conclusions concerning sediment distribution and composition were similar 
to those of Goodell and Gorsline (1961). Doyle et al. (1985) suggested 
that fine grained material dominating Hillsborough Bay surface sediments 
is derived from rivers and urban runoff. In situ generation of fine, high 
organic material produced by the flora and fauna within Hillsborough Bay 
was not discussed. Potential areas of widespread hydrocarbon 
contamination were found in upper Hillsborough Bay and the lower portion 
of the Hillsborough River. The rest of Tampa Bay appears relatively 
uncontaminated. 
During the summer of 1986, the Florida Department of Environmental 
Regulation (in cooperation with Science Applications International Corp.) 
photographed the surface sediments in Hillsborough Bay from May 28 to 
June 2, 1986 (SAIC 1987). A vessel-deployed sediment profile camera was 
used at 200 locations with water depths greater than 2m. Results from the 
report were based solely on computer image analysis of the profile 
photographs, referred to as REMOTS technology. No traditional sampling 
methods were utilized. A series of quantitative and qualitative sediment 
characteristics and processes, including the distribution of successional 
stages of benthic macro-invertebrates were mapped from the photographs. 
The report stated that several kinetic regimes influence the sediment 
pattern in Hillsborough Bay. The shallow areas which are subject to 
scouring have well-sorted sandy sediments, while low kinetic deep areas 
in the central axis of the bay have mostly silt-clay size sediments. The 
REMOTS study also documented apparent high sediment oxygen demand (SOD) 
areas where seasonal hypoxia could be expected during the warm months. 
SAIC (1987) recommended long-term monitoring of potentially anoxic areas 
to determine impacts from anthropogenic pollution and overall "health" of 
the bay ecosystem. Several areas were identified along the margin of the 
2m depth contour of Hillsborough Bay which may be degraded by inputs of 
pollutants, mainly stormwater run-off and sewage discharges, including a 
large region south of the Hillsborough River, most of the eastern margin 
of the bay, and two local areas off the Interbay Peninsula. 
SAIC (1987) concluded that all hypoxic areas in Hillsborough Bay 
are located relatively close to shore near point and non-point sources, 
and that the deeper areas generally lack organic loading and hypoxia. The 
study suggested that intrusion of cool oxygenated bottom water from lower 
Tampa Bay may keep the deeper parts of Hillsborough Bay aerobic. SAIC 
(1987) also postulated that bioturbation from the high-order successional 
stage benthic invertebrates living in the deep areas stimulate microbial 
activity, which in turn, prevent the build-up of labile organic matter. 
The last macro-benthic study in Hillsborough Bay was conducted from 1975 
to 1978 (see Santos and Simon 1980). A comprehensive study is presently 
needed to establish the current macro-benthic environment and to evaluate 
SAIC’s (1987) findings. 
131 
