Indian River Lagoon aquatic preserves management plan Vero Beach to Fort Pierce and Jensen Beach to Jupiter Inlet

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

INDIAN RIVER LAGOON

AQUATIC PRESERVES MANAGEMENT PLAN

(VERO BEACH TO FORT PIERCE
and
JENSEN BEACH TO JUPITER INLET)

ADOPTED

JANUARY 22, 1985

]
QH
90.75
.F6
153
1985
QH
90 .75
jF6
53
1985

INDIAN RIVER LAGOON
AQUATIC PRESERVES MANAGEMENT PLAN

(VERO BEACH TO FORT PIERCE
a n d
JENSEN BEACH TO JUPITER INLET)

ADOPTED

JANUARY 22, 1985

Dr. Elton J. Gissendanner

Executive Director

Department of Natural Resources

This plan was prepared by
The Bureau of Environmental Land Management
Division of Recreation and Parks

.-it,2r Library

cl.':Cleston' SC 29dU5-2413 _j

Preparation of this management plan was primarily supported by
a grant from the U.S. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, National Oceanic and Atmo.spheric Administration,
and the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, the
office of Coastal Management, through the Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Act of 1972 as amended.

Executive Summary

The Indian River Lagoon area is a long, shallow lagoonal estuary important in
this region for its value to recreational and commercial fishing, boating and
prime residential development. The preserve is in a rapidly growing urban
area affected by agriculture and residential drainage. The majority of the
shore line is mangrove fringed, with scattered development in single family
residences and a few condominiums. The lagoon is bounded on the west by the
Florida mainland and on the east by barrier islands. The Intracoastal
Waterway runs the length of the lagoon, which is designated as a wilderness
preserve.

The estuary is an important home and nursery area for an extensive array of
fish and wildlife. The major problems in the continued health of this area
include the construction of major drainage networks that have increased the
fresh water flow into the estuary, the loss of wetland areas and water quality
degradation associated with agricultural drainage and urban runoff.
Additionally, the Intracoastal Waterway and the maintained inlets have changed
the historical flushing and circulation within the lagoon system.

The major objectives of the aquatic preserve management program are to manage
the preserve to ensure the maintenance of an essentially natural condition,
and to restore and enhance those conditions which are not in a natural
condition. Managemnt will also be directed to ensure public recreational
opportunities while assuring the continued propagation of fish and wildlife.
This task will be guided by the identification and mapping of natural
resources and habitats necessary to meet these objectives. An additional
management objective is the review and comment on applications for the use of
state-owned submerged lands. This will require, in a fully implemented
management program, the onsite investigation of these proposed uses by field
personnel assigned to the aquatic preserve. The field personnel are critical
to the realistic management of this aquatic preserve.

STATE OF FLORIDA

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF 71HC INTERNAL P-1,PROVEMENT TRUST FUND

R E S 0 L U T 1 0 N

WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund is

charoed with the acquisition, administration, management, control, super-

vision conservation, protection, and disposition of all lands title to which

is vested in the Trustees under Chapter 253, Florida Statutes; and

WHEREAS, Chapter 258, Florida Statutes, directs that state-owned

submerged lands within aquatic preserves be set aside forever in their

essentially natural or existing condition for the benefit of future

generations; and

1.11HEPEAS, the Trustees are charged with the adoption and enforcement of

reasonable rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of Sections

?58.35 through 258.46, Florida Statutes, regarding the regulation of human

activity within the aquatic preserves so as not to unreasonably interfere with

lawful and traditional public uses of the preserves;

WHEREAS; Section 160-20.13, Florida Administrative Code, mandates the

development of management plans for aquatic preserves; and

WHEREAS, the Trustees desire to serve the public by effectively planning,

managing and protecting aquatic preserves; and

WHEREAS, the Trustees recognize the importance and benefits of protecting

the natural resources and preserving the natural ecosystem of the aquatic

preserves in the Indian River Lagoon area, and

Page One of Three

@101-1 THEREFORE BE 1T RESOLVED that the Board of [Trustees of the internal

Imorovement Trust Fund, hereby adopts the Indian River Laqoon Aquat-1c Preserves

Manacement Plan; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Trustees designate the Vero Beach to Fort

Pierce Aquatic Preserve and the Jensen Beach to Jupiter Inlet Aquatic Preserve

as "wilderness preserves", wherein the printary management objective will be

the maintenance of these ecosystems in an essentially natural state; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves

Management Plan shall serve as a fundamental policy guideline for the Trustees

and other state and local aaencies having jurisdiction rela t4 Ive to maintaining

the Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves system, and shall provide the

overall policy direction for the development and implementation of all

administrative rules and programs related to the management of state-owned

submerged lands within the Vero Beach to Fort Pierce and Jensen Beach to

Jupiter inlet Aquatic Preserves; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Department of Natural Resources, Division

of Recreation and Parks, is hereby designated as agent for the Trustees for

purposes of aquatic preserve planning and management.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF THE Board of Trustees of the Internal imorovement

Page 'Two of Three
iv

Trust Fund have hereunto subscribed their names and have caused the Official

Sea! of the Board oF Trustees of the internal 'improvement Trust Fund to be

hereunto affixed in the City of Tallahassee, The Capitol , on this the 22nd

day of January A.D., 1985.

moved AS TO
AND LEGALITY

ATTORNEY D.N.R Governor

(Seal)

Secretary f State

Commissioner of Education Attorney General

Commissioner of Agriculture Comptroller

As and Constituting the State of

Florida Board of Trustees of the Treasurer

Internal Improvement Trust Fund
n

Page Three of Three

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................. 1

11. MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY .......................................... 9

III. MAJOR PROGPAM POLICY DIRECTIVES ............................... 21

IV. RESOURCE DESCRIPTION .......................................... 27

A. Geologic Features and Landforms ........................... 28

B. Community Associations .................................... 29

C. Archaeological and Historical Sites ....................... 45

D. Water Resources ........................................... 49

E. Cultural .................................................. 51

V. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ........................................... 53

A. Introduction .............................................. 53

B. Onsite Management Objectives .............................. 53

C. Resource Mapping and Resource Protection Areas ............ 76

D. Administrative Management Objectives ...................... 78

VT. MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION NETWORK ............................. 87

A. Federal ................................................... 87

B. State ..................................................... 90

C. Regional .................................................. 97

0. Local Governments and Special Districts ................... 99

E. Other Entities ............................................ 103

Table of Contents (Continued)

CHAPTER Page

VII. PUBLIC USES ................................................... 105

A. Consumptive Uses ........................................... 105

B. Non-Consumptive Uses ....................................... 106

VIII. PRIVATE NON-COMMERCIAL USES ................................... 107

IX. COMMERCIAL USES ............................................... 113

A. Traditional Commercial Uses ............................... 113

B. Non-Traditional Commercial Uses ........................... 117

X. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ........................................... 119

XI. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ....................................... i2l

XII. IDENTIFIED PROGRAM NEEDS ...................................... 123

A. Acquisition of Additional Property ........................ 124

B. Boundary Problems and Systems insufficiences .............. 125

C. Legislative Needs ......................................... 125

D. Administrative Rule Changes ............................... 126

E. Data (Information) Needs .................................. 126

F. Resource Protection and Enforcement Capabilities .......... 12_7

G. Funding and Staffing Needs ................................. 127

BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................... 129

CONTENTS OF APPENDICES ................................................ 135

vii

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

This plan addresses the management of the Indian River Lagoon which

encompasses two existing aquatic preserves (Vero Beach to Fort Pierce and

Jensen Beach to Jupiter Inlet Aquatic Preserve) (Figures 1, 2, 3). The lagoon

is located in southeast Florida, extending from southeastern Indian River

County, through St. Lucie and Martin Counties, to the northeastern portion of

Palm Beach County, and is bordered by three incorporated cities, Vero Beach,

Ft. Pierce, and Stuart, north to south respectively. The Vero Beach,to Fort

Pierce Aquatic Preserve extends from the southern Vero Beach corporate limit

(Indian River County) to the north AlA bridge (St. Lucie County) (Fig. 1).

This preserve is 12 miles long and encompasses approximately 11,000 acres of

surface water area. The larger Jensen Beach to Jupiter Inlet Aquatic Preserve

extends from the southern corporate limits of Fort Pierce south to Jupiter

Inlet, including the Peck Lake and Hobe Sound area (Figures 2 and 3). This

preserve is 37 miles long and encompasses approximately 22,000 acres of

surface water area.

The Indian River is a long, wide, shallow estuarine lagoon bounded on the west

by the Florida mainland and on the east by bar-built barrier islands. The

Fort Pierce, St. Lucie and Jupiter Inlets contribute to the estuarine

environment by allowing mixing of saline Atlantic Ocean waters with fresh

water from the St. Lucie and Loxahatchee Rivers. Additional input comes

Figure 1

USL
Lo"rloN

scam ft.&ACC@
sto"Cuku. VERO KACH

TAMM

n
22

C)
27 as zs

oil
34 36 34

34%
I *40tAX MVER COW" ft - T 33 S
IL
5@ T 34 3
ST. LUME ...
3
AIA
4
I A' LEGEMO

COUNTY WUNCARY UJIlf
71;7/77777/7,
op CORPORATE LIMITS

RAILROA0

I bi No -AVED ROAD-NIGM TYPE
F
is
14 BITUMINOUS RQAO

I. WAY

I STATE HIGHWAY
U,

Z2 23 1 24 m INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY
AQUATIC PRESERVE

zo 25 0
zr

50 n x 31 u

-r 34 s
T 3M5,c@'@ AIA
3 1 0.5 0 1

SCALE IN MILES

MAP OF
Fo"T INDIAN RIVER -VERO BEACH TO FORT PIERCE
PIERCE
13 AQUATIC PRESERVE
AQUATIC PRESERVE A-9)
WDIAN RIVER A340 ST. LUCIE COUNTIES, FLORIDA
20
4AC130"*.1
T_

22 CXEArro IV

STATE OF FLORIDA BOARD Of
PoKpad= ey F. J. TRUSTEES Of THE INMA"AL IMPOOVEMEMT TRUST FUND
clovislow CIF LAMI) Down 26, Isss
uff, mm XC501-PrION A00PT= OCTOW.0 2J, 1"9
(2)

Figure Z

6a I PREPARED 8Y P J. 4ANSEN
DIVIS ON OF LAND MANAGEMENT
M AY, .970

FORT
17 a
PIERCE
LOCA770N

lg\
21

29 28 1 27 2 30

TA.ft i

_n.
Ul
s
T
T 36 S
MIAMI
5 54 2

10 11
9 a 9

17 1 15 14 13 a 16

22 23
Vi
0.5 0 1 2
LEGEND
SCALE IN MILES
29 couhry BOUNDARY LINE
CORPORATE LIMITS
.. ...........

...............
RAILRCAID

PAYED ROAO-KiGm TYPE
- - - - - - - SITUMINIOUS ROAD 34
U. S. HIGHWAY T 36 S
_ji ......
STATE HIGHWAY
L T 37 S
E
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY 4 IN
V
Aou&ric PRESERVE PORT ST. L 14
7/PORT ST. LIE
xx

P RT
UCIE
S T L
ST* LUCIE CO.
... ... \,\MARTIN CO.
14
f6 15 is r IS 15%

21 22 23 24 ..........
20 21
22 24

MAP OF

2-1
29
INTRACOASTAL WATERS -JENSEN BEACH TO
-ley.
JUPITER INLET AQUATIC PRESERVE

34
AQUATIC PRESERVE A-10) 32 33
ST. LUCIE, MARTIN AND PALM 8EACH COUNTI ES,
FLORIDA
Ri ver
PART I (N/2) ST LUCIE AND MARTIN COUNTIES st T 37 S
@777@ -

CREATED BY STUART T 38 S

STATE OF FLORIDA BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND 2
N
OCT08ER ZI,jq6q
RESOLUTION AO0-TEO OCTOSER 21, t969
(3)

Figure

PIKPARED 9Y F. J. HAMSEN
14 IVISION OFI-ANO WAftAGEbKNT
JUNE. 1970
st Lwv Mier

Lo"rloN

2, 28 PMACOLA

32 Z

T 38S
T 393

C,
WAM

Vp my West
AIA

16 P3 14 t3 a
. i 7@II

22, 23 24 44 1*

28 rr 20 20 30
A a5 0 1
27
26 SCALE IN MILES

33 34 33 34

T 39$ Le
=UfM M.00A.-I LWE t,
T 40S

CO"40RATE UMIrS 2
4 4
m kttuTAay nscovAnow

RAILROAD

doommolommoommEw PAVED ROAD-HIGM TYK
9 a
IhTkWI*CW ROAD )o

...............

....... STATIC )4fGT
INTRACOASTAL WATERMAY ta f4 13

AG"r)C PQfSESICRVE

a zz 25 24 'o 21 zz 23 24\1w
icy
MARTIN CO.
27 1 26 25 30 29 V 28Q!Z@ zT EOU 25 50 PIZZRZ@-m i7b.

MAP Of
INTRACOASTAL WATERS - JENSEN BEACH TO U. I NAVY 10"INE BASIC
;UPITER INLET
JUPITER INLET AQUATIC PRESERVE 54 36 BEACH COLONY
AQUATIC PRESERVE A-10) T40S
ST. LUCIE. MARTIN AND PALLM 13FEACH COUNTIES, T 413-
FLOR10A 706
ftgr 4 (3n) MAIMN AND PALM BEACH COUNTIES IjOITEFr

CKATtO 4Y AL.
STATE Of FLORICIA 90"0 OF AIA
TftISTICES Of THE INTEPINAL lMP*OVEMEKT TRUST FUNO 10 11 cz 1 7
OCTOSER it, 1369
RCSCLUTKW ADOPTED OCTCOER 21, 1%9
((4

from Taylor and Moores Creeks and artificial drainage canals. Salinity

regimes in the lagoon range from 4.0 to 36.0 parts per thousand (ppt) with a

mean of 26.5 ppt. The average depth of this shallow lagoon is five feet, with

the deeper dredged artificial channel of the Intracoastal Waterway running

through the length of the lagoon (von Zweck and Richardson, 1975). The

climate in this region is subtropical with an average annual rainfall of

approximately 56-60 inches.

The rainy season occurs from May to October (Treasure Coast Regional Planning

Council, 1979). The shallow configuration of this system makes it particu-

larly vulnerable to adverse impacts from urban runoff, chemical and heavy

metal contamination and siltation.

These environmentally sensitive preserves harbor seagrass beds which stabilize

bottom sediments and provide shelter and food to adult, juvenile and larval

vertebrates and invertebrates. Mangrove trees fringe the shoreline of the

barrier island and, to a lesser extent, the mainland and perimeters of the

spoil islands. Saltmarsh grasses, oyster bars, drift algae, and tidal flats

are also intricate parts of this dynamic lagoonal syst em.

These preserves are designated as wilderness preserves because of the presence

of environmentally productive habitats and ecosystems within the preserves,

and the lack of urban development, or shoreline modification. Figures 1, 2

and 3 represent the gross boundary of these aquatic preserves. The actual

preserve includes those sovereignty submerged lands located waterwar d of the

mean high waterline within this boundary area. Wilderness preserves will be

managed to emphasize maintenance and enhancement of existing wilderness

conditions. As more site specific information becomes available, essentially

natural conditions shall be identified and resources in distu*rbed areas

restored to that condition where possible.

Due to the current limitation of onsite staff resources, the management pro-

gram in these aquatic preserves will be restricted in the.scope of operations.

However, the program will fill the minimum need for active management in the

preserve and should provide the framework for future program growth. The

administrative support for this management program will be provided by the

Division of Recreation and Parks' Bureau of Environmental Land Management

(BELM) in Tallahassee, known as the "central office". Field personnel support

will be through the Florida Park Service, Division of Marine Resources and the-

BELM staff, when available.

Initially, development of the resource inventory will be heavily dependent on

LANDSAT satellite imagery, DOT aerial photography, and existing scientific and

other literature. As the program proceeds and onsite managers are present,

the experience and additional resource information will likely result in

modifications to the program and plan, which are both designed to accommodate

such changes or at least identify areas needing improvement.

This plan is divided into chapters according to their management application.

Chapter IT cites the authorities upon which this management program and plan
are built. Chapter TIT (Major Program Policy Directives) highlights the major

policy areas that are within this plan. Chapter IV presents a brief resource

description and references the appendices which contain more detailed

information on the resources.

Chapter V presents the management objectives of both the on-site managers, who

actually work in the preserve, and the administrative staff in Tallahassee.

Chapter VI addresses how this plan will interface with local, regional, state,

and federal agencies and programs; as well as its relevance to non-government

organizations, interest groups, and individuals.

Chapters VII through IX address the various uses, from public to private to

commercial. Chapters X and XI address the use of the aquatic preserve for

scientific research and environmental education, respectivety.

Chapter XII is an-internal management improvement section identifying problems

and needs in the progressive improvement of this aquatic preserve management

plan.

This plan was written by the Department-of Natural Resources (DNR), Division

of Recreation and Parks, Bureau of Environmental Land Management staff.

Funding for the plan was by a coastal management grant (CM-78) through the

U.S. Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,

Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, and the Florida Department of

Environmental Regulation (DER), Office of Coastal Management.

Chapter II

MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

The primary management authorities available to the staff for implementing

management directives affecting aquatic preserves are found in Chapters 258

and 253, Florida Statutes (F.S.). These authorities clearly establish the

proprietary management overview role of the Governor and Cabinet, sitting as

the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund and are variously

referred to as the "Trustees" or the "Board". Furthermore, all management

responsibilities assigned to the Trustees by this plan may be fulfilled

directly by the Governor and Cabinet or indirectly via staff or agents of the

Trustees, pursuant to delegations of authority, management agreements, or

other legal mechanisms. All subsequent references to the Board or Trustees

should be presumed to potentially include staff and designated agents, in

addition to the Governor and Cabinet. The staff of the Bureau of

Environmental Land Management (BELM) (acting as "agents" for the Trustees) is

able to review all requests for uses of, or directly affecting, state-owned

sovereignty submerged lands within aquatic preserves. The review and

subsequent staff comments are primarily designed to evaluate the environmental

consequences of any proposed use of state-owned submerged land. The review is

conducted within the confines of the criteria contained in the "maintenance"

provisions for aquatic preserves in Chapter 258, F.S.

Formal review comments are provided to the Department of Natural Resources

(DNR), Division of State Lands by the Bureau of Environmental Land Management

for inclusion in the comments and recommendations accompanying agenda items

for Trustees consideration. This mechanism allows the Trustees, sitting as

owners of the land, to evaluate public interest and project merits within the

context of environmental impact upon the preserve.

BACKGROUND

In many respects, the authorities supporting aquatic preserve planning and

management are the cumulative result of the public's awareness of the

importance of Florida's environment . The establishment of the present system

of aquatic preserves is a direct outgrowth of public concern with dredge and

fill activities rampant in the late 1960's.

In'1967, the Florida Legislature passed the Randall Act (Chapter 67-393, Laws

of Florida), which set up procedures regulating previously unrestricted dredge

and fill activities on state-owned submerged lands. That same year the

legislature also provided statutory authority (Section 253.03, F.S.) for the

Trustees to exercise proprietary control over state-owned lands. In 1967,

this gov6rnmental focus on protecting Florida's productive estuaries from the

impacts of development led to the establishment of a moratorium by the

Governor and Cabinet on the sale of submerged lands to private interests. In

that same year, this action was followed by the creation of an Interagency

Advisory Committee on submerged lands management. In late 1968, that

Committee issued a report recommending the establishment of a series of

aquatic preserves. Twenty-six separate waterbodies were addressed in the

original recommendation.

Also in 1968, the Florida Constitution was revised, declaring in Article 11,

Section 7, the State's policy of conserving and protecting the natural

resources and scenic beauty of the state. That constitutional provision also
established the authority for the Legislature to*enact measures for the

abatement of air and water pollution.

It was not until October 21, 1969 that the Governor and Cabinet acted upon the

recommendations of the Interagency Advisory Committee and adopted, by

resolution, 18 of the waterbodies as aquatic preserves. Other preserves were

similarly adopted at various times through 1971.

Prior to the October 1969 action by the Governor and Cabinet, the Legislature

had created the Boca Ciega Aquatic Preserve. Subsequent Legislative action in

1972, 1973 and 1974, created the Pinellas County, Lake Jackson and Biscayne

Bay Aquatic Preserves, respectively.

In 1975, the Legislature established a Florida Aquatic Preserve Act (Codified

in Chapter 258, F.S.), thereby bringing all existing preserves under a

standardized set of maintenance criteria. Additional acts were p@ssed

subsequent to the 1975 action, such as the addition of the Cockroach Bay

Aquatic Preserve in 1976 and the Gasparilla Sound-Charlotte Harbor Aquatic

Preserve to the system in 1978.

The Charlotte Harbor Aquatic Preserve Management Plan, approved by the

Trustees on-May 18, 1983 was the first management plan for an aquatic

preserve. The following aquatic preserves have approved plans: Estero Bay

September 6, 1983; North Fork--St. Lucie - May 22, 1984; and Loxahatchee

River--Lake Worth Creek - June 12, 1984.

The State Lands Management Plan, adopted on March 17, 1981, by the Trustees,

contains specific policies. The Plan also establishes policies concerning

,spoil islands, submerged land leases, "Outstanding Native Florida Landscapes",

unique natural features, submerged grassbeds, archaeological and historical

resources, and endangered species. All of these issues provide management

guidance to the aquatic preserve program.

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

Chapters 16Q-21 and 16Q-20, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), are two

administrative rules directly applicable to the ONR's/Trustee's actions

regarding allowable uses of submerged lands, in general, and aquatic preserves

specifically. Chapter 160-21, F.A.C. controls activities conducted on

sovereignty submerged lands, and is predicated upon the provisions of Sections

258.03 and 253.12, F.S. The stated intent of this administrative rule is:

"(1) To aid in fulfilling the trust and fiduciary responsibilities of

the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund for

the administration, management and disposition of sovereignty

lands;

(2) To insure maximum benefit and use of sovereignty lands for all

the citizens of Florida;

(3) To manage, protect, and enhance sovereignty lands so that the

public may continue to enjoy traditional uses including, but not

limited to, navigation, fishing, and swimming;

(4) To manage and provide maximum protection for all sovereignty

lands, especially those important to public drinking water

supply, shellfish harvesting, public recreation, and fish and

wildlife propagation and management;

(5) To insure that all public and private activities on sovereignty

lands which generate revenues or exclude traditional public uses

provide just compensation for such privileges; and,

(6) To aid in the implementation of the State Lands

Management Plan."

Chapter 16Q-20, F.A.C. addresses the aquatic Oreserves and derives its

authority from Sections 258.35, 258.36, 258.37, and 258.38, F.S. The intent

of this rule is contained in Section 16Q-20.01, F.A.C., which states:

"(1). All sovereignty lands within a preserve shall be

managed primarily for the maintenance of essentially

natural conditions, the propagation of fish and

wildlife, and public recreation, including hunting

and fishing where deemed appropriate by the

board and the managing agency..

(2) The aquatic preserves which are described in Section

258.39, 258.391, and 258.392, F.S., and in 16Q-20.02,

F.A.C., were established for the purpose of being

preserved in an essentially natural or existing

condition so that their aesthetic, biological and

scientific values may endure for the enjoyment of

future generations.

(3) The preserves shall be administered and managed in

accordance with the following goals:

(a) Preserve, protect, and enhance these exceptional

areas of sovereignty submerged lands by

reasonable regulation of human activity within

the preserves through the development and

implementation of a comprehensive management

program;

(b) To protect and enhance the waters of the

preserves so that the public may continue to

enjoy the traditional recreational uses of

those waters such as swimming, boating, and

fishing;

management programs, which are compatible with

the intent of the Legislature in creating the

the preserves;

(d) To use app-licable federal, state, and local

management programs, which are compatible with

the intent and provisions of the act and these

rules, to assist in managing the preserves;

(e) To encourage the protection, enhancement or
res"toration of the biological, aesthetic,

or scientific values of the preserves, including

but not limited to the modification of existing

manmade conditions toward their natural condition,

and discourage activities which would degrade the

aesthetic, biological, or scientific values, or

the quality, or utility of a preserve, when

reviewing applications, or when developing and

implementing management plans for the preserve;

(f) To preserve, promote, and utilize indigenous life

forms and habitats, including but not limited to:

sponges, soft coral, hard corals, submerged grasses,

mangroves, salt water marshes, fresh water marshes,

mud flats, estuarine, aquatic and marine reptiles,

game and nongame fish species, estuarine, aquatic

and marine invertebrates, estuarine, aquatic and marine

mammals, birds, shellfish and mollusks;

(g) To acquire additional title interests in lands

wherever such acquisitions would serve to protect

or enhance the biological, aesthetic, or scientific

values of the preserves.

(h) To maintain those beneficial hydrologic and biologic

functions, the benefits of which accrue to the public at

large."

OTHER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITIES

Other Department of Natural Resources management authorities applicable to

aquatic preserves include fisheries and marine mammal management and protec-

tion, and beach and shore preservation programs outlined in Chapters 370 and

161, F.S., respectively. Land acquisition programs conducted under the

Environmentally Endangered Lands authorities of Chapter 259, F.S. or the

Conservation and Recreation Lands Program authorized by 253, F.S., will

enhance the protection of the natural resources within the aquatic preserves.

Chapter 403, F.S., is an important adjunct to Chapter's 253 and 258, F.S.

This governs, in part, the State's regulatory programs affecting water

quality and biological resources. The Department of Environmental Regulation

(DER), through a permitting and certification process, administers this

program. Section 253.77, F.S., as amended by the Warren S. Henderson Wetlands

Protection Act of 1984, requires that any person requesting use of state-owned

land shall have approval of the proposed use from the Trustees before

commencing the activity. An interagency agreement between DNR and DER pro-

vides an avenue for staff comments on potential environmental impacts of

projects in aquatic preserves through the DER permitting process. Addition-

ally, the DER has designated, by administrative rule, a series of waterbodies

with stringent use criteria called "Outstandi,ng Florida Waters" (OFW). The

inclusion of all aquatic preserve waters within this classification greatly

enhances the protective provisions of Chapter 258, F.S. As the designated

"306" Coastal Zone Management Agency, the DER also-provides a source of

funding for data collection and planning in areas such as the Indian River

area, as well as being the.state agency responsible for implementing the

"federal consistency" provisions of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act.

The DER's administrative rules of primary significance to the aquatic preserve

management program include Chapters 17-3 and 17-4, F.A.C. Both rules are

based upon the authorities contained in Chapter 403, F.S. Chapter 17-3,

F.A.C. addresses water quality standards and establishes the category of

"Outstanding Florida Waters", while Chapter 17-4, F.A.C. addresses permit

requirements.

In December, 1982 a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the DER, DNR,

and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) was executed. This MOU clearly

establishes a process whereby the proprietary concerns of the Trustees, stated

in Chapter 253, F.S. can be integrated into the DER/COE joint permit

processing system.

Other opportunities for environmental review and input into activities

potentially affecting aquatic preserves are afforded by the Department of

Community Affairs (DCA), and the Department of State, Division of Archives,

History, and Records Management (DAHRM). The Executive Office of the Governor

also provides a mechanism for public input into federal projects via the State

clearinghouse process.

The DCA is statutorily responsible for administering the "Development of

Regional Impact" (DRI). The DRI program, authorized by Section 380.06, F.S.

was established by the.Legislature to provide a review and monitoring

procedure for those development projects potentially affecting m6re than one

county.

Chapter 267, F.S. establishes the state policy regarding preservation and

management of Florida's archaeological and historical resources. This

responsibility is legislatively assigned to the DAHRM, which holds title

to those cultural resources located on state-owned lands. This also applies

to sovereignty submerged lands, including aquatic preserves.

The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, under their :)ij':)lic

mandate, administers two programs directly affecting the aquatic preserve

management program. These programs are (1) septic tank regulation, usually

administered by county health departments and (2) arthropod (mosquito) control

programs, usually implemented through local mosquito control districts. Each

of these programs holds the potential for creating significant impacts upon

the aquatic preserves. Establishment of close working relationships between

the aquatic preserve staff and the Department of Health and Rehabilitative

Services will be a necessary element of the aquatic preserves management

program.

Each of the above referenced programs may provide an effective means of

protecting aquatic preserves and their ecologically sensitive resources.

Appendix A contains a compendium of the appropriate statutes and

administrative rules.

Chapter III

MAJOR PROGRAM POLICY DIRECTIVES

This plan contains a number of management policy issues that are discussed

either generally or definitively. This section highlights those major policy

areas-that comprise the basic thrust of this management effort. Adoption of

these policies will provide specific staff direction for implementing the

day-to-day aquatic preserve management program. Major program policy

directives are:

(A) Manage all submerged lands within the aquatic preserve to ensure the

maintenance of essentially natural conditions to ensure the propagation of

fish and wildlife, and public recreation opportunities.

(B) Prohibit the disturbance of archaeological and historical sites within

the aquatic preserve, unless prior authorization has been obtained from the

Trustees and DAHRM, and such disturbance is part of an approved research

design or authorized project.

aquatic preserve, with an emphasis on those habitat types utilized by

threatened and/or endangered species.

(0) Protect and, where possible, enhance threatened and endangered species

habitat within the aquatic preserve.

(E) Prohibit development activities within the aquatic preserve that

adversely impact upon grassbeds and other valuable submerged habitat, unless a

prior determination has been made by the Board of overriding public importance

with no reasonable alternatives, and adequate mitigation measures are

included.

(F) Prohibit the trimming and/or removal of mangroves and other natural

shoreline vegetation within the aquatic preserve, except when necessitated by

the pursuit of legally authorized projects and local Mangrove Protection

Ordinances.

(G) Provide research and educational opportunities for scientists and other

interested researchers within the framework of a planned research program in

the aquatic preserve.

(H) Acquire, where feasible, privately owned submerged lands located within

the boundaries of the aquatic preserve pursuant to the authorities contained

in Section 253.02(4), F.S.

(I) Prohibit the drilling of oil and gas wells, the mining of minerals, and

dredging for the primary purpose of obtaining upland fill within the aquatic

preserve.

W Prohibit non-water dependent uses of submerged lands within the aquatic

preserve except in those cases where the Board has determined that the project

is overwhelmingly in the public interest and no reasonable alternatives exist.

This prohibition shall include floating residential units, as defined in

*Section 125.0106(2), F.S.

W Prohibit storage of toxic, radioactive, or other hazardous materials

within the aquatic preserve.

M Prohibit mosquito control practices within the aquatic preserve that

require habitat modification or manipulation (i.e. diking, ditching) unless

failure to conduct such practices would result in a threat to public health.

(M) Limit pesticide and biocide use within the aquatic preserve to those that
are approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for wetlana and

aquatic application.

(N) Proh.ibit the construction of new deep water ports within the aquatic

preserve boundaries.

(0) Insure that artificial reef construction does not adversely impact

environmentally fragil'e areas within the aquatic preserve and that the

construction will maintain the essentially natural condition while enhancing

the quality and utility of the preserve.

(P) Manage state-owned spoil islands within the aquatic preserve as bird

rookeries and wildlife habitat areas.

(Q) Encourage public utilization of the aquatic preserve, consistent with the

continued maintenance of its natural values and functions.

(R) Develop a well coordinated aquatic preserve man-agement mechanism

that recognizes and utilizes local government programs and authorities.

(S) Require, through the efforts of DER and the water management districts,

the maintenance of the naturally high water quality of the estuary and ensure

the natural seasonal flow fluctuations of freshwater into the estuary.

(T) Formally recognize and designate the Indian River Lagoon Aquatic

Preserves (Vero Beach to Fort Pierce and Jensen Beach to Jupiter Inlet) as

wilderness preserves as delineated in Figure 1, 2 and 3 in accordance with the

provisions of Section 16Q-2'0.13(d), F.A.C.

(U) Apply the management criteria contained in the adopted Indian River.

Lagoon Aquatic Preserves Management Plan to all subsequent legislative

additions of land to the aquatic preserve.

(V) Encourage the assistance of federal, state, and local government agencies

in implementing the aquatic preserve management plans, especially in the areas

of protection of natural and cultural resources and the.enforcement of

applicable resource laws and ordinances.

(W) Marinas shall not be located in Class I or 2 Resource Protection Areas.

(X) Identify and document any problems caused by fishing activities and

report them to the Marine Fisheries Commission. Enforce any rule adopted by

the Marine Fisheries Commission and approved by the Trustees.

Chapter IV

RESOURCE DESCRIPTION

The Indian River Lagoon is a long, dynamic, lagoonal estuary important in this

reoion for its value to recreational and commercial fishing, boating and prime

residential development. It is located in a rapidly growing urban area

affected by agriculture and residential drainage. The majority of the shore

line is mangrove fringed, with scattered development in single family

residences and a few condominiums. The southern portion of the preserve

(figure 3) is much narrower than the homogenous northern portions. South of

the St. Lucie Inlet, this section of the Indian River in Martin County has

minimal disruption of the natural shoreline and much of the adjoining land is

under the protection of the Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service. The grassbeds in this area are an important feeding

ground for the endangered manatee. The area adjacent to the Jupiter Inlet in

Palm Beach County is noted for its high water clarity and rich, tropical

marine life.

The estuary is an important shelter and nursery ground for an extensive array

of fish and wildlife (Appendix C). The major problems in the continued health

of this area are the massive amounts of fresh water released by the extensive

manmade drainage systems, mosquito impoundments restricting nutrient flow and

the ingress and egress of fishes, circulation problems due to causeways, and

water quality problems associated with agriculture and urban drainage, and

sewage treatment plants surrounding the lagoon.

Detailed information on the resources (e.g., species lists, water quality

information, archaeological and historical site information, life histories,

geological background, supporting maps, and cultura-1 resource information) is

located in Appendices C and D. The resource information presented in this

chapter is intended to be generally descriptive of the major management

functions and resources of the area surrounding the riverine and estuarine

complex.

A. Geological Features and Landforms.

In the late Pleistocene (125,000 years before present (B.P.)) sea level was

higher than today, covering the present barrier island as an offshore sand bar

formed on the shallow shelf. The present mainland acted as a barrier island

which protected a shallow lagoon (Eastern Valley) behind a ridge (Atlantic

Coastal Ridge) creating a situation analogous to the present day barrier

island lagoon system.

Sea levels dropped at the beginning of the glacial age and exposed the present

lagoon and bar-built barrier island which partially lithified. As sea level

rose during the deglaciation of the continent (30-35,000 years B.P.), the

Indian River Lagoon became partially inundated and created a brackish water

environment.

Between 6,000 and 30,000 years B.P. the present lagoon was once again exposed

to the air as the sea level retreated. Deposition of sediments through wind

and fresh water tr4ansport partially filled the lagoon until the last great ice

sheets melted and a rising sea level inundated the Indian River Lagoon. The

lagoonal environment, as exists today, formed 5,000-6,000 years ago.

The lonq narrow chain of barrier islands act as the first line of defense of

the Mainland against storm surges. Inlets have historically broken through

the islands during storms forming temporary shallow inlets which later closed

due to siltation. Man's intervention through dredging and stabilization of

the existing inlets allowed saline water to mix with fresh water, creating the

estuarine environment that now exists (after Almasi, 1983 and Florida

Oceanographic Society, 1982).

B. Community Associations.

The plant communities of the Indian River basin are a major factor in the

continued health and productivity of the natural systems in the preserves.

This section will also reference some of the major animal species associated

with these plant communities. The major communit@ associations recognized in

the preserves are mangrove forests, marine grassbeds, drift algae, saltmarsh,

oyster bars, tidal flats and spoil islands. Each community is presented

separately although in reality these communities are sometimes mixed or

overlap. Final subsections address the animal life and endangered species

within the aquatic preserves.

1. Manqroves. The four species of mangrove trees in the Indian River Lagoon

represent the dominant vegetational association. The mangroves range from

twelve to fifty feet in height and generally inhabit the low energy shorelines

of the estuary system.

The four species of mangroves occurring here are the red mangrove-(Rhizophora

mangle) which is dominant, both in and near the water at low tide level; black

mangrove (Avicennia qerminans) qenerally inland of, but sometimes mixed with

reds; white mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa) generally upland of, but also

mixed with blacks; and buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus) upland of and mixed

with whites. These mangrove association species generally indicate areas of

frequent (red mangrove) to infrequent (white mangrove) saline inundation.

There are many variations of the mangrove community within the area. The

major variation is the fringe mangrove which occurs along the shorelines of

the embankments, river, creeks and other waterways. All four species can

appear in this variation, both in zones and mixed as described above. There

are also areas of overwash where the mangroves are standing in water with

little or no associated uplands. This variation is generally dominated by red

mangroves (Odum et al., 1982). The mangrove species have various root

structures, i.e., prop roots and pneumatophores (the aerating root spikes of

the black mangroves) and extensive underground root mats which capture and

stabilize sediments in the estuarine waters and function as an erosion control

buffer in other areas. These root networks recycle nutrients and minerals

from the anaerobic soil substrate by returning them to the estuary as detritus

from the mangrove leaves, This is the primary basis of the estuary's food

chain and productivity (Heald and Odum, 1970). The mangrove canopy and root

tangle also provide valuable habitat for many marine and estuarine organisms

.(Savage, 1972). The entire community also functions to buffer the uplands

from storm tides and winds, and acts as a storage area for those waters.

The mangrove community types and various locations indicate that they can

adapt to many situations, but they are susceptible to both natural and man-

induced disturbances. The natural disturbances can come from freezing

temperatures, hurricanes, new pass formations or changes in sea level.

Hurricane damage, although not experienced in the recent past, is a potential

threat to these communities. Man induced disturbances in the Lagoon area

include the large areas of mosquito impoundments that changed the mangrove

diversity, dredge and fill activities that destroyed mangrove areas, and

erosion and other forces that may be attributed to man..

Man's more subtle influence on the mangrove communities is not as fully

understood as the natural forces that cause the direct removal or killing of

the trees. The effects of changing the upland drainage pattern, both by

bulkhead placement and drainage canals, need much more study. The placement

of extensive bulkheading along waterways has preempted mangrove growth in many

areas.

Protection of the extensive mangrove communities in the preserve will be a

major task of this plan's management activities. The policies and practices

of this management are addressed in Chapter V, Section B.

Other vegetation associated with the mangrove communities include: salt grass

(Distichlis spicata); bull rush (Scirpus americanus); spike rush (Eleocharis

cellulosa); smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora); glasswort (Salicornia

spp.); sea purslane (Sesuvium portulacastrum); saltwort (Batis maritima); sea

ox-eye (Borrichia frutescens), and sea lavender (Limonium cardinianum).

The tree.canopies and root tangles provide habitat for various animals. These

community types are utilized by a wide variety of invertebrates, fishes,

amphibians, reptiles, mammals and birds (Table I).

2. Marine Grassbeds. Marine grasses are submerged flowering plants which

stabilize sediments, entrap silt, recycle nutrients, provide shelter, habitat

and substrate for animals and other plant forms, provide important nursery

grounds, and are important direct food sources (Odum, 1974; Wood et al.,

1969).- The grassbeds are very productive, possibly the most productive

habitat within the estuary. These beds serve as a food source for the

endangered manatee (Trichechus manatus), important nursery areas for juvenile

forms of shellfish, and as substrate for many epiphytic algae species eaten by

invertebrates which are in turn eaten by the fishes. Many commercially

important fishes spend at least part of their lives in these grassbeds

(Zieman, 1982) (Table IT).

The most common marine grass found in the Indian River Lagoon is manatee grass
(Syringodium filiforme). The next dominant is Cuban shoal grass (Halodule

wrightifl. Other marine grasses found in the lagoon include turtle grass

(Thallassia testudinum), widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima), Halophila johnsonii,

Table I

ANIMAL LIFE COMMONLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE MANGROVE COMMUNITY

Mammals
marsh rabbit
rice rat
raccoon
bobcat
otter

Birds
yellow-crowned night heron
green-backed heron (formerly green heron) brown pelican
black crowned night heron white ibis
little blue heron clapper rail
great blue heron belted kingfisher
snowy egret fish crow
American egret northern parula warbler
cattle egret yellow-rumped warbler
roseate spoonbill yellow-throated warbler
osprey red-winged blackbird

Reptiles
diamondback terrapin

Fishes
tarpon
bay-anchovy
rainwater killifish
sheepshead minnow
mosquitofish
sailfin molly
tarpon snook
gray snapper

Invertebrates
mangrove tree crab
fiddler crab
blue crab
oysters
shrimp
snails

Source: Fernald, et al. The Sebastian Inlet-Ft. Pierce Inlet Barrier
Islands. A Profile of Natural Communities, Development Trends,
and Resource Management Guidelines. 1982.

As modified by: Barnett, et al. Fish and Wildlife Resources of the
Charlotte Harbor Area. 1980.

Mike Nagy, Per. Comm.

Table IT

ANIMAL LIFE FOUND IN MARINE GRASSBED AREAS OR

GENERALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THIS COMMUNITY

Mammals
Atlantic bottle-nosed dolphin
manatee

Birds Fishes (continued)
common loon tarpon
horned grebe scaled sardine
brown pelican striped anchovy
double-crested cormorant sea catfish
magnificent frigatebird gafftopsail catfish
pintail rainwater killifish
green-winged teal gulf killifish
blue-winged teal longnose killifsh
American widgeon sheepshead minnow
northern shoveler sailfin molly
lesser scaup gulf pipefish
ruddy duck crevalle jack
red-breasted merganser snook
osprey gray snapper
American coot pigfish
herring gull spotfin mojarra
Forster Is tern silver jenny
least tern silver perch
royal tern spotted seatrout
Caspian tern spot
black skimmer southern kingfish
belted kingfisher red drum
sheepshead
Reptiles pinfish
diamondback terrapin striped mullet
white nullet
Fishes tidewater silverside
bullshark lined sole
ladyfish
Invertabrates
Northern quahog
Southern quahog

Source: Fernald, et al. The Sebastian Inlet-Ft. Pierce Inlet Barrier
Island. A Profile of Natural Communities, Development Trends,
anT -Reso6-rce Management Guidel ine-s-7-1-9-877.

As modified by: Barnett, et al. Fish and Wildlife Resources of the
Charlotte Harbor Area. 1980.

and H..engelmanii,(Thompson, 1976, Eiseman and McMillan, 1980). Detailed

mapping of marine grassbeds are in Appendix D (Resource Protection Area

Mapping). The more dense areas of grassbeds in the estuarine complex are

usually in shallow water with a fairly constant salinity. These shallow areas

are prime fish habitat and are vulnerable to damage by boating activities.

The marine grassbeds are sensitive to turbidity and, as a result, are

vulnerable t6 dredging activities.

Within the Indian River Lagoon, grassbeds are denser near inlets, in bands

along the western shoreline, and in scattered patches on the eastern shoreline

(Thompson, 1976). Seagrass coverage and diversity appear to vary seasonally,

yearly and possibly in longer cycles.

Marine grassbeds are a primary vegetation community and will be used as a key

indicator in measuring the natural condition of the aquatic preserve.

Protection of marine grassbeds will be a major consideration in the field and

administrative review of use proposals (See Appendix D).

The invertebrate fauna and algal flora associated with these grassbeds can be

rich and diverse, depending on the specific area. There is a need for more

data on the animal life associated with marine grassbeds.

3. Drift Algae. Drift algae are important associated components of the

marine grassbed system in the Indian River Lagoon. There are some 60 species

of red, brown and green algae that are either interspersed or grow on marine

grasses. These algae begin as attached forms on the grass blades and

eventually break loose to drift. These floating algal mats become substrata

for numerous invertebrates, associated algae and fish. The drift algae

communities may provide better refuge for many organisms than marine grasses.

These communities occur throughout the.lagoon (Benz et al., 1979, Eiseman and

Benz, 1975; Gore et al., 1981; Kulczycki et al., 1981; Virnstein and Howard

Fin press]).

4. Saltmarsh. Historically, this habitat was commonly converted to mosquito

impoundments and only a small percentage of the original acreage remains open

today. These communities in this region are generally forced out by the more

dominant mangroves. The saltmarsh grasses grow in transitional areas between

mangroves, freshwater marshes and saltbarren areas. Some of these transi-

tional areas are also at elevations (i.e., landward of the mean high water

line) that technically may put them outside the aquatic preserve boundary

(unless the uplands are state-owned).

The species within this community are smooth cordgrass (Spartina

alterniflora), saltwort (Batis maritima), glasswort (Salicornia virginica),
salt grass (Distichlis.spicata) and sea ox-eve (Borrichia frutescens).

This community can also have mangroves, cabbage palms, and exotics mixed

in with the vegetation. The type of vegetation present varies with the degree

of tidal inundation, the influence of other vegetation, the amount of

disturbance by ditching and diking, and the amount of freshwater drainage from

the uplands. The saltmarsh grass community recycles nutrients, contributes to

the estuarine productivity, and provides shelter and habitat to-a variety of

animal life (see Table III).

Table III

ANIMAL LIFE COMMONLY ASSOCIATED WITH SALTMARSH GRASS COMMUNITIES

WITHIN THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON AREA

Mammals Birds

marsh rabbit great blue heron
rice rat great egret
hispid cotton rat snowy egret
raccoon tricolored heron
clapper rail
Reptiles least sandpiper
black-necked stilt
diamondback terrapin ring-billed gull
common garter snake laughing gull
Forster's tern
Fishes least tern
black tern
bay anchovy tree swallow
rainwater killifish barn swallow
gulf killifish common yellowthroat
sheepshead minnow red-winged blackbird
mosquitofish sharp-tailed sparrow
striped mullet

Source: Fernald, et al. The Sebastian Inlet-Ft. Pierce Inlet Barrier
Island. A Profile of Natural Communities, Development Trends, and
Resource Management Guidelines. 1982.

As modified: Barnett, et al. Fish and Wildlife Resources of the
Charlotte Harbor Area. 1980.

5. Tidal Flats.. A tidal flat in the estuarine complex describes a wide

variety of habitats that.may have sporadic vegetation from the previous three

communities, or no vascular vegetation at all. There is extensive algal

growth in these areas. The tidal flats are used primarily by shore and wading

birds as feeding and loafing areas (Barnett et al., 1980). These areas are

also valuable for invertebrates, including crabs, oysters, and worms.

Tidal flats, consisting of estuarine beaches, areas waterward of the

mangroves, spoil areas, shoal areas, and mud flats, are important to the

estuary through their contribution to the algal production. The mollusk,

crustacean, and worm communities feed on both the algae and materials from the
other plant communities of the estuary." The bird life is dependent on these

areas for feeding and some of these flat areas surround colonial nesting sites-

in the estuarine complex. The ecological role of these various tidal flat

areas is not fufly understood, but it is known that they are important

habitats (Table IV).

6. Oyster Bars. The oyster performs a valuable function in the food web by

converting plankton, detritus and possibly dissolved organics into animal
protein, which is then available to higher predators (Tabb et al., 1974). The

substrate formed by the oyster colonies occurs in areas where there are no

other hard substrates. These oyster bars create habitat space that is unique

to the estuary. The oysters and the associated animals are utilized by other

animals which feed on or around the oyster bars. Oyster bars are common in

the lagoon and once were commercially fished (Wilcox, 1897). Due to pollution

from residential and agricultural sources there is only a relatively small

Table IV

ANIMAL LIFE COMMIONLY ASSOCIATED WITH TIDAL FLATS

OF THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON AREA

Mammals

raccoon

Birds

brown pelican
great blue heron
yellow-crowned night heron
white ibis
roseate spoonbill
semipalmated plover
Wilson's plover
ruddy turnstone
spotted sandpiper
greater yellowlegs
lesser yellowlegs
willet
red knot
least sandpiper
dunlin
western sandpiper
sanderling
shore-billed dowitcher
black-necked stilt
herring gull
ring-billed gull
laughing gull
Forster's tern
least tern
Royal tern
sandwich tern
Caspian tern
black skimmer
fish crow

Source: Fernald, et al. The Sebastian Inlet-Ft. Pierce Inlet Barrier
Island. A Profile of Natural Communities, Development Trends,
and Resource Management Guidelines. 1982.

As modified by: Barnett, et al. Fish and Wildlife Resources of the
Charlotte Harbor Area. 1980.

area north of Fort Pierce and east of the Intracoastal Waterway that presently

has approved, open shellfish waters. This approved area may also be affected

by squatters as addressed under Spoil islands (Section 8.). The continued

health of this remaining open shellfish.water will depend on its protection

from existing or potential pollution sources from the spoil islands and other

shoreline developments.

7. Deep Water Areas. These areas within the Indian River Lagoon area

include natural and artificial inlets, channels, rivers, creeks, and other

deep water areas. These areas are important to the estuary's tidal exchange.

They are critical to tidal flushing and are necessary for a healthy estuary.

The deeper waters also allow predator fish access to the lagoon. The

bottle-nosed dolphin and manate(@ are important mammals potentially found in

these areas.

8. Spoil Islands. The construction and maintenance of the Intracoastal

Waterway channel and barrier island inlets resulted in the formation of a

chain of spoil islands within the Indian River Lagoon. These islands, formed

by the deposition of the dredged material (spoil), usually parallel the

channel alignment. These islands vary in size from 1 to 75 acres within the

Indian River Lagoon. They have been subjected to erosion and accretion from

winds, currents and boat wakes which have modified the original shape and

placement of many of the islands. In many cases, the original spoil placement

destroyed valuable marine grassbeds and shallow water habitats.

Vegetation on these-islands is generally dominated by exotics, such as

Australian Pine and Brazilian pepper. However, the shoreline fringe is

generally vegetated with mangroves and other native wetland vegetation, and

provides valuable habitat to fish and wildlife, especially bird life.

There are some 10 spoil islands within the Indian River County, 14 within the

St. Lucie County and 10 within the Martin Cou6ty portions of the preserves.

The Palm Beach County portion does not have these same spoil areas but has

more upland disposal. The Indian River County spoil islands have been

dedicated to recreation and waterbird roosting and nesting habitat. Some of

the spoil islands within St. Lucie County have undergone minor development by

"squatters". These islands are within areas conveyed to the Florida Inland

Navigation District (FIND) by the Trustees for the sole purpose of

navigational improvement and are not owned by these individual squatters.

9. Mosquito Impoundments. Numerous mosquito -impoundments have been developed

by diking and impounding high marsh habitats adjacent to the Indian River

Lagoon (Bidlingmayer and McCoy, 1978). By manipulating water levels within

these impoundments, prime mosquito habitat can be flooded to prevent mosqui-

toes from depositing eggs in tidal areas.

The impounding and flooding have changed the vegetation, wildlife types and

diversity. The impoundments also restrict and, in some cases, prohibit the

flow of nutrients and fishery interaction within the Indian River lagoon.

These impacts can be mitigated by opening the impoundments to tidal access

during months when mosquito control is not needed (Clements and Rogers 1964;

Provost 1967, 1974b, 1976). There is now a wide variation in management

practices for mosquito impoundments. A Subcommittee on Mosquito Impoundments

was established under the Governor's Working Group for Mosquito Control to

help foster improved management technioues, to benefit environmental and

mosquito control concerns.

10. Animal Life. The animal life associated with the Indian River Lagoon

area is historically as diverse as the vegetation. However, with the

encroachment of human activities such as mosquito impoundments, intracoastal

waterway, maintained inlets, spoil islands and other dredge and fill areas,

artificial drainage, bridges, and roads, much of the original habitat has been

modified. These modifications h.ave caused a variety of changes to the animal

life of the Lagoon.

The fisheries of the Indian River Lagoon are a major reason for its

designation as an aquatic preserve. The estuary is a valuable recreational

fishing and nursery area for fish commercially caught in the Atlantic Ocean.

Other species not directly important to commercial fishing, but-necessary to

its ultimate food chain, also depend.on this estuary. The islands, tidal

flats, mangrove forests and spoil islands provide a refuge for species

visiting this area during migrations, for daily feeding purposes and during

times of environmental stress (i.e., drought, storms, development activities).

These visiting species include the manatee and many bird species. Fresh and

saltwater fish species and other animal species lists and information can be

found in Appendix C.

11. Endangered Species. The combination of the subtropical climate, diverse

vegetation and habitats, and waterbodies in the Indian River Lagoon Aquatic

Preserves has resulted in the survival of many species of endangered animals.

Portions of the Indian River Lagoon area have also been established as a

sanctuary for the endangered manatee. Chapter 16N-22 of the Florida Manatee

Sanctury Act establishes a slow speed zone (from November 15 to March 31) that

extends from the St. Lucie Inlet south to Jupiter Inlet. Exceptions to this

include the Intracoastal Waterway and portions of the river regulated under

Section 371.522, F.S. The northern section of the Vero Beach to Ft. Pierce

Aquatic Preserve is similarly designated. Table V provides a list of

endangered animals known to occur within this lagoon.

C. Archaeological and Historical Sites.

The Indian River Lagoon area has a long history of Indian activity. The main

Indian occupants were the Ais tribes. The Jeaga Indians, considered to be

"cousins" of the Ais, occupied a few scattered villages in the area. These

Indians were primarily hunter-gatherers, taking advantage of the rich fishery

resources of the Indian River and Atlantic Ocean.

The demise of these early tribes in the 1700's led to speculation that they

had been replaced by Spanish civilization and the migration from the north of

Seminole Indians into the area. From the 1880's on, early settlers used many

of the Ais Indian shell mounds for road construction. Today, few artifacts

are left in the area (Rights, 1982).

Ft. Pierce, Ft. Jupiter (near Pennock Point) and Ft. Capron (north of Ft.

Table V

SPECIES OF THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON AREA

WHICH ARE CLASSIFIED AS ENDANGERED, THREATENED, OR OF SPECIAL CONCERN

ENDANGERED

Reptiles

Atlantic green turtle (Chelonia mydas mydas)
Atlantic hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata
imbricata)
Atlantic Ridley turtle (Lepidochelys kempii)
Leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea)
Atlantic salt marsh snake (Nerodia fasciata taeniata)

Birds

Wood stork (Mycteria americana)
Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus)

Mammals

li-lest Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus)

THREATENED

Reptiles

Atlantic loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta caretta)

Birds

Eastern brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis
carolinensis)
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
American kestrel (Falco s verius R-@Ulus)
Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii)
Least tern (-S-tprna @i-ibifrons-)

Table V (continued)

SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN

Fishes

Common snook (Centropomus undecimalis)
Rivulus (-qivulus marmoratus)

Reptiles

American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis)

Birds

Little blue heron (Florida caerulea)
Snowy egret (-Cgretta thuT-a)-
Louisiana heron (Hydranassa tricolor)
Reddish egret (Dichromanassa rufescens)
Roseate spoonbill (Aiaia ajaia.)
American oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus)

Adapted from: Fernald, et al. The Sebastian Inlet-Ft. Pierce Inlet Barrier
Island: A Profile -of Natural Communities, Development Trends,
and Resource Management Guidelines, 1982.

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Offical lists of
Endangered and Potentially Endangered.Fauna in-'F'lorida,
October 1984.

Pierce) are just a few in a chain of forts established by the U. S. Army

during the Seminole wars. General Thomas Jessup and Lt. Benjamin Pierce

battled the Seminole Indians in the area, eventually forcing many of them to

take refuge in the Everglades (Tebeau, 1972).

D. Water Resources.

Water is the one resource whose characteristics most directly affect the

habitability and healthiness of the Indian River Lagoon for the plants and

animals naturally adapted to living there. The drainage basin of the majority

of the Indian River Lagoon has been modified by agricultural drainage and

residential development. The agricultural areas west of the river represent

the first stage of man's alterations. These alterations included the

construction of maijor drainage networks that allowed large amounts of fresh

water to flow into the lagoon much quicker than natural drainage would have

permitted. Added to the fresh water impacts are the potential biocides and

nutrients within these waters that drain off agricultural, residential and

urban lands.

The Intracoastal Waterway (completed in 1941) and the maintained inlets have

changed the historical flushing and circulation within the lagoon system. The

mosquito impoundments have removed large acreages of wetlands from the free

exchange with the lagoon. Finger canals and lands created by dredge and fill

have destroyed wetland areas and created water quality problems.

Two major sewage treatment plants are located within close proximity of the

Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves. The Fort Pierce Utility Authority

facility is located within the city limits of Fort Pierce, on the east side of

the Indian River, approximately 0.9 miles north of Aquatic Preserve A-10.

This plant has recently been expanded to a design capacity of 9.0 million

gallons per day. The average daily flow of 4.0 million gallons per day

discharges into Class III waters of the Indian River Lagoon southwest of the

Causeway Island plant site and Fort Pierce Inlet.

The Vero Beach treatment plant is located within the city limits along the

western shore of the Indian River Lagoon, approximately 1.5 miles north of the

aquatic preserve boundary. This facility has a design capacity of 4.5 million

gallons per day with an average flow of 3.0 million gallons per day

discharging into Class III waters of the Indian River Lagoon.

Both sewage treatment plants have secondary treatment of sewage effluent. An

engineering study indicated no significant water quality impact (i.e., oxygen

depression) should occur from these discharges.

The City of Stuart also has a sewage treatment plant in close proximity to the

Indian River, but uses deep well injection for effluent disposal.

in addition to these major sewage treatment facilities, there are

approximately 25 smaller plants located on the mainland, discharging into the

Lagoon, and at least 60 package plants on the barrier islands.

With all of the aforementioned problems, the Indian River Lagoon is still a

relatively productive system, when compared to more populated areas to the

south and on the west coast of Florida. The growth experienced in past

decades is beginning to take its toll on the resources, but has not yet

reached a critical level. The magnitude of development is now reaching a

level-where water quality considerations will become critical.

E. Cultural.

The U. S. Census population for Indian River, Martin and St. Lucie Counties

for 1970 and 1980, with percent increase, was 35,992 to 59,896 - 66.4%, 28,035
to 64,014 - 128A% and 50,836 to 87,182 - 71.5%, respectively. The majority

of these counties' population is along the coastline. The Palm Beach County

population was 348,993 in 1970 and 576,812 in 1980.' However, population

growth in that portion of the preserve within northern Palm Beach County is

insignificant compared to the dense population residing in the lower end of

that county.

The U. S. Census populations for the cities along these preserves and their

growth and percent increase between 1970 and 1980 are: Vero Beach 11,903 to

16,17-6 35.8%; Fort Pierce 29,721 to 33,802 - 13.7%; Seawalls Point 298 to

1,187 298.3%; Stuart 4,820 to 9,467 - 96.4%; Tequesta 2,642 to 3,685 -

39.5%. This graphically indicates that the population increases, which also

indicate an increase in associated residential development, are quite

significant. These qrowth pressures effect water resources and wildlife, and

generally increase the potential for environmental degradation. Growth

impacts on the Indian River Lagoon are generally covered under the issues

identified by the Hutchinson Island Resource Planning and Management Plan:

� elimination of mangrove areas and other marine or freshwater habitat

for the purpose of development;

� the elimination and/or isolation of mangrove and marsh areas from the

estuary/lagoon by diking and impounding for the purpos e of mosquito

and sand fly control;

� extensive bulkheading of the Indian River;

� adverse impacts on water quality due to reduced flushing and increased

waste load, bulkheading, dredging of channels and storm water runoff.

Chapter V

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

A. Introduction

The main objective of the resource management plan in the aquatic preserve is

to protect the resources of the aquatic preserves for the benefit of future

generations (Section 258.35, F.S.). The Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves

are designated as wilderness preserves and the management will be directed

toward the maintenance of the existing or essential natural conditions. This

part of the management plan addresses the policies and procedures which both

onsite and administrative personnel will pursue. The onsite manaaement will

involve DNR's field personnel assigned to the aquatic preserve. The

administrative management will involve Division of Recreation and Parks'

personnel (both in the field and in Tallahassee) and Division of State Lands'

personnel, cooperating in the review of applications for use of state-owned

lands and related activities surrounding the preserve. These personnel will

be interacting with various governmeot and non-government entities, interest

groups, and individuals.

B. Onsite Management Objectives

The onsite management objectives are reflected in the activities that the

field personnel become involved in (i.e., observation, research, public

interaction, emergency responses, etc.) to protect and enhance the resources

within the aquatic preserve. Other activities, such as the interaction with

other government and non-government entities, are covered in more detail in

Chapter VI (Management Implementation Network). The field personnel's duties

are, with respect to management of the various uses of the aquatic preserve,

addressed in more detail in Chapters VII through XI. The field personnel will

generally be involved in all management activities concerning the Indian River

System.

1. Plant Communities

The communities of aquatic and wetland plants within the Preserve perform five

major functions vital to the health and productivity of the estuarine system:

a. they tend to stabilize geologic features in the face of dynamic

forces (i.e., currents, tides, winds, and way.es), which often

act in concert to both erode and deposit;

b. they create, from recycled nutrients and solar energy, the

organic material that fuels the estuarine food web which

supports the area's fisheries, endangered species, migratory

waterfowl, colonial waterbird nesting colonies, raptors, marine

mammals, and marine and estuarine invertebrates;

c. they provide protected fisheries habitat for spawning and

juvenile development;

d. they provide roosting and nesting habitat for water birds;

and,

e. they physically buffer estuarine and riverine waters from

contaminated and channelized runoff from uplands within the

estuarine watershed and, in some cases, buffer the uplands from

storm waves and winds.

The management objectives for plant communities will be to maintain and

enhance these functions. Because these plant communities are critically

important to the well-being of the Preserve, a program to work toward the

protection and restoration of those communities now damaged or destroyed by

human activities should be developed.

Management Policy

a. Field Familiarization and Documentation. Field personnel will become

familiar with the plant species and communities present in the aquatic

preserve, and locations of their occurrences.

b. Literature Familiarization. Field personnel will assemble a working

library of existing pertinent literature concerning the species and

communities present in the aquatic preserve. Staff will become familiar with

the ranges, life histories, ecological requirements, productivity, importance

to water quality, contribution to landform stabilization, wildlife habitat

provision, fisheries habitat provision, and fisheries food production of the

plant communities within the aquatic preserves.

c. Preparation of Guidelines for Management of Endangered Species. Field

personnel, based on their field observations and literature reviews, will

develop maps (using 7.5 minute quadrangles) showing the locations of

threatened and endangered plant species within the aquatic preserve. A set of

management guidelines for each-species, outlining the habitat requirements and

the methods to sustain and/or restore these habitats will be developed. Field

personnel, in the course of documenting the occurrence of threatened and

endangered animals, will develop maps showing the locations and types of plant

communities used by these animals for nesting, roosting, feeding, resting,

spawning, etc. Literature information and personal observations will then be

used to develop guidelines for maintaining (or restoring if necessary) the

"critical habitat" required by each species.

d. Monitoring of Plant Communities for Natural Changes. Field personnel will

become familiar with the use of aerial photography and LANDSAT imagery, for

the study and monitoring of plant communities (historically and at the present

time) and will use this remote sensing in conjunction with field observations

to monitor and document natural changes,such as:

1. freeze damage to, and recovery of, mangrove communities:

2. wind and wave damage to mangrove communities from storms and

hurricanes;

3. accretion-related seaward extension of mangrove communities;

4. erosion-related landward retraction of mangrove communities;

5. depositional burying of marine grassbeds communities;

6. invasions of exotic plant species and revegetation by native

species after exotic plant removal projects;

7. pathogen damage to and recovery of plant communities.

e.. Identification of Areas and Communities in Need of Restoration. Field

personnel will, as time permits, systematically survey the aquatic preserve to

determine the location, nature, and extent of environmental damages from human

activities and assess the possibility of restoring each of the sites according

to whether the site is publicly or privately owned, and the cost and effort

required.

f. Protection of Plant Communities. Field personnel shal-1 protect the plant

communities from the various uses of sovereign lands within the aquatic

preserve according to the following guidelines.

1. Field personnel in their biological reports shall not recommend

for approval any proposed use of sovereignty submerged lands

when the plant communities in the proppsed use area appear to

be jeopardized.

i. Pruning of mangroves shall only be permitted for access

from the mean high-water line to a dock or pier. The

destructive clearing of mangroves in sovereignty lands

shall be strictly prohibited.

ii. Marine grassbeds communities shall not be removed or shaded to

such an extent as to cause.the death of a significant area of

the community. They shall not be subjected to unacceptable

turbidity, decreased light penetration, propeller or net damage.

2. Field personnel shall be notified of applications for uses of

submerged lands within the aquatic preserve by the Bureau

of Environmental Land Management central office. No applica-

tions will be approved within Class 1 and 2 Resource Protection

areas (see section B(6) of this chapter) without a thorough

review by the field personnel. The field personnel will

inspect the site, assess the potential impacts to the plant

communities, and then convey their recommendations to the

central office as required.

3. Field personnel will initiate various educational programs

and supplement existing educational programs designed to

increase public awareness of the damage that recreational, private

and commercial uses (i.e., propeller damage) can inflict on

marine grassbed communities.

4. Field personnel will develop an exotic plant control and

removal plan after monitoring the rate and extent of invasion

by exotic species, such as Brazilian pepper, Australian pine, and

melaleuca.

5. In cooperation with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning

Council, field personnel will familiarize themselves with the

results of a study under the Coastal Energy Impact Program, in

assessing the potential impacts of an oil tanker spill or

drilling rig accident on the natural resources of the Indian

River Lagoon.

58-

Restoration of Plant Communities. Field personnel will consult with

professionals in the wetlands restoration/revegetation field to determine the

advisability of using healthy beds of marine grasses as a stock source to

restore damaged grassbeds. They will develop guidelines for restoring marine

grassbeds in the aquatic preserve.

Field personnel will identify easily accessible mangrove communities within

the aquatic preserve.where a high density of mangrove seedlings could serve as

a nursery stock source for transplanting to restoration sites. Field personnel

will consult with professionals in the wetlands restoration/revegetation field

concerning proven procedures for transplanting and nurturing mangroves, and

will develop guidelines for restoring mangrove communities in the aquatic

preserve.

In the event that plant restoration is required as the result of a permit

application with DER,.or as a result of any other process, the field personnel

will be responsible for monitoring the restoration activity. This might

include advising the individuals involved in the actual restoration work on

the best techniques under the available restoration guidelines. The field

personnel will monitor the success of the restoration project after the work

is completed.

h. Identification of Research Needs. Field personnel will identify research

needs concerning plant communities within the aquatic preserve with special

emphasis given to data needs that would increase the capability of field

personnel to manage plant communities under environmental stress, and to

determine threshold tolerances for plant community health and diversity in

relation to degraded environmental conditions.

i. Coordination with Other Researchers. Field personnel will become familiar

with research projects being conducted within the aquatic preserve by state

and federal agency biologists and non-government researchers. Water quality

research issues, as they affect plant communities, should also be closely

followed. This familiarization should lead to a better understanding of both

agencies' personnel and a better awareness of the data findings and uses. The

research liaison will also be addressed in Chapter X (Scientific Research).

2. ANIMAL LIFE

The richness of the animal life of the Indian River Lagoon area is important

to the designation of the aquatic preserve. The fish, shrimp, and crabs

within the aquatic preserve, both in the estuary and offshore, are valuable

resources on which recreational and commercial fisheries depend. Large areas

of undisturbed wetlands are excellent habitat for many types of wildlife.

These wildlife include an extensive list of endangered species, migratory

waterfowl, colonial waterbirds, invertebrates and vertebrates.

The management objective for animal life within the aquatic preserve will be

the protection through preservation of habitats and living conditions in the

most natural condition possible.

60..

MANAGEMENT POLICY

a. Field Familiarization and Documentation. Field personnel will become

familiar with the major animal species in each habitat in the aquatic

preserve. This identification process will include the location, number,

season of sighting, weather conditions and any other factors which may be-

necessary to build a working knowledge of the species, and their interaction

and occurrence in the aquatic preserve.

b. Literature Familiarization. The field personnel will assemble a working

library of existing literature concerning the major animal species and
communities within the aquatic preserve. The field personnel will"become

familiar with life histories, ecological requirements, position in the

community, habitat and other factors necessary for sound management.

c. Preparation of Guidelines for the Management of the Endangered Species

Within the Aquatic Preserve. The field personnel will become familiar with

the guidelines of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, U. S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, Department of Natural Resources' Division of Marine

Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service and any other applicable agencies

and non-government organizations involved in the management of endangered

species. These guidelines will be used in conjunction with the field

familiarization, documentation, and mapping to develop management guidelines

for each endanqered species within the aquatic preserve. Special guidelines

shall be developed and implemented for the management of areas within the

aquatic preserve that are identified as critical habitat for endangered

species.

d. Manatee Management. When applications for use of submerged lands within

the preserves are within a manatee sanctuary or manatees are known to use the

area, field personnel will notify the State Manatee Coordinator. These

applications will require his authorization and approval before those

applications are recommended by BELM. Field personnel will also work with the

manatee coordinator in gathering manatee siting data within the preserves and

establishing new sanctuaries, if necessary.

e. Monitoring Changes in Animal Populations. Field personnel will study and

monitor changes in,animal species that are caused by natural phenomena, such

as:

i. freezes;

ii. storms and hurricanes;

iii. changes in habitat due to changes in plant types;

iv. changes in habitat due to water quality changes; and

v. geologic or hydrologic changes including erosion,

estuarine current flow changes, and any other physical

changes.

f. Protection of Animal Life From Human Uses of the Aquatic Preserve.

Field personnel, during the process of resource impact analysis in the review

of use applications in or affecting the preserve, shall consider the

protection of animal species. The review shall also consider the potential

effects of the proposed use-on the plant communities as they function as

habitat for the animal life and uses that may cause a disturbance in the

natural activities and functions of the animal life (e.g., air pollution,

excessive noise or bright lights affecting a bird rookery). The field

personnel should be notified of any proposed activities (e.g., seismic

testing, mammal capture by permit) within the aquatic preserve that might

affect the well-being of animal life and should be involved in planning the

activity so as to cause the least amount of stress on animal life.

g. Identification of Research Needs. The field personnel in the course of

their duties shall identify research needs required to improve the management

of animal life in the aquatic preserve. This identification process is more

fully described in Chapter XII (Identified Program Needs).

h. Coordination with Other Researcher. Field Personnel will become familiar

with research projects conducted within the aquatic preserve by state and

federal agency biologists and non-government researchers. This

familiarization should lead to a better understanding of both agencies'

personnel and a better awareness of the data findings and uses. The research

liaison will also be addressed in Chapter X (Scientific Research).

3. GEOLOGIC FEATURES

The management of geologic features will require that the field personnel

become aware of the natural geologic features and the changes, both human and

natural, which affect these features within the aquatic preserve to better

enable a review of applications for state-owned land uses that might affect

these features. These geologic features will include inlets, islands, shoals,

shorelines, embayments, and channels. The overall objective of the management

of these features is to allow the naturally dynamic system to operate without

man's influence or interference. Active management in this area shall include

the review of proposed uses that might affect the geologic features within the

aquatic preserve. The majority of these reviews will probably concern

bulkheads, bridges and channels as they might affect stateowned lands. The

objective in the placement of bulkheads on lands upland of the aquatic

preserve shall be that the natural contour and drainage be altered to the

least amount practicable. The use of rip rap with mangrove or other suitable

native plantings would be preferable to bulkheads within the preserve.

Bulkheads are not allowed within the preserve, except as stated in Sect-ions

258.42(2), and 258.44 F.S. and in accordance with the management objectives of-

the preserve.

Existing bridges and causeways within the Indian River Lagoon have resulted in

losses of grassbeds and mangroves. Future proposed bridge locations will be

reviewed in light of these potential impacts. Causeways restrict natural

flushing and create unnatural circulation patterns.

Maintenance dredging of existing channels should also be carefully studied to

remove conditions that require perennial maintenance and environmental

disturbances. New channels also have the potential to adversely impact the

aquatic preserves, with varying influences in each preserve, depending on

channel location.

The field personnel shall also be involved in the review of project proposals

64. ,

submitted to other agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the

Department of Environmental Regulation, the Department of Transportation or

the Water Management Districts, and shall.formally review and comment on an-y

permit application that impacts the aquatic preserve. These projects shall be

reviewed jointly with those agencies' personnel whenever possible. The field

personnel will review these projects on beh-alf of the aquatic preserve and its

resources.

4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HTSTORICAL SITES

Archaeological and historical sites have several characteristics which must be

recognized in a resource management program.

i. They are a finite and non-renewable resource.

ii. Each site is unique because individually it represents the

tangible remains of events which occurred at a specific time and

place.

iii. While these sites uniquely reflect localized events, these

events and the origin of particular sites are related to

conditions and events in other times and places. They also

preserve traces of past biotic communities, climate, and other

elements of the environment that may be of interest to other

scientific disciplines.

iv. These sites, particularly archaeological sites, are very fragile

because their significance is derived not only from the

individual artifacts within them, but especially from the

spatial arrangement of those artifacts in both horizontal and

vertical planes.

Administering Agency.

The management of the archaeological and historical sites is authorized and

administered by the Division of Archives, History and Records Management

(DAHRM) in the Florida Department of State. The management authority for this

area of management is presented in Chapter II (Management Authority).

Management Policy.

The management policy presented here is one of conservation, as recommended by

the DAHRM and subject to that agency's changes. Their policy is as follows:

1. The field personnel and all other agencies-planning activities

within the aquatic preserve shall coordinate closely with DAHRM in

order to prevent any unauthorized disturbance of archaeological

and historical sites that may exist on the affected tract. DAHRM

is vested with the title to archaeological and historical resources

abandoned on state lands and is responsible for administration and

.protection of such resources (Section 267.061(l)(b), F.S.). It is

illegal to destroy or otherwise alter sites on state lands without a

66-

permit from DAHRM (Section *267.13, F.S.). Therefore, agencies

planning activities should coordinate-their plans with DAHRM at a

sufficiently early stage to preclude inadvertent damage or destruc-

tion to these resources.

2. The nature of these sites' fragility and vulnerability to looting and

other*destructive forces requires that the location of these sites

not be widely known, if the location is known at all. In many

instances DAHRM will have knowledge of the known and expected site

distribution in an area. Special field surveys for unknown areas may

be required by DAHRM to identify potential endangerment of a proposed

activity to these archaeological and historical sites. This will be

especially necessary in the case of activities contemplating ground

disturbance over large areas.

3. In the case of known sites, activities that are expected to alter or

damage these sites shall alter their management or development plans

as necessary, or make special provisions so as not to disturb or

damage such sites prior to professionally acceptable and authorized

mitigation.

4. If in the course of a*management activity, or as a result of

development or the permitting of dredge/fill-activities, it is

determined that valuable historic or archaeological sites will, be

damaged or destroyed, DAHRM reserves the right to require salvage

measures to mitigate the destructive impact of such activities on

such sites (Section 267.061(l)(b), F.S.). Such salvage measures

shall be accomplished before DAHRM would grant permission for site

destruction.

5. Excavation of archaeological sites in the near future is discouraged.

Archaeological sites within the aquatic preserve should be left

undisturbed for the present, with particular attention devoted*to

preventing site looting by "treasure hunters".

6-. Field personnel will note suspected sites for future surveys by

DAHRM. Cooperation with other agencies in this activity is also

encouraged by DAHRM. The DAHRM will help inform the field personnel

about the characteristics and appearance of these sites.

7. Any discovery of instances of looting or unauthorized destruction of

these sites will be reported to the DAHRM so that appropriate action

may be initiated. The Florida Marine Patrol and other enforcement

personnel of DNR shall provide enforcement assistance to DAHRM and

make arrests or investigate cases of looting or other unauthorized

destruction of archaeological sites. The field personnel will follow

the above manaqement policy and become familiar with the personnel

involved*with this task in DAHRM and their procedures for identifying

suspected sites.

5. WATER RESOURCES

Responsible management of water resources for the protection of human health

and recreational enjoyment of aquatic preserve waters, as well as for the

protection and enhancement of the preserves' plant and animal communities is,

without a doubt, the most critical aspect of aquatic preserve management.

Research to understand how human activity can alter or detrimentally affect

the dynamic characteristics of the preserves' various habitats can be

approached confidently after monitoring data has been used to model the

effects of naturally occurring variations on the same habitat. Only a single

toxic substance may be necessary to initiate irreparable ecological damage

and change in the water resources of the aquatic preserve estuarine ecosystem.

Management Policy

The successful management of the water resources of the aquatic preserve

depends heavily on other government agencies (i.e., DER and the Water

Management District) charged with regulating water quality and quantity. The

objective of the water resources management shall be to maintain the naturally

high water @uality and to ensure the natural seasonal fluctuations of fresh

water into the estuary. Sources of water resources data from non-government

agencies, are dependent on or may be found among colleges, universities,

scientific foundations and private consultants working in the Indian River

Lagoon area. These various entities have interests at many different levels

and areas within the riverine and estuarine system. The aquatic preserve

management program will manage the water resources through coordination with

these various entities. The field personnel will not conduct water sampling,

but through the review of these data from other entities and from their own

field observations, they will be able to identify water resource problems in

the aquatic preserve.

a. Familiarization with the Jurisdiction, Personnel, and Monitoring Programs

of Government Agencies and Other Entities. Field personnel will become

thoroughly familiar with the jurisdiction, personnel and monitoring programs

of other agencies, institutions and corporations involved in studying,

monitoring, regulating and managing water resources within the aquatic

preserve and the drainage basins which provide fresh water to this preserve.

Those agencies known to be working or having potential activities affecting

the preserve are listed below; others may be added as they are identified.

1. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation

2. Palm Beach County Health Department

3. South Florida Water Management District

4. St. Johns Water Management District

5. U. S. Geological Survey

6. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service

7. Treasure Coast'Regional Planning Council

8. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission

9. Florida Department of Natural Resources Marine Research Laboratory

10. University of Florida

11. Florida Institute of Technology

12. Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory

13. Jupiter Inlet District

14 Fort Pierce Inlet District

15. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

16. Florida Power and Light Company

17. Florida Inland Navi-gation District

18. Harbor Branch Foundation

19. Florida Oceanographic Society

20. National Marine Fisheries Service

21. Applied Biology, Inc./St. Lucie Power Plant

b. Monitoring of Water Resources by Cooperative Data Collection and Review.

Field personnel will: 1. promote coordination among involved agencies in

planning monitoring programs and in evaluating monitoring data; and 2. monitor.

water resources within the preserve by reviewing the data collected and

compiled by those agencies as it applies to the aquatic preserve and its

resources.

c. Review of Permit and Lease Application for Aquatic Preserve Uses and

Watershed Activities that would affect the Preserve Water Resources. Field

personnel will review sovereign land lease applications, development of

regional impact reviews, and DER/COE permit applications in cooperation with

other agencies as necessary, and as outlined in Chapter V (C) for their

potential impact on the water resources of the aquatic preserve.

d. Familiarization with and Monitoring of Activities and Users which

Regularly Contribute Pollutants to Preserve Waters. Field personnel will

become familiar with the activities and users which regularly or potentially

contribute pollutants to the waters of the aquatic preserve. This monitoring

will be accomplished directly by field observations and indirectly by review

of other entities' water resources data. Field personnel will encourage and

coordinate with other agencies involved with water resources monitoring to

consider more detailed field monitoring in areas of the.preserve where the

incidence of polluting activities is found to be high. These monitoring

activities will also include the-monitoring of freshwater releases into the

preserves and their effect on the environment.

These activities will also be applicable to Chapter X (Scientific Research),

and the coordination through Chapter VI (Management Implementation Network).

The field personnel's onsite presence will be complemented by their reliance

on other agencies and entities for data and regulation. The field personnel

will have the ability to visually monitor water resource crises and phenomena

as they occur and when they affect other.resources.

6. CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS

Cumulative Impacts are the@ sum total of major and minor changes or effects

upon a natural system. Taken singularly these effects may not constitute a

notable change in the condition of the natural system, but as these single

changes or uses accumulate, their combined impact may result in a substan-

tive environmental disturbance or degradation of the natural system.

The review of proposed uses in the aquatic preserve from the perspective of

cumulative impact analysis requires a thorough knowledge of the natural system

and the various interactions and dynamics within that system. This aquatic

preserve management program will initiate development of a cumulative impact

analysis program. The evaluation of cumulative impacts shall include the

following criteria from Chapter 160-20 F.A.C.:

"(I) The number and extent of similar human actions within

the preserve which have previously affected or are

likely to affect the preserve, whether considered by

the Department under its current authority or which

existed prior to or since the enactment of the Act;

and,

(2) The similar activities within the preserve which are

currently under consideration by the department; and

(3) Direct and indirect effects upon the preserve and

adjacent preserve, if applicable, which may reason-

ably be expected to result from, the activity; and

(4) The extent to whi.ch the activity is consistent

with management plans for the preserve, when

developed; and

(5) The extent to which the activity is permissible

within the preserve in accordance with comprehensive

plans adopted by affected local governments, pursuant

to Section 163.3161, F.S., and other applicable plans

adopted by local, state and federal governmental agencies.

(6) The extent to which the loss of beneficial hydrologic

and biologic functions would adversely impact-the quality

or utility of the preserve; and

(7) The extent to which mitigation measures may compensate

for adverse impacts."

The availability of onsite reserve staff who are familiar with the distinctive

characteristics of this system, coupled with their ability to access'LANDSAT

imagery and mapping, and other data sources, is the key to development of a

successful cumulative impact analysis program. As cumulative impacts are

identified for specific areas and/or resources, they will become an integral

part of the project analysis and decision-making process.

7. MANAGEMENT OF PICROACHMENTS

The management of encroachments in the preserve will concern the unauthorized

placement of structures or other illegal uses in the aquatic preserve. These

encroachments might also include illegal activities associated with an

approved use (e.g., extension of a dock, construction of boat houses,

extension of an approved channel).

The management policy for the field personnel, after identification of a

suspected illegal encroachment, will involve a reporting procedure and the

monitoring of the remedial action. After a field identification of suspected

encroachments, field personnel will notify the central office to verify the

title of the property and research the possibility of the use being an

approved activity. Due to the extensive areas involved in the aquatic

preserve, this will be a progressive activity depending on the field per-

sonnel's even.tual familiarization with the preserve and the approved uses.

The potential for unauthorized activities in such an extensive area may

possibly require some type of mapp-ing and recording system to assist the field

personnel in their monitoring.

The management action for verified illegal encroachment will be developed by

the agencies specifically involved (i.e., DNR, DER). The field personnel will

assist, as necessary, with field evaluations or other support activities. The

final action will be monitored by the field personnel, at the direction of the

Trustees to the central office. The procedures followed in these applications.

will be decided on a case bv case basis.

The issue of squatters living on spoil islands is the major initial

encroachment issue. The major points of this issue are concerned with private

individuals living on public lands and the potential degradation of water

quality in surrounding waters. The surrounding waters are not only in the

aquatic preserve but also in open shellfishing waters.

These private individuals will be given a specific period of time to prove

ownership. If they can not deliver proof of ownership, a method of removal

will be developed, given the conditions of each site.

C. RESOURCE MAPPING AND RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS

The efficient description and location of resources within such a large area

requires the use of remote sens.ing techniques. This work will be done in

conjunction with DNR's Marine Research Laboratory's Assessment of Fishery

Habitat Loss Study in the Indian River Lagoon. Marine Research Laboratory

personnel have developed resource and habitat indentification mapping through
the use of LANDSAT (satellite) imagery and aerial photography.

The vegetation and land use mapping done in this study will become the basis

for the development of a Resource Protection Area management system in the

aquatic preserves. This mapping system will identify and classify various

resources within the aquatic preserves that require protection by the

management program. This mapping system will also give acreage totals for

each land use and vegetation classification in the preserves. The vegetation

portion of the mapping will be augmented over time by wildlife and fisheries

information (endangered species, bird rookeries, etc.), archaeological and

historical site information and other resource factors deemed crucial to the

continued health and viability of the aquatic preserves.

The onsite managers will supplement this mapping with the above information to

develop and update a Resource Protection Area (RPA) mapping program. The RPA

mapping system is based on three levels of resource classification. The Class

1 level will contain resources of the highest quality. Uses proposed for

these areas will receive the most rigorous review. The Class 1 level will

include one-or more of the following: marine grassbeds; mangrove swamp;

saltwater marsh; oyster bars; archaeological and historical sites (upland and

submerged); endangered species habitat; colonial waterbird nesting sites; and

other appropriate factors.

The Class 2 areas will be defined as those areas containing the resources of

Class 1, but in a transitional condition compared to Class 1. These resources

wil*l either be building toward Class 1 status or declining to Class 3 status.

Class 2 areas will require careful field review as to the specific area's

sensitivity to each proposed use. In some respects, these areas may be as

sensitive or more sensitive to disturbances as Class 1 areas. The resources

of Class 2 will include: marine grassbeds; mangroves in scrub condition or

colonizing new lands; saltwater marsh colonizing new lands; and other

resources of Class 1 type that fit in the Class *2 condition.

Class 3 areas will be characterized by the general absence of the attributes

of the above two classes. Class 3 areas may have small localized Class 1 or 2

areas within them. Class 3 will generally have deep water areas or areas with

no significant vegetation or wildlife attributes. Nearshore and bottom areas

significantly modified by man will be designated Class 3.

These RPA maps will require periodic revisions-as the onsite managers learn

more about the resource's reactions to man's uses. Scientific research and

other data additions may also require modification of this system. Natural

changes will also require modification of this classification system.

Periodic checking by LANDSAT satellite imagery will become useful for remote

sensing monitoring as its use is more fully developed.

The RPA maps will become a planning tool for both onsite and central office

staff. More detailed field review will still be required to supplement this

information on a case by case basis, as necessary.

The initial development, as 'Well as periodic review, will require the support

and assistance of the many other resource regulating and managing agencies, as

well as local and regional government entities. Support will also be

requested from the colleges, universities, foundations and other interest

groups and individuals.

The RPA mapping will use the USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle map format for

vegetation and these maps, after public notice and opportunity for public

review and comment, will be placed in Appendix D of the aquatic preserve

management plan. It is recognized that mapping at this scale may not

adequately define small areas which do not qualify for the RPA class level

assigned to a general area.

D. ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES

This section of the chapter addresses the role of the central office, in the

aquatic preserve management planning and implementation process. The central

office's role is generally interpreted within the 'context of coordinating

activities with the field personnel. This coordination linkage is important

to many program aspects, including project review and evaluation, local

contact initiation, administrative rule development, contractual services and

conflict resolution, not to mention the routine support (payroll, operating

expenses, etc.) usually extended by the central office to the onsite managers.

All program activities identified within this context are designed to protect

and enhance the environmental, educational, scientific, and aesthetic

qualities of the natural systems of the aquatic preserve.

1. Objectives

Specifical-ly, the- following administrative objectives are an essential part of

the aquatic preserve management program.

a. To ensure a comprehensive, coordinated review and evaluation of

proposed activities potentially affecting the environmental integrity

of the aquatic preserve.

b. To serve as the link between aquatic preserve field personnel and

state agencies and programs which originate in Tallahassee.

c. To serve as the primary staff in the development of administrative

rule additions, deletions, and revisions.

-d. To serve as the administrative staff for contractual agreements and

services.

e. To establish and maintain a conflict resolution process.

f. To review all existing and past activities as to their affect on the

environmental integrity of the aquatic preserve.

2. Project Review and Evaluation

A major element in the administration of-an aquatic preserve management system

is the establishment of a thorough project review process. It is the program

intent that the central office staff review all proposed activities requiring

the use of state-owned lands within the preserve.

Sections 258.42 through 258.44, F.S., establish the legal context within which

all proposed uses of the aquatic preserve mU-st be evaluated.

Essentially, these sections require that projects be basically water dependent

or water-enhanced, not contrary to the lawful and traditional uses of the

preserve, and not infringing upon the traditional riparian rights of the

upland property owner.

The primary mechanism through which proposed uses are reviewed is accomplished

by participation in the state lands management process as established by

Chapter 253, F.S., and modified by Chapter 258, F.S. The central office was

administratively designated, on October 4, 1982, as an agent of the Trustees,

for the purposes of evaluating the environmental consequences of proposed uses

of state-owned lands within aquatic preserves.

In conducting the environmental evaluations, the central office staff will

rely heavily upon the most current, readily available data such as Department

of Transportation (DOT) aerial photography, LANDSAT imagery, DER biological

reports, and other data resources (see Appendices C and D). If a proposed

activity is legally consistent with the maintenance criteria outlined in

Section 258.42 F.S. and Chapter 16Q-20, F.A.C., and is generally of negligible

environmental concern, then the project review will likely be conducted in its

entirety by the central office staff, utilizing the generalized environmental

data.

.The field personnel will be requested to conduct a more detailed environmental

assessment of the project if the central office staff, during the course of

the preliminary application review; determines that the requested use of

state-owned lands may have a significant effect upon the environmental

integrity of the preserve. Copies of all applications received will be

provided to the field personnel for project monitoring and assessment of the

possible cumulative impacts.

Field personnel will be encouraged to establish direct communication links

with the various regulatory and management agencies for purposes of obtaining

advance notification of projects potentially affecting the preserve. All

environmental review and assessments, however, will be channeled through the

central office unless other arrangements have been previously cleared-with the

central office.

While the State Lands Management Program authorized by Chapters. 253 and 258,

F.S. and Chapters 16Q-20 and 16Q-21, F.A.C. is expected to be the primary

management implementation vehicle for the aquatic preserve, it is by no means

the only vehicle. Section 253.77, F.S., as amended, and the December, 1982

Memorandum of Understanding between the COE, DER and DNR provide direct access

to DER's permitting process for DNR. The Development of Regional Impact (DRI)

and other regional or state level review processes represent other

implementation mechanisms. The basic review approach and the evaluation

relationship between the field personnel and the central office staff will be

the same as the case involving the State Lands Management program.

One aspect of the aquatic preserve review and evaluation program is the

identification of proposed activities that are either generally or specifi-

cally prohibited. Immediately upon review of such project applications, the

central office staff will notify the Division of State Lands (or other program

managers) that the proposed activity is legally unapprovable for the stated

reasons. For those proposals which are subject to denial due to their adverse-

environmental impacts, even though the activity may be permissible, Section

258.42, F.S., specifically provides that:

"(1) No further sale,-lease, or transfer of sovereignty submerged

lands shall be approved or consummated by the trustees except

when such sale, lease, or transfer is in the public interest.

(2) The trustees shall not approve the waterward relocation or setting

of bulkhead lines waterward of the line of mean high water within

the preserve except when public road and bridge construction

projects have no reasonable altern.ative and it is shown to be

not contrary to the public interest.

(3) (a) No further dredging or filling of submerged lands shall

be approved by the trustees except the following activities

may be authorized pursuant to a permit:

1. Such minimum dredging and spoiling as may be authorized

for public navigation projects.

2. Such minimum dredging and spoiling as may be authorized

for creation and maintenance of marinas, piers, and docks

and their attendant navigation channels.

3. Such other alteration of physical conditions as may, in

the opinion of the trustees, be neces.sar%y to enhance the

quality or utility of the preserve or the public health

generally.

4. Such other maintenance dredging as may be required for

existing navigation channels.

5. Such restoration of land as authorized by s. 253.124(8).

6. Such reasonable improvements as may be necessary for

public utility installation or expansion.

7. Installation and maintenance of oil and gas transportation

facilities, provided such facilities are proper-ly marked

with marine aids to navigation as prescribed by federal

law.

(b) There shall, in no case, be any dredging seaward of a

bulkhead line for the sole or primary purpose of providing

fill for any-area landward of a bulkhead line.

this will not prohibit the state from leasing the oil and

gas rights and permitting drilling from outside the

preserve to explore for oil and gas if approved by the

board.

(d) There shall be no excavation of minerals, except the

dredging of dead oyster shells as approved by the

Department of Natural Resources.

(e) There shall be no erection of structures within the

preserve, except:

1. Private docks for reasonable ingress or egress of

riparian owners;

2. Commercial docking facilities shown to be consistent

with the use or management criteria of the preserve;

and 4

3. Structures for shore protection, approved navigational

aids, or public utility crossings authorized under

subsection (3)(a).

(f) No wastes or effluents shall be discharged into the

preserve which substantially inhibit the accomplishment

of the purposes of this act.

(9) No nonpermitted wastes or effluents shall be directly

discharged into the preserve which substantially

inhibit the accomplishment of the purposes of-this act."

Generally, applicants desirous of appealing staff recommendations will have to

follow those appellate procedures outlined in the appropriate authorizing

statutes. In the case where applications requesting the use of state-owned

lands are denied, three appellate procedures are available to the applicant.

Depending upon the type of application submitted, an applicant may:

a. Ask the Governor and Cabinet to overturn an application decision

rendered by the Executive Director of Department of the Natural Resources

(or his designee) under a delegation of authority;

b. Request an Administrative Hearing under the procedures outlined in

Chapter 120, F.S.; or
c. Appeal the action of the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement

Trust Fund to the District Court of Appeals.

Liaison Between Field Personnel and Other Interested Parties

One of the most important aspects of the field personnel's job is to establish

a mutually beneficial communication link with pertinent interest groups. The

central-office staff will assist in initially identifying and contacting

governmental bodies, special interest groups and interested individuals

requiring aquatic preserve program coordination.

When requested by the onsite managers, the central office staff will assist

in arranging for specialized management expertise not generally available

locally. This may include, for example, such things as arranging for DAHRM

to conduct a detailed cultural resource assessment for certain areas of the

the preserve.

CHAPTER VI

MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION NETWORK

This chapter of the management plan will address the various

relationships of aquatic preserve management to the different government

agencies and programs, non-government entities, interest groups, and

individuals within the aquatic preserve area. The activities of both field

personnel and central office staff as they relate to these other organizations

will be presented.

A. FEDERAL

Many federal agencies have property interests, land and wildlife management

programs, research activities, construction activities, and regulation

programs existing or potentially existing within the aquatic preserves. The

objective of the aquatic preserve management program will be to complement the

various activities wherever possible. The field personnel will assist thos6

federal agencies in areas where they have common goals. The field personnel

and central office staff will also review the federal activities as to their

effect on the objectives of the aquatic preserve management. This review

shall be coordinated through the DER's Office of Coastal Management for the

purposes of enforcing the provisions of the Federal Coastal Zone Management

Act of 1972, as amended.

1. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The aquatic preserve program

will be involved in the review of proposed preserve uses in conjunction with

the Fish and Wildlife's Division of Ecological Services in Vero Beach. This

division reviews dredge and fill requests and other federal level permitting

under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.

Another management program in which the field personnel could possibly

interact with the Fish and Wildlife Service is the protection and recovery of

endangered species and bird rookeries within the aquatic preserve. Field

personnel will become involved in using available recovery techniques for this

purpose, as necessary.

2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The U.S. Corps of Engineers (COE) is

charged with providing technical guidance and planning assistance for the

Nation's water resources development. The COE also provides supervision and

direction to many engineering works such as harbors, waterways and many other

types of structures. Their major responsibility, as it applies to the aquatic

preserve, is the protection of navigable waters, pollution abatement and

maintaining water quality and the enhancement of fish and wildlife.

The COE activit-ies in the Indian River Lagoon include their involvement with

the DER in the dredge and fill permitting process, technical oversight of

channel, inlet and canal maintenance, and evaluating requests for new

channels, canals jand other such public works projects. The field personnel

will become familiar with the various programs, policies and procedures as

they apply to the aquatic preserve.

The field personnel and central office staff will also review activities

proposed by the COE for conformance to the objectives of the aquatic

preserves' management plan. This involvement should begin in the early stages

of project planning in order to facilitate the best protection of the aquatic

preserve possible.

3. U.S. Geological Survey. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) under the

Department of the Interior has the responsibility to perform surveys,

investigations, and research pertaining to topography, geology, and the

mineral and water resources of the United States. USGS also publishes and

disseminates data relative to those preceding activities. In the past the
USGS has conducted many studies on various resour"ces in the region.

The field personnel and central office staff will become familiar with these

studies and the data results as they apply to their management activities.

4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency._ The U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA), in cooperation with state and local governments, is the federal

agency responsible for the control and abatement of environmental pollution.

The six areas of pollution within which the EPA is concerned are air, water,

solid waste, noise, radiation and toxic substances. The DER is the state

agency responsible for handling most of these programs on a state level in

lieu of a federal program. Within the aquatic preserve, the field personnel

will assist the EPA in planning field activities where there are common goals.

5. U.S. Coast Guard. The U.S. Coast Guard is the federal agency involved in

boating safety, including search and rescue when necessary. The Coast Guard

is also charged with the permitting of structures which affect navigation and

boating safety. These structures include bridges, causeways, aerial utilities

and other structures which may be in conflict with navigational uses. The

field personnel, in conjunction with the central office staff, will also

review projects which the Coast Guard may be evaluating for permits.

6. National Marine Fisheries Service. The National Marine Fisheries Service

(NMFS) under the U.S. Department of Commerce is active in the Indian River

area in recording commercial fish landings. The NMFS also has enforcement

officers in the area checking for illegal fishery activities. The field

personnel will work with thesd personnel whenever they have common goals

Wi
the aquatic preserve.

B. STATE

Many state agencies have programs which affect the resources or regulate

activities within the aquatic preserve. There are also other DNR programs

that are within or affect the Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves. This

section will describe the interactions and relationships of these various

agency programs and how they relate to aquatic preserve management.

1. Department of Environmental Regulation.. The Department of Environmental

Regulation (DER) is responsible for regulating air and water quality and, in

some cases, water quantity (through the water management district) within the

Indian River Lagoon. The DER is also the local contact for the initiation of

dredge and fill applications in conjunction with the COE and DNR. With

respect to water quality-and dredge and fill regulation, the DER is possibly

one of the most important agencies to the management of the aquatic preserve.

The water quality of the preserve is the most important factor to the health

of the estuarine complex, and dredge and fill activities are one of the most

potentially destructive activities within the preserve. The DER also

regulates other forms of pollution, such as air, noise, wastewater and

hazardous waste, which may be important in the future to the preserve.

The field personnel will become familiar with the water quality, dredge and

fill, and other regulatory programs that are important to the aquatic

preserve. The field personnel should develop a close working relationship

with DER staff and become familiar with DER field activities and programs that

are in common with the objectives of the aquatic preserve. management program.

The field personnel should open the most efficient line of communication with

the local offices to receive the permit applications from DER as soon as

possible to improve the response time within the review process.

The DER, Office of Coastal Management is charged with coordinating activities

related to coastal management in the state and reviewing federal actions for

consistency with the State Coastal Management Program, Section 380.20, F.S.

The central office staff will maintain a close relationship with the Office of

Coastal Management for assistance in the review of federal actions, data and

research needs, and other program support.

2. Department of Community Affairs. The Department of Community Affairs

(DCA) is responsible for reviewing Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) and

for designating Areas of Critical State Concern (ACSC). DRI's are major

developments that have impacts on a scale which is greater than county level

and require a regional review from neighboring local governments and state

agencies. Both the central office staff and field personnel of the aquatic

preserve program will be involved in reviewing DRI's. The field personnel

should receive notice of a DRI through the central office staff and wi-11

proceed with the field review. The central office staff will coordinate the

field review findings and work with the other state agencies in Tallahassee in

the review of the DRI.

Hutchinson Island, the barrier islands between Sebastian Inlet south to

Jupiter Inlet, is presently under review by the DCA. The ACSC staff of DCA

has completed the Hutchinson Island Resource Planning and Management Plan and

it was enacted by the Governor in 1983. This region was identified as a

possible ACSC and a Resource Planning and Management Program (RPMP) was

established as a preliminary review for this designation.

The ACSC program is intended to protect the areas of the state where

unsuitable land development has endangered or may potentially endanger

resour@es of regional or statewide significance. The RPMP evaluates the

resources, and the local government's land development practices. After this

evaluation is complete, the RPMP committee makes recommendations to the local

governments on how their land development practices could be improved to

ensure an orderly and well-planned growth that would protect the critical

resources. The local governments, counties and cities, are now in the process

of making these land development modifications, based on the RPMP

recommendati-ons. If these modifications are not made to the RPMP Committee's

approval, those areas of local government that are not in conformance could be

designated an ACSC or the entire area may be designated an ACSC by the

Legislature. Under an ACSC designation, the local governments are required to

notify DCA of any application for a development permit. The entire land

development process will require the state's oversight until that local

government modifies its land development practices to conform to the ACSC

requirements. The recommendations of the Hutchinson Island Resource Planning

and Management Committee as they apply to the aquatic preserves have been

included into this plan.

3. Department of Natural Resources. The aquatic preserve management program

is associated with several other Department of Natural Resource (DNR) programs

in the Indian River area.

DNR's M`arine Research Laboratory in St. Petersburg, under the Division of

Marine Resources, has several programs and projects within the Indian River

Lagoon which will benefit the aquatic preserve program. The Marine Lab is

presently studying fishery habitat losses in the Indian River Lagoon. The

Resource Protection Area mapping, which will be used in the management of

these aquatic preserves, was created as a product of that fishery habitat loss

study. The data from this project, when it is completed, will be incorporated

into this management plan. The Marine Lab staff is also involved in manatee

protection programs and is the headquarters of the State Manatee Coordinator.

The marine laboratory also operates a field station in Jensen Beach, active in

research on marine turtles.

The field personnel will become familiar with these studies and programs, and

will consult the Marine Lab for their data needs whenever possible.

The Division of Marine Resources also handles the permitting for the

collection of certain marine species and use of certain chemicals. The field

and central office staff will become familiar with this permitting process and

request notification of these permits within the aquatic preserve.

The Marine Patrol, under DNR's Division of Law Enforcement, also operates in

the Indian River Lagoon. The field personnel will become familiar with their

programs and operation, and will call on the Marine Patrol for law enforcement

support as required.

The Division of State Lands within the DNR is charged with overseeing uses,

sales, leases or transfers of state-owned lands. The aquatic preserve staff

will interact with State Lands in all transactions concerning submerged lands

within the aquatic preserve. These would include the potential acquisition of

privately titled submerged lands or contiguous uplands important to the

integrity of the preserve. This relationship is more fully described in

Chapter V(C).

The Division of Resource Management, through the Bureau of Geology and Aquatic

Plant Research and Development, is responsible for various programs poten-

tially affecting the aquatic preserve. Staff will establish communication

links with this Division to ensure that adequate consideration is given to

potential impacts upon the preserve that may result from the conduct of their

various programs.

The Division of Recreation and Parks, in addition to the work related to

aquatic preserves by BELM and The Florida Park Service, is also involved in

the management of State parks and recreation areas nearby. The aquatic

preserve program will work closely with these programs as they relate to

aquatic preserve management objectives.

4. Marine Fisheries Commission (MFC).

The MFC was established as a rulemaking authority pursuant to Section 370.027,

F.S. The seven members are appointed by the governor and are delegated full

rulemaking authority over marine life (subject to approval by the Trustees),

with the exception of endangered species. This authority covers the following

areas: a) gear specifications, b) prohibited gear, c) bag limits, d) size

limits, e) species that may not be sold, f) protected species, g) closed

areas, h) quality control codes, i) seasons, and J.) special considerations

related to eggbearing females and oyster and clam relaying. The field

personnel and central office staff will become familiar with and enforce the

rules of the MFC.

The MFC is also instructed to make annual recommendations to the Trustees

regarding Marine fisheries research priorities. The field and central office

staff will use these recommendations to direct research efforts within the

aquatic preserve.

5. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. (GFWFC) The GFWFC's

Environmental Services office in Vero Beach sends biologists into the Indian

River Lagoon area to review projects which may have potential impacts on local

fish and wildlife habitat as necessary. The central office will use the

GFWFC's assistance in their review process, when possible, and in developing

fish and wildlife management for the aquatic preserve.

The GFWFC has enforcement officers working in this area. The field personnel
will interact with these officers where there are common goals".

The GFWFC is also the state coordinator of the Endangered Species in Florida.

The field personnel and central office staff will work with GFWFC personnel in

developing program needs in this area.

6. Department of Transportation. (DO T) The DOT has an office in Fort Pierce

and the field personnel and th.e central office will work with the resident

engineer on anticipated projects having possible impacts on the aquatic

preserve. The field@personnel and administrative staff will review any major

highway or bridge projects that may be proposed in the future.

7. Department of State. The Division of Archives, History and Records

Management (DAHRM) in the Department of State will have a close working

relationship with the field personnel and central office staff in the

protection of archaeological and historical sites. The field personnel will

be directed by DAHRM, through the central office, in any activities or

management policy needs for these s.ites.

8. Health and Rehabilitative Services. (HRS) Both the central office staff

and field personnel will establis h communication and coordination linkages

with HRS and their locally conducted programs of septic tank regulation and

mosquito control. Although mosquito control serves a useful public function,

the effects of pesticides (adulticides and larvacides) in the waters of the

preserve are a primary concern. Additionally, the central office staff will

become involved in future meetings and management programs developed by the

Governor's Working Group on mosquito control. Subsequent policy

recommendations coming out of this group will be evaluated for applicability

to the ongoing aquatic preserve management program.

C. REGIONAL

The regional level of the management implementation network as it applies to

the Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves will include the South Florida Water

Management District, St. Johns River Water Management District, the Treasure

Coast Regional Planning Council, and the Florida Inland Mavigation District.

-ivities that are broader than the local
These organizations have act

government, but are on a smaller scale than the state level.

1. Water Management District. The district boundaries of the South Florida

Water Management District (SFWMD) contain the Martin,*Palm Beach and St. Lucie

Counties' area of the aquatic preserves. The St. Johns River Water Management

District includes the Indian River County portion of the preserves. The water

management district administers permitting programs for the local consumable

use of water, storm water discharges, and dredge and fill type activities.

This includes the withdrawal and use of water from rivers, streams, and wells.

The types of water uses they permit in the Indian River Lagoon area include

irrigation and public water supply. The field personnel will become familiar

with the review and permitting procedures as they might apply to water supply

in this basin. The water management district is also involved in various

studies on water supply and management, and other related research that may be

of use to aquatic preserve management.

2. Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. The Treasure Coast Regional

Planning Council (TCRPC) serves as a regional planning body for the local

governments of Indian River, Martin, Palm Beach and St. Lucie Counties, as

well as two cities within these counties and other southeast Florida counties.
Among its duties, the T@RPC:

a. aids local governments with planning expertise;

b. is the regional representative for the Development of Regional

Impact (DRI) review process;

C. serves as a regional clearinghouse for state and federal projects

and programs; and

d. conveys information from the local governments to the state and

federal levels.

The field personnel will become familiar with the various projects, programs,

and data sources that the TCRPC has within its administration that may effect

or prove useful to the aquatic preserve program.

The DRI review of projects which affect the aquatic preserves will be reviewed

by the central office staff, with the field personnel's field review, when

necessary. DRI's for large marinas, large subdivisions on the uplands above

the preserve, and commercial or industrial developments will require a field

review by the field personnel as to their effect on the aquatic preserve.

3. Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND). The FIND is a multi-county

district sponsor of the Intracoastal Waterway from Duval County south to Dade

county. FIND is also responsible for providing and maintaining spoil areas

(spoil islands) to the Corps of Engineers for the dredging and maintenance of

the Waterway. FIND presently holds title to channel and spoil easements

throughout the Indian River Lagoon. Field personnel and the central office

will work closely with the FIND in the removal of squatters on spoil islands

and future dredging proposals.

D. Local Governments and Special Districts.

This section will address the relationship of the-aquatic preserve management

program to the various local government agencies, special districts and their

programs. The local governments are the incorporated cities and counties that

surround the aquatic preserve. The Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves span

four counties which include, from north to south, Indian River, St..Lucie,

Martin and Palm Beach Counties. The followinq cities border this 'lagoon area;

Vero Beach, Fort Pierce, Stuart, St. Lucie Village, Ocean Breeze Park,

Sewall's Point, Hobe Sound, Jupiter inlet Colony and the unincorporated Jensen

Beach community. The various special districts (drainage, inlet and mosquito

control) and their relationship to aquatic preserve management, are also@

presented.

The field personnel will be the local lialson for the aquatic preserve to

these local government entities to assist them in modifying their policies and

practices to conform to the objectives of the aquatic preserve's management

plan, and to exchange information and expertise for mutual benefits.

1. Relationship to local management plans. The local governments are

required by the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975 (LGCPA),

(Section 163.3161, F.S.) to have a comprehensive management plan with elements-

relating to the different governmental functions (i.e. housing, physical

facilities, conservation, land use, and coastal zone protection). These

plans, in effect, are long-range plans for the orderly and balanced

development of the city or county. The comprehensive plans guide local zoning

policies and practices toward a future as set out in the plan. No development

is permitted that does not conform to the local government's comprehensive

plan.

The aim of the aquatic preserve, with respect to these local government

comprehensive plans, is to have their plans be consistent with the aquatic

preserve management plans. The field personnel will become familiar with the

above plans an d how they support or are in conflict with the objectives of

aquatic preserve management. The field pe rsonnel will assist local planning

100

officials in having their plans meet these objectives. The field personnel

and central office staff will assist these officials in the preparation of

their Marina Element, as required in Chapter IX. It is hoped that local

governments will join in the spirit of aquatic preserve management and be

willing to work for these changes.

2. Relation to local development codes. The local zoning and development

codes (e.g., building codes) provide the major local regulation that defines

what an owner can do on a particular parcel of property. The zoning

prescribes the allowable uses and the intensity of those uses. Certain uses

along an aquatic preserve can potentially have a profound effect on a

preserve.

This section will operate in conjunction with the preceding section on local

management plans. The field personnel will become familiar with the local

zoning, development codes and their potential effects on the nearby aquatic

preserve. The field personnel will assist local planning and zoning officials

in identifying areas where changes in zoning would better conform to the

objectives.of the aquatic preserve management. The field personnel might also

offer to assist local planning and zoning officials in the review of proposed

subdivisions upland of the preserve.

3. Suggested policies and practices in support of Aquatic Preserve

Management. This section will address any other policy or practice not

covered in the two preceding sections. These policies and practices might

include local government mangrove ordinances; recreation problems where a park

101

is in or near an aquatic preserve, or any other problem as it might relate to

local governments. The field personnel will offer assistance or information

to local officials or will coordinate with other agencies to help solve these

problems as they occur. The field personnel will work with county personnel

on enforcement of"ordinances such as the Palm Beach Mangrove Protection

Ordinance. The field personnel will also comment, through the central office,

on any local practice that is identified as endangering the well-being of the

aquatic preserve.

4. Special Districts (Drainage, Inlet and Mosquito Control). The special

districts are taxing districts established to correct drainage and mosquito

control problems. There are 3 drainage districts that directly affect these

preserves; Indian River Farms Drainage District in Indian River County, Fort

Pierce Farms Water Management District in St. Lucie County, and Hobe-St. Lucie

Conservancy District in Martin County. Several other interior districts

indirectly affect these preserves and are addressed in the North Fork-St.

Lucie River and Loxahatchee River-Lake Worth Creek Aquatic Preserve Management

Plans. Each of the three counties has a mosquito control district. The

Jupiter Inlet District is responsible for maintaining that inlet.

These districts may not have an official comprehensive management plan, but

they do have management policies and program statements that are similar to

such a plan. The field personnel will become familiar with these policies and

the activities of these districts and will monitor their effect on the aquatic

preserve. For example, the field personnel might recommend identifying areas

that should not receive mosquito spraying or other alternative management

102

because of remoteness to inhabited areas and possible, but unnecessary damage

to the resources of the aquatic preserve; or drainage districts might be asked

not to use certain types of herbicides or to use them only at certain times of

the year.

E. Other Entities

This section will apply to the numerous entities that have an interest in the

aquatic preserve but are non-governmental agencies. This will include, but

not be limited to, the environmental interest groups (i.e., Audubon Society,

Sierra Club and Conservation Alliances), the scientific organizations, the

fishing and sports interest groups (i.e., Florida League of Anglers, Organized

Fishermen of Florida), the universities that may have research activities in

the preserve (i.e., Florida Tnstitute of Technology, University of Miami,

University of Florida,) and any other interest groups or individuals. The

relationship of these entities to aquatic preserve management might include
the coordination of activities, such as scientific research, environmental

education, management of rookeries or

other natural areas, or numerous other possible activities. A worthwhile

aquatic preserve management process will depend on the continued support and

help of these interest groups in all of the aquatic preserves. The field

personnel will be active in communicating the aquatic preserve management

process and activities to the various groups and consulting with them for

their help in their areas of expertise.

103

Chapter VII

PUBLIC USES

This chapter addresses the public use of the aquatic preserve. The public in

this case shall refer to the general public or those persons without riparian

rights. The "Florida Aquatic Preserve Act of 1975" (Section 258.35, F.S.)

allows for the lawful and traditional public uses of the aquatic preserve,

such as sport fishing, boating and swimming (as adapted from Section

258.43(l), F.S.). These and other traditional uses that do not involve a
commercial intent or the use of a riparian ri9ft to place a structure in the

preserve, and do not degrade or otherwise destroy the preserve will be con-

sidered public uses. This section will be further divided into consumptive

and non-consumptive use@ as applicable to each resource.

A. Consumptive Uses.

Consumptive uses involve the removal of resources from the preserve.

These uses include fishing, hunting, shellfishing, and other related

activities. They also include the unintentional removal of resources

such as propeller damage to grassbeds. The management of these uses

(see Chapter V. Resource Management, Section B: Onsite Management

Objectives) will include the observation and monitoring of the effects

of these uses on the resources. The field personnel will periodically

assess the impacts through the use of the Marine Research Laboratory's

LANDSAT capabilities for habitat losses or disturbance in the Indian

105

River Lagoon area plus any other studies or data sources that might

become available. This management will also include the protection of

the resources from unlawful or excess practices of these uses. The

legality of these uses will be controlled by existing applicable state

laws and local ordinances. Field personnel will, for example, become

familiar with and will enforce rules adopted by the Marine Fisheries

Commission. These will include regulations on fishing gear, bag and. size

limits, closed areas, seasons, etc.

Consumptive uses will also be monitored for their effect on other

resources (e.g., bird rookeries, marine grassbeds, oyster bars, archae-

ological and historical sites). The field personnel will also be

sensitive to additional enforcement needs (i.e., the need for additional

enforcement staff during nesting seasons).

B. Non-consumptive Uses.

These uses are those which do not generally remove resources from the

preserve. Examples of these uses include swimming, diving, boating,

bird-watching, and other related activities. The management pradtices

involved with these uses will be the same as those previously described

under Section A., except that these uses are not generally controlled by

law. The guiding principle in these cases will be whether or not the

activity causes a disruption of the preserves' resources (e.g., destroys

marine grassbeds, disturbs rookeries). Only in the event of these

disruptions will the field personnel become involved. Some of these uses

may possibly.be involved in environmental educational (Chapter XI)

programs.
106

Chapter VIII

PRIVATE NON-COMMERCIAL USES

This section will apply to those private, non-commercial, uses which are

derived from riparian rights (e.g., docks, piers). The management of the

aquatic preserve recognizes the rightful and traditional uses of those

near-shore sovereignty lands lying adjacent to upland property. This right of

ingres's, egress, boating, swimming, fishing, and other incidental uses of

sovereignty lands normally allows for the placement of certain structures,

such as docks, within the preserve. This right, however, can only be

exercised with the prior consent of the Board, and does not include approval

of activities that destroy or damage areas of environmental significance. The

review of these will require the interaction of the Resource Protection Area

mapping with administrative and possible field review and later monitoring by

field personnel as projected by Chapter V., Section B.

Private non-commercial uses shall be designed to avoid critical Resource

Protection Area (Class I and 2) and shall be designed to reduce the use's

impact to the preserve in general. Individual applications for these

private non-commercial uses shall be reviewed by the applicable Resource

107

Protection Area Map and criteria. In addition, private dock proposals will

be reviewed by the following criteria as to specific design and location:

a. private dock structures shall have a maximum width of 4 feet,

b. the dock decking design and construction will insure maximum light

penetration, with full consideration of safety and practicality,

c. the dock will extend out from the shoreline to a maximum depth of

4 feet (mean low water),

d. when the water depth is 4 feet at an existing bulkhead the maximum

dock length from the bulkhead shall be 25 feet, subject to

modificationseaccommodating shoreline vegetation overhang,

e. wave break devices, when necessary, shall be designed to allow for

maximum water circulation and shall be built in such a manner as to

be part of the dock structure.

f. maximum terminal platform size shall be 160 square feet, not

exceeding 8 feet in width.

g. maximum dock length of 500 feet or 20% of the subject waterbody,

whichever is less. I

h. Dredging to obtain navigable water depths is not

normally approved in conjunction with private dock applications.

i. Exceptions to these guidelines may be considered, but only upon

demonstration by the applicant that such exceptions are necessary to

ensure reasonable riparian ingress and egress.

j. The above criteria shall be modified by local zoning requirements if

found to be more restrictive.

Bulkheads should be placed, when allowed, in such a way as to be the least

destructive and disruptive to the vegetation and other resource factors in

108

each area. Approved uses which do disrupt or destroy resources on state-owned

lands will require mitigation. This mitigation will include restoration by

the applicant or other remedy which will compensate for@the loss of the

affected resource to the aquatic preserve.

Dredging within the aquc7tic preserve shall be held to a minimum. Dredging

proposals shall be reviewed according to the procedures in Chapter V depending

on the proposed activities location within the RPA. Proposals within Class I

areas (Chapter V (B)[6]) will be scrutinized to the maximum extent in order to

find the best practicable method of development and location if that use is

acceptable in that particular area of the preserve. The mitigation of lost or

disturbed resources shall be required. There shall be no dredging allowed in

Class 1 or 2 areas or in nearby areas if it will adversely impact these areas..

The location of proposed multiple docking facilities, such as for condominium

developments, shall be based on the marina siting criteria described in

Chapter IX, because their impact is generally the same as marinas. No

multiple docking facilities shall.be located in Class 1 or 2 resource

protection areas; provision for reasonable riparian ingress and egress shall

be specifically allowable. The multiple docking facility designation will

include any multiple docking facility for multiple unit developments,

subdivision facilities or other non-profit operation. In evaluating

applications for such facilities, the following criteria shall be utilized:

a. The preempted area of sovereignty submerged land shall not exceed

square footage amounting to ten times the waterfront footage of the

109

applicant, or the square footage attendant to providing a single

dock in accordance with the criteria for private single family

residential docks, whichever is greater;

b. Water depths adjacent'. to and within the facility shall insure that a

minimum of one foot of clearance is provided between the deepest

draft of a vessel and the bottom;

C. Dredging and/or filling in conjunction with the construction of the

docking facility and access cha nnel shall be prohibited in Class 1

or 2 res.ource protection areas, except as allowed pursuant to

Sections 258.42-44, F.S.

d. No dock shall extend waterward more than 500 feet or 20 percent of

the subject waterbody, whichever is less;

e. Main access docks and connecting or cross walks shall not exceed six-

feet in width;

f. Terminal platforms shall not exceed eight feet in width;

9. Finger piers shall not exceed three feet in width, and 25 feet in

length;

h. Pilings may be utilized as required to provide adequate mooring

capa bilities.

i. The Trustees may also stipulate the number, lengths, drafts and

types of vessels allowed to utilize the proposed facility.

j. Exceptions to these guidelines may be considered, but only upon

demonstration by the applicant that.such exceptions are necessary to

ensure reasonable riparian ingress and egress.

Authorization of such facilities will be conditioned upon receipt of

documentation evidencing the subordination of the riparian rights of ingress

110

and egress for the remainder of the applicant's shoreline for the life of the

proposed docking facility. Boat ramps and travel lift platforms or other

similar launching facilities, with as.sociated temporary mooring facilities,

will be encouraged over permanent wet storage facilities. Non-residential

docking facilities (commercial) are addressed in Chapter IX.

The use of seaplanes within this preserve is seen as a non-traditional use.

Applications for seaplane use within the preserve will be reviewed on a case

by case basis. These uses will only be recommended where such use will not

affect resource protection areas or natural values of the preserve, not effect

endangered species habitat, can be utilized in a safe manner, and will not

preempt traditional uses within the proposed use area.

CHAPTER IX

COMMERCIAL USES

This section addresses the variety of traditional and non-traditional (i.e.,

new uses to this area) commercial uses which might occur within the aquatic

preserve. Among the traditional uses in the Indian River area are utility

crossings, power plants, marinas and yacht clubs, commercial fishing, and
other types of boats (i.e., sportfishing, diving) for hire. Non-traditional

uses in this area which have also occurred in other areas of this or other

states include oil and gas transportation facilities, and other such

commercial uses.

A. TRADITIONAL COMMERCIAL USES.

1. Utility Crossings. There are at present time both aerial and

underwater utility crossings in the aquatic preserve. Future proposals should

be designed so the preserve is crossed by the least destructive method in the

least vulnerable areas according to the RPA maps (see Chapter VFBI).

Increased or additional use of any existing utility crossings is preferable,

if their condition at the time of the proposal is acceptable. The field

personnel should eventually develop a utility crossing plan for all areas with

anticipated utility crossing needs to allow for clear and advance planning,

for placement of these crossings in the best environmental location possible.

The utility crossing plans, when completed, will become a part of this plan.

113

Crossings should be limited to open water areas to minimize disturbance to

marine grassbeds, mangroves or other critical habitat areas.

2. Commercial Fishing. The management of the aquatic preserve shall

not include the direct management of commercial fishing activities. Field

personnel will monitor these activities and assess their affects on the

preserve only in conjunction with the Division of Marine Resources and as part

of a cooperative effort with that division. The field personnel will also

notify the requisite authority in the event of illegal activities (Chapter

370, F. S. or by special act). The field personnel, along with other agencies

and divisions' programs and studies, will monitor fishing activities within

the aquatic preserve with respect to the need to manage access of boats in

certain areas, prevention of marine grassbed destruction and other needs of

the aquatic preserve as they are associated with commercial fishing

activities. After problems associated with commercial fishing activities are

identified and documented, the findings will be presented to the Marine

Fisheries Commission. It is the authority of the Commission and the Florida

Legislature to regulate commercial fishing within the aquatic preserve.

3. Marinas. The locating of marinas and their related uses will be a

major concern of the Indian River Aquatic Preserves management. Marinas

represent a use with many potential impacts on the preserve's resources. The

siting policy of the Blue Ribbon Marina Committee (Final Report-January,

1983), as adopted by the Governor and Cabinet, is modified and shall be used

for siting mari.nas in the aquatic preserve. This policy will be that:.

1-14

a. marinas shall only be located in or near well flushed, deep

water areas,

b. the design of the marina should not rely on dredge or fill

activities in Class 1 or 2 resource protection areas, except as

allowed pursuant to Sections 258.42-44, F.S.,

C. the marina shall not be located in Class 1 or 2 resource

protection areas, except for provision of required riparian

ingress and egress through shoreline vegetation,

d. the site location shall also take into account the access of

the boat traffic to avoid marine grassbeds in the surrounding

areas,

e. the location of new facilities within the preserve shall be

secondary to the expansion of existing facilities within the

preserve,

f. the location of new facilities and expansion of existing

facilities shall consider-the use of upland dry storage as an

alternative to multiple wet slip docking,

g. new facilities shall be discouraged in any previously

undisturbed location within the boundaries of the preserve and

shall be allowed only in Class 3 resource areas, and then only

where the local governments have a marina element and after

careful review and approval by the Board,

h. marinas should be specifically sited outside state designated

manatee sanctuaries and ingress and egress channels shall be

posted with appropriate speed limits,

i. field personnel will work with local governments (see Chapter

115

VI) on location of marinas close to demand areas and in areas

with sufficient uplands to support activity needs, and

j. field personnel will work with local government in finding

marina sites that meet the above policies and that are

protected from hurricanes,
4. Deep Water Port Facilities." The only port of this type within the

Indian River Lagoon is the Port of Fort Pierce which is not wit hin either

aquatic preserve. Although activities within this port facility are outside

the preserves, they will effect the preserves. New activities and maintenance

work will be reviewed as to their effect on the preserves. New port

facilities within the preserve boundary shall be prohibited.

5. Other Docking. Any other type of commercial docking, not mentioned

in the preceding sections, will follow the marina siting policy as stated in

Section A(3) of this Chapter.

6. Power Plants. The St. Lucie Power Plant is located on Hutchinson

Island halfway between Fort Pierce and Stuart. The primary intake and

discharge for the plant cooling system is to the Atlantic Ocean. However,

'there is an emergency cooling canal connected to Big Mud Creek and the Indian

River. Normal operating activities do not apparently effect the Indian River

Lagoon. Emergency situations have major impact potentials.

Power plants have the potential for causing major changes in the air quality,
water quality, and plant and animal life of the aquatic preserve. For these

reasons, additional power plants are incompatible with the purposes of this

116

aquatic preserve. The location of proposed power plants upstream of a

preserve should also be evaluated as to the effects on the downstream

preserve.

B. Non-traditional Commercial Uses

1. Other Uses. Any other use that qualifies as a commercial use of

state-owned submerged lands not mentioned above will require a review for its

anticipated impact on the aquatic preserve and the best location for the

activity compatible to the resource protection areas within the preserve.

2. Aquaculture The Indian River area could potentially have proposals

for aquacultural development in the future. These uses may include floating

structures or other new techniques now being used in aquaculture. The

location and type of impacts to the resources will require careful exam-

ination. If there is not sufficient data available for a valid evaluation, a

small scale test of the use might be possible in a selected area.

117

CHAPTER X

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

The field personnel attached to the Indian River Aquatic Preserve should serve

as the area coordinators of scientific research in the preserves. Scientific

research, and any other type of research or testing within the aquatic

preserve, should require the clearance of both the field personnel and the

central office staff before these activities can proceed. Certain activities

could be detrimental to the resources of the preserve and should be carefully

rpviewed before allowing them to occur. Factors including location, species

procedures, and time of year, should be carefully reviewed for the possible

disturbance or effect of the research on the other resources of the aquatic

preserve. The field personnel will be aware of the possibility of working

with other government agencies, colleges, universities, research foundations

and government programs to fill the data needs of the aquatic preserve (see

Chapter V and XII). The field personnel will assist in the selection of

possible test sites and other research needs within the preserve.

119

CHAPTER X!

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

The aquatic preserve should be used to enhance environmental educational

programs at every opportunity. The goal of maintaining the aquatic preserve

for the benefit of future generations can begin to be realized through the use

of aquatic preserves for environmental education. Through education, the

youth of Indian River, Martin, Palm Beach and St. Lucie Counties can acquire a-

knowledge of the natural systems and an appreciation for the aquatic preserve

program. Such appreciation helps to ensure the future protection and support

of the aquatic preserves.

The field personnel will, through their normal activities in the aquatic

preserve, select good examples of habitats and resources within these aquatic

environments for use during educational group tours. This might include the

development of environmental educational boat or canoe tours through the

preserves. Other educational activities might also include prepared

presentations for specific interest or user groups such as sport (boating,

diving, fishing, etc.), civic and conservation groups and the development of a

brochure outlining the major points of management within the preserve. These

brochures could then be circulated to the various user groups.

121

The field personnel should also prepare programs on the value of management

activities of the aquatic preserve for presentation to interested groups of

all ages. Educating the public-about aquatic preserve management is the key

to the success and future of the preserve.

122

CHAPTER XII

IDENTIFIED PROGRAM NEEDS

This chapter of the management plan will address the various internal program

needs that are expected to be identified during management activities.

Meeting these needs will correct or generally relieve some stress on the

preserve or the personnel involved in the management of the aquatic preserve.

These needs may, in some cases, require legislative or administrative rule

changes or acquisition of critical areas by the state. The need to identify

problem areas and adjust the management plan in a manner that will positively

address these problems and management needs is an essential element of any

good management* program. Both field personnel and central office staff will

continually monitor the management plan implementation process and specifi-

cally identify observed program needs and problems. The areas to be

considered include, but are not limited to:

A. acquisition of additional property,

B. boundary problems,

C. legislative needs,

D. administrative rule changes,

E. data needs,

F. resource protection capabilities, and

G. funding and staffing needs.

123

Staff will annually develop an implementation status report that will contain

a summary of identified management needs and suggested measures to be taken in

meeting these needs.

A. Acquisition of Additional Property

There are areas both within and upland of the aquatic preserve that are in

public ownership under the jurisdiction of various local, state and federal

agencies.. Many of these lands contain important resources, such as bird

.rookeries, archaeological or historical sites, endangered species habitat, and

freshwater source wetlands. The protection of these areas is necessary to the

wilderness preserve designation areas. Formal management agreements,

memoranda of understanding', etc., that will ensure the compatible management

of these areas will be developed. Other areas within or adjacent to the

preserve that are in private ownership should be closely examined to determine

the advisability of bringing them into public ownership. The acquisition of

these lands might act as a buffer to critical resources, prevent development

of sensitive areas, allow the restoration of areas adversely affected by

previous development or allow removal of disrupting uses within a preserve.

The field personnel, during normal management activities, should be aware of

significant upland areas and sovereign land conveyances which, if developed,

would compromise the integrity of the aquatic preserve. The field personnel

will keep a running record of these areas a nd will prioritize these areas for

possible public acquisition.

124

B. Boundary Problems and Systems Insufficiencies

The boundaries of the aquatic preserve are often artificial delineations of

the natural systems within and surrounding the preserves. A variety of

scientific studies are presently being conducted both within and outside of

the preserve boundaries, and their results could conceivably suggest a change

in these boundaries. These changes may include the extension of the present

boundaries in some areas or the exclusion of other areas. The field

personnel, in their normal management activities, will be sensitive to the

possible need for boundary modifications. Potential boundary changes and

acquisition projects might include areas upstream of the present boundary in

the streams flowing into the preserves, previously conveyed sovereign lands,

or other areas not presently within the preserve. Any boundary changewill

require legislative approval.

An initial consideration for boundarv modification is to extend the southern

.boundary of the Vero Beach to Fort Pierce Aquatic Preserve to include

productive grassbeds north of Fort Pierce Inlet and east of the Intracoastal

Waterway. Another consideration would be the possible future addition of the

inlets to the aquatic preserve boundary area.

C. Legislative Needs

Management needs could conceivably involve changes in the legislation

pertaining to aquatic preserve or changes in the other statutes upon which

125

aquatic preserve management is based. These changes may include boundary

realignments or the strengthening of certain management authorities.

D. Administrative Rule Changes

Administrative rules are statements addressing-the organization, procedures

and practices used in the implementation of aquatic preserve management plans

and policies. This process includes identifying problems within the

Oepartment of Natural Resources, as well as other agencies, that affect the

management of-the preserve.

E. Data (information) Needs

The field personnel and central office staff will note data needs and promote

research or other means to fulfill them. Data needs in the near future could

possibly be supplied by such ongoing projects as the U.S. Geological Survey's

and South Florida Water Management District's studies, Department of

Environmental Regulation water quality monitoring or by the research of other

agencies. The field personnel will be aware of data needs as they interact

with the various levels of government and with other entities. These data

needs might include additional mapping, ownership information, water quality

data or any other data. The major suppliers of data will probably be other

public agencies that are conducting programs in and around the preserve.

Other potential sources of data are the colleges and universities that have,

in the past, conducted research projects in the area.

126

F. Resource Protection and Enforcement Capabilities

The protection of the preserve's resources depends on the Florida Marine

Patrol, in addition to field personnel. These protection needs might also

require additional enforcement support from local government or other state

agencies. The need for additional nanpower, authority, equipment,or vehicles

for this task will be identified.

The field personnel will become familiar with the staff capabilities of both

the Department of Natural Resources and the other agencies with enforcement

responsibilities in the preserve. Annually, staff should fully assess the

effectiveness of the protective and enforcement capabilities of these combined

agencies.

G. Funding and Staffing Needs

The present aquatic preserve management program has been minimally implemented

with funds from a variety of sources and programs. The writing of this

management plan was funded through a grant from the U. S. Office of Coastal

Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and through

the "Co.astal Zone Management Act of 1972", as amended. This grant will end in

1984.

In order for the management program proposed in this plan to function and

succeed, the program must have its own funding and staffing. The workload

required by this program is too much for an interim staff from other agencies

127

to handle in addition to their other obligations. Funding and staffing needs

are critically important to the success of the aquatic preserve program.

The management of Tndian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves would be integrated

into the management program and needs of other BELM management programs in the

area. This preserve's management would be combined with two other aquatic

preserves (North Fork-St. Lucie and assistance to Loxahatchee River-Lake Worth

Creek). A proposed budget given these needs has been estimated at $150,000

for staff, equipment, office and expenses for the first year. The proposed

staff would include two biologists and one ranger.

128

INDIAN RIVER LAGOON AOUATIC PRESERVE

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Almasi, M.N. Halocene Sediments and Evolution of the Indian River (Atlantic
Coast of Florida). Ph.D Dissertation, Universitv of Miami_.@l 8@3.

Barnett, B.S., R.T. Fernald, A. Goetzfried and S.R. Lau. The Fish and
Wildlife Resources of the Charlotte Harbor Area. Office of Env'lronmental
Services,77-orida Game and Fresh Water Fish ComFission, Vero Beach,
Florida. 1980.

Becker, Linda J. A Pictorial Key and Annotated Species List of the Mantis
Shrimp of the Indian River Region of Florida. (Crustacea, StomatopoTa-).
Harbor Branch Foundation, Inc:, Tech. Rep. 9. Ft. Piercej Florida,
pp. 1976.

Bidlingmayer, W.L.,and E.D. McCoy. An Inventory of the Saltmarsh Mosquito
Control Impoundments in Floridi-.Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory.
Vero Beach,-Florida, 1978.

Benz, M.C., N.J. Eiseman, and E.E. Gallaher. "Seasonal occurrence and
variation in standing crop of the drift algal community in the Indian
River, Florida". Botanica Marina 22:413-420, 1979.

Clements, R.W. and A.J. Rogers. "Studies of impounding for the control of
salt-marsh mosquitos in Florida, 1958-1963". Mosquito News
24(3):265-276. 1964

Dickinson, Jonathan. Jonathan Dickinson's Journal, Ed. by Andrews, E. W. and
Charles Andrews. 109 Pp_ 1969.

Eiseman, N.J. An Illustrated Guide to the Sea Grasses 9f the Indian River
Region of Florida. Harbor Branch Foundation, Inc. Tech. Rep. 31. Ft.
Pierce, Florida. 24 pp. 1980.

Eiseman, N.J. and M.C. Benz. Marine Algae of the Indian River. 1. Species
_2
ril 19
of the algal drift commun@itv collected from April 1974 to Ap 75.
Harbor Branch Foundation, Inc. Tech. Rep. 1. Ft. Pierce, Florida. 17
pp. 1975.

Eiseman, N.J. and C. McMillan. "A new species of seagrass, Halophila
T
johnsonii, from the Atlantic coast of Florida." Aquat. o-t.9-15-19.
1980.

Federico, Anthony C. Upper East Coast Water Ouality Studies. South Florida
Water Management District, Technical Publication 83-1. 99 pp. 1983.

Fernald, R.T., B.S. Barnett, A. Goetzfried, S.R. Lau. The Sebastian
Tnlet--Ft. Pierce Inlet Barrier Island. A Profile@ -ofNatur-al
Communities, Development Trends, and Resource Management Guidelines.
Office of Environm-ental Services. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission, Vero Beach, Florida. 139 pp. 1982.

129

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Forestry.
Coastal Plants of Florida: A Key to Good Land Management. January, 1979.

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Endangered and Threatened
Species Management and Conservation Plan 1984 Update and Progress Report.
34 pp., 1984.

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Endangered and Potentially
Endangered Fauna and Flora in Florida. 14 pp. 1984.

Florida Oceanographic Society. Coastal Zone Management Study of Hutchinson
Island. Martin County, Florida. 163 pp. 1982.

Gilmore, R. Grant. Fishes of the Indian River Lagoon, Florida. Harbor Branch
Foundation, Inc. Tech. Rep. 41. Ft. Pierce, Florida. 36 p. 1981.

Gore, R.H., E.E. Gallaher, L.E. Scotto, and K.A. Wilson. "Studies of
decapod Crustacea. from the Indian River region of Florida: XI. Community
composition, structure, biomass, and species-areal relationships of
seagrass and drift algae-associated macrocrustaceans." Estuarine,
Coastal and Shelf Science 12:485-508. 1981.

Hall, M.O. and N.J. Eiseman. "The seagrass epiphytes of the Indian River,
Florida. 1. Species list with descriptions and seasonal occurrence."
Botanica Marina. 24:139-146, 1981.

Heald, E.J. and William E. Odum. "The Contributions of Mangrove Swamps to
Florida Estuaries." Proceedings of the Gulf Caribbean Fish Institute,
Vol. 22, 1970.

Hellier, Walter R. Indian River Florida's Treasure Coast. Hurricane House,
Publishers, Inc. Coconut Grove, Florida. 128 pp. 1965

Indian River County, Community Development Department. Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan. 122 pp. 1982.

Indian River County. Spoil Island Study: Indian River County, Florida. 86
pp. 1980.

Kulczycki, G.R., R.W. Virnstein, and W.G. Nelson. "The relationship between
fish abundance and algal biomass in a seagrass - drift alqae community."
Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 12:341-347. 1981.

MacVicar, Thomas K. Rainfall Averages and Selected Extremes for Central and
South Florida. @_outh Florida Water Management District. Technical
T_-2. 31 pp. 1983.
Publication 3

Mahoney, Ronald K. and R. A. Gibson. "Phytoplankton ecology of the Indian
River near Vero Beach, Florida." Florida Scientist 46(3-4): 212-232.
1983.

130

Mahoney, Ronald K. and R. A. Gibson. "A checklist of the phytoplankton species
of the Indian River, Florida near Vero Beach." Florida Scientist
46(3-4): 206-211. 1983.

Martin Count , Local Planning Agency. Martin County Comprehensive Plan.
y
167 pp. 1982.

Miley, Charles S. Miley's Memos. Indian River Community College Historical
Data Center. Ft. Pierce, Florida. 114 pp. 1980.

Mook, David. "Indian River fouling organisms, a review." Florida Scientist
460-4): 162-167. 1983.

Odum, Howard T. "Tropical Marine Meadows." Coastal Ecological Systems of the
United States. Vol. I Odum, H. T., D. J. Copeland, and E. A. McMahan,
eds., Conservation Foundation, Washington, D. C., 1974.

Odum, William E., Carole C. McIvor and Thomas J. Smith, III. The Ecology of
the Mangroves of South Florida: A Community Profile. U. S. Fish and
T4-ildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, D.C.
FWS/OBS-81/24. 144 pp. 1982.

Provost, M.W. Managing Impounded Salt Marsh for Mosquito Control and
Estuarine Resource Conservation. In Proceedings of the 0-671-SU Marsh
and Estuary Symposium. 163 pp-. 1967.

Provost, M.W . Salt Marsh Manacement in Florida. In Proceedings of the 1973
Tall Timbers Conference on Ecological T-himal 7ontrol by Habitat
Manaqement. Tall Timbers Research Station. Tallahassee, Florida. 5-17
pp. 1974 b.

Provost, M.W. "Tidal Datum Planes Circumscribing Salt Marshes". Bull Marine
Science. 26(4):558-563. 1976.

Rights, L. Notes From the Saint Lucie County Historical Commission. 1982
1
Rouse, Trving. A Survey of the Indian River Archeology, Florida. Yale
University Publications in Anthropology. NumEer 44. Yale University
Press. 263 pp. 1951.

Saint Lucie County, Planning/Design Group. St. Lucie County Growth Management
Policy Plan. 105 pp. 1981.

Savage, Thomas. Florida Mangroves as Shoreline Stabilizers. Florida
Department of Natural Resources. Professional Paper No. 19, 1972.

Tabb, D.C., R.G. Rehrer, P. Larsen, S. Berkely, E.J. Heald, M.A. Roessler and
T.R. Alexander. Ecological Tnventory of Coastal Waters and Adjacent
Uplands of Lee County, Florida in the Vicinity of the Estero Say Plarine
Preserve. University of Miami, RSM-AS 74-75013 (Appendix A). June, 1974.

Tabea-u, C.lq. A History of Florida. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables,
Florida. 507 -pp. 1972.
131

Thompson, M.J. 'Photomapping and species composition of the seagrass beds in
Florida's Indian River estuary. Harbor Branch Foundation, Inc. Tech.
Rep. 10. Ft. Pierce, Florida. 35 pp. 1976.

Thompson, Ralph B. (Editor). Florida Statistical Abstract. University
Presses of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 19"8-1.
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. toastal Zone Management Interim
Goals, Objectives and Policies for the Treasure Coast Region. Stuart,
Florida, 177-8-.

Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. Regional Profile Update Treasure
Coast Region. Stuart, Florida, 1979.

U. S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic Coast
Ecological Tnventory - User's Guide and Information Base. September,
1980.

U. S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic Coast
Ecological Inventory Map. Ft. Pierce, Florida, 1980.

U. S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States.. 1979-.-

Virnstein, R.W. and R.K. Howard. "The mobile epifauna of marine macrophytes
in the Indian River lagoon, Florida. II. Comparisons between drift algae
and three species of seagrasses." In Press. 1984.

von Zweck, 0., and G. Adragna. Physical Oceanographic Studies of the Indian
River Reqion. In Indian River Coastal Zone Study Annual Report for
1975-76. 1:70-2T. Harbor Branch Consortium. Ft. Pierce, Florida. 187
pp. 1976.

von Zweck, 0., and D. Richardson. Physical Oceanographic Studies of the
Indian River Region. In Indian River Coastal Zone Study AnnuaT -Report
for 1974-1975. Harbor@--Branch Consortium. Ft. Pierce, Florida. 1:3-13.
1975.

Wilcox, J.R., and R.G. Gilmore. Some Hydrological Data From the Tndian
River Between Sebastian and St. Lucie InIeFs-, Torida: January 1972
-F-
February 1975. Harbor Branch Foundation, Inc. Tech. Rep. 17. t.
Pierce, Florida, 104 pp. 1977.

Wilcox, W.A. Commercial Fisheries of Indian River, Florida. In U.S.
Commission Fish and Fisheries Report of the Commissi r.-U.S
Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C. 22:249-262. 18@7.

Wood, E.J.F., William E. Odum, and Joseph C. Zieman. "Influence of
Seagrasses on the Productivity of Coastal Lagoons." Mem. Simp. Inter.
Lagunas Consteras, UNAM-UNESCO, 1969.

132

Young, David K., Martin A. Buzas and Mlartha 14. Young. "Species densities of
macrobenthos associated with seagrass: a field experimental study of
predation." Journal of Marine Research 34(4):577-59.9. 1976.

Young, navid R. Indian-River Coastal Zone Study - First Annual Report.
A report on research and progress October 1973 - October 1974. Vol. I
and II. Harbor Branch Consortium. 1974.

Young, David R. Indian River Coastal Zone Study - Second Annual Report.
A report on research and progress October 1974 - October 1975. Vol. I
and II. Harbor Branch Consortium. 1975.

Young, David R. Indian River Coastal Zone Study - Third Annual Report.
A report on research and progress October 1975 - October 1976. Vol. I
and II. Harbor Branch Consortium. 1976.

Zieman, Josheph C. The Ecology of the Seagrasses of South Florida: A
Community ProfiTe. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, OffiE-e 'ofBiological
Services, Washing n, D.C. FWS/OBS-82/25. 158 pp. 1982.

133

CONTENTS OF APPENDICES

Appendix A. Management Authorities

All laws, rules, memoranda of understanding, and other

directives mentioned or related to in the Plan.

Appendix B. References

Pertinent References; basis for formulation of Plan USGS

Bibliography

Appendix C. Resource Data

Resource Inventories for each preserve

DOT Vegetation and Land Use Acreages by quad and preserve

Species Lists

Streams and Lakes data

Colonial Waterbird Areas

Water Quality: STORET

Archaeological Profiles

Cultural Information (Population, etc.)

Appendix D: Maps

Map Packet: by quad size for each quad in the preserve areas

[JSGS 7.5 Minute quadrangle topographic maps

135

Contents of Appendices (continued)

Appendix D: Maps (Con't)

Mark Hurd Aerial Photography (73-79)

Flood-prone (USGS)

State-Owned Lands Maps

National Wetland Inventory Maps

Gulf Coast Ecological Inventory (1:250,000 scale)

Shellfish Atlas for Indian River, Martin, Palm Beach and St. Lucie

Counties

CV1 Maps--Indian River, Martin, Palm Beach and St. Lucie Counties

Navigation Charts

DOT County Maps--Martin and Palm Beach Counties

136

3 6668 14101 8350