BH-10
Implement the Tampa Bay Freshwater Wetland Habitat Masterplan
OBJECTIVES: Increase acreage of freshwater wetlands in the Tampa Bay watershed through
both publicly and privately funded protection, restoration and mitigation; track freshwater
wetland habitat losses and gains; encourage use of wetland banks to assist in achieving
freshwater wetland goals; evaluate success of freshwater wetland mitigation.
STATUS:
New action implementing key goal of TBEP Habitat Master Plan (Action BH-1) to quantify
freshwater wetland losses and current extent, and set restoration/protection targets.
BACKGROUND:
The majority of the wetland impacts associated with development in the bay watershed since the
1950s occurred away from the water’s edge, in areas without a direct estuarine connection to the
bay. During the nearly 60-year period from 1950-2007, more than 100,000 acres of freshwater
wetlands were lost, compared with about 5,000 acres of coastal mangroves, salt marsh and salt
barrens. Losses may have been greater as 1950s aerial photographs were not available for all
portions of the watershed, and significant urban development already had occurred in Tampa and
St. Petersburg.
While direct impacts from development account for the majority of these losses, indirect impacts
such as groundwater and surface water withdrawals for urban and agricultural use have also
degraded wetlands. Both forested wetlands, such as cypress and maple swamps, and non-forested
“grassy” wetlands dominated by rushes and low-profile plants provide significant ecosystem
services. Healthy wetlands, both fresh and estuarine, “fix” or capture carbon dioxide preventing
release into the atmosphere, and mitigating the effects of climate change. Freshwater wetlands
also absorb nitrogen: natural and manmade wetland ponds both are commonly used to filter and
remove nitrogen in stormwater runoff.
Research estimates that freshwater wetlands provide habitat and food for more than 80 unique
animals. Commonly found species include amphibians, such as salamanders, frogs and snakes;
invertebrates, such as snails, clams and crayfish; and fish such as striped bass, bluegill and
sunfish. Small, isolated wetlands, known as “frog ponds,” are especially important for amphibian
populations – and often most at risk of degradation, since wetlands less than half an acre in size
currently are not protected by regulations.
Waterbirds and wading birds are particularly dependent on freshwater wetlands. Resident wading
birds such as heron, ibis, egrets and wood storks (an endangered species) depend on the bay’s
freshwater marshes year-round; they also host significant wintertime bird populations. White
ibis, whose population has declined by about 80% in the state since the 1940s, must nest within 9
miles of freshwater marshes to provide food for their young, as the nestlings cannot tolerate
saltwater species. The loss of freshwater marshes has contributed to declines in other bird
populations that forage primarily in freshwater habitats, such as the glossy ibis, snowy egret,
roseate spoonbill, American oystercatcher, and Caspian, royal and sandwich terns.
Setting Targets for Restoration
A comprehensive assessment sponsored by TBEP documented historic and current extent of
freshwater wetlands within the watershed, using the same 1950s baseline embraced in the overall
“restoring the balance” habitat restoration strategy. (Ries, et. al 2014) This research shows a net
loss of more than 100,000 acres of freshwater wetlands from the 1950s to 2007.
Wetland Loss
Wetland Gain
Overall Change
-153,900 acres
+51,080 acres
-102,820 acres
Additionally, 36,200 acres changed wetland type, e.g. transitioning from a grassy marsh to a
forested marsh.
This work led to the formal adoption by TBEP partners of specific restoration and protection
targets for forested and non-forested freshwater wetlands in 2014, as follows:

The baywide restoration target is 18,703 acres, of which 17,088 acres is non-forested and
1,615 acres is forested.

The baywide protection target is 229,958 acres, encompassing the existing 149,683 acres
of forested and 80,275 acres of non-forested freshwater wetlands documented by the
mapping project.

Targets also were set for smaller basins within the watershed to enable better local
decision-making.
Coordination with Agencies
Because non-forested freshwater systems have experienced the greatest proportional losses,
restoration goals focus on recovering a larger percentage of these. Aerial photographs also
showed that some wetlands classified as non-forested in the 1950s were classified as forested in
the 2007 photos. This may be a result of a natural transition, or because of fire suppression
and/or hydrologic alterations. For example, some high-quality grassy marshes became dominated
by non-native shrubs that do not provide the same benefits as a natural forested wetland.
To encourage restoration of non-forested wetlands, mitigation can be directed to grassy systems
if applicants can demonstrate that they previously existed in that location. This provides both
flexibility and cost-savings for regulatory agencies and permittees, while supporting bay-wide
restoration goals.
Forested wetlands also warrant preservation, enhancement and restoration. Old-growth cypress
swamps in the bay watershed are largely gone; while healthy younger forests are common,
cypress tree are slow-growing, vulnerable to hydrologic changes, and provide critical habitat for
creatures as diverse as the alligator gar, river otter, wood duck, and limpkin.
Freshwater wetlands as part of integrated stormwater management
Wetlands can be an effective component of an integrated stormwater management system. They
provide functional reduction of nitrogen, while enhancing habitat and aesthetics in highly
urbanized areas. Pinellas County’s new Stormwater Manual serves as a model for integrating
wetland protection into long-term planning and stormwater treatment programs to support
multiple management objectives. The manual promotes a suite of best management systems
including enhancement of traditional treatment ponds to mimic natural wetlands.
Large-scale, interconnected greenspaces that include freshwater ponds, streams and wetlands
also can be encouraged as part of development master plans, both for new private development
and community redevelopment.
STRATEGY:
Activity 1. To assist implementation of the Master Plan for the Protection and Restoration of
Freshwater Wetlands in the Tampa Bay Watershed, Florida, encourage SWFWMD to adopt
restoration targets and recommendations as part of the SWIM Plan for Tampa Bay, and
implement priority projects identified in the SWIM Plan. Encourage regulators and planners to
incorporate recommendations from the master plan into their permitting reviews, land use plans
and land acquisition programs.
Responsible parties: SWFWMD (lead for SWIM Plan); partners regulators and planners
include EPCHC, SWFWMD, USACOE, FDEP, local governments
Timeframe: SWFWMD SWIM Plan due in 2017; implementation initiated by 2018
Cost and potential funding sources: $- $$ (SWFWMD SWIM Plan); $$-$$$$ for
freshwater wetland habitat restoration and protection. Potential funding sources include
grants, SWFWMD Cooperative Funds, RESTORE funds.
Location: Freshwater wetlands throughout the Tampa Bay watershed
Benefit/Performance measure: Increased acreage of non-vegetated freshwater wetlands;
increased protection for existing mature forested wetlands
Results: Progression towards achievement of bay-wide freshwater wetland restoration
and protection targets will help restore the historic balance of these critical habitats.
Deliverables:
 SWFWMD SWIM Plan with freshwater wetland targets and projects
 Priority wetland project final reports
Activity 2. Track freshwater wetland gains and losses during regular updates of the Tampa Bay
Habitat Master Plan. Determine progress towards targets, and whether current restoration and
protection goals are appropriate. Monitor implementation of the federal Waters of the United
States rule, which clarifies and extends Clean Water Act protections to freshwater streams and
wetlands. (Rule issued in May 2015; Legal challenge filed in October 2015)
Responsible parties: TBEP (lead), SWFWMD, EPCHC, local governments, EPA
Timeframe: 2017-2019 (Habitat Master Plan Update), then Ongoing
Cost and potential funding sources: $$-$$$. TBEP funding via CWA Section 320
Location: Freshwater wetlands throughout the Tampa Bay watershed
Benefit/Performance measure: Change in freshwater wetland land uses over time
Result: Ability to measure progress toward adopted freshwater wetland targets will help
guide future freshwater wetland restoration and protection efforts
Deliverables:
 Habitat Masterplan Update (2019, then every 5-7 years)
 Maps of freshwater wetlands throughout the Tampa Bay watershed (2019, then
every 5-7 years)
Activity 3. Increase participation and involvement from wetland mitigation bankers in achieving
freshwater wetland goals. Provide technical GIS tools to identify appropriate locations and types
of freshwater wetland creation and mitigation. Highlight economic incentives of performing nonforested wetland mitigation when ecologically beneficial.
Responsible parties:
 Partners to increase participation include wetland regulatory agencies (FDEP,
SWFWMD, ACOE, EPCHC) and private sector mitigation bankers
 GIS tools are available from TBEP. Partners to distribute include wetland
regulatory agencies, TBRPC, local governments
 Highlighting economic incentives (TBEP through Habitat Masterplan Update)
Timeframe: Ongoing
Cost and potential funding sources: $-$$ (TBEP Section 320 for Habitat Masterplan
Update); $ for staff time for regulatory agencies
Benefit/Performance measure: Increase percentage of mitigation for non-forested
freshwater wetlands within the Tampa Bay watershed
Results: Wetland bankers can help achieve baywide and basin-specific targets, where
appropriate and beneficial.
Deliverables: Chapter in the Tampa Bay Habitat Masterplan Update on freshwater
wetlands
Activity 4. Examine success of freshwater wetland mitigation at various time scales and
recommend improvements to mitigation practices (see BH-2).
Responsible parties: EPCHC (lead), SWFWMD, USF, other wetland permitting agencies
(USACE, FDEP)
Timeframe: 2016-2017 (EPA Wetland Development Grant-funded project to EPCHC)
Cost and potential funding sources: $$-$$$; EPA Wetland Development Grant, EPCHC
staff time
Location: Hillsborough County
Benefit/Performance measure: Assessment of success and failure rates of freshwater
mitigation projects
Result: Recommended improvements in mitigation practices will result in more
successful long-term ecological benefits of freshwater wetland mitigation
Deliverables: Final Report, including recommendations
Activity 5. Incorporate creation of freshwater wetlands as an option for stormwater treatment.
Encourage other local governments to adopt a BMP guide similar to the Pinellas County
Stormwater Manual, to expand opportunities for wetland protection and creation in urbanized
areas.
Responsible parties: Pinellas County (lead), other local governments
Timeframe: Pinellas County manual to be completed in 2016; Stormwater Manuals for
other local governments initiated by 2018.
Cost and potential funding sources: $-$$. Pinellas County manual funded by EPA
Wetland Development Grant and Pinellas County funds. Other potential funding sources
include grants, local government stormwater funds.
Benefit/Performance measure: Stormwater manuals incorporating freshwater wetlands
as an option for stormwater treatment.
Results: Enhanced restoration and creation of freshwater wetland systems in urban areas
where natural wetlands are lacking.
Deliverables: Pinellas County Stormwater Manual
Accomplishments for BH-10
BH-10 Implement the Tampa Bay Freshwater Wetland Habitat Masterplan
New Action
1996-2006
Action Title: None.
2006-2016
Action Title: None.
TBEP played a role in the following:
 Funded the mapping of historic and present day freshwater wetland habitats throughout
the Tampa Bay watershed, and developed recommendations for freshwater wetland
habitat goals (also see BH-10). TBEP Technical Reports #10-12 and 05-14.
 TBEP Policy Board adopted numeric freshwater wetland targets for the major drainage
basins in 2014.
 The Tampa Bay Environmental Restoration Fund awarded funds to restore hydrologic
functions in 1600 acres of freshwater wetlands in Manatee County.
 EPA CMB funded an evaluation of green infrastructure inconsistencies and barriers in
code and guidance for Hillsborough County, including Action Items. TBEP Technical
Report #08-14.