches and shores, including the control of beach erosion and the
protection against hurricane and storm damage.
The Legislature also assigned specific duties to the new division. These
include:
To conduct, direct, encourage, coordinate or otherwise see to a continuing
program of basic research into problems of beach erosion, shoreline deteriora-
tion and hurricane protection.
To prepare a comprehensive, long-range, statewide plan for erosion con-
trol, beach preservation and hurricane protection.
To review all plans and activity pertinent to erosion control, beach pre-
servation and hurricane protection, and provide coordination in this field among
the various levels of government and among the various areas of the state.
To make recommendations to the Board of Conservation relative to the
use of funds in the erosion control account.
To assist in the proper regulation of shoreline alteration and development
by investigating proposed work and making recommendations to the Trustees
of the Internal Improvement Fund.
To promote sound planning and development of shoreline upland by
devising standards and working closely with local planning and zoning bodies.
To coordinate erosion control, beach preservation and hurricane protection
activities with waterways, harbors and other water control and development
projects.
To provide a clearing service for erosion control, beach preservation and
hurricane protection matters by collecting, processing and disseminating pert-
inent information.
To assist and guide localities in the preparation and execution of unified
erosion control, beach preservation and hurricane protection.
In addition, the Attorney General (Opinion 063-67 of June 18, 1963)
ruled that transfer of regulation of coastal construction relating to shoreline
protection to the Division from the Trustees of the Internal Improvement
Fund was inherent in Chapter 63-40.































STORM WRECKS BEACH-The damage suffered by Florida beaches from
tropical storms is shown dramatically in this photograph taken at Atlantic Beach
the day after Hurricane Dora struck the Northeast Coast


ACTIVITIES
The 1963 Legislature did not provide an appropriation for operations of
the Division of Beaches and Shores. However, through the cooperation of
the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund, modest sums were made
available to permit activation of the Division on a skeleton basis to undertake
the more urgent responsibilities assigned by statute.
The Trustees transferred to the Board of Conservation for use by the
Division funds it has budgeted for regulation of coastal structures. This
amounted to $12,000 for fiscal 1963-64 and $10,800 for fiscal 1964-65. In addi-
tion, the Division, through December 31, 1964, had received $4,300 in coastal
construction application fees which was made available for operating expenses.
One man and a secretary were assigned to carry out, insofar as possible,
the duties of the Division.
The Trustees, at the request of the Board of Conservation, contributed
$7,500 to match an equal amount of federal funds to permit the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers to make an evaluation survey of the entire shoreline of
Florida. This survey has been completed and a comprehensive report prepared.
This report will prove invaluable to the Division not only in moving toward
solution of the more urgent problems of beach erosion, but in developing the
comprehensive, long-range, statewide plan for erosion control, shoreline deter-
ioration and hurricane protection required by statute.












Critical problems of beach erosion throughout the state, which caused
the Legislature to create the Division of Beaches and Shores, were magnified
by the extensive damage.to shore areas caused by the hurricanes which plagued
Florida during the Fall of 1964, particularly Dora, which struck the Northeast
coast early in September.
Tremendous damage was sustained at Fernandina Beach, Jacksonville,
Atlantic, Neptune and Mayport Beaches, South Ponte Vedra Beaches and St.
Augustine Beach.
At Fernandina Beach, for example, from 30 to 60 feet of dune was
washed away for extensive lengths, and beaches lowered up to five feet in
sections.
At South Ponte Vedra Beaches, the dunes were eroded from 20 to
40 feet.
The damage to St. Augustine Beach, particularly to Anastasia State Park
Beach, was shoreline recession probably about 100 feet.
Although the hurricanes did extensive and readily apparent damage to
Florida beaches, there is a disturbing lack of public knowledge and under-
standing of the nature and extent of beach erosion throughout the State and
the importance to the general economy of restoring and maintaining these
beaches. Assuming funds are provided by the 1965 Legislature, a strong educa-
tional program is planned by the Division.
It is vital that public support be engendered for creation of county-wide
beach erosion districts capable of financing the local contributions that are
required to secure federal financial assistance in solving erosion problems.
Inspection has shown that serious erosion exists along Florida's East Coast
from the Georgia line to a point just south of Miami, and on the West Coast
from just south of Naples to Anclote Key, north of Tampa. Less serious erosion
exists from Carrabelle along the Northwest Coast to the Alabama line.
Lee-side erosion is occurring at all our inlets, including those in which
protective jetties have been constructed.
Close liaison has been maintained with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
In conjunction with the Corps of Engineers and with the co-sponsorship
of the Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association, the Division con-
ducted a statewide conference on beach erosion problems at Jacksonville
September 29, 1964. More than 150 representatives of federal, state and local
agencies concerned with beach erosion attended. Special attention was given
at the meeting to State and local participation in federally-recommended beach
restoration and preservation projects, of which a major portion of cost will be
borne by the federal government.

ARTIFICIAL NOURISHMENT
An experiment in artificial nourishment of beaches by the "sand scraper
method" was inaugurated in 1964.





































a-_


** --^ "*"r >- -
^^.^,^ ^b. -_
5-"- .t .AtL^
p^P-'*^^te.^ s^*^b*^?
** J- -^ a

*- -i -:irfL-


FEEDING A BEACH-A sandscraper hauls up sand from the deep to a
diminishing beach on Jupiter Island in an experimental program to determine
feasibility of artificially nourishing beaches to check losses due to erosion.


//


"""


I- sf











This experiment is being carried out on Jupiter Island in Martin County,
and is the first of its kind. In the experiment, sand is scraped from deep
water bottoms by a specially-designed dragline, carried close into shore and
dumped. Natural tidal action then distributes the sand along the beach. Pre-
liminary results of the experiment have been encouraging.
The Corps of Engineers awarded a $113,509 contract in December, 1964,
to Alpine Geophysical Associates of Norwood, N. J., to search the Atlantic
Ocean bottom for pockets of sand that could be pumped onto eroded Florida
beaches. This special research projects was to be carried out in a three-by-
seven mile area between Cape Florida on Key Biscayne and a point opposite
the south end of Miami Beach; a 14 by 20 mile area off Cape Kennedy, and
a 12 by 20 mile area between a point eight miles south of Fort Pierce Inlet
and a point opposite Vero Beach.
COASTAL STRUCTURE REGULATION
Following the transfer of coastal structure regulation from the Trustees
of the Internal Improvement Fund to the Division of Beaches and Shores,
procedures for obtaining construction permits and regulations governing grant-
ing of permit and construction work were revised completely. The objective
was not only to simplify procedures but to tighten controls and enforcement
of construction regulations.
Any coastal construction undertaken below the mean high water line of
any body of tidal water within the limits of the State must be under permit
granted by the Trusees of the Internal Improvement Fund upon recommenda-
tion of the Division of Beaches and Shores.
Coastal construction is defined as any work or activity which is likely to
have a material physical effect on existing coastal conditions or natural shore
processes.
Construction and physical activity undertaken specifically for shore
protection purposes must have a permit. These include such structures and
physical activity as groins, jetties, moles, breakwaters, seawalls, revetments,
causeways and artificial nourishment or other deposition or removal of beach
material.
A processing fee of $100 must accompany each application for a permit.
A field investigation is conducted by the Division of Beaches and Shores,
if indicated by the nature of the project. Riparian property owners within
1,000 feet of the proposed construction are notified of the application and
given opportunity to comment.
Following approval, the Division recommends to the Trustees that the
permit be issued. If the Division finds the proposed project objectionable
in some respect, the applicant is so notified and given opportunity to revise
his plans to overcome the objectionable feature.
Since July 1, 1963, the Division has investigated, processed and recom-
mended issuance of 22 permits for construction of coastal structures. As of
December 31, 1964, 29 applications were pending.










Statewide inspection has disclosed many protective structures which were
installed without state or federal permit. Some of these are deteriorating and
are a hazard to those making use of the beach. Steps are being taken to
cause removal of dangerous or otherwise undesirable structures.
During the past two years the Division has received technical assistance
from the Coastal Engineering Laboratory of the College of Engineering, Uni-
versity of Florida, under a contractual agreement. Cost to the Division has
been $5,000 a year. This assistance has been primarily evaluation reports on
proposed coastal structures, but has included also aid in program planning and
in preparation of hurricane damage reports.
COOPERATION WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
The Division has worked with the Board of Commissioners of Sarasota
County and other county officials in developing the proposed Venice Area
Beach Preservation District.
The Division also has cooperated with Dade, Palm Beach and Broward
Counties and with the Town of Longboat Key in efforts to standardize coastal
structures in each of these areas, and to develop effective administration of
coastal construction regulations.










FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Beaches and Shores
Statement of Actual Revenues
BEACHES AND SHORES TRUST FUND
Receipts from Trustees of Internal Improvement Fund ..........................$ 19,500.00
M miscellaneous Revenue ...................... ...... ....... 2,600.00
TOTAL BEACHES AND SHORES TRUST FUND ..................................$ 22,100.00



FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Beaches and Shores
Statement of Actual Expeditures

For the Fiscal Year, 1963-64


Other
Personal


Operating
Capital


Department Salaries Services Expenses Outlay Total
General Administration ........ $ 2,970.00 $ 5,127.74 $ 9,388.74 $ 1,566.75 $ 19,053.23
Total Expenditures .................. $ 2,970.00 $ 5,127.74 $ 9,388.74 $ 1,566.75 $ 19,053.23

















PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS OF PROPOSED

FLORIDA'S INTEGRATED INLAND WATERWAYS SYSTEM



14
pS. .


PENSACOL .13 i


SONVILLE


JGUSTINE


C-~ 6~ca25


1 Cross-Florida Barge Canal.
Authorized: 12' deep, 150' wide, 5 locks
84x600'; under construction since 27 Feb. 1964.
2 Port Canaveral Lock and Canal to Atlantic In-
tracoastal Waterway; Canal-Existing: 8', under
construction to 12'; Lock-under construction,
90'x600'.
3 St. Johns-Indian River Canal: Needed; and un-
der study authorized by Florida Board of Con-
servation; Navigation District created by
Florida Legislature.
4 St. Marks to Anclote: Needed, Survey Report in
preparation by Corps of Engineers. Big Bend
and Suwannee-Anclote Inland Navigation Dis-
tricts created by Florida Board of Conservation.
5 St. Johns River, Jacksonville to Sanford.
Authorized, and Existing: 12'.
6 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Jacksonville to
Miami:
Authorized: 12'-Jacksonville to Miami.
Existing: 12'--Jacksonville to Ft. Pierce; 10'-Ft.
Pierce to Miami.
Needed: Additional study for 12', Ft. Pierce to
Miami.
7 Miami to Key West: Authorized: 7'-Existing 7'
to Cross Bank; Open Bay to Key West.
8 Okeechobee Waterway: Authorized and Exist-
ing: 8'; 4 Locks, 3 @ 50'x250', 1 @ 56'x400.
9 ntracoastal Waterway; Andote to Ft. Myers.
Authorized: 9' (under construction)
10 Existing-Open bay section.
11 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, St. Marks to Pen-
socola. Authorized: 12'. Existing: 12'-Carrabelle
to Pensacola.
12 Apalachicola, Chattahoochee and Flint Rivers.
Authorized and Existing: 9' to Bainbridge and
Columbus, Ga. Locks: 2'x450'.
13 Santa Rosa Island and Peninsula Canal. Needed,
and Survey Report by Corps of Engineers due
in-F. Y. 1965.-
14 Escambia-Conechuh Rivers. Authorized and
Existing: 10', Mouth to Mile 7; Ne d to An-
da usia, Ala., and Survey Report in preparation
by Corps of Engineers.


FT. MYERS '


W~^

\.it-


V~,~. --

I,-,,


/ .::, BANK


KEY V..,T 7


LEGEND

Existing

Under Construction ...

Under Study ..oo


i.~-'- -- -















DIVISION OF WATERWAYS DEVELOPMENT
FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
TALLAHASSEE


SECOND BIENNIAL REPORT
1963-1964












RESPONSIBILITIES


It is the statutory duty of the Division of Waterways Development to
coordinate the activities of all public bodies, authorities, agencies and special
districts charged with the development of waterways within the state.

The Division also is charged by law with fostering, promoting and guiding
development of a unified system of waterways within Florida.

The Division has authority under law to distribute to the Canal Author-
ity of the State of Florida any available state funds for use on a matching
basis to acquire rights-of-way for any waterways development project authorized
by an appropriate federal or state agency.

The Division of Waterways Development, in cooperation with the Divi-
sion of Water Resources, assists the Director of Conservation in conducting
the annual Governor's Conference on Water Resources Development, analyz-
ing the data received, and assisting the Board in preparing its recommenda-
tion of projects to be presented to the Congress in a unified Florida program
of water-related public works projects for which federal authorization and/or
funds are sought.











ACTIVITIES
The Governor's Conference on Water Resources Development, first held
in 1962, was repeated in 1963 and 1964, with increasing success. Proof of the
effectiveness of the unified Florida program is demonstrated by the sub-
stantial increase in federal appropriations for water-related public works pro-
jects.
Prior to 1961, the annual appropriation by the Congress for water-related
public works projects in Florida averaged $14 million. Since the inception of
the unified program under the sponsorship of the Broad of Conservation, the
federal funds appropriated have climbed steadily. The 88th Congress in 1964
appropriated a total of $31 million for Florida projects.
The major achievement in waterways development in Florida during the
past two years was the start of construction of the Cross-Florida Barge Canal.
When President Johnson pushed the button to touch off the blast that
moved the first dirt at ground-breaking ceremonies near Palatka on February
27, 1964, a dream of far-seeing Floridians dating back to the administration of
Territorial Governor Andrew Jackson was culminated.
Ground was broken December 17, 1964 for the St. Johns Lock, the first
of five giant navigational locks along the 107-mile barge canal, and earlier the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers had awarded a $1.81 million contract for dredg-
ing a five mile segment of the canal at the western terminus, the mouth of the
Withlacoochee River.
The shallow-draft waterway avoids a deep cut into the Florida aquifer
and will have no adverse effect on the fresh water resources of the state.
The canal will provide an artery for low-cost barge transportation from the
Gulf of Mexico at Yankeetown to the St. Johns River near Palatka, then down
the existing 13-foot deep navigation channel of the St. Johns River to east of
Jacksonville where it will join the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. Target
date for completion of the canal is eight years.
Construction costs of $157.9 million, will be borne entirely by the federal
government. Lands for right-of-way and spoil areas must be acquired by state
and local interests. These costs are estimated at $12.4 million.
Construction to date has been on right-of-way already owned by the
Canal Authority of the State of Florida. Future construction will require the
purchase of rights-of-way and spoil areas. Acquiring these necessary lands is
one of the critical problems facing the Board of Conservation.
Another significant milestone in waterways development was the com-
pletion of construction December 9, 1964, of a small boat channel in the West
Pass of the Suwannee River mouth. This was the first waterway constructed
in Florida entirely with state funds.
The 1963 Legislature appropriated $50,000 for the small boat channel,
which cuts through a sand bar in the Gulf at the mouth of the Suwannee
River and allows direct entrance in the Gulf through West Pass.











Actual cost of construction was $34,620, including engineering fees.
The channel will serve recreational boaters and commercial fishermen.
It should enhance use of the Suwannee River and value of river banks pro-
perty.
One of the major goals of the Board of Conservation is to obtain authori-
zation and eventual funding by the Congress of the so-called missing link of
the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, which now stretches from the Texas-Mexican
border to Key West. This missing link in the great inland waterway is the
segment from Carrabelle to the Anclote River in Florida.
To help move forward on this project, the Board on March 10, 1964,
created the Big Bend Inland Navigation District and the Suwannee-Anclote
Inland Navigation District.
The Big Bend Inland Navigation District embraces Franklin, Wakulla,
Jefferson, Taylor and Dixie Counties. The Suwannee-Anclote Inland Navigation
District includes Levy, Citrus, Hernando and Pasco Counties. It will be the
responsibility of these navigation districts, once the project has been authorized
and funded by the Congress, to obtain the rights-of-way. Meantime, they are
available to assist in generating local support and coordinate efforts to bring the
project to reality.
Summarizing other developments in waterways development:
(1) Substantial progress was made in the construction of the segment
of the West Coast Inland Waterway from the Caloosahatchee River to the
Anclote River. Problems concerning rights-of-way and controversy over the
route, which had threatened to delay work, were resolved successfully. Funds
are available to start construction of the last remaining section, the bypass
east of Venice.
(2) The Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway was completed to a depth of
12 feet as far south as Fort Pierce, and to a depth of 10 feet between Fort
Pierce and Miami. Several restrictive bridge clearances exist presently on the
Fort Pierce-Miami segment. The Board of Conservation has recommended re-
construction of these bridges to provide adequate navigation clearance.
(3) Navigation locks were provided on the Kissimmee River, in con-
junction with the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District. This
will enhance recreational use of this waterway. The shallow channel will not
support major commercial navigation.
(4) Extensive studies were made by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to
determine construction needed to improve the Apalachicola River navigation
channel. Revetments and contraction works at selected points along the river
would confine the water flow to a desired channel and reduce extensive
dredging now necessary to maintain a navigable depth. Some construction
was accomplished, and plans drafted for completion of corrective action.
Federal funds will finance actual construction, but the state or local interests
would be responsible for acquisition of easements for the river control works.
Funds to meet local responsibilities, estimated at two percent of the total
cost, are not available at this time.












































9u


SUWANNEE RIVER CHANNEL-A big dredge pumps out sand off the
mouth of the Suwannee River in the final phase of construction of the West
Pass small boat channel the first waterways project in Florida financed solely
with state funds.


S-c. "t !













(5) Proposals were advanced for improving the Okeechobee Waterway,
connecting the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway at Stuart with the Gulf of
Mexico at Fort Myers and traversing Lake Okeechobee, to meet modern
navigation requirements. The waterway is eight feet deep. Three of its four
navigational locks measure 50 feet by 250 feet. The channel depth and the
lock measurements are inadequate to meet present barge traffic requirements.
The proposed improvements will be extremely expensive. However, as industry
develops in South Florida and traffic demands increase, modernization of the
waterway should be considered strongly.
(6) Directors of the St. Johns-Indian River Canal District, created by the
1963 Legislature, approved the Maytown Plan developed by Reynolds, Smith
and Hills, consulting engineers, as the route of a proposed navigation canal
connecting the St. Johns River with the Indian River. The Maytown Plan
begins in Lake Monroe, follows the St. Johns River to the north end of Lake
Harney, thence proceeds east to the Indian River to intersect the new align-
ment of the Intracoastal Canal from Indian River to Oak Hill. Substantial
gifts of rights-of-way for the proposed canal were obtained by the District
directors.

FLORIDA'S UNIFIED WATERWAYS SYSTEM
Florida's unified waterways system, showing existing waterways and
those under construction, is displayed in Figure 1 (page 68). There is an
existing network of commercially navigable inland waterways along the east
coast from Fernandina to Miami, on the Gulf coast from Pensacola to Carra-
belle and from Anclote to Ft. Myers (except the Venice bypass now under
construction).
Other commercially navigable waterways of Florida, including those under
study, include:
The Apalachicola, Chattahoochee and Flint Rivers from the Gulf at
Apalachicola to Columbus, Georgia and to Bainbridge, Georgia.
The St. Johns River from its mouth east of Jacksonville to Sanford.
The Kissimmee, Suwannee, Withlacoochee and Oklawaha Rivers, which
are limited to use by recreational craft, and in their lower reaches, extremely
shallow-draft barges.
A shallow channel from Miami to Cross-Bank, along the Keys.
An offshoot of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway from Carrabelle to St.
Marks. This has been authorized for construction, but a rerouting survey is
being made because of road and bridge construction projects completed after
the authorization was granted.











FLORIDA'S PORTS
There are 14 deepwater ports and seven shallow-draft ports serving
Florida. These include:
Deepwater Ports Controlling Depth in Feet
Fernandina Beach ...................................... ..... ............. 32
Jacksonville ......................................... ......................... 34
C anaveral ................................................... .......................... 35
Fort Pierce ......................... ........................................... 25
Palm Beach .................................................. ......................... 33
P ort Everglades ................................... ................ ....... ..... 37
M iam i ..... ................ ....................................... ......... ...... .... ....... 30
K ey W est .......................................................... .................. 30
Charlotte Harbor ..................................................................... (30 ft. to Port Boca


T am p a ................ ... ......... ... .......... ................ .......
St. Petersburg ............................................ ..................
Port St. Joe .....:........................... ................
P an am a C ity .......................................... ........... ..................
P en sacola ........................ ...... ....................................... .........
Shallow-Draft Ports
St. Augustine .......................................... .....................
Bradenton ......................................................................
P ort In glis ..........................................................................
F ort M y ers .............................. ..............................................
C ed ar K ey s ...........................................................................
Apalachicola .. .......... .................
S a r a so ta ..........................................................................................


Grade;
10 ft. to Punta Gorda)
34
24
35
32
33

16
13
12
11
10.5
10
8


PROJECT LISTINGS

1. During 1963-64, the following navigation projects were constructed as
authorized with federal funds.

Project Total Federal Cost
IW W Jacksonville to M iam i ............................................. ................ $11,400,000
Port Everglades Harbor (Broward Co.) ..................................... 4,734,000
M iam i Harbor( Dade County) .................... ................................... 2,580,000
Bakers Haulover Inlet (Dade County) .............................................. 252,000
G arrison Bight (K ey W est) ................................................. ............ 37,000
Cats Point Channel (Pinellas County) ................................................ 10,000
Everglades Harbor (Collier County) ............... ................................. 232,000
Sunshine Skyw ay Channel ........................... .................................... 9,000
Apalachee Bay, Two Mile Channel .......................................... 125,000
La Grange Bayou Modification (Walton County) ........................... 289,000
Panacea H arbor M odification ....................... ................................ 122,000
St. Marks River Channel Improvement ............................................ 1,505,300
2. The following navigation projects were under construction during
1963-64 with federal funds. Total construction cost of the project and the
amount appropriated to date for each are also listed.


Project Estimated
Federal Cost
IWW Cross-Florida Barge Canal ......................$145,300,000
IWW Caloosahatchee River to Anclote ................ 8,550,000
Apalachicola River Channel Improvement .......... 3,360,000
Canaveral H arbor .................... ................................ 8,880,000
Palm B each H arbor .................................... ................ 5,890,000
Tampa Harbor (Ybor Channel) .............................. 1,100,000
Pensacola H arbor ............................................................ 550,000
Sarasota Passes ............. ..................... ....... .................. 50,000
Largo Sound Channel (Monroe County) ............ ...... 38,000
Pass-A-Grille Pass (Pinellas County) .................... 105,000
Johns Pass (Pinellas County) ........................ .......... 98,000


Appropriated
To Date
$ 6,685,000
5,457,000
462,000
5,180,000
1,753,000
150,000
550,000
50,000
38,000
20,000
25,000















3. General investigation studies of navigation projects made
with federal appropriations are listed below:

Project Estimated
Federal Cost
Gulf IWW St. Marks River to Tampa Bay ............$347,000
Jacksonville Harbor Improvement .............................. 138,000
Miami Harbor Improvement ...................................... 225,000
East Pass, Chotawhatchee Bay ................................ 41,700
Cedar Key Harbor Improvement ......................... 23,000
Escambia River Channel Improvement .................... 65,000
Crystal River Channel Improvement .......................... 39,000
Pithlachascotee River Channel ....................................... 11,000
Johns & Pass-A-Grille Passes (Pinellas County) ...... 33,000
J u p iter In let ........................................................................... 24,000
Ponce de Leon Inlet ........................................................ 45,800
St. Lucie Inlet ................................................ .............. 56,500
C & SF N aviation Study .......................... ..................... 56,000
Choctawhatchee River Improvement ..................... 85,000
Apalachicola River Basin Study ............................ 450,000
Carrabelle Harbor Modification ................................. 12,500
Santa Rosa Island Channel ................................ ......... 35,000
Gulf County Canal Enlargement Study .................. 18,000
Choctawhatchee Bay Inlet at Point Washington ........ 5,000
Escambia Bay at Mulat Bayou ................................ 10,000


during 1963-64


Appropriated
To Date
$260,000
138,000
36,000
41,700
23,000
65,000
39,000
11,000
33,000
24,000
45,800
56,500
16,000
85,000
312,000
12,500
35,000
18,000
5,000
10,000






















FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Division of Waterways Development
Statement of Actual Expenditures

For the Fiscal Year, 1963-64


Other
Personal


Operating
Capital


Department Salaries Services Expenses Outlay Total
General Administration $ None $ None $ 3,540.51 $ 1,049.67 $ 4,590.18
Total Expenditures ...................... $ None $ None $ 3,540.51 $ 1,049.67 $ 4,590.18
















DIVISION OF GEOLOGY
FLORIDA BOARD OF CONSERVATION
TALLAHASSEE


SIXTEENTH BIENNIAL REPORT
1963-1964



R. O. VERNON
DIRECTOR










RESPONSIBILITIES
The duties, responsibilities, and organization of the Division of Geology
are set forth in the Florida Statutes under Section 373.011, 373.012, and
under Sections 370.02(8) and 377.07. The Division is required to:
(1) Conduct surveys and explorations of minerals, water supplies, and
other natural resources of the State.
(2) Collect, maintain, and display specimens illustrating the geological and
mineral features of the State.
(3) Prepare and publish reports of surveys and special papers.
(4) Administer the law regulating the search for oil and gas, and controlling
the production.

ACTIVITIES
The Division has met its responsibilities in 1963-64, and recorded its work
in 34 papers on the geology and hydrology of Florida. Progress in many of
the areas of Florida has been based upon the data developed in these studies.
There are presently underway 63 major studies, including 19 maps and 10
county-geologic and hydrologic projects, that will provide the data on the
State's mineral, water and other natural resources required by an expanding,
vigorous and healthy economy. Some of these studies will be directed toward
providing data on the State's water resources, in order to meet problems
created by the steadily increasing withdrawals of water accompanying an
anticipated population expansion of 80 percent during the next 10 years.
As consultants to the citizens of Florida, the Division is proud to have
assisted in the establishment or expansion of about 76 companies that pro-
duce or use the State's minerals. More than 200 contacts relating to problems,
production or availability of mineral resources were made at the office, in-
cluding inquiries and information on clay, phosphate, mineral resources, oil,
water, dolomite and limestone, road base course materials, lakes, foundation
problems, sewage disposal and the lock-barge canal. Interest in water, oil
and phosphate headed the list of inquiries.
The Division of Geology has, over a period of 55 years, accumulated a
library of rock cuttings from wells. While these have been utilized for county
studies, this important resource has never been completely analyzed and
tabulated. All of the cuttings are now being analyzed and studied. The upper
100 feet are worked carefully for any leads to new mineral resources, and for
expansion of reserves at the present mines. Where a commodity is indicated,
field checks are given and, if proved, the areas are mapped; samples of
minerals are collected from the cuttings and analyzed for possible use.
Area mineral studies and specific mineral commodity evaluations are
being made. These will include considerations of the nature of the resource,
its possible uses, and possible areas of expansion of present mining and mineral
utilization. Some preliminary pilot tests will be made where these are thought










to be helpful. Data on the problems associated with mining, uses, transporta-
tion and sales of specific minerals, or of areas where these may be combined
with other minerals, are tabulated in each study.
Large reserves of high calcium limestones are present in many areas of
the State. The use of this rock has been limited to road base courses and to
soil conditioning. Only a small tonnage is now being used in agriculture.
Silty clays in the same areas offer the possibility of blending these with lime-
stone in manufacturing cement and mortar, and for numerous other purposes.
The Division hopes to work closely with developmental agencies in finding
a suitable deposit and someone to produce it.
Phosphate rock of high grade of mill-feed sizes is now being produced
in Hamilton County near Jasper, Florida. Several major oil, fertilizer and
chemical companies are now busily prospecting sediments of the Hawthorn
Formation cropping out in Baker, Columbia, Union, Bradford, Alachua, Hamil-
ton, Madison and Jefferson counties, utilizing the Division's library of well
cuttings and cores and studies made by its personnel.
CONTINUING STUDIES
The data developed from the studies of rock cuttings and cores are
coordinated with electric well logs, where available, and regional maps are
prepared to illustrate the stratigraphy and geology. These studies are funda-
mental tools to the search for oil, gas, other minerals, and to studies of the
water resources undertaken by the personnel of both the Division of Geology
and the U. S. Geological Survey. Specific county water studies can thus be
set into the general framework of structures, stratigraphy and geology deter-
mined by these basic regional and statewide studies.
The geologic well data will provide the details necessary to plot:
(1) Maps of the top of the principal artesian aquifer.
(2) Isopach maps giving casing requirements for wells that penetrate the
principal artesian aquifer.
(3) Several maps of the top of selected beds to illustrate the geologic struc-
tures, the inclination of the beds, the stratigraphy, and the relationship
of aquifers to aquicludes.
(4) Geologic sections throughout the State.
When these data are fully developed, it will be possible to more accurately
forecast the casing requirements for various wells, the prospective depths for
wells and the areas of water production.
From these maps and data, a comprehensive summary of the geology of
Florida will be compiled. It is proposed that the geology of Florida will
include six parts under the general headings of:
(1) Landforms
(2) Stratigraphy
(3) Structure
(4) Guide fossils
(5) Economic geology
(6) Hydrology










The first part of the comprehensive study of the "Geology of Florida"
has been completed. A summary of this report on landforms was published in
the revision of Special Publication No. 5. The series of studies planned to be
included in the "Geology of Florida" will terminate with the publication of
a detailed geologic map issued in a folio of eight sheets on a scale of
1/250,000. Each map will be issued in color upon base maps showing topo-
graphic features as supplied by the U. S. Geological Survey, Topographic
Division.
Test holes are being placed by the Division at the corners of all town-
ships, where information is not available, by use of a Failing 1500 drill which
was made available by the 1963 Legislature. These holes are providing the nec-
essary data on the subsurface geology and the thickness of the Pleistocene
sand and clay deposits. The drill is also providing the only accurate informa-
tion available on the presence of and the reserve of the State's exploitable
minerals in some areas.
The Division of Geology is the principal State agency that cooperates
with the Water Resources Branch of the U. S. Geological Survey, and, together,
these departments develop water resource and geologic facts covering the oc-
currence, movement, management, quantity and quality of surface and ground
waters of Florida. Such data are helpful to the Division of Water Resources
and Conservation and the water management districts in meeting their respon-
sibilities. The Waterways Division will require accurate data on base flows
of all waterways it seeks to develop.
MINERAL PRODUCTION
The production of mineral commodities increased 8% in 1963 over 1962,
establishing a record year for the State. The total value of mineral production
was $202 million in 1963 and $186 million in 1962. The increase in value
represented a 5% increase in sales of phosphate rock, a 17% increase in
stone production, a 27% increase in sand and gravel sales, a 23% increase in
lime, a 10% increase in all clays, and minor increases in other commodities.
Florida, for the 69th and 70th consecutive years, led the nation in phos-
phate rock production. The State ranked first in the nation in the production
of zircon, fullers earth, staurolite; was second in production of titanium con-
centrates; and led the southeastern states for the third year in total stone
production.
Polk and Hillsborough counties produced more than 54% of the total
State production, and the International Minerals and Chemical Corporation,
V-C Corporation, and General Portland Cement Company were the leading
companies in the value of minerals produced.
The mineral production in Florida is shown on Table 1.
THE SUNOCO-FELDA FIELD
On October 9, 1964, the Sun Oil Company officially tested their No. 2
Red Cattle Company, the discovery well for the Sunoco-Felda Field in Collier
County, Florida. During this test the well flowed from an open hole at
11,472-11,485 feet through a 20/64-inch choke at a rate of 111 barrels of oil












Table 1 Mineral Production in Florida


1962 1963

Quantity Value Quantity Value
(thousands) (thousands)


Clays .......... thousand short tons
Gem stones
Lime .......................... thousand short tons
Natural Gas ..........................................million cubic feet
P e te .......................... ................. ....... .......... .. ..... ... ............. ............... ......
o Petroleum (crude) ...............................thousand 42-gallon barrels ................
Phosphate rock ................................. thousand long tons
Sand and gravel .................................. thousand short tons ............................
S ton e .............. .......... d o .......................... ................
Cement, lime, magnesium compounds,
natural gas liquids, rare earth metal
concentrates, staurolite, titanium
concentrates, zirconium concentrates,
and values indicated by footnote 4

Total ............................


487 $ 6,741


29
20,595
419
13,949
5,924
27,279


6
139
(4)
94,595
5,179
32,608


(6)46,432

(6)185,700


538
(2)
126
30
21,049
(5)464
14.592
7,542
31,900


$ 7,777
(3)
1,996
7
129
(4)
101,050
5,823
38,173, o"rP


46,665

201,620


(1) Production as measured by mine shipments, sales, or marketable production (including consumption by producers).
(2) Weight not recorded.
(3) Less than $500
(4) Figure withheld to avoid disclosing individual company confidential data.
(5) Preliminary figure.
(6) Revised figure.


1962 1963
Quantity Value Quantity Value
(thousands) (thousands)











per day with 3 percent bottom sediment. The water tubing pressure was 30
pounds per square inch and the casing pressure was 340 pounds per square
inch.
After washing the producing zone of this well with 1,000 gallons of
muriatic acid, the results reported by the operator on the first 24-hour pro-
duction report, dated November 23, 1964, were:
Choke size: 28/64 inch
Recovery: 427 BOPD with 11 barrels of B. S. and W. with a gas-oil
ratio of, 125 to 1 Gravity, 25.4' A. P. I. at 60.
A confirmation field test, the Sun Oil Company No. 1-A the Collier
Company well, is located about 11/ miles southeast of the discovery well.
This test reached a total depth of 11,495 feet during the week of December
13-19, 1964. On drill time correlations it appears to be about 20 feet lower
structurally than the discovery well. Conventional cores were cut from 11,466
to 11,495 feet. At least one portion of the core recovery, from 11,488-11,489
feet, contained excellent porosity and oil saturation. This interval is about 6
feet above the total depth of the hole, and 15 feet above the anticipated oil-
water contact. No drill stem test will be run in this well. The operator reported
that the first test produced 109 barrels of oil and 65. barrels of water. Tests
are continuing.
Sun has spudded its next hole with cable tools in Section 33, T45S, R29E,
at a point about 1/4 mile in a generally southeast direction from the discovery
well. A rotary rig contracted from the Empire Drilling Company of Mississippi
has been moved in to drill this hole. In addition, the operator will continue
drilling Sunoco-Felda Field wells with the Larco Drilling Company rig, used in
its previous operations here, and has located a new test for this rig in the
NW 1/4 Sec. 30, T45S, R29E, Hendry County, as the west offset to the
Red Cattle No. 2.
The productive rock in the Sunoco-Felda Field is a porous microcoquinoid
limestone. In the discovery well these sediments were capped by a 41/ foot
dense limestone. According to the operator, the lack of accumulation in locally
high wells to the north of the discovery well may be due to the absence of a
good cap rock and to the pinch-out of porosity in that direction.
Oil accumulation in the Sunoco-Felda Field does not appear to be anti-
clinally controlled. The accumulation may be due to a permeability trap
associated with a (probably gentle) south-plunging nose.
A comparison of the Sunoco-Felda Field with the Sunniland Field is
presented in Table 2.

SUNOCO-FELDA FIELD PRODUCTION DATA
Production from the Sunoco-Felda Field began when the discovery well,
the Sun Oil Company No. 2 Red Cattle Company test, flowed on the official
production test on October 9, 1964. On November 23, 1964, after being washed
with acid, the first 24-hour pumping test of the well was performed. As of
December 31, 1964, two additional wells had been drilled or located to deter-












mine the limits of the field, but none had been opened to commercial produc-
tion on that date. The entire yield of oil from the field for 1964, by months,
all produced from the discovery well, was:
Barrels
October 2,202
November 7,322
December 9,698
19.222
Monthly production figures for the Sunniland Field in 1963 and 1964
are presented in Table 3. This production is from 15 pumped wells.












Table 2 A comparison of the Sunoco-Felda Field with the Sunniland Field
(as of December 22, 1964)


Sunoco-Felda Field


Sunniland Field


Cap rock


Productive lithology


Gross thickness of productive
Co zones
cn

Trap


Production




Gravity


GOR


Datum, Sunniland formation,
restricted


Limestone, hard, dense


Limestone, microcoquinoid


110' (based on correlation from the aban-
doned Sun No. 1 Red Cattle Well)


Thought to be a permeability trap associated
with a south-plunging nose


427 BOPD with 2%% B. S. and W.-on
28/64-inch chock, in the discovery well



25.4 A. P. I. in the discovery well


125 to 1 in the discovery well


-11,378 feet in the discovery well


Anhydrite


Limestone, biostromal, containing character-
istic macrofossil fragments


75' (in the Humble No. 22 GCRC well)


Anticlinal


Ranges from 31 to 552 BOPD associated
with 88% and 9% salt water, respectively,
through 2% to 2-7/8-inch tubing, with no
choke


Ranges from 19 to 26* A. P. I.


Ranges from 67 to 1, to 136 to 1


Ranges from -11,493 to -11,548 feet












TABLE 3. Sunniland Field monthly production, 1963 and 1964.

1963 1964
Month (Barrels) (Barrels)
January 32,756 38,270
February 36,365 34,807
March 39,211 36,285
April 38,539 33,785
May 41,631 41,116
June 40,927 46,911
July 39,965 56,766
August 39,729 56,872
September 36,291 53,552
October 40,169 64,174
November 39,057 68,849
December 39,002 69,299
463,642 600,686

The cumulative production from the Sunniland Field through Decem-
ber 31, 1964, is 8, 348,697 barrels.
The wells drilled in the Sunniland Field, beginning in 1962, opened
to production for the first time new and better zones, about 22 to 50 feet
deeper than those from which production was previously obtained. The
steady increase in yearly production from this field, from 1961 through
1964 inclusive, with wells opened to deeper zones, which caused this
increase, is shown in Table 4.
TABLE 4. Increase of yearly production from the Sunniland Field,
1961 through 1964 inclusive, with wells opened to deeper zones which
caused this increase.


Year Barrels Dates of First Production Report on Wells producing
1961 374,240 from the deeper pay zones
1962 414,673 October 19, 1962, No. 1BG. C. R. C. (new well)
December 19, 1962. No. B-5 LTCL Co. (new well)
1963 463,642 January 15, 1963, No. 5 G. C. R. C. (deepened well)
February 5, 1963, No. 10 G. C. R. C. (deepened well)
1964 600,686 May 19, 1964, No. 19 G. C. R. C. (new well)
October 8, 1964, No. 21, G. C. R. C. (new well)
November 4, 1964, No. 22 G. C. R. C. (new well)
Note: G. C. R. C. signifies "Gulf Coast Realties Corporation" L. T. C. L. Co.
signifies "Lee Tidewater Cypress Lumber Company".












SUNOCO-FELDA FIELD EXTENSION
Data on confirmation field tests, which have been commenced, or
located are presented in Table 5. No official production results have been
released on any of these tests.
TABLE 5. Confirmation field tests in 1964, Sunoco-Felda Field.


Permit
No.


Sun Well Well
Date designation location


Comments


1964
319 10-20


No. 1 The
Collier Co.


Sec. 4, T46S, R29E
1520' from the north
line, and 1320' from
the east line of the
section (Collier County)


Abandoned at 4550'
due to hole trouble


No. 1-A The
Collier Co.


Sec. 4, T46S, R29E T.D., 11,494 on
1583' S and 1415' W test flowed 10 to 12
of the NE corner of B. 0. P. D.
the section (Collier County) Preparing to swab


321 12-29 No. 3-2 The Sec. 3, T46S, R29E
Collier Co. 1327-5' E and 1369.9'
S of the NW corner of
the section (Collier County)


322 12-29 No. 33-2
Sunoco-Felda




1965
323 1-12 No. 32-2
Red Cattle Co.


Sec. 33, T45S, R29E
200' NE of the center of
the NW quarter of the
section (Hendry County)



Sec. 32, T45S, R29E
700' from N and E lines
of NW/4 (Hendry County)













Table 6. Exploratory wells drilled in Florida, 1963 and 1964.


Date


Well
designation


County


Total Depth
(feet)


1963


304 1-29 California-
Coastal No. 3
St. Lse 224-B

305 2-5 Prince and
Munroe No. 1
Owenby

306 3-26 DuPont de
Nemours and
Co. No. 1 Fee

307 4-23 Geotechnical
Corp. No. 1
Terry

308 6-24 Mattaliano
No. 1 Buckeye
Cellulose Corp.

309 8-20 Mattaliano
No. 2a Buckeye
Cellulose Corp.

310 11-5 Gulf Oil No. 1
Stevens


1964
313 2-25


Young Drilling
Co. No. 1
Carlton-May

Sun Oil No. 1
Red Cattle Co.

Kirby-Sun Oil
No. 1 Jay Unit

Young Drilling
Co. No. 1 Golden


Monroe 10,600
offshore (in prob. Lower
Cretaceous)

Gadsden 7,029
(in prob. Lower
Cretaceous)

Clay 3,509
(in prob. Lower Ord.)


Orange This was an abandoned
well re-entered to test
defence equipment.

Taylor Consented to use as
a water well not an
oil test.

Taylor 4,115
(in Lower Cretaceous)


Charlotte 12,459
(in Lower Cretaceous)


Santa Rosa 6,576
(in Lower Cretaceous)

Hendry 12,686
(in prob. Lower Cretaceous)

Santa Rosa 6,524
(in Lower Cretaceous)

Santa Rosa 6,539
(in Lower Cretaceous)


Permit
No.




















Table 7. Summary of offshore geophysical scout data, 1963

Permit Type No. of Weeks
No. Survey boats Worked For Contractor

1 Velocity one day California Century


co 2 Gas gun
co echo sounder


3 Gas gun echo
sounder

4 Gravity


Program
Completed
October 13,
1963
Suspended
April 27,
1964
Planned to
work about
18 weeks


Geophysical
Company

Mobil Self


Mobil Self


Work was done by Ray
Geophysical Division of
Mandrel Industries, Inc.


General Area

Within 650 feet of
the Calco No 3 224-B
well
Eastward from Fla.-Ala.
State line to Long. 86* W

Southward from Cape
Romano area to Florida
Keys

Eastward from Fla.-Ala.
State line to Long 86* 45.5'
W out to 600'















Table 8. Summary of offshore geophysical data, 1964.


Type
Survey
Reflection


No. of Weeks
boats Worked
1 1


Reflection
and
refraction


Continuation
of Reflection
and refraction


3 3


Gravity


For
Shell



HORC


1% Gulf


Contractor


Geophysical
Service, Inc.


Western
Geophysical Co.


Pan Am Western
Geophysical Co.


California Western
Geophysical Co.


13 Independent Self (data will be
Explor. Co., sold to clients
Tidelands after obtained
Division


General Area
a) Off Crystal River
(Citrus County)
b) Off Charlotte Harbor
(Lee County)
Program will extend
from Pensacola to Florida
Bay. The 1964 work was
south of Naples (?)
From the Fla.-Ala. State
line eastward to long. 85*
30' west and from shore
to the seaward limit of the
jurisdiction of Florida.
The lines were at widely
spaced intervals along
the entire Gulf Coast of
Florida.
Within 3 leagues of, and
approximately co-extensive
with, the coast line of
Escambia County.
Entire offshore Fla. Gulf
Coast out to 600 feet of water
depth; see fig.


Permit
No.
6











SPECIFIC NEEDS
The Division of Geology maintains a cooperative study of the water
resources of Florida with the Water Resources Division of the U. S. Geological
Survey, in which the costs of such studies are borne equally by Florida and
the Federal Government. If the program is to be maintained at the level
at which it has been conducted over the past several years, the State side of
the program must be increased to meet the annual increments of increased
costs resulting from salary raises and increased costs of materials.
Presently there are ready for printing 25 reports, maps, special publications
and brochures that are reflected in the anticipated increase in general printing
costs.
The Division needs the following personnel if it is to meet its responsibili-
ties
(1) Geologist II, to work with the Cross-Florida Canal project-being re-
sponsible for testing, analyzing and recording all mineral, fossil, and
archaeological resources encountered by the excavation. Prepare detailed
reports on the area, and serve as a economic geologist.
(2) Photographic Technician II-to develop film for the Board of Conserva-
tion and assist in the reproduction work of the Division.
(3) Custodial Worker II-to assist with the custodial care of the building
occupied by the Division. The building is too large to be properly
maintained by one man.
(4) Semi-skilled Laborer-to assist the Core Drill Operator in handling heavy
equipment used in the well drilling activity.
The Division's 1965 request for funds reflects the normal increases in the
costs of doing business. Increased costs are anticipated in materials, travel, and
the production, completion and publication of data on water, minerals and
geology.
The capital outlay budget anticipates the completion of the Division's
electric logger. This logger is used to develop information on the porosity and
permeability of rock penetrated by wells, log the diameter of the hole, and
determine formation boundaries and lithologic characteristics in part, locate
split casing, if present, ascertain the depth to which it has been set and
whether cement was used to secure the casing, and determine the depth from
the surface to the top of the cement.
Several items are scheduled to be replaced to avoid high costs of upkeep
and repair.
MUSEUM BUILDING
The Florida Statutes require the Division of Geology and the State
Archaeologist to collect and display examples of the State's wealth of mineral,
fossil, archaeological materials and such specimens shall be correctly labeled
for use and study. The Division has a wealth of materials that were formerly
displayed in a museum, operated in conjunction with the offices of the Divi-











sion. The designs for the Geology building provide for a museum adjoining
the office building of the Division. Funds are needed to construct this build-
ing and to maintain the museum-both as a teaching aid at Florida State
University and to meet the responsibilities of the Survey.
WATER RESOURCES COOPERATIVE STUDY
The broad objective of the cooperative program with the Water Resources
Division of the U. S. Geological Survey is to determine and evaluate the
quantity and quality of Florida's water on the surface and underground;
whether under natural conditions or under conditions of present or potential
development and use. The program involves systematic collection, analysis,
and interpretation of data, continued research to improve the understanding
of physical laws, processes, and mechanics of various phases of the hydrologic
cycle; and publication of the findings. Hydrologic studies made in cooperation
with the U. S. Geological Survey provide fundamental information needed for
locating, planning, designing and constructing water resource projects, high-
ways, bridges, and other structures at or near water bodies; and for water
management and regulation.
The program of water resources investigations in Florida during the
1963-64 biennium was continued in cooperation with the Florida Geological
Survey, with several counties, municipalities, and water districts, and with
other State and Federal agencies. Financial support for the cooperative pro-
gram is shared equally by the various state and local agencies and the
Federal Government. During the biennium, cooperation was begun with the
Southwest Florida Water Management District, Volusia, Sarasota, and Duval
counties, and with the cities of Jacksonville, Boca Raton, and Deerfield Beach.
The program with the Southwest Florida Water Management District is
significant in that it provides for a long-range program covering the total
area of the District.
A number of water resource investigations were started during the
biennium. Included were the Middle Gulf basin, fluoride in the Peace and
Alafia basin, and evaporation at Lake Helene, in cooperation with the South-
west Florida Water Management District; effects of water management in
southeast Florida, leakage from Lake Okeechobee, and hydrologic effects of
the Area B plan in cooperation with the Central and Southern Florida Flood
Control District; lower Hillsborough Canal area, in cooperation with the cities
of Boca Raton and Deerfield Beach; recharge in Volusia County, in coopera-
tion with the County Commission; and hydrology of Marion County, ground
water in the Panama City area, and a water atlas of Florida, in cooperation
with the Florida Geological Survey. The program for determining flood flows
at bridge sites, in cooperation with the State Road Department, was expanded.
Figure 1 shows the areal studies of water resources in progress.
Approximately 30 reports were completed during the biennium. Of special
significance were reports completed, or in preparation, on the hydrology of the
Green Swamp, of the Biscayne aquifer in the Pompano Beach area, and or











Pasco County; the summary of record high, low, and current water levels in
observation wells; water resources of Alachua, Bradford, Clay, Union, Escam-
bia, Santa Rosa, Glades, Hendry, and Orange counties; possibility of salt-
water leakage from the proposed intracoastal waterway near Venice; hydrologic
aspects ot lake-stage control in Orange County; springs and sinks of west
Florida; public water supplies and water use in the Southwest Florida Water
Management District; hydrologic studies and salt-water movement in the
Snake Creek Canal area; and water availability in the Mid-Gulf tributaries.
area. A number of scientific journal articles also were prepared, including
those on using flow distribution curves to analyze deep-well current meter
data, surface and ground-water relations in a highly permeable environment,
rate of freshening of Deerpoint Lake, saline ground water of southern Florida,
installation assembly for conductance cells, use of analog plotter in water con-
trol problems, two variable linear correlations of fluctuation of water levels,
and deep well disposal of industrial wastes in northern Florida. Figure 2
shows the areas of water resources investigations completed since 1951.

Special effort was devoted during the biennium to preparing maps and
brochures on water resources for the general public. Included were pamphlets
on water resources of the Pensacola and Jacksonville areas, on water for
thirsty industry, on sea water versus fresh water in Broward County, and
on control of salt intrusion; maps on the water availability in Seminole,' Orange,
Escambia and Santa Rosa counties; maps on the quality of water from the
Floridan aquifer in Hillsborough County, chloride in ground water in Piiellas
County and fluoride in water in the Floridan aquifer in northwest Florida;
a map of piezometric surface and water use in the Southwest Florida Water
Management District; and various maps for a water atlas of Florida. Special
effort was also devoted to preparing a long-range plan of water-resource
investigations.

The hydrologic networks were expanded somewhat during the biennium,
particularly in the Southwest Florida Water Management District. As of
1964, the state-wide hydrologic networks consisted of 300 stream discharge
stations, 220 lake, stream, and estuary stage stations, 65 stream and lake
temperature and water quality sites, 960 water-level observation wells, and
175 water-quality observation wells. Areal distribution of the various networks
is given in figures 3, 4, 5, and 6. A hydrologic bench mark station was estab-
lished in northwest Florida. The feasibility of utilizing a punch card system
for the storage and retrieval of well information and quality of water data
was studied during the biennium. Significant progress on automatic data pro-
cessing of stream discharges was made by installing 65 additional digital re-
corders. A battery operated, multiple-parameter, automatic, digital recorder
was designed to record hydrologic parameters measurable as electrical re-
sistance, the output of which is a perforated tape that can be processed auto-
matically.











Though the program of water resources kept pace somewhat with the
needs, additional effort is required to keep up with the mounting water de-
mands and problems occasioned by the rapid increase in Florida's population.
If population growth in Florida is projected into the future, our water
problems will increase in proportion to this increase. The costs of developing
the required knowledge of the State's Water Resources will parallel this in-
crease in population and the inflationary costs of doing business. We, therefore,
must decide to obtain more funds for the study of water. During the past
eight years the State's share of this cost has increased less than enough to
cover inflation. The only way the study has been maintained at a rate suffi-
cient to meet the growing problems is through an intensified selling program
to city and county governments having problems. This has resulted in studies
designed to "put out fires", but we have not fully met our responsibilities for
the future. A long-range plan is being prepared to more adequately meet these
responsibilities.




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


/Z


,-/ (" .

^i t^ ^ v
.. .


& 0
0


EXPLANATION

SStreamflow measuring station


0 10 20 30 40 50 meI

-b .J-


Streamflow measuring stations, November 1964.

95


















S/ 7 ~






-~ / o _- / I



28*-

/ o o J,





27*, o









a, Sta stsuge ar go ao







on stream, lake, or estuary
84 83 8- 81

lo 0 by U S Geologcl Survey
Stream, lake, and estuary stage measuring stations,
on stream, lake, or estuary 1964.




0 1) 20 30 40 50 rmles


84' 83' 82' 81' 80.
Bose token from 1933 edrlfon of mop of
Florndo by U S Geologicol Survey
Stream, lake, and estuary stage measuring stations,
November 1964.




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


0
S \ .J









/ / -














i ]'-
*/O





















O0 I 20 30 40 KOm.les -^
'i ^ (


Recording conductivity stations and daily sampling sites for surface water quality, November 1964

97













N~


EXPLANATION
S Observation well
@ Chloride sample
PRINCIPAL AQUIFERS
I Sond-ond-grovel


W Floridon


SFloridan and/or others


SBiscoyne


-- --Approximate aquifer boundary

12
"----Chloride wells


Central and Southern Florida
Flood Control Project


Southwest Florida
Water Management District


0 10 20 30 40 50 miles


Observation wells and chloride sampling wells, June 1964