Coastal hazard mitigation and resource protection in the North Central Florida Region

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Coastal
Hazard
Mitigation
And
Resource
Protection

In The North Central
Florida Region

74@

-@7

-_ @-gtT-,

NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA
REGIONAL PLANNING.COUNCIL

COASTAL HAZARD MITIGATION

AND RESOURCE PROTECTION

IN THE

NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA REGION

PYOperty of CSC Library

Prepared for:

Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
2600 Blair Stone Road
Twin Towers Office Building
Tall ahassee, Florida 32301

Preparation of this report was financed in part
through a Coastal Zone Management Grant
from the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation under provisions of the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended,
administered by the OCRM/NOAA

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council
10-300 S.W. 2nd Avenue
Gainesville, Florida 32601-6294

March-, 1986

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This study identifies and delineates hurricane hazard and
regionally-significant natural areas within the North Central Florida
Region. Based in part on the amount of development pressure occurring
within or adjacent to these areas and their intrinsic natural values,
management programs are recommended for application to the various areas
for the purpose of mitigating or eliminating potential adverse impacts
which could be created by present or future development activities.

To assist in accomplishing this purpose, the Region is divided into five
major ecological zones: (1) coastal areas subject to the hurricane surge
which include off-shore islands and seagrass beds, coastal marshlands
including salt, estuarine, and freshwater marshes, estuaries, and the
upland swamps and associated streams which supply fresh water to the
coastal marshes and estuaries; (2) rivers and riverine systems subject to
flooding and other hurricane-induced hazards; (3) upland areas directly
adjacent to the river system such as upland swamps and forests; (4)
upland areas not directly linked to a river system including upland
forests and prairies along with scattered remnants of Florida ecology
prior to its conversion to agricultural and urban uses; and (5) the
Floridan Aquifer and associated sinkholes, springs, and stream-to-sink
discharge areas.

Within these zones, over 50 areas are identified as being regionally
significant. These areas range in size from relatively small areas such
as Brook Sink located in Bradford County, to areas covering vast
stretches of land such as the coastal marsh and associated freshwater
wetlands which occupy significant portions of Dixie and Taylor Counties.
The areas serve a wide variety of functions such as groundwater recharge,
recreation, habitat for flora and fauna, flood control and hurricane
surge protection. These areas are listed on Table 27.

The study ascertains the degree of development pressure that is occurring
within or adjacent to these identified regionally significant areas. It
is first noted that the Region, like the State, will nearly double its
population by the Year 2020 with some regionally significant areas, such
as the Suwannee River floodplain, developing faster than the Region as a
whole. This section of the study concludes that regionally significant
areas in the Region are threatened by three predominant activities:
(1) the subdivision and development of land for residential uses;
(2) the clear-cutting of hardwood forests and hammocks; and (3) the
filling and draining of wetlands. To assist in determining the type of
management program needed to successfully mitigate or eliminate adverse
impacts created by development or economic activities, the areas are
divided into four groups: natural areas facing imminent danger; natural
areas facing significant pressure; natural areas facing average pressure;
and natural areas facing little or no pressure.

Three general methods are available to the public sector to ensure the
proper use and management of areas vulnerable to natural disasters and
areas of high natural significance. They are public acquisition, public
regulation of the use of privately owned land, and public regulation of
individual actions. All three are not particularly popular nor
necessarily effective. In examining State and local laws and programs
that could be applied for use in either acquiring the area or in,
regulating activities and development that may occurwithin or adjacent
to these areas, the study finds that a vast array of laws/programs
exist. However, these laws and programs were established over a period
of many years, usually to address a specific purpose and, therefore, are
generally not applied to a specific area in a coordinated manner by the
various responsible agencies following a single plan.

Utilizing existing laws and programs available to State, regional
and local agencies, this study attempts to address this deficiency
by developing a management plan which includes four different program
thrusts for application to the regionally significant areas. These
program thrusts include the following: (1) preservation-conservation;
(2) preservation-recreation; (3) economic-production rural; and (4)
urban.

These generalized program thrusts are assigned to the various areas in
combination with overlay zones that indicate special programs which
should apply to all or a portion of the special area. The overlay zones
range in purpose from a wildlife corridor along the Suwannee River to the
hurricane surge zone along the coasts of Dixie and Taylor Counties. When
combined, the resulting programs often include recommendations for public
purchase and the strict management of centain areas and strict regulation
of other areas within the program thrust. In other cases, the program
thrust places few restrictions on economic or development activities and
only applies a few overlay zones to ensure the protection of a specific
resource. Illustration 1 shows the application of the generalized
program thrusts to the various regionally significant areas, while Table
27 provides more detail in terms of recommended overlay zones.

The study concludes with an evaluation of the fiscal impacts that
could be anticipated if all of the areas recommended for public purchase
would be taken off county tax roles.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x

I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

II AREA IDENTIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Coastal Drainage Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Coastal Drainage Basin . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Suwannee River System . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Uplands with Direct Impact on River System . . . 18

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Aucilla River Sinks . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Holton Creek . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . . . 19
Brown Tract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Suwannee River State Park . . . . . . . . . 20
Peacock Slough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Suwannee - Santa Fe Rivers Confluence . . . 22
Wannee Natural Area . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Santa Fe Headwaters Swamp . . . . . . . . . 22
O'Leno State Park and River Rise State
Preserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Ichetucknee Springs State Park . . . . . . . 24
Ginnie Springs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Blue Springs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Uplands with Indirect or No Impact Upon River
System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Pinhook Swamp - Sandlin Bay - Impassable Bay 26
Osceola National Forest . . . . . . . . . . 27
Big Gum Swamp National Wilderness Area . . . 28
Bee Haven Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Hixtown Swamp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Wacassassa Flats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Brooks Sink . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
San Felasco Hammock State Preserve . . . . . 31
Lochloosa Wildlife Management Area . . . . . 31

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CON'T.)

CHAPTER PAGE

Il (Con't.) Payne's Prairie State Preserve . . . . . . . 32
Gum Root Swamp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Newnan's Lake - Prairie Creek . . . . . . . 34
Groundwater Recharge Areas . . . . . . . . . 34
Stream to Sink Recharge Areas . . . . . . . 35
Percolation Recharge Areas . . . . . . . . . 35

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

III DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Evaluation of Development Pressure . . . . . . . 37

Alachua County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Bradford County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Columbia County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Dixie County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Gilchrist County . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 50
Hamilton County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Lafayette County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Madison County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Suwannee County . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 57
Taylor County . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . 58
Union County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Sawannee River System . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Projections and Rankings . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

IV DISCUSSION OF MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . 73

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Government Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Acquisition Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Planning Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Local Government Comprehensive Planning . . 81

V RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Program Thrusts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Preservation-Conservation . . . . . . . . . 83

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CON'T.)

CHAPTER PAGE

V (Con't.) Preservation-Recreation . . . . . . . . . . 84
Economic Development-Rural . . . . . . . . . 84
Urban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

Overlay Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

Overlay Element Descriptions

Program Thrust Designation by Ecological Zone. 94

Coastal Drainage Basin . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Suwanne River System . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Uplands With Direct Impacts on River System 95
Uplands With Indirect or No Impact On
River System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Groundwater Recharge Areas . . . . . . . . . 96

Vi ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED ACQUISITION POLICY. . 99

Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Evaluation Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

APPENDIX

A STORM HAZARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

B BIOLOGIC COMMUNITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ill

C NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA HABITATS AND CRITICAL SPECIES 117

D CRITICAL SPECIES OF NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA . . . . . . 128

E SIGNIFICANT FEATURES OF THE SUWANNEE RIVER SYSTEM . . 131

F MAJOR SINKS WITHIN NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA . . . . . . . 140

G PROJECTIONS FOR SELECTED NATURAL AREAS . . . . . . . . 141

H SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

I MAPS AND COORDINATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

i SECTION COORDINATES AND 1985 TAXABLE VALUE OF REAL
PROPERTY FOR SECTIONS CONSIDERED FOR PUBLIC
ACQUISITION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CON'T.)

CHAPTER PAGE

FOOTNOTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

1 Population by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . 38

2 Population Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

3 Alachua County Development by Regionally Significant Area . . . 42

4 Bradford County Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . . . . 44

5 Columbia County Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . . . . 45

6 Dixie County Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . . . . . 49

7 Dixie County Development: Suwannee River Corridor by Decade . 50

8 Gilchrist County Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . . . 51

9 Hamilton County Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . . . . 54

10 Lafayette County Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . . . 55

11 Madison County Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . . . . 56

12 Suwannee County Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . .. . . 58

13 Taylor county Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . . . . . 60

14 Union County Development by Natural Area . . . . . . . . . . . 61

15 Santa Fe River Corridor Development by Decade . . . . . . . . . 63

16 Suwannee River Corridor Development by Decade . . . . . . . . . 63

17 Santa Fe River Corridor Identified Lots Adjacent to River . . . 64

18 Santa Fe River Corridor Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

19 Suwannee River Corridor Identified Lots Adjacent to River . . . 65

20 Suwannee River Corridor Development by County . . . . . . . . . 66

21 Natural Areas Facing Imminent Danger . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

22 Natural Areas Facing Significant Pressure . . . . . . . . . . 69

23 Natural Areas Facing Average Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

vii

LIST OF TABLES (CON'T.)

TABLE PAGE

24 Natural Areas Facing Little or No Pressure . . . . . . . . . . 71

25 Urban Areas Located Within or Adjacent to Regionally
Significant Natural Areas by Ecological Zone, Including Urban
Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
26 Overlay Elements by Program Thrust ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

27 Recommended Management Program for Areas by Ecological Zone. 97

28 1985 Millage Rates and Estimated First Year Lost Operating
Revenues for Affected County Governments and Local School
Districts in Dollar Amounts and Percentage of Countywide
Taxable Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

29 Changes in Taxable Value and Resulting Tax Revenues as a
Result of Increased Taxable Value for County Governments and
School Districts, 1980 - 1985 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

30 First Year Projected Increase in County Government Operating
Revenues Due to Increases in Taxable Value Minus Revenues
Generated by Lands Proposed For Acquisitions . . . . . . . . . 102

31 First Year Projected Increase in School District Operating
Revenues Due to Increases in Taxable Value Minus Revenues
Generated by Lands Propos ed For Acquisitions . . . . . . . . . 103

C-1 Critical Species Found in North Central Florida . . . . . . . . 118

C-2 North Florida Habitat Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

C-3 Number of Vertebrate Species Using 14 N Florida Habitat Types. 120

C-4 Number of Species Using No More Than 3 Habitat Types . . . . . 121

C-5 Number of Critical North Central Florida Species by Habitat
Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

G-1 Current Trends: Suwannee Rive Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

G-2 Projected Development: Suwannee River Corridor . . . . . . . . 141

G-3 Current Trends: San Felasco Hammock . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

viii

LIST OF TABLES (CON'T.)

TABLE PAGE

G-4 Projected Development: San Felasco Hammock . . . .. . . . . . . 142
G-5 Projected Development: Devil's Millhopper . . . . . . . . . . 142

G-6 Current Trends: Payne's Prairie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

G-7 Projected Development: Payne's Prairie . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

G-8 Current Trends: Santa Fe River Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . 143

G-9 Projected Development: Santa Fe River Corridor . . . . . . . . 144

G-10 Current Trends: Alachua Stream-to-Sink Recharge . . . . . . 144

G-11 Projected Development: Alachua Stream-to-Sink Recharge . . . 144

G-12 Current Trends: Columbia Recharge Areas . . . . . . . . . . . 145

G-13 Projected Development: Columbia South Recharge . . . . . . . 145

G-14 Projected Development: Columbia Western Recharge . . . . . . 145
G-15 Current Trends: Dixie Coastal Corridor . . . . . . . . .. . . 146

G-16 Projected Development: Dixie Coastal Area . . . . . . . . . . 146

G-17 Current Trends: Taylor Coastal Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146

G-18 Projected Development: Taylor Coastal Area . . . . . . . . . 146

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Illustration Page

1 Generalized Map of Management Program Thrusts . . . . . . 103.1

I-1 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Alachua County 152

1-2 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Bradford County. 154

1-3 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Columbia County. 156

1-4 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Dixie County 158

1-5 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Gilchrist County 160

1-6 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Hamilton County. 162

1-7 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Lafayette County 164

1-8 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Madison County . 166

1-9 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Suwannee County. 168

I-10 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Taylor County. 170

I-11 Regionally Significant Natural Areas in Alachua County 172

INTRODUCTION

The population of the state of Florida is projected to reach 16.6 million
by the year 2010, a sixty P, ercent increase in population over the 1980
population of 9.7 million. This represents an enormous increase in
population over a relatively short period of time and could place Florida
as the fourth-largest state in the nation. All areas of Florida will
share in this population explosion including the north central Florida
region -- an 11-county area which, thus far, has been relatively
untouched by the growth that has been and is continuing to effect all
other parts of the state.

Today, the region is largely undeveloped and is rich in natural areas.
The region's unique environment is characterized by extensive coastal
marshes adjacent to freshwater swamps extending great distances inland,
undisturbed estuaries, meandering rivers which have been mostly
maintained in a natural state, and large expanses of forests managed by
several large paper companies. The current population of the 11-county
region is 327,836, an average of only 48.-1 persons per square mile
which can be compared to a State of Florida average of 202 persons per
square mile.

According to the projections, the region's estimated share of this
doubling in population is 557,500, representing a 70 percent increase.
What changes in development patterns within the region can be expected
to occur as a result of this increase? Will migration tend toward
coastal areas as it has for the rest of Florida? Will people prefer
rural homesites within or adjacent to the many beautiful natural areas
contained within the region over urban environments? Hoc can the State
of Florida and local governments within the region effectively manage
this growth?

As one effort to address these questions, this study identifies and
delineates hurricane hazard and regionally-significant natural areas,
determines the current level of development pressure within or adjacent
to these areas, and recommends a management plan to mitigate or eliminate
adverse impacts upon these areas (and the people who may choose to
locate within such areas) which could be created by future development
activities.

METHODOLOGY

The first task in completing this study is to develop criteria for the
identification of regionally significant natural areas. This study
focuses on natural areas which are significant due to their intrinsic
values. The values are generally defined in terms of a function these
areas provide the region, such as water recharge to the Floridan Aquifer
or the recreational values provided by a state park. However, to be
designated as "regionally significant" requires their having an actual
or potential substantial impact on the citizens of more than one local
government.

The second task is to develop a management plan which can be used to
direct growth in and around these areas or, in some cases where the
values of the resource can only be adequately preserved by public
purchase, identify those existing programs, state or local, that can be
utilized for that purpose.

The third and fourth tasks are to apply the appropriate management
programs to the identified regionally significant natural areas and,
where public purchase is recommended, estimate the potential fiscal
impact on local government finances when such areas are taken off the
tax roles.

AREA IDENTIFICATION

INTRODUCTION

For purposes of this study, the region is divided into five major
ecological zones. These zones are as follows: 1) coastal areas subject
to hurricane surge, consisting of off-shore islands and grass beds,
coastal marshlands consisting of salt marsh, estuarine marsh, and
freshwater marsh, estuaries, as well as upland swamps and associated
tributaries which supply fresh water for estuarine areas; 2) rivers and
riverine systems subject to flooding and other hurricane-induced hazards;
3) Upland areas directly adjacent to the river system including upland
swamps and forests; 4) Upland areas not directly linked to a river
system, including upland forests and prairies, remnants of Florida
ecology before extensive logging operations, draining, filling, and
conversion of lands to agricultural and urban uses; and 5) The Floridan
Aquifer and associated sinkholes, springs, and groundwater recharge
areas.

COASTAL DRAINAGE BASIN

The Gulf coast and its drainage basin represent the region's focal point
where the Floridan Aquifer, the Suwannee River system, and upland marsh
converge and interact with one another. The viability of any productive
coastal wetlands system depends upon the ecological integrity of its
surrounding estuarine and wetlands system. Therefore, the coastal marsh
as well as its drainage basin is grouped together and treated as one
discrete system.

COASTAL DRAINAGE BASIN

The Gulf Coastal drainage basin, which provides water to many smaller
streams with access to the coast, consists of an area of approximately
1700 square miles. It is characterized by sinks, lakes, swamps, springs,
streams and underground limestone solution channels that store and
regulate much of the runoff before it collects in surface channels.
Permeable soils which are underlain by clays and/or limestone also affect
the amount of runoff which reaches the rivers and streams of the basin.

There are approximately 80 linear miles of coastline bordering the Gulf
of Mexico within the coastal drainage basin. A considerably greater
distance could be measured if all irregularities of the coast are
considered. This coastline is characterized by rock outcroppings, oyster
reefs, island clusters, as well as saltwater and freshwater marsh.
Beaches and partially enclosed bays are rare, while salt marshes line
virtually the entire length of the Dixie and Taylor county coastline,
broken only by streams and very few areas of beach.

The basin is important to the estuarine and freshwater components of
the coastal marsh as a principal source of freshwater. This water is
provided by the Steinhatchee, Econfina and, to a lesser extent, by the
Fenholloway River and Spring Warrior Creek. In addition, significant
areas of the coastal basin drain by direct sheet flow to the Gulf. The
basin is composed of many wetland areas and numerous smaller rivers and
creeks. Further inland are managed pine forest wetlands. Although these
areas no longer support native hardwoods, they still moderate the flow of
surfacewater runoff to the Gulf, releasing water during dry periods and
storing water during wet periods. In addition, the managed pine forests
help buffer and reduce the impact of hurricanes. At the inland periphery
of the basin are two large titi-based swamps, San Pedro Bay and Mallory
Swamp, located in Taylor, Lafayette, and Hamilton counties.

Not all of the coastal drainage area impacts upon the coastal marsh. The
best available evidence indicates it is mostly the area west of
U.S. Highway 19 that continues to play an important role in providing
surfacewater runoff to the Gulf. The highway has significantly altered
the course of surfacewater runoff by forcing flows through specific
culverts and drainage channels. Furthermore, although the headwaters of
the Steinhatchee River are in San Pedro Bay, the river's principal water
source appears to be Steinhatchee Springs, located approximately 4 miles
north of Highway 19. The Fenholloway would be an intermittent stream
were it not for waste water pumped into the river by a wood pulp
processing plant and a wastewater treatment plant in Cross City.2 Both
the Econfina and Fenholloway are similar in that flows become
significantly larger west of Highway 19. Although the entire coastal
drainage basin west of highway 19 is considered a regionally significant
natural area, a discussion of significant features within the basin
follows.

SALT MARSH

The salt marsh appears to average between 1/2 and 1 mile in width but
penetrates several miles inland in some places, most notably at Shired
Island and Horseshoe Cove where Suwannee River and California Swamp
waters enter the Gulf. Submarine meadows form an extensive offshore
community extending out from the salt marsh along the coast two to six
nautical miles offshore (about the 6 foot contour).

Nutrients from the land and sea combine in the salt marsh to produce
more protein than some of the most intensively managed farms in the
nation. The coastal wetland is a rich breeding ground for plant and
animal life and is a primary nursery that supplies commercial fish to
the Gulf. Spotted sea trout, mullet, redfish and others spend much of
their lives in the productive wetland areas afforded by marshes. In
addition, crabs, oysters, some species of clams, several species of
shrimp and other Gulf marine life depend on the salt marsh for food,
protection, and breeding.

Animal species which abound in the salt marsh ecosystem include birds
such as rails, egrets, gulls, terns, and seaside sparrows, all of which
are relatively common to coastal marshes and depend upon that system
for food. The bald eagle breeds in several areas of salt marsh habitat.
In addition to the bald eagle other rare, endangered, or threatened
species found within the coastal marsh include the diamond-back terrapin,
salt marsh snake,'mink, and otter.

Seaward of the salt marsh are submerged lands and their biological
communities. These generally lie below mean sea level and merge with
the salt marsh landward. Submerged seagrass beds constitute the primary
biologic community of the submerged lands. The seagrass beds throughout
the coastal zone are reported to be the most important community of the
inner continental shelf in terms of basic productivity. They also
provide an essential environment for many species of invertebrate and
fishes including those of economic value such as the spotted sea trout,
mullet, redfish, crabs, oysters, and several species of shrimp. In
additions, submerged grass beds supply food to grazing animals, provide
nutrients to the water, add oxygen (during daylight hours) and stabilize
bottom sediments. They are nursery areas for young fish and crustaceans
and are often the source for a-substantial amount of the primary product-
ivity of estuaries.

Plant species in the saltwater marshes are limited to a few species which
occur in large numbers. Very few plants have physical and physiological
adaptations to grow and reproduce in the conditions of salinity and
flooding found in the salt marsh. The Dixie and Taylor county coastlines
are dominated by two plant species, Spartina alterniflora (salt marsh
grass) which forms an almost pure stand in an outer band of the salt
march where is exposed to the deepest an longest inundation by salt water
during high tide. Juncus roemerianus (black rush) is commonly found on
slightly higher ground and covers the greatest area of any salt marsh
plant. With a height of up to six or seven feet, its density slows the
penetration of tidal water into the marsh. The height of Juncus drops
inland as the salt marsh with the salt flats. Only lower plants, such as
blue-green algae, are abundant in the salt flats.

Estuarine marshes can be found to a greater or lesser extent all along
the region's coastline where rivers and creeks empty their fresh waters
into the Gulf. Estuarine marshes are distinguished from salt marsh by
brackish water and lower salinity levels. Estuarine marsh forms a buffer

area between saltwater and freshwater marshlands. Many commercial fish
such as the spotted sea trout, mullet, redfish, and others spend much of
their lives in the productive wetlands afforded by such marshes. In
addition, crabs, oysters, some species of clams, several species of
shrimp, and other Gulf marine life depend on the estuarine marsh for
food, protection, and breeding. Particularly notable estuarine marsh
areas occur at the mouths of the Aucilla, Econfina, Fenholloway, and
Steinhatchee rivers as well as Spring Warrior Creek. The most extensive
estuarine marsh occurs between California Swamp and the Suwannee River.

Fortunately, the environmental quality of the Gulf Coast of Dixie and
Taylor Counties is generally excellent with few major problems. Land in
the coastal region is owned largely by the timber and pulp industry
which, in general, recognizes the natural attributes of coastal marshes
and forests, as well as the ramifications for forest management.

LOWER SUWANNEE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

The Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge comprises approximately
22,821 acres of coastal marsh. The refuge starts at the unincorporated
town of Suwannee and extends eight miles northward. The coastal marsh
here is at its widest in the region and penetrates several miles inland
at Shired Island.

National wildlife refuges were created by Congress for the protection
of migratory waterfowl and endangered species. They are owned or leased
by the federal government and managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. While economic use may be made of a national wildlife refuge,
the economic activity must not threaten the habitats of endangered
species or migratory birds. It is not uncommon for selected timber
harvesting or limited agricultural activities to occur in a wildlife
refuge.

CALIFORNIA SWAMP

California Swamp is located in the southwest corner of Dixie County
between Cross City and the Gulf of Mexico. Its major feature is an
extensive cypress-hardwood swamp. However, a wide variety of habitat
types ranging from tidal marsh near the coast to upland hammocks and pine
forest further inland are found within California Swamp.

The swamp occupies a approximately 63,360 acres. However, the core swamp
and hardwood forest area are considerably smaller at approximately 17,280
acres. There is an abrupt change between the core and the periphery of
California Swamp. The core is bounded by logging roads, forming a very
distinct break with the planted pine forest. The core swamp extends from
Station Lake to the Gulf coastal marsh along Sanders Creek. Its width
varies from five miles near California Lake to two miles further south
along Sanders Creek where the forest grades into coastal marsh.

California Swamp is generally flat, having a relief of approximately two
to five feet and a gentle slope to the south. Drainage is poorly
developed. In the area from Station Lake southward some flow is channel-
ized through Fishbone and California Creeks into California Lake. From
there, water moves through Sanders Creek for the remaining five miles to
the Gulf.

Although numerous logging roads have been established for the purpose of
harvesting within the swamp, portions of the lower regions of core of
C
alifornia Swamp are still inaccessible. Dirt roads are passable to
California Lake and to the few private hunting camps located in the
icinity of the swamp.

Approximately 94 percent of the entire watershed is forested land. The
principal tree species include slash and loblolly pines, black gum, ash,
oak, red maple, and cypress. Excluding the core swamp, the remainder of
the California watershed is extensively harvested. Most of the land is
in planted pine forests. In 1973, the California Swamp area was added to
the Steinhatchee Wildlife Management Area. The swamp has a good
population of deer, turkey, and squirrel. Other wildlife specie s inc lude
the alligator, black bear, raccoon, opossum, mink, and otter. The
salt marsh near the coast is reported to have many varieties of shore
birds such as terns, plovers, and sandpipers. Wading birds living within
the swamp include large populations of common and cattle egret, white
ibis, limpkin, and many others.

The now defunct Florida Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning generally
outlined the entire coastal marsh at the mouth of Sanders Creek and the
hardwood swamp inland along that Creek as-an area deserving preservation
status. The remaining areas of the California Lake watershed were also
designated as deserving of conservation status in management and
development plans.

SPRING WARRIOR SWAMP

Spring Warrior Swamp is located in Taylor County approximately five miles
south of the City of Perry, west of U.S. Highway 99. The drainage basin
comprises approximately 51,500 acres. The swamp itself comprises
approximately 19,840 acres and includes floodplain forests with good
stands of cypress and diverse hardwoods. The swamp is an important
source of freshwater to the coastal marsh. Drainage is provided from the
swamp to the marsh via Spring Warrior Creek. The upland areas of the
coastal hydric hammock vegetation include live oak, magnolia, cabbage
palm, elm, maple, hickory, sweet gum, and others. This habitat is
heavily used by spring and fall migratory birds. Both upland and flood-
plain hardwoods in this area constitute a prime wildlife habitat.

TIDE SWAMP

Tide Swamp is located on Florida's Gulf Coast in southwest Taylor
County. It is roughly confined to the Gulf side of State Road 361 just
north of the Steinhatchee River which forms a border with Dixie County.

The coastal marsh here is heavily vegetated with a variety of mixed
grasses and reeds. The marsh serves a dual purpose as a valuable
waterfowl refuge and a protective barrier from storm winds for an inland
hardwood forest which extends seaward almost to the coast.

Tide Swamp stands as an example of what the future may hold for some of
the region's as yet undisturbed natural areas. Until the early 19801s,
Tide Swamp was noted for containing approximately 10,000 acres of
hardwood swamp and nearly 20 miles of coastal marsh in an undisturbed
condition. Portions of the swamp were cut over for forestry products in
the 19301s. However, a significant portion of the hardwoods in the swamp
have been harvested since 1980.

Tide Swamp has declined as a habitat for wildlife and waterfowl. This
is apparently due to extensive timber harvesting. Before recent
harvesting activities began, the swamp contained a relatively small deer
population. Before 1980, approximately 5,000 to 6,000 squirrels were
harvested every year.3 The number of squirrels currently harvested is
between 1,000 to 2,000. Pre-1980 population estimates of wild hog and
turkey were described as "abundant". Residential and transient duck
populations were described as "large". The turkey population is now
described as "low" and duck populations as I'moderate".

STEINHATCHEE RIVER

The Steinhatchee River which flows from Cooks Hammock in southwestern
Lafayette County to the Gulf of Mexico, forms the border between Dixie
and Taylor Counties. The Steinhatchee is approximately 30 miles in
length and has an average flow of 325 cubic feet per second (CFS).5 The
river is generally considered to begin approximately six miles north of
U.S. Highway 19 at Steinhatchee Springs, a principal source of water for
the Steinhatchee River. However, numerous small tributaries whose
headwaters are located in Mallory Swamp in the southwestern corner of
Lafayette County also contribute to the river. Approximately four miles
downstream of the springs, the river disappears underground for a
distance of approximately one-half mile. From the point of its
resurgence, it is possible to canoe theentire distance to the Gulf
without portage. The river forms an important estuary at the Gulf
Coast.

The town of Steinhatchee, a small fishing village, is located at the
mouth. The outstanding feature of the Steinhatchee River is its
undeveloped nature. Virtually the entire length of the river from
Steinhatchee Springs to the town of Steinhatchee is under one ownership

and remains in a relatively natural state. Many untouched hardwood trees
line the banks. Another distinctive feature of the river is the
extensive tidal flats which front the marsh around the river's mouth.
The Steinhatchee River has a relatively large coastal drainage basin of
approximately 375,000 acres. Most of this is wet forests and titi-based
swamps. The western half of Mallory swamp is located within the
Steinhatchee drainage basin. Excess waters drain from Mallory Swamp to
the Steinhatchee River during rainy periods.

ECONFINA RIVER

Located approximately midway between the Aucilla River and the City of
Perry, the Econfina River has a length of approximately 32 miles with
a drainage area of 198 square miles. The river has an average discharge
of 138 CFS.6 Its principal attractions are its relatively natural state
along its banks and its estuary at the Gulf. Virtually no residential
development has taken place along its entire length. Hardwood forest
lines the banks of the river while numerous adjacent lands contain
managed pine forest. The river becomes significantly wider at the
Gulf and forms an important estuarine marsh.

Water quality of the river and the adjoining marsh is reported to be very
good. The adjoining forests contribute to the quality of the marsh by
filtering the water before it reaches the coast and by acting as a buffer
between the marsh and the forest industry land to the north.
The river corridor is primarily a mixture of hydric and messic
communities. The major ecosystems found on the river include salt marsh,
mixed-pine-hardwood community, pine-oak-palm community, and river swamp.

AUCILLA RIVER

The Aucilla River begins near the Georgia community of Boston, and
meanders 48 miles through Florida terminating at the Gulf of Mexico. The
river drains approximately 805 square miles and has an average discharge
of 436 CFS.7

Forming the boundary between Taylor, Madison, and Jefferson Counties,
the Aucilla River flows through the Aucilla Wildlife Management Area
in upper Taylor County and St. Marks Wildlife Management Area in the
coastal marsh area. The river has been designated as an Outstanding
Florida Water. It provides some of Florida's most unspoiled river
vistas available to canoeists and hikers. The Aucilla River traverses
upland forests of longleaf pine and turkey oak, as well as old growth
messic and hydric hardwood forests, cypress and gum swamps,
beech-magnolia groves, cabbage palm-live oak hammocks, and finally salt
marshes of the St. Marks Wildlife Management Area on the coastal fringe.

Southern bald eagles, osprey, otters, and turkeys can be seen, as well as
smaller animals such as fox squirrels and raccoons. Numerous species
of birds nest or migrate throughout the coastal marsh segment of the
river. Indian mounds, dating back more than 2000, years are said to
be scattered along the banks of the river. Much of the river floodplain
is owned and managed by timber companies, effectively restricting
residential intrusion, and two Wildlife Management Areas provide habitat
for numerous plant and wildlife species.

A four mile section of the river, known as the natural bridge or sink
area, is described in another section of this document. This unique
geological feature, combined with a wide variety of wildlife in diverse
and varied forest settings along the river, qualify the kucilla River as
one of the most unique areas of regional significance in north central
Florida.

SUWANNEE RIVER SYSTEM

INTRODUCTION

The Suwannee River System Corridor is defined by the 100 year floodplains
of the Suwannee River and its major tributaries, the Santa Fe,
Withlacoochee, Ichetucknee, and Alapaha rivers. The Suwannee River
system serves an important role in the region by the linking of inland
wetlands to the Gulf coastal marshes. The rivers also play an important
role in the control of freshwater flooding. In addition, they are the
setting of many natural features unique to the southeastern United
States, including an abundance of freshwater springs, sinks, and
underwater caves. The rivers are also widely used as a recreational
resource for camping, boating, canoeing, skindiving, and fishing.

This report divides the Suwannee into five sections: the upper Suwannee,
or Segment I which runs from the Georgia-Florida border to White Springs;
Segment II which flows from White Springs to the confluence of the
Withlacoochee River; Segment III which traverses between the confluences
of the Withlacoochee River and the Santa Fe River; Segment IV, which , I
extends from the Santa Fe River to Manatee Springs; and Segment V which
extends from Manatee Springs to the Gulf of Mexico. In addition, the
major tributaries of the Suwannee are each discussed separately.

SUWANNEE RIVER

The Suwannee River flows some 288 miles in a southwesterly direction
from the Okefenokee Swamp in Georgia to the Gulf of Mexico. It is the
largest water course in north central Florida and dominates the entire
planning region. The Suwannee forms the borders of seven counties and
drains all, or portions of, every county within north central Florida.
The actual drainage basin extends into Georgia and Alabama. In fact,

4,127 square miles of Florida are located within the Suwannee River
drainage basin. The Suwannee River owes its popularity to its
outstanding scenic beauty and undeveloped, unspoiled nature. The
combination of abundant natural vegetation, the Floridan Aquifer, and
numerous springs and sinkholes along the river make it special.

Unlike many rivers, the Suwannee's water quality is generally better
downstream than upstream. The headwaters of the Suwannee, the Okefenokee
Swamp in Georgia, produces a dark and muddy water flow that is high in
tannic and humic acids from the decay of lush swamp vegetation. Its
major tributaries provide the Suwannee with cleaner water. Downstream
springs also provide the Suwannee with a high quality water source. The
Suwannee is fed by over 50 springs. Nine of these are among the nation's
75 first magnitude springs.8 During periods of drought the springs are
a major source of the Suwannee's water.9 The Suwannee has a flow of
approximately one billion gallons per day at its entrance into the State
of Florida but empties eleven billion gallons per day into the Gulf of
Mexico.10

The Suwannee has relatively few tributaries compared to most rivers due
to the basin's fast draining sands and underlying limestone channels.
Instead of having many tributaries as sources of water, the great number
of sinks and lakes in the region collect rain and local runoff before
well-defined channels are formed. The Suwannee River flows across
sediments formed over a time span of 40 million years. Many of these
sediments, deposited in large deltas, estuaries, and shallow ocean
environments are composed of limestone, dolostone, and other sandy
materials. Geological attributes principally center around the karst
features of the river. The dissolution of underlying limestone produces
scenic rock outcroppings, sinkholes, and the many springs along the
river. This diversification of geologic features greatly contributes to
its scenic and recreational value.

The vegetation along the river is one of the major features of the
Suwannee River's scenic beauty. Its almost unbroken forested banks are
unique in that they contain every principal terrestrial habitat in
Florida. Fresh water marsh and swamp forests occur at its headwaters
while salt marsh can be found river's mouth. Although there apparently
is no plant species unique to the river area aside from ogeechee tupelo,
the variety, size, and geographic location of the several plant communi-
ties are noteworthy.

The river and its heavily forested floodplains provide excellent habitat
for many fish and animal species. Fifty-four species, most notably the
Suwannee black bass and the Okefenokee pigmy sunfish, are found only in
the Suwannee River drainage basin.

The Suwannee is also home to the endangered West Indian Manatee and
Atlantic Sturgeon. The sturgeon have historically been a mainstay of
fishermen all along the Gulf coast. However, due to over fishing, dam
construction, and river pollution their numbers have declined to the

point where it is considered an endangered specie on the Mississippi
River. The Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission imposed a
suspension on the fishing of the Atlantic Sturgeon in 1984. The Suwannee
may well represent one of the last spawning grounds for the Atlantic
Sturgeon. In the spring, adult sturgeon migrate upstream from their
wintering grounds over the continental shelf to spawning areas in shallow
portions of the Suwannee. Adults return to the Gulf of Mexico in the
fall. Juveniles may remain in fresh or brackish water for 3 to 5 years
although they may participate in prespawning runs as early as age one.11
West Indian manatees can be found in the lower Suwannee River during the
warmer months of the year. During the winter months, they concentrate at
Manatee Springs, one of six natural, warm water refuges for this
endangered specie within the state.12

Thirty-nine species of amphibians, 73 species and subspecies of reptiles,
232 species and subspecies of birds, and 42 species and subspecies of
mammals are known to be present within the Suwannee River floodplain.13
This large number of species may be accounted for in part by the diverse
and undeveloped habitat that is present. The river also forms an
important dividing line which abruptly terminates the range of a number
of species. Some life forms such as the alligator snapping turtle, wood
thrush and marsh hawk reach their southern and eastern limits on the
northeast bank of the Suwannee. Other species reach their westerly and
northerly limits at the river including the Florida crow and the Florida
black bass.14 Forested areas along the river support, as the principal
large upland species, white-tailed deer and wild turkey. In addition,
black bear can be found in small numbers. Small game species that can
be found in the watershed include bobwhite quail, mourning dove, grey
squirrel, woodcock and common snipe. The-delta region at the mouth of
the Suwannee has an abundant habitat for waterfowl. Numerous duck
species utilize north central Florida. These include mallard, pintail,
red-breasted merganser, black duck, gadwall, and others.

The value of the Suwannee's archeological attributes cannot be
underestimated. A number of historical and archeological sites lie along
the river, including an Indian flint mine as well as evidences of Spanish
influence and activities that occurred during the Seminole and Civil
Wars. Many valuable paleontological finds have been discovered both on
the river bottom as well as on the surrounding lands, most notably near
Bell in Gilchrist County.

SUWANNEE RIVER, SEGMENT I

The upper Suwannee flows some forty miles from the Georgia-Florida border
(river mile 210) to the Stephen Poster State Cultural Center at White
Springs. This river segment is characterized by its numerous shoals and
swift currents. It is used for recreational purposes mostly by cancers,
campers, and fishermen. The Big Shoals and Little Shoals areas are
reported to have the best whitewater in the state. The upper Suwannee is
generally a very scenic and unspoiled segment. The riverbanks are all

privately owned. Public ownership is confined to the Suwannee River
State Park and the Stephen Foster State Cultural Center. The segment
receives discharges from phosphate mine slime pits but the large water
volume of the river appears to preclude significant pollution with
limited development. Surrounding land uses are typically farmland,
forest, and low density residential.

Significant points of interest along Segment I include Algal Beach, Big
Shoal, Agatized Coral, and the Brown Tract-Little Shoals area.

SUWANNEE RIVER, SEGMENT II

Segment II covers the area from White Springs to the confluence of the
Withlacoochee River. The segment is 53 miles in length and is noted
for its many freshwater springs. The spawning grounds of the Atlantic
Sturgeon probably occur in this segment of the Suwannee between Ellaville
and White Springs. A section of the Florida Trail parallels the course
of the Suwannee for the entire length of segment II. The Florida Trail
Guide states about this section of the Suwannee,

Near creek and spring junctions people have found fossils,
Indian articles, and Florida's unique agatized coral.
Striking white sand beaches occur frequently... White
lilies, azalea, sparkle berries, dogwood, and redbud
trees grow along the path, and at the western end there is
an abundance of spruce pine. Many types of animals are
found, including the beaver which leave abundant handiwork
in evidence ... The Suwannee section also has a picturesque
bluff over 130 feet above the water called Devil's Mountain,
named after a peculiar barbstick which grows there.15

Significant points of interest include Bell Spring, White Spring, Louisa
Sink, Indian Flint Quarry, Suwannee Springs, Guinea Creek, Alapaha River
confluence, Holton Creek natural area, a hardwood preserve, Ellaville
Springs, Morgan Spring, Adam's Spring, Wesson's Iron Spring, Florida
Sheriff's Boys Ranch, and Suwannee Spring.

SUWANNEE RIVER SEGMENT III

This river segment is 62 miles in length and includes the area from the
Withlacoochee River confluence to the Santa Fe River confluence. Segment
III is also noted for its many springs. The following significant
natural features are located within Segment III: Withlacoochee River
confluence, Anderson Spring, Greenspan, Charles Spring, two historic
spanish trails, Allen's Mill Pond Spring, the North Florida Methodist
Camp, a pine preserve, Running Springs, Bonnet Springs, Peacock Springs,
Owen's Island, Troy Spring, Little River Springs, and the Santa Fe River
confluence.

SUWANNEE RIVER SEGMENT IV

Segment IV covers 42 miles from the confluence of the Santa Fe River to
Manatee Springs.State Park. Segment IV is noted for its many freshwater
springs and has a considerably larger water flow as it has already
received most of its additional waters by the time it passes Santa Fe
River confluence. This segment also has many public boat ramps and is
heavily used by boaters. Significant natural features along Segment IV
include: Fletcher Spring, Branford Spring, Mearson Spring, Ruth Spring,
Owen's Spring, Royal Spring, Convict Spring, Telford Spring, Perry
Spring, Falmouth Spring, Morrison Spring, Turtle Spring, Rock Bluff
Spring, Little Copper Spring, Hart Springs, Otter Springs, Lumbercamp
Spring, Townsend Spring, Fanning Spring, Bell Springs, McCrabb Spring,
Copper Spring, Big Cypress Spring, the Guaranto property, and the
Kalogridis property.

SUWANNEE RIVER SEGMENT V

The lower Suwannee segment is 25 miles in length and ranges from Manatee
Springs State Park to the Gulf of Mexico. The lower Suwannee serves as
a travel corridor for the western manatee during its annual migration to
its wintering habitat at Manatee Springs,. The segment is relatively
free of springs and becomes increasingly wider as it approaches the
mouth. The river eventually breaks up into numerous smaller streams and
deposits its sediments in the Gulf of Mexico. The Suwannee forms a large
estuary at its mouth. This estuary is a prime habitat area for many
different species of birds, fish, mollusks, and crustaceans, as well as
many different plant species.

SANTA FE RIVER

The Santa Fe River is the largest tributary of the Suwannee, covering
75 miles from its headwaters at the Santa Fe Swamp - Upper Santa Fe Lake
and Santa Fe Lake complex in northeast Alachua County to its confluence
with the Suwannee River in northwestern Gilchrist County. The river has
a watershed of 1,440 square miles. This major tributary of the Suwannee
River, the Santa Fe, has three major tributaries of its own: the Sampson
River, New River, and Olustee Creek. With wierage recorded flows of over
1,500 feet per second, the large volume of surface waters flowing through
the river make the Santa Fe a regionally significant natural area
independent of the Suwannee.16

The forest areas which surround the river can be divided into swamp
forest and hammock forest. The swamp forest has an abundant diversity
of tree species including sweet gum, tupelo gum, pumpkin ash, carolina
ash, laurel oak, Florida elm, red maple, bald cypress, water hickory and
water locust. The intermittently flooded areas of the river swamp show
a preponderance for live oak trees. Of special note, the overcup oak
and river birch species that are found in the area reach their

southern-most limit of growth along the Suwannee and Santa Fe Rivers.
14

A diverse group of vegetative and tree species still exist along the
Santa Fe floodway. The hammock forest normally exists in the higher
elevations outside the floodplain. Typical trees include maple, live
oak, laurel oak, swamp chestnut, sweet gum, red bay, magnolia, spruce
pine, sugarberry, blue beach, and pignut hickory.

Examples of virtually all wildlife species that still exist in north
central Florida can be found along the Santa Fe River. Bobcats and an
occasional black bear may still be found along the river. An abundant
wildlife population including such wide-ranging species as deer, grey
squirrel, turkey, and otter can be also found. Alligators are abound,
particularly in the northern portion. The bird population is fairly
extensive and includes the common egret and heron, the pileated
woodpecker and the limpkin, kingfisher, red shouldered hawk, barn owl,
many species of warbler, and reportedly the rare Mississippi kite.
Aquatic species in the Santa Fe River system consist of a small but
apparently stable species population. This includes more than 40 fish
species and approximately 50 invertebrate species.17

The Santa Fe is in a nearly natural state and receives almost no domestic
or industrial pollution. The most notable attribute of the upper Santa
Fe River is the Santa Fe Swamp. The lower Santa Fe is noted for its many
springs. The area between Olleno State Park and the Suwannee River
confluence is the center of the range of the Suwannee Bass, a species of
very restricted distribution and an excellent game fish. In fact, the
lower Santa Fe harbors an estimated eighty to ninety percent of the total
population of this unique species. The area between the Ichetucknee
River and Poe Springs is an important fossil site.

Important natural features along the Santa Fe include Poe Spring, Lily
Spring, Ginnie Springs, Devil' Eye Spring, Dogwood Spring, July Spring,
Blue Spring, Naked Spring, and Rum Island Spring.

WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER

The Withlacoochee River begins its 108 mile route to the Suwannee near
Tifton, Georgia. Flowing southeasterly, it joins the Suwannee near
Ellaville at Suwannee River State Park. Some 24 miles of the river
lie within Florida forming the border between Madison and Hamilton
counties. The river flows through some of the state's most picturesque
swamp lands. Its varying river channel exhibits such features as sandy
beaches and impressive limestone outcroppings. Several springs feed the
Withlacoochee and add to its scenic qualities. These include Blue
Spring, Suwannacoochee Spring, and Morgan Springs.

The Withlacoochee River Canoe Trail was the first river canoe trail
established in Florida. The trail is maintained by the Florida
Department of Natural Resources in cooperation with the Coastal Plain
Area Tourism Council of Valdosta, Georgia. The trail begins north of
Valdosta and terminates some 56 miles downstream at the confluence with

the Suwannee River.

The river is only accessible by small boats and canoes. Many shoals
and shallow areas severely limit powerboat access. Only one public boat
launch is known. Canoes and other small boats primarily launch at
river crossings.

Approximately 2,120 square miles are contained within the Withlacoochee
drainage basin in Georgia and Florida. The river itself has a recorded
discharge at the Suwannee ranging from 93 to 2,060 cubic feet per second
with an average flow of approximately 1,000 CFS.18

The Withlacoochee averages 150 feet in width and the water is apparently
clean although it has a dark tannic-acid stain. The river has relatively
high, steep banks. Owing to the fairly resistant nature of the limestone
throughout the area, these banks are often sheer, thereby severely
limiting boat access and serving, in effect, as a means of natural
protection for the river.

The ecology of the Withlacoochee River is much the same as that which
occurs along the Suwannee. Forest types vary considerably along the
river depending upon variations of land character around the river. Oak
and pine are the predominant tree types. The forests along the river's
bank are harvested primarily for pulpwood. Less than two percent of the
stream margins appear to be actively used by the property owners, with
the rest lying in a relatively natural condition. There are very few
areas with residential housing along the river. These are located
near river's mouth at its junction with the Suwannee.

Wildlife species found in and around the river's relatively narrow
floodplain include a year round population of wood duck. Beaver, once
trapped out of the region, have been reintroduced and are active in
contributing to tree damage. In addition, deer, gray and red fox, and a
variety of bird species including the kingfisher, and numerous species of
swallow are abundant. The rare and endangered striped turtle and
alligator are only two of the numerous aquatic species that live in
the river. A fish survey by the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish
Commission identified 31 species including Suwannee bass, warmouth, blue
gill, shellcracker, red breast sunfish, spotted sucker, several species
of shiner, and shad.

Both agricultural runoff and industrial pollution degrade the water
quality and compromise the environmental integrity of the river. The
industrial pollution results from the discharge of approximately 11.7
million gallons per day of paperboard mill wastewater into the
Withlacoochee River near Clyattville, Georgia. Nutrient and dissolved
oxygen problems in the river are caused, at least in part, by these
effluents. Runoff from agricultural lands bordering the river is likely
to be the source of high levels of coliform bacteria and phosphate.

Despite the pollution problems occurring in small segments of the river,
the Withlacoochee remains essentially a unique undeveloped natural river
affording excellent recreational potential. The varied character of the
river itself, in addition to the profuse natural vegetation and absence
of development, create a very impressive aesthetic appearance which
offers a pleasing, and perhaps primitive, river experience.

ICHETUCKNEE RIVER

Located in southern Columbia County, Ichetucknee Springs forms the
headwaters of this five mile long river. This clearwater river is a
very popular location for canoeing, rafting, and tubing.

The river runs past high limestone banks, river swamp, and marsh
shoreline where dominant plant types are ribbon grass, spatter-dock,
coastal willow, and buttonbush. The swamp area originally had several
beaver ponds. However, beavers are no longer present. Animals common
to the park include turkey, limpkin, apple snail, suwannee bass, gulf
pipe fish, and river otter.

The floodplain is primarily composed of sandhills and messic hammock
vegetation. The sandhill community is located in the highest elevations.
Common plants include turkey oaks, sand post oak, longleaf pine, bracken
fern, and wiregrass. Messic Hammock is moderately drained and has a
closed canopy consisting of mixed hardwoods such as southern red oak,
laurel oak, sweetgum, flowering dogwood, and sparkleberry. There is a
small area of river swamp which is poorly drained, frequently flooded,
and has a dense canopy. Dominant trees in this swamp area include red
maple, sweetgum, american elm, Florida ash, and bald cypress.

ALAPAHA RIVER

The Alapaha River travels 125 miles from its headwaters in southwestern
Georgia to the Suwannee River in Hamilton County. The Alapaha drainage
basin contains 1,840 square miles. Only a relatively small portion of
the river, approximately 40 miles, flows through the region. Similarly,
only 140 square miles of its drainaze basin is located in the region.
The river flow averages 1,346 CFS.1@1

The Alapaha is similar to the Upper Suwannee in that it has fairly high
and steep banks and winds through undeveloped forest lands. However, the
Alapaha is unique as it is divided into two distinct parts by a group of
sinks. The river flows continuously in the northern segment year round.
The northern segment flows into the sinks channeling a significant
portion of the river flow underground. The southern segment is
considered to be an intermittent stream. During periods of low flow, the
sinks absorb all of the northern segment's waters. However, water flows
the entire length of the Alapaha about sixty percent of the time. It is
thought that the river waters travel through underground limestone

channels for 19 miles and re-emerge at Holton Creek.

UPLANDS WITH DIRECT IMPACT ON RIVER SYSTEM

INTRODUCTION

Regionally significant upland areas with direct impact upon the Aucilla
River and Suwannee River system include areas which have regional
significance beyond their association with the rivers. Typically, these
areas include major springs, sinks, swamps, and hardwood hammocks
adjacent to either the Suwannee or one of its major tributaries but
exclude areas located within the Gulf coastal drainage basin. These
areas typically have high recreational value or play an important role in
the Suwannee River ecosystem. In the case of springs and sinks, they
represent the best examples of their type in the region. The wooded
areas of the Suwannee represent the last vestiges of a once extensive
native wood forest population.

Upland wetlands are important to the region for natural flood control.
Wetlands also filter and purify water as well as provide a rich habitat
and travel lane for varied wildlife. They also serve as important
natural fire breaks to limit foreet fire damage. Wetlands throughout the
southeast have been vastly reduced by logging, drainage, and
channelization projects. River swamp is an important and endangered
original Florida forest type.20 Three upland swamps impacting the
Suwannee River system, Pinhook Swamp, Santa Fe River Headwaters Swamp,
and Bee Haven Bay have been identified as.regionally significant natural
areas.

Upland wetlands occupy a large portion of north central Florida. Their
dense vegetation causes wetlands to act as a reservoir. During the
rainy season, wetland vegetation absorbs surfacewaters, helping to reduce
flooding along the Suwannee River system. During dry periods, wetland
vegetation slowly releases water, helping to maintain stream flows. This
vegetative growth, enhanced by a ready supply of water, provides abundant
resources both for wildlife and for the forestry industry. It also
provides a constant supply of nutrients which are essential to the
wetlands ecosystem.

AUCILLA RIVER SINKS

Marking the boundary between Taylor and Jefferson Counties, the Aucilla
River remains one of the few unspoiled and natural rivers in north
central Florida. A four-mile section of the river is known as the
"natural bridge" or "sink area". This is where the river disappears and
rises in numerous sinkholes. This unique geological feature, combined
with a wide variety of wildlife in a diverse and varied forest setting
makes the sinks area of the Aucilla River one of the most unique geologic

settings in Florida.

The entire sink area encompasses some 2,000 acres lying along four miles
of the river's trace in both Taylor and Jefferson Counties. In the four
mile stretch below the river's disappearance there are at least 50 to 60
known sinkholes and quite possibly hundreds more.21 Some are simply
limestone chimneys only a few feet in diameter; many are several,hundred
feet across and seem to favor an elongated shape. Areas of both
upwelling and downwelling of waters can be seen in the larger sinks.
Many have a distinct, flowing current.

The origin of these sinkholes may most likely be attributed to ceiling
collapse of an underground limestone river channel. Throughout the
entire area, limestone banks are evident along the borders of all the
sinks, usually forming banks from three to approximately ten feet above
the water's surface. It is reported that during periods of high rainfall
the entire area may flood with river water as well as water from
overflowing sinkholes.

The area along the trace of the river is predominantly a hardwood or
upland hammock. Although there are some pine plantings throughout the
area, the limestone formation very near the surface effectively prohibits
successful beddings and subsequent pine growth along the immediate river
trace area. Much of the surrounding forest is overgrown with a dense
understory, but paths and trails are frequent providing a network of
access roads between the sinks. The area is not well used primarily
because so few people know of its existence. Through the courtesy of
Buckeye Cellulose, it is open to the public for fishing, hunting,
camping, and other recreational pursuits... Numerous woods roads remain as
evidence of past logging efforts. Cattle range over much of the area.
However, the lack of general information about this area coupled with
difficult access to many of its more remote spots has left much of the
area free from serious human abuse.

No information is available on the precise numbers or diversity of
wildlife species. The area is recognized for its hunting potential and
has excellent populations of raccoon, deer, and squirrel. Many types
of birds are apparent, and reportedly, a large number of turkey inhabit
the forest area. The entire region in Taylor and Jefferson Counties
surrounding the sinks trace is either within the Aucilla Wildlife
Management Area or within the Buckeye Cellulose hunting area in Taylor
County.

HOLTON CREEK

The Holton Creek area has been designated as a potential preserve site
by the Nature Conservancy. The area is located on the north side of
the Suwannee River between Holton and Mitchell Creeks, approximately one
mile east of the Alapaha River in Hamilton County. J. Merrill Lynch,
author of the Suwannee River Preserve Design Project, notes that the area

includes Holton Spring and its run to the Suwannee, one of the nine first
magnitude springs on the Suwannee and one of 27 such springs in the
state.22 More importantly, it is one of the few first magnitude springs
that remains in a relatively undisturbed, natural state. The area
includes one of the largest concentration of sinkholes and depressions in
the floodplain.

Perhaps most importantly, it contains the largest and highest qu ality of
old-growth, bottomland forest remnant in the upper Suwannee River
floodplain. The area also contains five and one-half miles of
undeveloped river frontage.

Endangered species found in the area include the gopher tortoise and
Suwannee cooter and also contains the cedar elm, an endangered plant.
According to Lynch, the tract contains the largest known population of
cedar elm in Florida with an estimated 100 to 1,000 individual trees.

BROWN TRACT

The Brown Tract is located on the north bank of the Suwannee River
approximately three miles east of the town of White Springs in Hamilton
County. Mr. Lynch notes that the Brown Tract is the largest block of
natural vegetation that remains on the upper Suwannee River. The tract
contains over five miles of river frontage and includes both Big and
Little Shoals, the largest and most extensive white water rapids in
Florida. In addition to the rapids, the tract is significant because
it contains at least ten natural community types, representing almost all
community types within one segment of the.river basin. Also of note, the
tract contains a sizable population of American beech, one of the
southernmost populations of this tree specie.

Threatened or endangered species found in the tract include a sizable
population of gopher tortoise. At active rookery, one of only seven in
the Suwannee River basin, is also located on the property. In addition,
the tract contains a number of non-threatened wildlife species, including
wild turkey, beaver, bobcat, river otter, and white-tailed deer.

SUWANNEE RIVER STATE PARK

Located 14 miles west of Live Oak and 15 miles east of Madison on the
north side of U.S. 90 in Madison and Hamilton counties, the Suwannee
River State Park features the confluence of the Suwannee and Withlac-
oochee Rivers.

The park comprises 1831 acres of open pine sandhills, rich hardwood
hammocks, and dense river swamps. The banks of the Suwannee in the park
have striking exposed walls of limestone outcroppings, where the river
has cut down the underlying rock over long periods of time.

Typical plants found in the sandhill community include longleaf pine,
turkey oak, blue jack oak, and wiregrass. Typical wildlife found in
the park includes fox squirrel, gopher tortoise, red-tall hawk, indigo
snake, pine snake, fence lizard, quail, rufous-sided towhee, and red
cockaded woodpecker. The sandhills are relatively high rolling prairies
with pines growing on them. They are places of expansive openness, with
wide spacing between the trees and a grassy cover. Original explorers
found miles upon miles of open sandhills with virgin longleaf pines
towering above them. Most of these have now been logged and cleared
for development or agriculture. Some, however, were left to succeed into
hardwoods through the exclusion of natural fire. Sandhills are fire
dependent, and constitute a fire-climax community wherever they appear.

Hardwood hammocks are a very important Florida forest type and are
considered the climax forest of the southeastern coastal plain. Due
to heavy logging and development and clearing for agriculture, there
are very few sizeable areas of hardwood hammock left in Florida. The
wildlife species that depend on it are, therefore, diminishing.

Typical plants of the xeric hammock include live oak, scrub holly,
sparkleberry, turkey oak, palmetto, myrtle oak, wild cherry, and rusty
lyonia. Plant species typical to the Messic hammock include pignut
hickory, mockernut hickory, palmetto, laurel oak, American beautyberry,
Carolina jasmine, dogwood, and muscadine grape. Hydric hammock plant
species include swamp sweetbells, loblolly bay, red bay, sweetgum., needle
palm, buttonbush, as well as many ferns and epiphytes. Typical river
swamp plants include pond cypress, bald cypress, blackgum, sweetgum,
sweetbay, southern magnolia water hickory pop ash, and buttonbush.

The Suwannee River State park provides a rich habitat for a wide variety
of wildlife including bobcat, deer, turkey, gray squirrel, river otter,
pileated woodpecker, wood duck, alligator, white ibis, cottonmouth
moccasin, as well as numerous songbirds, turtles, and snakes.

PEACOCK SLOUGH

Located in Suwannee County six miles north of the Town of Mayo lays
Peacock Slough. The Slough has been declared an Environmentally
Endangered Land (EEL) Project and has been recently purchased by the
Nature Conservancy. The area is a truly exemplary natural ecosystem
containing elements of regional and statewide significance. The natural
area encompasses excellent examples of surface and subsurface karst
limestone features, Including sizeable sinks, numerous smaller sinks, and
depressions. It has one of the most extensive underwater cave systems in
the continental United States and contains a total of 28,000 feet of
underwater passage which have been explored and surveyed.23 The
underwater cave system is widely regarded as one of the best underwater
cave diving areas in the United States. In addition, the property has
important archeological value as an early Spanish mission site.

The sinks and associated aquatic cave system provide critical habitat
for at least three endangered or threatened species of cave crustace-
ans endemic to the limestone regions of Florida. The area also contains
mature, second-growth and old-growth forest stands. These represent four
major natural community types.

SUWANNEE - SANTA FE RIVERS CONFLUENCE

Located at the confluence of the Suwannee and Santa Fe Rivers, this area
extends about 4.3 miles both upstream and downstream from the Santa Fe
River. It also extends as far as the lower two miles of the Santa Fe.
The area overlaps portions of Gilchrist, Lafayette, and Suwannee
counties. It contains excellent examples of various wetland and
terrestrial natural communities associated with the river floodplains.
Four natural community systems are represented by mature second-growth or
old growth forest stands. These include the threatened cedar elm.

The confluence contains the largest active heronry in north central
Florida.24 Nesting species include the great blue heron, little blue
heron, white ibis, cattle egret, and American anhinga. The confluence
is the largest remaining undeveloped floodplain area between Branford
and Fanning Springs.

WANNEE NATURAL AREA

Located 8 miles north of Fanning Springs, the Wannee Natural Area
straddles both sides of the-Suwannee River for approximately 5 miles of
its length in Dixie and Gilchrist Counties. J. Merrill Lynch notes that
the Wannee natural area contains the most extensive remnant of mature,
second-growth and old-growth bottomland forest and floodplain swamp on
the Suwannee River.25 The site is known to contain excellent examples of
at least ten different floodplain-wetland plant communities. It is by
far the largest block of undeveloped bottomland forest that remains in
the river floodplain corridor upstream from Fanning Springs.

The site is particularly noted for its high diversity of alluvial
landforms in the Suwannee River floodplain. Examples include natural
levees, sloughs, backswamps, and ridge and swale topography.

SANTA FE HEADWATERS SWAMP

Santa Fe Headwaters Swamp is located north of Little Santa Fe Lake in
northeastern Alachua County and southeastern Bradford County. The swamp
in its natural capacity performs valuable services to the region by being
part of the headwaters of Santa Fe River, by contributing to aquifer
recharge, and by serving as an excellent and remote wildlife habitat.
The swamp encompasses some 5,500 acres. The major feature of this area
is an extensive hardwood swamp. Approximately 300 acres along the

eastern side of the swamp may be described as a sandhill community
dominated by longleaf pine, turkey oak, and wire grass. The remainder
of the property consists primarily of inaccessible wetlands. The swamp
community is consists of a mosaic of vegetation types including pine
flatwoods, cypress swamps, bayheads, wet prairies, and marshes, portions
of which reportedly resemble Okefenokee Swamp.

The dominant swamp vegetation includes cypress, gum,.and bay trees.
Several small pine plantations occur in the upland portions near the
eastern boundary of the property. Reportedly, there is some logging in
the perimeter. Large amounts of hardwood are available in the swamp.
Although the wetness of the area provides obstacles, it does not preclude
the harvesting of these trees.

Water quality is largely unknown but is probably good. This information
is based upon limited available records and visual inspection of the
Santa Fe River near the swamp. A considerable number of wading birds
have been observed in the feeding ponds and prairies, and reportedly, the
area would be a potentially good habitat for waterfowl and game species.
In addition, three nesting pairs of bald eagles as well as black bear and
wood stork have been observed.

It is expected that those species inhabiting the area around the Santa
Fe River would likewise reside in the swamp. There are no roads or
access of any kind into the swamp. The area is expected to be the
habitat of a diverse and abundant wildlife population due to its
undisturbed nature.

OILENO STATE PARK AND RIVER RISE STATE PRESERVE

O'leno State Park and River Rise State Preserve encompass 10,120 acres
along the Santa Fe River corridor. The property is located within
Alachua and Columbia Counties between High Springs and Interstate 75.
The Santa Fe River enters the park at its northeast corner and proceeds
in a southwesterly direction through the property. The river disappears
within in the area known as the "river sink". The Santa Fe River
travels approximately three miles underground before reappearing in the
highly scenic area known as "river rise". This unique geological
formation is referred to as the "natural bridge".

The "natural bridge" is due to the underlying geology of the park, which
is characterized by a thin layer of quartz sand on top of the Ocala
Limestone Formation. Sinkholes are scattered throughout the property.
Also interspersed throughout the park are areas of common clay which can
be found just under the surface. Lime rock surfaces along the river and
chert, also known as flint or flintrock, is present. Chert was utilized
by Florida's Indians in the manufacture of axe heads, spear heads, and
arrow points.

The area has significant historical interest to the state. The northern
portion of the property is traversed by the Old Bellamy Road. This road
was authorized by Congress and begun in 1824 for the purpose of linking
the east and west coasts of Florida. The abundance of chert artifacts
also adds to the archeological value of the area.

Major plant communities are sandhill, messic hammock, swamp, and'sandy
scrub. Dominant species of the sandhill community include longleaf pine
and loblolly pine. The loblolly pine has been able to establish itself
because of the lack of fire within the community. Other species found
here are the turkey oak, and wiregrass. Dominant plant species in the
messic hammock community include the live oak, laurel oak, pignut
hickory, and swamp chestnut oak. The sub-canopy consists of hollies,
numerous shrubs, and wildflowers.

Areas of sandy scrub are found on the natural levees and the former
floodplain along the course of the river. Due to a lack of nutrients
and dry soil conditions the trees that grow here very seldom attain great
height. Some of the species found here include the sand live oak,
chapman oak, and extensive areas of saw palmetto.

Much of the river is bordered by woody swamp which is inundated at least
part of the year. Some of the plant species in the swamp area include
the bald cypress, river birch, red maple, american hornbeam, and black
gum. Common animals found in the park include the fox squirrel, gopher
tortoise, red tail hawk, indigo snake, pine snake, rufus-sided towhee,
alligator, river otter, wood duck, and white ibis, whitetail deer,
opossum, raccoon, wild turkey, and pileated woodpecker.

ICHETUCKNEE SPRINGS STATE PARK

Ichetucknee Springs State Park consists of 2,250 acres and has a
shoreline of 37,400 feet along the Ichetucknee River (both banks). The
park was purchased by the state in 1970 and listed on the National
Registry of Natural Landmarks in 1972. It is known for its numerous
freshwater springs and is a very popular location for canoeing, rafting,
and tubing.

The river bank ranges from high limestone outcrops to river swamp/marsh
shoreline where dominant plant types are ribbon grass, spatter-dock,
coastal willow, and buttonbush.

The swamp area originally had several beaver ponds. However, beavers
are no longer present in the park. Animals common to the park include
turkey, limpkin, apple snail, Suwannee bass, gulf pipe fish, and river
otter.

The highest elevations in the park are dominated by sandhills. The
sandhill community comprises 30 percent of the park and has well drained
soil with an open canopy. Common plants include turkey oaks, sand post

oak, longleaf pine, bracken fern, and wiregrass. The next line of
succession is messio hammock which constitutes 65 percent of the park
area. It is moderately drained and has a closed canopy consisting of
mixed hardwoods such as southern red oak, laurel oak, sweetgum, flowering
dogwood, and sparkleberry. There is a small area of river swamp, which
is poorly drained and frequently flooded. It also has a dense canopy
which is comprised of red maple, sweetgum, American elm, Florida ash, and
bald cypress.

GINNIE SPRINGS

Located on the Santa Fe River in northwestern Gilchrist County, Ginnie
Springs is actually composed of nine separate springs; Ginnie, Poe,
Lily, Devil's Pond, Dogwood, July, Blue, Rum Island, and Naked. They are
located in an aesthetically appealing woodland setting and are easily
accessible from each other. Much of the plant life here is in an almost
natural state. Large species of cypress, oak, and maple trees surrounded
by a dense undergrowth of natural vegetation occur along both the
adjacent Santa Fe River and the spring group.

Ginnie Spring is a large clear-water spring with depths to 40 feet and
is one of the most popular scuba diving springs in the region. The
underwater view is notable. Devil's Eye Spring is in the middle of
three boils in one of the loveliest combinations of springs in the
state. The spring contains a multi-caved tunnel leading to the Santa Fe
River.

BLUE SPRING

Blue Spring is located approximately five miles east of the City of
Madison on the west bank of the Withlacoochee River in Hamilton County.
Although located on private property. The site is widely used by Madison
and Hamilton County residents for recreational activities. The spring
has gained a national reputation for skindiving and draws visitors from a
very large area of Florida and Georgia.

Blue Spring is one of the 27 first magnitude springs and spring groups in
the State of Florida. It has an average flow of about 78 million gallons
per day. The spring pool is normally about thrity yards wide and some
thirty feet deep. The river that borders the tract is about 50 yards
wide. A clear run travels approximately fifty yards from the spring to
the Withlacoochee River. Vegetation on the property can be characterized
by high pine lands and sand hills on the west giving way to a dense
hardwood forest toward the east and along the river. Approximately 170
acres north of State Road 6 is cleared and in agricultural use. Of the
forested area, approximately fifty percent pine-turkey forest, forty
percent is hardwood hammock, and a small portion is swamp bottomland
forest. The vegetation is generally diverse with many large trees that
contribute to the aesthetic appearance of the site26.

UPLANDS WITH INDIRECT OR NO IMPACT UPON RIVER SYSTEM

PINHOOK SWAMP - SANDLIN BAY - IMPASSABLE BAY

Lying 15 miles northeast of Lake City, extending through much of Columbia
and Baker Counties, and ranging up to the Georgia - Florida border,
Pinhook Swamp is essentially one continuous swamp system It extends from
the Okefenokee Swamp southward to the Osceola National Forest and
westward to the Suwannee River. Covering approximately 70,000 acres
within north central Florida, Pinhook Swamp is probably the largest
continuous wilderness area in northern Florida.

-The swamp includes the area known as Sandlin Bay and those portions of
the Osceola National Forest known as Impassable Bay. It is predominantly
a cypress, gum, and loblolly bay swamp and may be characterized as a
vast, open area that is almost continually flooded. It is interspersed
with dotted pine, cypress, and lesser shrubs in open areas. The swamp is
not as aesthetically pleasing as other natural areas within the region
but has a unique character due to the bleak wilderness quality of the
expansive tree dotted prairie and thick fetter bush and titi-based
vegetation around its fringe.

This predominantly fetter bush swamp is very wet with many peat bogs
and generally has a very rich humus soil. In slightly higher areas
around the swamp, wide belts of pine forests are quite evident. Slash
pines have been, in many cases, planted in fringe areas, but harvesting
has apparently not been on a large scale due to the wetness of the
ground. These fringe areas are typical pine flatwoods which, near the
swamp give way to cypress, slash and long-leaf pine, magnolia, and sweet
bay.

The interior of the swamp is inaccessible except by aircraft or perhaps
by airboat. Only those few elevated, unimproved dirt roads that extend a
short way into the swamp for timber harvesting allow even partial access
to its interior.

Pinhook Swamp is a valuable wildlife habitat. Rare, endangered, or
protected species included in this habitat are the black bear, the
Florida sandhill crane, and the bald eagle. It is reported to contain
one-third of Florida's entire bear population. The swamp has a good
population of deer and turkey, as well as squirrel, rabbit, otter,
beaver, and many varieties of snakes, alligators, and other reptiles.
Common birds reported in this area include the anhinga, many species of
egrets, heron, and ibis, as well as many duck species, including wood
duck. Canadian geese now frequent the area as winter residents.
Drainage of the swamp is very poor. Timber companies have dug a few
canals to drain portions of the swamp. They have done this by channeling
runoff water into fringe areas and off of access roads. However, no
large scale drainage works have been undertaken. Surface runoff
generally flows westerly to the Suwannee River, principally through

Little Creek,'with some runoff flowing easterly to St. Mary's River in
Baker County.

The swamp itself is unqu estionably of regional significance not only
for the ecological values it represents as a wetland system but because
of its immense size. Its size and flat terrain offer a natural degree
of protection that will not be readily overcome by developers and land
speculators.

OSCEOLA NATIONAL FOREST

Approximately one-half (80,000 acres) of Osceola National Forest is
located in northern Columbia County immediately south of Pinhook Swamp.
The other half is located in Baker County. In total, this forest
consists of 157,218 acres and represents the largest federal government
land holding within the region. The higher, better drained areas are
covered by pine flatwoods with longleaf pine predominating in western
one-third and slash pine predominating in the eastern two-thirds of the
forest. The most common understory includes saw palmetto and gallberry.
Runner oak and wiregrass comprise the most common ground cover. Cypress
is the second largest tree type in the Forest. Blackgums, red bay, red
maple, and holly accompany the bald cypress and pond cypress. Creek
swamp type which features sweetbay, blackgum, and red maple occupies
about 12 percent of the Forest. A variety of wildflowers can be found
throughout the forest.

Osceola National Forest hosts a wide variety of wildlife and fish. Game
animals include white-tailed deer, black bear, wild turkey, quail,
rabbit, squirrel, and dove. Non-game species include over 50 species of
fish, 40 species of amphibians, 60 species of reptiles, 180 species of
birds, and 48 species of mammals. The red-cockaded woodpecker, Florida
sandhill crane, American alligator, indigo snake, and Suwannee bass are
among the rare, threatened, or endangered species found within the
forest.

National Forest land is owned by the federal government. The National
Forest Management Act of 1976 authorizes the U.S. National Forest
Service as the management agency for national forest lands. Under the
act, the Forest Service is mandated to produce a continuous supply of
goods and services from national forest lands. Goods and services are
limited to timber, wildlife, water, forage, minerals, outdoor recreation,
and soil conservation. Essentially, any activity which is detrimental to
these items is prohibited in National Forest lands. The National
Environmental Policy Act of 1976 requires the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement for major projects proposed on national
forest lands.

The forest is extensively used for timber production and also contains
economically valuable phosphate deposits. Exploratory drilling during
the late 1960's indicated a high quality phosphate reserve in excess of

100 million tons. There may also be some potential for oil and gas
reserves, but limited exploration to date has shown no deposits.

BIG GUM SWAMP NATIONAL WILDERNESS AREA

Within Osceola National Forest is the newly-created Big Gum Swamp
National Wilderness Area which comprises approximately 13,640 acres.
Big Gum Swamp is administered by the National Forest Service. Wilderness
areas differ from national forest lands in that no economic activity may
take place in wilderness areas. The land and wildlife must be left in
its natural state.

BEE HAVEN BAY

Located approximately four miles east of the City of Jasper, Bee Haven
Bay is found immediately north of Occidental Chemical's phosphate mining
area in Hamilton County. As the name implies, Bee Haven Bay is a bayhead
swamp consisting of bays, dahoon holly, cypress, red maple, and other
mixed woods. The bay is a prime habitat for the threatened black bear
and other mammals. Drainage of the bay is by Rock Creek into the
Suwannee River. The bay contains several species of bay pitcher plants
which is considered by the state to be a critical specie.

HIXTOWN SWAMP

Hixtown Swamp is located between the cities of Madison and Greenville
in central Madison County. It is roughly confined on the north by
U. S. Highway 90 and on the south by Interstate 10. Hixtown Swamp
comprises approximately 15,000 acres. It is listed by the National Park
Service as a potential addition to the National Register of Natural
Landmarks.

The swamp is a wide expanse of wetlands broken up by peninsulas, islands,
and cypress stands. It is surrounded by considerably higher rolling
country. The highlands surrounding the swamp often reach elevations
that are approximately 50 feet higher than the swamp. It is considered
to be the most extensive, undisturbed cypress swamp still found in
northern Florida. Many of the islands of pond and bald cypress cut
around 1900 have now returned to sizeable trees of 12 to 18 inches in
diameter. The luxuriant undergrowth includes many species commonly found
in more northern areas. Therefore, the swamp is totally different from
the semi-tropical aspects of cypress swamps.found in south Florida.

Despite the construction of Interstate 10, Hixtown Swamp has retained
most of this rare primitive character. This is due, in part, to
conservative construction practices. A provision was made for the flow
of water underneath the highway through a series of culverts. However,
no similar provision was made for'the safe movement of wildlife.

Nevertheless, a rich diversity of wildlife occurs within the swamp. The
area is considered to represent one of north Florida's heaviest
concentrations of wildlife. In addition to the alligator, other large
species include otter, raccoon, wildcat, deer, fox, and possibly even
black bear.

Wading birds are abundant, including several rare and endangered species.
These are the white ibis, American egret, sandhill crane, great blue
heron, Louisiana heron, little green heron, little blue heron, the least
bittern, the common bittern, the limpkin, a great number of other duck
species, black and turkey vulture, osprey, bald eagle and the endangered
wood stork.27

The highlands surrounding the swamp are largely devoted to farming and
cattle grazing. A small amount of pulp cutting and some cypress
timbering occurs in the fringe areas. However, there appears to be no
large-scale tree harvesting at the present time. Pastures abutting the
swamp, when dry, are utilized by domestic cattle. The adjacent waters of
the swamp often provide a source of drinking water to such animals.

Cypress and bottomland hardwoods predominate the isolated hammock
islands. They are also found in low areas bordering the swamp. Many of
the plant species that occur in the fringe area include spruce, slash,
loblolly and longleaf pines, bottomland gums, as well as many varieties
of oak, magnolia, and willow. The dense understory consists of way
myrtle, sea myrtle, elderberry, green briar, sumac, and wild plum.

In terms of aquatic vegetation, the swamp has been reported to be one
of the most productive wetlands in all of,.north Florida. The dominant
aquatic vegetation in the swamp is maidencane. However, associated
species are abundant and consist of frogbit, floating hear, wampee,
pickerel weed, cow tongue, golden club, dotted smartweed, watershield,
water lily, and a variety of aquatic grasses.

Drainage in the marsh is generally in a southeasterly direction with
one small stream, Sundown Creek, carrying a majority of the outflow for
the area. Several other culverts running beneath I-10 transmit water
to southern portions of the swamp.

WACASSASSA FLATS

Occupying 61,440 acres, Wacassassa Flats forms the spi ne of Gilchrist
county. The Flats are an intermittent wetland which begins about one
and one-half miles south of the Suwannee River in the center of the
county and continues to the Levy County border. The principal feature
of Wacassassa Flats is Wacassassa Creek, whose headwaters are found in
southern Gilchrist County. The Flats are part of a larger wetlands
system which traverses Levy County and empties to the Gulf of Mexico at
Wacassassa Bay.

The Floridan Aquifer comes very close to the surface in the flats.
During the rainy season, waters in the aquifer build up sufficient
pressure to spill out of the many sinkholes and ponds scattered
throughout the Flats to inundate the area. Because the aquifer is so
close to the surface and because of many small sinkholes in the area, it
is very easy to contaminate the Floridan Aquifer in Wacassassa Flats.

BROOKS SINK

Brooks sink is located within a privately owned and managed pine forest
approximately four miles east of the Town of Brooker in Bradford County.
The natural character of the sink is said to rival that of Devil's
Millhopper. It is located in a small, well-maintained area of natural
vegetation within an eight square mile area of planted pine forest It is
closed to the public. Although in the midst of an intensively managed
pine forest, the immediate surroundings of the sink, approximately
ten acres, have not been harvested.

The value of Brooks Sink lies primarily in its significance as a site
for geologic study. The area is known for its excellent exposures of
soil and rock strata, particularly of the phosphatic Hawthorne
formation. The relatively small, natural forest surrounding the sink
contributes to the aesthetic appeal of the site.

The sink itself has almost sheer limestone banks lined with large oak
and elm trees which occasionally fall into the sink. The walls are
covered with a variety of moss and ferns. Only on its south side do
the banks have sufficient slope for trees-and shrubs to grow partially
into the basin. The sink is approximately 85 feet deep and greater than
400 feet in diameter. A deep gully has been eroded into the southeast
side of the sink draining some 600 acres of planted pines northeast of
the sink. This channel has eroded deeply into the sides of the cavern.

Almost every common pine species occurs here including slash, longleaf,
and loblolly pine, as well as large oak, elm, and gum trees. The planted
pine forest surrounding the sink area consists primarily of loblolly
pines in various stages of maturity. The retention of natural vegetation
around the sink itself greatly minimizes erosion in the sink and
generally precludes its removal.

Common wildlife in the area include wild pig, deer, and rabbit. A
variety of panfish have been caught in the sink but no other aquatic
specie has yet been identified.

SAN FELASCO HAMMOCK STATE PRESERVE

San Felasco Hammock is located in the center of Alachua County, between
the cities of Gainesville and Alachua. The hammock is renowned for
having the most fertile soil on the Florida peninsula. It is the last
large remaining example of hardwood hammock in north central Florida.

San Felasco Hammock has many steep slopes, ravines, sinkholes, ponds,
scattered swamps, and sand ridges. It contains virtually every species
of plant and animal native to Alachua County. In addition, the hammock
recharges the Floridan Aquifer. Surfacewater runoff is transported
into the hammock via Turkey Creek and Blue's Creek.

The hammock comprises approximately 10,240 acres of wild forest land with
some pasture land on its northern edge. Most of the forest has been
selectively logged at one time or another during the 20 years previous to
its purchase by the state. However, the select.ive cutting does not
appear to have caused any permanent damage.

San Felasco Hammock has direct recharge to underground aquifers. The
water quality of Blues Creek is especially important to the health of the
hammock and the water quality of underground aquifers.

San Felasco Hammock was the first property purchased under the State
Environmentally Endangered Lands program in August of 1974 and was placed
on the National Registry of Natural Landmarks in 1975.

DEVIL'S MILLHOPPER STATE-GEOLOGIC SITE

The Devil's Millhopper is a large sinkhole located north of Gainesville
in Alachua County. The bowl shaped sink, one of the largest in the
state, measures 500 feet across and approximately 120 in depth.
Currently owned and managed by the Florida Department of Natural
Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, the Devil's Millhopper was
registered as a National Landmark by the National Park Service in 1976.

Because of its depth, the sinkhole creates a gradation of
micro-ecosystems, each with its own biotic community. In addition to
its unique ecological features, the exposed slopes of the sinkhole
reveal a slice of Florida's fossil and geologic record.

LOCHLOOSA WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA

The Lochloosa Wildlife Management Area is located in southeastern Alachua
County and comprises approximately 31,000 acres. It includes Lake
Lochloosa, a small portion of Orange Lake, and the River Styx Rookery.
It is on the state's Environmentally Endangered Lands list and has been
proposed for purchase as a state forest.

Lochloosa Forest forms the habitat for several endangered species.
Approximately 16 active bald eagle nests can be found in the area* 28
The River Styx Rookery,located within the wildlife management area,
contains one of the two most important wood stork colonies in northern
Florida. Between 100 and 125 nesting pairs of wood stork, recognized
as an endangered specie, nest in the large cypress trees of the
Rookery.29 Since the 1930's it has been one of the few stable and
constantly productive rookeries in the state. The few colonies of wood
storks in Florida and one colony in Georgia, are all that remain in North
America. In addition, the rookery is known to be used as a nesting site
by significant numbers of ospreys and herons. In 1978, approximately 50
active osprey nests and 12 to 15 breeding pairs of great blue heron
used the area.30

The River Styx flows into the northern tip of Orange Lake in southeastern
Alachua County. The river environment is defined by a broad expanse
of swamp forest and hammock for a two and one-half mile distance from
Camps Canal on the north to Orange Lake on the south. The river's
sluggish trace southward is obscured within a 3,500 acre area of swamp,
forest, and hardwood hammock. The dense, relatively undisturbed
vegetation system gives way to a shallow marsh area at its junction with
Orange Lake.. The inaccessibility of the area has afforded a secure
breeding haven for colonies of wading birds which are otherwise sensitive
to human encroachment.

PAYNE'S PRAIRIE STATE PRESERVE

Encompassing 18,000 acres in southeastern.Alachua County, Payne's Prairie
was acquired by the state as part of its State Parks and Preserves system
in 1973. The prairie is intermittently flooded and serves as a drainage
recipient for groundwater runoff from metropolitan Gainesville. The
quality of surfacewater runoff to the prairie is of particular concern as
the prairie has direct access to the Floridan Aquifer through Alachua
Sink. Payne's Prairie is famous as a wildlife and waterfowl habitat.
State preserves differ from state parks as they are established primarily
to protect natural wildlife and habitat. Access is limited, when
necessary, to prevent adverse environmental damage. State parks are
generally more accessible and emphasize outdoor recreation and camping
activities.

The major plant community of the prairie is marsh composed of herbaceous
plants. The depth of water governs plant species and several vegetative
zones can be found as one moves from the dry prairie edge to the deeper
water in the center. Dog fennels occupy the dry zone as well as maiden
cane, pickerel weed, cattails, and spatterdock. Woody plants such as the
coastal plain willow, wax myrtle, elderberry, and persimmon have invaded
the prairie along the artificial dikes.

The abundance and diversity of animal life in the prairie has been well
known since it was first described by Bartrum. Deer, otter, muskrat,
and raccoon exist in the prairie along with numerous birds, including
herons, egrets, ibises, ducks, and bobwhites. Among threatened species
inhabiting the prairie are the wood stork, Florida sandhill crane, and
American kestrel.

Payne's Prairie State Preserve, despite its size, does not include the
prairie's entire ecosystem. The state Department of Natural Resources is
concerned about development on the fringe of the prairie and would like
to expand its boundaries. An area of land on the southeast side of the
preserve has been proposed for purchase under the Conservation and
Recreation Lands (CARL) program.

GUM ROOT SWAMP

Gum Root Swamp is a natural hardwood swamp covering about 2,800 acres
on the north side of Newnan's Lake in eastern Alachua County. The swamp
owes its environmental value to its large area of relatively natural
swamp which serves as a biologic filter and purifier for runoff waters
for a very large watershed.

All the waters from Hatchett Creek as well as overland flow from a wide
area pass through Gum Root Swamp before entering Newnan's Lake. These
waters are very high in nutrients due to the large amount of surrounding
agricultural land and homes in the vicinity. The swamp serves as a
large filter system by which biological processes wh ich occur in the

swamp convert nutrients in the water to cellulose and plant life, thus
leaving the water in a more purified form as it flows into Newnan's Lake.
The capacity of Gum Root Swamp to assimilate these nutrients has been
exceeded by the large nutrient production in the watershed and has
contributed to the eutrophication of the lake.

A wide, often wet, heavily vegetated fringe area has helped restrict
access and development over the years. The dominant forest vegetation in
this fringe area includes live oak, laurel oak, and red maple. The .
predominant understory species include gallberry, palmetto, wax myrtle,
red bay, blackberry, and American holly.

Cypress and gum trees predominate the swamp while red maple and bay trees
are also abundant. The numbers of sweet gum, wax myrtle and gallberry
increase in density toward the edge of the swamp. Many ferns, mosses,
and lichen are evident as undergrowth vegetation. There is evidence that
some selective cutting of hardwood occurred approximately 40 years ago.
Abandoned, overgrown tramways as well as debris left over from earlier
cuttings have been found among the thick vegetation. The swamp appears
to have nearly regained its natural state and no evidence of recent
harvesting is apparent. Mixed hardwoods of commercial value exist in the
swamp at the present time. However, the inaccessibility of the area due

to its very wet nature appears to be an obstruction to harvesting.

Gum Root Swamp is considered to have one of the largest varieties of
wildlife species.of any area in Alachua County. There are at least two
rare or endangered species living in this swamp. These are a small
colony of wood stork or iron stork and a small number of southern bald
eagle. Other birds which frequent the area include egrets, herons,
bitterns, and white ibis. Also identified in the area are the anhinga,
the osprey, loon, cormorant, black and turkey vulture, and the turkey.
Of the larger animals, deer and otter also inhabit the swamp and its
marginal areas.

NEWNAN'S LAKE - PRAIRIE CREEK

Located just east of the City of Gainesville in Alachua County, Newnan's
Lake - Prairie Creek area occupies approximately 15 square miles. The
lake itself can be described a perched surface water body with an area of
6,007 acres and a mean depth of 1.5 meters.31 The lake obtains regional
significance for several reasons. The northern lake shorelines is the
boundary of Gum Root Swamp. Prairie Creek, located at the south end of
the lake is Newnan's Lake has only one surface outflow. Prairie Creek
drains directly into Alachua Sink and Payne's Prairie State Preserve.

A natural edge of cypress and gum trees in a relatively undisturbed state
surrounds the entire lake. The lake shoreline is The border's of the
lake is a hardwood swamp. Due to its wet shoreline, very little
residential development has occurred next to the lake.

GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AREAS

North central Florida is underlain by the Floridan Aquifer, one of the
largest underground repositories of high quality freshwater in United
States. The aquifer is the single most important natural resource of
north central Florida. It is vital to man as a source of drinking
water. The success of agriculture, phosphate mining, and the forest
industry is dependent upon adequate groundwater supplies.

Generally, groundwater recharge occurs to intervening water table and
artesian aquifers, thus preventing direct surfacewater penetration to the
Floridan Aquifer. Sands and soils filter and purify this water before it
reaches the aquifer. Concerns regarding water recharge revolve around
potential pollution of the Floridan Aquifer. Two methods of recharge are
considered in this report: direct recharge to the aquifer via sinkholes
(stream to sink recharge areas) and through downward percolation from
surficial soils where Floridan Aquifer is near the surface.

STREAM TO SINK RECHARGE AREAS

Waters entering the aquifer via sinkholes and sinkhole lakes do not
receive any filtering or cleansing. In the natural environment, direct
aquifer recharge does not constitute a threat to groundwater quality due
to the high quality of groundwater runoff. However, the introduction of
manmade chemicals, pollutants, and fertilizers to the Floridan Aquifer
could have disastrous consequences and has made the identification and
management of sinkholes and their drainage basins especially critical.

A listing of major sinkholes and stream-to-sink recharge areas with
section-township-range coordinates is included an appendix. However,
this listing is not complete. Additional research should be undertaken
to identify known sinkholes.

PERCOLATION RECHARGE AREAS

Percolation recharge areas are defined as land areas where, large
amounts of surfacewater penetrate surface and subsurface soils,to enter
the Floridan Aquifer. Percolating waters are subject to a natural
purification process performed through leeching.

Aquifer depth to surface and cover soils type are related to the amount
of natural filtering percolating surfacewater receives before entering
underground aquifers.

Percolation recharge areas have as yet not been well defined in north
central Florida and no percolation recharge areas have been identified
in this study. Additional work needs to be performed to identify areas
within the region where the soil type and depth to limestone require
special handling of groundwater runoff in order to avoid groundwater
pollution.

SUMMARY

Regionally significant natural areas are categorized into at least one
of five major groups. These are: (1) coastal areas, consisting of
off-shore islands and grass beds, coastal marshlands including salt
marsh, freshwater wetlands with direct sheet flow connection to salt
marsh, freshwater wetlands without direct sheet flow connection to salt
marsh, and streams and rivers which empty into the Gulf of Mexico; (2)
The Aucilla River, the Suwannee River, and the major tributaries of the
Suwannee which constitute a regionally significant natural area
independent of the Suwannee's role in providing estuarine waters and as
the major source of freshwater flooding; (3) Upland areas with direct
impact upon the river system; (4) upland areas with indirect or no impact
upon the river system; and 5) the Floridan Aquifer and associated
stream-to-sink recharge and percolation recharge areas.

Several identified natural areas are located either adjacent to or in
close proximity with one another, thus creating a regionally significant
natural area of greater importance than indicated through presentation of
isolated segments. These include the Gum Root Swamp - Newnan's Lake - I
Payne's Prairie - Lochloosa Forest area; the Okefenokee Swamp (located
outside the region) Pinhook Swamp - Osceola National Forest area;
the California Swamp Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge area; and
the Olleno State Park - River Rise State Preserve - Ginnie Springs area.

In total, 49 regionally significant areas were identified, comprising
approximately 37 percent of the entire area of the region. In many
cases, additional research is needed to define more precise boundaries of
significant natural areas based on ecosystems. This is particularly
true of state parks and preserves, whose boundaries are based typically
upon land ownership patterns and thus do not include entire ecosystems.

DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE

INTRODUCTION

Chapter II identifies and describes natural areas located within the
eleven-county area which have intrinsic values considered to be of
regional or greater significance to mankind. The purpose of this
chapter is to ascertain the degree of development pressure each of these
areas is facing in order to design a management program which will
ensure that the natural values of these areas can be preserved for the
benefit of both present and future generations.

Development pressure on natural systems can take many forms but in
Florida, it historically has included the subdivision and development of
land for residential and other urban uses, the filling and draining of
wetlands for agricultural production, and specific to northern Florida,
timber harvesting. Thus, the following sections examine the types of
activity that are occurring within and around the identified regionally
significant areas and then, based on this evaluation, projects future
conditions and groups the areas based on the degree of development
pressure each is facing.

EVALUATI ON OF DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE

As noted above, the subdivision and development of land for residential
or second home purposes is one of the major threats to the continued
viability of natural systems. In Florida, it is undoubtedly the greatest
single threat given the stat's extremely high population growth rate --a
rate that is expected to continue well into the twenty-first century.

Until fairly recently, the northern parts of Florida have been relatively
unaffected by this population influx. However, as the southern parts
of the state are becoming overcrowded, many of these residents are
beginning to move to the less-crowded counties to the north. Although
a portion of this movement is generated by the University of Florida and
the state prison facilities located in the region, this relocation of
people within the state accounted for over twenty percent of the net
migration increase of population in region during the 19701s.

Table I presents both historical and projected population for each
of the counties located within the region. As can be seen in the table,
the region's population is projected to increase to nearly one-half
million people by the year 2010, more than doubling its 1970 population
of 107,764.

TABLE I

POPULATION BY COUNTY

PERCENT
INCREASE
COUNTY 19701 19801 19902 20002 20103 1970-2010

Alachua 107,764 151,348 194,765 229,134 260,600 141.82
Bradford 14,625 20,023 25,407 28,104 31,000 119.97
Columbia 25,250 -35,399 43,832 50,203 56,100 122.18
Dixie 5,480 7,751 11,086 .13,890 16,100 193-80
Gilchrist 3,551 5,767 8,890 11,601 13,700 285-81
Hamilton 7,787 8,761 9,332 9,469 10,000 28.42
Lafayette 2,892 4,035 5,336 6,061 6,700 236.17
Madison 13,481 14,894 15,919 16,363 17,400 29.07
Suwannee 15,559 22,287 28,479 32,940 37,000 137.80
Taylor 13,541 16,532 19,461 21,738 24,100 78.00
Union 8,112 10,166 11,304 12,172 13,300 63-95
Region 218,042 296,963 373,811 431,675 486,000 122.89

State 6,791 9,746 12,528 14,671 16,579 144.13
(X1,000)

Source: lBureau of the Census, U.S. Dep't. of Commerce, 1980 Census of
Population.

2
Division of Economic and Demographic Research, Joint
Legislative Management Committee, State of FLorida, "Florida
Population by County April 1st Estimates and Projections",
Official January 1, 1986.

3Bureau of Economic and Business Administration, University of
Florida, 1985 Florida Statistical Abstract, Table 1.84,
"Population Projections: Estimates April 1, 1984 and
Projections April 1, 1987, 1990, 1995, 2000, 2010, and 2020, in
the State and Counties of Florida",(medium projection) pg. 37.

Table 1 suggests that natural areas within Alachua County should
experience, by far, the greatest development pressure. Other counties
receiving significant development pressure as a result of population
growth are Columbia, Bradford, Suwannee, and Taylor. The population
projections suggest a middle range, or average development pressure,
group of counties. These are Madison, Dixie, and Union counties. A
fourth group can be classified as facing little or no development
pressure. These are Hamilton and Lafayette counties., _

Although development pressure at first blush may seem lower in counties
projected to experience lower population increase, development pressure
can still be significant when measured in relative terms.

Gilchrist, Lafayette, and Dixie counties are projected to incur the
largest percentage increases over their 1970 population. These counties
are projected to triple in population by 2010. A second tier includes
Alachua, Suwannee, columbia, and Bradford counties where population
is projected to increase at rates ranging between 119 to 141 percent.
A third group of counties are expected to receive considerably below
average development pressure due to low rates of population growth.
These are Taylor, Union, Madison, and Hamilton counties. However,
population growth will still be experienced within these counties.
Projected percentage population increases within this group range between
78 to 24'percent.

Perhaps a more meaningful measure of development pressure upon regionally
significant natural areas may be found in county population density
projections when regionally significant lands are excluded. This method
assumes that the higher the population density the greater the pressure
on regionally significant areas. The examination of county population
densities exclusive of regionally significant natural areas has value as
it indicates that development pressure may be different than expected
when looking solely at county population counts or growth rates. Table 2
portrays county population densities over time when regionally
significant natural areas are removed from county land area totals.

TABLE 2

POPULATION DENSITY
WHEN NATURAL AREAS ARE EXCLUDED
(PERSONS PER SQUARE MILE)

PERCENT --
INCREASE
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1970-2010

Alachua 164.8 231.4 297.8 350.4 398.5 141.8
Bradford 57.4 78.5 99.6 110.2 121.6 112.0
Columbia 58.9 82.6 102.3 117.2 130.9 122.2
Dixie 32.8 46.4 66.4 83.2 96.4 193.8
Gilchrist 20.2 32.8 50.6 66.1 78.0 285.8
Hamilton 28.8 32.4 34.5 35.0 37.0 28.4
Lafayette 6.2 8.6 11.4 12.9 14.3 131.7
Madison 21.5 23.8 25.4 26.1 27.8 29.1
Suwannee 29.3 41.9 53.5 61.9 69.6 137.8
Taylor 43.3 52.8 62.2 69.5 77.0 78.0
Union 33.9 42.5 47.3 50.9 55.7 64.0
Region 52.8 71.9 90.5 104.5 117.6 123.9

Using this method, Alachua county still stands clearly above the others
sa the most threatened in terms of the largest number of persons per
square mile. A second tier of counties which can be considered to be
receiving significant development pressure includes Bradford, Columbia,
and Dixie County. Taylor and Suwannee counties, due to their large size,
drop to the average development pressure category. In addition to
Taylor Suwannee counties, this class includes Gilchrist and Union
counties. Hamilton and Madison counties are still below average in terms
of development pressure.

This method produces no change in classification when measuring relative
increase in population densities. Gilchrist and Dixie Counties again
stand out as experiencing the greatest relative change. A second
tier of counties again includes Alachua, Bradford, Lafayette, Columbia,
and Suwannee Counties. The below average development pressure group
again includes Taylor, Union, Madison, and Hamilton counties.

This county level analysis has tried to present an overview of
comparative development pressure within the region at the county level.
However, the analysis does not, and cannot, evaluate development pressure
on individual natural areas as county-wide growth trends are not uniform.
The remainder of this section examines the degree of development pressure
on the identified regionally significant areas posed by population growth
and other activities on a county-by-county basis.

ALACHUA COUNTY

Alachua County is by far the most populous county in the region.
Estimates for 1985 indicate a population of 172,900, comprising
approximately 52 percent of the region's population. Alachua County is
the only county within the region which has experienced a continuous
population expansion with growth rates comparable to the state as a
whole. Since its 1930 population of 30,365, Alachua County has grown by
340 percent to a 1980 population of 151,348. Projected population to the
year 2010 is 260,600.32

Census data indicates that between 1970 and 1980, 51 percent of the
county's population growth was due to net in-migration from other
states. Roughly 24 percent of the county's growth was attributable to
in-migration from other Florida counties. Local officials indicate an
increase in the proportion of new residents from other parts of Florida,
particularly south Florida. The county has been issuing an average of
2,446 residential dwelling unit permits per year, roughly 10 times as
many as any other county in the region.

The focal area for Alachua County growth is the City of Gainesville.
Located between San Felasco Hammock and Payne's Prairie, the city is
ranked as the twelfth most populous city in the state.33 However,
approximately 70 percent of new residential development during the 1980's
has occurred in the unincorporated areas, principally in the fringe areas
of the cities of Gainesville and Alachua.

As can be seen in the Table 3, privately-held lands in and round Devil's
Millhopper, Payne's Prairie, and San Felasco Hammock have experienced the
greatest amount of subdivision activity.

TABLE 3

ALACHUA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREA

SUBDIVIDED PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Cary Forest 3,008 51 1.7 1.42
Olleno State Park 2,560 0 0.0 0.0
Payne's Prairie 36,480 2,354 6.5 2.84
San Felasco Hammock 10,240 11090 10.6 1.03
Santa Fe River 41,600 403 1.0 0.60
Santa Fe Swamp 12,160 12 0.1 0.33
Alachua Co. Recharge 51,840 3,738 7.2 1.51
Gum Root Swamp 2,816 0 0.0 0.00
Lochloosa Forest 36,922 378 1.0 0.40
Devil's Millhopper 640 266 41.6 0.79

Much of the new residential development in Alachua County is concentrated
between the cities of Gainesville and Alachua along U.S. Highway 441.
San Felasco Hammock, Devil's Millhopper, and Payne's Prairie are all
located in this linear corridor. The hammock and Devil's Millhopper are
located between Gainesville and Alachua while Payne's Prairie is
southeast of Gainesville.

As Gainesville and Alachua have grown, residential development.has
increasingly crept in on the fringes of these natural areas. Although
all three natural areas are state-owned, development pressure upon their
fringe is a serious concern, particularly for San Felasco Hammock and
Payne's Prairie, as the limits of their ecosystems extend beyond the
boundaries of the preserves. Thirty-six different subdivisions have
occurred in areas adjacent to Payne's Prairie since 1959 consisting of
1,103 lots on 3,135 acres of land. The average lot size for these
subdivisions is 1.61 acres.

Similarly, San Felasco Hammock is also experiencing significant
development pressure. Nineteen separate subdivisions have occurred on
the fringes of the hammock since 1970. These subdivisions have created
1,056 lots occupying 1,190 acres of land. The average lot size appears
to be smaller than in Payne's Prairie, averaging 1.04 acres. The
greatest outside influence on the hammock is an 840 acre tract of private
land on its southern edge. This area borders some fragile areas of the
preserve. Development here could play havoc on the natural systems of the
hammock. Residential developments draining into Turkey and Blue's Creek
could also have an adverse impact on the water quality of the aquifer. 34

Three subdivisions consisting of 338 lots on 266.58 acres with an average
lot size of .49 acres have been developed adjacent to the Devil's
Millhopper State Geologic Site. Although the total acreage appears

relatively sm all, it in fact, rep-resents 42 percent of the section which
includes Devil's Millhopper.

The physical beauty of the hammock and the prairie are likely to continue
to attract development activity. The rate of subdivision activity is so
great that both areas are in jeopardy of irrevocable losses within the
immediate future of the privately-owned lands which comprise the
remainders of their respective ecosystems.

To a lesser extent, the proposed Lochloosa State Forest area is also
experiencing development pressure. A total of 14 subdivisions have been
recorded in this area. These subdivisions have accounted for 950 lots on
378 acres of land. Lot sizes average .40 acres. Only five subdivisions
have been recorded in this area since 1970, possibly owing to its
greater distance from Gainesville and that Payne's Prairie acts as a
natural boundary to the southern expansion of the City of Gainesville.
If development is not contained at the prairies the Lochloosa Forest area
is likely to receive a larger percentage of future county growth.

Another area receiving a significant amount of growth is the Alachua
County Recharge Area. This area encompasses the San Felasco Hammock,
Devil's Millhopper, and the City of Alachua. In total, there are 74
recorded subdivisions within this area comprising 9,367 lots on 3,685.3
acres. Development in this area has largely occurred since 1970, as
55 subdivisions have been recorded during the past 15 years.

The Santa Fe River floodplain is relatively undeveloped. Only four
subdivisions have been recorded in the Santa Fe River floodplain. These
subdivisions a,:=unt for 668 lots on 403 acres of land. The acreage lot
size is .6 acres. Subdivision data indicates little or no development
activity around Austin Cary Memorial Forest, O'Leno State Park, or
Gum Root Swamp.

BRADFORD COUNTY

Bradford County is located adjacent to and northeast of Alachua county.
In 1982, Bradford County was added to the Gainesville Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA). Bradford County ranks as the fourth most
populous county in the region with a 1980 population of 20,023. The
county has the third highest population density in the region after
natural areas exclusion at 78.5 persons per square mile. Between 1980
and 1985, Bradford County population has risen to an estimated 23,400.
Population is projected to increase by 112 percent between 1970 and
2010.35

Three sites in Bradford County have been identified as natural areas of
regional significance: the Santa Fe River corridor, Santa Fe Swamp,
and Brooks Sink. At the present time there is little development
pressure on either area.

Brooks Sink, said to rival Devil's Millhopper in size and natural
character, is located on land owned and managed by Container
Corporation. Statements by Container Corporation representatives
indicate that residential development in the area is not likely in the
near future.

Much of the recent residential development in the county has been on lake
frontage. Residential growth is primarily occurringin the southern half
of the county, most recently in the southeast quarter. However, little
of the Santa Fe River Corridor has been subdivided or developed. Only
one 60-acre subdivision, Santa Fe Acres, has been platted on the Bradford
County side of the river. Only four houses within this eleven-lot
subdivision have been constructed. Furthermore, Georgia Pacific donated
Santa Fe Swamp to the Suwannee River Water Management District in
1985.

Future county growth is expected to continue to occur in unincorporated
areas and generally concentrate around the many small lakes located in
the southern half of the county.

TABLE 4

BRADFORD COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

SUBDIVIDED PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Santa Fe River 16,000 60 0.3 5.5
Santa Fe Swamp 7,680 0 0.0 0.0
Brooks Sink 640 0 0.0 0.0

COLUMBIA COUNTY

With a 1980 population of 35,399, Columbia County is the second most
populous county in the region.36 County population is projected to
reach 57,100 by 2010.37 Census data reveals that 57 percent of the
county's population growth between 1970 and 1980 was attributable to
in-migration from other states. Seventeen percent of the county's
growth was a result of in-migration from other Florida counties. Local
officials suggest that there has been a recent increase in the number of
new residents moving to Columbia County from southern Florida.38

New residential construction building permits bet ween 1980 and 1983 have
averaged 277 Units per year. Local officials indicate a sharp increase
in development activity during the first half of 1985. The perceptions
of local officials are born out by the recent influx of subdivision
requests.

The county can be viewed as consisting of two sections: lands north and
south of Lake City. The northern part of the county is generally very
wet. Land use is generally limited to forestry operations. Land south
of Lake City is a dry, gently rolling terrain used for agriculture.
Growth is generally occurring to the south and west of Lake City with
residential subdivisions appearing in a checkerboard pattern from Lake
City to the Santa Fe River. Eighty-one percent of all new residential
construction permits for the years between 1980 and 1983 inclusive were
issued in unincorporated areas. Ninety-two percent of all single family
residential dwelling unit starts were located in unincorporated areas.

Columbia County contains a large percentage of regionally significant
natural areas. Fifty-four percent of Columbia County has been identified
as regionally significant natural area. These areas include portions of
the Santa Fe and Suwannee River floodplain corridors as well as Osceola
National Forest, Pinhook Swamp, and two large stream to sink recharge
areas.

TABLE 5

COLUMBIA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

SUBDIVIDED PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Osceola N Forest 80,000 0 0 0.0
Pinhook Swamp 89,600 0 0 0.0
Santa Fe River F P 48,320 4,622 9.57 1.28
Ichetucknee River F P 2,880 1,500 52.8 1.0
Ichetucknee St Park 3,520 810 23-01 1.49
Western Recharge 13,440 316 2.35 1.43
Southern Recharge 47,360 5,419 11.44 0.90
Olleno & River Rise 6,400 453 7.08 0.0

There are numerous subdivisions within the Suwannee and Santa Fe river
corridors located in Columbia County. Most of the subdivided river
corridor development is intended for single family homes. Local
officials indicate these lots area principally used as places of primary
residence.

The Santa Fe River Corridor comprises approximately 28 square miles of
Columbia County. Subdivision information indicates that approximately 50
percent of the corridor has been subdivided and that residences have been
constructed on approximately 50 percent of these parcels. Lots are
typically one acre or less in size. Property at the' confluence of the
Santa Fe, Ichetucknee, and Suwannee rivers is particularly developed.
The entire east bank of the Ichetucknee River from Ichetucknee State Park

to the Santa Fe has been subdivided into one acre lots. Furthermore, a
growing area for residential development along the Santa Fe is occurring
near Olleno State Park. Not only has a larger percentage of the Santa Fe
floodplain corridor been developed compared to the Suwannee, but
development activity has been greater on the Santa Fe when measured in
absolute terms. Santa Fe River corridor subdivisions include 3,582 lots
on approximately 5,380 acres of land, roughly three times the land area
and six times as many lots as on the Suwannee.

Development within the Suwannee River Corridor began much later than
on the Santa Fe. The first recorded subdivision in Columbia County
within the Suwannee River Corridor occurred in 1968. Since then, 17
subdivisions totaling 503 lots on approximately 1,080 acres have been
recorded along the Suwannee. Development is concentrated in the
southwestern segment. Approximately 20 percent of the Suwannee River
Corridor has been subdivided within a ten square mile area in the western
segment.

That portion of the Suwannee north of Lake City is practically untouched
by subdivision activity. There have been no recorded subdivisions on
the Suwannee north of the Big Shoals area. Development has apparently
been prevented by wet soil conditions. However, development activity has
gradually been moving northerly along the Suwannee and subdivisions now
extend virtually entire length of the Suwannee from the Hamilton County
line east to within two miles of Big Shoals.

Columbia County river corridor subdivision activity has been increasing
at a rapid rate. Only three subdivisions were platted in the floodplain
prior to 1957. Four subdivisions, comprising 3,100 acres, were platted
between 1957 and 1969. Between 1970 and 1979, twelve subdivisions were
recorded totalling 591 lots on 1,640 acres. Average lot size in these
subdivision was two acres. Since 1980, there have been seven
subdivisions totalling 175 lots on 241 acres. Five of these subdivisions
have occurred since adoption of the county floodplain ordinance.

Lots adjacent to Columbia County rivers tend to be long and narrow to
maximize the number of lots with riverbank access. Lots along the Santa
Fe have an average width of 71 feet. Lots adjoining the Suwannee tend to
be wider, with an average width of 103 feet.

The quality of development within the river corridors is questionable,
particularly along the Santa Fe and Ichetucknee rivers. Residences
bordering the riverbanks tend to have little natural vegetative
screening. The lack of screening may, at least in part, be due to
homeowner's attempts to enhance their view of the river. In addition,
structures built since the adoption of the floodplain ordinance have been
placed on unsightly stilts to prop the unit above the regulatory flood
profile. The combination of cleared vegetation, increased building
height, and one acre density levels has significantly detracted from the
appearance of the Santa Fe and Ichetucknee rivers.

In spite of river corridor subdivision activity, the greatest growth is
occurring to the south of Lake City in the South Recharge Area. This
stream-to-sink recharge area encompasses approximately 74 square miles.
Approximately 8.6 square miles (11.7 percent) of the recharge area has
been subdivided. During the past 10 years, approximately 50 percent of
all county subdivision activity has occurred here. While the recharge
area may be well-suited to low density residential development, concern
exists over the quality of groundwater runoff penetrating the Floridan
Aquifer.

The Western Recharge Area, a 21 square mile stream-to-sink recharge area
west of Lake City, has received only a small amount of development.
Approximately one-half of one square mile (2.4 percent) of this area has
been developed. The remaining land is still, primarily, in agricultural
use.

The county floodplain ordinance appears to have reduced development
activity within the floodplains as only four floodplain subdivisions have
been platted since its adoption. The floodplain ordinance requires a 75
foot buffer of natural vegetation along the riverbanks. All new
construction must be 75 feet back from the riverbanks. In addition, the
ordinance requires new construction to be placed one foot above the
regulatory flood profile. State standards on septic tank construction
also impact upon floodplain development, prohibiting the construction of
septic tanks within the 10 year floodplain and requiring 112 acre minimum
lot sizes for homes which rely upon well water.

Building permit data reveals that 53 new residential dwelling units have
been constructed within the floodplains for the years between 1982 and
1984, with most of the activity occurring in 1984 for mobile home
placement.

It is expected that a most of the development activity anticipated by
the year 2000 will occur n the South Recharge Area and, to a lesser
extent, in the Western Recharge Area. The Osceola National Forest to the
east and generally wet soil conditions to the north appear to preclude
extensive residential development in these areas. Given the difficult
economy faced by many farmers, the increased numbers of persons migrating
to northern Florida from southern Florida, and a general increased demand
for recreational development within the state, it is likely that pressure
to subdivide agricultural land in the river corridors, particularly land
with direct access to the river will increase. It is anticipated that
the riverbanks along the entire length of the Santa Fe will be subdivided
and developed into one-half acre residential lots with an average width
of 100 feet at the river's edge. Furthermore, the Suwannee River
corridor is anticipated to be subdivided from the Hamilton County border
to Big Shoals.

DIXIE COUNTY

With a 1980 population of 7,751, Dixie County has the second smallest
county population within the region and has one of the lowest population
densities of any county in the State. Growth rates since 1930 have
lagged behind state and regional averages, increasing by a relatively
small 20.75 percent between 1930 and 1980. Most of this population
increase occurred during the 1970's. Census data reveals that between
1970 and 1980, Dixie County grew from 5,840 to 7,751, an increase of 41.4
percent. Eighty percent of the increase in population was attributable
to net in-migration. Sixty-four percent of the population increase
was attributable to out-of-state migration while 16 percent was
attributable to other Florida counties. Local officials indicate that a
growing proportion of new residents appear to be relocating from southern
Florida.

Dixie County, perhaps more than any other county in the region, is
at a cross-roads. While historical growth trends and population
densities have remained low, county population and subsequent development
pressure is rapidly increasing. Dixie County's population is projected
to experience a very fast rate of growth. Dixie County's year 2010
population is projected at 16,100, a 193 percent increase over the
county's 1980 population. Dixie County ranks as the second fastest
growing county in the region in terms of growth rate.

Approximately 76 percent of Dixie County has been designated as
regionally significant natural area. Dixie County has the second-largest
share of regionally significant areas. 19.4 percent of the region's
significant natural area is located in Di.xie County. The county's
projected 2010 population density is a low 22.97 persons per square
mile. However, population density dramatically rises to 96-41 persons
per square mile when regionally significant natural areas are removed.

Dixie County currently has 39 subdivisions consisting of 3,163 lots on
2,129 acres within regionally significant natural areas. Current
development activity is concentrated around Cross City, Old Town,
and, to a lesser extent, the Town of Steinhatchee. Local officials
indicate that development activity is increasing. Most of the new
construction consists of mobile homes placed on single family lots.
Local officials indicate that approximately 67 percent of all new
residential construction consists of mobile home siting.

TABLE 6

DIXIE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

ACREAGE PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Hurricane Surge Area 152,320 616 0.4 0.33
Suwannee Floodplain 42,240 2,129 5.0 0.67
Salt Marsh 42,240 178 0.4 0.23
California Swamp 63,360 11 0.02 0.93
L Suw N Wildlife Refuge 16,000 0 0.0 0.0
Steinhatchee Corridor 5,120 183 3.6 0.84
Lime Sink 640 0 0.0 0.0
Drainage Basin 248,800 2,537 0.9 0.63
Freshwater Wetlands 87,040 0 0.0 0.0
with sheet flow to
salt marsh

A large number of subdivisions exist along the Suwannee River, occupying
approximately 23,400 linear feet of riverbank from Guaranto Springs in
northern Dixie County south to Yellow Jacket, where subdivision activity
adjacent to the Suwannee appears to halt. Yellow Jacket is also the
upper limit of the hurricane surge line. Approximately 17.7 percent of
the 25 miles of Suwannee riverbank in Dixie County has been subdivided.
However, a rather low percentage of this land has actually been built
upon. Approximately 30 percent of the lots adjacent to the river have
been built upon. Less than 10 percent of the lots located within the
floodplain but lacking riverfront access have been built upon. Developed
lots typically feature mobile homes and dirt access roads. The average
lot adjacent to the Suwannee River is one acre in size and 130 feet in
width.

Floodplain subdivision activity on the lower Suwannee is a relatively
new phenomenon. Most floodplain subdivision activity has occurred since
1960 in and around the town of Suwannee. Floodplain subdivision activity
in the 1980's has generally concentrated in the area between U.S. Highway
19 and Hatchbend. The county floodplain ordinance appears to have had
some success in deterring floodplain subdivision activity. Many of the
new subdivisions are occurring just outside and immediately adjacent to
floodplain designated areas.

TABLE 7

DIXIE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT: SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR BY DECADE

TIME PERCENT PERCENT AVE AGE
PERIOD LOTS OF TOTAL ACRES OF TOTAL LOT SIZE

pre 1950 183 5.79 34-31 1.61 .19
1950-1959 272 8.60 77.20 3.63 .28
1960-1969 1,517 47.96 269.68 12.63 .18
1970-1979 942 29.78 858-90 40-34 .91
1980-1985 249 7.87 889-09 41.76 3.57

TOTAL 3,163 100-00 2,129.18 99.97 .67

Development on the Steinhatchee and Econfina rivers is very limited.
There are two eighty-acre tracts on both rivers which have experienced
a relatively small amount of development activity. Both rivers are
virtually free of development except for the town of Steinhatchee at
the mouth of the Steinhatchee River.

Excluding the area around the Town of Steinhatchee, coastal development
is generally restricted by physical constraints imposed by the coastal
marsh. Development activity at the towns of Suwannee and Horseshoe Beach
appear to be limited by the availability of land suitable for buildings.
Further development in these areas will require increased intensity of
lands already developed.

Property development pressure in California Swamp is virtually
non-existent. Land use is limited to forestry activities and is expected
to remain in forest use in the future. The major pressure in the swamp
revolves around harvesting the swamp core. Currently, the core swamp has
not been harvested for many years and contains a large number of hardwood
trees.

GILCHRIST COUNTY

With a 1980 population of 5,767 ard a population density of 16.3 persons
per square mile, Gilchrist County is one of the least populated counties
in the state.39 County population growth rates have lagged behind the
rest of the state. Dixie County population grew by 39.4 percent
between 1930 and 1980. The population growth represents only an
additional 1,630 persons. The greatest period of population growth was
between 1970 and 1979 when county population increased by 63 percent.

Census data indicates that 80 percent of the population increase exper-
ienced between 1970 and 1980 was attributable to net in-migration.
Relocation from other Florida counties accounted for 27 percent of the
net in-migration while 64 percent was attributable to out of state

populations.40 Gilchrist County is projected to have a year 2010
population of 13,700. This represents a 285.8 percent increase and is the
highest rate of growth for any county in the region.41

The county has an agricultural and forestry based economy. Development
activity throughout the county is relatively low. Between 1980 and 1983,
only 267 single family units and 37 multiple family dwelling units were
authorized for construction in all of Gilchrist County.42 No city within
the county has a population greater than 2000. Most development activity
appears to be taking place at the Alachua-Gilchrist County line. A large
proportion of future population growth is likely to be spillover growth
in the form of Alachua County commuters.

Gilchrist County also contains a large amount of regionally significant
natural areas'. Fifty percent of the county has received such
designation. The year 2010 population density with the exclusion
of natural areas is 78.02 persons per square mile.

The majority of Gilchrist County regionally significant natural area is
located within Wacassassa Flats. As indicated in Table 8, the flats
comprises 61 percent of the counties identified regionally significant
natural areas. However, as mentioned previously, most of the future
development pressure within Gilchrist County is expected to occur within
the river corridors.

TA13LE 8

GILCHRIST COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

ACREAGE PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Suwannee River 20,480 2,384 11.6 2.0
Santa Fe River 14,976 169 1.1 2.2
Wacassassa Flats 62,720 0 0 0

Approximately 32 square miles of land is located within the Suwannee
River Corridor. 3.75 square miles, or 11.7 percent, of the corridor has
been subdivided. The vast majority of river corridor subdivision
activity has been adjacent to the river. Of the approximately 32 miles
of Suwannee River frontage bordering the county, approximately 42.6
percent has been subdivided. There appears to be little subdivision
activity near the confluence of the Suwannee and Santa Fe rivers,
possibly owing to the regular flooding of this area.

The Santa Fe River Corridor is relatively undeveloped. Approximately
22.7 percent of the 23.4 miles of 'Santa Fe River frontage within the
county has been subdivided. There are approximately 22 square miles of
county land within the Santa Fe River floodplain corridor. Only 55 acres
of the corridor have been subdivided. Homes have been constructed on
approximately 70 percent of the subdivided land.

Earlier subdivisions were platted on the higher river corridor elevations
and in generally more desireable locations. Later subdivisions have
occurred on land less well suited to residential construction.
Generally, the later subdivisions have not sold well. Only a handful of
lots from subdivisions recorded in the 1980's have been built upon.
Older river corridor subdivisions, dating from the 1950's through the mid
1960's, are almost completely developed and now serve as places of
primary residence. Local officials estimate that 90 to 95 percent of the
lots in the'older subdivisions have been developed and of these, 90 to 95
percent are used as places of primary residence. The newer subdivisions
appear to be primarily used as campsites.

Subdivision activity has been particularly concentrated around major
springs. Land adjacent to Hart, Sun, and Otter Springs are extensively
subdivided. However, development activity has been fairly unsuccessful.

Lots within the Otter Springs Estates subdivision were never sold and is
today a privately-owned campground. A few lots have been sold in Sun
Springs Estates but none have been built upon and is primarily used for
camping and as a summer vacation retreat. Hart Springs is a county
park. Ginnie Springs and its associated smaller springs is a
privately-run camping, cave-diving, and outdoor recreation center.

Lot sizes within river corridor subdivisions varies from one-fourth acre
to ten acres. However, virtually all riverfront lots are long and narrow
to maximize the number of lots with riverbank access. The average width
for lots fronting the Suwannee is 152 feet. Lots greater than seven
acres in size appear to have a significantly wider width (300 feet).

There are 38 recorded subdivisions with a total of 1552 lots within the
Suwannee and Santa Fe river corridors. The average subdivision consists
of 43 lots on 68 acres of land. Subdivision activity occurred at a
relatively constant rate in the decades between 1950 and 1980, typically
averaging 10 platted subdivisions per year. Lot size remained relatively
constant at one acre through 1970. Although riverfront lot width has
not significantly changed over time, lot sizes have increased since
1970. Between 1970 and 1979 the average lot size was 2.5 acres. The
average lot size between 1980 and 1985 was 4 acres.

Six river corridor subdivisions were approved during the 1950's. These
subdivisions consisted of 190 lots on 206 acres. The typical 1950's
subdivision consisted of 32 one-acre lots within a 34 acre tract. There
were 10 subdivisions in the 1960's including the two subdivisions on the
Santa Fe River. These subdivisions provided a total of 698 lots on 744

acres. The typical 1960's subdivision consisted of 70 one-acre lots on
74 acres. In the 19701s, there were 10 subdivisions. These subdivisions
included a total of 213 lots on 539 acres. The typical subdivision
consisted of 21 2.5-acre lots on a 50 acre tract of land. During the
1980's thus far, there have been 12 subdivisions consisting of a total of
313 lots on 1243 acres. The typical 1980's subdivision consists of 26
four-acre lots on a 103 acre tract.

The period of greatest river corridor subdivision activity occurred in
the years between 1979 and 1982 when sixteen subdivisions were recorded.
Only four subdivisions have been platted in the river corridors since
adoption of a county floodplain ordinance in the fall of 1982. Only one
subdivision has been platted in the river corridors since January 1984.

HAMILTON COUNTY

Hamilton County, located in the north central section of the region, is
bounded on the north by the Georgia state line, on the east and south by
the Suwannee River, and on the west by the Withlacoochee River. Hamilton
County has experienced no net population growth since 1930. In fact, the
county's 1980 population of 8,761 was 7.48 percent lower than its
1930 population of 9,454. Population projections estimate a 28.4 percent
increase in population to 10,000 by the year 2010.43 This represents
the smallest projected county growth rate for the region. The 1980
population density exclusive of identified natural areas was 32.4 persons
per square mile.

Land use in Hamilton County is similar to. that of the surrounding
counties. The western half of the county is principally used for
agricultural activities. Mining in the southeast, however, sets the
county apart from the rest of the region.

Almost the entire eastern half of the county consists of swamps and
associated wetlands. Most of the timber in this part of the county has
been or is currently being harvested and, with the exception of mining
areas, is used by the timber industry as managed pine forest.
Settlement patterns in the county are typical of' other rural counties
in the Region. Individual residences are scattered throughout the
county, while residential concentrations exist in and around the
communities of Jasper, Jennings and White Springs. No specific areas
have been identified by county personnel as experiencing development
pressure and, in their opinion, future development will likely continue
to be in and around existing communities.

A significant portion of the Suwannee River borders Hamilton County.
The county has control of 82 miles of the Suwannee River, which
represents approximately 21 percent of the total river frontage found
within the region. There are nineteen subdivisions within the Suwannee
and Withlacoochee river corridors and two subdivisions in the Alapaha

River Corridor. According to the County Building Inspector, no more than
five percent of the lots in these 21 subdivisions have been built upon.

As can be seen in the Table 9, privately-held lands near the Stephen
Foster State Cultural Center, have experienced significant development
activity and is likely to continue to experience development pressure
since the Center is located adjacent to the town of White Springs and the
Suwannee River. However, Bee Haven Bay is experiencing the greatest
development threat in Hamilton County due to phosphate mining which is
expected to unearth the entire bay area.

TABLE 9

HAMILTON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

SUBDIVIDED PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Withlacoochee River 16,000 649 4.06 1.0
Alapaha River 17,920 125 0.07 1.4
Suwannee River 38,080 781 2.60 1.5
S. Foster Center 640 167 26.09 0.3
Suwannee State Park 1,830 200 10.93 1.0
Recharge Area 61,440 964 1.57 0.75
Bee Haven Bay 29,760 0 0.0 n/a
Brown Tract 5,760 0 0.0 n/a

LA FAYETTE COUNTY

By every available measure, Lafayette County ranks as one of the counties
least likely to experience significant population growth. Despite
healthy regional growth rates, the 1980 Lafayette County population of
4,035 is 7.5 percent lower than its 1930 population of 4,361. The county
is projected to grow by 131.7 percent between 1970 and 2010 population of
6,700. However, this population growth is roughly equivalent to what
Alachua County is expected to experience in nine months.44 Similarly,
the 1980 county population density exclusive of regionally significant
areas is very low ranks as the lowest in the region at 8.6 persons per
square mile.

Agriculture and silviculture are the principal land uses in the county.
Agricultural activities are concentrated along a north-south five mile
strip of land west of the Suwannee River. To the west of the
agricultural area, the land is swampy and intermittently wet. The
principal land use in this area is managed pine forest, along with some
agriculture at higher elevations.

TABLE 10

LAFAYETTE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

SUBDIVIDED PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Suwannee River 48,000 2,303 4.8 .8

Only thirty-one building permits for new residential dwelling units were
issued in the county between 1980 and 1983. The permits were generally
scattered throughout the county, with no discernable development pressure
in any particular area. Between 1975 and 1985, twenty-seven subdivisions
were recorded. Of these, fifteen are within the Suwannee River
floodplain.

Lafayette County has 53 miles, roughly 13.67 percent of the region's
Suwannee River frontage. There are 29 subdivisions within the Suwannee
River Corridor. A total of 14-84 miles of Suwannee River frontage, 28
percent, has been subdivided. Only a small percentage of river frontage
has been built upon. Local officials indicate that floods in 1984
convinced many of these residents to vacate the floodplain and/or
sell their property. An inspection of several floodplain subdivisions by
reveals numerous "for sale" signs by individual owners. Generally,
river corridor construction has been in the northern portion of the
floodplain.

MADISON COUNTY

Madison County, lying in the northwest corner of the region, is bounded
on the west by the Aucilla River and on the east by the Withlacoochee
and Suwannee Rivers. Madison county reflects the typical distribution of
population common to the rural counties of the region. Most of the
county's population is concentrated in and around the communities of
Cherry Lake, Greenville, Lee, and the City of Madison.

Madison County, like Hamilton and Lafayette counties, actually lost
population between 1930 and 1980. The county's 1980 population of
14,894 is 4.6 percent less than its 1930 population of 15,614. Madison
County growth rates also lag behind region and state averages. Madison
County's population is projected to reach 17,400 by 2010. This
represents an increase of 29.1 percent over the county's 1970 population.
Population densities with the exclusion of regionally significant
natural areas is also low. The 1980 population density was 23.8 persons
per square mile. This it projected to increase to 27.8 by 2010.

Land use in Madison County is predominately agriculture and
silviculture. Forestry activity generally occurs south of Interstate
10, especially in the San Pedro Bay area. Land use in the northern half
of the county is principally agriculture, with some agricultural activity
also in the southeast quarter of the county.

Residential development is widely dispersed throughout the county with
slightly more activity in the existing urban areas. One hundred
eighty-five building permits were issued for new residential dwelling
unit construction between 1980 and 1983. Almost all issued permits have
been for year-round residences. County officials anticipate that future
residential development will locate near the City of Madison, along State
Road 90, and, to a lesser extent, at Cherry Lake and the Town of Lee.

Land subdivision since 1980 has been concentrated along the Withlacoochee
and Suwannee river corridors, with 16 plats recorded between 1980 and
1981. A subdivision ordinance was passed by the Madison County
Commission in August of 1982. No subdivision plat has been approved
since.

TABLE 11

MADISON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

SUBDIVIDED PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREA GE ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Hixtown Swamp 29,440 0 0 n/a
Suwannee River 10,688 40 0.07 o.6
Withlacoochee River 13,120 1,051 1.9 1.4
Blue Springs 640 52 0.1 o.6
Campbell Springs 640 0 0 n/a
Rogers Sink 640 0 0 n/a
Johnson Sink 1,280 0 0 n/a
County Recharge 11,200 0 0 n/a
Western Recharge 1,280 0 0 n/a

Development along the Withlacoochee and Suwannee river corridors has been
limited. Construction has occurred on no more than ten percent of the
river corridor lots. According to the Building Inspector, sale of river
property has been almost exclusively to out-of-state or out-of-county
residents. Mobile homes have been the dominant housing type where
construction has occurred.

No regionally significant natural area within Madison County is
experiencing noticeable development pressure. Hixtown Swamp is generally
unsuited to residential development due to wet conditions and periodic
flooding. However, any drainage activity by agricultural interests

should be closely monitored since this could create an opportunity for
residential development in the more scenic areas of the swamp. In
general, the vulnerability of the swamp to man's encroachment may be
high. The potential for degradation due to drainage for crop or pasture
land conversion or for irrigation waters is a distinct possibility. In
addition, extensive harvesting of hardwoods could have a detrimental
effect on the ecology of the swamp.

Development within the Madison County Stream-to-Sink Recharge Area is
generally restricted by county subdivision and sanitary sewer
regulations. The several sinkholes in this area should, however, be
closely monitored for encroaching development. County regulations and
floodplain ordinances likewise restrict development within the
flood-prone areas of the Withlacoochee and Suwannee Rivers.

SUWANNEE COUNTY

Suwannee County is bounded by the Suwannee River, the Santa Fe River,
and the Ichetucknee River. The county is sparsely populated. The 1980
county population was 22,287. The 1980 county population density minus
regionally significant natural areas was 41.9 persons per square mile.
Suwannee County's population growth rate between 1930 and 1980 lagged
considerably behind the state and regional averages. However, county
population growth is projected to more than double by the year 2010,
reaching 37,000.45

Census data also that 83 percent of the population increase between 1970
and 1980 was attributable to net in-migration. Eighteen percent of the
population increase attributable to in-migration originated from other
Florida counties. Local officials here, as in almost all counties within
the region, feel there has been an increase in the number of residents
relocating from southern Florida.

Between 1980 and 1983 inclusive, the county authorized the construction
of 780 residential dwelling units. Local officials indicate that the
majority of residential construction consists of the siting of mobile
homes. According to the Building Inspector and personnel in the Property
Appraiser's office, much of the current sale of platted land,
particularly river property, is to out-of-state or out-of-county
residents.

The predominant county land uses are managed pine forests and
irrigation-based agriculture. The northeast portion of the county, an
area of approximately 165 square miles, has numerous lakes, creek,
surficial depressions, and scattered cypress heads and domes interspersed
with cleared agricultural land. While not specifically delineated as a
recharge area, soils and topography suggest a close relationship between
the quality of groundwater runoff and water quality in upper aquifers.

As can be seen in Table 12, both the Suwannee and Santa Fe River
corridors have experienced considerable subdivision activity.

TABLE 12

SUWANNEE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

SUBDIVIDED PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Suwannee River 69,440 7,027 10.10 1.3
Low. Little R. Rechg. 16,000 597 0.57 4.3
Up. Little R. Rechg. 8,960 60 0.06 3.0
Telford Springs 640 0 0.0 n/a
Peacock Slough 1,280 0 0.0 n/a
Ichetucknee St. Park 2,240 80 3.6 2.1
Ichetucknee River 3,200 324 10.13 2.0
Santa Fe River 2,240 820 36.60 4.3

Suwannee County has an important role in the management of the Suwannee
River. Approximately 27 percent of the region's Suwannee River frontage
is under the jurisdiction of Suwannee County. Areas of most intense land
subdivision within the Suwannee River Corridor include nine miles of
frontage immediately south of Peacock Slough, 15 miles of frontage
south of Dowling Park, and 4 miles of frontage at the State Road 249
bridge. Notable Santa Fe River Corridor development includes 5 miles of
frontage below Ichetucknee Springs State Park. Construction activity
has occurred on only ten to fifteen percent of subdivided lots in the
river corridors. Suwannee County appears to have the highest incidence
of recreational use of the river. Local officials indicate that only 15
percent of established river corridor dwelling units are used as places
of primary'residence.

TAYLOR COUNTY

Taylor County is one of two coastal counties found within the region.
Population growth has historically lagged behind regional and state
averages. Taylor County's 1980 population of 16,532 represents only a
24.2 percent increase over its 1930 population of 13,316. The population
is projected to increase by 78 percent for the years between 1970 and
2010 to 24,100.

Census data indicates that, of the net increase in popul ation between
1970 and 1980, 64 percent was the result of net in-migration. Thirty-six
percent of the population increase was caused by net in-migration from
out-of-state while only 6 percent was attributable to in-migration from
other Florida counties. Local officials indicate that the number of new
residents from southern Florida is increasing.

The number of authorized new residential dwelling units for the years
between 1980 and 1983 inclusive averaged 110 units per year.
Approximately 60 percent of these permits were issued for unincorporated

areas. During this period, all residential construction in
unincorporated parts of the county has been for single family
residences. Local officials indicate that most of the building activity
in Taylor county is located in and around the City of Perry and the town
of Steinhatchee. This is evidenced by the fact that only 13 building
permits for new residential units were issued in 1984 for the coastal
areas (excluding the Town of Steinhatchee).

Taylor County ranks as sixth-lowest in population density county in the
state. The 1980 Population density was only 15.6 persons per square
mile. However, the county contains 745 square miles of regionally
significant natural areas. This is the largest amount of natural area
located within any county and constitutes twenty-seven percent of all
regionally significant natural areas. Excluding these areas from
population density considerations, the 1980 population density was much
higher, at 52.8 persons per square mile.

All of Taylor County's regionally significant natural area within the
coastal drainage basin. It includes all areas subject to either
hurricane surge or freshwater flooding. In addition, the off-shore
seagrass beds, salt marsh, freshwater wetlands with sheet flow
connection to the salt marsh, the Tide Swamp Wildlife Management Area,
the Steinhatchee River, the Aucilla River, and the Aucilla River Sinks
have been identified as regionally significant natural areas.

The greatest growth pressure within the identified regionally significant
areas appears to be along the Steinhatchee River around the town of
Steinhatchee. Some development pressure exists within the Aucilla River
floodplain as well. Along the coast, lands between Spring Warrior Creek
and Cedar Island, a distance of approximately 4 miles (7 percent of the
Taylor County coastline) is experiencing the greatest level of
development pressure. The remainder of coastal lands are owned by large
timber companies.

The unincorporated town of Steinhatchee has a 1984 estimated population
of 1624. Steinhatchee contains approximately 570 residential units and
approximately 2000 residential lots. Homes have been constructed on an
estimated forty percent of all available lots in Steinhatchee. Of
particular note is the subdivision activity occurring along the
Steinhatchee River immediately to the east of the town of Steinhatchee.
Here, three residential subdivisions have been platted since 1981
totalling 119 lots on 120 acres of land. Virtually no development has
occurred on these lots as of this time. The entire north bank of the
Steinhatohee River has been subdivided from the town of Steinhatchee to
Boggy Creek, a distance of approximately 3.5 miles. The town of
Steinhatchee has the potential to double in population within ten years.
Subdivision activity is likely to continue along the Steinhatchee River
from the town of Steinhatchee all the way to U.S Highway 27-A.

TABLE 13

TAYLOR COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

ACREAGE PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED SUBDI VIDED LOt-SIZE

Aucilla River Sinks 2,560 148 5.8 1.84
Aucilla River F P 6,400 324 5.1 0.83
Hurricane Surge Area 125,440 1,554 1.2 0.67
Coastal Drainage 390,400 2,357 o.6 0.59
Salt Marsh 71,040 1,036 1.5 0.63
Econfina F P 18,240 0 0 .0 0.0
Freshwater Wetlands 139,520 0 0.0 0.0
with Direct Sheet
Flow to Salt Marsh
Steinhatchee F P 7,360 405 5.5 0.75
Spring Warrior Creek F P 14,720 0 0.0 0.0
Tide Swamp 9,984 0 0.0 0.0

Development between Cedar Island and Dekle Beach is occurring as
unrecorded subdivisions and as lot splits for individual housing units.
The areas has a development pattern whereby streets are platted but the
resulting blocks are not subdivided. Typically, one or two homes have
been constructed per block. The remainder of the block is retained as one
parcel to be split at a later date for an-additional one or two homes.
It is estimated that construction has occurred on approximately 50
percent of the available land intended for development in this manner.
Of the 29 identified residential development areas, only 8 were recorded
subdivisions.

There are approximately 1700 residential lots on 1313 acres located
within the gulf coastal marsh and hurricane surge area between Spring
Warrior Creek and Cedar Island, residential units have been constructed
on approximately 25 percent of these lots. Assuming existing densities
continue an additional 1700 residential lots are anticipated as infill
development, for a total of approximately 3400 residential lots by the
year 2010.

The Aucilla River is also experiencing development pressure. There are
currently 381 residential lots within the corridor, 111 of which have
direct access to the river. Lots with riverfront access average two
acres in size and 167 feet in width. Approximately 19,000 feet of the
Aucilla riverbank has been subdivided. There have been four unrecorded
and one recorded subdivision in this area.

While the growth projections may appear to lag behind state and regional
averages, it must be pointed out that regionally significant natural

areas within Taylor County, as in Dixie County, are extremely sensitive,
especially the Gulf coastal marsh. Finally, the impact which an improved
and soon to be completed State Highway 51 will have on the county is
unknown. One can only estimate that the current population projections
may need to be revised substantially upward for Taylor County upon the
completion of this road.

UNION COUNTY

Union County, with a 1980 population of 10,166, is one of the lesser
populated counties in the region. The 1980 population density exclusive
of regionally significant natural areas was 42.5 persons per square
mile. Most of Union County's population is concentrated in the southern
half of the county. Northern Union County is, for the most part, either
used for timber harvesting or *for the Florida state prison system.
Population projections suggest a below-average growth rate. Union County
is projected to experience a 64 percent increase in population between
the years 1970 and 2010. The 2010 county population is projected to
reach 13,300.

County subdivision activity is relatively slow. Only 13 subdivisions
were filed with the Clerk's office for the years between 1956 and 1964.
Two subdivisions were filed in 1981 and 1982 respectively. No
subdivisions were filed in 1983. Only one was filed in 1984. Local
officials note that a large percentage of new construction activity
within recent years has used metes and bounds lot splits. This technique
has apparently been employed to avoid the county subdivision process and
the re-classification of land use from agricultural to residential for
property tax purposes.

Future development will most likely continue to concentrate in the
Olustee Creek area and south of County Road 238. There is currently some
individual siting of homes along the Santa Fe and New Rivers but these
are scattered, individual lots and are not related to any subdivision
development efforts. As can be seen in Table 14, there has been
relatively little subdivision activity within the Santa Fe River
Corridor.

TABLE 14

UNION COUNTY DEVELOPMENT BY NATURAL AREA

SUBDIVIDED PERCENT AVERAGE
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOT SIZE

Santa Fe River 4,480 120 2.7 1.9

Total 4,480 120 2.7 1.9

SUWANNEE RIVER SYSTEM

This section examines development pressure along the Suwannee River
System, focusing principally upon the Suwannee and its major tributary,
the Santa Fe. These two river corridors are treated separately as
development activity within the two corridors does not generally follow
county growth trends. Furthermore, the rate of development activity
appears to be occurring in a more or less uniform manner along the entire
length of the Suwannee.

The evaluation of development pressure examines historical trends in
subdivision activity. Furthermore, the analysis distinguishes between
corridor-wide development and development activity directly adjacent to
the rivers. Projections are then made based upon historical trends for
the Santa Fe as well as each segment of the Suwannee River.

The following evaluation is an important indicator of development
trends. However, it is less than a complete accounting of all river
corridor development activity. The unit of aggregation is the section
which constitutes one square mile. Section-level data does not precisely
correspond to actual 100 year floodplain boundaries. Furthermore,
development dates were not available for unrecorded subdivisions which
excluded their use in time series analyses. The quality of land
development information varies widely from county to county. Where
available, lot counts were made from aerial photographs. However,
not every county within the region has up-to-date aerial photographs. In
counties where aerial photographs were unavailable, development data was
limited to information gleaned from subdivision plats. In such cases,
unrecorded subdivisions and residences cr.eated through the use of lot
splits went uncounted.

HISTORICAL TRENDS

In general, development pressure appears to have started sooner on the
Santa Fe than on the Suwannee. Although portions of the Suwannee
developed in the 1920's, these areas were limited to areas near the coast
within Segment V as well as major upland springs. Development activity
on the Santa Fe was much more extensive during the 1920's.

There does not appear to be any reduction in development pressure along
either river. Table 15 reveals that development along the Santa Fe
corridor has been proceeding at a fairly constant rate since 1950. As
indicated in Table 16, development activity along the Suwannee has
doubled every ten years between 1950 and 1985.

Historical trends for the Suwannee suggest a general increase in average
lot size over time. However, no such trend is readily discernible within
the Santa Fe River Corridor. Despite the large number of recorded
subdivisions, only 11.2 percent of the land adjacent to the riverbanks of
the Santa Fe has been subdivided. A significantly larger proportion,

17.2 percent, of the lands directly adjacent to the Suwannee River have
been subdivided.

TABLE 15

SANTA FE RIVER CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT BY DECADE

ACRES NO. OF AVERAGE
DECADE SUBDIVIDED LOTS LOT SIZE

pre 1950 227.7 952 .24
1950 - 1959 1,849.0 2,020 .92
1960 - 1969 1,034.0 955 1.08
1970 - 1979 1,724.0 678 2.54
1980 - 1985 971.0 664 1.46

TABLE 16

SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT BY DECADE

ACRES NO. AVERAGE
DECADE SUBDIVIDED OF LOTS LOT SIZE

Pre 1950 215.8 1,639 0.13
1950 - 1959 1,028.2 916 1.12
1960 - 1969 1,782.9 4,276 0.42
1970 - 1979 6,169.4 4,514 1.37
1980 - 1985 6,061.1 2,529 2.40

USAGE CHARACTERISTICS

Approximately 80 percent of existing residential dwelling units within
the floodplain corridor are estimated by local officials to be used as
places of primary residence. However, despite the flurry of subdivision
activity in recent years, local officials indicate that approximately 80
percent of all river corridor subdivisions recorded since 1980 remain
undeveloped. Several local officials indicate a relatively high rate
of quick-claim deeds where the purchaser of newly subdivided land
relinquishes ownership to the original landowner upon discovering that
building upon the property is either impractical or too costly. This
suggests a speculative nature to the subdivision activity. This sort of
speculative subdivision activity is especially harmful to government
attempts to purchase large portions of the river corridor.

PARCEL AND STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS

Lot width is similar along both rivers, averaging 122 feet on the Santa
Fe and 126 feet on the Suwannee for lots with river frontage. rIver
frontage lot width does not appreciably change with increased lot size
until a lot size of 3 acres or larger is reached. The purpose appears to
be to provide as many lots as possible with direct access to the@-rivers-
It is not uncommon to find lots 90 feet wide and 500.feet in length. The
long length is important for the placement of septic tanks beyond the
10-year floodplain. Lot size appears to vary widely from county to
county with no readily apparent explanation.

A large number of mobile homes are located within the river corridors.
In some counties, mobile homes appear to constitute as much as 75
percent of all river corridor residential construction. However,
on the average, mobile homes appear to constitute 50 percent of all
river corridor construction. Very few residences have landscaped
Developed property is generally left in its natural state. This is
particularly true for properties with river frontage. River corridor
subdivisions generally lack paved roads, public sewerage systems, or
public water supply.

TABLE 17

SANTA FE RIVER CORRIDOR IDENTIFIED LOTS ADJACENT TO RIVER

PERCENT
TOTAL RIVER SUBDIVIDED AVERAGE AVERAGE OF FRONTAGE
COUNTY FRONTAGE FRONTAGE LOT WIDTH LOT SIZE SUBDIVIDED

Alachua 221,760 8,333 163.4 3.85 3.8
Bradford 81,460 1,750 250.0 6.00 2.2
Columbia 178,840 32,720 89.2 1.00 18.3
Gilchrist 123,552 27,974 149.6 2.69 22.6
Suwannee 37,488 4,725 175.0 2.35 12.6
Union 47,520 1,700 100.0 1.00 3.6

Region 111 690,620 77,202 122.8 1.89 11.2

TABLE 18

SANTA FE RIVER CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT

PERCENT
COUNTY CORRIDOR ACRES NO. OF AVERAGE OF CORRIDOR
ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOTS LOT SIZE SUBDIVIDED

Alachua 41,600 403 668 .6o 0.9
Bradford 16,000 60 10 6.00 0.4
Columbia 17,920 4,622 3,598 1.28 25.8
Gilchrist 14,976 169 77 2.20 1.1
Suwannee 2 240 820 189 4.34 36.6
Union 4,480 120 63 1.90 2.7

Region 111 97,216 6,194 4,965 1.25 6.4

TABLE 19

SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR IDENTIFIED LOTS ADJACENT TO RIVER

PERCENT
TOTAL RIVER SUBDIVIDED AVERAGE AVERAGE OF FRONTAGE
COUNTY FRONTAGE FRONTAGE LOT WIDTH LOT SIZE SUBDIVIDED

Columbia 211,200 19,300 107 .74 9.1
Dixie 322,080 23,400 130 1.74 7.3
Gilchrist 181,104 83,307 152 2.20 46.0
Hamilton 432,960 47,610 114 1.37 11.0
Lafayette 279,840 78,369 124 1.23 28.0
Madison 73,920 5,310 104 .50 7.2
Suwannee 547,536 95,857 121 1.49 17.5

Region 111 2,048,640 353,153 126 1.50 17.2

TABLE 20

SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT BY COUNTY

PERCENT
CORRIDOR ACRES NO. OF AVERAGE OF CORRIDOR
COUNTY ACREAGE SUBDIVIDED LOTS LOT SIZE SUBDIVIDED

Columbia 30,400 843 487 1.73 2.7
Dixie 42,240 2,129 3,613. 0.67 5.0
Gilchrist 20,480 2,384 1,194 2.00 11.6
Hamilton 38,080 781 489 1.60 2.1
Lafayette 48,000 2,303 2,755 0.84 4.8
Madison 10,688 40 68 0.59 0.4
Suwannee 69,440 7,026 5,324 1.32 10.1

Region 111 259,328 15,506 13,930 1.11 6.0

PROJECTIONS AND RANKINGS

This study has tried to ascertain the current level of development
pressure upon regionally significant natural areas using subdivision
information, on-site visitation, and discussions with local officials.
Existing evidence suggests that regionally significant natural areas
are threatened by three predominant activities: The subdivision and
development of land, the clear cutting of hardwood forests and hammocks,
and the filling or draining of wetlands. Development pressure and
rankings of individual areas presented in this section are based upon the
estimated amount of time remaining before the natural area is irrevocably
lost through one of these three activities.

An attempt was made to base projections on the average annual acreage
subdivided since 1970. This average was pr ojected to the year 2010 or
until all available lands have been utilized. Unfortunately, significant
amounts of subdivision data is unavailable for all natural areas.
County-wide averages are substituted in cases where the number of
subdivisions was too small for reliable projections. Appendix G
contains more detailed projections and underlying assumptions for
selected natural areas.

The projections are conservative. They do not take into account metes
and bounds lot splits, which could account for 25 percent of all
development activity. Projected average yearly development activity is
based upon mean acreage and lot figures between 1970 and May 1, 1985. In
fact, subdivision activity within most natural areas has been occurring
at a greater rate during the 1980's than during the 1970's.

Four categories of development pressure are used. These are natural
areas facing imminent danger, natural areas facing significant
development pressure, natural areas facing average development pressure,
and natural areas facing little or no development pressure.

NATURAL AREAS FACING IMMINENT DANGER

Areas facing imminent danger can be described as those areas which, due
to one of the identified major types of development pressure, are
anticipated to lose their natural character by the year 2010. As Table
21 indicates, not all areas classified as facing imminent development
pressure are threatened by subdivision activity. Certain areas, such as
the Econfina River, the Steinhatchee River, and California Swamp are
threatened by clear-cut timber practices. As the recent experience of
Tide Swamp demonstrates, these areas could, in less than 12 months, lose
all of their remaining hardwoods. The hardwoods contained within these
areas currently receive no government protection from clear cutting.

Although the Florida State Best Management Practices Manual recommends a
streamside buffer zone in which there should be no harvestin t6 of trees,
the best management practices are purely advisory in nature.
Furthermore, while the Works of the District rules recently adopted by
the Suwannee River Water Management District prohibit the removal of
vegetation within 75 feet of the riverbank, neither the Econfina or
Steinhatchee River has been designated as a Work of the District.

TABLE 21 .

NATURAL AREAS FACING IMMINENT DANGER

PERCENT OF AREA SUBDIVIDED BY
NATURAL AREA ACREAGE 1985 2010

Devil's Mhopper 640 41.6 100.0
S Felasco Hammock 10,240 10.6 100.0
Suwannee R Frontage a 2,048,640 17.2 75.8
Payne's Prairie 36,480 14.8 30.2
Suwannee River St Park 4,380 76.5 100.0
Cal Swamp 63,360 0.0 0.0
Bee Haven Bay 29,760 0.0 0.0
Steinhatchee R 7,360 8.0 15.4
Aucilla R 6,400 5.1 8.7
Econfina R 18,240 0.0 0.0

If current trends continue, the region faces the very real possibility
of having all of the lands adjacent to the Suwannee River subdivided by
the year 2034. This could result in the irrevocable loss of the river

as a natural environment and habitat for native species. The river could
become a linear city with lots averaging 125 feet in width, a width which
is not uncommon for typical large-lot urban subdivisions. Of particular
concern within the river corridors are local subdivision regulations
and zoning ordinances. Although the counties have adopted ordinances
requiring new construction to be 75 feet back from the river banks and
to prohibit the removal of natural vegetation, almost all counties permit
small and narrow lots adjacent to the river.

Privately-held lands which comprise the remaining portion of the
ecosystems of Payne's Prairie and San Felasco Hammock state preserves,
Devil's Millhopper State Geologic Site, and Suwannee River State Park
also face imminent danger. These lands are popular residential
development locations precisely because of their attractive environmental
setting and proximity to state-owned lands.

Development pressure is so great on Devil's Millhopper that all remaining
undeveloped land on its fringe could be subdivided within the next 12
months. The San Felasco Hammock is experiencing similar development
pressure. If current trends continue, the remaining privately held
lands whIch constitute the reset of the San Felasco Hammock Ecosystem
will be completely developed by the year 2005. Payne's Prairie State
Preserve, despite its size, does not include the prairie's entire
ecosystem. The state Department of Natural Resources is concerned about
development on the fringe of the prairie and would like to expand its
boundaries. An area of land on the southeast side of the preserve has
been proposed for purchase under the Conservation and Recreation Lands
(CARL) program.

If additional lands are scheduled for purchase by the state for these
state preserves, consideration should be given to accelerating the
acquisition date. This is particularly important in the case of San
Felasco Hammock and Payne's Prairie where significant portions of their
ecosystem are privately owned.

NATURAL AREAS FACING SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE

The following areas are currently experiencing significant development
pressure. However, projected trends do not indicate that these areas
are in imminent danger of losing their natural character, despite the
fact that many of these areas are projected to experience a greater
percentage of their area subdivided than for the other category.
This is in a large part due to the fact that many of these areas, such
as stream-to-sink recharge areas, are less sensitive to development. In
addition, some of these areas, such as the Ichetucknee River, have
already been significantly altered.

Area facing significant development pressure include the western and
southern stream-to-sink recharge areas of Columbia County, the Alachua
County Stream-To-Sink Recharge Area, and the Lower Santa Fe and

Ichetucknee River corridors. The lower Santa Fe River floodplain
corridor should be carefully monitored for development trends. In
particular, the Olleno Park - River Rise area, Ginnie Springs natural
area, and the Suwannee-Santa Fe River confluence should be closely
monitored for development activity for potential changes in development
pressure.

As indicated earlier, all of the subdivision activity along the Santa
Fe River Corridor is located downstream of Olleno State Park. The
following projections are limited to the lower portion of the Santa
Fe.

TABLE 22

NATURAL AREAS FACING SIGNIFICANT PRESSURE

1985 SUBDIVIDED 2010 SUBDIVIDED
NATURAL AREA ACRES ACRES PERCENT ACRES PERCENT

Col Co S Recharge 47,360 5,419 11.4 9,093 19.2
Col Co W Recharge 13,440 316 2.4 3,961 29.5
Al Co Recharge 51,840 3,738 7.2 11,049 21.3
Lwr S F R Frontage 512,516 77,202 15.1 201,295 39.3
Ichetucknee R 6,080 1,824 30.0 2,528 41.5
Ichetucknee St Park 5,760 890 15.5 1,713 29.8
S Foster Center 640 167 26.1 219 34.3
Suwannee River St Pk 1,830 200 10.9 250 13.7
Dixie Co Salt Marsh 42,240 178 0.4 523 1.2
Taylor Cc Salt Marsh 71,040 1,036 1.5 1,844 2.6

As can be seen in the preceding table, the Dixie and Taylor County salt
marshes are projected to receive very small amounts of additional
development. As discussed previously, most of this development is
anticipated to occur around existing coastal communities. Little
development will occur within the salt marsh itself. Instead, upland
areas immediately adjacent to the salt marsh have been, and are likely
to continue to receive, most of the future coastal development. The
sensitivity of the salt marsh is so great, however, that a significant
rating was attached to it. Existing studies indicate that eighty
percent of the nutrients found within the region's salt marsh originates
from upland sources.47 Therefore, even small amounts of development in
or near the salt marsh have the potential for significant impact.

NATURAL AREAS FACING AVERAGE DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE

Areas experiencing average development pressure are regarded as areas
which will receive some development activity within the projected time
period but appear to be able to handle the projected growth without undue
adverse environmental impacts. Regionally significant natural areas
in this category are listed in table 23.

TABLE 23

NATU RAL AREAS FACING AVERAGE PRESSURE

1985 SUBDIVIDED 2010 SUBDIVIDED
NATURAL AREA ACRES ACRES PERCENT ACRES PERCENT

Dixie Co H S 152,320 616 0.4 1,121 0.7
Taylor Cc H S 125,440 1,554 1.2 3,460 2.8
Cary Forest 3,008 51 1.7 98 3.3
Olleno-River Rise 12,000 0 0.0 0 0.0
Lochloosa Forest 36,922 378 1.0 750 2.0
Wacassassa Flats 62,720 0 0.0 0 0.0
Alapaha River 17,920 125 0.7 164 0.9
Withlacoochee River 16,000 649 4.1 852 5.3
Hamilton Co Recharge 61,400 964 1.6 1,265 2.1
Madison Cc Recharge 11,200 0 0.0 0 0.0
Taylor Cc Freshwater 139,520 0 0.0 0 0.0
Wetlands w Sheet
Flow to Salt Marsh
Dixie Cc Freshwater 87,040, 0 0.0 0 0.0
Wetlands w Sheet
Flow to Salt Marsh

NATURAL AREAS FACING LITTLE-OR NO PRESSURE

Areas with below average or little development pressure have not
experienced any or, at most, very little development activity due to
natural conditions or government ownership of land. These areas include
wetlands and swamps as well as large tracts of government-owned land. Of
particular note is Tide Swamp, which, since its recent clear-cutting, has
little to offer for timber harvesting or aesthetics for residential
development.

TABLE 24

NATURAL AREAS FACING LITTLE OR NO PRESSURE

1985 SUBDIVIDED 2010 SUBDIVIDED
NATURAL AREA ACRES ACRES PERCENT ACRES PERCENT

Gum Root Swamp 2,816 0 0 0 0
U Santa Fe R Corridor 39,680 11 0 22 0
Santa Fe Swamp 7,680 0 0 0 0
Brooks Sink 640 0 0 0 0
Osceola Forest 80,000 0 0 0 0
Pinhook Swamp 89,600 0 0 0 0
Lwr Suw Nat Wld Rfg 16,000 0 0 0 0
Lime Sink 640 0 0 0 0
Hixtown Swamp 29,440 0 0 0 0
Tide Swamp 9,984 0 0 0 0

SUMMARY

North central Florida is in the middle of a major growth period.
Population growth and urban development common to southern Florida since
1960 is now beginning to occur in north central Florida. However, the
growth is occurring in uneven increments throughout the region. Certain
counties are receiving and are projected to continue to experience
greater growth increments than other counties. Most notably, Alachua and
Columbia counties are expected to receive the largest increases in
absolute numbers. Although their increase in absolute numbers is less,
Dixie, Gilchrist, Bradford, and Suwannee counties are projected to
experience the greatest rates of population growth. By far, Alachua
County will experience the greatest increase in population density (when
regionally significant areas are subtracted from total county acreage
values), followed by Bradford and Columbia counties. Conversely,
Hamilton, Madison, and Lafayette counties are expected to experience the
smallest increases in population density.

Development of the Suwannee River Corridor is of particular concern.
Given the history of subdivision platting on the Suwannee, it is entirely
possible for one subdivision to wipe out an entire regionally significant
contained within this natural area. Similarly, Devil's Millhopper could
also be completely surrounded by residential subdivisions at any time.
Timber harvesting concerns aside, it is not surprising that the majority
of development pressure is occurring in Alachua County, the region's most
populous county.

The major threats to regionally significant natural areas appear to be 1)
new construction and development activity at an intensity level similar
to large lot development found in most cities; 2) clear cutting of

remaining hardwood forest stands; 3) dredging and filling of wetlands;
and 4)phosphate mining within wetlands areas. Timber harvesting appears
to represent the most immediate threat. Residential development occurs
over a sustained period of time which usually allows government time to
develop and respond with appropriate policies. However, timber cutting
of large land areas can occur virtually overnight, without allowing
adequate lead time for government action. Florida state law provides
provisions for reclamation of lands used for phosphate mining. Despite
legal requirements for wetlands reclamation, areas subject to phosphate
mining activity canno t be restored to their original appearance due to
the large quantities of fill material removed.

Difficulty is encountered with the definition of development pressure.
While the current approach may be adequate for comparative purposes, it
may not be adequate for recognizing the real problems associated with
individual natural areas. What types of activity or how much development
pressure is too much for a natural area to sustain and still perform its
original functions? It is entirely possible that a relatively small
scale development or activity could have disastrous consequences for
Payne's Prairie yet be entirely appropriate in another regionally
significant natural area. More information is required about the
ecological processes of these natural areas.

A cause-effect relationship exists between the degradation and
elimination of natural systems and man's actions. Perhaps the best
measures are indicators of the health of the natural systems and
functions. Wildlife counts, water quality and flow analyses, water table
levels, vegetation counts and the like perhaps represent the best
measures of the effects of man's activities. Unfortunately, such
information is not readily available. Available information is
particularly incomplete for areas of high indirect recharge to the
Floridan Aquifer. A more detailed understanding of the vegetative cover,
food-chain, and hydrologic cycles is needed.

A set of key indicators of development pressure specific to each natural
area is beginning to emerge. Examples of key indicators deal with
whether the coastal marsh is receding or expanding, the quality of
groundwater runoff entering the Floridan Aquifer through sinks and major
stream to sink recharge areas, and the impact of fertilizers and
herbicides used by the forestry industry on the coastal marsh. Such a
set of key indices could serve as part of a system for monitoring the
health of natural areas. However, while data is being gathered and
studied, development pressure and subsequent irretrievable loss of
significant natural areas continues. Public funds are limited. It may
be necessary to weigh expenditures of public funds between data
collection, land acquisition, and regulation development.

DISCUSSION OF MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

INTRODUCTION

Chapter II of this study identifies areas subject to hurricane-induced
hazards as well as natural areas considered to be regionally significant,
while Chapter III evaluates development trends within and around these
areas. This chapter addresses methods of land acquisition and
regulation--programs that may be utilized to: (1) reduce/prevent damage
to property as well as loss of life resulting from hurricanes and
flooding; and (2) preserve representative samples of original Florida
habitat, flora, and fauna within the Region for the benefit of both
present and future generations.

There are three general methods available to accomplish this purpose:
(1) public land acquisition; (2) public regulation of privately-owned
land; and (3) public regulation of individual actions. These methods and
their variants have advantages and disadvantages.

Aside from limited acquisition funds' government acquisition of land
reduces the total assessed valuation of land available to state and local
governments for property tax revenues. In addition, public acquisition
does not always assure proper land management. Government expenditures
must increase to provide minimum levels of maintenance and security for
government-held lands. It is difficult for government officials to
decide which lands should be purchased now and which should be left
vulnerable to development for acquisition at a later date. Land costs
are high and land which is most vulnerable to development is usually the
most costly to purchase. Given limited acquisition funds, lands
deserving of purchase must compete with one another for acquisition
funding.

Regulation of land is difficult. It is generally unpopular. Land
regulation must fall within parameters established by state enabling
legislation and constitutional guarantees for private property rights
which may or may not allow an adequate level of protection. Furthermore,
enforcement of government regulations is often times inadequate.
Property owners can cause irreparable environmental damage which cannot
be rectified through fines or restoration requirements.

Regulation of individual actions such as banning the collection of
endangered plants is probably the least effective implementation
mechanism. Not only are these laws difficult to enforce, once the
violation of the regulation has been committed, such as the killing of a
bald eagle, it may be too late for government sanctions to restore the
original species.

GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

Government programs applicable to hazard mitigation and natural resource
protection are comprised of three different types: (1) acquisition
programs; (2) regulatory programs; and (3) planning programs. There are
currently three major State programs for acquisition of regionally
significant natural areas. These are Save Our Rivers (water management
district funds), Land Acquisition Trust Fund (LATF), and Conservation and
Recreation Lands Trust (CARL) Fund.

The regulatory programs strive to protect Florida's natural resources and
native species by establishing minimum standards which must be met by a
proposed development. These include such programs as the Coastal Zone
Protection Act, the Aquatic Preserves Act, Outstanding Florida Waters
program (Water Resources and Protection Act), the Wetlands Protection
Act, and the Developments of Regional Impact review process which is
considered as both a planning and a regulatory program. However, these
programs are uncoordinated, single-purpose programs typically designed
for the protection of a specific resource.

Planning programs can be differentiated from regulatory programs by their
broader perspective. It is through the planning programs that goals and
policies for protection of hazard and natural resource areas can be
devised and appropriate regulatory programs be selected. Where existing
programs are inadequate, new regulatory programs can be proposed.
Planning programs include Areas of Critical State Concern, the Local
Government Comprehensive Planning Act, and the State Comprehensive
Planning Act. A brief overview of these acts and programs, focussing
primarily on those sections that are pertinent to this study, completes
this chapter.

ACQUISITION PROGRAMS

CARL FUNDS

The 1979 Legislature created the Conservation and Recreation Lands
Program and Trust Fund for the selection and acquisition of lands
for use and protection as natural floodplain, marsh, or estuary, if the
protection and conservation of such lands is necessary to enhance or
protect water quality or quantity or to protect fish and wildlife habitat
which cannot otherwise be accomplished through local and state regulatory

programs. CARL funds can also be used for acquisition of state parks,
recreation areas, public beaches, wilderness areas, or wildlife
management areas, the restoration of altered ecosystems to correct
environmental damage that has already occurred, and the preservation of
significant archaeological or historical sites.

The selection of lands for acquisition is made by the Conservation
and Recreation Lands Selection Committee. The Selection Committee
has established a priority list of potential land acquisitions. As of
July 3, 1984, the list consisted of 45 separate areas with an estimated
market value of $217,421,000. The legislature has allocated a
significant level of funds to the CARL program, $35 million dollars
during the current fiscal year and $40 million dollars during the next
fiscal year.

The 1984 CARL list consisted of approximately 173,410 acres, of which
32,494 acres are located in the region. This represents an estimated
average cost of $1,254 per acre. However, it should be noted that all
but 350 acres of this land is located within Alachua County (Lochloosa
Forest and Payne's Prairie) and that the remaining 350 acres (Peacock
Slough) has been purchased by the Suwannee River Water Management
District. The two Alachua County projects are ranked 24th and 30th on
the current CARL program funding priority list.

The CARL program has been extensively used in the region to acquire state
lands, most notably Payne's Prairie, River Rise, and San Felasco Hammock
State Preserves.

SAVE OUR RIVERS PROGRAM

The Save Our Rivers program is funded by the documentary stamp tax, which
allows Florida's water management districts to acquire environmentally
sensitive areas. North central Florida is under the jurisdiction of two
water management districts, the Suwannee River Water Management District
and the St. Johns River Water Management District. The Suwannee River
Water Management District is expected to receive approximately $80
million over the next 20 sheet flow connection to salt marsh, freshwater
wetlands without direct sheet flow connection to salt marsh, and streams
and rivers which empty into the Gulf of Mexico; (2) The Aucilla River,
the Suwannee River, and the major tributaries of the Suwannee which
constitute a regionally significant natural area independent of the
Suwannee's role in providing estuarine waters and as the major source of
freshwater flooding; (3) Upland areas with direct impact upon the river
system; (4) upland areas with indirect or no impact upon the river
system; and 5) the Floridan Aquifer and associated stream-to-sink
recharge and percolation recharge areas.

isolated segm ents. These include the Gum Root Swamp - Newnan's Lake
Payne's Prairie - Lochloosa Forest area; the Okefenokee Swamp (located
outside the region) Pinhook Swamp - Osceola National Forest area;
the California Swamp Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge area; and
the Olleno State Park River Rise State Preserve - Ginnie Springs area.

Although the list of natural areas is considerable, additional candidates
for regionally significant natural area designation may exist. San Pedro
Bay, Mallory Swamp, the Fenholloway River, Olustee Creek, stream-to-sink
recharge areas, and percolation recharge areas need further study.
Further work is also needed on identification of habitats of rare,
endangered, or threatened specience that water quality standards will not
be violated and that the project is not contrary to the public interest.
The Department must consider and balance certain criteria relating to
public safety, impacts upon fish and wildlife, water navigation and water
flows when determining whether to grant a permit.

The Department is authorized to develop appropriate regulatory provisions
governing activities in waters. Such rules may include stricter
permitting and enforcement provisions within areas designated Outstanding
Florida Waters, aquatic preserves, areas of critical state concern, and
areas subject to resource management plans, when plans for an area
include waters that are particularly identified as needing additional
protection.

The Act does not apply to subdivisions in which 30 percent or more
of the lots approved for sale as home sites subsequent to January
1, 1970, have been sold, to any residential development for which
a development order pursuant to Section 380.06 F.S. (DRI) has been
issued or which is exempt pursuant to Section 498.025(2)(a) and (4)(a),
F.S. or to any activity to which a dredge and fill permit has been issued
by the Department prior to October 1, 1984. The Act also took permitting
authority for dredge and fill and surfacewater management activities
pertaining to agriculture and forestry away from the Department and
placed it with the five water management districts.

FLORIDA AQUATIC PRESERVES

The Aquatic Preserves Act allows the State of Florida to recognize
and set aside for future generations State-owned submerged lands in areas
which have exceptional biological, aesthetic, and scenic attributes. The
establishment of an aquatic preserve limits the construction of
bulkheads, places severe restrictions on dredging, restricts the dredging

of minerals, and limits the erection of structures within the preserve to
docks for reasonable ingress and egress, commercial docking facilities,
and shore protection structures. In addition, no water or effluents can
be discharged into an aquatic preserve which substantially harms the
preserve. There are currently 30 aquatic preserves in the State,
consisting of inland and coastal waters. None of these are located
within the region.

OUTSTANDING FLORIDA WATERS

The Florida Air and Water Pollution Control Act (Section 403.061(10),
(25),(28) F.S.) allows the Department of Environmental Regulation to
establish rules which provide for a special category of water within the
State known as "Outstanding Florida Waters" (OFW). In general, the
Department cannot issue permits for direct pollution discharges to OFW's
which would lower existing ambient water quality or for indirect
discharges which would significantly degrade an Outstanding Florida
Water. In addition, permits for new dredging and filling within an OFW
must clearly be in the public interest.

Waters under OFW designation include all waters in National Parks,
National Wildlife Refuges, State Parks and Preserves, Scenic and Wild
Rivers, State Aquatic Preserves, and certain waters within National
Forests. Currently, 17 of Florida's 1,700 rivers, one chain of lakes,
and waters off the Florida Keys are designated OFW's. Waters within the
region designated Outstanding Florida Waters include the Suwannee River,
and the Santa Fe River system (Santa Fe River, Lake Santa Fe, Little Lake
Santa Fe, Santa Fe Swamp, Olustee Creek and the Ichetucknee River below
State Road 27).

DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT

The Florida Environmental Land and Water Management Act of 1972 declares
the intent of the legislature to protect the natural resources and
environment of the State and establishes land and water management
policies to guide and coordinate local decisions relating to growth and
development.

The Act provides for the Administration Commission to adopt guidelines
and standards to determine whether a particular development is presumed
to be of regional impact. For development proposals deemed to be of
regional impact, a complicated process allows for the identification and
resolution of development related issues, including potentially adverse
impacts upon regionally significant natural areas and endangered or
threatened plant and animal species. Regional planning councils prepare
a report and make recommendations on the regional impact of the proposed
development. Local governments have the discretionary authority to
approve the development as submitted, deny the development, or approve
the development subject to conditions designed to mitigate or eliminate
adverse impacts.

ENDANGERED AN D THREATENED SPECIES

Florida has enacted numerous laws for the protection and preservation of
native Florida species and endangered or threatened plant and animal
species. Among the more significant acts are the following.

-The Endangered and Threatened Species Act of 1977 declares the intent of
the State to provide for research and management and to conserve and
protect native animal and plant species defined by the Game and
Freshwater Fish Commission, the Department of Natural Resources, or the
U.S. Department of the Interior as endangered or threatened. The Act
provides for public education and the preparation and update of a plan
for the management and conservation of said species.

Section 372.26, F.S. requires permits from the Department of
Environmental for placing imported fish in any fresh waters of the
State, while Section 372.265 F.S. makes it unlawful to release any
animal species not indigenous to Florida without a permit from the
Game and Freshwater Fish Commission. Permit decisions are based upon any
foreseen detrimental impacts that may be caused to the ecology of the
State by the release of non-indigenous species.

Current State statutes make it unlawful to kill alligators (Section
372.663, F.S.), the Florida panther (Section 372.671, F.S.), to
contaminate waters of the State to the degree to cause fish kills
(Section 372.85, F.S.), the personal possession of certain classes of
wildlife without a permit (Section 372.922, F.S.), engage in organized
poisonous reptile hunts without a permit (Section 379.912, F.S.), or
harm or disturb a manatee (Section 370.12(c),(d), F.S.).

Endangered plants are protected by Section 581.185, F.S. makes it
a Class I misdemeanor to willfully destroy or collect endangered or
threatened plants on public land without first obtaining a State permit,
or on private land without permission of the property owner. A State
permit is also required when taking three or more endangered plants from
private lands.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES STANDARDS FOR ON-SITE
SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS

Section 1OD-6, Florida Administrative Code sets minimum statewide
standards for the construction and location of septic tanks. The
regulations include minimum allowable lot sizes for use with septic
systems. Under these rules, "Sewage waste and effluent from individual
on-site sewage disposal systems shall not be discharged into the ground
surface or into ditches, drainage systems, surfacewaters, or aquifers."

In conjunction with the construction standards, these regulations
require minimum lot widths of 100 ft. and, where community water systems
are not available, lot sizes of at least one-half acre. Lots utilizing a
community water system may develop at a density of four lots per acre.
In addition, no system can be placed laterally within 75 feet of the mean
high water line of tidal water bodies or within 75 feet of the ordinary
high water line of lakes, streams, canals or other non-tidal
surfacewaters. Nor can a septic system be placed within the 10-year
flood elevation. The regulations further require that the water table
elevation at the wettest season of the year is at least 24 inches below
the bottom surface of the drainfield trench or absorption bed.

SURFACEWATER MANAGEMENT RULES AND WORKS OF THE.DISTRICT

The Suwannee River Water Management District has recently adopted
surfacewater management rules which include special standards for
those areas declared "Works of the District". Designated areas
essentially include the floodways of the Suwannee, Santa Fe. Alapaha,
Withlacoochee, and Aucilla Rivers. In addition, the surfacewater
management rules provide special standards for surfacewater runoff in
stream-to-sink recharge areas as well as areas having direct sheet flow
connection to the Gulf coastal marsh. While these rules do not dictate
land use or land use intensities, they do provide for a 75 foot
streamside setback from the water's edge of all streams and rivers
located within Works of the District. The rules prevent construction and
vegetation clearance within the streamside setback area, including
mounded septic tanks.

For areas located outside of Works of the District, the rules essentially
require all structures except a single-family residence of less than
10,000 square feet to obtain a surfacewater management permit.

THE COASTAL ZONE ACT OF 1985

The State of Florida has had some measure of control of coastal
development for the past twenty years provided by the Beach and Shore
Preservation Act of 1965. Since then, the State has become more
restrictive with each new law affecting the coastal area. The growth
management legislation passed during the 1985 Legislative session
continues this trend by significantly increasing the requirements for
development in the coastal area.

In amending Section 161-53, F.S., the Act essentially provides strong
recognition of the importance of coastal areas as 11 ... the first line of
defense against both winter storms and hurricanes ... 11 and that " ... these
coastal areas ... should be preserved and enhanced." The legislation
states that the most sensitive portion of the coastal area "shall be
managed through the imposition of strict construction standards in order
to minimize damage to the natural environment, private property, and
life ...

The coastal building zone along Dixie and Taylor county coastline is an
area from mean high-water to a line 3,000 feet inland. Major structures
within this area, except mobile homes, must be designed and constructed
to withstand a wind velocity of no less than 140 miles per hour. All
major structures, including mobile homes, are required to be elevated
above the design breaking wave crests or wave uprush as superimposed on
the storm surge of a 100-year storm.

The legislation does not set additional minimum wind load standards for
minor structures, such as signs, however. Instead, such structures will
continue to comply with Southern Standard Building Code minimum wind load
requirements. Along the coast of Dixie and Taylor Counties, the minimum
wind load is 110 miles per hour. Inadequate funding levels prevent the
surveying of the mean high water line by the Department of Natural
Resources. Therefore, the Department will use the velocity zone
established by the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) for
the flood insurance program on an interim basis as the coastal building
zone until proper funding is provided.

PLANNING PROGRAMS

AREAS OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN

Areas eligible for designation as an Area of Critical State Concern
include lands or waters having significant impact on environmental or
natural resources of regional or statewide importance, including
state/federal parks forests, wildlife preserves, wildlife refuges, major
rivers and estuaries, Outstanding Florida Waters, and aquifer recharge
areas for which the development thereof would cause substantial
deterioration of such resources.

Designated areas are subject to locally developed regulations which
comply with state-developed standards. Such state-developed standards
are developed specific for each designated area and are based upon a
careful study of the characteristics, problems, and needs of the area.

The State Legislature can designate specific geographic areas of state
concern and establish the principles for guiding the development of the
area. State and regional agencies are required to coordinate their plans
and to conduct their programs and regulatory activities consistent with
the state-adopted principles for guiding development.

Designation is limited to no more than five percent of the area of
the State. Current "Areas of Critical of State Concern" include the
Everglades, the Florida Keys, and the Green Swamp. The 100-year
floodplain of the Suwannee River was recently considered but not
recommended for designation by a resource management committee appointed
by the Governor. However, this effort resulted in a management plan
which is presently being implemented by State regulatory agencies and by
units of local government abutting the river.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING

The Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act requires all units of
general purpose local government to prepare a comprehensive plan for
their jurisdiction which must include a future land use map that
designates areas for future residential, commercial, industry,
agriculture, recreation, conservation, education, public buildings and
grounds, and other categories of land use.

A conservation element is also required which provides for the
conservation, use, and protection of natural resources in the area,
including air, water, water recharge areas, wetlands, water wells,
estuarine marshes, soils, beaches, shores, floodplains, rivers, bays,
lakes, harbors, forests, fisheries and wildlife, marine habitat,
minerals, and other natural and environmental resources.

In addition, coastal cities and counties are required to develop a
coastal zone protection element which includes policies to guide a
local government's decisions and program implementation with respect to
the maintenance, restoration, and enhancement of the overall quality of
the coastal zone environment. The element must address a number of
subject areas including the protection of coastal resources, the orderly
development and use of ports and the issue of public expenditures which
may have the effect of subsidizing development in high-hazard areas.

Amended in 1985, this Act now requires the development and adoption of
land development regulations such as zoning ordinances and subdivision
regulations which are designed to implement the adopted comprehensive
plan.

THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ACT OF 1972

This Act, as amended by the 1984 Legislature, requires the preparation of
a state comprehensive plan for the " ... long range policy guidance for the
orderly social, economic, and physical growth of the state. 11 (Section
187.01 (1), F.S.). The plan, which was subsequently adopted by the 1985
Legislature, contains goals which, along with many other topics, deal
with the protection of the State's water resources, natural systems,
coastal resources, land development and use, and property rights.
Each State agency must prepare a state agency functional plan which will
guide its programs and functions consistent with the State Comprehensive
Plan. These plans must be completed by May, 1986.

The Act also calls for the development of "Comprehensive Regional
Policy Plans" (CRPP) consistent with the adopted State Comprehensive
Plan. The regional plans are to contain goals, policies, and standards
which accurately reflect and implement the goals and policies of the
State plan. On adoption, the comprehensive regional policy plans will

provide the basis for regional review of developments of regional impact,
local government comprehensive plans, federally-assisted projects, and
other regional overview and comment functions. Comprehensive regional
policy plans for the eleven planning councils must be completed by

December, 1986.

RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION

As can be seen from the programs described in Chapter IV, much
legislation has been enacted by the State to provide for legislation has
been enacted by the State to provide for the protection of hurricane
surge areas, floodprone areas, water quality, and significant natural
areas. However, these programs have been created over a number of years,
usually to address a specific issue. Thus, these programs are often
isolated from one another in their application to a specific area. The
purpose of this chapter is to describe a coordinated hazard mitigation
and natural area protection management program.

The recommended program establishes a desired outcome for each of the
previously identified regionally significant areas and suggests a number
of independent programs which, when taken together, should be successful
in resource protection and hazard mitigation. These programs include
public acquisition, the imposition of opt@ional State regulatory programs,
and the use of local regulatory powers. It is the intent of the
recommended management program to provide guidance to the proper
management and use of these areas for inclusion in State, regional and
local plans and programs. The management program consists of two major
parts: (1) overall program thrusts; and (2) overlay designations.

PROGRAM THRUSTS

Four broad classifications, or program thrusts, are developed for
application to the previously identified regionally significant natural
areas. These are Preservation-Conservation, Preservation-Recreation,
Economic Production-Rural, and Urban.

PRESERVATION-CONSERVATION

The preservation-conservation program thrust has as its objective
the maintenance of designated natural areas in a relatively undisturbed
state. Thus, this program thrust places emphasis on the public
acquisition of especially critical natural areas, along with the strict
regulation of privately-held lands.

For example, public acquisition programs such as the Save Our Rivers
program would be widely used to purchase certain critical areas which
would then be managed to ensure their preservation while a combination
of State, regional and local regulatory programs would be used to ensure
the protection of the remaining area under this designation. Appropriate
State and regional programs would be the Outstanding Florida Waters
program administered by the Department of Environmental Regulation, the
Works of the District program administered by the Suwannee River Water
Management District and/or the Developments of Regional Impact program
administered by the Council which could establish lower "thresholds" for
areas so designated. Local governments could address issues regarding
the use and management of these areas through their comprehensive plans
and regulations.

PRESERVATION-RECREATION

The'preservation-recreation program thrust has as its objective the
provision and maintenance of resource-based recreation values. Similar
to the preservation-conservation program, this program thrust would
utilize public acquisition programs such as the Land Acquisition Trust
Fund or the Save Our Rivers program to purchase regionally-significant
natural areas for recreational use--open to the general public. In
addition, State, regional and local regulatory programs such as the ones
discussed above would be used to protect the natural recreational and
aesthetic values of privately-held areas adjacent to lakes and river
corridors and to designate the types of recreational uses that may be
most appropriate for the adjoining water bodies.

An example of the application of the Preservation-Recreation Program
Thrust would be along Segment III of the Suwannee River. Here,
residential development would be permitted but lot sizes would be large
enough and riverfront setbacks of sufficient depth to maintain
undeveloped character of the river. The wildlife corridor overlay would
be extensively used by the public as a hiking and horseback riding trail.
Motorboats would be permitted extensive use of the river corridor in
conjunction with canoes and speed limits sufficient to prevent riverbank
erosion.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-RURAL

The economic production-rural program thrust has as its objective the
retention of regionally significant areas in rural uses such as
agriculture and forestry operations. For areas designated economic
production-rural, rural production values would take precedence over
residential and urban land uses. Several of the State, regional and
local regulatory programs such as the ones described above would be
appropriate for application to these areas.

Public acquisition is limited to specific springs or other small-scale,
unique features. Wildlife corridor overlays are possible within this
program thrust but are subordinate to economic production value S, For
example, within an agricultural area, the wildlife corridor may also be
used by grazing cattle or may be altered from its actual course to
reflect crop plantings and property lines.

An example of an Economic Production-Rural Program Thrust is the
secondary wetlands of California Swamp. This area is under extensive
timber harvesting and has been for many years. Most of the timber is on
a 20-year rotation cycle employing clear-cut harvesting techniques.

Silviculture Best Management Practices are employed. The land is
regularly burned and fertilized using aerial application techniques to
promote tree growth. Such applications could cause problems adjacent to
residential subdivisions. In order to promote economical timber
harvesting and management, aerial application techniques would be
allowed to continue and residential development would be prohibited
within such areas. A buffer area of adequate depth may be appropriate
around the designated area in order to insure the continued use of
appropriate economic production techniques.

URBAN

The urban designation is applied to existing and proposed urban areas
located within or adjacent to regionally significant natural areas. Once
identified, the objective is to determine which areas can receive further
growth without causing significant adverse impacts to the resource and
what special precautions should be taken to ensure its protection as
development occurs. Table 25 presents existing urban areas classified by
size and function located within or immediately adjacent to regionally
significant areas. Urban places within the region range from settlements
(Class 1) with populations of less than 100 persons, e.g., town of
Suwannee, to a regional metropolis (Class 6) with a population exceeding
60,000 persons, e.g., Gainesville.

TABLE 25

URBAN AREAS LOCATED WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO
REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS BY
ECOLOGICAL ZONE, INCLUDING URBAN AREA CLASSIFICATION

URBAN
URBAN AREAS AREA
BY ECOLOGICAL ZONE CLASS

Coastal Drainage Basin
Athens 1
Cedar Island 1
Cross City 4
Dekle Beach 1
Hampton Springs 1
Horseshoe Beach 2
Jena 1
Jonesboro 1
Keaton Beach 1
Old Town 1
Perry 5
Salem 1
Spring Warrior Camp 1
Steinhatchee 1
Steward City 1
Tennille 1
Town of Suwannee 1

Suwannee River System
Branford 3
Dowling Park 1
Ellaville 1
Fanning Springs 2
Grady 1
Luraville 1
Rock Bluff Ferry .1
Wannee 1
White Springs 3

Uplands with Direct Impact on River System
Brooker 2
Chancey 1
Dixie Town 1
Fletcher 1
Graham 1
Hampton 2
Hatchbend 1

TABLE 25, CONTINUED

URBAN
URBAN AREAS AREA
BY ECOLOGICAL ZONE CLASS

Jennings 3
Louise 1
Mayo Junction 1
Old Town 1
Santa Fe 1
Wilcox Junction 1

Uplands with Indirect/No Impact on River System
Cross Creek 1
Earleton 1
Gainesville 6
Greenville 3
Hawthorne 3
Island Grove 1
Lake City 5
Lochloosa 1
Melrose 1
Micanopy 3
Rochelle 1
Waldo 3

Groundwater Recharge Areas
Alachua 4
Baker's Mill 1
Columbia City 1
Hillcoat 1
Jasper 4
Lee 2
Myrtis 1
Northwood 1
Wellborn I
Williford 1

OVERLAY DESIGNATIONS

In addition to program thrusts, the recommended management program
uses a number of programs independent of program thrust designation,
referred to hereafter as overlay designations. Overlay designations are
designed for an underlying resource which is so special that regardless
of the program thrust designation, special consideration must be-given to
the protection of the affected resource.

Overlay designations are divided into four types: (1) Flora and Fauna
Protection; (2) Resource-based Recreation; (3) Hazard Protection; and (4)
Water Quality Protection. Flora and fauna overlays include wildlife
islands, wildlife breeding areas, wildlife nesting sites, aquatic
preserves, unique habitats, manatee preserves, and wildlife corridors.
Resource-based recreation overlays include hiking/horseback riding
trails, canoe trails, and motorboat corridors. Hazard protection
overlays include the hurricane surge area, floodplain corridors and
floodprone areas. Water quality protection overlays include
stream-to-sink recharge areas, high indirect recharge areas, Works
of the District, and Outstanding Florida Waters.

As noted in Table 26, overlay designations can overlap each other
and cross areas with differing program thrust designations. However,
standards and implementation methods may vary by program thrust
designation. There are a few overlay programs which are applicable only
to specific program thrust designations. The majority of overlays are
applicable to all program thrusts.

TABLE 26

OVERLAY ELEMENTS BY PROGRAM THRUST

PROGRAM THRUSTa
CORRIDOR OVERLAY C R E U

Flora and Fauna Overlays
1. Wildlife Island, including x
Wildlife Breeding Areas and x x x
Wildlife Nesting Sites x x x x
2. Wildlife Corridor x x x x
3. Aquatic Preserve Designation x x x x
4. Manatee Preserve Designation x
5. Unique Habitat Overlay x x x x

Resource-based Recreation
1. Hiking/Horseback Riding x x x x
Trail
2. Canoe Trail x
3. Motorboat Corridor x x x

TABLE 26, CONTINUED

PROGRAM THRUSTa
CORRIDOR OVERLAY C R E U

Hazard Protection Overlays
1. Hurricane Surge Area x x T x
2. Floodplain Corridors and x x x x
Floodprone areas

Water Quality Protection Overlays
1. Stream-to-sink Recharge Areas x x x x
2. High Indirect Recharge Areas x x x x
3. OFW Designation x x x x
4. Sink/Spring Overlay x x x x
5. Works of the District x x x x

aWhere C represents Conservation; R Recreation; E Economic
Production-Rural; and U - Urban.

OVERLAY ELEMENT DESCRIPTIONS

FLORA AND FAUNA OVERLAYS

WILDLIFE ISLAND, BREADING AND NESTING SITES OVERLAY

Flora and fauna overlays consist of wildlife islands, wildlife corridors,
aquatic preserves, manatee sanctuaries, and unique habitats.
Furthermore, wildlife island designations consist of three different
scales: (1) wildlife islands; (2) wildlife breeding areas; and (4)
wildlife nesting sites. A wildlife island should be large enough to
support a threshold level population of a particular species. Therefore,
wildlife islands tend to be quite large, involving several thousand acres
of land. Wildlife breeding areas tend to be much smaller ranging between
50 and 200 acres in size and are typically used by migratory and resident
bird populations. Nesting sites represent individual nests of birds,
reptiles, or other animals. Such areas generally represent only one or
two nesting pairs and may be found within any program thrust.

WILDLIFE CORRIDOR OVERLAY

Wildlife corridors connect wildlife islands together. They allow
animals to migrate from one wildlife island to another to reduce
in-breeding and provide evacuation routes during stressful environmental

events such as fires and hurricanes. Most wildlife corridors follow
89

One proposal currently under review is the establishment of a statewide
corridor system for movement of Florida panthers from north to South
Florida. This proposal also calls for linking the Gulf coastal marsh
with the Osceola National Forest-Pinhook Swamp area using wildlife
corridors.

AQUATIC PRESERVE OVERLAY

The Aquatic Preserve Overlay sets aside for future generations
state-owned submerged lands in areas which have exceptional biological,
aesthetic, and scenic attributes. The establishment of a State aquatic
preserve limits the construction of bulkheads, places severe restrictions
on dredging, restricts the dredging of minerals, limits the erection of
structures within the preserve to docks for reasonable ingress and
egress, commercial docking facilities, and shore protection structures.
In addition, no water or effluents can be discharged into an aquatic
preserve which substantially harms the preserve. Currently, the Dixie
and Taylor county coastal marsh are the only aquatic preserves in the
region.

MANATEE PRESERVE OVERLAY

The Manatee Preserve Overlay is intended to preserve Florida's
"outstanding marine mammal". The Overlay Designation essentially calls
for the enactment of a state manatee preserve under the State's Manatee
Preserve Act. Designation may impose limits on dredging activities,
motorboat speed limits, and general river use, particularly during
the spring Manatee migration.

UNIQUE HABITAT OVERLAY

Unique habitat designation is meant to apply primarily to areas
containing endangered, threatened or rare plant species. Once
identified, special care should be given to these areas to prevent the
loss of the habitat. In urban areas, a specialist should be brought in
to design development proposals compatible with such plant species.

RESOURCE-BASED RECREATION OVERLAYS

HIKING/HORSEBACK RIDING OVERLAY

This corridor is very similar to a wildlife corridor and in some
instances the two may be coterminous. When overlapping, hiking trails
should be kept as distant as possible from the center of the wildlife
corridor to reduce disturbance and human intrusion. For example, in the
case of the Suwannee River, the trail should only approach the river's

edge at areas offering interesting views or containing unique river
features. Buffer areas should be established in conservation and
recreation areas to minimize the negative impacts of residential land use
and other activities upon hikers. When overlapping wildlife corridors,
usage of the trail should be kept down to levels which will not
substantially disrupt the wildlife corridor function.

Camping areas should be kept small in size. In preservation-conservation
areas, camping areas should be limited to off-road access while in
preservation-recreation areas, car campers should be permitted along the
trail and bicyclists should be allowed to use the trail. Camping areas
should be prohibited in urban areas. In economic production-rural areas,
hiking trail campgrounds should generally be limited to hikers and
horseback campers. In urban areas, the trail system might be
incorporated into urban parks and along scenic highways.

CANOE TRAIL OVERLAY

Canoe trails are meant to provide a quality wilderness experience
similar to a hiking/horseback riding trail and could correlate well with
wilderness corridors, hiking trails, and floodprone areas. For example,
canoe trails could share campgrounds with the hiking trails. In order to
provide a quality outdoor experience for canoe trails, it is important
that special regulations be adopted along the stream banks of canoe
trails for minimum setbacks and special design review of development
proposals to insure all proposed development is harmonious with the
wilderness quality of the canoe trail.

MOTORBOAT OVERLAY

Motorboat corridors should allow for mixed use of motorboats, canoes, and
other watercraft. Speed limits and special regulations may be necessary
in order to minimize shoreline erosion. A certain amount of limited boat
dock access should be available to allow river access to State parks,
urban areas, and other selected features. In addition, during certain
times of the year it may be necessary to limit motorboat activity, such
as during manatee migration periods and sturgeon spawning runs.

HAZARD PROTECTION OVERLAYS

HURRICANE SURGE AREA OVERLAY

This overlay zone applies only to the coastal areas of Dixie and Taylor
Counties. The primary thrust of this overlay designation is to minimize
damage to human life and property caused by hurricanes. As noted in
Chapter IV, coastal jurisdictions must address this problem in their
comprehensive plans including the issue of public infrastructure

investments which may have effect of subsidizing development in hazardous
areas.

FLOODPLAIN CORRIDOR AND FLOODPRONE AREA OVERLAY

This overlay designation applies only to the regional river systems and
is limited to the 100-year floodplain. The primary intent of the overlay
designation is to minimize damage to human life and property caused by
river flooding. Continued application of the local government floodplain
ordinances and Works of the District setback requirements are appropriate
to this designation.

WATER QUALITY PROTECTION OVERLAYS

STREAM-TO-SINK RECHARGE AREA OVERLAY

This overlay is intended to provide adequate treatment of groundwater
runoff reaching sinks with direct recharge to the Floridan Aquifer.
Currently, the surfacewater management rules of the Suwannee River Water
Management District have identified such recharge areas and produced
surfacewater runoff regulations for development within such areas.
These regulations minimize surfacewater discharge to sinks. Additional
regulations could include a development setback of sufficient distance
from the sink to allow proper treatment of surfacewater runoff.

HIGH INDIRECT RECHARGE AREA OVERLAY

The protection of the Floridan Aquifer as the primary source of potable
water for the urban areas of the region is anticipated to require special
land management techniques within areas subject to large volumes of
indirect (percolation) groundwater recharge. Such regulations may limit
the use of certain pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers.
Additionally, such areas are likely to require special consideration
for hazardous waste and toxic chemical contamination considerations.

OFW DESIGNATION OVERLAY

The OFW Overlay designation is an extenskon of the Florida Air and Water
Pollution Control Act (section 403.061 (10), (25),(28) F.S.) which allows
the Department of Environmental Regulation to establish rules which
provide for a special category of water within the state known as
"Outstanding Florida Waters."

Waters under the State Outstanding Florida Waters Act include all waters
in National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, State Parks and Preserves,
Scenic and Wild Rivers, State Aquatic Preserves, and certain waters

within National Forests. Special Water OFW's within the region include
the Suwannee River, and the Santa Fe River system (Santa Fe River, Lake
Santa Fe, Little Lake Santa Fe, Santa Fe Swamp, Olustee Creek and the
Ichetucknee River below State Road 27).

OFW designation freezes current water quality levels and prevent further
water quality degradation regardless of DER Water Quality Classification.
Designation does not include incorporated or unincorporated
municipalities or the area 500 ft. off-shore of any incorporated or
unincorporated municipality. When an individual submits a DER
application, it is reviewed under a tougher standard than would otherwise
apply. OFW designation only has an impact if a proposed project is in
the DER permitting system. Septic tanks and building permits are not
included. Silvicultural activities are also exempted. In practice, OFW
status affects dredge & fill activities, sewage disposal plants, and
industrial waste disposal. In addition, residential developments of 40
acres or more must meet certain water detention and retention
requirements. Under OFW designation, a residential development must meet
existing surfacewater management requirements plus 50 percent more. For
example, if a development project is required by surfacewater management
rules to retain the first 1/2 inch of stormwater, the same development
would have to retain the first 3/4 inch of stormwater under an OFW
classification.

SINK/SPRING OVERLAY

The Sink/spring overlay is similar to the spring to sink recharge
overlay with additional provisions for the protection spring sloughs.
The Overlay is more localized and applies only to areas within close
proximity to major sinks and first, second, and third magnitude springs.

WORKS OF THE DISTRICT OVERLAY

The Works of the District Overlay is an extension of surfacewater
management rules developed by the water management districts. The SRWMD
and SJRWMD have rules for surfacewater management within the water
management district as well as works of the district rules for those
areas declared works of the district by the respective water management
districts. Works of the District currently include the floodways of the
Suwannee, Santa Fe, Alapaha. Withlacoochee, and Aucilla rivers. While
these rules do not dictate land use or land use intensities, they do
provide for a 75 foot streamside setback from the river's edge of all
streams and rivers located within works of the district. The rules
prevent construction and vegetation clearance within the streamside
setback area, including mounded septic tanks.

PROGRAM THRUST DESIGNATION BY ECOLOGICAL ZONE

This section applies the management program developed in this chapter to
the previously identified regional significant areas. Table 27 presents
a summary of the recommended management program for all of the areas
grouped by ecological zone. The recommendations consist of program
thrust designation, public acquisition policy, and applicable overlay
zones. It is important to note that the wildlife island overlays
(islands, breeding areas, and nesting sites) are hierarchical. The
actual designation presented in the table represents the highest level of
wildlife island recom mended for each regionally significant area. Thus,
an area designated as a wildlife island will also include both breeding
area and nesting site overlays.

COASTAL DRAINAGE BASIN

The primary program thrust recommended for the coastal drainage basin is
preservation-conservation due in part to the sensitivity of the coastal
ecology (which is critical to the health of the Gulf fishing industry)
and in part to hurricane hazards. Virtually the entire coastline, except
for a few scattered areas designated for urban development, is included
in the recommended designation. The second-largest areal designation
within the coastal drainage basin is economic production-rural. This
designation acknowledges the vast acreage of existing commercial forestry
and agricultural operations occurring within the coastal drainage basin.

In addition to the primary program thrusts, the hurricane surge overlay
designation is recommended for the entire.coastline of Dixie and Taylor
counties, while the unique habitat overlay is recommended for the coastal
marsh and estuaries. The Outs.tanding Florida Waters designation is
recommended for the Gulf coastal waters, the coastal marsh, the Econfina,
Steinhatchee and Aucilla Rivers, and regionally significant freshwater
wetlands located westward of U.S. Highway 19. Finally, public
acquisition is recommended for the core of California Swamp as well as
the Aucilla, Econfina, and Steinhatchee River corridors.

SUWANNEE RIVER SYSTEM

The following program thrusts are recommended for the five segments of
the Suwannee River and its major tributaries; the Alapaha, Ichetucknee,
Santa Fe, and Withlacooche6 rivers. Segment I of the Suwannee is
recommended for preservation-conservation; Segment II is designated for
preservation-conservation; Segment III, preservation-recreation; Segment
IV, preservation-recreation; and Segment V, preservation-conservation.
Only Segment V of The Suwannee is recommended for acquisition. However,
within each segment of the Suwannee as well as its tributaries are
several features which require special consideration in their treatment.

These smaller areas consist of significant natural areas, urban areas,
sinks and springs. Regardless of program thrust, two overlay
designations are applied along the entire Suwannee River system. These
are the floodplain and wildlife corridor overlays.

The intent of the recommended program thrusts for the Suwannee River
system is to limit land uses primarily to recreational, agricultural, and
silvicultural along the length of river system and to cluster urban
development within designated points along the rivers. Urban clusters
would support a greater intensity of development, allowing smaller lot
sizes than permitted elsewhere along the rivers.

As shown on Table 27,a number of different overlays are recommended for
various segments of the river system, for example, hiking/horseback and
canoe trails are recommended for Segments I and II, while the manatee
preserve overlay is recommended for Segment V which includes the mouth of
the Suwannee River.

UPLANDS WITH DIRECT IMPACTS ON RIVER SYSTEM

The primary program thrusts recommended for these regionally significant
areas are preservation-conservation and preservation-recreation.
Generally, areas which are currently used for recreational purposes are
classified for future use as recreational while undeveloped areas are
classified as conservation. This ecological zone includes some of the
most extensive proposed land acquisitions. Only Ginnie Spring and
Blue Spring are recommended to remain in private ownership.

Regionally significant natural areas within this ecological zone are
almost inseparable from the rivers themselves. Most of these areas are
located within the 100-year floodplain. Identified areas include many
floodprone lands directly adjacent to the river system. These natural
areas are generally smaller than other identified regionally significant
areas; however, they represent the best remaining natural areas on or
adjacent to the river system. Many of these areas are presently
experiencing significant development pressure.

UPLANDS WITH INDIRECT OR NO IMPACT ON RIVER SYSTEM

The primary recommended program thrust is preservation-conservation, with
the exceptions of the proposed Lochloosa Forest and Osceola National
Forest which are designated as preservation-recreational, and Wacassassa
Flats which is designated economic production-rural.

These lands are primarily large areas of upland wetlands and forests,
much of which is already in public ownership. Some of the land,
particularly in Alachua County, is experiencing significant development
pressure while other areas, due to wetness, are experiencing virtually no
development pressure and are not anticipated to experience significant
pressure through the year 2010.

One of the primary goals for upland areas, particularly Pinhook Swamp and
the Osceola National Forest, is preservation of existing natural systems
due in part to the possibility that an experimental panther preserve may
be established linking the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge in
southern Georgia to the Osceola National Forest.

GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AREAS

Less is known about groundwater recharge areas in the Region than
any other natural resource. The Suwannee River Water Management District
has identified stream-to-sink recharge areas but has yet to accurately
identify areas of high indirect recharge. Nevertheless, the identified
stream-to-sink recharge areas represent a significant land area which
require special care due to their direct hydrologic connection to the
Floridan Aquifer. Generally, the land use and intensity of use is not so
much a concern as is the method of surfacewater management. Recently
enacted surfacewater management rules are expected to provide an adequate
level of protection to protect the underground aquifers within identified
recharge areas.

Areas with high indirect recharge rates may require different forms of
land management. In such areas, the use of certain pesticides,
herbicides, and fertilizers may need to be restricted in order to protect
the drinking water supply from contamination. Due to the many
contaminants created by an urban environment, intensive development
should be directed away from these areas. The Suwannee River Water
Management District is attempting to identify such areas and their
associated rates of recharge. Once the areas have been identified and
recharge rates established, local governments as well as the District
should be prepared to develop and implement appropriate regulations for
groundwater protection.

Currently, all but the Alachua County Recharge Area is recommended
for the economic production-rural classification. Classification
of these areas is especially difficult, since with proper surfacewater
management, a wide variety of land uses could be supported within the
stream-to-sink recharge areas. The current program thrust designation is
a reflection of both current and projected land use and economic
activities within these areas.

TABLE 27 RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR AREAS
BY ECOLOGICAL ZONE

Wrogram I Acquls .1 Flora A Fauna Protection Recreation Huard I Veter Quality
IThrust I Policy I V Isl V Breed W Rest 9 Corr Habitat M20 lisnateal Trall Canoe Boat IN 3 Area r P IS-Sink Ground orw w of 0 1

Coastal Drainage Ruin
1. AmilIa River Corridor I C I A I : I I I x I I I I I x I I
2. A`ucIIIa River Estuary I C I R I I I I I I x I I I I I I x I x I
,.CalIfornia Swamp, Care I C I A I x I I I I I I I I I
4. CAllfonta Sweep. Ruat-der 1 2 1 R I I I I I I I I I I
S. Econfina River Corridor I C I A I I I I I I I I I I x I
1. gconflm River EstuuT I C I R I x I I I I x I x I I
7. Fres"ter Iletlands
Wit of U.S. 19
a. Direct Sheet Flow to Gulf I C I It I I I I x I I
Ii. Indirect Sheet Flow to Calf I I I R I I I I I I
8. ouit Coastal Kaih 9 1 R I x I I I I
9. wit coastal liater's I I I x I I I
16. Lw Suum@ne. Net Wildlife Ref I C I P I I I I X
11. St Marks Kat W Refuge I C I A I I I x I
12. Spring Warrior Creek Corridor I C I R I I I I
13. Wing Merrier Creek Estuary I C I R I x I I x I x I I x I I
14. Spring Warrior S-sp I C I R I x I I I I I I I I I x I
Stelrfttch" River Co"Idor I C I I I X I I I I X
SteInhetchee River Estuary C X I I X I I I
I?. Suwannee River. Sepent V
(see Suwnme River Systes)
Is. Tide Sw-p I I R I x I I I I I I x I I

SuwaW River System
19. Also-" Rl- I C I a I I I x I x I I x I I I x I
28. Ihtuckrwa River I R I R I 1 1 x I
31. Santa to River R I R I
22. S-mmad River, Sepent I I C I A I I I I I I I I I x I I x I I I x I I
2"4, ss=e 2=: S,:Pp:".t 1". 1, RC " : : I '. : " 'x ; x : 1, X, 1, : 1, 'x
25. Suwannee River, Sepent IV I R I It I I I I I I I I I I x I I I I I
26. Suwannee River, Segment V I C I A I I I I I I x I I I I I x I I I I I
27. WILhlacooches River I C I R I I I x I I I x I I I

TABLE 27, CONTINUED

@
Pro- AcquI, Mr. I Is. Protection Hazard Water Quallt
Thrust Policy W read U Nest W Corr Habitat HM Ranateel Trall Canoe - Canoe Boat @H 3 Arm FP IS-SInk Ground OFW Y 9 off

Uplands With Direct Impact
on River Systems
2B. Aucilla River Sinks I C I A I x I x I x I x I I
29. Blue Spring I R I R I I I I x I I I I
38. grown Tract I C I p I I x I I I x I I x I I I
51. Carey Forest I C I R I I x I I
32. Clemle Springs I R I R I I I x I x I I I
33. Holton Creek I C I A I I x I I I x I I x I I x I 1 2
34. Ichetucknee Springs State Park I R I P I I x I I
35. O'lano State Park A River Rise I C I P I x I I
State preserve
36. Peacock Slough I R I A I I x I I x I I I x I I I I
Y?. REGAIning LaMs Comprising
Ecosystem of:
a. Ichetucknee St. Park I R I A I I x I I I I I I x I
b. Suvwme River State Park I R I a I I x I I I
c. O'lerm-River Rise St Pro I C I A I I x I I x I I
Santa Fe Madvaters Swamp I C I P I I I I I x I I I I I I
Suwannee River State Park I R I P I I I I I I I x I I I I x I I
40. S6%onnee-Santa Fe Confluence I C I A I I I I I x I I I I I I x I I I
41. Mannee Natural Arm I C I A I I I I I I x I x

Uplands with Indirect/No Impact
an River System
42. Us Haven Say I C I R I X I I I I
43. Big Gum Swamp Hat Wilderness I C I P I I I I x I I
44. Brooks Sink I C I A I I I
45. Devil's M*hpper St Goo Site I C I P I I I x I
46. Gum Root Swamp I C I R I I I I x I I I I I I
47. Nixtown Swamp I Z I R I I I I I I I x I I I
40. Lochloom Wildlife Mgt Arm I C I A I X I I I I . I I I I I
49. Osceola Mat Forest I R I P I I I I I I I x I
$8. P%Yne's Prairie State Preserve I C I P x I I I x I I I I x I
$1. Pinhook Svap-SuWltn B*y- 9 1 R I X I I I
Impassable Bay 1
R."Inig Land. Comprising
Ecosystem of:
a. S Felasco Hassock St Preserve I C I A I I
b. Payno-s Prairie St Preserve I C I A I X
S Felasco Hassock St Preserve I C I P I x I I I
54. Wocassasse Flats I I R I x I x I

Groundwater Recharge Areas
Alachua Ca Recharge I x I
9 1 R I
Columbia Ca Southern Recharge
$7. Columbia Co Western Recharge I I R I I x I I x I
$0. Hamilton Go Recharge 9 1 it I I x I I x I
59. Kadlson Co Recharge 9 R I I x I
60. Su-me Ca Recharge 9 A I I x I I I I

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED ACQUISITION POLICY

All or portions of 23 regionally significant natural areas are
recommended for purchase. Areas recommended for public acquisition
are located in 9 of the 11 north central Florida counties. It is the
intent of this section to determine fiscal impacts upon county
governments and school districts from the withdrawal of these lands
from the local tax base. No proposed acquisition is located within
city limits or metropolitan service taxing units. All other local
taxing jurisdictions, except for the Suwannee River Water Management
District, are unaffected. It should be noted that the following analysis
is only an indicator of the relative impacts the management plan's
proposed acquisition policy upon county government and school district
revenues.

The fiscal impact analysis presented in this report is a worst case
scenario. The worst case is considered to be the acquisition policy
which would produce the most severe financial burden possible on local
governments by removing all recommended lands from the tax roles in one
year (1986).

METHODOLOGY

Taxable value figures are gathered from the 1985 and, to a limited
extent, 1984 tax roles for sections recommended for public acquisition.
These figures were then compared to county total taxable values. Total
taxable value figures presented for each natural area reflect real
property values only. They do not include personal property or centrally
assessed property as it is assumed that these taxable values would be
unaffected by the acquisition program. An analysis of property tax
records for areas proposed for purchase did not reveal significant
amounts of taxable personal property and their omission should not
substantially affect estimates of loss.

The fiscal impact analysis is limited to operating revenues. However,
it should be noted that Alachua and Bradford county governments have
separate county tax assessments for bonded indebtedness. In addition,
Alachua, Bradford, and Suwannee counties have separate tax assessments
for school district bonded indebtedness. Required funds for meeting
bond obligations represents a fixed amount of money every year.
Therefore, the actual rate charged for these funds may vary from year
to year depending upon countywide taxable values. It is anticipated
that the fiscal impacts on these funds would be very slight and is
not considered in the following analysis.

As noted above, the values are obtained for sections which include the
areas proposed for acquisition. Actual acquisitions, particularly
along river corridors, are unlikely to conform to section line
boundaries. It is therefore estimated that the lost tax base presented
in this report may be overstated by as much as 20 percent. Furthermore,
significant tax breaks for green belt and homestead exemptions exist
which are not reflected in taxable value figures.

EVALUATION RESULTS

Table 28 depicts the im pact of lost tax revenues upon affected county
governments and school districts. The lost tax base as a percentage of
total county taxable value ranges from a high of 3.71 percent in Dixie
County to a low of 0.11 percent in Bradford County. Using 1985 tax
rates, actual dollar amounts are also provided, with an estimated loss
of 1986 county government tax revenues ranging from a high of $44,088
in Dixie to a low of $801 annually for Lafayette. Similarly, lost 1986
school district revenue ranges from a high of $31,530 in Dixie County
to a low of $586 in Lafayette County.

TABLE 28

1985 MILLAGE RATES AND ESTIMATED FIRST YEAR LOST OPERATING REVENUES
FOR AFFECTED COUNTY GOVERNMENTS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS
IN DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND PERCENTAGE OF COUNTYWIDE TAXABLE VALUE

LOST TAX
LOST ANNUAL VALUE AS OPERATING REVENUE
OPERATING REVENUE PERCENT OF MILLAGE RATES
COUNTY COUNTY SCHOOL OF TAX BASE COUNTY SCHOOL

Alachua 34,430 27,317 0.2 8.5 6.744
Bradford 1,599 1,174 0.1 8.25 6.017
Columbia 3,571 3,127 0.1 6.466 5.662
Dixie 44,088 31,532 3.7 10.0 7.152
Gilchrist 12,421 7,130 1.3 10.0 5.74
Hamilton 13,831 15,284 1.0 5.35 5.95
Lafayette 801 586 1.3 10.0 7.309
Suwannee 5,208 3,232 0.2 9.136 5.669
Taylor 26,094 35,378 1.3 4.587 6.219

Alachua, Bradford, Columbia, Hamilton, Suwannee, and Taylor county
governments as well as all school districts could recover all lost
revenues through slight increases in millage rates. However, the
maximum allowable millage rate under state law for both county government

100

and school district operating revenues is 10 ($10.00 of tax per $1,000 of
assessed valuation). Dixie, Gilchrist, and Lafayette county governments
are currently at the 10 mill operating revenue cap.
These three counties must rely upon increases in the total taxable
value to recover any lost revenue.

As can be seen in Table 29, all nine counties have experienced
significant increases in countywide total taxable value for the years
between 1980 and 1985 inclusive. Assuming that these average annual
rates of increase in county taxable value continue into the immediate
future, all counties are anticipated to recoup lost operating revenues
within one year after removal of all selected areas from the tax roles.
Thus, no county or school district is anticipated to experience a
reduction in operating revenues from current levels.

TABLE 29

CHANGES IN TAXABLE VALUE AND RESULTING TAX REVENUES
AS A RESULT OF INCREASED TAXABLE VALUE
FOR COUNTY GOVERNMENTS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS, 1980-1985

AVERAGE ANNUAL
PERCENTAGE CHANGE AVERAGE ANNUAL INCREASE IN
TAXABLE VALUE 1980-1985 TAX REVENUES ($)
COUNTY 1980 -1985 COUNTY SCHOOL

Alachua 10.4 2,085,740 1,654,850
Bradford - 2.8 39,777 29,010
Columbia 4.5 118,523 103,882
Dixie 6.8 80,176 57,342
Gilchrist 3.8 36,291 20,831
Hamilton 3.2 43,944 48,872
Lafayette 2.2 13,871 10,139
Suwannee 4.9 121,926 75,657
Taylor 8.6 148,627 201,507

As can be seen in tables 30 and 31, under the worst case scenario
no county or school district is anticipated to experience a reduction
in operating revenues from current levels. However, reductions the
amount of increased operating revenues attributable to increased taxable
value would occur.

Under this worst case scenario, several counties are anticipated to
experience, in the short term, significant adverse impacts on future
revenue increases. Although the lost taxable value in all cases
represents a very small percentage of the countywide total taxable
value, the resultant loss would have a significant impact on increases
in short-term future revenues. For example, Dixie County's first-year

101

lost taxable revenue base represents 3.5 percent of the county's tax
base. However, this 3.5 percent loss translates into a first-year
reduction of 55 percent in anticipated revenue increases attributable
to increased countywide taxable value for the county government and a

39 percent reduction for the school district. Similarly, the first-year
revenue loss for Gilchrist County amounts to 34
percent for county government and 19 percent for theschool district.
Other significantly impacted counties are Hamilton with first-y6ar

county government losses of 31 percent and 35 percent for the county
school district. Taylor County also would experience a notable fist-year
revenue loss of 18 and 24 percent, respectively, for the county
government and county school district.

TABLE 30

FIRST YEAR PROJECTED INCREASE IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT OPERATING REVENUES
DUE TO INCREASES IN TAXABLE VALUE MINUS REVENUES GENERATED BY LANDS
PROPOSED FOR ACQUISITION

PROJECTED LOST PERCENTAGE LOSS PROJECTED NET
INCREASE REVENUE OF INCREASED INCREASE
COUNTY (IN $) (IN $) REVENUE (IN $)

Alachua 2,085,740 34,430 1.7 2,051,310
Bradford 39,777 1,599 4.0 38,178
Columbia 118,523 3,571 3.0 114,952
Dixie 80,176 44,088 55.0 36,088
Gilchrist 36,291 12,421 34.2 23,870
Hamilton 43,944 13,831 31.5 30,113
Lafayette 13,871 801 5.8 13,070
Suwannee 121,926 5,209 4.3 116,717
Taylor 148,627 26,094 17.6 122,533

102

TABLE 31

FIRST YEAR PROJECTED INCREASE IN SCHOOL DISTRICT
OPERATING REVENUES DUE TO INCREASES IN TAXABLE VALUE MINUS REVENUES
GENERATED BY LANDS PROPOSED FOR ACQUISITION

PROJECTED LOST PERCENTAGE LOSS PROJECTED NET
INCREASE REVENUE OF INCREASED INCREASE
COUNTY (IN $) (IN $) REVENUE (IN $)

Alachua 2,085,740 27,317 1.3 2,058,423
Bradford 39,777 1,174 3.0 38,603
Columbia 118,523 3,127 2.6 115,396
Dixie 80,176 31,532 39.3 48,644
Gilchrist 36,291 7,130 19.7 29,161
Hamilton 43,944 15,284 34.8 28,660
Lafayette 13,871 586 4.2 13,284
Suwannee 121,926 3,232 2.7 118,694
Taylor 148,627 35,378 23.8 113,249

In conclusion, lost revenues are anticipated to represent an
ever-decreasing proportion of actual annual operating revenues over
time. Over the long term, increases in taxable value are anticipated
to reflect increases in county-wide population growth. Furthermore,
public acquisition of lands in Dixie, Taylor, Hamilton, and Gilchrist
counties should occur over a period of several years in order to reduce
adverse short-term fiscal impacts. Specifically, an acquisition policy
could be established to limit the annual.impact upon lost revenues to a
fixed dollar amount or percent of total increased taxable value.

103

ILLUSTRATION 1

North
Central
lorl::
7
log op
GENERALIZ
'MANAGEM
PROGRAM

V. I PRE

-7,
PRE

ECC

t U@%.o
;-d6-0 00?-
IV

.0 .1
Q.; iu. UP vi
MILES to
a 0

NORTH CENTRAL IFLORIDA =Zpm
REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL

103.1

APPENDIX A: STORM HAZARDS

Major hurricanes and floods have occurred in north central Florida. It
is entirely possible that the storms of record will be exceeded in the
future. Development now exists in coastal and riverine floodplain and
damages have occurred as a result of past storms. As in the case of
riverine flooding, topographic features can be identified which reveal
the landward limits of typical coastal floods. In the case of Dixie
and Taylor counties, a natural "seawall" exists several miles inland.
This natural seawall is not really a wall at all. Rather it is an area
where there is a notable rise in land elevation to 20 - 30 feet above
mean sea level (MSL). In the case of the region, this rise in elevation
is located several miles inland.

In order to plan for activities within the hurricane zone, we need to
understand what are the forces involved, how the elements of a hurricane
affect the land and how the land and biologic communities have adjusted
over time to coastal storms and hurricanes. While most studies consider
hurricanes instead of smaller coastal storms, due consideration should be
given to the impact of smaller storms as well. Natural functions which
appear insignificant in the face of hurricanes can play an important role
in absorbing the impacts of lesser magnitude coastal storms.

Coastal flooding is distinctly different from riverine flooding. When
a river floods, the runoff and subsequent damage generally follow the
river's course. Coastal flooding occurs over broad areas that
alternately flood and drain during hurricanes and intense winter sea
storms. To fully understand the danger requires a detailed review of
the physical hazards associated with these storms and the full range of
impacts such forces could have on the coastal area. The characteristic
components of a hurricane which cause physical damage are storm surge,
waves, winds, debris battering, and coastal erosion.

HURRICANE STORM FORCES

Waves, wind, storm surge, and coastal erosion constitute the main
hurricane forces that must be considered when evaluating impact forces
on structures within the coastal zone. These force categories cause
the most property damage and loss of life during a storm.

104

HURRICANE SURGE

One of the most devastating elements of the hurricane is the high tide
which floods the coastal area. A rise in the ocean water level is
generally caused by a storm approaching the shoreline. The height of
the surge during a hurricane is dependent on a number of factors, which
include offshore water depth, wind speed, and storm speed.

The onset of the storm surge is usually characterized by a gradual rise
in the sea level at the shoreline. This gradual rise may begin when
the hurricane is as much as 500 miles offshore. As the storm moves
toward the land, the level of the water continues to rise, reaching its
maximum height when the eye of the hurricane makes its landfall.
However, dangerously high tides can occur all along the coastline
during a severe hurricane and are not confined to the immediate
vicinity of the storm center.

The increased water level is a function of two major factors:
barometric pressure and high wind velocity. The low barometric
pressure found at the center of the hurricane may raise the water level
one foot for each inch of pressure reduction. The high winds
associated with hurricanes cause the water to shoal or pile up as the
storm moves toward the coast, which increases surge height.
Furthermore, the storm surge is heightened by a shallow coastal bottom,
as is the case in the Gulf waters adjacent to Dixie and Taylor
Counties.

The maximum storm surge may be,expected 10 to 50 miles to the right of
the storm track or in the direction of the on-shore hurricane winds.
Thus for Gulf storms, the greatest surge levels are usually to the
right of the center of the storm as it makes a landfall, and to the
left of the center as it moves from land to sea and for hurricanes
travelling overland from the Atlantic.

Hurricane high-water surges often last three to five hours, during
which seawater flows into bays with such intensity that it may stop or
reverse the direction of flow down tidal rivers and through estuaries
to the sea. Furthermore, hurricanes are usually preceded by many hours
of heavy rains, which saturate the soil, cause advance runoff, and
raise the water level in rivers and bays before the surge hits.
Pre-hurricane rainfalls of five inches or more are common.

It is important to note that the direct effect of waves, including the
wave is not included with the height of the storm surge. Along the
Dixie and Taylor county coasts, the wave crest can be expected to add
an additional eight feet in height to the storm surge at the coastline
and decrease as the surge moves inland. The wave is expected to drop
to less than 3 feet in height after travelling 200 yards inland.

105

WAVES

There are many factors which influence the height of the storm waves.
These include the wave period, wave length, barometric pressure, and
wind speed. They also have a significant affect on the two major
components of the wave force: vertical and horizontal wave pressures.
The horizontal impact pressure of a hurricane storm wave has tremendous
destructive potential when breaking directly on coastal
structures. The vertical force component has the effect of producing
uplift pressures on the structure as the wave peaks.

WINDS

The shore and nearshore regions are often characterized as windy areas,
having little topographical relief to slow down wind gusts. Hurricanes
can gust up to 200 miles per hour with sustained winds of 140 miles per
hour. Wind forces exerted on structures during a hurricane can have
devastating effects particularly in conjunction with wave forces. Wind
increases with height above ground, so a tall structure is subject to
greater wind pressure than a low structure.48 It is important to note
that hurricane force winds can occur anywhere within the region.49
Generally, wave and wind forces on structures during a hurricane will
have similar impacting consequences, unless structural design
techniques are implemented to mitigate these forces. For example,
direct horizontal wave and wind forces will cause inadequately designed
structures to laterally move off their foundations, laterally collapse
from racking, or lose parts of the structure by material failure or
connection separation, all of which can cause structural collapse.

COASTAL EROSION

When a hurricane moves onshore, its high-velocity winds, waves, and
currents scour and transport large quantities of coastline sands and
soil. The amount of damage suffered by the coastline and adjoining
areas depends on a number of factors including angle of storm approach,
configuration of the shoreline, shape and slope of the ocean bottom,
wind velocity, astronomical tide, decrease in atmospheric pressure, and
longevity of the storm.50

Storm surge and wave action tend to plane off pre-existing topographic
features and produce a featureless, uniformly seaward-sloping beach.
Eroded dunes, wave-cut steps, and overwash fans are common results of
storm surge and wave activity. Sand removed by erosion may be (1)
transported and stored temporarily in an offshore bar, (2) transported
along the shore, and/or (3) transported onto or across barrier islands
through overwash channels. Trees along the coastline may be uprooted
and projected inland, like hurtling missiles, damaging structures and
other trees in their path.

106

The extent of shore erosion is especially critical on shorelines with
residential structures. The overall storm action will loosen and scour
out the sand or dirt underneath slab-on-grade foundations. This action
has the effect of causing the structure to become unstable and thus
subject to failure and collapse.

Although beach area within the region is limited, these concerns do
apply for the coastal area around Horseshoe Beach in Dixie County and
the area between Keaton Beach and Adam's Beach in Taylor County.

HAZARDS FROM UPLANDS

Storm-water runoff from uplands in the coastal drainage basin may
discharge so rapidly that it adds to the water level already forced up
by a sea storm or hurricane. Uplands runoff can thereby cause
increased flooding along the shores of a confined coastal embayment.
In the case of region III, this is especially important for coastal
communities located at the mouths of rivers, i.e., the towns of
Suwannee and Steinhatchee. The magnitude of storm necessary to cause
inundation of these areas is to some extent dependent upon water
management practices of in the upland areas of the coastal drainage
basin.

Furthermore, hurricanes are often preceded by many hours of heavy rains
which saturate the soil, cause advance runoff, and raise the water
level in rivers and bays before the surge hits. Pre-hurricane
rainfalls of five inches or more are common, and far greater rainfalls
have been recorded. Both upland and costal wetlands help to reduce the
impact of this water- through their normal function of retaining and
gradually releasing stormwaterrunoff. When wetlands areas within the
coastal drainage basin filled and drained, a significant increase may
occur in the impact of surfacewater runoff within the coastal basin
upon coastal flooding.

HAZARDS TO STRUCTURES WITHIN HURRICANE SURGE ZONE

Waves and wind can cause severe battering damage not only in forcing
water onshore to flood buildings, but also in throwing boats, barges,
piers, and other floating and wind blown debris inland against standing
structures. Few, if any, residential structures could be expected to
survive the impact of a one-ton object moving at even a slow velocity
of seven miles per hour.51

At the shoreline proper, inundation by the storm surge and accompanying
storm waves can be one to the most destructive elements of a hurricane.
The tremendous force of a wave can be realized when considering that a
cubic yard of water weighs over three-fourths of a ton. A breaking
wave moving shoreward at 60 miles per hour will have devastating
effects on structures subject to storm surge inundation.52

107

Direct vertical wave forces from peaking waves will cause structures
not securely anchored to overturn or be laterally moved off their
foundation. Structures that are anchored securely but are not elevated
high enough above the peaking wave level may experience floor cracking
leading to flooding and possible floor collapse.

Other direct forces to be reckoned with are those associated with the
effects of rising water. Often the pressure of the wind backs water
into streams or estuaries already swollen from the additional rainfall
brought by the storm. The town of Suwannee may be particularly
susceptible to flooding due to its low elevation and proximity to the
mouth of the Suwannee River.

An unanchored house located in high water may become buoyant and float
off its foundation possibly colliding against another house, severely
damaging both. Even if a house itself is left structurally intact,
flooding may destroy its contents. The buoyancy phenomenon is caused
by the difference between outside pressure and inside pressure of the
structure. An object becomes buoyed by an upward force equal to the
weight of the water displaced. Each cubic foot of water displaced by
the structure exerts enough buoyant force to float about 62 pounds.53
As a rule of thumb, the average one-story air-tight house will float
when water reaches to the structure's eaves.

Rising water accompanying the storm surge will also create a pulsating
water action which is most pronounced inside the house once a wall has
given way. Water rushing in is halted by an opposite wall and is then
forced back toward its place of entry. This pulsating water will cause
floating contents and debris inside the house to batter against
furnishings and structural elements.

Many of the indirect forces of coastal flooding, such as scouring and
horizontal recession can destroy coastal structures by undermining the
soil that underlie foundations, thereby causing the structures to
collapse.

In sum, the battering process of onrushing water, waves, and objects
floating in the water, in conjunction with high velocity winds can
create extensive damage to structures within the hurricane surge zone.

HAZARDS FROM SALTWATER INTRUSION

One of the major concerns with coastal flooding is saltwater
intrusion. Saltwater associated with storm surge rushes inward to the
hurricane surge line. The normally dry depressions of lands within the
surge zone can temporarily retain considerable amounts of surge
generated saltwater. If saltwater is held long enough, it can damage
soil fertility (by penetration into the earth) or groundwater quality
(by penetration into subsurface aquifers). It is important that
saltwater does not remain for very long due to the danger of saltwater

108

intrusion to underground aquifers. This is especially important for
Dixie and Taylor counties as the Floridan Aquifer comes very near the
surface at the coastline. Therefore, construction of seawalls or
alterations in landscape or topography should not impede the outflow of
seawater back to the Gulf.

HAZARDS IN ESTUARIES

The danger to life and property from estuarine flooding is exacerbated
by the intensity of development in the coastal zone. Mounting losses
due to floods can be expected when new residential, commercial, and
industrial construction is located in the floodplains of bays and other
estuaries. Not only are more people and property exposed, but there is
a reduction of the coastal environment's natural resistance to floods.
Eliminating wetlands and stripping watersheds accelerates runoff to the
coastal basins.

In estuaries, inundation from a rising water level, rather than direct
wave action, is the principal threat. The flood waters come
principally from seawater driven through the estuarine mouth, or inlet,
by the force of the hurricane. The form of an inlet is a key factor in
protection against hazards. Inlet channels, if they are narrow, slow
the surging water entering estuarine basins but also hold back the
outward flow of rainwater and storm runoff that fill the basins.

The normally heavy rains that accompany hurricanes and sea storms not
only fall into the estuary itself but also often produce heavy-
storm-water runoff that flow into the estuary from adjacent uplands.
Rain and runoff-added to the ocean surge level may, during the course
of a storm, elevate bay waters.higher than the ocean waters outside.
The result can be extreme flooding of shore communities as well as
possible breaks through barrier islands from bay water rushing seaward
after the hurricane passes.

The flooding of estuarine shores diminishes according to the basin's
capacity to receive and store both storm-water discharge from the
shorelands and storm surges from the ocean. This capacity is related
to the depth, width, and shape of the basin.

Saltwater wetlands can help protect communities from sea storms.
Wetland vegetation stabilizes estuarine shorelines and prevents
erosion. Salt marshes may also provide some frictional dissipation of
flooding, particularly in the broad stretches of vigorous cordgrass and
spike-grass marshes, especially for lesser magnitude storms.

109

HAZARDS UPON THE SUWANNEE RIVER SYSTEM

Flooding upon the Suwannee River System can be categorized into two
types of storm events, those induced by hurricanes and those induced by
frontal-type storms.

Major differences between the effects of hurricane storms on the,
coastal and upland riverine system have to do with intensity of wind
and water action. Except for that part of the region's rivers located
within the hurricane surge zone, rivers are not subject to hurricane
surge or wave action. In addition, flooding of riverine systems occur
within a defined floodway. The concern with riverine flooding is not
so much the damage which hurricanes can inflict but rather keeping the
floodway clear of obstacles which may block the water's flow. However,
it should be pointed out that hurricanes are capable of extensive
damage anywhere within the region. Inland winds generated by
hurricanes reach speeds of 70 to 90 miles per hour.

It is possible for a combination of strong winds and rapidly moving
water to dislodge roofs and poorly fastened structural members and
send them hurtling through the air like missiles or floating
downstream. It is entirely possible for unsecured air-tight
structures, such as mobile homes, to be washed off their foundation and
swept downstream, breaking up and littering the streambanks or crashing
into nearby buildings. Other concerns include the pollution of
riverine floodwaters and underground aquifers from stores of hazardous
chemicals, pesticides, fertilizers, and petroleum products washed away
by floodwaters.

Most of the region has permeable soil and subsurface structures and
sparse distribution of tributary streams. Normal runoff to the primary
watercourse is accomplished largely by way of sinks, seepage, and
underground channels. During periods of sustained rainfall,
groundwater levels are high, sinks and depressions overflow, and flood
runoff reaches the main river system mostly by sheet flow over the
saturated soils. There are no large reservoirs, diversions, or stream
regulating structures in the basin. Limited storage provided by
numerous small lakes and ponds has little effect on flood stages.

The average bottom slope of the Suwannee River is less than those of
the tributaries. Flooding in the lower reaches of the tributaries to
the Suwannee River is accentuated by channel control and backwater
effect from the main river. Also, several highway and railroad bridge
structures intrude into the flood plain and aggravate flood
conditions. Combinations of the above factors cause frequent and
prolonged flooding in the basin after severe storms and extended
rainfall periods. For storms causing major flooding, it is not
uncommon for floodwaters to remain for 30 days over the lowlands and
for longer periods in depressions that drain by percolation and
seepage.

110

APPENDIX B: 131OLOGIC COMMUNITIES

INTRODUCTION

Plant communities and wildlife are closely linked components of the
total natural resources of the region. Each plant community has an
associated animal community, the combination of which is considered a
biological community. Each regionally significant area is described in
terms of the biologic community found within it. Therefore, a brief
description of each biological community is provided. In general,
plant communities may be subdivided into two very broad categories,
upland communities and lowland or. wetland communities. Upland communi-
ties of north-central Florida include sandhills, mixed hardwoods and
pine, hammocks, and pine flatwoods. Lowland communities include swamp
forests, wet prairies, salt marshes and submerged lands.

UPLAND COMMUNITIES

SANDHILL COMMUNITIES

Sandhill communities typically occur on well-drained sandy soils and
may usually be identified by the typical longleaf pine-turkey oak
vegetative association. In general, due to the harsh conditions
imposed by poor soil quality, low moisture and high fire potential, the
community has a low tree diversity. It possesses a low understory
composed of herbaceous plants such as wiregrass and yellow foxglove.

Many of the animals found in sandhill communities are burrowers due to
the often high temperatures and absence of water. Species such as
indigo snakes, gopher tortoises, desert lizards, ground doves, quail,
fox squirrels and pocket gophers are cited as typical vertebrae
associated with this community. The rare red-cockaded woodpecker,
listed as an endangered specie by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
inhabits old and diseased trees in mature sandhill communities.

MIXED HARDWOOD AND PINE COMMUNITIES

Mixed hardwood and pine communities are typically found on the clayey
soils of Madison and Taylor counties. They represent the southernmost
extension of the southern piedmont mixed hardwood forest. The natural
climax vegetation of the community is characterized by an American
beech- southern magnolia-Florida maple association along with numerous
other hardwoods.

Animal species vary with the successional stage of the forest communi-
ty. Typical in early successional stages are cottontails and
bobwhites, while woodpeckers, moles, and woodcock are found in more
mature communities. Other characteristic animals include gray fox,
white-tailed deer, barred owl, pileated woodpecker, and red-bellied
woodpecker.

HAMMOCKS

Hnmmocks are a cluster of broad-leaved trees, often evergreens, usually
growing on relatively rich soil. They are noted as the climax vegeta-
tion of most areas of central and peninsular Florida. Characteristic
trees in the north central region include live oak, cabbage palm,
magnolia, laurel oak and American holly. San Felasco Hammock in
Alachua County is a good example of this type of community. Typical
animals in the hammock community include the spadefoot toad, tufted-tit
mouse, great-crested flycatcher, golden mouse, wood rat and flying
squirrel.

Based upon a survey assessing wildlife values of Floridats plant
communities, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission has
recognized hardwood hammocks as first priority communities. Such a
designation indicates those communities most deserving of protection
based upon estimated wildlife values, scarcity within the watershed and
endangerment of the plant community.

PINE FLATWOODS

Pine flatwoods are the dominant plant community in the gulf coastal
zones and are widespread throughout the region. The great majority of
upland areas of Dixie and Taylor counties are covered with pine
flatwoods forests. Most of these are managed by the large lumbering
and pulp industry which owns vast tracts within this area.

Generally, flatwoods have a low diversity of tree species. Many
understory plants common to flatwoods are wire grass, saw palmetto, wax
myrtle, mulberry, and fetterbush. Often found within large pine
flatwoods forests are small cypress pond, bayheads, and other forest
types typical of wetter environments, emphasizing the rather poorly
developed drainage.

112

Pine flatwoods are noted as having fairly numerous and diverse animal
populations. Larger animals such as deer, bear, bobcat, racoon, and
gray fox are commonly found near boundaries between flatwoods and
associated forest communities. Other typical animals common to
flatwoods include the black racer, brown-headed nuthatch, fox squirrel,
cotton rat and cottontail rabbit. Wildlife values can vary considerab-
ly depending upon the degree and type of forest management applied.

LOWLAND COMMUNITIES

SWAMP FORESTS

Swamp forests, or deciduous hardwood swamps, are found border ing rivers
and basins where the forest floor is saturated or submerged during a
portion of each year. Other terms for this community are floodplain
forest, hydric hammock and river swamp. Such communities are
characterized by hardwoods such as black gum, water rupulo, red maple,
sweetgum, water oak, and water hickory. Other typical trees include
the bald cypress and cabbage palm. Within the north central region,
swamp forests are typically encountered along the floodplains of the
Suwannee, Steinhatchee, Santa Fe and Econfina Rivers.

Animals inhabiting these areas include species such as the bobcat,
deer, turkey, grey squirrel, otter, pileated woodpecker, wood duck, as
well as numerous other birds, turtles, and snakes. In general, the
productivity of both plant and animal systems in swamp forests is very
high because of the diverse habitat, the availability of nutrients, and
the periodic flooding and drying essential to the maintenance of this
system.

WET PRAIRIE

Wet prairies and freshwater marshes cover a very limited area in north
central Florida. They are defined by any grass-sedge-rush community
occurring in an area where the soil is saturated or covered with water
two or more months of the year. Payne's Prairie in Alachua County is
the most notable example of this type of community in the region, but
occurrences are also noted in western Madison County and northern
Columbia County.

Prairie communities are very productive in wildlife. Numerous wading
birds, water fowl, frogs and other amphibians inhabit such areas. Many
rare and/or endangered species rely upon this habitat, including the
wood stork, sandhill crane, and Florida round-tailed muskrat.

113

SALT MARSH

Salt marshes are plant communities that have developed in inter-tidal
zones along low energy coasts. Tidal marshes extend along the full
length of the coasts of Dixie and Taylor counties, and extend up into
tidal rivers. In the salt marsh zone only a few inches of vertical
elevation may determine a suitable habitat for a given species or
community. Salt marsh grass often forms an almost pure stand as an
outer band of the salt marsh where it is exposed to the deepest and
longest inundation by salt water during high tide. The black rush is
commonly found on slightly higher ground in the coastal marshes of
Dixie and Taylor Counties. The species existing in any one area are
usually dependent upon the degree of inundation by tides as well as the
salinity of the water.

Salt marshes harbor large numbers of invertebrates which are fed upon
by many of the higher animals of the marsh and estuary, and conse-
quently are of particular importance to Florida. Nutrients from the
land and sea combine to produce more protein than some of the most
intensively managed farms. Many commercial fish such as the spotted
sea trout, mullet, redfish, and others spend much of their lives in the
protective estuaries afforded by salt marshes. In addition, crabs,
oysters, some species of clams, several species of shrimp and other
Gulf marine life depend on the salt marsh for food, protection and
breeding.

Other animal species which abound in the salt marsh ecosystem include
numerous species of birds, such as rails, egrets, gulls, turns, and
seaside sparrows. In addition, the endangered bald eagle breeds in
several areas of salt.marsh habitat in Taylor County. Characteristic
animals also include diamond-back terrapin, salt marsh snake, mink
otter and raccoon.

SUBMERGED LANDS

Submerged lands and their communities are those salt water ecosystems
which merge with the coastal marshes at their landward limits and
extend westward into the Gulf of Mexico. Submerged lands are those
generally lying below sea level.

Generally, the salt water systems along the northwestern gulf coast
consist of numerous flowering plants that grow completely submerged in
undiluted sea water. Although there are about 35 species of seagrasses
in the worlds's oceans, only five have been recognized on the
continental shelf of the eastern Gulf of Mexico.

Thalassia testudinum or turtlegrass is the most abundant species in
this portion of the gulf. Three other species, including manatee grass
and shoal grass, make up about 90 percent of the total seagrass
biomass.

114

Seagrass beds form an important habitat for many small crustacean,
shellfish and other invertebrates as well as fish. Most of the
important species in Florida's commercial and sport fishery spend a
portion of their lives in shallow inland and coastal waters. Many
species, including oysters, crab, sea trout, and pompano spend much of
their lives in such areas. In addition, a variety of reptiles, water
fowl, wading birds and aquatic mammals such as the otter and manatee
utilize this habitat. Sea turtles and manatees feed on seagrasses as
well as do some sea urchins, conch, parrot fishes, sturgeon, trigger
fish and many others.

Many commercial fish such as th e spotted sea trout, mullet, redfish and
others spend much of their lives in the productive wetland areas
afforded by marshes. In addition, crabs, oysters, some species of
clams, several species of shrimp and other gulf marine life depend on
the salt marsh for food, protection, and breeding. The destruction of
salt marshes could therefore have significant economic consequences
which demand their preservation. In addition, the coastal marshes
provide a measure of storm surge protection for inland areas and serve
as a natural tertiary waste treatment facility because of the nutrient
intake afforded by the abundant vegetative growth.

Animal species which abound in the salt marsh ecosystem include birds
such as rails, egrets, gulls, terns, and seaside sparrows all of which
and mare are relatively common to coastal marshes and depend upon that
system for food. The bald eagle breeds in several areas of salt marsh
habitat. In addition, the diamond-back terrapin, salt marsh snake,
mink, otter, and raccoon are also found in the marsh areas.

For a given plant species or community to survive in the region's
coastal environment, only a few inches of vertical elevation may
determine suitability for growth. Vegetation in marsh areas include
salt marsh grass, which forms an almost pure stand in an outer band of
the salt marsh where it is exposed to the deepest and longest
inundation by salt water during high tide. The black rush is commonly
found on slightly higher ground. Black rush generally covers the
greatest area of any salt marsh. With a height up to six or seven
feet, its density slows the penetration of tidal water into the marsh.
The height of the Black Rush drops inland as that system merges with a
third ecological zone. The salt flats and the subsequent barrens area
consisting of bare ground is flooded only by exceptionally high storm
tides for brief periods of time. In such areas only lower plants, such
as blue-green algae, are abundant.

Seaward of the coastal marshes are submerged lands and their communi-
ties. These generally lie below mean sea level and merge with the salt
marsh landward. Submerged seagrass beds constitute the primary
biologic community of the submerged lands. Turtlegrass is the most
abundant seagrass species in this portion of the Gulf of Mexico. Other
species of seagrass beds include Manatee grass and shoalgrass. The
seagrass beds throughout the coastal zone are reported to be the most

115

important community of the inner shelf in terms of basic productivity.
They also provide an essential environment for many species of
invertebrate and fishes including those of economic value.

Submerged grass beds supply food to grazing animals, provide nutrien-
ts to the water, add oxygen (during daylight hours) and stabilize
bottom sediments. They are nursery areas for young fishes and
crustaceans and are often the source for a substantial amount of the
primary productivity of estuaries.

116

APPENDIX C:

NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA HABITATS AND CRITICAL SPECIES

INTRODUCTION

No states other than California, Hawaii, and Texas have larger numbers
of native plant and animal species than Florida. Along with water,
native plants and animals constitute important parts of Florida's
heritage and contribute to Florida's uniqueness.

Some native species are very common. They may be found throughout the
state, or they may occur abundantly in particular habitats. Many are
as common today as they ever were. These Florida natives have
characteristics that enable them to withstand the impact of modern man
and to resist the competition of the foreign plant and animal species
now invading the state. But a greater number, perhaps a majority, of
native species are not so capable and are declining in numbers of
individuals and in numbers of populations. In time, if this trend is
not stopped or reversed, the native species of Florida will in large
part be eliminated from their natural setting and be confined to zoos
and horticultural houses. The loss of sufficient numbers and diversity
of native plant species may bring about the destruction of habitats
necessary to support Florida's native animal species.

Of the many species declining in number, a relative few may be singled
out for concern because of their beauty, historical interest, biological
importance, economic value, or perceived threat to man. These species
are largely those that are now approaching the point where their
remaining populations are in danger and only prompt action can avert
their disappearance. As can be seen in the following table, a
significant proportion of plant and animal species are already on the
critical list. A significant number of these species can be found
within THE region (See Appendix D).

CRITICAL SPECIES

The Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals (FCREPA)
study of 1978 identified 153 species of reptiles and amphibians,
approximately 3,500 species of plants and 76 species of land animals
presently existing in Florida. The study identified 210 critical
species, of which 82 can be found within the region.54

117

Nearly one-fifth (10 of 54 species) of the amphibians and more than
one-third (35 of 99 species) of reptiles in the state are considered
to fall into one of five status categories of concern. Nearly two-thirds
of Florida's land mammal species are on the critical list along with 72
species of birds and 101 plant species.

TABLE C-1

CRITICAL'SPECIES FOUND IN NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA

NO. OF ENDANGERED SPECIES
CLASS NO. OF SPECIES STATE REGION

Birds 72 29
Fish 43 6
Mammals, land 76 49 12
Plants 3,500 101 20
Reptiles
& Amphibians 153 45 15

Certain variables emerge which must be measured in order to develop
management techniques to properly protect.critical species. These
include habitat type-and diversity of different habitat types which
sustain the species, primary threats, degree of habitat degradation and
modification, territory size and range, nesting and breeding sites,
travel corridors, edge or interior species status, principal food
source, degree of specialization, and key species designation, minimum
sustainable threshold population, and degree of sensitivity to man.
While additional study is needed, steps must now be taken based upon
the available information as the explosive state population growth may
otherwise eliminate these species.

THE IMPORTANCE OF HABITAT

Habitat, the place where an organism lives, is the single most important
determinant of species health and diversity. Habitats are typically
described in terms of vegetative cover, water functions, soil types, and
land elevation. The correlation between habitat type and species
expected to occupy a particular habitat type is high. The very limited
expanse of certain Florida habitats means that often only a minute
portion of the mapped range is home for these special species.

118

Unfortunately, no map exists which identifies habitat areas at a scale
adequate for regional planning. The best available information is
based upon Landsat imagery which classifies land use by vegetative
cover types, a more general classification system.55

Florida habitats are most complex and do not easily lend themselves to
mapping. For example, certain species require intermittently flooded
wetlands while others require permanently flooded wetlands. Certain
species found in river beds require a sandy bottom and moving waters
while others require standing water. Therefore, a river may support
several different habitat types.

TABLE C-2

NORTH FLORIDA HABITAT TYPES

Coastal Strand Dry Prairies
Pine Flatwoods Sand Pine Scrub
Longleaf Pine-Oak Mixed Hardwood-Pine
Hardwood Hammocks Tropical Hammocks
Coastal Marshes Freshwater Marinas &
Scrub Cypress Wet Prairies
Hardwooe Swamps Cypress Swamps
Open Water Mangrove Swamps
Old Fields Sand, Mud Flats
Caves- Grassy Ditches
Marine-Freshwater Buildings
Ponds & Lakes Sphagnum Bogs
Subterranean Wateres Streams & Rivers
Marshes Marine Environments
Springs

Kautz's study of number of animal species by north Florida habitat type
suggests that natural pine flatwoods support the largest total number
of,species of Florida wildlife and intensively managed pine plantations
support the least numbers.56 Other communities which support large
numbers of animal species include sandhills, mixed swamp, and xeric
hammock. In addition, wetlands ares appear to support the largest
number of species specifically dependent upon habitat type. That is to
say, without the wetness the specie would be unable to survive.
Amphibian species are most abundant in cypress-tupelo swamps and least
abundant in xeric and altered habitats such as improved pasture and
managed pine plantations.

119

TABLE C-3

NUMBER OF VERTEBRATE SPECIES USING 14 N FLORIDA HABITAT TYPES

HABITAT TYPE AMPHIBIANS REPTILES BIRDS MAMMALS TOTAL

Pine Flatwoods 19 26 81 23 149
Sandhills 10 33 76 25 144
Mixed Swamp 10 14 98 18 140
Xeric Hammock 11 31 78 19 139
Cypress-tupelo Swamp 27 27 73 5 132
Sand Pine Scrub 9 25 67 28 129
Marsh and Prairie 15 24 72 14 125
Messic Hammock 12 19 59 21 125
Pine-Hardwood Forest 14 21 62 14 ill
Hydric Hammock 15 21 54 16 106
Improved Pasture 8 14 68 14 104
Bayhead 20 27 43 10 100
Coastal Hammock 6 26 49 10 91
Pine Plantation 4 18 52 12 86

Mean 13 23 67 16 119

Source: Randy S. Kautz, "Criteria for Evaluating Impacts of Development
on Wildlife Habitats."

120

TABLE C-4

NUMBER OF SPECIES USING NO MORE THAN 3 HABITAT TYPES

HABITAT TYPES AMPHIBIAN REPTILES BIRDS MAMMALS TOTAL

Pine Flatwoods 2 2 7 1 12
Sandhills 0 6 8 3 17
Mixed Swamp 3 2 24 6 35
Xeric Hammock 0 3 8 0 11
Cypress-tupelo Swamp 7 5 9 0 21
Sand Pine Scrub 0 2 5 4 11
Marsh and Prairie 3 8 20 2 33
Messic Hammock 0 1 2 2 5
Pine-Hardwood Forest 0 1 3 1 5
Hydric Hammock 2 2 2 2 8
Improved Pasture 0 0 15 2 17
Bayhead 3 3 0 0 6
Coastal Hammock 0 4 4 1 9

Mean 1 3 8 2 14

Source: Kautz.

An examination of critical animal species within the region tends to
support Kautz's findings. Pine flatwoods and coastal marshes provide
habitat for the largest number of critical species within the region.

Sand pine scrub, longleaf pine, and hardwood swamp also provide habitat
for significant numbers of critical species. Dry prairie provides for
the least number of species, but even this appears to represent a
significant number of animals.

121

TABLE C-5

NUMBER OF CRITICAL NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA SPECIES BY HABITAT TYPE

NUMBER OF
HABITAT CRITICAL SPECIES

Coastal Strand 12
Dry Prairies 7
Pine Flatwoods 15
Sand Pine Scrub 13
Longleaf Pine 13
Xerophytic Oaks
Mixed Hardwood Pine 10
Hardwood Hammocks 11
Coastal Marshes 15
Freshwater Marshes 10
Wet Prairies
Hardwood Swamp 13

Source: FCREPA, 1978

FCREPA points out that sandhill, sand pine scrub, and xeric habitats
are important because they are limited in areal extent, and they are
home to a large number of endemic reptiles and amphibians. In
addition, wet habitats, in general, are important travel corridors and
are utilized by a large number of bird species, particularly in winter.

Certain animals, such as the Florida black bear, require a territory
consisting of a wide variety of habitats while other species can adapt
to virtually any habitat. Kautz suggests that fragmented forests,
early successional stage habitats, and edge habitats are in abundance
and that large blocks of undisturbed forest are at a premium.57
Several species of amphibians and reptiles are associated primarily
with vegetation types that occur on the well drained soils
characteristic of the Central Florida Ridge and certain coastal areas.
Habitats referred to as sand pine scrub, and sandhill or longleaf
pine-turkey oak are typical of these xeric areas. This kind of habitat
has a high degree of endemism and is one that is rapidly giving way to
agricultural, urban, and residential development. Seven species,
including one found within the region, the Florida gopher frog, are
essentially restricted to these habitats.58
The coastal brackish water and marine habitats provide suitable area
for several endemic Florida plants and animals. Several species of

122

Florida amphibians are found only in specific kinds of aquatic sites.
Noteworthy among these in the region are the Florida gopher frog which
is found in upland and flatwood ponds and the Carpenter Frog which is
found in sphagnaceous ponds in bay head or cwess stands in Baker
County and possibly eastern Columbia County.

HABITAT ISLANDS, CORRIDORS, AND EDGES

A habitat island is an area of adequate size and habitat type(s) to
support a specified number of a particular animal species. Islands are
connected by corridors which serve as travel lanes for wildlife between
habitat islands. Edges or ecotones refers to the border between
habitat types. It has been noted that edges or ecotones support a
larger number of animals and species type as well as different species
type than found in adjacent habitat interiors. S 'imilarly, certain
animal species are found exclusively in habitat interiors. Patch sizes
vary with minimum territory sizes necessary to support desired animal
species. However, Kautz suggests that the larger the patch size, the
greater the diversity of species the patch will support. Kautz does
not suggest a minimum corridor width but does indicate that width must
exceed 40 meters to support forest-interior species.

MINIMUM POPULATION THRESHOLDS

Minimum Population thresholds necessary to sustain a species is
unclear. Geneticists speak of minimum population size necessary to
sustain a gene pool without in-breeding. -Others suggest a minimum
population size necessary for the species to sustain its role in the
food chain without upsetting the balance of the ecosystem. However,
there are other considerations which may warrant a larger minimum
population threshold, such as the minimum population necessary for a
species to recover from climatic disasters such as drought, hurricane,
or other short-term impact. For some species minimum population size
is apparently attached to behavioral patterns. For example, it has
been suggested that the minimum population threshold necessary to
sustain the now extinct Passenger Pigeon was very high, possibly
numbering in the millions.

TERRITORY SIZE

It seems apparent that minimum habitat size is related to minimum
territory size. Differing animal species require differing territory
sizes. Some species, such as the Florida Panther require a very large
territory comprising between 70 and 150 square miles per individual.
Black bears require similarly large territories. However, in the case
of black bears, territories of individual animals can overlap. The
eastern indigo snake, which requires one of the largest territories for
a reptile, requires 90 to 175 acres. Since most species require

123

territories smaller than this, designated habitat areas should be based
upon the largest territory size needed for such animals multiplied by
the minimum number of animals needed to sustain the population at or
above minimum population threshold limits.

DEGREE OF SPECIALIZATION

Plant and animal species have evolved to fill many niches in nature.
Some have become highly specialized in one or more ways. Highly
specialized species require special consideration as events or changes
in the environment that adversely affect these specializations may
cause the population to disappear. The Everglades kite, for example,
is a highly specialized species. Its sole food item is the Apple
Snail. In areas where this kite is found, the snail is abundant. When
the snail disappears, so does the kite. Both the snail and the kite
were plentiful and widespread in south and central Florida before
massive drainage projects changed the hydrologic cycles and features of
the land. As of 1978, no more than 150 kites remained, and the
population is in imminent danger of extinction.60

HOST SPECIES

Host species are those which play an important role in providing
habitat for other plant and animal species. Without the presence of
host species, the other life forms dependent upon host species for
survival would not exist. A relatively few plant species are of
greater importance because they create a habitat required by other
plants and animals. Host species should be given special consideration
as when their numbers decline, the impact is far greater than with a
proportionate decrease in other species. An example of a host animal
species is the gopher tortoise. The gopher tortoise likes to burrow
and can create burrows as long as 30 feet and as deep as 12 feet.
These burrows also provide habitat for the indigo snake, Florida mouse,
gopher frog, and big pine snake.61

ENDEMIC SPECIES

One of the most distinctive features of Florida species are the number
of endemic species. The FCREPA study on Florida mammals indicated that
of the 43 identified mammals, 25 were considered endemic to Florida.
Although not specifically addressed, the FCREPA study indicated that a
significant percentage of identified amphibians and reptiles were also
endemic to the state. Endemic species also deserve special
consideration as a loss of their population could mean extinction of
the species.

124

EXTIRPATED AND EXTINCT SPECIES

Extirpated or extinct species formerly located within north central
Florida are important to note as they may provide insight into what can
happen to other species in the future. Extirpated and extinct plants
from the region include ginseng, which was apparently collected out of
existence by people seeking its medicinal root. The San Felasco@-
spleenwort, found in a rocky ravine in San Felasco Hammock, has not
seen since 1969, and is assumed to be extinct.62

It is worthwhile to note the fate of species in other locales in the
state which have experienced significant development pressure as
similar fates could befall those of the region without proper
management. The mistletoe cactus, found on the upper branches of live
oak trees in Monroe and Dade County, was entirely destroyed by
Hurricane Donna in the fall of 1960.63 A fern, Thelypteris macilenta,
disappeared in 1937 following drought and disturbance by livestock.64
Scentless vanilla, was destroyed by collectors.65 Turk's-cap Lily was
lost with the conversion of its habitat to permanent pasture-66

Several field sightings were made of large numbers of plains bison
between the Suwannee and Aucilla rivers, around Newnan's Lake in
Alachua County, and near Ichetucknee Springs in Columbia County. Bison
were apparently extirpated in Florida by the late 18th or early 19th
centuries as a result of killing of large numbers by early
settlers. The Florida red wolf which used to be found in Payne's
Prairie, was apparently extirpated in the early 1900's. The wolf
apparently was found at Payne's Prairie. The species has been
exterminated over much of its original range and in much of the
remaining areas has hybridized with the coyote. The west indian monk
seal was lost by the early 20th century. The animal was hunted out of
existence for its oil.

The Carolina parakeet was once abundant throughout the eastern half of
the United States and was common throughout Florida (except in the
Keys). The bird was virtually extinct by the end of the 19th century.
The bird was unusually susceptible to systematic killing. When a flock
member was shot, its fellows would return again and again, so that a
single hunter could take all the birds.

The passenger pigeon is an striking example of uncertainties regarding
minimum threshold populations. FCREPA suggests that their minimum
threshold population numbered in the millions.67 The bird was one of
the most gregarious birds ever known, travelling and nesting in flocks
of millions. The low-flying flocks and large nesting grounds
encouraged mass-slaughter for food and sport. In Florida, the bird was
only known as a winter visitor. Their decline was rapid after the 19th
century, probably because of reduction below a very hi9h critical
minimum threshold necessary to sustain the population. 8

125

THREATS

One first thinks of habitat destruction as the primary cause of
population declines, and indeed with many Endangered and Threatened
species this is the case. Plants such as the four-petal pawpaw, the
Spiny Hackberry, the Florida Golden aster, the wiregrass gentian, and
the highlands scrub hypercium would presumably continue to thrive if
their special habitats were not under pressure from agricultural and/or
commercial development. A surprisingly large number of endangered and
threatened plants, particularly those of south Florida, are being
destroyed by selective removal from the undisturbed habitat. The hand
fern, the bird's-nest spleenwort, nodding catopsis, and fuzzy-wuzzy
airplant, and nearly all of the native orchids continue to decline in
numbers even though their habitats remain undisturbed.69 Within north
central Florida, Bartram's Ixia has rapidly diminished in numbers.
FCREPA notes this flowing herb as "Florida's premier endemic". It was
spotted flowering in pine flatwoods north of Starke in Bradford County
in 1931. However, this location has been converted to a junkyard and
apparently can no longer be found at this site.70

One general characteristic of the region's threatened mammals is the
tendency for individual species or subspecies to be relatively narrowly
restricted to certain habitat types. Twenty-four of the 35 desip'nated
land mammals are limited to only one or two major habitat types.'71
One-third of these are wetland inhabitants. Required habitats for the
remainder include beaches and dunes (coastal strand), tropical hammocks,
longleaf pine-turkey oak woodlands, sand pine scrub, mixed pine and
hardwoods, pine flatwoods, and caves. Most of these habitat types are
being destroyed or modified by man throughout the state in ways
unsuitable for the affected species. Some of the land mammals which are
not narrowly restricted to specific habitat types, such as the Florida
black bear and Florida panther, are dependent upon large, relatively
undisturbed areas of mixed vegetation types.72 Such large, undisturbed
areas are rapidly giving way to urban development in many parts of the
state.

The major factors responsible for the critical status of animals
presently listed as endangered or threatened are habitat loss and
various kinds of direct human impact. Natural factors, such as
hurricanes or long-term climatic trends, may also be involved. Habitat
loss alone appears to be the primary cause for the critical status of
eight (62 percent) of the endangered and threatened mammals, including
the Florida mouse in sand pine scrub and sandhill habitats. Habitat
loss has resulted from development, overprotection from natural fires,
and agricultural or forestry practices.

Habitat loss coupled with some direct detrimental human influences is
apparently responsible for the critical status of the Sherman's fox
squirrel. The squirrel is a legal game species and has been hunted.
Habitat destruction in the form of development, logging, drainage, and
burning has undoubtedly been by far the predominant cause of the
decline of the species.

126

The critical status of the Florida panther, Florida black bear, and
west indian manatee appear to be due more to human exploitation than
loss of habitat. Although the carrying capacity of the habitats of
these species today is less than under primitive conditions, evidence
indicates that these mammals were drastically reduced by hunting or
trapping much before there was significant habitat reduction.
Populations are probably presently being suppressed at a level below
the carrying capacity of remaining habitats by continued accidental or
deliberate killing. The bear may still be legally hunted in parts of
the state. It is possible that the Florida Mink is now scarcer in
coastal areas because of destruction or degradation of salt marsh
habitats. The only species of special concern among Florida mammals,
the round-tailed muskrat, is so listed because of continuing reduction
of wetland habitats.

The continued existence and size of populations of Florida panther and
Florida black bear are ultimately dependent upon the availability and
quality of their habitats. Therefore, for the most part, the problem
of rare and endangered Florida animals boils down to the problem of
rare and endangered Florida habitats. The survival of these species is
synonymous with protection and proper management of their habitats.

Hunters and fishermen are seldom mentioned as a source of concern to
species preservation. According to the laws of population dynamics, a
particular species will maintain a specific biomass under a specific
set of ecological conditions. Those individuals of a species that are
eliminated from a population will in turn be replaced by others of the
same species that would not otherwise have been able to survive. Fish,
as a rule, have a higher reproductive potential than other vertebrate
animals, and thus are quickly able to "bounce back" from temporary
population losses. However, if their numbers increase in direct
proportion to the expected population increases of north Florida, the
additional pressure might place even more species on the critical
list.

Certain species such as the Atlantic sturgeon, mature very slowly
(possibly as long as 10 years or 15 years, depending upon the species).
Expansion of the commercial fishery for sturgeon in Florida may
substantially adversely affect this species.

Critical fish are vulnerable to a greater or lesser degree because of
their limited ranges. As a general rule, the degree of vulnerability
of fish is related to the size of the body of water in which they
occur. Those species found in large rivers and closely adjacent areas
are most subject to the adverse effects of pollution, dredging, or dam
construction. The smaller the body of water, the less likely the water
body will be subject to ecological disturbances.

127

APPENDIX D:

CRITICAL SPECIES OF NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA

LEGEND

E = Endangered
T = Threatened
R = Rare
S = Special Concern
U = Unknown Status
X = Extirpated or Extinct

MAMMALS STATUS

Florida Panther E
Sherman's Fox Squirrel T
Florida Mouse T
Florida Black Bear T
Round-Tailed Muskrat S
West Indian Manatee T
Southeastern Shrew R
Southeastern Big-Eared Bat R
Southeastern Weasel R
Florida Mink R
Southern Mink R
Sherman's Short-Tailed
Shrew U
Plains Bison X
Florida Red Wolf X

128

PLANTS

Poppy Mallow T
Needle Palm T
Jackson-Vine T
Bartram's Ixia T
Florida Coontie T
Baneberry R
Texas Anemone R
Flyrls Nemesis R
Southern Lip Fern R
Water Sundew R
Hartwrightia R
Mountain Laurel R
West's Flax R
Pond Spice R
Green Adder's-Mouth R
Spoon-Flower R
Pine-Wood Dainties R
Mexican Tear-Thumb R
Florida Willow R
Cedar Elm R

BIRDS

Wood Stork E
Ivory-Billed Woodpecker E
Red-Cockaded Woodpecker E
Bachman's Warbler E
Kirtland's Warbler E
Southern Bald Eagle T
Southeastern American
Kestrel T
Florida Sandhill Crane T
Louisiana Seaside Sparrow T
White-Tailed Kite R
Short-Tailed Hawk R
Florida Great White Heron S
Little Blue Herron S
Great Egret S
Snowy Egret S
Louisiana Heron S
Eastern Least Bittern S
White This S
Cooper's Hawk S
Limpkin S
Royal Tern S
Black Skimmer S
Florida Burrowing owl S
Marian's Marsh Wren S

129

BIRDS (Continued)

Florida Prairie Warbler S
Scott's Seaside Sparrow S
Wakulla Seaside Sparrow S
Florida Clapper Rail U
Black Rail U
Carolina Parakeet x
Passenger Pigeon x

AMPHIBIANS

Florida Goph er Frog T
One-Toed Amphiuma R
Striped Newt R
Carpenter Frog R

REPTILES

Atlantic Ridley E
Short-Tailed Snake E
Suwannee Cooter T
Gopher Tortoise T
Spotted Turtle T
Atlantic Leatherback R
Mole Snake R
Gulf Salt Marsh Snake R
American Alligator S
Eastern Indigo Snake S
Alligator Snapping Turtle U
Atlantic Sturgeon E
Ohoopee Shiner R
Spotted Bullhead R
Mud Sunfish R
Suwannee Bass R
Dusky Shiner S

Source: FCREPA, Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida Volumes I-V,
Gainesville, University of Florida Press, 1978.

130

APPENDIX E:

SIGNIFICANT FEATURES OF THE SUWANNEE RIVER SYSTEM

SEGMENT I

Algal Beach Example of ancient seashore phenomenon

Big Shoals Example of limestone erosion and shoals phenomenon-
Only freshwater shoals in the state of
Florida.

Agatized Coral Placer deposit agatized coral cobbles

Brown Tract Example of cypress knees and limestone
Little Shoals ledge features.

SEGMENT II

Bell Spring S. bank of Suwannee River. Present use: Swim
ming .6 mile from Suwannee River. 3 dams make a
large body of water for swimming. Is used as
private, residential, swimming hole.

White Springs SW corner of the City of White Springs. Acreage
200-300. (Stephen Foster Memorial) Land
Use: Residential, urban. One of first tourist
centers in Florida. Spring is enclosed in 901
x 501 concrete foundation of former spring/bath
house. Scenic spring and historic memorial.
2nd magnitude spring. Also'known as White Sulphur
Springs.

Blue Sink See text

Louisa Spring

Indian Flint quarry Example of unique outcrop flintrock

Suwannee Springs Example of early conduit between Pond and
Spa Suwannee Springs Spa

Boat Ramp Suwannee County Development Authority.
734 acres owned by county. Boat ramp facilities

131

Guinea Creek Example of karst features, limestone sinks
Florida Sheriff's privately owned. Boat rental, picnicking, Boy's
Ranch & swimming.

Alapaha River Example of underground river surface return
Confluence

Hardwood Preserve Example of mature hardwood timber

Adams Spring Large spring syphon 500-600 ft. long by 200-250'
wide. Good sight-seeing for skin and scuba
diving to depths of 37 feet in spring basin & 25
ft. in syphon. Surrounding area very scenic.
Land Use: Undeveloped/woodland.

Suwannee Springs Interesting rock formation in spring issuing
19 mgd of clear green sulfur water. Entire
spring is surrounded by rock walls that resemble
an old Spanish Fort. Land use: woodland?. At
least 6 springs in this third magnitude spring
group. All are at edge of Suwannee River. No
facilities.

Suwannee River Suwanneecoochie Spring. 19 mgd.

Ellaville Springs Example of large grotto spring.

SEGMENT III
Withlacoochee
River confluence

Anderson Spring

Greenspan County owned boat ramp facilities.

Charles Spring Example of Spanish Mission (ruins at Charles
Spring) A second magnitude spring. Headpool
501 in diameter, 101 depth to cave entrance.
Cave can be dangerous due to extreme silt and
cave-ins. Flow is 14 mgd. 2nd magnitude.
Land use: undeveloped/woodland. 100 ft. run
to river. Is apparently used for picnicking.

Historic Trail Example of Spanish travel route.

Historic Trail Example of Spanish St. Augustine Trail.

Allen's Mill Pond 30 Acres historic mill. Is in a valley Spring
surrounded by dense woodland. 50 x 150 ft.
Flow runs .6 mile to Suwannee River. Flow

132

widens from 20 ft. to 100 ft. at confluence
with Suwannee. Private campgrounds.

N. Fla. Methodist Privately owned campground consisting of 530 Camp
acres.

Pine Preserve Example of virgin pines stand.

Hardwood Preserve Example of mature hardwood timber.

Springs on Suwannee (Bonnett, Peacock, Running Cow Spring, & Olson
Sink) (Suwannee). A group of springs and
sinks that are located next to each other on
Suwannee River. Land use: woodland.

Running Springs Two beautiful springs located on banks of
Suwannee River. The right spring is 101 deep
with a short run that syphons under the river
banks to Suwannee. The left spring has
an underwater natural bridge with a 31 x 51
opening that can be easily free-dived. Land
use: Woodland. Approximate acreage: 1 acre.
3rd magnitude 6.46 mgd.

Bonnet Spring Small spring in beautiful natural setting.
9
Good swimming and skin diving in large area of
lily pads with many fish. 3rd magnitude spring
flow less than 10 cu.ft. per sec. 6.46 mgd.

Cow Spring A small spring-syphon filled with crystal clear
water. Apparently too small for any large
scale recreation. Approx. acreage: I acre. Land
use: woodland.

Owens Island Vestiges of Seminole War Island Fort.

Troy Spring On Suwannee River. Clear spring flowing into
Suwannee river approx. 400 ft. distant. Open
to public for limited use. Vestiges of sunken
vessel. A first magnitude spring. Avg. flow of
166 cu. ft./sec.

Little River Springs Restricted to only certified cave divers. Is
rated as one of finest cave dives in Florida.
Spring basin is 1arge with bare land sand
bottom. There is an underground system of
eaves. Surrounding land use woodland/un
developed. Example of deep spring with
extensive cavern source. A 2nd magnitude
spring.

133

Santa Fe River Example of an area with a variety of values,
Confluence including hardwoods.

Fletcher Spring Fletcher Spring is in a heavily wooded area
with many dry sinks. It has been used for
years as a swimming hole. The area is easily
flooded as is located in floodplain, and there
is not good visibility in the spring or run.
Depth 321 to a small cave. The run is 30
ft. wide and meanders 450 downstream and
disappears into a sink. A 2nd magnitude
spring.

Branford Spring Approximate acreage: 5 acres. Is part of a
recreation area adjacent to Suwannee River. Is
used for swimming and has a diving board.
Private canoe rentals, boat ramp, etc. adjacent
to spring. Land use: River, woodland, some
residential. 2nd magnitude spring.

Mearson Spring 2nd magnitude spring.

Ruth Spring 550 ft. from Suwannee. 3rd magnitude spring
surrounded by woods.

Owens Spring West of Mearson Spring. 2nd magnitude spring.
Used for fishing, swimming, and scuba diving. -
Flow is .2 mile to Suwannee.

Royal Spring Spring is surrounded by steep banks. A
concrete retaining wall is built on east side
with steps to the water. The basin is about
40 yards in diameter with a shallow 60 yd. of
water. Land use: undeveloped. A third
magnitude spring. Has flow of less than 10
cu.ft. per second (6.46 mgd).

Convict Spring Is in a clearing surrounded by dense
woodlands. Spring is in a 20 x 501 teardrop
shaped pool. Run flows about 50 ft. to
Suwannee River. A third magnitude spring.
Quite attractive.

Telford Spring Bare dirt banks slope gently down to the spring
which has a run about 40 yards long a small
crevice ends in a small cave. Located adjacent
to Telford Sink and Terrapin Sink. Flow is 24
mgd. Second magnitude Spring. Adjacent to
Suwannee River.

134

Perry Spring Spring with depth to 30 ft. Run to river
connects 2 natural bridges. Land use: pasture.
South bank of Suwannee River. Present use:
swimming & scuba diving.

Falmouth Spring A first magnitude spring. Avg. flow of 158
cu. ft./sec. A spring-sink combination 400
ft. run from spring to sink. Spring reportedly
flows underground to Suwannee.

Morrison Spring Flow of 33 mgd.

SEGMENT IV

Turtle Spring (Resurgence of Fletcher) 2nd magnitude spring.

Rock Bluff Spring 2nd magnitude spring 700 ft. run to Suwannee.
Privately owned.

Little Copper flow: 1.6 mgd. 200 yard run to Suwannee. A third
magnitude spring.

Hart Springs Acreage 190. Designated County Park. Flow 39
mgd W. Gilchrist Co. on Suwannee River. Flows
500 ft. to Suwannee. 2nd magnitude spring.

Otter Springs Campground 640 acres. Privately owned. Full
facility campground. -Forested lands around
-spring run on Suwannee River. 65 acres in
sandhill vegetation, 110 acres of messic hammock.
Many sinkholes on property. Much of area is
swamp land. Very scenic area. Possible archeo-
logical site on property.

Georgia Pacific 188 acres privately owned. Camping
Wilderness Area

Lumbercamp Spring flow 1.9 mgd. Land Use: Woodland

Townsend Spring 3rd magnitude spring. flow <6.46 mgd

Trail Spring

Fanning Spring A 1st magnitude spring.

Bell Springs

McCrabb Spring A 3rd magnitude Spring flow <6.46 mgd.

135

Sun Spring Also known as Aiken Springs. West Bank of
Suwannee River. Land use: woodland on west or
outer edge and pasture on east side. A small
spring that forms a narrow run leading to
Suwannee river. A circular rock cliff 101 below
the surface drops to 201 depth. Popular swimming
site, no other spring in immediate vicinity.@-

Copper Spring flow 12 mgd. 2nd magnitude spring also known as
Oldtown Springs. is a group of 3 springs. 500
ft. run to Suwannee River. Derives name from
yellowish-brown deposits coating ground around
springs. high in iron content. Private property
used for swimming and boating.

Big Cypress Spring Two miles below Rock Bluff Ferry.
flow 8 mgd. 3rd magnitude spring.

Guaranto Land Use: Woodland. 2nd magnitude spring. Used
locally for swimming. No facilities.

Kalogridis Acreage: 256. 6,240 ft. of river frontage on
Property Suwannee River.

SEGMENT V

Hog Island Acreage: 2980. Example of salt marsh ecosystem.

SANTA FE RIVER

Poe Springs Acreage: 10. Land use: Woodland, few private
homes. One of several springs feeding into the
Santa Fe River. High potential as Alachua County
Recreation site. During the 1920's it was a
popular facility with bath house, dance hall. Many
trees, variety of vegetation. Circular pool 90
ft. in diameter. 175 ft. run to Santa Fe. Little
evidence of former development remains. 2nd
magnitude spring.

Devil's Eye Land Use: Undeveloped-woodland. Devil's Eye is the
Spring middle of 3 boils in one of the most beautiful
combinations of Springs in the state. Multi-caved
with tunnel leading to Santa Fe River. Very popular
for swimming and scuba diving. Centrally located
around Ginnie, Hull, and Blue Springs. 2nd
magnitude spring.

136

Dogwood Springs 100 yards west of Ginnie Springs on Santa Fe River.
Land Use: Woodland. A small spring with depths to
Ginnie Spring 12 ft.
Acreage: 5 acres. Land Use: Undeveloped/woodland.
Large shallow swimming area around spring boil.
Cave at 15 ft. in boil leads to cave with initial
depths to 40 ft. Clear water with some eel grass
and fish along with nice run to Santa Fe River makes
scenic swimming and scuba diving area. Ginnie
Spring is one of the most popular scuba diving

springs in the state. A 2nd magnitude spring.

Lily Spring Surrounding Land Use: Woodland. Small shallow
spring boil about 150 yards from Santa Fe River.
Has winding run through wooded area. Centrally
located around Poe, Rum Island, Blue Springs, etc.

Columbia Springs Spring containing indian artifacts. Woodland
surroundings. A 2nd magnitude spring.

Naked Spring Acreage: I acre. Land use: Woodland. Spring is
small and therefore is only capable of limited
recreational use. Since it is centrally located
with other springs it should be considered with that
group with regard to management plans. Is 25
yds. in diameter with 3 small crevices about 121
below the surface. Water flows through the thick
woods and connects with Blue Spring's run before it
reaches the Santa Fe. This spring is very small but
is located with Blue, Rum Island, and Ginnie Spring.

Hornsby Spring Land use: Woodland and Pasture. A first magnitude
spring. Avg. discharge of 163 cu. ft./sec. Part of
camp Kuluqua. Used as a swimming and recreation
facility by Camp Kuluqua, privately owned and
operated by a religious organization.

Blue Spring Spring is 1000 ft. south of Santa Fe River. Land
Use: Woodland-undeveloped. A large limestone cliff
drops 25' to a small cave entrance 15001 boardwalk
down run. Sand beach borders south bank. Tourist
attraction. Commercially owned. A 2nd magnitude
springs complex.

July Spring Surrounding land use: woodland. Reportedly there
are connective passages between rum spring and
devil's eye spring.

137

Rum Island Sp ring Small spring located on the north bank of the Santa
Fe River. Extremely clear water fills a 401
diameter basin. Depths to 12 feet. The spring is
filled with a beautiful variety of plant life. Land
use: woodland. Worthington In town of Worthington
Springs. North bank of Santa Spring Fe River. Has
been cased in a square pool with concrete walls
measuring 901 by 501. Water flows into an adjoining
swimming pool. Flow estimated at 1,000 gpm. Land
use: Residential. 4th magnitude spring. Used to
be a privately operated bath house. No buildings
remain. Not utilized.

Wright Estate Straddling both sides of Santa Fe River. River
Swamp & Hammock area with some pasture and hardwood
forest. Periodic flooding of area. Pine & Scrub
Oak in uplands. Early development in area, some
historic value. Blue & Ginnie Springs located on
property. Present use: pasture land, floodplain.

DLC Tract Acreage: 190. Lands bordering Santa Fe River,
including one island.

Kittredge NE Alachua County portion only. Natural, almost
Property pristine area. Pine flatwoods surrounds natural
cypress swamp with scattered hardwood hammocks.
Present use: none. Surrounding land use: Forest,
Agriculture, some residential.

Olleno Addition Acreage: 4000. Present use: natural, some
timbering. Purchased by state. Area where the
Santa Fe River returns to the surface after a @hree
mile underground route from a sink in the Olleno
State Park. Area noted for wilderness qualities
and natural beauty. Site of old Belamy Road
Historic Trail.

WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER

Morgan's Spring North bank of Suwannee River but discharges into
Withlacoochee.

Blue Springs

ICHETUCKNEE RIVER

Dickenson Tract Present use: none. Land use: woodland. Natural
scenic tract near state park. wooded. Is adjacent
to Ichetucknee State Park.

138

Ichetucknee In Ichetucknee Springs State Park. A first
Springs magnitude spring with avg. flow of 361 cu. ft. /sec.

ALAPAHA RIVER

Alapaha Rise A first magnitude spring on Alapaha River avg.- flow
608 cu. ft./day.

Holton Spring A first magnitude spring discharges into Alapaha.
Avg. flow of 288 cu. ft./sec.

139

APPENDIX F:

MAJOR SINKS WITHIN NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA

ALACHUA COUNTY
Devil's Millhopper
Haile Quarry Herricle Smith
Sinkholes & quarries in Newberry Area
Alachua Sink
Kanapaha Sink
Robinson Sink

BRADFORD COUNTY
Brooks Sink

DIXIE COUNTY
Lime Sink

GILCHRIST COUNTY
Ginnie & Devil's Eye Sinks

HAMILTON COUNTY
Alpha Sink

MADISON COUNTY
Blue Sink
Campbell Sink
Johnson Sink
Patterson Sink
Rogers Sink

SUWANNEE COUNTY
Sailor Hole (?)
Challenge Sink
Cisteen Sink
Olson Sink
Orange Grove Sink
Telford Sink
Terrapin Sink

TAYLOR COUNTY
Adams Sink
Aucilla River Sinks
California Sink
Page Sink

140

APPENDIX G:

PROJECTIONS FOR SELECTED NATURAL AREAS

TABLE G-1

CURRENT TRENDS: SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR

CURRENT TRENDS

Avg. lot width for riverfront property 126 ft.
Avg. acreage subdivided per year 797 acres
Avg. lot size 1.74 acres
Available river frontage as of 4-85 = 1,666,087 feet
Available F. P. corridor area as of 4-85 = 242,322 acres
Percent of subdivided
property with river frontage 58.32 Percent

TABLE G-2

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR

CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT RIVERBANK DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPED REMAINING DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES FEET PERCENT FEET

1990 20,022 07.7 239,306 543,871 26.6 1,504,769
2000 27,992 10.8 231,336 880,458 43.0 1,168,182
2010 35,962 13.9 221,836 1,217,045 59.4 831,595
2020 43,932 16.9 215,396 1,553,632 75.8 495,008
2030 51,902 20.0 205,426 1,890,219 92.3 158,421
2034 59,872 23.1 199,456 2,013,940 98.3 34,700

141

TABLE G-3

CURRENT TRENDS: SAN FELASCO HAMMOCK

CURRENT TRENDS

Corridor Acreage = 10,240
San Felasco Hammock Acreage = 6,487
Developable Acreage = 3,753
Developed Acreage = 1,090
Remaining Developable Acreage = 2,663
Average acreage/yr
developed since 1977 131

TABLE G-4

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: SAN FELASCO HAMMOCK

DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES

1990 1,832 48.8 1,921
2000 3,142 83.7 611
2005 3,753 100.0 0

TABLE G-5

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: DEVIL'S MILLHOPPER

DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES

1987 603 100 0

142

TABLE G-6

CURRENT TRENDS: PAYNE'S PRAIRIE

CURRENT TRENDS

Corridor acreage = 36,480 acres
Payne's Prairie State Preserve acreage = 17,775 acres
Roadway corridor acreage 451 acres
Developed Acreage = 2,354 acres
Remaining developable acreage = 15,900 acres
15 year annual average development 88 acres

TABLE G-7

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: PAYNE'S PRAIRIE

DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES

1990 2,870 15.7 15,345
2000 3,750 20.5 14,465
2010 4,630 25.4 13,585
2020 5,510 30.2 12,705

TABLE G-8

CURRENT TRENDS: SANTA FE RIVER CORRIDOR

CURRENT TRENDS

Avg. lot width for riverfront property 122.8 ft.
Avg acreage subdivided per year 175.8 acres
Avg lot size 1.25 acres
Available river frontage as of 4-85 690,620 feet
Available F. P. corridor area as of 4-85 97,216 acres
Percent of subdivided
property with river frontage 21.07 Percent

143

TABLE G-9

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: SANTA FE RIVER CORRIDOR

CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT RIVERBANK DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPED REMAINING DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES FEET PERCENT FEET

1990 6,956 11.7 52,500 92,864 18.1 419,292
2000 8,713 14.7 50,743 129,007 26.2 383,149
2010 10,471 17.6 48,985 165,151 32.3 347,005
2020 12,229 20.6 47,227 201,295 39.3 310,861
2030 13,987 23.5 45,469 237,439 46.4 274,717
2040 15,744 26.5 43,712 273,583 53.4 238,573

TABLE G-10

CURRENT TRENDS: ALACHUA STREAM-SINK RECHARGE

CURRENT TRENDS

15 year annual average acreage development = 205 acres
Currently developed acreage = 3,738 acres
Total Recharge Area acreage = 51,840 acres

TABLE G-11

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: ALACHUA STREAM-SINK RECHARGE

DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES

1990 4,899 9.5 46,941
2000 6,949 13.4 44,891
2010 8,999 17.4 42,841
2020 11,049 21.3 40,791

144

TABLE G-12

CURRENT TRENDS: COLUMBIA RECHARGE AREAS

CURRENT TRENDS

15 year annual average acreage development 106 acres
Currently developed acreage, South Recharge = 5,419 acres
Total South Recharge area acreage = 47,360 acres

Currently developed acreage, Western Recharge = 316 acres
Total Western Recharge area acreage = 13,440 acres

TABLE G-13

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: COLUMBIA SOUTH RECHARGE

DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES

1990 5,913 12.5 41,446
2000 6,973 14.7 40,387
2010 8,033 17.0 39,327
2020 9,093 19.2 38,267.

TABLE G-14

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: COLUMBIA WESTERN RECHARGE

DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES

1990 811 6.0 12,692
2000 1,841 13.7 11,608
2010 2,901 21.6 10,548
2020 3,961 29.5 9,488

145

TABLE G-15

CURRENT TRENDS: DIXIE COASTAL CORRIDOR

CURRENT TRENDS

Corridor Acreage 152,320 acres
Developed Acreage 616 acres
15 year Avg Annual Developed Acreage 15 acres

TABLE G-16

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: DIXIE COASTAL AREA

DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES

1990 671 0.4 151,649
2000 821 0.5 151,499
2010 971 0.6 151,349
2020 1,121 0.7 151,199

TABLE G-17

CURRENT TRENDS: TAYLOR COASTAL AREA

CURRENT TRENDS

Corridor Acreage 124,440 acres
Developed Acreage 1,554 acres
Average Annual Acreage Subdivided: 15 acres

TABLE G-18

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT: TAYLOR COASTAL AREA

DEVELOPED REMAINING
YEAR ACRES PERCENT ACRES

1990 1,810 1.5 122,630
2000 2,360 1.9 122,080
2010 2,910 2.3 121,530
2020 3,460 2.8 120,980

146

APPENDIX H:

SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICTS

ALACHUA COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Alachua
Archer
Gainesville
High Springs
Lacrosse
Micanopy
Newberry
Waldo

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Alachua County Health Facility Authority
Alachua County Soil and Water Conservation District
Gainesville Housing Authority

BRADFORD COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Brooker
Hampton
Lawtey
Starke

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

147

COLUMBIA COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Ft. White
Lake City

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Columbia Housing.Authority
Columbia Housing Finance Authority
Columbia Industrial Development Authority
Lake Shore Hospital Authority
Suwannee River Water Management District
School District?
Santa Fe Soil Conservation
Lake City Health Facility

DIXIE COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Cross City
Horseshoe Beach

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Dixie County Soil and Water Conservation District

GILCHRIST COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Bell
Fanning Springs
Trenton

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Gilchrist Housing Authority
Gilchrist Medical Board
Gilchrist County Park Board
Gilchrist County Soil and Water Conservation District

148

HAMILTON COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Jasper
Jennings
White Springs

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Hamilton Development Authority
Hamilton County Memorial Hospital

LAFAYETTE COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES
Mayo

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Lafayette County Development Authority

MADISON COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Greenville
Lee
Madison

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Madison County Soil and Water Conservation District

149

SUWANNEE COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Branford

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Live Oak Housing Authority
Suwannee Chamber of Commerce Development Authority
Suwannee Hospital
Suwannee County Soil and Water Conservation District

TAYLOR COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Perry

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Taylor County Development Authority
Taylor County Soil-and Water Conservation District
Taylor County Recreation Board

UNION COUNTY

MUNICIPALITIES

Lake Butler
Worthington Springs

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

Union County Housing Authority

150

I
I
I
APPENDIX I I
MAPS AND COORDINATES
I
I
I
I
I
- I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1 9:;l

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION I-1

ALACHUA COUNTY 7 O'LENO STATE PARK
STREAM/SINK RECHARGE & RIVER RISE STATE PRESERVE
2 DEVIL'S MILLHOPPER 8 PAYNE'S PRAIRIE
3 GINNIE SPRINGS 9 SAN FELASCO HAMMOCK---
4 GUM ROOT SWAMP 10 SANTA FERIVER CORRIDOR
5 LOCHLOOSA FOREST 11 SANTA FE SWAMP
6 NEWNAN'S LAKE
& PRAIRIE CREEK

rc
FOREST

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLAND, CORE WETLAND

HURRICANE SURGE

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK

SPRING

STATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

152

ILLUSTRATION I-1

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN ALACHUA COUNTY

ALACHUA COUNTY

.7
0 1 q mLr:s
10

High 3prin

Waldo
3 441

10"

------- . . . . . .-----

75
2
20

Gainesville 6

Newberry

c
27
4 1

121
r

canopy

NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA =Z@;@
REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL @@
6

153

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION 1-2

1 BROOKS SINK
2 SANTA FE RIVER CORRIDOR
SANTA FE SWAMP

P..@Y a-P-1. FOREST

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLAND, CORE WETLAND

HURRICANE SURGE
K@@.'7 NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK

SPRING

STATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

154

ILLUSTRATION 1-2.

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN BRADFORD-COUNTY

225 Lawtey

100 225

Starke 230

231

ker 100

ampton

2 MUM

BRADFORD COUNTY

N04TH aNTRAL FtORIDA =Z:--@ 155
RECXX4AL PLWd4G COMM

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION 1-3

ICHETUCKNEE SPRINGS 7 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR
STATE PARK SEGMENT I
2 O'LENO STATE PARK 8 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR
3 OSCEOLA NATIONAL FOREST SEGMENT II
4 PINHOOK SWAMP 9 WESTERN STREAM/SINK
5 SANTA FE RIVER CORRIDOR RECHARGE AREA
6 SOUTHERN STREAM/SINK
RECHARGE

FOREST

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

.... ................
FRESHWATER WETLAND, CORE WETLAND

HUMICANE SURGE

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK
0 SPRING

STATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

156

ILLUSTRATION 1-3

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN COLUMBIA COUNTY

Rrm
-7

10 10

100
Q3

24 0
7@;

OLUMBIA
ort While 2)
COUNTY

1 2 3
5)

NORTtf CDMAL RORIDA
RECKkw pLANNVC C 157

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION 1-4

CALIFORNIA SWAMP 6 SALT MARSH
2 CORE OF CALIFORNIA 7 STEINHATCHEE RIVER
SWAMP CORRIDOR
3 FRESHWATER MARSH 7 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR
WITH DIRECT SHEET FLOW SEGMENT IV
TO SALT MARSH 8 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR
4 LIME SINK SEGMENT V
LOWER SUWANNEE NATIONAL 10 WANNEE NATURAL AREA
WILDLIFE REFUGE

FOREST

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH
It .. . ......
. ...... FRESHWATER WETLAND, CORE WETLAND

HURRICANE SURGE
77 NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
RON, RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK

SPRING

STATE PARK/PRESERVE
N v

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

158

ILLUSTRATION 1-4

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN DIXIE COUNTY

A.,
7) .10

90 WIT

r. y
V- - ov- g
27A
0,
010-

@
r
pc
-Al w
'm @@, m

6
11'
INJI'l

z
4
HW.ssaho
ailt

DIXIE COUNTY

0 1 2 3 4 MLEM

159
NORTH CINTRAt nORMA
RECJONAL PLApr4NG C

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION 1-5

GINNIE SPRINGS
2 SANTA FE RIVER CORRIDOR
3 SUWANNEE/SANTA FE
RIVERS CONFLUENCE
4 SUWANNEE RIVER SEGMENT IV
5 WACASSASSA FLATS
6 WANNEE NATURAL AREA

FOREST

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH
r .. . .............. FRESHWATER WETLAND, CORE WETLAND

HURRICANE SURGE

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK
0 SPRING

STATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

160

ILLUSTRATION 1-5

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN GILCHRIST COUNTY

7-@

Bell
7,

282

Z@ 7 -7@,.

@*7v,

25 Trenton

49 339
Fanning Spring* 'z-.

GILCHRIST COUNTY

0 1 2 3 4 WLES

161

NORTH CINTRAL FIORCDA =zz-,@
RECONAL PLANP4NG COL"3L

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION 1-6

ALAPAHA RIVER CORRIDOR 7 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR
2 BEE HAVEN BAY SEGMENT I
3 BROWN TRACT NATURAL AREA 8 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR
4 HAMILTON STREAM/SINK SEGMENT II
RECHARGE 9 SUWANNEE RIVER STATE
HOLTON CREEK NATURAL AREA PARKS
6 STEPHEN FOSTER CENTER 10 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER
CORRIDOR

FOREST

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLAND, CORE.WETLAND

HURRICANE SURGE

NA
TIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK

SPRING

4@,J- STATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

162

ILLUSTRATION 1-6

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN HAMILTON COUNTY

JMing
;hl
@,A-- , , .
A, .2-51 Af

Whi
HAMILTON COUNTY

NOR71-f CWMAL FLOR!PA
RECX)NAL nANWC COUNM

163

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION 1-7

SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR, SEGMENT III
2 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR, SEGMENT IV

FOREST

SHWATER WETLANDS WIT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH
FRE H

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLAND. CORE WETLAND

HURRICANE SURGE

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK

lp SPRING

STATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

164

ILLUSTRATION 1-7

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN LAFAYETTE COUNTY

S3
LAFAYErrE COUNTY

0 1 imm
.
ih
.........

2 51

0
May*

355

NORT14 CENTRAL FLORIDA
REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL

165

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION 1-8

AUCILLA RIVER CORRIDOR 8 ROGERS SINK
2 BLUE SPRING 9 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR
3 CAMPBELL SINK SEGMENT III
4 HIXTOWN SWAMP 10 SUWANNEE RIVER STATE PARK
5 JOHNSON SINK 11 WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER
6 MADISON STREAM/SINK RECHARGE CORRIDOR
7 PATTERSON SINK

FOREST

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLAND, CORE WETLAND

HURRICANE SURGE
47
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

R
IVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK

SPRING

STATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

166

ILLUSTRATION 1-8

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN MADISON COUNTY

N"DISON- COUNTY

0 1 2 3 MRM

221

10
0

Madis
10
3
lo
'ex"
Le*
221 10

kup,

NORTH cumm FlOR!PA
REGK*M nANNM COUNCIL

167

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION 1-9

COLUMBIA CO. WESTERN 6 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR
STREAM/SINK RECHARGE SEGMENT II
2 ICHETUCKNEE SPRINGS STATE PARK 7 SUWANNEE RIVER CORRIDOR
3 LOWER LITTLE RIVER SEGMENT III
STEAM/SINK RECHARGE 8 SUWANNEE RIVER STATE PARK
4 PEACOCK SLOUGH 9 TELFORD SPRINGS
5 SANTA FE RIVER CORRIDOR 10 UPPER LITTLE RIVER
STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

F
OREST

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
11. DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLkXD, CORE WETLkND

HURRICANE SURGE

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH
0 SINK

SPRING

s
TATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

168

ILLUSTRATION 1-9

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT K ATURAL AREAS IN SUWANNEE COUNTY

129
51

Live Oak

765

XPA

1@@: E
9

renfor

SUWANNEE COUNTY

5
0. 2 3 1 MLES

NORTH CDMAL FIORIDA 169
REC30NAL PLANNM COUNCIL

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION I-10

1 AUCILLA RIVER CORRIDOR 5 ST. MARKS NATIONAL WILDLIFE
2 AUCILLA RIVER SINKS REFUGE
3 ECONFINA RIVER CORRIDOR 6 SALT MARSH
4 FRESHWATER MARSH WITH 7 SPRING WARRIOR SWAMP
DIRECT SHEET FLOW 8 STEINHATCHEE RIVER CORRIDOR
CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH 9 TIDE SWAMP

Rl,@-;21, 21 ?,", FOREST
I T11@1@1(1 FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

.. . .......
--------- Z- FRESHWATER WETLAND, CORE WETLAND

HURRICANE SURGE
17FF,
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK

SPRIN G

STATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

170

ILLUSTRATION I-10

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN TAYLOR COUNTY

221

361

35
porry

A\X00,
%'.
P

mw
VA\% %A\ 'XAW.

9
14

0 1 2 3 4 MUM
TAYLOR COUNTY .1.96

NORTH CEMMAL FIORIDA
REC@ M-A@M CM*Iol

171

LEGEND TO ILLUSTRATION I-11

SANTA FE SWAMP

l"R*-l;;4. a4l FOREST

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITH
k. DIRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLANDS WITHOUT
D
IRECT CONNECTION TO SALT MARSH

FRESHWATER WETLAND, CORE WETLAND

HUIRRICANE SURGE

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
END- RIVER

RIVER SEGMENT BOUNDARY

SALTWATER MARSH

SINK

SPRING

STATE PARK/PRESERVE

STREAM/SINK RECHARGE

172

ILLUSTRATION I-11

REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IN UNION COUNTY

100
238 Raiford 121 ie

31 121.

Lake Butler N

t2t

Worthington Spring*
UNION COUN"

1 3 4 MLES

NORM CMMAJ FLORMA
RE(JONAIL ptAhpdN(; CoLeqCX

173

ALACHUA COUNTY

ALACHUA COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

Alachua County Stream to Sink Recharge Area
Austin Cary Mem. Forest
Gum Root Swamp
Lochloosa Forest
Olleno State Park
Newnan's Lake - Prairie Creek
Payne's Prairie
San Felasco Hammock
Santa Fe River floodplain Corridor
Santa Fe Swamp

SECTION - TOWNSHIP - RANGE COORDINATES

Alachua County Stream to Sink Recharge Area

Range 18E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 14-16, 21-28, 32-36

Range 18E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 1-4, 9-17, 22-27, 36

Range 18E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 37 (Sanchez Grant)

Range 19E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 30-31

Range 19E
Twn. 8S
See. 4-9, 16-22, 26-36

Range 19E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 1-18

remaining area undefined

174

Austin Cary Memorial Forest

Range 21E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 28, 32, 33

Range 21E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 4, 9
Arredondo Grant 4-6

Gum Root Swamp

Range 21E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 20, 28-29, 34

Lochloosa Forest

Range 21E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 26, 27, 32-36,

Range 21E
Twn. 11S
Sec. 1-4, 9-16, 21- 23, 25, 27, 28

Levy Grant 5-6, 11-12

Range 22E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 31 - 33

Range 22E
Twn. 11S
Sec. 3-10, 16-21, 28-33

Range 22E
Twn. 12S
See. 3-9

Newnan's Lake Prairie Creek

Range 21E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 27, 31 34

175,

Range 21E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 3 - 10, 16 20, 30

O'leno State Park

Range 17E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 36

Range 17E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1

Payne's Prairie State Preserve

Range 19E
Twn. 11S
Sec. 1, 2, 11, 12

Range 20E
Twn. 10S
See. 20-29, land grant lots 1-4

Range 20E
Twn. 11S
Sec. 6, 7, 18, 24, land Grant Lots 1-5, land grant lots 7-10

San Felasco Hammock

Range 18E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 37, 38,39, 40
Special Grant No. 5

Range 18E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 12, 13, 38
Special Grant No. 5

Range 19E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 33, 37, 38, 49,
Special Grants. 4, 11, 12

Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor
Range 22E
Twn 8S
Sec. 5, 6

176

Range 21E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 29-36

Range 21E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 1, 2

Range 20E
Twn. 7S
See. 17-21, 25, 27-29, 31-36

Range 19E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 3-6, 9, 10, 13-16, 24

Range 19E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 29-33

Range 18E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 31, 33-36

Range 18E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 6

Range 17E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 36

Range 17E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1, 11, 12, 13, 14, 23-32, 37

Range 17E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 5, 6

Santa Fe Swamp

Range 22E
Twn. 8S
See. 5-8, 17, 18, 21

Range 21E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 1, 2, 12, 13

177

Range 21E
Twn. 7S
See. @9-36

BRADFORD COUNTY

BRADFORD COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

Brooks Sink
Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor
Santa Fe Swamp

SECTION - TOWNSHIP - RANGE COORDINATES

Brooks Sink

Range 21E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 12

Santa Fe Swamp

Range 22E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 31-34

Range 22E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 2-11, 14-16, 18, 21, 22

Range 21E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 29-36

Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor

Range 22E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 31, 32

Range 22E
Twn. 8S
See. 3-6, 8-17, 21, 22

178

Range 21E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 19, 20, 25-36

Range 20E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 16-18, 20-23, 25-27

Range 19E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1, 2, 10-15,

Range 19E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 33, 34

COLUMBIA COUNTY

COLUMBIA COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

Big Gum Swamp National Wilderness Area
Columbia County Southern Recharge Area
Columbia County Western Recharge Area
Ichetucknee River Floodplain Corridor
Ichetucknee Springs State Park.
Olleno State Park and River Rise State Preserve
Osceola National Forest
Pinhook Swamp
Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor
Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor

SECTION - TOWNSHIP - RANGE COORDINATES

Big Gum Swamp National Wilderness Area

Range 18E
Twn. is
Sec. 36

Range 18E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 1, 11 14, 23, 24

179

Range 19E
Twn. is
Sec. 21, 22, 27 - 34

Range 19E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 3 - 10, 16 - 20

Columbia County South Recharge Area

Range 16E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 1-2, 11-13, 20-29, 33-36

Range 16E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 1-4, 10-12, 15

Range 17E
Twn. 3S
See. 31-36

Range 17E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 1-36

Range 17E
Twn. 5S
See. 1-12, 14-16

Range 18E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 7, 17-20, 29-31

Range 18E
Twn- 5S
Sec. 6

Columbia County Western Stream-to-Sink Recharge Area

Range 15E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 23-26, 35-36

Range 15E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 1-2, 11

Range 16E
Twn. 2S
See. 16-17, 19-22, 27-34

180

Range 16E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 3-6, 8-10, 15

Ichetucknee River Floodplain Corridor

Range 15E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 13, 14, 23, 24, 26, 27

Range 16E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 7, 18

Ichetucknee Springs State Park

Range 15E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 13, 14, 23, 24

Range 16E
Twn. 6S
Range 7, 18

Olleno State Park

Range 17E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 34-36

Range 17E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1-3

Osceola National Forest

Range 17E
Twn. is
Sec. 22-27, 34-46

Range 17E
Twn. 2S
See. 1-3, 10-15, 22-27, 34-36

Range 17E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 1-3, 10-16, 22-27-

181

Range 18E
Twn. is
Sec. 19-36

Range 18E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 1-36

Range 18E
Twn. 3S
See. 1-33

Pinhook Swamp

Government Lots 559-573, 594-607

Range 16E
Twn. 2N
See. 13-14, 23-26, 35

Range 17E
Twn. IN
Sec. 1-5, 8-17, 20-30, 34-36

Range 17E
Twn. 2N
Sec. 13-18, 22-27, 34-36

Range 17E -
Twn. IS
See. 1-2, 4, 11-14

Range 18E
Twn. IN
Sec. 1-36

Range 18E
Twn. 2N
Sec. 13-36

Range 18E
Twn. is
See. 1-18

Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor

Range 15E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 25-27, 36

182

Range 15E
Twn. 7S
See. 1

Range 16E
Twn. 7S
See. 6, 7, 18, 19, 20, 21, 27, 28, 34-36

Range 17E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 35, 36

Range 17E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1-3, 11, 15, 21-23, 27-29, 31, 32

Range 18E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 20, 29-32

Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor

Range 15E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 11-14, 23, 24

Range 16E
Twn. 2N
Sec. 10, 11, 15,21, 22, 23v 27, 28, 33v 34, 574, 575

Range 16E
Twn. 1N
See. 3, 4, 9-11, 13-15, 22-26, 36

Range 16E
Twn. is
See. 25, 35, 36

Range 16E
Twn. 2S
See. 1, 2, 8-23

Range 17E
Twn. iN
Sec. 30, 31

Range 17E
Twn. is
Sec. 5-9v 17-20, 28-31

183

DIXIE COUNTY

DIXIE COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

California Swamp
California Swamp Core
Coastal Drainage Basin
Hurricane Surge Zone
Freshwater Wetlands with Direct Sheet Flow to Coastal Marsh
Salt Marsh
Lime Sink
Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge
Steinhatchee River Floodplain Corridor
Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor, Segment V
Wannee Natural Area

SECTION - TOWNSHIP - RANGE COORDINATES

California Swamp

Range 12E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 26-27, 34-35

Range 11E
Twn. 11S
Sec. 13-16, 19-36,

Range 12E
Twn. 11S
Sec. 1,2, 11-24, 27-36

Range 13E
Twn. 11S
Sec. 18p 19

Range 11E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 1-5, 10-14, 22-26, 35, 36

Range 12E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 1-13, 15-22, 27-29, 32-36

Range 13E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 5-7, 18, 19

184

Range 12E
Twn. 13S
Sec. 5, 6, 8,

Range 11 E
Twn. 13S
Sec. 1

California Swamp, Core

Range 11E
Twn. 11S
See. 36

Range 11E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 1, 2, 11 - 13, 24, 25

Range 12E
Twn. 11S
See. 19, 20, 28 - 30, 33 - 36

Range 12E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 4 - 9, 18, 19, 30

Gulf Coastal Drainage Basin Freshwater Wetlands
with Direct Sheet Flow to Gulf

Wetland 1

Range 10E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 31, 32

Range 10E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 1. 4 - 36

Range 10E
Twn. 11S
See. 1 - 16, 22 26, 36

Range 10E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 1

Range 11E
Twn. IOS
Sec. 1, 2. 7, 9 - 36

185

Range 11 E
Twn. 11 S
See. 2 - 11, 14 - 23, 26 35

Range 11E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 3 - 5, 10

Range 12E
Twn. IOS
Sec. 6, 7. 18 - 20

Wetland 2

Range 12E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 31, 32

Range 12E
Twn. 13S
Sec. 4, 5, 8. 9

Salt Marsh

Range 9E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 26-28, 34-36

Range 9E
Twn. 10S -
Sec. 1-3, 10-15, 22-27, 34-36

Range 9E
Twn. 11S
Sec. 1-3, 10-14, 23-24

Range 10E
Twn. 11S
Sec. 17-21, 27-30, 32-35

Range IOE
Twn. 12S
See. 2-3, 10-14, 24

Range 11E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 6-9, 15-18, 20-22t 26-28, 33-36

Range 11E
Twn. 13S
See. 1-3, 9-14

186

Range 1*2E
Twn. 13S
See. 7

Hurricane Surge Zone

Range 9E
Town. 9S
Sec. 25-27, 34-36

Range 9E
Town 10S
See. 1-3, 10-15, 22-27, 34-36

Range 9E
Twn. IIS
Sec. 1-3, 10-14, 23, 24

Range IOE
Twp. 8S
Sec 32, 33

Range IOE
Twp 9S
See. 4. 5, 8, 9, 16, 17, 19-21, 28-32

Range 10E
Town. IOS
Sec. 5-7, 16-21, Z8-33

Range IOE
Twn. IIS
Sec. 2-11, 14-36

Range 10E
Twn. 12S
See. 1-3, 10-14

Range.IiE
Twn. liS
Sec. 19, 20, 28-36

Range 11E
Twn. 12S
Sec. All

Range 12E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 5-9. 15-22, 25, 28-36

187

Range 12B
Twn - 13S
Sec. all

Range 13E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 8, 9, 16-21, 25, 29-32

Range 13E
Twp- 13S
Sec 6

Lime Sink

Range 12B
Twn. 12S
See. 9

Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge

Range 11E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 5, 8, 9, 15-17, 20-23, 26-28, 33-36

Range 11E
Twn. 13S
See. 1-3, 10-14, 23, 24

Range 12E
Twn. 13S
Sec. 6-8, 17-19

Steinhatchee River Floodplain Corridor

Rge-Twn-Sec

Range 10E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 21, 28, 29, 32

Range IOE
Twn. 9S
See. 5, 8, 17 - 19, 30

Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor, Segment V

Range 14E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 5-8, 16-19, 30-32

Range 13E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 13, 24, 25, 36

Range 14E
Twn. 9s
See. 6, 7, 17, 18, 30, 31

Range 13E
Twn. 9s
Sec. 1, 12-14, 23-26, 35, 36

Range 14E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 21, 29, 30, 31

Range 13E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 1, 2, 11-14, 24, 25, 36

Range 14E
Twn. 11S
See. 6

Range 13E
Tw-n. lis
Sec. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13-15, 22, 23, 26, 27, 34, 35

Range 13E
Twn. * 12S
Sec. 2-4, 8-10, 16, 17, 20, 21, 29-32

Range 12E
Twn. 12S
Sec. 36

Range 13E
Twn. 13S
Sec. 6

Range 12E
Twn. 13S
Sec. 1-5, 8-23, 28-36

189

Range 11 E
Twn. 13S
Sec. 23, 24, 25, 36

Wannee Natural Area

Range 14E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 31

Range 14E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 6, 7

GILCHRIST COUNTY

GILCHRIST COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL-AREAS

Santa Fe River Flood Plain Corridor
Suwannee River Flood Plain Corridor
Suwannee - Santa Fe Rivers Confluence Natural Area
Vacassassa Flats
Wannee Natural Area

SECTION - TOWNSHIP RANGE COORDINATES

Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor

Range 16E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 7, 18-20, 28-30, 32-36

Range 16E
Twn. 8S
See. 1-3

Range 15E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1, 4-7, 12, 13, 18

Range 15E
Twn. 6S
See. 26-28, 30-36

190

Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor

Range 14E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1, 12, 13, 23-26, 35, 36

Range 14E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 2-5, 8-10, 15-17, 19-21, 28, 29, 30, 32

Range 14E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 5-8, 17-20, 29-32,

Range 14E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 5-7, 18-20

Range 13E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 12, 13, 24

Suwannee - Santa Fe Rivers Confluence Natural Area

Range 14E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1, 12

Wacassassa Flats

Range 15E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 2, 11, 14,22 27, 34 36

Range 15E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 1-4, 9-16, 21-28, 33-36

Range 15E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 1-4, 9-16, 21-28, 34-36

Range 15E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 1, 2, 11, 12

Range 16E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 31

191

Range 16E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 19, 10, 31

Range 16E
Twn. 9S
See. 17-20, 29-32,

Range 16E
Twn. 10S
Sec. 4-9, 15-22, 27-34

Wannee Natural Area

Range 14E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 31

Range 14E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 6, 7

HAMILTON COUNTY

HAMILTON COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

Alapaha River Floodplain Corridor
Bee Haven Bay-Rocky Creek Swamp
Brown Tract Natural Area
Holton Creek Natural Area
Hamilton County Stream to Sink Recharge Area
Stephen Foster State Folk Culture Center
Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor, Segment I
Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor, Segment II
Suwannee River State Park
Withlacoochee River Floodplain Corridor

SECTION - TOWNSHIP - RANGE COORDINATES

Alapaha River Floodplain Corridor

Range 12E
Twn. 3N
Sec. 11, 12, 190, 191, 224, 225

192

Range 12E
Twn. 1 N
Sec. 13, 14, 23-26, 34, 35

Range 13E
Twn. 3N
Sec. 6-8, 16, 17, 20, 21, 28, 29, 32, 33, W 1/2 of 226

Range 13E
Twn. 2N
Sec. 5, 8, 17-19

Bee Haven Bay-Rocky Creek Swamp

Range 14E
Twn. 2N
Sec. 25, 36

Range 14E
Twn. 1N
Sec. 1, 11-13, 24
Range 15E
Twn. 2N
Sec. 19-21, 23-36

Range 15E
Twn. 1N
Sec. 2-10, 15-22, 27, 28

Range 16E
Twn. 2N
See. 19-21, 28-33

Brown Tract Natural Area

Range 16E
Twn. is
Rec. 28, 29, 32-34

Range 16E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 2-5, 8-11

Holton Creek Natural Area

Range 13E
Twn. is
Sec. 2-6

193

Stephen Foster State Folk Culture Center

Range 15E
Twn. 2S
See. 12

Hamilton County Stream to Sink Recharge Area

Government Lots 231-232, 519-524, 589-592

Range 13E
Twn. 2N
Sec. 1-2, 11-15, 22-28, 33-36

Range 13E
Twn. 1N
Sec. 1-4, 9-17, 19-25, 27-35

Range 13E
Twn. 1S
Sec. 2-4

Range 14E
Twn. 2N
Sec. 4-10, 14-21, 26-36

Range 14E
Twn. 1N
See. 1-11, 14-23, 26-30

Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor, Section I

Range 16E
Twn. 2N
See. 15, 16, 20, 21, 28, 32, 33, 536, 537, 574, 575

Range 16E
Twn. 1N
Sec. 4, 5, 9, 10, 15-17, 20-23, 25, 26, 35, 36

Range 16E
Twn. is
Sec. 24-26, 35, 36

Range 16E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 2, 3, 8-11, 16, 17

194

Range 17E
Twn. is
Sec. 6, 7, 18, 19

Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor, Segment II

Range 11E
Twn. is
Sec. 13, 24

Range 12E
Twn. 1N
Sec. 32-36

Range 12E
Twn. is
Sec. 1, 3-8, 18

Range 13E
Twn. 1N
Sec. 31-33, 35

Range 13E
Twn. is
Sec. 1-6, 11, 12

Range 14E
Twn. is
Sec. 7-9, 14-17, 20-23, 25, 26, 36

Range 15E
Twn. is
Sec. 31-34

Range 15E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 2-6, 11, 12

Suwannee River State Park

Range IlE
Twn. is
Sec. 13, 24

Range 12E
Twn. is
Sec. 5-7, 18

195

Withlacoochee River Floodplain Corridor

Range 10E
Twn. 3N
Sec. 163-166, 204-206

Range 11E
Twn 3N
Sec. 201, 203, 212

Range 11E
Twn. 2N
See. 5-8, 17-20, 22, 27, 28, 33, 34

Range 11E
Twn. 1N
Sec. 4, 5, 8, 9, 16, 17, 20-22, 27, 28, 33, 34

Range 11E
Twn. is
See. 2-4, 9-13, 24

LAFAYETTE COUNTY

LAFAYETTE COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor
Suwannee Santa Fe Rivers Confluence Natural Area

SECTION TOWNSHIP - RANGE COORDINATES

Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor

Range 11E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 5-7, 17-20, 30-32

Range 11E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 5-8. 16, 17, 20, 21, 25-29, 32-36

Range 12E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 28-34

196

Range 12E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 1-4, 10-14, 24

Range 13E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 7, 17-21, 27-30, 32-36

Range 13E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 1, 2. 12, 13

Range 14E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 17-21, 28-30, 32, 33

Range 14E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 4, 5, 8-11, 14-17, 20-23, 26-29, 31-34

Suwannee - Santa Fe Rivers Confluence Natural Area

Range 14E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 11, 14, 23, 26, 35

MADISON COUNTY

MADISON COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

Blue Spring
Campbell Spring
Hixtown Swamp
Johnson Sink
Madison County Strewn to Sink Recharge Area
Patterson Sink
Rogers Sink
Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor, Segment III
Withlacoochee River Floodplain Corridor

SECTION - TOWNSHIP - RANGE COORDINATES

Blue Spring

Range 11E
Twn. 1N
Sec. 20

197

Campbell Spring

Range 10E
Twn. is
Sec. 10

Hixtown Swamp

Range 7E
Twn. IN
Sec. 25-27, 33-36

Range 8E
Twn. IN
Sec. 14-16, 19-23, 25-34

Range 7E
Twn. IS
Sec. 1-5, 9-13, 15-16, 21

Range 8E
Twn. IS
Sec. 3-6, 9-10, 15-16

Johnson Sink

Range 10E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 9, 10

Madison County Stream to Sink Recharge Area

Range 9E
Twn. IS
Sec. 14, 21-27, 35-36

Range 9E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 1

Range 10E
Twn. IS
Sec. 8-10, 15-21, 28-32

Range 10E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 5-6

198

Patterson Sink

Range IOE
Twn. is
Sec. 31

Rogers Sink

Range 10E
Twn. is
Sec. 28

Withlacoochee River Floodplain Corridor

Range 10E
Twn. 3N
See. 36, 160, 161, 203-2069 212

Range 11E
Twn- 2N
Sec. 6, 7, 18, 19, 30-33

Range 10E
Twn. 2N
Sec. 11-14, 24, 36

Range 11E
Twn. iN
Sec. 5, 8, 17, 18, 20, 21,@ 28, 33

Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor, Segment III

Range 11E
Twn. is
Sec. 4, 5, 9-11, 13, 14, 22-24, 26, 28, 33-35

Range 11E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 3-5, 8-10, 15-17, 20, 21, 29, 31, 32

199

SUWANNEE COUNTY

SUWANNEE COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

Columbia County Western Stream to Sink Recharge Area
Ichetucknee River Floodplain Corridor
Ichetucknee Springs State Park
Lower Little River Stream to Sink Recharge Area
Peacock Slough
Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor
Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor
Suwannee - Santa Fe Rivers Confluence Natural Area
Telford Springs
Upper Little River STream to Sink Recharge Area

SECTION - TOWNSHIP - RANGE COORDINATES

Columbia County Western Stream to Sink Recharge Area

Range 15E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 3, 10

Ichetucknee River Floodplain Corridor

Range 15E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 12-14, 22, 23, 27

Ichetucknee Springs State Park

Range 15E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 11-14, 23

Lower Little River Stream to Sink Recharge Area

Range 14E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 13, 14, 22-27, 35, 36

Range 14E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 1-4, 9-15, 14, 15, 22, 27, 33-35

200

Peacock Slough

Range 21E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 20-21

Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor

Range 14E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1

Range 15E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 27, 28, 31, 32

Range 16E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 11-14, 23

Suwannee River Floodplain Corridor

Range 15E
Twn. is
Sec. 7, 17, 18, 20-23, 26-28, 24-36

Range 14E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 3-6, 8-10, 16

Range 15E
Twn. is
See. 31

Range 13E
Twn. is
Sec. 2-12

Range 12E
Twn. is
See. 1, 3, 4, 4-9. 16-18

Range 11E
Twn. is
Sec. 24-26, 34-36

Range 11E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 2, 3, 10, 14, 21, 22, 28, 32, 33

201

Range 11 E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 5-8, 17, 20, 21, 29, 32, 33

Range 11E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 4, 5, 8-10, 13, 15, 16, 21-28, 35

Range 12E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 8, 16-22, 24-30, 32, 34-36

Range 12E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 1, 2, 12

Range 13E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 5-10, 15-17, 21-23, 25-27, 34-36

Range 14E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 5-8, 16-18, 21, 28, 33, 34

Range 14E
Twn. 7S
See. 2-4, 9-11

Suwannee - Santa Fe Rivers Confluence Natural Area

Range 14E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1, 11

Telford Springs

Range 11E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 25

Upper Little River Stream to Sink Recharge Area

Range 15E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 16-21, 2.8-32

202

Range 15E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 5-6

TAYLOR COUNTY

TAYLOR COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

Aucilla River Floodplain Corridor
Aucilla River Sinks
California Sink
Gulf Coastal Drainage Basin Freshwater Wetlands
with Direct Sheet Flow to Gulf
Gulf Coastal Marsh
Hurricane Surge Zone
Page Sink
Spring Warrior Swamp
Steinhatchee River Floodplain Corridor
Tide Swamp Wildlife Management Area

SECTION - TOWNSHIP - RANGE COORDINATES

Aucilla River Floodplain Corridor

Range 3E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 18, 19, 25, 36

Range 3E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 1

Range 4E
Twn- 3S
Sec. 2, 10, 15, 22, 27-29, 32

Range 4E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 5, 7, 8, 18
Range 5E
Twn. 2S
Sec. 21, 22, 27-29, 31, 32

203

Aucilla River Sinks

Range 4E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 22, 27-32

Range 4E
Twn. 4S
See. 5-6

Eoonfina River Floodplain Corridor

Range 5E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 33-36

Range 5E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 2-5, 7-10, 17-18

Range 6E
Twn. 3S
Sec. 19-21, 29-31

Gulf Coastal Drainage Basin Freshwater Wetlands
with Direct Sheet Flow to Gulf

Wetland 3

Range 4E
Twn- 4S
See. 21 29, 32 34

Range 4E
Twn- 5S
Sec. 3

Wetland 4

Range 4E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 13

Range 5E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 2, 10 - 15, 21 - 28, 32 36

204

Range 5E
Twn - 5S
Sec. 1 18, 21 23, 26, 27

Range 6E
Twn- 3S
Sec. 32 -34

Range 6E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 4, 5, 7, 8, 17 19, 30, 31

Range 6E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 6,7

Wetland 5

Range 6E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 25, 34 - 36

Range 6E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 1 - 4, 9 - 14

Range 7E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 27, 28, 30, 31, 33 36

Range 7E
Twn. 6S
See. 1 - 11, 15 19

Range 8E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 29 - 31

Wetland 6

Range 7E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 32 - 36

Range 7E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1 - 4, 10 15, 23 25

205

Range 8E
Twn. 6S
See. 25, 26, 31, 33 - 36

Range 8E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 1 - 36

Range 8E
Twn. 8S
Sec. I - 18, 20 291 33 36

Range 8E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 1, 2, 12

Range 9E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 31

Range 9E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 7, 18

Range 9E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 18, 19, 29 - 33

Range 9E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 3 - 10, 15 - 18, 21, 22, 27, 28

Salt Marsh

Range 3E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 25, 36

Range 3E
Twn- 5S
See.I

Range 4E
Twn. 4S
See. 19-36

Range 4E
Twn- 5S
Sec. 1-17, 22-25

206

Range 5E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 9-12, 14 -36

Range 5E
Twn. 6S
Sec. Unnumbered sections

Range 6E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 19-20, 29-33

Range 6E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 6-8, 15-18, 21-23, 25-27, 36

Range 7E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 30-32

Range 7E
Twn. 7S
Sec. 5-6, 8-10, 15-16, 21-23, 25-27, 35-36

Range 7E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 1, 12-13, 24

Range 8E
Twn. 8S
See. 6-7, 17-22, 26-36

Range 8E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 1-24

Range 9E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 4-9, 15-23

Hurricane Surge Zone

Range 3E
Twn. 3S
See. 28-29, 32-33

Range 3E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 24-36 That portion in Taylor County

207

Range 3E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 1-? That portion in Taylor County

Range 4E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 1-36 That portion in Taylor County

Range 4E
Twn- 5S
Sec. 1-26 That portion in Taylor County

Range 5E
Twn. 4S
Sec. 17-21, 26-36

Range 5E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 1-36

Range 5E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 1-? That portion not in water

Range 6E
Twn- 5S
Sec. 4-9, 16-21, 27-34

Range 6E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 2-36 That portion not in water

Range 7E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 29-32

Range 7E
Twn. 7S
See. 4-10, 14-23, 25-36
Range 8E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 6-8, 16-22, 25-36

Range 8E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 1-24 That portion not in water

Range 9E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 1, 5-9, 12-36 That portion not in water

208

Range 10E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 31-32

Range 10E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 5-8, 17-19-36 That portion in Taylor County

Page Sink

Range 4E
Twn. 3S
See. 24

Spring Warrior Swamp

Range 7E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 12-14, 22-29

Range 8E
Twn. 5S
Sec. 33

Range 8E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 3-11, 15-22, 28-30

Steinhatchee River Floodplain Corridor

Range 9E
Twn. 9s
Sec. 23-26

Range 10E
Twn 8S
See. 21, 28, 29, 31, 32

Range 10E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 5-7, 17-19, 30

209

Tide Swamp (does not include Coastal Marsh sections)

Range 8E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 5-7, 17-18, 20-22, 26-29, 32-36

Range 8E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 1-2, 12

Range 9E
Twn. 9S
Sec. 4-9, 15-18, 21-22

Add following for Coastal Marsh

Range 7E
Twn. 8S
Sec. 13-24 not in water

UNION COUNTY

UNION COUNTY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS

Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor

SECTION - TOWNSHIP RANGE COORDINATES

Santa Fe River Floodplain Corridor

Range 19E
Twn. 6S
Sec. 29-33

Range ISE
Twn. 6S
Sec. 20-22, 25-27

210

APPENDIX j

SECTION COORDINATES AND 1985 TAXABLE VALUE

OF REAL PROPERTY FOR SECTIONS CONSIDERED FOR

PUBLIC ACQUISITION

ALACHUA COUNTY

LOCHLOOSA FOREST

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value

21E-10S-32 $59,400.00
21E-10S-35 $84,300-00
21E-10S-36 $57,000.00
21E-11S-1 $68,600.00
21E-11S-2 $63,900-00
21E-11S-3 $58,600.00
21E-11S-4 $56,600.00
21E-11S-9 $34,900-00
21E-11S-10 $57,600.00
21E-11S-11 $51,200.00
21E-11S-12 $78,100.00
21E-11S-13 $51,500-00
21E-11S-14 $73,700.00
21E-11S-15 $156,900.00
21E-11S-16 $32,000.00
21e-11s-20 $26,300-00
21E-11S-21 $26,400.00
21E-11S-22 $49,400.00
21E-11S-23 $188,700.00
21E-11S-24 $55,700.00
21E-11S-25 $47,500-00
21E-11S-26 $562,400.00
21E-11S-27 $26,500-00
21E-11S-28 $0.00
21E-11S-33 $14,400-00
21E-11S-34 $8,200.00
22E-10S-31 $65,800.00
22E-10S-32 $120,390-00
22E-10S-33 $101,600.00
22E-10S-34 $90,6100.00
22E-11S-4 $87,700.00
22E-11S-5 $73,400.00
22E-11S-6 $79,000.00
22E-11S-7 $68,900-00

211

22E-11S-8 $25,200.00
22E-11S-9 $57,200.00

22E-11S-16 $165,800.00
22E-11S-17 $0.00
22E-11S-18 $36,600.00
22E-11S-19 $6,000.00
22E-11S-20 $0.00
22E-11S-28 $0.00
22E-11S-29 $6,000.00
22E-11S-30 $10,600.00
22E-11S-31 $27,600.00
22E-11S-32 $21,200.00
22E-11S-33 $23,300.00
22E-12S-3 $83,200.00
22E-12S-4 $53,500.00
22E-12S-5 $23,400.00
22E-12S-6 $33,700.00
22E-12S-7 $85,200.00
22E-12S-8 $89,300-00
22E-12S-9 $109,800.00

TOTAL $3,534,790.00

OILENO - RIVER RISE

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value

17E-6S-36 0
17E-7S-1 0

TOTAL 0

PAYNE'S PRAIRIE

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value

19E-10S-24 $24,300-00
19E-10S-34 $0.00
19E-10S-35 $2,300-00
19E-10S-36 $0.00
19E-11S-1 $0.00
19E-11S-2 $0.00
19E-11S-3 $8,800.00
19E-11S-12 $105,300-00
20E-10S-00 $0.00
20E-10S-17 $0.00
20E-10S-20 $37,000-00

212

20E-10S-24 $0.00
20E-10S-26 $14,600.00
20E-10S-27 $0.00

20E-10S-28 $0.00
20E-10S-29 $0.00
20E-10S-30 $0.00
20E-10S-31 $0.00
20E-10S-32 $0.00
20E-10S-33 $0.00
20E-10S-34 $0.00
20E-10S-35 $0.00
20E-10S-36 $0.00
20E-11S-6 $0.00
20E-11S-7 $43,500-00
20E-11S-18 $11,800.00
20E-11S-24 $11,900.00

TOTAL $259,500-00

SAN FELASCO HAMMOCK

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value

18E-8S-36 $7,300-00
1SE-9S-1 $0.00
18E-9S-12 $0.00
19E-8S-29 $193,900-00
19E-8S-30 $0.00
19E-SS-31 $0.00
19E-8S-32 $5,500-00
19E-9S-5 $0.00
19E-gS-6 $0.00
19E-9S-7 $0.00
19E-9S-8 $49,600.00
TOTAL $256,300-00

BRADFORD COUNTY

BROOKS SINK

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value

21E-7S-12 $195,040

213

COLUMBIA COUNTY

ICHETUCKNEE SPRINGS STATE PARK

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
15E-6S-13 $0
15E-6S-14 $0
15E-6S-23 $58,510
15E-6S-24 $6,630
16E-6S-18 $300,960

TOTAL $366,100

OILENO STATE PARK

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
17E-6S-34 $79,820
17E-6S-35 $44,140
17E-6S-36 $15,330
17E-7S-1 $0
17E-7S-2 $63,070
17E-7S-3 $123,080

TOTAL $366,100

DIXIE COUNTY

CORE OF CALIFORNIA SWAMP

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
11E-11S-36 $75,018
11E-12S-1 $34,030
11E-12S-2 $82,226
11E-12S-11 $54,506
11E-12S-12 $31,167
11E-12S-13 $32,134
11E-12S-24 $28,924
11E-12S-25 $31,264
12E-11S-19 $82,729
12E-11S-20 $78,197
12E-11S-28 $54,418
12E-11S-29 $83,900
12E-11S-30 $40,238
12E-11S-33 $54,269
12E-11S-34 $87,683

214

12E-11S-35 $84,583
12E-11S-36 $81,132
12E-12S-4 $84,455
12E-12S-5 $40,637
12E-12S-6 $33,170
12E-12S-7 $33,020
12E-12S-8 $43,780
12E-12S-9 $91,497
12E-12S-18 $33,373
12E-12S-19 $30,816
12E-12S-30 $36,476

TOTAL $1,443,642

WANNEE NATURAL AREA

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
14E-8S-31 $88,200
14E-gS-6 $95,400
14E-9S-7 $119,300

TOTAL $302,900

STEINHATCHEE RIVER CORRIDOR

Rge-Twn-Seo Taxable Value
10E-8S-21 $30-,225
10E-8S-28 $82,990
10E-8S-29 $82,990
10E-8S-32 $82,990
10E-9S-5 $82,990
10E-9S-8 $82,990
10E-9S-17 $82,990
10E-9S-18 $82,990
10E-9S-19 $82,990
10E-9S-30 $82,990

TOTAL $777,135

SUWANNEE RIVER, SEGMENT V

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
11E-13S-23 $2,275
11E-13S-24 $3,425
11E-13S-25 $3,740
11E-13S-36 $8,090
12E-12S-36 $58,258

215

12E-13S-1 $23,744
12E-13S-2 $88,300
12E-13S-3 $75,935
12E-13S-4 $62,315
12E-13S-5 $87,290
12E-13S-8 $120,344
12E-13S-9 $61,215
12E-13S-10 $33,411
12E-13S-11 $40,270
12E-13S-12 $6,250
12E-13S-13 $7,620
12E-13S-14 $58,988
12E-13S-15 $77,151
12E-13S-16 $219,778
12E-13S-17 $35,196
12E-13S-20 $3,365
12E-13S-21 $314,993
12E-13S-22 $1,960
12E-13S-23 $475
12E-13S-28 $1,945
12E-13S-29 $2,010
12E-13S-31 $6,000
12E-13S-32 $0
12E-13S-33 $0
12E-13S-34 $0
12E-13S-35 $0
12E-13S-36 $0
13E-13S-6 $ 5,850
13E-12S-4 $61,190
13E-12S-8 $75,130
13E-12S-9 $46,860
13E-12S-10 $3,200
13E-12S-16 $10,572
13E-12S-17 $73,268
13E-12S-20 $41,834
12E-12S-21 $ 2,200
13E-12S-29 $44,654
13E-12S-30 $52,848
13E-12S-31 $47,439
13E-12S-32 $15,735

TOTAL $1,885,123

216

GILCHRIST COUNTY

SUWANNEE - SANTA FE RIVERS CONFLUENCE

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value

14E-7S-1 $ 11,402
14E-7S-12 $ 779,343

TOTAL $790,745

WANNEE NATURAL AREA

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
14E-8S-31 $12,250
14E-9S-6 $28,795
14E-9S-7 $410,309

TOTAL $451,354

HAMILTON COUNTY

BROWN TRACT

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
16E-1S-28 $89,513
16E-1S-29 $88,459
16E-1S-32 $475,131
16E-lS-33 $102,796
16E-1S-34 $67,341
16E-2S-2 $11,932
16E-2S-3 $45,195
16E-2S-4 $69,214
16E-2S-5 $76,547
16E-2S-8 $74,953
16E-2S-9 $48,048
16E-2S-10 $8,480
16E-2S-11 $0

TOTAL $757,609

217

HOLTON CREEK

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
13E-IS-2 $154,466
13E-1S-3 $320,610
13E-1S-4 $441,770
13E-1S-5 $360,196
13E-1S-6 $531,072

TOTAL $1,808,114

SUWANNEE RIVER STATE PARK

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
11E-1S-13 $0
11E-1S-24 $0

TOTAL $0

STEPHEN FOSTER STATE FOLK CULTURAL CENTER

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
15E-2S-12 $19,810

TOTAL $1 9,810

LAFAYETTE COUNTY

SUWANNEE - SANTA FE RIVERS CONFLUENCE

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
14E-7S-11 $326,630
14E-7S-14 $252,470
14E-7S-23 $84,240
14E-7S-26 $137,960
14E-7S-35 $170

TOTAL $801,470

218

SUWANNEE COUNTY

ICHETUCKNEE SPRINGS STATE PARK

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
15E-6S-11 $54,324
15E-6S-12 $76,994
15E-6S-13 $0
15E-6S-14 $6,403
15E-6S-23 $0

TOTAL $237,721

PEACOCK SLOUGH

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
21E-4S-20 $218,993
21E-4S-21 $113,344

TOTAL $332,337

SUWANNEE -SANTA FE RIVERS CONFLUENCE

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
14E-7S-1 $280,988
14E-7S-11 $116,293

TOTAL $397,281

TAYLOR COUNTY

STEINHATCHEE RIVER CORRIDOR

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
9E-9S-23 $1,122,670
9E-9S-24 $268,784
9E-9S-25 $3,069,798
9E-9S-26 $1,588,792
10E-8S-21 $202,057
10E-8S-28 $3,530
10E-8S-29 $83,016
IOE-8S-31 $71,760
10E-9S-5 $1,241,856

219

10E-9S-6 $60,834
10E-9S-7 $91,194
10E-9S-17 $467,133
10E-9S-18 $809,326
10E-9S-19 $1,961,344
10E-9S-30 $21,218,391

TOTAL $32,260,485

ECONFINA RIVER CORRIDOR

Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
5E-3S-33 $118,849
5E-3S-34 $106,920
5E-3S-35 $10,7602
5E-3S-36 $97,251
5E-4S-2 $73.611
5E-4S-3 $119,493
5E-3S-4 $114,104
5E-4S-5 $109,260
5E-4S-7 $75,722
5E-4S-8 $109,840
5E-4S-9 $119,410
5E-4S-10 $98,372
5E-4S-17 $117,688
5E-4S-18 $108,838
6E-3S-19 $86.992
6E-3S-20 $80,192
6E-3S-21 $84,658
6E-3S-29 $92,820
6E-3S-30 $86,780
6E-3S-31 $61,428

TOTAL $1,969,830

AUCILLA RIVER CORRIDOR
Rge-Twn-Sec Taxable Value
3E-4S-18 $0
3E-4S-19 $0
3E-4S-25 $23,163
3E-4S-36 $0
3E-5S-1 $0
4E-3S-2 $59,870
4E-3S-10 $62,972
4E-3S-15 $74,116
4E-3S-22 $88,480
4E-3S-27 $88,470
4E-3S-28 $44,090 220

4E-3S-29 $0
4E-3S-30 $0
4E-3S-31 $0
4E-3S-32 $26,170
4E-4S-5 $63,314
4E-4S-6 $1,071
4E-4S-7 $912,260
4E-4S-8 $412,778
4E-4S-18 $182,220
5E-2S-21 $13,503
5E-2S-22 $67,756
5E-2S-27 $75,954
5E-2S-28 $71,692
5E-2S-29 $51,538
5E-2S-31 $319,734
5E-2S-32 $89,643

TOTAL $2,728,794

221

FOOTNOTES

lBureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Florida,
1985 Florida Statistical Abstract (Gainesville, Fl.: 1984), Table 1.84,
Population Projections: Estimates April 1, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2010,
and 2020, in the Stae and Counties of Florida", pg. 36.
2North Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Environmental
Quality Assessment: Coastal Zone Planning for Dixie and Taylor Counties,
Florida (Gainesville, Fl.: 1976), pg. 65.

3North Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Significant
Natural Areas in Planning District Three (Gainesville, Fl.: 1977),
pg. 46.

4A.T. Gailard, Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission (personal
communication with author), April, 1985.
5Water Ressources Division, United States Geological Survey, Water
Resource Data for Florida, Vol. 4, Northwest Florida (Tallahassee, Fl.:
1984).

6Water Resources Division.

7Water Resources Division.

8Ken Pelham, Suwannee River Visual Resource Assessment Study,
University of Florida, Department of Landscape Architecture (Gainesville,
FI.: 1980).

9Pelham.

loWater Resources Division.

liAngelo D. Becasso, Nick Fotheringham, Alice E. Redfield, Ronald
L. Frew, William M. Levitan, Joel E. Smith, and Jarrett 0. Woodrow, Jr.,
Gulf Coast Ecological Inventory: User's Guide and Information Base,
Dames and Moore (Bethesda, Md.; 1982), pg. 132.
12Beccasio, et. al., pg. 130.
13Becoasio, et. al., pg. 132.
14S. David Webb, "A Short Report on the Ecology of the Suwannee
River Drainage", Florida State Museum (Gainesville, Fl.: 1970), Pg. 4-7.

222

15Walking the Florida Trail, John M. Keller, Ed., Florida Trail
Association, Inc. (Gainesville, Fl.: 1983). pg. 114.

16Water Resources Division.

17North Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Significant
Natural Areas (Gainesville, Fl.: 1977), pg. 60.

18Water Resources Division.

19Water Resources Division.

20Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation
and Parks, Management Criteria statement, Suwannee River State Park
(Tallahassee, Fl.: 1985).

21Significant Natural Areas, pg. 41.
22J. Merrill Lynch, Suwannee River Preserve Design Project, The
Nature Conservancy (Tallahassee, Fl.: 1984), pg. 55.

23j. Merrill Lynch, pg. 119.

24j. Merrill Lynch, pg. 150.

25j. Merrill Lynch, pg. 184.
26Significant Natural Areas, pg. 69.
27Significant Natural Areas, pg. 54.

2SAnnual Report of the Conservation and Recreation Lands
Selection Committee, Division of State Lands (Tallahassee, Fl.: 1985),
pg. 211.

29Robert M. Brantley, Executive Director of the Florida Game and
Freshwater Fish Commission, correspondence of March 6, 1984 to Mr.
John Bethea, Director, Division of Forestry, Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services, Tallahassee, Fl.

30Significant Natural Areas, pg. 82.

31Ad Hoc Committee for Newnans Lake Environmental Concerns,Report:
1983 Alachua County, Gaionesville, Fl.: pg. 13.

32Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Table 1.84.

33Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Table 1.69,
"Population: Census Counts, April 1, 1970 and 1980, and Estimates April
1, 1984, of the 1984 Most Populous Cities in Florida", pg. 30.

223

34Management Criteria Statement, San Felasco Hammock State Preserve,
Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, 1977.

35Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Table 1.84.

36Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Estimates of Population
by County and Municipality in Florida (Gainesville, Fl: April 1,,1984).

37Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Table 1.84.

38Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Economic Leaflets,
Vol. 41, No. 12 (Gainesville, Fl.: 1982).

39Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Estimates of Population
by County and Municipality in Florida (Gainesville, Fl.: April 1, 1984).

40Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Economic Leaflets,
Vol. 41, No. 12, (Gainesville, Fl.: 1982).

41Bureau of Economic Research, 1984 Florida Statistical Abstract,
Table 1.84.

42University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research,
Florida Statisitcal Abstract, 1980-1984, Table 11-15, "Building Permit
Activity: New Housing Units Authorized by Building Permits in the State,
Counties, Municipalities, and Unincorporated Areas of Florida."

43Bureau of Economic and Business Research, 1984 Florida Statistical
Abstract, Table 1.84.

44Bureau of Economnic and Business Research, Florida Statistical
Abstract, Table 1.84.

45Bureau of Economic and Business Research, 1984 Florida Statistical
Abstract, Table 1.84.

46Silviculture Best Practices Manual, State of Florida, Division of
Forestry (Tallahassee, F,l.), ca. 1980.
47Judy P. Stout, The Ecology of Irregularly.Flooded Salt Marshes of
the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico: A Community Profile, Marine
Environmental Sciences Consortium, Dauphin Island, Alabama (December,
1984), Pg. 6.
480rrin H. Pilkey, et. al., From Curritack to Calabash: Living With
North Carolina's Barrier Islands, North Carolina Science and Technology
Research Center (Research Triangle Park, N. C.: 1978).

224

49John D. Wilson, et. al., Hurricane Hazard Mitigation at the Local
Government Level: The Roles of the Building Code and Other Development
Management Strategies, Department of Urban and Regional Planning,
Florida State University (Tallahassee, Fl.: 1980), pg. 73.

50 Texas Coastal and Marine Council, Model Minimum Hurricane
Resistant Building Standards for the Texas Gulf Coast, Texas State
Printing Office (Austin, Tx: 1978).

51Texas Coastal and Marine Council.

52Texas Coastal and Marine Council.

53Federal Emergency Management Agency, "Proposed Federal Emergency
Management Agency Disaster Relief Policy for Barrier Islands, Beaches,
and Spits," (Washington, D. C.: 1979).

54Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals, Rare
and Endangered Biota of Florida, Volumes I-V, Peter C.H. Pritchard,
series ed. (Gainesville, Fl.: 1978).

55James R. Anderson, Ernest E. Hardy, John T. Roach, and Richard
E. Witmer, A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use with
Remote Sensor Data, Dep't. of the Interior, U. S. Geological Survey
Professional Paper 964 (Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office,
1968).

56Randy S. Kautz, Criteria for Evaluating Impacts of Development on
Wildlife Habitats, Office of Environmental Services, Florida Game and
Freshwater Fish Commisison (Tallahassee, Fl., 1985).

57Kautz.

58Amphibians and Reptiles, Roy W. McDiarmid, ed. Vol. Three of Rare
and Endangered Biota of Florida, Peter C. H. Pritchard, series ed.,
Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Species, 5 vols. (Gainesville,
Fl.: 1978), pg. x-xi.

59McDiarmid, pg. 15.
60Birds, Herbert W. Kale, ed., Vol. Two of Rare and Endangered Biota
of Florida, pg. vii.
61moDiarmid, pg. 34.

62Plants, Daniel B. Ward, ed., Vol. Five of Rare and Endangered
Biota of Florida, pg. xiii.
63Ward, ed., pg. xix.

64Ward, ed. pg. xix.
225

65C. A. Luer, The Native Orchids of Florida (New York: 1972),
pg. 293.

66Luer.

67Kale II, ed., pg. 120.
68Pritchard, ed., pg. 120.
69Ward, ed., pg. xiii.

70Ward, ed., pg. 111.

70Mammals, James N. Layne, ed., Vol. One of Rare and Endangered
Biota of Florida,_pg. x.
70Layne.

226

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, James R., Hardy, Ernest T., Roach, John T., Witmer, Richard E.
"A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use with Remote
Sensor Data". Geological Survey Professional Paper 964.
Washington, D.C.: USGPO, 1576.

Bartholomew, J., Brown, M., Brown, S., Boyt, R., DeBellevue, E., Duever,
L., Duever, M., Evel, K., Lugo, A., Odum, H. T., and Wharton, C. H.
Forested Wetlands of Florida - Their Management and Use. Final
Report to the Division of State Planning on a Contract for a
Forested Wetlands Manual. Gainesville, Fl.: University of Florida,
Center for Wetlands, 1977.

Balisllie, J. H. "Design Hurricane Generated Wind Loads". Florida
Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Beaches and Shores,
unpublished report. Tallahassee, Fl.: 1978.

Beccasio, Angelo D., Fotheringham, Nick, Frew, Ronald L., Levitan,
William M., Redfield, Alice E., Smith, Joel E., Woodrow, Jarrett 0.
Jr. Gulf Coast Ecological Inventory. User's Guide and
Information Base. Dames and Moore, Bethesda, Md.: 1982.,

Carter, Virginia, Cowardin, Lewis M., Golet, Francis C., and LaRoe,
Edward T. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United States. Washington, D.C.: USGPO, 1979.

Clark, John. The Sanibel Report. Washington, D.C.: The Conservation
Foundation, 1976.

Clark, John. Coastal Ecosystems. Ecological Considerations for
Managemen t of the Coastal Zone. Washington, D.C.: The Conservation
Foundation, 1974.

Fernald, Edward A. and Patton, Donald J. Water Resources Atlas of
Florida. Florida State University, Tallahassee, Fl: 1984.

Fifield, DeeEll, Hayes, Vera McIntyre, Trescott, Daniel L. and Wilson,
John D. Hurricane Hazard Mitigation at the Local Government Level
The Roles of the Building Code and Other Development Management
Strategies'. State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs,
Division of Public Safety and Disaster Assistance, Bureau of
Disaster Preparedness, Tallahassee, Fl.: 1980.

Gilbert, Carter R., ed. Fishes. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida,
Volume Four. Gainesville, Fl.: University of Florida Press, 1978.

227

Hunn, James D. and Slack, Larry J. Water Resources of the Santa Fe
River. Tallahassee, Fl.: U.S. Department of the Interior,
Geological Survey, 1983.

Kale II, Herbert W., ed. Birds. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida,
Volume Two. Gainesville, Fl.: University of Florida Press, 1978.

Kautz, Randy S. "Criteria for Evaluating Impacts of Development on
Wildlife Habitats". Unpublished paper, State of Florida, Game and
Freshwater Fish Commission, Office of Environmental Services,
Tallahassee, Fl.: 1985.

Keller, John M., ed. Walking the Florida Trail. Gainesville, Fl.:
Florida Trail Press, 1983.

Layne, James N., ed. Mammals. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida,
Volume One. Gainesville, Fl.: University of Florida Press, 1978.

Livingston, Robert J. "The Ecological Impact of Pulp Mill Efluents on
Aquatic Flora and FAuna of North Florida: Comparison of a Polluted
Drainage System (Fenholloway) with an Unpolluted One (Econfina)".
Unpublished research paper, Florida State University, 1974.

Lynch, J. Merrill. Suwannee River Preserve Design Project. Enfield,
N.C.: 1984.

McDiarmid, Roy W., ed. Amphibians and Reptiles. Rare and Endangered
Biota of Florida, Volume Three. Gainesville, Fl.: University of
Florida Press, 1978.

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Areas of Environmental
Concern in Planning District Three. Gainesville, Fl.: 1974.

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Development Framework
Element. Part 1, Regional Profiles. Gainesville, Fl.: 1982.

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Environmental Quality
Assessment. coastal Zone Planning for Dixie and_Taylor Counties,
Florida. Gainesville, Fl.: 1976.

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Green Plan Inventory
Sheets. Gainesville, Fl.: ca. 1978.

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Hurricane Evacuation
Study. Gainesville, Fl.: 1985.

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Natural Resources.
Gainesville, Fl.: 1978.

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Significant Natural
Areas. Gainesville, Fl.: 1978.

228

Pelham, Ken. Suwannee River Visual Resources Management Study.
Unpublished report, University of Florida, Department of Landscape
Architecture, Gainesville, Fl.: ca. 1980.

Pilkey, Orrin H., et. al. From Currituck to Calabash: Living With
North Carolina's Barrier Islands. North Carolina Science and
Technology Research Center, Research Triangle Park, N.C.: 1978.

Research Planning Institute, Inc. Atlas: The Sensitivity of Coastal
Environments and Wildlife to Spilled Oil in the North-Central
Florida Region. Columbia, S.C.: 1984.

Rodriguez, Heber. Impact of Intensive Slash Pine Management on the
Hydrology of a Coastal Savannah Watershed. Unpublished Masters
thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, Fl.: 1981.

Ryffel, Carleton J. Environmentally Sensitive Areas - 1975.
State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs, Gainesville, Fl:
1975.

Sinclair, William C. and Stewart, L. "Sinkhole Type, Development, and
Distribution in Florida". U.S. Geological, Survey, State of
Florida, Department of Environmental Regulation, and State of
Florida, Bureau of Geology, Tallahassee, Fl.: 1985.

State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs and the University of
Florida, Holland Law Center, The Center for Governmental
Responsibility. Local Options for-Floodplain and Wetlands
Management. Gainesville, Fl.: 1982.

State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs, Division of Resource
Planning and Management, Bureau of State Land Planning. The Areas
of Critical Concern Program. Tallahassee, Fl.: 1984.

State of Florida, Department of Environmental Regulation. Report to
the Environmental Regulation Commission on the Proposed Designation
of Portions of the Santa Fe River System as Outstanding Florida
Waters. Tallahassee, Fl.: 1984.

State of Florida, Department of Environmental Regulation. Report to
the Environmental Regulation Commission on the Proposed
Redesignation of Portions of the Suwannee River System Between
State Road 6 (Hamilton and Columbia Counties) and Suwannee Springs
(Hamilton and Suwannee Counties) as an "Outstanding Florida Water.
Tallahassee, Fl.: 1980.

State of Florida, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation
and Parks. Management Criteria Statement, Suwannee River State
Park. Tallahassee, Fl.: 1985.

229

State of Florida, Division of Forestry. Silviculture Best Management
Practices Manual. Tallahassee, Fl.: ca. 1985.

State of Florida, Division of State Lands. Annual Report of the
Conservation and Recreation Lands Selection Committee. Tallahassee,
Fl.: 1985.

State of Florida, Office of the Comptroller. 'State of Florida, Local
Government Financial Report, Fiscal Year 1982-1983. Tallahassee,
Fl.-. 1984.

Stoudt, Judy P. The Ecology of Irregularly Flooded Salt Marshes of the
Northeastern Gulf of Mexico: A Community Profile. U.S. Department
of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Minerals Management
Service, USGPO, Washington, D.C. 1984.

Suwannee River Coalition. Attachment to the Report to the Environmental
Regulation Commission on the Proposed Designation of Portions of the
Santa Fe River System as Outstanding Florida Waters. Gainesville,
Fl.: 1983.

Texas Coastal and Marine Council. Model Minimum Hurricane Resistant
Building Standards for the Texas Gulf Coast. Texas State Printing
Office, Austin, Tx.: 1978.

U.S., Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. California
Lake Watershed: Dixie County, Florida. Environmental Assessment.
Gainesville, Fl. : 1975.

U.S., Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Economic
Research SErvice Forest Service. Interim Report. Northeastern
Gulf River Basins Florida, Alabama, and Georgi . USGPO,
Washington, D.C.: 1976.

U.S., Department of Defense, Army Corps of Engineers. Special Flood
Hazard Information. Suwannee River Floods: Georgia and Florida.

U.S., Department of the Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Suwannee
River, Florida-Georgia. A National Wild and Scenic River Study.
USGPO, Washington, D.C.: 1973.

U.S., Department of the Interior, National Park Service. National
Scenic Trail Study Environmental Assessment: Florida Trail.
USGPO, Washington, D.C.: 1982.

U.S., Federal Emergency Management Agency. "Proposed Federal Emergency
Management Agency Disaster Relief Policy for Barrier Islands,
Beaches, and Spits". USGPO, Washington, D.C.: 1979.

230

U.S., Geological Survey, Water Resources Division. Water Resources Data
for Florida. Volume 4. Northwest Florida. Tallahassee, Fl.:
1982.

United States Water Resources Council. Regulation of Flood Hazard
Areas. Volumes I & 2. USGPO, Washington, D.C.: 1971.

University of Florida', Bureau of Economic and Business Research.
1985 Florida Statistical Abstract. Gainesville, Fl.: 1984.

University of Florida@, Bureau of Economic and Business Research.
Economic Leaflets. Volume 41, No. 12. Gainesville, Fl.: 1982.

University of South Florida, Department of Marine Science. Proceedings
of Marine Environmental Implications of Offshore Drilling in the
Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Robert E. Smith, ed. St. Petersburg, Fl.:
1984.

Ward, Daniel B., ed. Plants. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida,
Volume Five. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Fl.: 1978.

White, Larry. Ecosystems Analysis of Payne's Prairie for Discerning
Optimum Resource Use. University of Florida, Institute of Food and
Agricultural Sciences, School of Forest Resources and Conservation,
Research Report No. 24, Gainesville, Fl.: 1978.

Wilson, John D. Hurricane Hazard Mitigation at the Local Government
Level: The Roles of the Building Code and Other Development
Management Strategies. Florida Sate-University, Department of
Urban and Regional Planning, Tallahassee, Fl.: 1980.

Wood, Don A. Official Lists o f Endangered and Potentially Endangered
Fauna and Flora in Florida. Florida Game and Freshwater Fish

Commission, Tallahassee, Fl.: 1984.

231

NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA
REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL

REGIONAL PLANNING STAFF

Charles F. Justice Executive Director

Charles L. Kiester, Director of Regional Planning

Steve Dopp, Principal Planner

Camilla Harshbarger, Associate Planner

Dwayne L. Mundy, Environmental Planner

Scott Smith, Associate Planner

Russell L. Watkins, Associate Planner

Primary Responsibility

3 6668 14103 5107