The annual cycles of temperature and rainfall, and the common 
events of red tides, hurricanes, drought and frost, are the basic 
controlling factors for all life cycles in the bay. However, no attempts 
have yet been made to statistically correlate physical factors to 
biological variables in the bay. Within the anlayses of some individual 
studies, distinct correlations are demonstrated. Without these analyses, 
conclusions as to cause and effect in bay processes can be erroneous. An 
example is the general anecdotal observation that water clarity in the 
bay is improving; this is often attributed to improved sewage treatment 
at such plants as the City of Tampa’s Hookers Point facility. Trends in 
water clarity and chlorophyll a (Estevez, this report) tend to support 
these observations. What is not taken into account is the fact that 
several recent winters have been the coolest in 100 years, and rainfall 
has been less than average. Both of these climatological features could 
potentially contribute to reduced phytoplankton populations and increased 
water clarity. To illustrate, Flint (1985), in examining eleven years of 
biotic and abiotic data for Corpus Christi Bay, noted that episodic 
events (floods, hurricanes) stimulated estuarine productivity and thus 
represented a significant forcing factor to the estuary. He stated (p. 
168) that "without the reconstruction of a long-term data set ... these 
perceptions of ecosystem function could not have been developed". 
Unfortunately, we do not have simultaneous, long-term data sets of 
abiotic and biotic information from which to draw similar conclusions 
about Tampa Bay. Although large amounts of abiotic data are collected, 
there has been no similar effort toward the collection of concurrent 
biotic community data. The problems of understanding the role of 
physical parameters in bay processes are immense but without that 
understanding, decisions on bay management will continue to be made on 
the basis of symptomatic, rather than causative, considerations. 
In addition to their role as sources of energy, plant communities 
in the bay are important as habitat for animals. Certain species are 
found in particular habitats at certain times of the year. For example, 
Brown Pelicans seek out the mangrove islands for nesting during the 
spring (Paul and Woolfenden 1985), and young pinfish are found in large 
numbers in seagrass meadows at about the same time (Springer and Woodburn 
1960). Quantitative sampling of fauna has been limited largely to 
benthic infauna in unvegetated habitats. The studies of polychaetes in a 
seagrass meadow (Santos and Simon 1974) and of invertebrates in a 
mangrove forest (Lewis 1983) are two of the few exceptions. 
The assumption is made that the loss of certain vegetated habitats 
has contributed to declines in fish and wildlife in the bay (Hoffman, 
Durako and Lewis 1985; Lewis et al. 1985; Paul and Woolfenden 1985), and 
that re-establishment of these plant communities would restore fish and 
wildlife populations to some higher numbers (Hoffman et al. 1985). 
Though most scientists would not disagree with these general assumptions, 
supporting data are not available for Tampa Bay. More importantly, the 
direction of restoration efforts should have a sound scientific basis in 
order to produce measurable results. 
105 
