now under strict control; although permitted dredging continues, 
protective measures exist to minimize loss that is not "for public 
benefit". Water quality is considered the primary and continuing limit 
to seagrass distribution in the bay. Loss of seagrass has generally 
occurred throughout the bay, but the most significant losses have 
occurred in Boca Ciega Bay and the upper portion of Tampa Bay. In Boca 
Ciega Bay, shallow seagrass meadows were dredged into massive fill areas 
for residential and commercial development. Simon (1974), citing other 
researchers, indicates that loss of Boca Ciega Bay bottom destroyed a 
standing crop of 1,133 metric tons of seagrass and in annual production; 
25,841 metric tons of seagrass; 73 metric tons of fisheries products; and 
1,091 metric tons of associated infauna. In 1968, this translated to an 
estimated value of $160/hectare/year loss, or $1.4 million, annually. 
Simon (1974) estimated a loss in natural investment by 1974, if 
capitalized at 6%, of $23 million. Although these values are opinionated 
estimates, the point to understand is that these are substantial economic 
losses. 
Loss of seagrass in upper Tampa Bay has been caused partially by 
dredge and fill, but the majority has not been due to direct mechanical 
destruction. Figure 2 depicts seagrass loss since 1950. In Hillsborough 
Bay (eastern extension of the upper bay), the loss is 90%. Changes in 
water quality suspected as the causative factors can be attributed to: 1) 
loss of range/forest and freshwater and saltwater wetlands,which act as 
filtering systems for runoff; 2) increases in agricultural area, which 
may increase sedimentation and suspended particles in the water; 3) 
intense urbanization and industrialization, which generate wastewater and 
stormwater disposal problems; and 4) dredging, which causes long-term 
release of fine sediments into the bay environment. With such large 
increases in urban and agricultural development (see Table 1) and 
decreases in those habitats that cleanse and buffer the bay, we can 
expect imbalances and changes to occur within the system as a whole. 
The overall importance of the seagrass community to the region 
cannot be overstated. For perspective, the Chesapeake Bay estuary 
encompasses 3,237 sq. mi. and has 75 sq. mi. of seagrass (2% coverage), 
whereas the Tampa Bay region encompasses 479 sq. mi. and has 50 sq. mi. 
of seagrass (10% coverage). A major issue in Chesapeake Bay has been the 
importance of the seagrass meadows to the overall production in the bay. 
It is readily apparent that this should be a major issue for Tampa Bay. 
FISHERIES 
The Tampa Bay region has historically been a highly productive 
source of consumable fish and shellfish. Indian populations used the bay 
for food and tools. During the 19th century, the bay was a commercial 
fishing area for boats from as far away as New England (Pizzo, 1968; cf. 
Lombardo and Lewis, 1985). The first known fishery lost in the bay was 
the Atlantic sturgeon, with 5,000 lb. landed in 1867 and 6,500 lbs landed 
in 1868. Sturgeon all but disappeared in 1869, probably due to fishing 
117 
