Aquatic preserve management plan Florida Keys

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

F L 0 R I D AKEYS MON ROE COUNTY
LAQUATIC PRESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN

FEBRUARY 5, 1935

The Department of Natural Resources

F L 0 R I D A K E Y S-MON ROE COUNTY

A Q U A T I C P R E S E R VE MANAGEMENT PLAN

FOR
PRQPOSED FLORIDA KEYS-MONROE COUNTY AQUATIC PRESERVE

Dr. Elton J. Gissendanner

Executive Director

Department of Natural Resources

Division of Recreation and Parks

Bureau of Environmental Land Management

STATE OF FLORIDA

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND

R E S 0 L H T 1 0 N

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

charged 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

WHEREAS, the Trustees are charged with the adoption and enforcement of

reasonable rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of Sections

258.35 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 16Q-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 preserve; and

WHEREAS, the Trustees recognize the importance and benefits of protecting

the natural resources and preserving the natural ecosystems of the aquatic

preserves in the Florida Keys-Monroe County area, and

WHEREAS, the Trustees have formally designated the Florida KeYs-rlonroe

County area as an aquatic preserve, subject to Legislative confirmation, and

Page I of three

WHEREAS, Chapter 84-312, Laws of Florida, directs the Department of

Platural Resources to develop a management plan for the Florida Keys-Monroe

County, specifically addressing preferred management boundaries, and transmit

same to the Governor and Legislature, and

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Internal

Improvement Trust Fund hereby adopts the Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic

Preserve Management Plan; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Trustees designate the Florida Keys-

Monroe County Aquatic Preserve as predominately a "wilderness" preserve,

wherein the primary management objective will be the maintenance of the

ecosystems in an essentially natural state; with smaller enclaves of urbanized

development categorized as "Urban", wherein management will emphasize natural

systems restoration; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic

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

Trustees and other state and local agencies having jurisdiction relative to

maintaining the Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic Preserve 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 Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic Preserve; and

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

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

Purposes of aquatic preserve planning and management.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF THE Board of Trustees of the internal improvement

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

Page ? of three

Seal 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 5th

day of February A.D., 19Pjr.

Governor

Secretary of State

Commissioner of Educatiol rney General

Commissioner of Agriculture Comptroller

As and Constituting the State of 17t@t
Florida Board of Trustees of the Treasurer

Internal Improvement Trust Fund

Page 3 of three

TABLE OF CONTENTS

,.,hapter

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

II. MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY .......................................... 5

;Ill. MAJOR PROGRAM POLICY DIRECTIVES ............................... 17

IV. RESOURCE DESCRIPTION .......................................... 21

A. Geologic Features and Landforms ........................... 25

B. Community Associations .................................... 35

C. Archaeological and Historical Sites ....................... 78

D. Water Resources ........................................... 84

Cultural .................................................. 86

V. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ........................................... 89

A. Introduction .............................................. 89

R. Onsite Management Objectives .............................. 89

C. Resource Mapping and Resource Protection Areas ............ 112

0. Administrative Management Objectives ...................... 114

VI. MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION NETWORK ............................ 123

A. Federal ................................................... 123

8. State ..................................................... 127

C. Regional .................................................. 134

D. Local Governments and Special Districts ................... 136

E. Other Entities ............................................ 141

Table of Contents (Continued)

CHAPTER Page

VII. PUBLIC USES ................................................... 143

A. Consumptive Uses ........................................... 1431

B. Non-Consumptive Uses ......................... 0 ........ * .... 144

VIII. PRIVATE NON-COMMERCIAL USES ................................... 147

IX. COMMERCIAL USES ............................................... 153

A. Traditional Commercial Uses ............................... 153

B. Non-Traditional Commercial Uses ........................... 158

X. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ........................................... 161

XT. ENVIROMMENTAL EDUCATION ....................................... 165

XII. IDENTIFTED PROGRAM NEEDS ...................................... 167

A. Acquisition of Additional Property ........................ 168

B. Boundary Problems and Systems Insufficiences .............. 169

C. Legislative Needs ......................................... 170

D. Administrative Rule Changes ............................... 170

E. Data (Information) Needs .................................. 170

F. Resource Protection and Enforcement Capabilities .......... 171

G. Funding and Staffing Needs ................................. 172
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................ A-1

CONTENTS OF APPENDICES ............................................... B-1

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

This plan addresses the management of the Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic

Preserve (Map A) as specified by the April 19, 1984 resolution by the Board of

Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund. The scope and boundaries of

that resolution have been studied and modified, as necessary, under the man-

date set forth in Chapter 84-312, Laws of Florida as passed by the 1984

Florida Legislature.

The Florida- Keys have long been an area of state, regional and national

attention. The line of islands from Key Largo to Key Yes" "With their mild

tropical climate, crystal clear water, coral reefs and abundant fishing, well

deserve this unique distinction. The Keys are also a graphic example of how a

tremendous resource can be destroyed by massive, and sometimes uncontrolled,

development. The many fine attributes that attract over a nillion tourists a

year (some of whom later establish permanent residences have been and are

being degraded.

The designation of the Florida Keys as an aquatic preserve will apply to

state-owned submerged lands within the boundary area. The area of this

preserve is approximately 930,000 acres or 1,453 square miles. The boundary

line along privately owned riparian lands will be at high waterline.

This plan is designed and written on the premise that these lands are held in

trust by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund
(Governor and Cabinet) for the benefit of present and future generations of

state citizens. In this respect, given the past designation of the Florida
Keys as an Area of Critical State Concern and the continuing degradation of
this area's natural resources, this area should be designated an aquatic

preserve.

The plan is based on the authority to manage those above noted submerged lands

and the natural resources on and over those lands. The credible management of

these lands requires the identification of problems and sources of problems

that are not within the realm of this program's authority. The basis of this

management program is to manage those lands and resources directly under its

authority, cooperate with other agencies' programs to correct problems and

needs and identify the need for new programs where no present agency or

program exists.

The Florida Keys represent an area of more diversified natural resources and

human interactions than in any other area of the state, The shoreline types,

for example, range from mangrove lined to rocky shoreline to sandy beach. The

coral community and its interactions with other communities have many diverse

variations and structures. Geology, bottom sediments, zoogeography of species

(bay vs. ocean) and many other facts make the Florida Keys a unique environ-

ment.

The Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic Preserve as described within this plan

is designated a wilderness preserve, with significant urban areas within the

overall area designated as urban preserves. The major overall wilderness

preserve area will be managed to emphasize maintenance and enhancement of

existing conditions, while management in the smaller urban preserve areas will

emphasize the restoration of natural conditions where possible. The urban

preserve areas are aquatic preserve designations and are not to be confused

with Monroe County urban upland designations.

The onsite staff resources necessary for the management program are identified

in Chapter XII (G) Funding and Staffing Needs. The program as described will

fill the minimum need for active management in the preserve and should provide

the framework for future management needs. 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 will also be supported by the local

Florida Park Service, Division of Recreation and Parks, Florida Marine Patrol

and other local Bureau of Environmental Land Management staff, when available.

The Resource Description section will identify resource and habitat types or

communities that are the major components of the Florida Keys natural envi-

ronment as it exists today. Background data, journals, books, maps and all

other material used to produce and support this plan are identified in the

Bibliography or Appendices. The Resource Protection Area mapping is described
in Chapter V(I)(C) and will also be maintained separately in the Appendices.

Appendices and Resource Protection Area mapping will be placed in permanent

office facilities after they are established in the Keys. These appendices

and maps will be maintained as open files to update as additional data becomes

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 accom
modate such changes'or at least identify areas needing improvement.

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

Chapter 11 cites the authorities upon which this management program and plan
are built. Chapter TH (Major Program Policy Directives) highlights the major

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

descrip-tion and references the appendices which contain more detailed informa-

tion 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, respectively.

Chapter XII is an internal management improvement section identifying problems

and needs in the progressive improvement of this aquatic preserve management

plan.

Chapter II

MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

The Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic Preserve was approved by resolution on

April 19, 1984 by the Governor and Cabinet, sitting as the Board of Trustees

of the Internal Improvement Fund. The Preserve was not confirmed by the 1984

Florida Legislature as required under Section 258.41, Florida Statutes (F.S.).

The Legislature did direct the Department of Natural Resources to review the

boundaries.of that original preserve and to prepare this management plan, to

hold public meetings in the Florida Keys and prepare a report on its findings

and recommendations to be submitted to the Governor, Speaker of the House, and

President of the Senate (Chapter 84-312, Laws of Florida).

BOUNDARY AREA AND DESIGNATION

The initial boundary configuration approved by the Trustees' April 19, 1984

Resolution included all the state-owned submerged lands within Monroe County,

with the exception of those lands within the Everglades National Park. The.

Legislature directed the Department to review the boundaries of the above

proposed aquatic preserve.

The Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic Preserve will be designated a wilder-

ness preserve. Areas of urban buildup within this overall designation will be

small urban preserve sections. These small urban areas include all or parts

of Ocean Reef, Key Largo, Rock Harbor-, Tavernier, Windley Key, Islamorada,
Plantation, Lower Matecombe Key, Layton, Conch Key, Duck Key, Marathon, Big
Pine Key, Little Torch Key, Ramrod Key, Summerland Key, Cudjoe Key, Sugarloaf
Key, Saddlebunch Key, Boca Chica Key and Key West (Map A).

The management emphasis in the wilderness portions of the preserve will' be

toward maintaining and enhancing the existing natural condition. The emphasis

in the small urban sections will be aimed at restoring and enhancing the

existing condition toward a natural condition, as much as possible.

AQUATIC PRESERVE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

The primary management authorities available to the staff for implementing

management directives affecting aquatic preserves are found in Chapters 258

and 253, F.S. These authorities clearly establish the proprietary management

overview role of the Trustees. 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) are 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 2_58, F.S.

Formal review comments are provided to the Department of Natural Resources

(ONR), 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 governmental 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

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

original recommendation.

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

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 passed

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 of the St. Lucie River 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

gui'dance 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 DNR's/Trustee's actions

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

specifically. Chapter 16Q-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 pu6lic 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 preserves 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 manaced 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 applicable 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

restoration of the biological, aesthetic,

or scientific values of the preserves, including

but.nof limited to the modification of existing

manmade conditions toward their natural condition,

an d 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, which concern fisheries and marine mammal management and

protection 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 10-59, F.S. or the

Conservation and Recreation Lands Program authorized by 275,J, F.will

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

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

governs, in part, the State's regulatory programs affecting water-quality.

The Department of Environmental Regulation (DER), through a permitting and

certification process, administers this program. Section 253.7 as

amended by the Warren S. Henderson Wetlands Protection Act 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 the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and DER provides

an avenue for staff comments on potential environmental impacts of Projects in

aquatic preserves through the DER permitting process. Additionally, the DER

has designated, by administrative rule, a series of waterbodies with stringent

use criteria called "Outstanding 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 Florida Keys 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, 17-4, and 17-12, F.A.C. These 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 and 17-12, F.A.C. address

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 more 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 public

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 preserve resources. 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 administra-

tive 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 poli-cy

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.

(D) 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, corals and other valuable submerged

habitat, unless a prior determination has been made by the Board of

overrding 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.

Prohibit the drilling of oil and gas wells, the mining of minerals, and

dredging or the primary purpose of obtaining upland fill within the

aquatic preserve.

(J) 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.

Prohibit storage of toxic, radioactive, or other hazardous materials

within the aquatic preserve.

(L) 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.

N Limit pesticide and biocide use within the aquatic preserve to those that

are approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for wetland and-

aquatic application.

(N) Prohibit the construction of new deep water ports within the aquatic

preserve boundaries.

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

environmentally fragile 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 management mechanism

that recognizes and utilizes local government programs and authorities.

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

the maintenance of the naturally high water quality of the Florida Keys.

(T) Formally recognize and designate the Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic

Preserve as a wilderness preserve with smaller urban preserve sections as

noted in Chapter II and as delineated in Map A in accordance with the

provisions of Section 16Q-20.13(d), F.A.C.

(U) Apply the management criteria contained in the adopted Florida Keys

Monroe County Aquatic Preserve 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 plan, 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 1 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.

(Y) Allow special consideration for a commercial fishing village or zone

concept.

Chapter IV

RESOURCE DESCRIPTION

The archipelago that comprises the Florida Keys represents a truly unique

region in Florida and the United States. This island chain separates Florida

Bay and the Gulf of Mexico from the Atlantic Ocean. Numerous channels between

island groups facilitate tidal exchange between the waterbodies.

The elevation of most of the keys is just above the mean high tide line so

there is extensive mangrove growth, especially along shorelines on the Gulf of

Mexico and Florida Ba . Mangroves protect shorelines from erosion, particu-
y

larly during storms, and provide habitat for many invertebrates and fishes.

Sand beaches in the Keys are few and scattered.

Higher elevations support the growth of pinelands and tropical hammocks and

such associated endangered animal species as the Key Vaca raccoon, Key deer,

and Key Largo woodrat.

Probably the most di-stinguishing feature of this area is the band of living

reefs located seaward of and parallel to the Keys toward the Straits of

Florida. Several different types of reef formations occur at varying water

depths. The coral assemblages and the hundreds of associated species of

invertebrates and fishes are fourio rowhere else in the United States. The

coral reefs make tourism and recreation a major factor in the local and

regional economy.

The relatively stable subtropical climate makes the Keys home for a variety of

plants and animals that depend on very specific conditions available only in

highly differentiated habitats such as the coral reef and tropical hardwood

hammock (Schomer and Drew, 1982). Due to indiscriminate development practices

and water quality degradation, many plant and animal populations are declin-

ing. In this area forty-four species of plants and sixty-nine animal species

in both terrestrial and aquatic communities are currently classified as

endangered, threatened, or of special concern.

The tropical ecosystems of the Keys are naturally subjected to the stresses of

wind and water damage from tropical storms and hurricanes. Damage to the

natural communities from these forces can be quite severe. It is the manmade

encroachments, however, that contribute continual stress in the form of water

quality degradation (via improper use of septic tanks, storm water runoff,

dredge and fill activities, increased turbidity) and indiscriminate develop-

ment practices.

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

data, archaeological and historical site information,'life histories,
geological background, supporting maps, cultural 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 Florida Keys.

Climate

The climate in the Florida Keys is subtropical, characterized by mild dry
winters and wann humid summers. C11,natic conditions are divisible into three

intensity levels: (1) prevailing mild southeast and east winds (trade winds),

(2) winter cold fronts and (3) infrequent major storms (tropical depressions

and hurricanes) (Warzeski, 1976). The average rainfall at Key West is 39.8

inches per year (NOAA, 1965, 1979). The typical rainfall pattern is bimodal

with large peaks usually occurring in June and September. The major seasonal

low in precipitation occurs from December through April. Though this pattern

is typical, year to year variability for each month is extremely high. The

summer rainfall is due primarily to thunderstorm activity caused by the over-

land rise and condensation of moisture in warm oceanic air associated with the

trade winds. During the winter months, the little rain that does fall is

caused by coldfronts that pass over the Keys from the northwest.

The-average air temperature for Key West, measured over a 20 year period, is

77.5 OF (NOAA, 1965, 1979). A seasonal mean peak of 84.7 OF occurs in July

through August, tapering to a mean low of 69.0 OF in the months of December

and January. Temperature in the Keys is strongly affected by the warm waters

surrounding the Keys and the Gulf Stream extending along the length of the

Keys. The constancy of temperatures throughout the Keys is produced by the

proximity of the Gulf Stream (Jordan, 1973; Thomas, 1974). In general,

rainfall increases along the trend from Key West to the Upper Keys by about

five inches per y@ear.

Winds in the Keys are mi-ld, averaging 10-15 knots over most of the year. The

highest winds occur in the winter following the passage of cold fronts while

the trade winds predominate for the remainder of the year. The exceptional

hurricane, however, may cause winds of 150 miles per hour (mph) (Gentry,

1974).

No discussion of the Florida Keys resources would be complete without a note

on the occurrence and effect of hurricanes. They will be noted as having

major effects throughout this text; from effects on geology, biology and other

natural features to the effects on activities of the public and private

sectors.

The probability that a hurricane will cross the Upper or Lower Keys in a given

year is about 20 percent (Simpson and Lawrence, 1971). Three major forces

contribute to the extensive damage caused by hurricanes: winds, storm surge

and rains. The destruetive capabilities of high winds are obvious. The force

exerted by wind increases by the square of the wind speed; thus, if wind speed

were to double, wind force would quadruple. The storm surge may be the most

destructive element of a passing hurricane. As a result of wind interaction

with the ocean surface, the affect of low pressures on the sea's surface, and

the affect of the shallow bottom contour in piling up water, massive storm

surges may form. Storm surges associated with Florida hurricanes have been

reliably measured at 15 feet. A storm surge of this magnitude would devastate

the Keys. Finally, large quantities of rain associated with hurricanes result

in erosion and water runoff. Each factor will combine to produce massive

destruction of natural and manmade features. Ball et al. (1967), and

Craighead and Gilbert (1962) reported extensive biological and geologic

rearrangement and destruction of the coastal zone in South Florida

and the Keys after the passage of Hurricane Donna in 1960. It is necessary to

understand a hurricane's potential as a destructive agent, to be prepared for

its occurrence, and to plan development in such a way that the environment

does not become any more vulnerable than it already is. Multer (1977) has

pointed out that manmade encroachments along shorelines and scarification of

shorelines and bay bottoms will play a role in hindering recovery of these

areas after a hurricane. @Iatural features (mangroves, coral reefs, etc.),

though possibly damaged severely by a storm, will act to lessen the severity

of impact on coastal areas (Multer, 1977).

A. Geological Features and Landforms

@The Florida Keys form an elongate arc stretching southwest-from Soldier Key in-

Biscayne Bay to Loggerhead Key in the Dry Tortugas. The overall length of

this chain of islands is approximately 233 miles. Miami Beach, Virginia Key

and Key Biscayne are not considered a part of the Florida Keys because, as

barrier islands rather than emergent reefs, they have a different geologic

origin. The Florida Keys lie in the physiographic province known as the

Southern Zone of the Coastal Lowlands, the Florida Plateau (Hoffmeister,

1974). e Keys are composed of two emergent Pleistocene formations, the Key

'@-___Largo Limestone and the Miami Limestone (or Miami Oolite) (Hoffmeister and
Multer, 1964, 1968). IThe two formations split the Keys into 6@*geologic
,,-areas; or three if the Dry Tortugas are.considered.1 The Upper Keys, to the
easterly extreme of Big Pine Key, are composed of Key Largo Limestone. The

Lower Keys, from Big Pine Key to Key West, are composed of Miami Limestone

which overlies the Key Largo formation. The Dry Tortugas are sand islands not

firmly cemented to any geological rock facies (Brooks, 1963).

Several geologic environments may be defined in the Keys (Multer, 1977). Most
of the Keys have fringing mangrove growth which is considered to be among the

most important of constructional geologic of the nearshore (Multer,
1977). The tangle of roots catch and hold sediments and provide an environ-

ment for calcification. In addition there are rocky shore, carbonate sand

beach, beach rock, tidal and supratidal nearshore environments. Lagoonal

areas, for the purpose of this discussion, are classified according to size
and complexity (e.g. Coupon Bight, Card Souid and Florida Bay) Transitional

areas include channels and cuts between Keys. Offshore areas can be divided

into innershelf and outer shelf areas such as Hawks Channel and the outer

reefs (e.g., Molasses and Carysfort reefs), respectively.

Because the geology of the Upper and Lower Keys is different, there are

notable differences in the geographic appearance and orientation of the

regions. The Upper Keys lie with their axis parallel to the axis of the
entire ch'ain of Keys. Since most of these keys are elongate and have

relatively few cuts or channels through the chain, the Upper Keys act as a

barrier between the waters of Florida Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. ,It is

because of this barrier that the long and extensive system of reefs exists

offshore and parallel to the Upper Keys or, the ocean side. Corals, which are

extremely sensitive to conditions of high turbidity, are favored by the

limited exchange of silty, carbonate rich waters from Florida Bay with those

of the Florida Straits (Hoff meister, 1974)

The axis of the islands making up the Lower Keys is oriented perpendicular to

the axis of the chain as a whole. There are numerous and extensive channels

connecting Florida Bay with the Atlantic Ocean. This resultant influx of

turbid water from Florida Pay is the reason that less extensive coral reefs

ex,i-st-in the Lower Keys.

The channels that are so characteristic of the Lower Keys are not believed to

be an emergent geological feature of these islands, but rather a feature of

the ancient depositional environment of the Miami Limestone. The Miami

formation was deposited in a relatively high energy, shallow water environ-

ment. The present channels and keys originated as underwater topography

created by tidal currents (Hoffmeister and Multer, 1968). During the last

glaciation and subsequent transgression in sea level, the Keys became emergent

features and tidal action continued to cut through the preexisting channels

leaving the keys we see today.

Ancient Geologic Environment

The oldest rock formations on the South Florida mainland are only six million

years old. The rock that forms the Florida Keys is even younger, aged at

100,000 years (Hoffmeister, 1974).

One important phenomenon that has worked to shape the geology of south Florida

is the continual shift'in sea level. During the formation of the Florida

Keys, sea level rose to a peak approximately 25 feet above the present level.

From 100,000 years until about 20,000 years ago there was a dramatic drop in

sea level as a result of the Wisconsin period of glaciation. Sea level

dropped to approximately 325 feet below its present level. During the recent

period (Holocene), sea level rose to'its present level and is continuing a

slow rise of about two inches every 100 years (Hoffmeister, 1974, Wanless,
1969).

Key Largo Limestone: Multer f1977) indicates that the Key Largo Limestone

occupies an area roughly 12.5 miles x 235 miles or 2900 square miles. Multer
and Hoffmeister (1968), after analyzing cores of the Key Largo formation,

distinguished three facies: (1) an outer reef facies (2 to 4 miles seaward of
the present keys), (2) a back-reef facies (2 miles seaward and approximately

one mile lagoonward of the present keys), and (3) a lagoonal facies in the

approximate site of the modern Florida.Bay.

The thickness of this.formation.is variable and lies on-a bedrock of lithifiea

quartzose calcareous sand. Its depth at north Key Largo is about 145 feet; in

south Key Largo its depth is only about 75 feet. Further south, its depth is

100 feet in Tavernier and about 1110 feet in Grassy Key. At Big Pine Key, the

Key Largo Limestone formation lies under 20 feet of the Miami Limestone

Formation with a thickness of at least 180 feet; approximately the same

situation exists in Key West. The Miami Limestone formation di sappears toward

the Tortugas and the Key Largo formation is found some 30 feet below sea level

(Multer and Hoffmeister, 1968).

Miami Limestone Formation: The Miami Limestone Formation lies in two separate

geographic areas of south Florida and is composed of two different facies; an

oolitic facies and a bryozoan facies. The first geographic area of the Miami

Limestone lies at the tip of mainland South Florida, and is visible throughout

the Everglades, Homestead, and Miami areas.

The second location of.the Miami Limestone is in the Lower Keys where it is

composed only of the oolitic facies. It overlies the Key Largo limestone

making surface contact along the Long Beach area of Big Pine Key to Key West.

This is not an ancient coral reef formation like the Key Largo Limestone but,

rather, was formed in a high energy environment at the shelf margin. These

areas are typified by conditions of shallow water, very low silt content,

saturated levels of calcium carbonate and high turbulence.

Modern Geological Environment

In the aquatic environment especially, the modern geology of the Keys is very

closely aligned with its biology. The living carbonate reefs we see today are

actively producing the carbonate limestones of tomorrow. The exposed Key

Largo limestone formation is a good, ancient analogue of the modern patch reef

communities. In addition, many other organisms, including algae and

microscopic plants and animals, act to precipitate calcium carbonate out of

the surrounding waters. When plants and animals die, they fall to the bottom

to become a part of the carbonate sand, mud, and reef rubble environment which

will lithify in the geologic future to become hard carbonate rock.

Six major modern geologic.regions can be distinguished based largely on the
physical and geographical characteristics of their locations: (1) lagoonal

areas (Florida Bay), (2) intertidal and su*pratidal areas (the nearshore

environment of the Keys), (3) transitional areas (tidal channels), (4) inner

shelf areas (Hawks Channel), (5) outer shelf areas (outer coral reefs), and

(6) shelf margin slope areas (Straits of Florida). Each of these areas is

currently forming, in a geologic sense'. The processes involved, including

biological agents, currents, and water chemistry, are active and produce

continual changes.

The lagoonal areas range from large complex habitats to small "sea island"

environments, all of which are biologically rich. They may be characterized

as sedimentar@y carbonate mud bottom environments with high turbidity and high

fluctuations in the temperature, salinity, and chemical parameters.

Variations in lagoonal environments may be attributed to three factors: (1)

seasonal runoff from the bordering mainland to the north, (2) open ocean

conditions to the west, and (3) tidal influences through cross channels to the

south. Florida Bay is characterized by a lacework of individual submerged

mud banks bordering small basins which contain a variety of lagoonal

environments. Florida Bay receives a great deal of detrital sediment from the

Florida mainland but much is produced by marine algae (primarily), and

remains of invertebrate skeletons, mollusks and corals within the Bay. Marine

grasses, algae and a wide variety of mollusks make up the predominant bottom
community (Enos and Perkins, 1976; Ginsburg, 1956, 1957; Ginsburg et al.,

1956, 1958; Multer, 1977; Scholl, 1966). It is a rich habitat for the feeding

and protection of invertebrates and fish.

Coupon Bight provides an interesting example of a small sea island lagoonal

environment. It covers an area of approximately 2.5 square miles near Big

Pine Key. It is open to the ocean to the south through channels between the

Newfound Harbor Ke s, a'nd to the west through Newfound Harbor Channel. For
y

such a small region it contains as many as six'different faunal environments

(Howard and Faulk, 1968).,

Intertidal and supratidal areas include rocky shore, carbonate sand beach,

beach rock, and tidal mud flat environments. Examples of rocky shore

environments can be found at the Spanish Harbor Keys and Pigeon Key. These

carbonate rock environments are distinguishable from other rocky shore

environments for at least two reasons: (1) the highly soluble nature of

limestones, and (2) the intensive destructive and constructive role that

marine organisms.play along such coasts. Burrowing and boring organisms such

as sponges, worms, crustaceans, mollusks and echinoderms (sea urchins) are

major erosive agents in the Keys' coastline. These are natural and normal

processes. Some of the classic work on the geology and biology of this

environment has been done by Ginsburg (1953), Neuman (1966), Robertson (1963),

and Stephenson and Stephenson (1950).

Carbonate sand beach environments exist at Bahia Honda and Long Key, for

example, but are not a common feature in the Keys. They exist almost exclu-

sively on the ocean side and the sand often exists only as a veneer that

overlies a seaward sloping bedrock surface. This feature is representative of

areas where the longshore current in the Keys is retarded or interrupted by

mangrove development, by an irregular shoreline, or by tidal channels between

keys.

Transitional areas are characterized by stabilized or migrating channels or

banks between two distinctly different environmental types. They are subject

to tidal action and are usually limited in extent. The most interesting

feature of these environments is the transitional character of the organisms

that live there. In Snake Creek and Whale Harbor Channels, for example,

faunal assemblages typical of the ocean side of the Keys (finger corals and
rose corals) will grade into typical Florid.a Bay fauna as one passes from the

ocean side to the bay side of the Florida Keys (Multer, 1977).

Tidal and supratidal regions are typified in lagoonal areas such as Crane Key

and adjacent Keys in Florida Bay. A common feature on the mud flats of such

islands is a laminated mat of blue-green filamentous and unicellular algae and
their desiccated byproducts (Ginsburg et al., 1954). These algae, found*both

in marine and freshwater environments, are important for their stabilizing

effect and accreting ability. Similar areas may be found on many of the mud

islands of Florida Bay as well as the tidal areas of the Sugarhead Keys (Enos

and Perkins, 1968; Shinn, 1964).

Beach rock environments are typical of those found on Loggerhead Key in the

Dry Tortugas. The rock consists primarily of mollusk shells, (Halimeda)

calcareous green algae, coral and encrusting algal debris. Cementation of

this rock is taking place as the beach is alternately wetted and dried with

the tides. Skeletal sand grains provide a nucleus upon which carbonate

supersaturated salt spray evaporates to leave a carbonate crust (Ginsburg,

1953; Multer, 1971).

The i.nner shelf areas in Hawks Channel, for example, are typified by four

types of environments: shallow nearshore shoal environments, patch reefs,

blanket sediment environments, and subtidal hardground.

Shoal environments are low energy environments protected from the high wave

energy typical of the outer reefs. These are mud bottom areas often suppor-

ting extensive seagrass beds. A good example of this type of habitat is the

nearshore area that extends seaward to about the six foot depth, found

southeast of Tavernier.

Patch reefs are elevated solid frameworks around which loose skeletal

sediments of the back reef accumulate. They are major stabilizers of the

marine environment where they are found. They are not arranged haphazardly

but lie in elongate bands parallel to the fore reef. In this way they receive

maximum nutrients from the waters of the Florida Straits (Hoffmeister and

Multer, 1968).

Blanket sediment environments are extensive areas of high sediment deposition

such as much of Hawks Channel and the White Bank area near Key Largo. They

are deeper than the shoal areas and are characterized by a loose sandy bottom

of very regular grain size or by grassbeds on less uniformly sized sand. The

first has a relative paucity of life, while grassbeds have a very rich and

diverse flora and fauna.

Subtidal hardground areas are regions within the inner shelf that are not

covered by mud, loose sand, grassbeds, or patch reefs as described above.

These are areas of hard, uneven rock floors and cemented rubble, and may

represent recently subaerially exposed surfaces of the Key Largo Limestone.

The outer shelf areas are represented by intermittent flourishing reefs, known

so well in the Keys, and by rubble flats and mounds and shelf edge sands. The

Molasses and Carysfort Reefs are representative examples of these areas.

full discussion of living reef areas is pres6nted in Chapter IV(B).

Rubble flats and mounds may be found at Trench Reef and Little Molasses

Island. These reefs were formerly active, living reefs which were altered by

hurricanes and the action of biological borers and burrowers. They are one

end of a spectrum ranging from areas of active thriving reefs to areas of

little flourishing reef activity.

The shelf edge sands are nothing more than an extension of those sandy areas-

that are found in the inner shelf areas. They lie between the reefs and

rubble flats and mounds. The reefs themselves are tfie "factories" responsi-

ble for the production of sands that make up the shelf sands environment.

Seagrasses and their rich association of flora and fauna help to stab-1141ze

this environment.

The shelf margin slopes are identified here as an extension of the outer shelf

area. The slope area extends out under the Florida Straits and represents an

area of steep topography and water depths exceeding 2,000 feet. Some of the

rubble produced on the shelf areas is transported down over the slope. For ;:i

further discussion of the inner and outer shelf areas and the shelf margin

slope consult Multer (1979).

Florida Bay

Much of the attention placed on the environments in the Florida Keys certer@

around the natural communities on the Atlantic side of the archipelago.

Florida Bay is briefly considered here to.focus attention on the complex

nature of its environment and the need for more research in the Bay itself.

Florida Bay is a shallow body of water characterized by carbonate mud banks

(shoals) covered with marine grassbeds and calcareous blue-green algae on

submerged portions and mangroves on emergent portions. The shoals are often

surrounded by deeper, open water areas overlying limestone rock hardened

substrate.

Because of the great size of the Bay and its varying contact with waters of

the Gulf and Atlantic, salinities vary considerably. Upper portions of the

Bay consist of hydrologically isolated sounds (Card and Barnes Sounds). In

the Middle Keys, numerous channels and cuts permit mixing between Florida Bay

and the Atlantic Ocean. In the Lower Keys, Florida Say is heavily influenced

by the temperate waters of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Observations of

Causey (DNR, pers. com.) in the Contents Keys area over the past ten years,

indicate much zoogeographic similarity between this portion of Florida Bay and

the bottom communities from Tarpon Springs to Sarasota. Conversely, faunal

assemblages in the Bay differ substantially from those on the Atlantic side of

the Keys, particularly in the stony coral community. Clearly, more research

is needed to fully understand the natural communities of Florida Bay.

B. Community Associations.

This section will reference some of the plant and animal associations within
the preserve in both natural and artificial communities and habitat types.

Major community associations are the upland areas, mangrove/ buttonwood areas,

beaches and berms, marine grassbeds, patch and outer coral reef areas, spoil

islands, tidal flats, and deep water areas. Each community is presented

separately, but in reality these communities display an infinite variety of

mixed and interdependent associations. Final subsections address endangered,

threatened, and species of special concern within the preserve.

1. Uplands

Tropical hardwood hammocks and rockland pine communities occur on the elevated

areas of the ancient coral reef that constitute the land mass of the Florida

Keys. Although these areas are outside the jurisdictional boundaries of the

Keys Aquatic Preserve, they are discussed here to reiterate their close

proximity to and interaction with marine systems within the preserve boundary.

The various upland.community associations interface with tidal and nearshore

environments to form a rich mosaic of habitats that provide cover, resting,

nesting and feeding areas for many wildlife species associated with the area.

Both upland communities exhibit differences in species composition and

physiology that distinguish them from their mainland counterparts (Schomer and

Drew, 1982). Differences in species composition have further classified the

tropical hardwood hammocks into two types. High hammocks are associated with

the elevated Key-Largo Limestone substrate of the Upper Keys and are

distinguished by a higher canopy. The low hammocks are present on the Miami
oolite parent material of the Lower Keys and are distinguished by a lower
canopy and the increased occurrence of palms (Thrinax sp.) (Davis, 1943).

Canopy vegetation associated with the tropical hardwood hammocks include:

Tamarind (L siloma latisiliquum); mahogany (Swietenia mahagoni); Jamaica

dogwood tPiscidia piscipula); and poisonwood (Metopium toxiferum).

More common understory plants are: Wild coffees (Psychotria sp.); marlberry.

(Ardisia escalloniodes); stoppers (Eugenia sp.); and blackbead (Pithecellobium
guadalupense).(Tomlinson, 1980; Weiner, 1974).

Pinelands of the Lower Keys are similar to the pine islands of the Everglades

with exceptions in species dominance (Olmstead, et al., 1983). The presence

of a subterranean freshwater lens, interspersed hammocks and freshwater

solution holes distinguish this unique community that occurs locally only on

the Lower Keys. Sawgrass (Cladium sp.) and cattail (Typha sp.) marshes

provide habitat for the fish, birds, reptiles, amphibians, mammals and

invertebrates commonly associated with freshwater areas.

Some common plant species in the pinelands are Caribbean pine (Pinus elliottii

var. densa), silver palm (Coccothrinax argentata), pisonia (Pisonia

rotundata), and locustberry (Byrsonima cuneata) (Craighead, 1971; Olmstead,

et al., 1983).

Table I lists animal species associated with the upland communities. An

additional list in the Endangered Species section identifies plant and animal

species from these upland communities that are classified as endangered,

threatened or of special concern.

Stormwater retention and diversity of habitat types are major attributes of

the upland systems. Thin organic soils, deposited over the solution hole

Table I

ANIMAL LIFE ASSOCIATED WITH UPLAND COMMUNITIES

Mammals
Fo-bcat
Key Vaca raccoon
Key deer
Key Largo wood rat
Key Largo cotton mouse
raccoon
Hispid cotton rat
least shrew

Birds
black-whiskered vireo
brown thrasher
yellow-billed cuckoo
chuck-wills-widow
mangrove cuckoo
mourning dove
ground dove
Carolina wren
cardinal
mockingbird
pileated woodpecker
red-bellied woodpecker
common flicker
screech owl
swallow-tailed kite
red-shouldered hawk

Reptiles
----Tm-erican alligator
box turtle
Keys mud turtle
coral snake
Big Pine Key ringneck snake
Eastern diamondback rattlesnake
Eastern indigo snake
Florida brown snake
red rat snake
Miami black-headed snake
ring-neck snake
Florida ribbon snake
Keys mole skink
blue-tailed skink

Amphibians
green tree frog

Table 1 (Animal Life Associated
with Upland Communities) Continued

Invertebrates
Stock Island tree snail
Florida tree snail
Schaus' swallow-tail butterfly

References:
Modified from: Patton, et al., 1984, Natural Envi ronment of the Florida Keys
in Florida Keys Growth Management Plan Draft. Lane Kendig, Inc. Mundelein,
Ill. 339 pp.

Odum, et. al., 1982. The ecology of the mangroves of South Florida. A
community profile, U'S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Bio. Services,
Washington, D.C. FWS@OBS, 81/2-4.

pocked limestones, provide needed moisture, substrate and nutrients to sustain

the plant communities. Continuous canopy and ground covers of the plant

communities absorb vital moisture from seasonal rains, prevent soil erosion

and deter leaching of important nutrients. Freshwater runoff is also retained

in solution holes for later use by wildlife. Food, cover and/or nesting

sites are also important to birds, reptiles, mammals, and invertebrates that

frequent shoreline and marine areas.

The white-crowned pigeon and mangrove cuckoo feed in upland areas but most

often nest in mangrove/buttonwood areas (Bent, 1932; Sprunt 1984). The

endangered silver rice rat is known to use both freshwater and tidal marsh

areas for foraging (Spitzer and Lazell, 1978). Key deer, raccoon, bobcat,

marsh rabbit, and several species of reptiles frequent both upland and

mangrove/buttonwood areas (Odum et al., 1982). Swallowtail kites (Snyder,

1974) blackbirds, woodpeckers, warblers and numerous arboreal avifauna

frequent a variety of upland and wetland sites (Robertson and Kushland, 1974).

Upland hammocks and pinelands also provide storm and hurricane protection for

wildlife and man. Wind resistant and salt-spray tolerant plants buffer and

deflect wind and waves. Less tangible values include carbon dioxide/oxygen

cycling, noise abatement, shade and aesthetics.

2. Mangroves

Mangrove/buttonwood communities contribute substantially to the health and

productivity of marine systems within the aquatic preserve. Shoreline

stabilization, storm protection, filtration of sediments, cycling of

nutrients, and habitat diversity are the most obvious contributions derived

from this community.

Many variations of the mangrove/buttonwood community occur in the aquatic

preserve, but the most dominant plant species usually represented are red
mangrove (Rhizophora mangle), black mangrove (Avicennia germinans) and white
mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa). Buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus.) does not
grow in areas that are frequently inundated by tides, but it is commonly

associated with the mangrove species and exhibits a high degree of salt
tolerance (Tomlinson, 1980).

Mangrove zonation described by Davis (1940) illustrates mangrove species

distribution from the mean low water line (red) to slightly elevated (black)

to inland (white). More recent literature (cf. Odum et al., 1982) indicates

that interspecific species competition, sea level changes, and successional

stages may facilitate mixing of the three species within the zones.

Of the six mangrove forest community types described by Lugo and Snedaker
(1974), four are well represented on the preserve. Overwash mangrove forests

are typical.on smaller islands and low peninsulas in the Keys. Red mangroves

are usually dominant and the islands are frequently overwashed by tides.

Fringing mangrove forests of varying widths are typical of slightly elevated

shorelines. This type is representative of the zonation described above and

the most common type in the preserve. Riverine mangrove forests are repre-

sented along tidal creeks in the preserve. Red mangroves frequently dominate

species composition. Mangroves may reach optimum size in riverine areas with

protection from storms. Scrub or dwarf mangrove forests are best represented

in the Lower Keys. Although all three species of mangroves are present,

nature specimens are less than five feet in height. Poor tidal flushing,

nutrient impoverishment, and soil characteristics appear to be limiting

factors to size and distribution.

Buttonwood occurs on more elevated areas landward of the mangroves. This area

is commonly referred to as the "buttonwood transition zone" and, as the name

implies, it lies between the mangrove and upland plant communities. Wide

spacing of trees and an open canopy allow greater light penetration to the

ground, which encourages a proliferation of air plants, succulents, grasses

and woody plants that are tolerant of periodic tidal flooding.

Other plant species commonly associated with mangrove/buttonwood communities

are glasswort (Salicornia spp.), sea purslane (Sesuvium portulacastrum), Key
grass (Monanthochloe littoral'is.), saltgrass (Distichilis spicata), saltwort
(Batis maritima) sea ox-eye daisies (Borrichia sp.), mangrove rubber vine

(Rhabdadenia biflora), and air plant species in the genus Tillandsia.

The prop roots of red mangroves, the extensive pneumatophores (aerating root

branches) of black mangroves and the root mats of the buttonwoods and white

mangroves and other vegetation, entrap and utilize sediments from upland areas

and from tidal import. The roots, stems and branches of these plants also

buffer the effects of storm surge and help retard erosion and protect upland

areas from intrusion of salt water wash and spray. This shoreline plant

community can also deflect strong winds which desiccate upland plant

communities and evaporate soil moisture.

Nutrient cycling and energy flow in mangrove systems have been studied by
numerous scientists (see references). The system's capability to assimilate

nutrients and export detrital material to marine food webs is the basis for
its productivity. Litterfall (leaves, stems, animal droppings, etc.) and sea

grass wrack are attacked by a host of micro flora and fauna. Desiccated

particulate and dissolved carbons are exported to marine systems by tidal

action where they are available to a wide range of aquatic consumers (Heald,

1969, Odum, 1970). Man is also a benefactor through commercially valuable food

fishes and invertebrates (especially shrimp) that are dependent upon the food

web.

Root structures provide points of attachment for marine organisms and

stabilize muds for algal colonization. Invertebrate grazers and filter

feeders ingest algae and detritus on or near the roots. They, in turn, are

prey to a varied assortment of mobile invertebrates and fishes (Tabb et al.,

1962). The tangle of roots also provides shelter and protection from larger

predators (fish and birds) that forage for the crabs, shrimp, juvenile spiny

lobster, snapper, mullet, killifish and pinfish.

Predatory fish that haunt these areas include a vast array of lesser known

species as well as many that are of interest to avid sport fishermen in the

area. Tarpon, snook, drum, seatrout, snapper, bonefish, sharks and pompano

are only a sampling of the fare available-to hook and line fisherman. Tidal

flushing and normal migration to marine grassbeds and coral reefs subject the

mangrove nursery speci.es to a wide range of predators in the food web,

including many commercially valuable fish, such as grouper, snapper, jacks,

king mackeral and tuna.

Arboreal portions of the mangroves are grazed by the mangrove tree crab

(Aratus Pisonii) Narner, 1967), and over 200 species of insects (Simberloff

and Wilson, 1969). Branches are also useful platforms for foraging bird life.

.Odum et al. (1982) list 181 species of birds that frequent mangrove/buttonwood

communities. Open water piscivorous (fish eating) birds (eg., osprey,

cormorant, pelican, bald eagle) use mangrove trees for resting and nesting
sites. Herbivorous and insectivorous passerine (perching) birds are also well

represented within the mangrove/buttonwood community. White-crowned pigeons

and mangrove cuckoos seek out nest sites in this area too. The large pileated

woodpecker finds nest cavities in old weather worn black mangrove trees

(personal observations).

Fifteen'species of wading birds (eg., egrets, herons, ibis and spoonbills) are

dependent upon mangrove areas for nesting and feeding (Robertson and Kushlan,
1974). An even larger number of probing shore birds (eg., rails, plovers,

sandpipers, etc.) frequent mangrove fringes to feed on mollusks, crustaceans,

and marine worms that are exposed on low tides (Howell, 1932).

Marine turtles (including the endangered green, hawksbill and Ridley),

terrestrial turtles and terrapins, snakes, anoles and frogs, the American

crocodile and alligator are representative reptiles and amphibians that

utilize mangrove/buttonwood areas. Endangered or threatened mammals that
utilize mangrove/buttonwood communities include the silver rice rat, Key Vaca

raccoon, Key deer and the West Indian manatee.

The value of this community to many endangered, threatened and species of

special concern cannot be underestimated. Life cycles of many are directly

dependent upon the continued health and productivity of mangrove/buttonwood

communities. Additional information is presented in the Endangered Species

subsection.

Table II lists invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals

that are associated with the mangrove/buttonwood community.

The mangrove/buttonwood community is inherently susceptible to hurricanes and

rising sea levels. Hurricanes may affect large areas of vegetation.

Desiccation of vegetative parts is by far the most obvious impact. However,

more subtle impacts may not be detected for some time after the event. Over

wash areas may be stripped of sediments that have taken years to accumulate.

These sediment loads are the base materials for nutrients and trace elements

necessary to the growth and maintenance of the system. Stripped sediments and

other flotsam are also deposited in fringing mangrove/buttonwood systems.

Deposition of excessive sediment can be equally devastating to this community

(Craighead and Gilbert, 1962). Adverse impacts to the faunal inhabitants from

oxygen depletion are discussed in Tabb et al. (1962).

.Table II
A PARTIAL LIST OF ANIMAL SPECIES
ASSOCIATED WITH THE MANGROVE-BUTTONWOOD COMMUNITY

INVERTEBRATES
Snails--FM-arine and terrestrial)
Crabs (Marine and terrestrial)
Wood borers
Bivalves
Barnacles
Zooplankton
Shrimp
Spiny lobster

Fish
BT-ack-tipped shark Barracuda
Bonnet-head shark Anchovy
Southern sting-ray Catfish
Ladyfish Needlefish
Tarpon Killifish
Bonefish Jewfish (juvenile)
Sardine Bluefish (young)
Menhaden Blue runner
Perm+t Snapper
Lookdown Grunt
Sheepshead Seatrout
Mullet Red drum
Blenny Filefish
Goby Triggerfish
Pinfish Puffers

Amphibians and Reptiles
uban tree frog Mangrove water snake
Mud turtle Eastern indigo snake
Mangrove terrapin American crocodile
Green anole Rat snake
Cuban anole

Birds
Roseate spoonbill Laughing gull
Snowy egret Least tern
Great white heron Royal tern
Great blue heron Belted kingfisher
Great egret Magnificent frigatebird
Reddish egret Turkey vulture
Louisiana heron Swallow-tailed kite
Yellow-crowned night heon Red-shouldered hawk
Black-crowned night heron American kestrel
White ibis Black whiskered vireo
Ruddy turnstone Blue-gray gnatcatcher
Lesser yellowlegs Carolina wren
Double crested cormorant Yellow warbler
Hooded merganser Boat-tailed grackle
American coot Summer tanager

Animal Species Associated with the Mangrove/Buttonwood Community
Continued

Mammals
Tpossum
Marsh rabbit
Gray squirrel
Cudjoe Key rice-rat
Raccoon
Bobcat
Bottle-nosed dolphin

Source: Odum et al. (1982)

Exotic (non-native) plant species are often efficient colonizers on despoiled

areas. Brazilian pepper (Schinus sp.) and Australian pine (Casaurina sp.)

have become established in many areas in the preserve. These exotics offer

less desirable habitat to native species (flazzotti et al., 1981), and inhibit

recolonization by native plants.

3. Beach and Berm Communities.

Beach and berm communities, although not abundant, are unique and valuable

resources within the Keys Aquatic Preserve. These areas offer open vistas and

scenic variation to the primarily forested shorelines. Numerous plant species

enrich the ecological diversity of the system and are well adapted to the

rigors of this harsh environment. The diversity of habitats for feeding and

nesting also attracts a wide range of animal species.

Beach and dune formation.in the Keys is not a common occurrence and is not

comparable to the broad strand communities in other areas of the state. Fine

grained silica sands, that are transported by riverine systems and littoral

drift along the east and west coasts of Florida, are not found in the Keys

(Multer, 1977; Wanless, 1969).

Major component materials of beach and berm areas are the fragmented remains

of corals, cast off shells and calcareous algae. The larger, more angular

fragments are sorted by wave action and deposited by storm waves along the

crest of beaches or berms. The relative size and weight of the fragments

inhibit formation of extensive dune systems because they are less susceptible

to erosion or deposition by winds.

The offshore coral reefs and gently sloping bottoms disperse oceanic wave

energy and preclude extensive beach development in most areas. Several

islands in the Middle and Lower Keys that are oriented to receive the direct

effects of waves and onshore currents have developed modest beach strands

along their Atlantic shorelines.

Berms are low, usually narrow coastal ridges that are common on many shore-

lines in the preserve. Berms are formed during storm events and may be

overwashed during seasonal high tides. Occasionally a second berm parallels

the shoreline-ridge, indicating a previous storm event.

Tide and.wave actions deposit sea grass wrack and detrital nutrients-that

enhance the capabilities of plant colonization. Plant colonizers mu'st, by

necessity, survive in an extremely hostile environment and have evolved

adaptive mechanisms to do so. Successful plant colonizers must survive

intense sun, (almost) constant wi nd, high salinity, tidal wash and shifting

substrate.

Physiological adaptations to prevent moisture loss from salt, sun, and winds
are evidenced in the succulent, shortened leaves of sea purslane (Sesuvium.
portulacastrum), saltwort (Batis maritima) and glasswort (Salicornia Sp.).
Other plant species possess thickened or involute (curled) leaves, surface

hairs or spines that slow moisture loss and inhibit grazing. Abundant seed

production, rapid seed gemination and vegetative reproduction from rhizomes

are effective methods evolved by herbaceous and woody plants to overcome

exposure to desiccating influences, bouyant seeds are dispersed over a large

area to ensure survival of new colonizers. The extensive horizontal and

vertical root systems of the grasses (Distichilis sp., Spartina sp., Panicum

sp. and Uniola paniculata) intercept locally available moisture and nutrients.

Their root masses bind and stabilize the soil to prevent erosion and enhance

plant colonization. Low horizontally spreading growth forms allow optimum

leaf surface areas for photosynthesis and a low profile to damaging winds.

Railroad vine (Ipomoea pes-caprae) sends out horizontal "runners" or branches

that may extend 20-30 feet from the main stem. Brittle woody plants, such as

Bay-cedar (Suriana maritima) and sea grape (Coccoloba uvifera), show a similar

tendency of horizontal crown spread to withstand high winds. Other plants

commonly associated with beach and berm communities are sea rocket (Cakile

fusiformis), spurge (Chamaesyce mesembryanthifola), sea lavender (Tournefortia
graphaTodes), spider lily (Hymenocallis latifolia), gray nickerbean
(Caesalpinia crista), sea daisy (Borrichia aboresens), and prickly pear cactus

(Opuntia stricta). Species from more upland communities include joewood

(Jacquinia keyensis), silver palm (Coccothrinax argentata) and black-bead

(Pithecolobium keyense).

Animal species of beach and berm communities include raccoons and opossums

that forage for fruit, crabs and tidbits washed up in the seagrass wrack.

Wading and probing birds also take advantage of the mollusks, crustaceans and

marine worms in the wrack and just below the surface of-the sand. Retreating

tides expose other invertebrates and stranded fish to complement their diet.

Herbivorous rodents and marsh rabbits harvest abundant foliage and grass seeds

and seek out nest sites in the dense foliage.

Snakes and avian predators hunt the more open spaces for anoles, rodents and

small birds. The loggerhead turtle, a threatened marine species is known to

rest on several Keys beaches. The endangered American crocodile utilizes

berms or high, marl banks of narrow, coastal creeks for nesting.

Additional animal species associated with the beach and berm community are

listed on Table III. Additional endangered, threatened or species of special

concern that may frequent the beach and berm community are listed under the

Endangered Species Section of this management plan.

4. Coral Reefs

Coral reef environments are among the most beautiful,diverse and productive.

environments in the world. Their structural complexity and biological

richness make them the subject of much interest and the source of much

pleasure.

Coral reefs are a tropical and subtropical phenomenon, limited in distribu-

tion by such factors as light, temperature, substrate availability and

sedimentation.

Reef builders, an assemblage of corals and other carbonate precipitating

organisms, begin construction on a hard consolidated substrate in shallow

water. As a reef increases in age, new colonizers add volume to the reef by

filling in empty space. The physical and biological breakdown of the reef,

due to major storms, climate fluctuations, coral grazers, burrowers and

TABLE III

ANIMAL LIFE ASSOCIATED WITH BEACH AND BERM COMMUNITIES

Invertebrates
Snails
Marine worms
Mole crab
Ghost crab
Clam
Insects
Isopods
Barnacles

Reptiles
7F-erican anole Carolina anole
Cuban anole
Red rat snake
Eastern indigo snake
Atlantic loggerhead turtle
American crocodile

Birds
Great blue heron
Sand pipers
Plovers (Snowy and Wilson's)
Ruddy turnstone
Sanderling
Killdeer
Short billed dowitcher
Willet
Dunlin
Gulls

Mammals
-6-possum
Raccoon
Marsh rabbit
Hispid cotton rat

Source: Schomer and Drew, (1982)

borers, creates carbonate skeletal rubble within the reef zone. This rubble

is recycled and cemented through biological and geochemical processes to yield

new substrate for coral and other invertebrate growth. Coral reefs exist in a

balance between active construction and breakdown.

The coral reefs in the Florida Keys are unique within the United States. They
are a valued resource and much vocational and recreational activity is

dependent on them. Important fisheries are tied to the reef community and

many vacationers visit the reefs each year to witness their profound beauty.

It is a resource that needs to be understood and preserved. Many impacts,
other than natural ones,'now affect the Keys reef area (Bright et al., 1981;

Davis,-1977; Dustan, 1977; Straughn, 1972; Voss in Multer, 1977; Voss, 1973,
1982). Impacts include commercial and sport fishing, collection of reef

species, diver related activities, shipwreck salvage, anchor damage, ship

groundings, oil spills, reduced water quality and increased turbidity. It is

the intent of this section to identify features of coral reef ecology, the

importance of the reef and other communities to one another, and the

significance of impacts.

Corals are members of phylum Cnidaria which includes such organisms as jelly

fish, sea anemones, and hydrozoans. -Two classes of Cnidaria are the

principle colonial forms associated with, or responsible for, producing reefs:

the Hydrozoa and the Anthozoa. The Hydrozoa are represented, in part, by the

fire corals. The Anthozoa contain two subclasses, the Octocorallia or soft

corals (e.g. whipcorals, sea feathers and sea fans) and the Zoantharia

containing the Scleractinia or true stony corals (e.g., brain corals, staghorn

corals) (Barnes, 1984). The characteristics common to each are the capability

to secrete a calcareous skeleton and functional autotrophy (self-production).

The Scleractinia are the reef builders; they are distinguished by their hard

calcareous exoskeleton. Though many only grow several inches in diameter,

larger forms are responsible for building the expansive reefs of the Florida

Keys. The coral tissue inhabits only the external surface of the entire coral

skeleton. New individuals accrete over dead skeletal material. Coral tissues

play host to dinoflagellate zooxanthellale; (microscopic algae). These live

symbiotically within the tissues of each coral cell. Zooxanthellae, like

other plants, are capable of producing their own food sources. Using solar

energy, they build protein, carbohydrates and other complex molecules out of
basic components like C02 (carbon dioxide). These microscopic algae may
provide enough energy to support coral growth. This makes corals functional

autotrophs. The tentacles do, however, capture and supply supplemental food

for the colony, especially at night (Yonge, 1940, 1973).

Though there are reef-like buildups as far north as Georgia, three dimensional

reefs are restricted to the offshore area of the Florida Keys archipelago

(Jaap, 1984). Following the prevailing topography, the reefs lie parallel to

the Keys and have been referred to as the Florida Reef Tract (Vaughan, 1914).

They lie in a region of ancient reef development, as has been discussed and

can be visualized through a process of sea level rise and reef progradation

(Hine and Neuman, 1977).

Four coral reef community types have been distinguished by Jaap (1984). These

are: (1) the live bottom community, (2) the patch reef community, (3) the

transitional reef community, and (4) the bank reef community. These are

communities unique to the Caribbean region and they do not correlate with the

reef types in the Pacific and Indian oceans.

The character of the Florida Reef communities is largely determined by their

physical environment. As a generality, the environment grades in depth, wave

energy, sediment and other parameters from the inner to the outer shelf along

lines parallel to the Keys.

a. Live Bottom

The live bottom communities lie close to shore, seaward of the intertidal

zone, and occupy the subtidal hardground area described in the geology

section. These are bare areas of Key Largo Limestone. They are not three

dimensional reef building communities and, typically, they are surrounded by

other communities such as those dominated by mud bottom, seagrass, or sponge.

The fauna and flora associated with this community are highly variable,

usually dominated by algae and invertebrate species such as soft corals,

sponges, and small stony corals.

Stony corals commonly found in the shallow live bottom communities include,
clubbed finger coral (Porites porites), porous coral (P..asteroides.), starlet
coral (Siderastrea radians), rose coral (Manicina areolata), lobed star coral

(Solenastrea hyades), and smooth star coral,(S. bournoni). In deeper areas
three other species are often found, Knobby brain coral (Diploria clivosa),

encrusting stinging coral (Millepora alcicornis), and eliptical star corals

(Dichocoenia stellaris). These species vary from a few inches to a foot in
height. Voss (1982) reports several species of sponges prevalent in the hard

ground area: Chicken liver sponge (Chondrilla nucula), vase sponge (Ircinia
campana), cake sponge Q. strobilina), stinking sponge (L. felix), the little
blue heavenly sponge (Dysidea etherea), the large loggerhead sponge

(Spheciosponqia vesparia), and Aplysima cauliformis. Gorgonians, such as the
purple sea plume (Pseudopterogorgia acerosa), Pseudoplexaura flagellosa, and
the sea whip (Pterogorgia anceps), are also prominent.

b. Patch Reefs

The patch reefs of Jaap (1984) may be compared to the dome patch reefs of

Marszalek et al. (1977). Most patch reefs in the Keys exist in the Upper

Keys, seaward of Elliot Key and Key Largo. Several, however, occur offshore

from Big Pine Key and Key West. Most exist seaward of Hawks Channel.

The complexity of the patch reef community is much greater than that of the

hard bottom areas. They are roughly dome shaped, varying in diameter from 100

to 1500 feet, and exhibiting topographical relief of 5-10 feet. Their

characteristics are highly variable but can be defined on the basis of the age

of each reef; thus, the nature of the community depends on its age. The

evolutionary sequence follows four steps (Jaap, 1984):

I.' Early stages of patch reef development are dominated by pioneering

species s.uch as clubbed finger coral (Porites porites), rose coral

(Manicina areolata) and golfball coral (Favia fragum). These are

smaller, nonreef building species. Over time, these corals live, die,

erode, and recolonize the hard bottom transforming it into a very

different community. They will consolidate the hard bottom into a

substrate dominated by coral and cemented coral skeletal material.

2. Frame builders dominate the next phase in patch reef development.

Larger corals such as smooth starlet coral (Siderastrea siderea), the

cavernous star coral (Montastraea cavernosa), smooth brain coral

(Diploria strigosa), grooved brain coral (D. labyrinthiforms), giant

brain coral (Colpophyllia natans) and common star coral (Montastraea

annularis) will colonize the reef. These corals reach dimensions of up

to 8 feet. As growth proceeds, reef.borers, represented by worms

(polychaetes), mollusks, and other species, begin a slow process of reef

excavat@on. Weaknesses caused by the excavations collapse and fill in

spaces within the reef. Coral death within the reef also provides new

and more complex surface area for additional colonizers, including

noncoral species. As the patch reef becomes more three dimensional, it

provides an alluring habitat for reef fishes as well.

3. In the maturing patch reef, the reef continues growth upward and

outward providing more surface area for secondary colonizers. As borers

continue their excavation of the reef resulting in more reef collapse, an

intricate maze of caves and passageways form, providing ideal hiding

places for the more cryptic species of fish. As hollow spaces get

larger, larger cryptic fish move into inhabit them.

4. In the fully mature patch reef, upward growth is limited by the sea's

surface. Outward growth is all that remains possible. Reef collapse

continues to the extent that rubble flats and mounds appear. These are

often colonized by the non frame building stony corals and octocorals.

If conditions are suitable, these rubble heaps may consolidate and new

frame builders may colonize or the flats may alternatively take on the

appearance of the live hard bottom communities.

Another feature commonly associated with patch reefs is a "halo" zone of sand

and rubble surrounding the reef. It is created by coral grazing invertebrates

and fish. The halo provides suitable substrate for reef expansion (Ogdon et

al., 1973; Randa-11, 1965; Sammarco, 1972; Sammarco et al., 1974).

Though the preceding scenario is a probable scheme for reef development, the

outcome is not determined or in any way guaranteed. The process is largely

controlled by the ambient physical environment and random biological and

climatological events, which are highly unpredictable. The composition of a

reef is highly variable, determined by chance settling of particular coral

larvae. Some patch reefs may be very diverse while others may be nearly

monospecific. Even within highly diverse reefs, there may be areas of much

lower diversity.

c. Transitional Reef

Transitional reef communities usually exist seaward of patch reef areas and

landward of the bank reefs. They may be described as embryonic bank-reefs,

coalesced patch reefs (the linear patch reefs of Marszalek, et al., 1977) or

very well developed hard ground communities that contain components of both

patch reef and bank-reef environments. Large branching frame builders, such
as elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata), crow at the seaward edge of transitional

reefs.

d. Bank Reef

Major bank reef communities lie along a zone at the margin of the outer shelf

and the margin shelf slope in the Keys. It is a zone of rapid change in depth

seaward. The greatest percentage of bank reel's lie in depths of 5 to 30 feet,

though they will extend to depths of 100 feet. Distinctive features of the

bank reef are the presence of staghorn and elkhorn coral (Acropora cervicornis
and A.Palmata), coral zonation by depth and spur and groove formations

oriented seaward. Bank reefs, like patch reefs, are highly variable,

exhibiting differing decrees of development dependent on age, hard ground

topography and hydrodynamics. A generalized bank reef area can be defined in

terms of six different zones. From shallow to deep water they are: 1) the

back reef/rubble zone, 2) the reef flat 3) the shallow spur and groove zone,

4) the deep spur and groove zcne, 5) the buttress or fore reef zone, and 6)

the deep reef. Zonation is deterrated by water depth, degree of light pene-

tration and wave energy. The reef flat is approximately five feet deep while

the deep reel' is at 100 feet or greater. The major reef builder here is

elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata). It is found growing from the seaward edge

of the reef flat to the deep spurred groove zone.

The spur and groove zone, characteristic.of bank reef areas, has a fascinating

development history. Spurs are raised, finger-like projections of reef

extending seaward, composed primarily of dead and over growing colonies of

elkhorn coral. Grooves are sandy bottom troughs between spurs. At shallow-to

mid depths these colonies orient away from the prevailing sea thus reducing

wave resistance as tidal currents and waves pass over the growing reef. In

the early stages of spur and groove development, oriented colonies of elkhorn

coral may also grow seaward when in the lee of other colonies. In this way

the colonies grow together and connect. Other colonies then grow in the lee

of these and so on. This process produces a line of connected colonies

oriented perpendicular to the prevailing wave direction. As growth continues,

older sections die and new coral colonies attach to the upper surfaces. The

spur grows upward. The unpopulated areas between spurs fill with sand which

is unfavorable for coral colonization. The higher the spur grows, the more

efficient the groove becomes as a sand trap. The process thus perpetuates

itself. These areas may be seen quite easily from the air or while diving.

Other major reef builders include knobbey brain coral (Diploria clivosa) in

the reef flat, and mountainous star coral (Montastraea annularis), smooth

brain coral (Diploria strigosa), and giant brain coral (Colpophyllia natans)

in the buttress or fore reef zone. The deep reef zone does not support large
reef builders, but species like green cactus coral (Madracis mirabilis),

fragile saucer coral (Agaricia fragilis) and saucer coral (Helioseris

cucullata) are common.

A wide variety of other invertebrate and vertebrate species call the reef

home. Kissling (1977) collected over 550 macrobenthic species from six sites

on nine reefs in the Lower Keys. Among these they identified 42 species of

stony corals, 41 species of octocorals, and 21 species of brittle stars

(Ophiuroids). He also speculated that well over 300 species of fish live on

or use the reef.

Eiseman (1981), in a recent survey of the algae, identified over 60 species in

Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary. Schmahl (1984) believes a conservative

estimate of the number of sponge species occurring on the Florida reefs is

120. Many of these are boring sponges which play a major role in bioerosion.

Polychaete worms are also important boring species. Grassle (1973) counted

1,441 individual polychaetes within a single 10 pound coral head. Vittor and

Johnson (1977) have identified some 84 species of polychaets from Grand Bahama

Island; the biology of the Keys should contain similar species.

Few vertebrate species other than fish occur on the reef with any frequency.

Those that do include sea turtles such as the Atlantic Ridley turtle
(Lepidochelys kempi), Atlantic hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys Imbrilcata),
loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta) and the green turtle (Chelonia mydas).

Each is currently listed as endangered by Florida State and the Federal
governments. The bottle nosed dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) is an occasional
visitor.- Coral reef fish;species and other.faunal species are listed in

Appendix C.

The reef is an area of critical concern to those who are interested in

continuing to preserve its beauty. The Endangered Biota of Florida series

(Franz, 1982) lists six coral species as endangered and nine as threatened.

In addition, at least seven species of fish are unique to the Keys: small
gobies (Lythrypnus phorellus and Gobiosoma oceanops);, the purple reef fish
(Chromis scotti); the mooneye cusk eel (Ophidon selenops); the blue hamlet
(Hypoplectrus gemma); the wrasse bass (Liopropoma enkrines), and the Keys

blenny (Starksia starcki). The latter is known only from Looe Key and is

u
nder consideration for federal listing as an endangered species. The coral

reef is also home to several commercial species; the foremost of which is the

spiny lobster (Panuluris argus).

e. Marine Grassbed Interaction

The importance of interactions between adjacent communities must also be

underscored. Seagrass beds are important in the life cycle of coral reef

fishes in that they provide nursery areas for some species. Juvenile reef

fish species reported common in grassbeds in Tagne Bay, St. Croix by Ogden and

Zieman (1977) include: juvenile spiny puffers (Diodon sp.), squirrelfish
(Holocentrus' ascensionis) yellowtail snapper (Ocyurus chrysarus), surgeonfish

(Acantharus) and numerous species of wrasse (Halichoeres) were observed. The
yellow goatfish (Mulloidi-cthys martinicus.) and the spotted goatfish
(Pseudupeneus maculatus) occur as juveniles in grassbeds off the Florida Keys

(Munro, 1976; Springer and McErlean, 1962). Eight species of juvenile

parrotfish were captured in grassbeds; all but one was considered a reef

species. As these species grow too large to hide in the grassbeds, they

migrate to the reef. Conversely many fish species utilize the reef for refuge

as adults but feed in adjacent grassbeds and sand flats (Davis, 1967; Longley

and Hildebrand, 1941; Odgen and Ehrlich, 1977; Ogden and Zieman, 1977;

Randall, 1963; Starck and Davis, 1966).

f. Reef Sensitivity

Coral reefs are biologically and structurally sensitive systems. They are

slow growing and vulnerable to structural damage. Shinn et al. (1977)

estimated that the reefs of the Florida Keys began growth about 5000 to 7000

years ago, and have been growing at a rate of about 190 inches/1000 years (or
0.2 inches/year). Thus, structural damage to a reef can take years to

rebuild. In addition, the reefs of the Florida Keys lie at the northern limit

for reef growth. The reefs of the Florida Keys are susceptible to the colder

water temperatures of this region.. During recent cold snaps, reefs in the Dry

Tortugas and near Plantation Key showed some mortality (Walker, 1981). The

natural stresses of a climate more severe than in other areas in the Carib-
bean may be responsible for the slower coral accretion in the Keys. Adey

(1977) noted reef growth rates at St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands were three

times the maximal growth rates in the Keys (0.60 inches/year).

Though few patch or bank reef areas lie within state boundaries and therefore

in the aquatic preserve, the Aquatic Preserve Program expresses concern for

their continued health. They are an important human resource as well as a

refuge for a large number of marine species. Presently, a large percentage of

the reefs in the Florida Keys are under the jurisdiction of state and federal

governments; John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, Key Largo and Looe Key

National Marine Sanctuaries, Biscayne National Park, Key West National

Wildlife Refuge and Fort Jefferson National Monument, respectively. The

aquatic preserve will serve to protect coral habitats that are not protected

by these other programs.

5. Marine Grassbeds

Marine grasses are submerged flowering plants which stabilize sediments,

entrap silt, recycle nutrients by production of detritus, provide shelter,

serve as important- nursery grounds, and are important sources of food (Odum,

1974; Wood et a 169). Grassbeds also increase the surface area available

to support epuipment plants and animals and supply a suitable substrate for
organisms that otherwise could not utilize a bare sand or mud bottom (Moore,

1963; Orth, 177,
The grassbeds are very productive, possibly the most

productive habitat within the Florida Keys. These beds serve as a food source

for the endangered manatee (Trichechus manatus) and the green sea turtle

(Chelonias mydas), important nursery areas for juvenile forms of shellfish

such as the pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum) and the spiny lobster (Panulirus

argus) , and as substrate for many algal species eaten by invertebrates which

are in turn eaten by the fishes. Many commercially important fishes (sea

trout, jack, pompano, barracuda, mullet, cowfish and snapper) spend at least

part of their lives in these grassbeds (Zieman, 1982).

Marine grassbeds act: as an interface between mangrove and reef communities by

all three communities to interact, thereby creating an
allowinng species

ecosystem and flow continuum. The three most common marine grasses

found in the Florida Keys are turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum), manatee
grass (Syrinngdium filiforme) and shoal grass (Halodule wriqhtii). There are

also three species of Halophila; H. johnsonii,. encelmanii, and H.

decipiens, but they are not as prevalent. Varying bottom substrates also

determine the of the seagrasses and their associated fauna. The

three most common marine grasses mentioned above thrive in the fine calcareous

mud bottoms found in the inner shelf margin associated with areas of
restricted circulation (Schomer and Drew, 1982). Typically, this bottom type

is found from Florida Bay seaward to the lee side of shelf edge sand shoals.

Water depth is usually less than 8m. The fine mud is the product of the

community inhabitants, most notably the green algal species like Halimeda

opuntia, H. incrassata, Penici!!Ls pyriformis, and P. capitatus. Other flora
include red algae (Jania sp., and Amphiroa sp.'; encrusting coralline algae
(Melobesla membranacea and Fosliella farinosa); and the brown algae (Padina

sp.).

Between Hawk Channel and the outer reef on the back-reef platform, large areas

of the sea bottom are composed of calcareous sands. These sands do not

contain the fine particles characteristic of tfie calcareous mud and the low

turbidities permit grassbed growth at much greater depths. The grasses

include Thalassia. testudinum and Syringodium filiforme. Green algae dominate

the algal community and the red alga, Melobesia membranacea, occasionally

occurs. Many of the faunal species observed in the grass covered mud bottom

habitat are common here as well. In areas where wave action is more vigorous,

there is little or no grass growth.

Grassbeds in the Keys are also located in near shore areas near fine-grained

and coarse-grained sand beaches, on man.-made gravel beaches and rip rap, and

less frequently on exposed tidal flats.

Thalassia is the largest and most abundant marine grass in the Keys. Its dis

tribution is limited by seven factors: temperature, water depth, turbidity,

salinitywave action, bottom composition and topography. Gaps in the distri-

bution are due to one or more of these limiting factors. Because Thalassia

flourishes best in shallow water, it is vulnerable to a variety of impacts

including propeller damage (Zieman, 1976), sewage effluent (McMulty, 1970).

excess sediment deposition and turbidity (Odum, 1963; Phillips, 1960), and

thermal pollution (Roessler and Zieman, 1969; Zieman, 1970; Zieman and Wood,

1975). Damaged Thalassia beds typically take two to five years to initially

recover (Zieman, 1976). Strong currents and severe weather, such as hurri-

canes, subject grassbeds to natural disturbances. During hurricanes, large

amounts of rain reduce temperature and salinity in shallow water while

increased runoff also dilutes salinity and wind-induced currents increase
turbidity-(Thomas et al-.., 1961). Phillips (1960) noted large amounts of leaf
kill during these events.

There is little marine grassbed development near patch or fringing reefs due

to grazing of grasses by herbivores (Randall, 1965). This zone of bare sand

near reefs can be used as an indicator of reef development and herbivore

population. The better developed the reef, the larger the fish population and

the broader the sand zone.

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

in the administrative review of use proposals. Detailed mapping of marine

grassbeds are in Appendix D (Resource Protection Area Mapping).

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

TABLE TV
ANIMAL LIFE FOUND IN MARINE GRASSBEDS
OR GENERALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THIS COMMUNITY

Mammals Fishes Continued
ntic bottle-nosed dolphin B o n-e-Ti s _h
West Indian manatee Crevalle jack
Spotted seatrout
Birds Red drum
Great blue heron Jewfish
Great white heron French grunt
Louisiana heron Blue striped grunt
Little blue heron White grunt
Great egret Pigfish
Reddish egret Pinfish
Roseate spoonbill Spot
Willet Hogfish
Double crested cormorant Bigeye anchovy
White pelican (winter) Bay anchovy
Crested grebe (winter) Hardhead halfbeak
Red breasted merganser (winter) Halfbeak
Osprey Goldspot killifish
Southern bald eagle Rain Killifish
Brown pelican Longnose killifish
Magnificent frigatebird Gulf killifi5h
American coot Sheepshead minnow
Herring gull Sailfin molly
Forster's tern Reef silverside
Royal tern Hardhead silverside
Least tern Spotfin mojarra,
Caspian tern Silver jenny
Black skimmer Tidewater silverside
Belted kingfisher Silver Perch
Scaled sardine
Reptiles Striped anchovy
T-a-monback terrapirr Southern kingfish
Striped mullet
Fishes White mullet
shark Lined sole
Nurse shark Gag grouper -
Lemon shark Banded blenny
Bonnethead shark Seaweed blenny
Atlantic guitarfish Clown goby
Southern stingray Notchtongue goby
Tarpon Code goby
Snook Emerald clingfish
Cobia Inshore lizardfish
Ladyfish Sea catfish
Grey snapper Gafftopsail catfish
Schoolmaster snapper Gulf toadfish
Lane snapper Sea bream
Mutton snapper Sheepshead
Yellowtail snapper Redfin parrotfish

Animal Life Associated with Marine Grassbeds Continued

Fishes Continued
Great barracuda
Sharptail eel
Goldspotted eel
Moray eel

Tnvertebrates
To -nYl obster
Pink shrimp
Hermit crabs
Long spined urchin
Sea cucumber
Bahamian starfish
Annelid worms
Bivalve mollusks
Queen conch
Sea hare
-Octopus

rich and diverse, depending on the specific area. Table IV lists the animal

life associated with this community. There is a need for more data on these

animal associations.

6. Drift Algae.

The drift algae community includes several species of red, brown, and green

algae, typically occurring interspersed throughout marine grassbeds, as well

as the more pelagic forms such as Sargassum natans and S. fluitans. Primary

productivity in southern seas is often influenced by such environmental

factors as low nutrient concentrations, clear water, high solar radiation and

sballow mi-xed layers in winter and the rapid recycling of nutrients and annual

productivity rates greater than in the temperate waters (Ryther and Yentsch,

1958). Where algal growth is dense and abundant, it is capable of

significantly influencing the area in a number of complex ways (Phillips,

1963). Floating algal mats contribute to the deposition of both organic

detritus and inorganic sediments (Phillips, 1963); while photosynthesizing

algae utilize ammonia from marine animal wastes (Beer, 1963). Kulczycki et

al. (1981) indicated that drift algae provide food, habitat, and shelter for a

variety of epiphytic algae and invertebrates and that the algal biomass is

related to the local abundance of fish which often prey on its inhabitants.

Conditions are favorable within the preserve boundaries for drift algal

communities throughout the year. The highest concentration occurs from spring

through fall in conjunction with prevailing easterly and southerly winds.

7. Tidal Flats

Due to the narrow tidal rances typical of the Florida Keys, tidal flats are

not a common habitat. Where they do occur, they consist of narrow bands

fringed with mangroves and vegetated with sea grasses.

Two tidal flat habitats are distinguished in the Keys by Schomer and Drew
(1982). Exposed tidal flats are characterized by high energy wave activity,

tidal currents and carbonate sand sediments. Sand bars typically occur on the

seaward side of these flats. Exposed tidal flats are generally located in

open bays, in the lee of offshore islands and near tidal inlets.

Sheltered tidal flats, characteristic of interior island lagoons, typically

have unconsolidated carbonate mud sediments in low energy wave and tidal

current areas. Faunal diversity is generally lower than the exposed tidal

flats but polychaete worms, land crabs, fiddler crabs and batillaria snails

inhabit both community types. The most conspicuous predators in this habitat

are the numerous shore and wading birds. Table V lists the animal species

commonly associated with this community.

8. Deep.Water Areas

These areas include natural and artificial inlets, channels, creeks and other

deep water areas. These areas are important for tidal exchange between the

Atlantic Ocean and Florida Bay. They are critical to the tidal flushing

necessary for a healthy ecosystem. The deeper waters also allow predator fish

Tabe V
ANIMAL LIFE COMMONLY ASSOCATED WITH TIDAL FLATS
AND SPOIL ISLANDS

Invertebrates
Polychaetes
Land crabs
Fiddler crabs
Batillaria snails

Birds
Brown pelican
Great blue heron
Yellow-crowned night heron
White ibis
Roseate spoonbill
Semipalmated plover
Wilson's plover
Snowy plover
Piping plover
Ruddy turnstone
Spetted sandpiper
Greater yellowlegs
Lesser yellowlegs
Willet
Red knot
Least sandpiper
Dunlin
Western sandpiper
Sanderling
Short-billed dowitcher
Black-necked stilt
Herring gull
Ring-billed gull
Laughing gull
Forster's tern
Least tern
Royal tern
Sandwich tern
Caspian tern
American oystercatcher
Black skimmer
Double crested cormorant

Mammals
Raccoon

access to shallow water communities. The bottle-nosed dolphin and manatee are

important mammals potentially found in these areas.

9. Spoil Islands

The construction and maintenance of the Intracoastal Waterway Channel resulted

in the formation of spoil islands within the Florida Keys. These islands,

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

channel alignment. Unless the dredging project is of a large scale, spoil

islands tend to be fairly small in size and linear in shape. The original

shape and placement of many islands has been modified by accretion and erosion

from wind, currents, and boat wakes. The placement of spoil islands, in many

cases, destroyed valuable seagrass and shallow water habitats.

Upland Vegetation on these islands is sparse and is generally dominated by

exotics such as the Brazilian pepper. The shoreline, on the other hand, is

usually vegetated with fringing mangroves and other types of native wetland

plants which act as shoreline stabilizers. They also provide valuable habitat

for fish and wildlife. Cormorants, pelicans, and gulls use the mangroves for

breeding and loafing areas. Barren sandy areas on the islands are used as

rookeries for such birds as snowy and piping plovers, least terns, and

American oystercatchers. Table V lists animal species associated with this

habitat.

10. Endangered Species.

Clearing for agriculture and development plus additional pressures from

collectors and exotic species invasion have endangered or threatened the

survival of the native flora and fauna. Tamarindillo (Acacia choriophylla),
mahogany mistletoe (Phoradendron rubrum), and yellowheart (Zanthoxvlum flavum

are known from only a few isolated sites in the Keys. Lands within the

aquatic preserve area contain forty-four species of endangered or threatened

plants currently listed on the official Florida plant list (Section 581.185,

Future research and field study will undoubtedly provide recommendations for

the inclusion of additional species as natural and manmade encroachments

continue to stress their capabilities for survival. Table VI lists the

endangered and threatened flora.

Encroachments on vital habitat, hunting, collecting and pesticides have all

contributed to the decline of many animal species in the Kevs. Hunting

pressures and egg collecting have drastically reduced marine turtles

and the white-crowned pigeon. Plume collecting and nest destruction once

brought several avian species to the brink of extinction. Their continued

existence may still be imperiled by the filling of wetlands necessary to their

survival and the introduction of pesticides in the food chain.

Collection and habitat destruction have extirpated eight subspecies of the

Florida tree snail (Liguus sp.) from their former range in the Keys. The

wide-banded and Florida Keys tree snails and several more species of.Liguus

are presently threatened or endangered.

TABLE VI
FLORAL SPECIES OF THE FLORIDA KEYS AQUATIC PRESERVE
AREA THAT ARE CLASSIFIED AS ENDANGERED OR THREATENED

Scientific Name Common Name Status
FDA FCREPA

Acacia choriophylla Tamarindillo E
Acrostichum aureum Golden leather fern T R
Acrostichum danaeifolium Giant leather fern T
Asplenium serratum Bird's-nest fern T E
Campyloneurum phyllitidus Strap fern T
Cassia keyensis Big pine partridge pea E T
Catesbaea parviflora Small-flowered lily-thorn E E
Catopsis berteroniana Powdery catopsis E T
Cereus graciis Prickly apple cactus E T
Cereus pentagonus Dildo cactus T
Cereus robinii Tree cactus E E
Chrysophyllum olivaeforme Satin leaf T

*Clusia rosea Balsam apple E
Coccotrinax argentata Silver thatch palm E T
Cocos nucifera Coconut palm T
Cordia sebestena Geiger tree T
Cupania glabra Cupania E E
Encyclia boothiana Dollar orchid E E
Encyclia tampensis Butterfly orchid T
Eugenia confusa Redberry ironwood T
Guaiacum sanctum Lignum vitae E T
Habenaria quinuesta Michaux's orchid T
Hippomane mancinella Manchineel T T
Mallotonia gnaphlodes Sea lavender T
Microgramma heterophylla Polypody fern T
Optunia spinosissima Semaphore cactus T
Paltnnium lanceolatum Ribbon fern T
Phoradendron rubrum Mahogany mistletoe T
Pseudophoenix sargentii Buccaneer palm E
Psilotum nudum Whisk fern T
Pteridium aquilium Bracken fern T
Pteris longifolia Ladder brake fern T
Scaevola plumieral Scaevola E
Strumpfia maritima
Pride-of-Big-Pine E E
Suriana maritim Bay cedar E -
Swietenia mahogoni Mahogany T -
Thrinax sp. Thatch palms (all species) T -
Tillandsia balbisiana Wild pine or air plant T -
Tillandsia circinata Wild pine or air plant T
Tillandsia fasciculata Wild pine or air plant E
Tillandsia flexuosa Wild pine or air plant T T
Tillandsia setacea Wild pine or air plant

Floral Species (Endangered or Threatened)-
of the Florida Keys Aquatic Preserve, Continued

Tillandsia utriculata Wild pine or air plant T
Tillandsia valenzuelFna Wild pine or air plant T
Vanilla barbellata Worm-vine orchid T T
Vittaria Tineata Shoestring fern T
ZantFoxy E
lUm flavum Yellowheart

Note:
E=Endangered; T=Threatened; R=Rare
FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services: Preservation of
Native Flora of Florida Act, Section 581.185 Florida Statutes. (Official State
of Florida, list.)
FCREPA=Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals: Rare and
Endangered Biota of Florida Vol. 5, Plants, D.B. Ward, ed; 1978.

Believed to be extirpated except for cultivated plants in the Keys. FCREPA.

Collecting, boat groundings, treasure-salvage and siltation have damaged or

eliminated many coral patch reefs in nearshore marine environments. These

impacts, coupled with natural stresses (storms, temperature fluctuation,

disease, etc.) have prompted concern for this unique community. Uncontrolled

collecting of marine fishes and other invertebrates may also prove threatening

to the survival of those species.

The Key silverside, essentially a marine fish, has been classified as

endangered. Development has encroached on an already restricted range for

this species. Similar pressures have prompted the classification of several

more marine fishes as species of special concern. Pesticide spraying has been
implicated in the decline of common snook populations (EPA, 1981). The

introduction of toxic chemicals into the marine system has the potential to bd.

dispersed throughout the food web to other endangered or threatened fauna.

Endangered and threatened animal species are listed on Table VII. This list

is compiled from the official State of Florida list, as designated by the

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Inclusion of species from other

lists are noted.

Although no amphibian species are presently listed, it is-anticipated that
future research and study of freshwater aquatic areas in the Keys may reveal

morphologically or physiologically unique species.

C. Archaeological and Historical Resources..

In Florida, the Calusa and Tekesta Indians occupied the southern Gulf coast

TABLE VII

FAUNAL SPECIES OF THE FLORIDA KEYS AQUATIC PRESERVE
AREA THAT ARE CLASSIFIED AS ENDANGERED,
THREATENED, OR OF SPECIAL CONCERN

Endangered

Fishes
Key Silversides Menidia conchorum

Amphibians and Reptiles
American crocodile Crocodylus acutus
Leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacea
Atlantic green turtle C@7e onia mydas mydas
Atlantic hawksbill turtle Eretmoche ys imbricata imbricata
Atlantic ridley turtle Lepidochelys Kempii
Key mud turtle Kinogternnn hauri baurl

Birds
Wood stork Mycteria americana
Per6-grine falcon Falco pererinus
Southeastern snow.y plover Charadrius alexandrinus
tenuirostris

Mammals
Key Largo woodrat Neotoma floridana smalli.
Key Largo cottonmouse Peromyscus gossypinus
allapaticola
Silver rice rat OUzomys argentatus
West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus latirostris
Right whale alaena 9 acialis
Finback whale Ba7aenoptera hysalus
Sei whale Balaenoptera forealis
Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae
Sperm whale Physeter catodon

Invertebrates
Schaus' swallowtail butterfly Heraclides aristodemus ponceanus
*Elkhorn coral ARcropora ta
*Staghorn coral Acropora cervicornis
*Staghorn coral prolifera
*Pillar coral Dendrogyra cylindrus
*Large flower coral Mussa angulosa
*Flower coral Eusmilia fastigiata

Threatened

Amphibians and Reptiles
Atlantic loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta caretta
ff'ladophis punctatus acricus
Big Pine Key ringneck snake
Florida brown snake (Lower Keys population Storeria dekayi victa
only)
Miami blackheaded snake Tantilla oolitica
Eastern indigo snake Drymarchon corai@ couperi
-7-
Florida ribbon snake ThamnopHis !iiuritus sac eni
(Lower Keys population only)

Birds
Eastern brown pelican Pelecanus occidentialis
carolinensis
Bald eagle HaTiaeetus leucocephalus
Roseate tern Sterna dougallii
Least tern Sterna antillarum
White-crowned pigeon Columba leucocephala

Mammals
Key Vaca raccoon Procyon lotor auspicatus
Key deer Odocoileus virginianus
c7a-vium

Invertebrates
Stock Island tree snail Orthalicus reses
*Lettuce coral Agaricia a aricites
*Starlet coral Sidprastrea siderea
*Brain coral Diploria cTivosa
*Brain coral Dip oriala.b@rinthiformis
*Brain coral Dieloria strigosa
*Giant braincoral Colpophyllia natans
*Small star coral Monastrpa annularis
*Large star coral To-nastrea cavernosa
*Brain coral Meandri meanUFirtes

Species of Special Concern

Fishes
Common snook Centrooomus undecimalis
Rivulus Rivu us marmoratus
Key blenny Starksia starcki
*Sheepshead minnow Typ-rinodon cf vYriegatus
*Southern gulf killifish Fundulus grandis saguanus
*Longnose killifish (Keys subspecies) Fundulus simills.
*Rainwater killifish Lucania.cf parva
*Mangrove gambusia Gambusia rhizophorae
*Sailfin molly Peocilia cf latipinna
TI stigmaturus
*Spottail goby Gobione us

Species of Special Concern Continued

Amph4bians and Reptiles
American alligator Alligator mississippiensis*
Florida Keys mole skink Eumeces egregius eqregius
Red rat snake Elaphe guttata guttata
(lower Keys population only)

Birds
American oystercatcher Haematopus palliatus
Little blue heron Egretta caertil-ea
Snowy egret Egretta tFuTa
Reddish egret Egretta rufescens
Tricolored heron or Louisiana heron -Eqretta tricolor
Roseate Spoonbill Ajaia ajaia
Limpkin Tramus guarauna

Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission Endangered and Threatened Species
Management and Conservation Plan. 1984 Updaie and Progress Report.
Tallahassee, FL 33pp.-1984.

*Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida. P.C.H. Pritchard, Series Editor. Vol.
1,2,3,4, and 6. University PresTes of Florida, Gainsville, FL 1978.

and southern Atlantic coast, respectively. There is a considerable difference

of opinion regarding the southern boundaries of these tribes and their

occupation of the Florida Keys. Goggin (1971) believes that the political

influence of the powerful Calusa tribe may have been felt in the Keys, but

that it was the Tekesta tribe which actually resided there. Swanton (1979)

generally places the Keys in the territory of the Calusa.

Goggin and Sommer (1949) divide the Tekesta tribes into smaller bands, of

which the most important were the Matecumbe. In all likelihood, the Matecumbe

and other natives of the Keys-were relatively small groups, subject to the

more powerful Calusa or Tekesta. The relative power of the latter two tribes

and their control over the Keys probably changed frequently.

The natives utilized the rich food resources of the tropical coastal waters,

consuming many species of fish, shellfish and marine reptiles and mammals.

Upland animal species such as deer and raccoon, as well as wild plants

probably supplemented their diet. Because there are no deposits of flint or

hard stone in the limestone rock of South Florida, many tools were made from
the heavier portions of conch shells (Goggin and Sommer, 1949).

Archaeological evidence from numerous village sites, middens and burial mounds

and early observations by Spanish explorers support these findings.

The Florida Straits directly off the Keys was a popular route for Spanish

ships, and frequent wrecks on the reefs provided the Indians with a source of

great wealth (Fontaneda, 1944).

The first recorded visit by the Spanish was made by Ponce de Leon in 1513.

The Spanish and English continued their exploration of south Florida and the

Keys throughout that century and there are frequent reports of hostile

encounters with the Indians. In 1755, the Indians reportedly killed as many

as 400 Frenchmen on Lower Matecumbe Key. It was a common practice then to

send the natives to Spain or Cuba to be slaves and interpreters.

The removal of the Spanish took place in 1763 when Florida was ceded to

England in exchange for Havana, Cuba and all of the Spanish residents in

Florida were given the opportunity to evacuate. Many did, taking most of the

South Florida Indians with them (Goggin, 1949). The modern occupation of the

Keys by the English began soon after the departure of the Spanish. There are

few references to the natives in the Keys in the 1800's, except in 1838 when a

band of Indians attacked the settlement on Indian Key. Any remaining Indians

were probably incorporated into the Seminole tribes on the Florida mainland.

By the early 1800's, the valuable mahogany was timbered from the Keys and

several naval stations were established. By 1862, Key West was an established

naval base and Federal troops captured over forty-five confederate ships there
during the Civil War.

Today, the Department of Natural Resources manages several properties in the

Keys and on-site historical and archaeological resources are protected.

Lignumvitae Key (including Shell Key) State Botanical Site protects midden and

burial mounds and Indian Key State Historic Site contains many valuable

artifacts. This area was important to the Indians because of the former

abundant water supplly and the location of the Indian Key Channel which offered

easy passage into Florida Bay.

D. Water Resources.

In other aquatic preserve areas, water resources have been identified as fresh

water sources associated with watersheds and drainage areas. In the Keys the

primary water resource is the marine environment. Water resources in the Keys

would include three separate natural areas: Florida Bay, channels and

passages between the Keys, and the ocean side of the Ke s (Hawks Channel,
y

etc.). Unnatural water resources would include manmade canals and waterways.

The three natural environments noted above have been described in previous

sections. Florida Bay is a shallow carbonate mud bottom area, affected by

mainland freshwater runoff, tidal currents between Keys and

ocean conditions emanating from the Gulf of Mexico. It is a turbid

ment subiect to fluctuations in temperature and salinity. Tidal
environ

channels are transitional areas affected primarily by tidal currents. The

ocean-side environment is one of low turbidity, fewer extremes in temperature

and salinity, and is affected by seaward increase in depth and wave energy.

It is also the environment of the Florida Keys patch and bank reefs.

Several topics are important with regard to water resources and their

continued high integrity. These topics concern impacts from used water

resources in the Keys, such as. reef use, commercial and sport fishing, prop

dredging (improvement of navigational aids), sewage disposal, pump out

facilities for "live aboard" boat owners, and other incidental impacts.

Water quality in the Keys is an important issue. There is a great deal of

information being generated through studies conducted by the Florida Depart-

ment of Environmental Regulation (DER) but information is sparse in some

areas. As a part of DER's 205(j) study, twelve sites in the Marathon-Key Vaca

area are currently monitored for water quality (DER, 1984). The purpose of

this project is to determine whether a water quality problem exists in that

area, whether the problem stems from inadequate sewage treatment, and to

identify significant biological and physiochemical indicators for use in

future monitoring programs. The Department also maintains study areas,

established to obtain baseline data, in several other areas In the Keys

including John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park and an area near Coupon Bight,

Big Pine Key.

Examples of water qualfty problems include the Key West sewage collection

system and outfall. The outfall discharges approximately 4 million gallons

per day (mgd) of raw sewage into the Atlantic Ocean about 4,700 feet from the

shoreline. Other water quality problems have occurred from commercial dock

areas, seafood processing houses and an electric generating plant in the Keys.

In conjunction with DER's permitting process several projects have been

required to monitor water quality in the areas they impact. These projects

may be the source of additional water quality information. DER will also
administer the Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW) program in the Keys if

designated. This designation demands higher water quality-standards and could

require additional water quality monitoring. Though specific areas of

interest may arise for water quality analysis, DER presently can provide a

large body of data on existing water quality.

E. Cultural

This section addresses the human influence and development of this area, and

their effects on the aquatic preserve. The Florida Keys area has been the

site of enormous subdivision and condominium development over the past years.

Most of these developments are restricted to the Key Largo, Marathon, and Key

West areas, but there is the potential for development in other areas. The

1980 U.S. Census population for Monroe County was 63,188, a 20 percent

increase since 1970. Approximately 73.9 percent of the population lives in

the three urban areas identified above. Key West and the Lower Keys hold 60.1

percent-of the population according to the 1980 U.S. Census; 24,292 and 13,687

residents, respectively. The Middle Keys hold 16.2 percent and the Upper Keys

holds 24 percent; 10,221 and 14,891 residents, respectively (Monroe County,

1982).

The North Key Largo area along County Road 905 typifies the massive develop-

ments planned within the aquatic preserve. At least 15 condominium, hotel,

and luxury home projects have been planned, with a projected population impact

of 25,000 to 45,000 new residents by the year 2,000 (Miami Herald, September

1982). The potential population increases associated with these developments

are the major reasons why a viable aquatic preserve management plan is needed.

Without water and wildlife resource management, the increase in population

will increase the potential for environmental degradation.

Tourism and military operations play important roles in the dynamics of the

Monroe County population. Approximately 9.5 percent of the population is

connected to military installations, with-the majority of these individuals

located in Key West. In 1981, approximately 1,006,020 tourists visited the

Florida Keys, mostly during the winter months. Their major activities

included fishing and diving. The large seasonal increases in population,

associated with tourism, add more stress to utilities, services, and

ecosystems that are already stressed.

Not only do the preserves have large population pressures to contend with, but

other man-induced pressures must be addressed as well.

The issues of growth impacts are identified as:

1. Damage to coral reefs from boat anchors, boat groundings, diver-induced

injury, and unpermitted specimen collection.

2. The elimination of mangrove areas and other marine and -Freshwater habitats

by dredging, filling, and land clearing for the purpose of development.

3. Damage to grassbeds from boat propellers. rBare spots in grassbeds do not-
heal rapidly and may increase in size during heavy storms (Patriquin,

1975)]

4. Water quality degradation from improper sewage disposal practices and

stormwater runoff.

5. Aerial spraying of insecticides and the ditching and draining of wetlands

for mosquito control purposes.

6. The replacement of mangroves and other native vegetation with exotic

species such as Brazilian pepper, and Australian pine that do not offer

the same shoreline stabilizing effects against erosion and storm surges.

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.). This part of the management plan

addresses the policies and procedures which both onsite and administrative

personnel will pursue. The onsite management 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

government 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 Florida

Keys. This section is to be used as management guidelines for the field.

personnel in each of the noted areas.

1. Plant Communities

The communities of aquatic and wetland plants, described in more detail in

Chapter IV, within the Preserve perform five major functions vital to the

health and productivity of the system:

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

forces (i.e., currents, tides, winds,, and waves), 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 food web which supports the area's

fisheries, endangered species, migratory waterfowl, colonial

waterbird nesting colonies,.raptors, marine mammals, and marine

invertebrates;

c. they provide protected fisheries habitat for spawning and

juvenile development;

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

e. they physically buffer adjacent waters from contaminated and

channelized runoff from uplands within the watershed and 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, locations of their occurrences, and their condition.

b. Literature Familiarizatiog. 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 and for Mapping the 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 and adjacent to

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 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 grassbed 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 shall 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 for sovereignty submerged lands

when the plant communities in the proposed 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 other approved uses.

The destructive clearing of mangroves on 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 noti-fied of appl4c;@t`orls for uses of

submerged lands within the aquatic preserve "he 9ureau

of Environmental Land Management central I'lo applica-

tions will be approved within Class 1 and 2 Resource Protection

areas (see section (C) of this chapter) withcu-,@- a thorough

review by the field personnel. The field personnel will

inspect the site, assess the potential impacts to the plant

t 4
communities, and then convey their recommenda Ions to the

central office as required.

3. Field personnel will, as time permits, initiate various educational

programs and supplement existing educational prcgrams designed to

increase public awareness of the damage that recreational, private

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

marine grassbed communities.

4. In cooperation with the South Florida 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 Florida Keys.

"I consult with
g. Restoration of Plant Communities. Field personnel ,; I

professionals in the wetlands restoration/revegetatior 7-41eld to determine the

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

restore damaged grassbeds. They will develop quide1-,r---- "rir restoring marine

grassbeds in the aquatic preserve.

Field personnal will identify easily accessible mangrove communities within

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

a nursery stool 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.

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

application will 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 complete.

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 marine animal life of the Florida Keys is important to the

designation of the aquatic preserve. The corals, fish, lobster,.shrimp, and

crabs within the aquatic preserve are valuable resources on which recreational

and commercial fisheries depend. The large areas of undisturbed adjacent

wetlands are critical to the future survival of these resources. 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.

MANAGEMENT POLICY

a. Field Familiarization and Documen!Ation. 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,

time 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. This familiarization will be

particularly focused on the various coral communities within the Keys.

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 endangered 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 of Animal Populations for Changes. 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., prop scars, anchor
damage to corals, 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.

9. Coral Management.. The various types of coral and coral habitat, as

described in Chapter IV, are in a balance between natural and man-induced

changes in the environment. The Coral Reef Report to the Governor and Cabinet
(Skinner and Jaap, 1984) in January 1984 described many factors affecting the

coral reef communities off Key Largo. Those reefs are presently within

federal sanctuary or State Park boundaries. The extensive reef communities in

the aquatic preserve are receiving much the same presslures as described in

that repc@rt, to a greater or lesser degree depending-on location and use. The
field personnel will identify problems in these reef communities (e.g., anchor

damage, water quality problems) and coordinate with other agencies and organi-

zations for solutions. Public education in correct anchoring techniques,

channel marking and other methods are examples of some solutions. The field

personnel will also observe and document any other problems that may need more

extensive solutions (e.g., water quality sources) (Section 370.114, F.S.)

h. 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).

i. Coordination with Other Researchers. 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 passes, 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 state-owned 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 Sections

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

the preserve.

100

Existing bridges within the Keys have resulted in losses of grassbeds and

mangroves. Bridges can restrict natural flushing and create unnatural

circulation patterns. Future proposed bridge locations will be reviewed in

light of these potential impacts.

Maintenance dredging of existing channels should also be carefully

studied to remove conditions that require perennial maintenance and chronic

environmental disturbances. New channels also have the potential to cause

major adverse impacts to the aquatic preserve, with varying influences

depending on channel location.

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

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

Department of Transportation or Water Management Districts, and shall formally

review and comment on any 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 behalf of the aquatic preserve and its resources.

4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL 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.

101

ii. Each site is unique because individually it represents the

tangible remains of events which occurred at a specific time ard

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).

102

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 -

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.

103

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 permissiorl 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

104

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 management 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 preserve's 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 preserve's 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, the South Florida

105

Water Management District) charged wit.h regulating water quality and quantity

or activities that could effect water quality. The objective of the water

resources management shall be to maintain the naturally high water quality and

to enhance or restore water quality in degraded areas. Sources of water

resources data include state and federal agencies, colleges, universities,

scientific foundations and private consultants working in the Keys. These

-various entities have interests at many different levels and areas within the

marine system. The aquatic preserve management program will manage the water

resources through coordination with these various entities. The field

personnel will not have the ability to do 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 Enti.ties. 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. Monroe County

3. South Florida Water Management District

106

4. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

5. U. S. Geological Survey

6. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service

7. South Florida Regional Planning Council

8. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission

9. Florida Department of Natural Resources Marine Research Laboratory

10. University of Miami

11. Florida Institute of Technology

12. Florida State University

13. J. S. Environmental Protection

14 Newfound Harbor Marine Institute

15. Harbor Branch Foundation

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

Field personnel will 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 or 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 applications in cooperation with

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

potential impact on the water resources and aquatic preserve.

107

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 personne-1 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 activities will also be applicable to Chapter X (Scientific Research),

and the coordination through Chapter VT (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

108

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.:

"(1) 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,

M-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 which 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

109

(7) The extent to which mitigation measures may compensate

for adverse impacts."

The availability of onsite staff who are familiar with the distinctive

characteristics of this marine environment, 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 ENCROACHMEMTS

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 area involved in the aquatic

preserve, this will be a progressive activity depending on the field per-

sonnel's eventual familiarization with the preserve and the approved uses.

110

The potential for unauthorized activities-in such an extensive area may

possibly require some type of mapping 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 by case basis.

The major encroachment issues in the Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic

Preserve are: individuals living on moored boats for long periods of time,

dredging and filling, and the building of artificial reefs without permits.

The points of these issues are concerned with private individuals using public

lands and submerged bottoms for activities that have a high potential for

water quality degradation. Not onl-y do these activities degrade water
quality but they are also navigational hazards (e.g., boats anchored without

displaying light and unmarked debris dumped in shallow water and canals to

attract fish and lobsters). The presently ongoing use of Loggerhead and

Raccoon Keys for raising of-monkeys for medical research purposes will be

accommodated, so long as the operators of these facilities take adequate steps

to minimize the impact of their operations on the aquatic preserve. New

requests or expansion of such uses in the preserve will be prohibited.

illegal dredging and filling are the main impacts on the ecosystems in the

Florida Keys. These activities can affect both upland and marine systems

within the area by increasing turbidity, impounding or draining hardwood and

mangrove systems thereby changing their water movement, and destroying

mangrove, hardwood, or seagrass areas. Once the activity is determined to be

illegal, and there is proof that certain individuals are responsible for these

activities, a method of removal conducted at the individual's expense, 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 sensing techniques. This work will be done in

conjunction with DNR's Marine Research Laboratory's Habitat Assessment Team.

Marine Research Laboratory personnel have developed resource and habitat

identification 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

resource and habitat types within the aquatic preserve 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.), archaeolog

archaeological and historical site information and other resource factors

deemed crucial to the continued health and viability of the aquatic preserve.

112

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 the following: hard and soft corals; marine grassbeds; mangrove swamp;

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

will 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 than Class 1 areas. The resources

of Class 2 will include: hard bottoms; marine grassbeds; mangroves in scrub

condition or colonizing new lands; saltwater vegetation 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 areas 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 as 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

113

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, 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 located 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 MA-NAGEMENT OBJECTIVES

This section of the chapter addresses the role of the central office in the

aquatic preserve management planning and implementation process. The central

114

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

Specifically, the following administrative objectives are an essehtial 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.

115

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 258.49. through 258.44, F.S. establish the leg-al context within which

all proposed uses of the aquatic preserve must 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.

116

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

-20, F.A.C., and is generally of negligible
Section 258.42 F.S. and Chapter 16Q

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

-owned lands ma have a significant effect upon the environmental
state y

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

117

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 alternative and it is shown to be

not contrary to the public interest.

118

(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 necessary 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 properly marked

119

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

3. Structures for shore protection, approved navigational

aids, or public utility crossings authorized under

subsection (3)(a).

No wastes or effluents shall be discharged into the

preserve which substantially inhibit the accomplishment

of the purposes of this act.

120

(g) 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.

3. Liaison Between Field Personnel and Other Tnterested 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 identifying and contacting governmental

bodies, special interest groups and interested individuals requiring aquatic

preserve program coordination.

121

When requested by the onsite managersi 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.

122

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 a,nd 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 those

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.

123

I. 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. Army 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 activities in the Keys 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 and 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.

124

The field personnel and central office staff will also review activities

proposed by the COE for conformance to the objectives of the aquatic preserve

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 only one study in the Florida Keys. This

was the Hansen Report on fresh water lenses on Big Pine Key. The field

personnel and central office staff will familiarize themselves with this

report as it applies to their management authorities and will encourage more

USGS participation in researching water quality degradation.

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 with 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 activities where there are common goals.

125

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 naviqation and

boating safety. These structures include bridges, causeways, aerial uti*lities

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 Florida Keys

area in recording commercial fish landings. The NMFS also has enforcement

officers in the area checking for illegal fish landings.

The NMFS has completed an extensive reef fish inventory in the Looe Key

National Marine Sanctuary. The field staff will familiarize themselves with

the results of this study and others as they apply to their management

activities.

Some common goals held by the Aquatic Preserve and NMFS staff are:

1. Maintain complete inventory of all species within preserve

boundaries.

2. Maintain a list of species which have commercial and

recreational value.

126

3. Investigate and document those species using marine grassbeds

and mangroves for nursery areas and juvenile protection areas.

4. Investigate any fishing activities which adversely impact

marine grassbeds and mangroves.

5. Enforcement against illegal fishing activities within the

preserve boundaries.

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 Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic Preserve.

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) holds principle responsibility for air and water quality

regulation. To this end DER, through its permitting process (DER 17-4, 17-12

F.A.C.), permits dredge and fill activities and dock, boat ramp, sea wall and

other forms of construction where applicable. Permitting for dredge and fill,

specifically, is initiated in a three way permit review process in conjunction

with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and the DNR. The overall impor-

tance of each type of permitting activity and its positive effect on water

quality makes DER of primar@v importance to implementation of the aquatic

127

preserve program. The DER also regulates other forms of pollution, such as

noise, wastewater, solid waste and hazardous waste, each of which might affect

the integrity of the aquatic preserve.

DER oversees designated Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW). The standards for

maintaining water quality within an OFW are more stringent than those other

wise considered in other Class III designated waters (waters for recreation,

and management and propagation of fish and wildlife.) All waters of Monroe

County are presently designated Class III while several preserve areas are

already OFW's. Currently the Aquatic Preserve program staff are working with

DER in its proce@ss to designate Monroe County, the entire Florida Keys, as an

OFW Such status will complement the goals of the aquatic preserve management

plan.

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. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR)

The aquatic preserve management program is associated with several other
Department of Natural Resource (DNR) programs in the Florida Keys. Under the

Division of Marine Resources, the St. Petersburg Marine Research Laboratory

128

conducts research statewide. The Marine Laboratory's Habitat Assessm=r-

has developed the Resource Protection Area (RPA) mapping, which will

in the management of this aquatic preserve. This RPA mapping was

through interpretation of aerial photography, LANDSAT satellite imager- a-el

cry
other data sources. The Marine Laboratory also maintains a field labora7.

in Marathon, which is active in lobster and blue crab research. The

Laboratory also has active studies on coral reef ecology and other

areas. Information available through these research facilities may be

important for evaluating potential impacts within the aquatic preserve.

field personnel will become familiar with these studies and prograns.

consult the marine laboratory for their data needs whenever necessary. 7,.,.C@

Division of Marine Resources is also responsible for collection permitting for

certain marine species (primarily shrimp, lobster and oysters). The fllpl@ and.

central office staff will become familiar with this permitting process -. -in

the aquatic preserve.

The Division of Beaches and Shores is responsible for carrying out Chaptpr

161, F.S., the Beach and Shore Conservation Act. The powers of the Div-,s-ion

include drawing coastal construction setback lines for counties under

consideration. The law does not apply, however, to the shores of irlar,-

waters or other non-sand (e.g., mangrove) shorelines. For this reaso-,

Division's concerns in the Keys have been limited to date. However, there are

several beach areas within the Florida Keys. If threats to these areas

apparent, interaction with the Division of Beaches and Shores persorre': oe

helpful. Currently, the county and the state offer little protection +c, 4.@-'nse

beaches.

129

The Division of Recreation and Parks,.in addition to administering the Aquatic

Preserve Management Program under the Bureau of Environmental Land Management,

manages 2 State Recreation Areas , 2 state historic sites, 1 state park and 1

state botanical preserve within the Florida Keys. John Pennekamp Coral Reef

State Park, managed in conjunction with the Key Largo Coral Reef National

Marine Sanctuary, exists as a major marine resource in the Keys. Over the

years of the park's exi.stence, many very informative studies have been carried

out within its boundaries. Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary is managed in

conjunction with Bahia Honda State Recreation Area and has also been involved

in important studies. Future studies will continue to provide much valuable

information about the Florida Keys and the marine environment. John

Pennekamp, Long Key, Bahia Honda, Lignumvitae Key and Indian Key also provide

protection and public access to unique and beautiful regions. Within the

boundaries of each of these recreation, historic and botanical areas, unique

upland and aquatic habitats are preserved. This is important for the

maintenance of the habitats themselves and their preservation as examples of

unique environments in Florida and the United States.

Two aquatic preserves and part of another presently exist within the Florida
Keys; Lignumvitae Key, Coupon Bight and Biscayne Bay (portion within Card

Sound). These preserves or portions of preserves are small and insular, but

have been important in protecting their respective resources.

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

130

privately titled submerged lands or contiguous uplands important to the integ-

rity of the preserve. This relationship is more fully described in Chapter V(C).

The Marine Patrol, under DNR's Division of Law Enforcement, also operates in the

Florida Keys. Although most of their enforcement efforts are drug related, they

have increased their environmental enforcement cases in the last year (primarily

lobster trapping issues). The field personnel will become familiar with their

programs and operation, and will call on the marine patrol for law enforcement

support as required.

3. 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 consideration

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.

131

4. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (GFWFC)

The GFWFC administers the Endangered Species Program in Florida. A

significant percentage of the species listed by the state as either, rare,

threatened, or endangered reside in the Florida Keys. Many of these species,

including mammals, invertebrates, birds, and reptiles live in or periodically

use the aquatic preserve. The GFWFC will play a strong role in assisting in

the preservation of these species, and will work closely with the field

personnel and central office staff in developing program needs in this area.

The GFWFC's Environmental Services office in Vero Beach sends biologists into

the 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.revi6w 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.

5. Department of Community Affairs (DCA)

The DCA is responsible for reviewing Developments of Regional Impact (DRI)

and for administration of the Areas of Critical State Concern (ACSC).

Presently the DRI process is not in effect due to the ACSC status in the Keys.

DRI's are major developments that have impacts on a scale which is greater

132

than the 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 then proceed with the field review. The central office staff will

coordinate the field review findings and work with the other state agencies in

the review of the DRT.

The Governor and Cabinet designated the Florida Keys as an Area of Critical

Concern on April 15, 1975. A prime objective of the designation and regula-

tions (principles) was to strengthen local land use management capabilities.

DCA has been working with the local governments in a cooperative inter-

governmental effort to meet this objective. The County has enacted ordinances-

and refined several existing ordinances to better address the complex growth

management issues within the Florida Keys. DCA has the authority to approve

the comprehensive plan and implement land use regulation within the ACSC.

6. The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS)

The HRS provides many services to the public. Of interest to the Aquatic

Preserve Program are the HRS's programs of septic tank regulation and locally

implemented mosquito control. Septic tank usage has become a major issue in

the Keys. Violations in or incorrect septic tank use affect the water quality

within the preserve. 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.

133

7. The 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 sites.

8. The Department of Transportation

The DOT maintains state highways and bridges. The DOT is currently renovating

old bridges and working on several highway projects in the Keys. The field

personnel and central office staff will work with the resident engineer on

anticipated projects having possible impacts on the aquatic preserve. The

field staff will review any major highway or bridge projects as they may

affect the aquatic preserve.

C. REGIONAL

The regional level of the management implementation network as it applies to

the aquatic preserve will include the South Florida Water Management District,

and South Florida Regional Planning Council. These organizations have

activities that are broader than-the local government, but are on a smaller

scale than the state level.

1. Water Management District. The district boundaries of the South Florida

134

Water Management District (SFWMD) contain.the Monroe County area. The water

management district administers permitting programs for the local consumable

use of water, stormwater discharges, and some dredge and fill type activities.

The types of water uses they permit in Monroe County are very limited at this

time. The field personnel will become familiar with the review and permitting

procedures as they might apply to water supply and stormwater in the Ke s.
y

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. South Florida Regional Planning Council. The South Florida Regional
Planning Council (SFRPC) serves as a regional planning body for the local

governments of Monroe County as well as cities within the Keys and other

southeast Florida counties. Among its duties, the SFRPC:

a. aids local governments with planning expertise;

b. is the regional representative for the Development of Regional

Impact (DRI) review process (when this process resumes after the

ACSC designation is removed);

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 SFRPC has within its administration that may effect

or prove useful to the aquatic preserve program.

135

The DRI review of projects which affects the aquatic preserve will be reviewed

by the central office staff, with the field personnel's field review, when

necessary. DRT'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.

D. Local Governments and Special Districts.

Incorporated areas in the Keys include the towns of Key Colony Beach, Layton,

and the City of Key West. These areas are governed by city commissions. They

are, as are the remainder of the Keys, designated-as Areas of Critical State

Concern.

The remainder of the unincorporated area of the Keys is governed by the Monroe

County Commission. The five members of the commission are nominated and

elected "at large" to administer county affairs. Special districts include

Monroe County Mosquito control, which is administered by the Department of

Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS). The Monroe Airport District

(19-283, M.C.C) administers Key I-lest, Marathon, and Port Largo airports in

conjunction with DOT and the Federal Aviation Administration. An appointed

Airport Site Selection Committee is currently reviewing proposed sites for an

airport in the Upper Keys.

Field personnel will be available to these local entities to assist them in

modifying their policies and practices to conform to the aquatic preserve

management plan, and to exchange information for mutual benefit.

136

1. Relationship to local management plans. All local governments are

required by the Local Government Conprehensive Planning Act (LGCPA) of 1975

(Section 163.3161, F.S.) to have a comprehensive management plan to assure

long range plans for orderly and balanced growth for cities and counties.

Prior to the LGCPA, there was minimal county regulation of activities in envi-

ronmentally sensitive areas within Monroe County. Private and public lands

were cleared of vegetation, dredged, filled and developed with little regard

for long term impacts or planning needs. Concern for the loss of natural

features, uncontrolled growth and lack of a comprehensive plan prompted the

state to designate the Keys as an Area of Critical State Concern in 1975.

A comprehensive County plan was drafted in 1977 and revised in 1979. The

Coastal Zone Protection and Conservation Element (CZPCE) addressed conflicts

in land use and established goals, objectives and policies for resource

management. Marine Resource Areas of Particular Concern (APC) include

Lignumvitae Key and Coupon Bight Aquatic Preserves, John Pennekamp Coral Reef

State Park and Key Largo Coral Reef National Marine Sanctuary. The CZPCE also

contained management policies for these categories (sea grasses, coral reefs

and shoreline mangroves). Policies for these areas were intended to provide

stringent regulations for adjacent development.

With the assistance of the Department of Community Affairs, Monroe County

embarked upon a concerted effort to draft a new comprehensive plan in 1983.

The new plan and map will conform to the "Principles for Guiding Development

in the Keys Area of Critical State Concern", adopted by the Governor and

Cabinet by resolution in July, 1984. The plan elements are nearing completion

137

and it is anticipated that the plan and map will be in place by March or

April, 1985. The county commission recently resolved to extend a major

development moratorium until the planning process is completed for the County.

A notice of a proposed rule to approve the Land Development Regulations for

the Cit of Key West was issued September 21, 1984. This document will be
y

proposed for adoption in January, 1985.

Key Colony Beach and Layton are currently formulating similar management

plans for those areas;

Aquatic preserve.personnel will become familiar with the county comprehensive

plan and assist local planning staff and state agencies to identify and

resolve possible conflicts or inconsistencies with aquatic preserve management

objectives. Field personnel and central office staff will assist local

planning officials in preparing marina elements, as required in Chapter

IX-30) of the Keys Aquatic Preserve management plan.

2. Relation to local development codes. Present county ordinances that

affect natural resources within the aquatic preserve include Chapters 4, 18
and Sections 19-101, 19-108 and 19-111 of the Monroe.County Code (MCC).

Chapter 4, also known as the Shoreline Protection Zone (SPZ)

ordinance, establishes a fifty foot zone that extends laterally

upland from fringing mangrove communities. Specified uses and

special uses are delineated. This ordinance does not address nor

protect rocky shorelines for sand/shell beaches and berms.

138

Chapter 18, known as the Trees and Vegetation ordinance, provides

guidelines for the protection of native vegetation. This chapter

may be used in conjunction with Chapter 4 to regulate the clearing

Of vegetation within the SPZ.

Section 19-101 regulates permitting and length of residential docks

but ports are not addressed.

Section 19-108 is intended to regulate liye-aboard vessels in canals

and offshore waters and specifies that live-aboards berth onl at
y

those marinas with sewage pump-out facilities. This portion of the

code is not currently enforced in the county.

Section 19-111 establishes criteria for county permitting for

excavation and dredging/filling of tidal or submerged lands.

Other chapters of Monroe County Code specify zoning, building, subdivisions,

planned unit development and major development regulations that may

potentially affect the aquatic preserve management goals and objectives.

Additional or revised ordinances will be forthcoming after the adoption of the

new comprehensive plan. Field personnel will become familiar with local

building and zoning codes to identify those areas that may be in conflict with

aquatic preserve management objectives. Field personnel and central office

staff will assist local planning and zoning officials in revision of present

139

codes a-@. 4M formulating new codes or ordinances to conform to the preserve

marage!r,n.-it pl6ns if required.

3. [email protected] 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 1--cal government mangrove ordinances; recreation problems where a

local pa--k is in or near an aquatic preserve, or any other preserve problem as

it might reate to local government. The field personnel will offer assis-

tarce cr 4n'ormation to local officials or coordinate with other agencies to

help solve these problems as they occur. The field personnel will also

comment, through the central office, on any local practice that is identified

as endarcering the well-being of the aquatic preserve.

4. Special Districts (Drainage and Mosquito Control). -These districts may

not have ar official comprehensive management plan, but they do have manage-

ment policies and program statements that are similar to such a plan. The

fleld personnel will become familiar with these policies and the activities of

these districts and will monitor their effect on the aquatic preserve. For

example, t@a field personnel might recommend identifying areas that should not

receive rcsquito spraying or other alternative management because of

remoteness to inhabited areas and possible, but unnecessary damage to the

resources c-F the aquatic preserve; or drainage districts might be asked not to

use cerl'.'a'fn types of herbicides or to use them only at certain times of the

year.

140

E. Other Entities

This section will apply to the numerous entities that have an interest in the

aquatic preserve but arenon-governmental agencies. This will include, but

not be limited to, the environmental interest groups (i.e., Audubon Society,

Izaak Walton Leagure, Sierra Club), the scientific organizations, the fishing

and sports interest groups (i.e., Organized Fishermen of Florida), the
universities that may have research activities in the preserve (i.e.,

University of Miami, University of Floridaj 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.

141

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 s-port 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 right 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 uses as applicable to each resource.

A. Consumptive Uses.

Consumptive uses involve the removal of resources from the preserve.

These uses include fishing, shellfishing, shell and fish collecting, and

other related activities. They also include the unintentional removal of

resources by propeller and anchor damage to grassbeds and corals. The

management of these uses (see Chapter V. Resource Management, Section 8:

Onsite Management Objectives) will include the observation and monitoring

143

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 identifying habitat losses or

disturbances in the 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 practice 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.

Traditional uses will also be monitored for their effect on other

resources (e.g., bird rookeries, marine grassbeds, archaeological 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. Although boating and diving

are usually considered as non-consumptive uses, they can become consump-

tive when boat operators carelessly place anchors in coral or seagrass

beds or navigate into waters that are too shallow for their boats.

144

The management practices 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 preserve's

resources (e.g., destroys marine grassbeds, damages corals, disturbs

rookeries). Some of these uses may possibly be involved in environmental
educational (Chapter XI) programs.

145

146

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

ingress, 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 Areas (Class 1 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

Protection Area Map and criteria. In addition, private dock proposals will

147

be reviewed by the criteria set forth. in Sections 160-21.05 and 16Q-21.041,

F.A.C. and 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

modifications accommodating 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 will be 500 feet or 20% of the subject waterbody,

whichever is less.

Ii. 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.

the above criteria shall be modified by local zoning requirements if

found to be more restrictive,

148

Bulkheads should be placed, if allowed, in such a way as to be the least

destructive and disruptive to the vegetation and other resource factors in

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 aquatic preserve shall be held to a minimum. Dredging

proposals shall be reviewed according to the procedures in Chapter V depending

on the location of the proposed activities within the RPA. Proposals within

Class 1 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

149

applications for such facilities, and the criteria set forth in Sections

16Q-21.03 and 16Q-21.041, F.A.C., 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

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 channel shall be prohibited in Class I

or 2 Resource 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;

g. Finger piers shall not exceed three feet in width, and 25 feet in

1 ength;

h. Pilings may be utilized as required to provide adequate mooring

capabilities.

i., The Trustees may also stipulate the number, lengths, drafts and

types of vessels allowed to utilize the proposed facility.

150

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

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 associated 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 affect

endangered species habitat, can be utilized in a safe manner, and will not

preempt traditional uses within the proposed use area.

151

CHAPTER IX

COMMERCIAL USES

This section addresses the variety of traditional and non-traditional (i.e.,

new uses in this area) commercial uses which might occur within the aquatic

preserve. Among the traditional uses in the Florida Keys area are utility

crossings, powerplants,marinas and yacht clubs, commercial fishing, and other
types of boats (e.g., sport fishing, diving) for hire. Non-traditional uses

in this area include: aquaculture, and seaplanes.

A. TRADITIONAL COMMERCIAL USES.

Utility Crossings. There are, at the 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 V[BI).

Increased or additional use of 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 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. Crossings

should be limited to open water areas to minimize-disturbance to marine

grassbeds, corals, mangroves or other critical habitat areas.

153

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 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). For example, the State of Florida has enacted closed

seasons for crawfish and stone crabs. During this time all traps are to be

out of the water. Traps that are found in the water during closed season

should be confiscated and sold at an auction or the owner should be notified

and fined a fixed amount per trap. The State of Florida has enacted a law

prohibiting the use of certain types of fishing procedures, such as fish

traps. The field personnel will notify the appropriate authorities in the

event these laws are broken. The field personnel, along with other agencies

and the 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 in commercial fishing are identified and

documented, the findings will be presented to the Marine Fisheries Commission.

It is within their authority and the Florida Legislature to regulate

commercial fishing.

Issues of trap storage and reworking facilities along with commercial tropical

fish collecting by chemical use need to be addressed also. The problem of

trap storage and trap reworking facilities should be a main concern of the

154

aquatic preserve management staff. The majority of lobster and stone crab

traps are made of wood dipped in oil or diesel fuel to prolong trap use.

Because commercial lobstering and crabbing is important throughout the Keys

and most of the dipp ing is done close to the water, the impact from oil and

fuel contaminated runoff is great, and it affects a significant area of the

preserve. The management staff should work in conjunction with other agencies

present in the preserve in order to centralize and minimize the number of trap

storage and reworking areas. The use of centralized commercial fishing

villages or zones that are properly sited and designed will relieve many of

the above problems. The use of chemicals in fish collecting is regulated

under Section 370.08 F.S. There is some evidence that excessive and negligent

use of ch'emicals has caused damage to coral and other organisms. Additional

data is necessary to document the extent of this problem.

3. Marinas. The locating of marinas and their related uses will be a major

concern of the Florida Keys 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, and as modified by Sections 16Q-21.03 and

16Q-21.0419 F.A.C., shall be used for siting marinas in the aquatic preserve.

This policy will be that:

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.,

155

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 undistur-'

bed 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

VI) on location of marinas close to demand areas and in areas

with sufficient uplands to support activity needs,.and

field personnel will work with local government in finding

marina sites that meet the above policies and that are

protected from hurricanes.

156

4. Deep Water Port Facilities. The only port of this type within the

Florida Keys is the Port of Key West. Mew activities and maintenance work

there will be reviewed as to their effect on the preserve. Mew port facili-

ties, including terminal facilites within the preserve boundary shall be

prohibited.

5. Other Docking. Any other type of commercial docking, such as associated

with fish houses, fish processing plants or other commercial uses, will follow

the marina siting policy as stated in Section A(3) of this Chapter. Size

dimensions are highly variable due to individual use needs and will be

reviewed on a case by case basis consistent with the environmental resources

and the criteria outlined in Sections 16Q-21.03 and 16Q-21.041, F.A.C.

6. Power Plants. The Key West City Electric Company has two power plants

located in the vicinity of the Aquatic Preserve. One is on Stock Island; the

other is in Key West. Both plants have primary intakes and discharges in

commercial boat basins. The potential is there for causing changes in air

quality, water quality, and plant and animal life in aquatic preserve waters

adjacent to these plants. For these reasons, additional power plants are

incompatible with the purposes of the aquatic preserve. Field personnel will

monitor water quality in areas adjacent to these power plants for impacts

which might be caused by heated or contaminated effluent. Presently the City

Electric'system is negotiating a merger with Florida Power and Light. If this

occurs, the power plants in Key West will be used for additional and emergency

power while Florida Power and Light will be the main power source.

157

B. NON-TRADITIONAL COMMERCIAL USES.

1. Aquaculture. The vast area of the Florida Keys and its relatively stable
environmental parameters (temperature, salinity, etc.) could potentially-be

used for aquaculture development. These uses may include floating or sub-

merged structures, impoundments, or other new techniques now being used in

aquaculture. The location and type of impacts to the resources will require

careful examination. If there is not sufficient data for valid evaluation, a

small scale test of the use might be possible in a selected area. Aquaculture

practices now being used are impoundments and above ground tanks to culture
pink shrimp (Panaeus duorarum), and submerged tile sponge culture, although

not on a commercial basis at this time.

2. Seaplanes. Uses of this sort, which cause high noise levels, high speed

disturbances, or constant activity over a standard route or landing area will

require careful placement in areas that will not disturb wildlife, affect

marine grassbeds, or otherwise degrade the natural conditions of the aquatic

preserve. There are approximately four seaplane bases in the Florida Keys.

Seaplane activity is not seen as a common means of travel or a-traditional

use, therefore no new seaplane areas will be allowed in the aquatic preserve.

The field personnel should be involved in the planning, time of operation

scheduling, and the monitoring of these seaplane activities in conjunction

with the central, office staff.

3. 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

158

anticipated impact on the aquatic preserve and the best location
activity compatible to the resource protection areas within the

159

Chapter X

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

More than most aquatic preserve areas, the.Florida Keys are the focus of a

wide variety of scientific studies. The primary interest of the Aquatic

Preserve Program is that communication be maintained with all entities

carrying out research in the Keys. It will be valuable for the staff of the

aquatic preserve to keep abreast of the ecological problems investigated by

researchers. Further, staff should be able to direct concerns to identified

knowledgeable individuals and groups as data and research needs become

apparent.

One of the largest problems for aquatic preserve'staff in the Keys will be

identifying all organizations currently doing research in the area. As the

Florida Keys environments are unique to the United States, groups from all

over the country carry out work here. One of the identified needs of the

program will be to make contact with as many of these groups as possible,

especially out-of-state groups.

The University of Miami carries out a wide range of biological and geological

projects, through The Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science.

Much of the current knowledge concerning the Keys has come from this

institution. In addition, the University has, in the past, promoted marine

161

education through its marine laboratory facility on Pigeon Key, below

Marathon. The Florida Keys Community College, as well as other universities

throughout Florida and other states, also provide much research knowledge

concerning the Keys.

Groups providing non-collegiate education in the Keys are Florida Keys Marine

Institute, Marine Training Program and Newfound Harbor Marine Institute,

associated with Sea Camp. The last group also carries out active marine

research in biology, geology and oceanography. Harbor Branch Foundation, Inc.

also has a unit doing research in the Big Pine Key area.

State and federal agencies which conduct or support research in the Florida

Keys include DNR's Marine Research Laboratory (Marathon), The National

Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Key Largo and Looe Key

National Marine Sanctuaries, The National Park Service (Everglades National

Park and Fort Jefferson National Monument), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (Key Deer and Crocodile Refuges) studies on rare, threatened or

endangered species.

Non-profit and private firms conducting marine related research include Sea
World (Shark Institute, Long Key), Walt Disney World's EPCOT Center (currently
investigating potential collecting sites in the Keys), Dolphin Research Center

and Aqualife Research Corp., Sea World's Shark Institute is currently doi-ng

research in animal husbandry and supports active research from individuals,

groups and universities.

162

The Aquatic Preserve Program will strive to encourage responsible research in

t.he Keys, and the staff will maintain active contact with groups doing

research.

163

CHAPTER XI

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

The aquatic preserve should be used to encourage and enhance environmental

educational programs at every opportunity. The goal of maintaining the

aquatic preserve for the benefit of future generations can be realized in

part, through the use of aquatic preserves for environmental education.

Through education, the people'living in and visiting Monroe County 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 preserve.

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 in the preserve.

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.

165

The field personnel should also prepare programs on the value of managemeni-

activities of the aquatic preserve for presentation to interested groups o-F

all ages. Educating the public about aquatic preserve management is the key

to the success and future of the preserve.

166

CHAPTER XII

IDENTIFIED PROGRAM NEEDS

This chapter ofthe management plan will address the various internal program

needs that are expected to be identified as the management program evolves.

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.

167

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, and endangered species habitat.

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. The Department of the Interior's U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

has continuing acquisition programs to enhance the Key Deer and Crocodile

Refuges in the Lower Keys and upper Key Largo. In addition there may be other

acquisitions of critical habitat for newly listed endangered species. The

status of several species is presently under review in the Keys. The efforts

in acquiring additional environmentally significant lands will complement the

goals of the aquatic preserve. The Conservation and Recreation Lands Program

(CARL) has been instrumental in the acquisition of these lands. This

statewide program has been charged with identifying lands of critical concern

for protection and prioritizing monies for their acquisition.

Of primary concern to the Florida Keys Aquatic Preserve are submerged lands

held in private ownership. The acquisition, where feasible, under the

168

authority contained in Section 253.02(4),.F.S. cQuld be possible. Private

agencies such as The Nature Conservancy and Trust for Public Land may be

involved in land acquisition of these lands in the Keys. The acquisition o.,F

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 the preserve.

The field personnel, during normal management activities, should be aware of
significant upland areas and sovereign lanid conveyances which, if developed,

would compromise the integrity of the aquatic preserve. The field personnel

will keep a running record of these areas and will prioritize these areas for

possible public acquisition. The directed efforts of other agencies and the

Aquatic Preserve Program toward acquiring uplands, wetlands and marine bottom

lands should complement one another in protecting the Keys' environment.

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 boundar chances and
y

169

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 change will

require legislative approval.

C. Legislative Needs

Management needs could conceivably involve changes in the legislation

pertaining to aquatic preserves or changes in the other statutes upon which

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

Department of Natural Resources, as well as other agencies, that affect the

management of.the preserve.

E. Data (Information) Needs

Staff will identify data needs as they arise, and will be in contact with

appropriate state and federal agencies as concerns from the staff and Keys

citizens are identified. Staff should be responsible for promoting research

170

on environmental issues through public agencies and private institutions, such

as maior universities.

In addition, further knowledge of water quality studies currently carried out

or proposed for the Keys will be most helpful in evaluating the health of the

Keys area. Information regarding all impacts within the aquatic preserve is

being collected and shall continue to be as a basis for environmental

evaluation.

F. Resource Protection and Enforcement Capabilities

In addition to field personnel, the protection of the preserve's resources

depends on the Florida Marine Patrol's enforcement authority. These

protection needs might also require additional enforcement support from local

government or other state agencies. The need for additional manpower,

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.

171

G. Funding and Staffing Needs

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 to handle even with

limited assistance from other agencies. Funding and staffing needs are

critically important to the success of the aquatic preserve program.

The management of the Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic Preserve will be

integrated into the management programs and needs of other BELM programs in

the area. A proposed staffing of the Keys would be designed around three

management zones; the Upper, Middle, and Lower Keys. The proposed staff would

include a preserve manager, three biologists, four rangers and a secretary.

A proposed budget given these needs for the first year has been estimated at

,V265,306 for staff, equipment, office and expenses.

172

FLORIDA KEYS-MONROE COUNTY AQUATIC PRESERVE

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adey, W. Shallow Water Holocene Bioherms of the Caribbean Sea and West
Indies. pp. XXI-XXIV. Vol. 2. In: Proceedings. Third international
Coral Reef Symposium. University-of Miami, Miami, Florida. 1977.

Alexander, T.R. "High Hammock Vegetation of the Southern Florida
Mainland". Quar. J. Fla. Acad. Sci., 21(4):294-298. 1958.

Artman, L.P., Jr. Key West History. 1969.
Baker, J.M. The Effects of Oil on Plant Physiology. In: Ecological Effects
of Oil Pollution.- E.B. Cowell, ed. Applied Sci6n-ce lishers, London.
pp. 88-98.-=.

Ball, M.M., E.A. Shinn and K.W. Stockman. "The Geologic Effect of Hurricane
Donna in South Florida". J. Geol., 75:583-597. 1967.

Ballentine, D. and H.J. Humm. "Benthic Algae of the Anclote Estuary 1.
Epiphytes of Seagrass Leaves". Florida Scientist, 38(3): 1975.

Barnes, 1Z.D. Invertebrate Zoology. Third Edition. W.B. Saunders Co. 870 pp.
1974.

Bell, F.W., P.E. Sorenson and V.R. Leeworthy. The Economic Impact and
Valuation of Saltwater Recreational Fisheries in Florida. Flor-irUa Sea
Grant College. Project #R/FR-16. Report #45. April 19*82.

Benham, S.R., R.L. Boyce, W.W. Drexler, and M.M. Hamilton. "A Carbonate
Sand Beach, Bahia Honda Key, Fla". (abst) Geol Soc Amer. Abstracts,
2:194. 1970.

Bent, A.C. Life Histories of North American Birds. U.S. Natl. Mus.
Bulletin. 162 pp. 1992.

Bert, T.M., R.E. Warner and L.D. Kessler. The Biology and Florida Fishery of
Stone Crab Menippe mercenaria with Emphasis n Southwest Florida.
Florida Sea Grant College. Technical paper #9. 1978.

Bohnsack, J.A. Effects of Piscivorous Predator Removal on Coral Reef Fish
Community Structure. pp. 258-267. In: Gutshop '81 Fish Food Habitat
Studies. C.M. Caillet and C.A. Sinienstad, eds. Washington Sea Grant
Publ. -University of Washington, Seattle. (in preparation)

Bright, T., W. Jaap and C. Cashman. Ecology and Management of Coral Reefs and
Organic Banks. pp. 53-160. In: Proceedings of environmental research
needs in the Gulf of Mexico. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, RL,
Miami, Florida. 1981.

"Reefs and Bioclastic Sediments of the Dry Tortugas". Geol.
-nks, H.K.
Soc. Am. Spec. Pap. 73: 1-2. 1963.

r,1---1ton, J.M. "Land Building and Stabilization by Mangroves". Environmental
Conservation, 1(4):285-293. 1974.

;-a-r, A.F. "A Contribution to the Herpetology of Florida. University of
Florida Publ. Bio. Ser. 3(1): 1-118. 1940.

Carr, A. "Handbook of Turtles. Turtles of the United States, Canada, and
Baja, California. Comstock Pub. Assoc. Ithaca, N.Y. 54Z pp. 1952.

C@@--r, A.W. and C.J. Goin. Reptiles, Amphibians and Freshwater Fishes of
Florida. University of Florida, Gainesville. 341 pp. 1955.

Hill. 1983 Biological Monit lts Stock Island Power Plant.
orinS Resu
Utility Board of the City of Key West. April 1984.

E.I. Oil pollution and Tropical Littoral Communities: Biological
Effects of the 1975 Florida Keys Oil Spill. In: Proceedings 1977 Oil
Spill Conference. American Petroleum Institute, Environmental Protection
Agency and U.S. Coast Guard. 539-542 pp. 1977.

"@---Ofer, R.H. Environmental Analysis: Canals and Ouarries Lower Florida
Keys. Marine Research Foundation. Key West, Florida. 162 pp. 1

:s@er, R.H. Canal Sur
Vey - Florida Keys. Marine Research Foundation. Key
',lest, Florida. 173 pp. 1914.

J.A. Aquatic Animals as Indicators of Environmental Exposures.
Journal of Environmental Science and Health, A17(4): 473-476. 198Z.

ghead, F.C., Sr. The Trees of South Florida. Volume I. University of
Miami Press, Coral Gables, Fl. 212 pp. 1971.

C-a4ghead, F.C., Sr. and V.C. Gilbert. "The Effects of Hurricane Donna on the
Vegetation of Southern Florida". Quart J. Fla. Acad. Sci. 25:1-28. 1962.

C. On the Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs and Geological.
Observations on the Volcanic Islands and Parts of South America Visited
During the Voyage of HMS Beagle. Ward lock & Co., London. 549 pp.
1842.

rFivis, G.E. "Anchor Damage to a Coral Reef on the Coast of Florida".
Biological Conserv., 11:29-34. 1977.

[email protected];s, J.H., Jr. "The Ecology and Geologic Role of Mangroves in Florida".
Carnegie Institute, Washington, D.C. Publ. 517. Tortugas Lab Pap.,
32:303-412 pp. 1940.

4
O.H., Jr. "The Natural Features of South Florida, Especially the
1.@eaetation and the Everglades". Fla. Geol. Sur. Bull., 25:1-333. 1943.

Davis, J.H., Jr. Stabilization of Beaches and Dunes by Vegetation in Florida.
Sea Grant College, Report # 7. 1

Davis, W.P. Ecological Tnteractions, Comparative Biology, and Evolutionary
Trends of Thirteen Pomadasyrd Fishes at Alligator Key, Florida K@ys.
Ph.D Dissertation. RSMAS, University of Miami, Coral Gabi-es-77orida.
128 pp. 1.967.
Department of Community Affairs. Bounda!_:X and Principles for Guiding
Development in the KUs Area of Cr tical State Concern. (Proposed rule
li-dopted March 6, 1984). Chapter 27F-8 (Formerly 22F-8). 26 pp. 1984.

Department of Community Affairs. Approval of Local Land Development
Regulations (for the City of Key West). Rule No. 9B-30.(PFo-posed rule,
adopted September Z1, 1984). 3 pp. T984.
Department of Pollution Control. Survey of Water Qualit@ in Waterways and
Canals of the Florida Keys: With Pecommendatons. April 1973.

Dustan, P. "Besieged Reefs of the Florida Keys". Natural Hist., 86:73-76.
1977.

Ebersole, W., N. McFarland, S.L. Miller and N.G. Wolf. "Timing of Recruitment
and-Species Composition in Coral Reef Fishes". Biological Science,
34(l): 1984.

Eiseman, N. Algae. pp 31-35 and 141-144. In: Key Largo Coral Reef National
Marine Sanctuary Deep Water Resource Survey. NOAA Tech. Rep. CZ/SP-1.
Washington, D.C. 1981.

Endean, R. Destruction and Recovery of Coral Reef Communities. pp. 215-254
In: Bj2122y and Geology of Coral Reefs. Vol. 3., 0. Jones and R. Endean
@i_ds._ AcMmic res's, New York. 197T.-

Environmental Protection Agency. Effects of Butex and Malathion on Earl
Life Staqes of Snook, Centropomus undecimalis. Surveillance and Analysis
Division, Ecology Br Athens, George. 1981.

Enos, P and P.D. Perkins. Evolution of Florida Bay Interpreted from Island
Stratigraphy (abst). S.E.P.M. Annual Meeting, New Orleans. 1976.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc. Bioassay Report: Onsite,
Flow-through Bioassays for the UtilitX Board of the City of K West*
Key West and Stock Island Plants. Utility Board of the City St.
April 198T.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc. Bioassay Report: Onsite
Flow-through Bioassays for the Utility Board of the City_-67 -Key West:
Ki@y@est and Stock Island Plants. Utility Board of the City of K`E77est.
May 1984.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc. Bioassay Report: Onsite
Flow-through Bioassays for the Utility Board of the City of Rev West:
Key West and Stock Island Plants. Utility Board of the City V Key West.
July 1984.

Evans, R.K. Guide to the Wetland Plants of Submerged and Transitional Zone
Lands. rida Department of Environmental Regulation. Z94 pp. 1977.

Florida Coastal Coordinating Council. Florida Keys, Coastal Zone Managmenent
Study. Florida Department of Natu-r-aT-Resources. 1974.

Florida Department of Environmental Regulation. Work Plan 205(j): Keys
Monitoring Study. Final Draft. South Florida Dis rict, Marathon Branch
Office. 1 T84.

Florida Department of Natural Resources. Resource Management Plan of
John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park. Division of Recreation a'Fd Parks.
55 pp. 1994.

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Rare and Endangered Biota of
Florida, P.C.H. Prichard, Series Ed., Vol. 1,2,3,4, and 6. University
Presses of Florida, Gainsville, 1978.

Flori-da Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Endangered and Potentially
Endangered Fauna and Flora in Florida, 6fficial Lists. TalTahassee, FL,-
11 pp. 1983.

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Endangered and Potentially
Endangered Fauna and Flora in Florida, Official Lists. Tallahassee, FL
14 pp. 1984.

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Endangered and Threatened
Species Mana5ement and Conservation Plan, 1984 Op2ate and Progress
Report. Tallahassee, FL 33 pp. 1984

Florida Statutes. Onsite Sewage Disposal. Section 43, Section 381.272.
1982 Supplement.

Fontaneda, d'Escalente. Memoir of D. d'Escalente Fontaneda Respecting
Florida. trans. Buckingham Smith (Washington, 1854; reprint ed., Miami,
1944

Gentry, R.C. Hurricanes in South Florida In: Environments of South
Florida: Present and Past. P.J. Gleason, eds. Miami Geol S_ . Memoir,
2:73-81. 1974.

Ginsburg, R.N. "Intertidal Erosion on the Florida Keys". Bulletin of
Marine Science of the Gulf and Caribbean. 3(l):54-69. 1953.

Ginsburg, R.N. "Beachrock in South Florida". Jour. Sed. Pet. 23:85-92.
1953.

Ginsburg, R.N. Environmental Relationships of Grain Size and Constituent
Particles in Some South Florida Carbonate Sediments. Bul. Amer. Assoc.
Petrol. Geol. 40:2384-2427. 1956.

Ginsburg, R.N. Early Diagnosis and Lithification of Shallow Water Carbonate
Sediments in South Florida. 80-99 pp. In: Regional Aspects of
Carbonate Deposition. SEPM Spec. Publ. TI-6. 5. 1957.

Ginsburg, R.N. and H.A. Lowenstam. "The Influence of Marine Bottom
Communities on the Depositional Environment Sediments". Jour Geol
66:310-318. 1958.

Ginsburg, R.N., L.B. Isham, S.J. Bein and J. Kuperberg, Laminated Algal
Sediments of South Florida and Their Recognition in the Fossil R@cord.
Unpublished Final Report (ML No. 8034) to the National Science Foundation
(Inst. Mar. Sci., University of Miami, Miami, Florida). 1954.

Goggin, J.M. Culture and Geography in Florida Prehistory. Ph.D.
Dissertaff-on. Yale University. 197r. -
Goggin, J.M. and F. Sommer. Excavations on Upper Matecumbe Key, Florida.
Yale University Publications in-Anthropology, Number 41. Yale University
Press, London. 1949.

Grassle, J. Variety in Coral Reef Communities. pp. 247-270. In: Bioloqv
and Geology of Coral Reefs, Vol. 2, 0. Jones and R. Endea_n, eds.
Academic Press, Mew York. 1973.

Gunderson, L., D. Taylor, and J. Craig. Fire Effects on Flowering and
Fruitinq Patterns of Understory Plants in Pinelands of Everqlades
5-tional Park. Natio-n-a-T-NaTF Service, South Florida Res. Station,
Homestead, FL. SFRC 83/04. 36 pp. 1983.

Hanson, C.E. Fresh Water Resources of Big Pine Key, Florida. USGS Open-file
Report. pp. 80-447. 1980.
Heald, E.J. The Production of Ouanic Detritus in a South Florida Estuary.
Ph.D. DiTsertation. University of Miami, Coral gables, Fl. 11U pp.
1969.

Hersh, S.L Ecology of the Key Largo Woodrat. M.S. Thesis, University of
Miami: Coral Gables., Fl. 109 pp. 1978.

Hine, A. and A. Newman. Shallow Carbonate Bank Margin Growth and Structure.
Little Bahama Bank, Bahamas AFerican Association Petra]. 1977.

Hoffmeister, J.E. Land From the Sea. University of Miami Press, Coral
Gables, Florida. 143 pp. 1974.

Hoffmeister, J.E. and H.G. Plulter. Pleistocene Limestone of the Florida Keys.
p. 57-61 In: Guidebook for Field Trip No. 1. Geol. Soc. Amer. Annual
Meeting, Fliami, Florida. 1964.

Hoffmeister, J.E., J. Edward and H.G..Multer. "Fossil Mangrove Reef of Key
Biscayne, Florida". Geological Society of America Bulletin. 76:845-852.
August 1965.

Hoffmeister, J.E. and H.G. Multer. "Geology and Origin of the Florida Keys".
Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 79:1487-1502. 1968.

Hoffmeister, J.E., K.W. Stockman and H.G. Multer. "Miami Limestone of Florida
and its Recent Bahamian Counterpart". Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 78:175-190.
1967.

Howard, J.F. and K.L. Faulk. Microfaunal Distribution and Controls, Coupon
Bi5ht, Southern Florida Keys (abs:E). Ohio Academy of Science Meeting,
Toledo, Ohio. 1968.

Howard, J.F., D.L. Kissling and J.A. Lineback. "Sedimentary Facies and
Distribution of Biota in Coupon Bight, Lower Florida Keys". Geol.
Soc. Amer. Bull. 81:1929-1946. 1970.

Howell, A.H. Florida Birdlife. Florida Department of Game and Fresh Water
Fisheries. Cowan-McCann, Inc., New York. 579 pp. 1932.

Huffman, S.' F., G.G. Anderson and C.A. Orosco. "A Carbonate Sand Bar Near
-Bahia Honda Key, Florida". (abst) Geol. Soc. Amer. Abstracts, 2:219.
1970.

Humphrey, S. and D.B. Barbour. Status and Habitat of Eight Kinds of
Endangered and Threatened Rodents in Florida. Spec. Scie. RFP-. No. 2 for
'Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish C5mmission. University of Florida,
Gainesville, pp 19-49. 1979.

Jaap, W. The Ecology of the South Florida Coral Reefs: A Community Profile.
Draft final report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-8Z/08.
1984.

Jameson, S.C. Ku Largo Coral National Marine Sanctuary Deep Water Resource
Survey. NOAA Tech. Rep. CZ/SP 1. 1981.

Johannes, R.E. Pollution and Degradation of Coral Reef Communities. pp.
13-51. In: Tropical Marine Pollution. R.E. Johannes and J.E. Fergenson
Wood eds-. Elsevier Scientific Pu-P 'ishing Co. Amsterdam, Netherlands.
1975.

Jordan, C.L. Climate. pp. 1-22. In: A Summary of the Knowledge of the
Eastern Gulf of Mexico, State University System, Florida. Institute of
Oceanography IIA.

Kendig, L. and Siemo, Larsen and Purdy, Inc. Executive Summary; Monroe County
Growth Management Issues. 24 pp. 1984.

Kendig, L. and Siemo, Larsen and Purdy, Inc. Florida Keys Growth Management
Plan; Background Data Elements; Tentative Draft. 339 pp. 1984.

Kissling, D.L. Coral Reefs in the Lower-Florida Keys. A preliminary report.
pp. 209-215. In: Field Guide to Some C ate Rock Environments:
Florida Keys a-nU Western Bahamas. H.G. Multer ed. Kendall/Hunt Publ. Co,
Dubuque, Iowa. 1977.

Klein, H. Preliminary Evaluation of Availability of Potable Water on Elliot
Key, Dade County, Florida. USGS Open-file Report 70-010. 1970.

Kulczycki, G.R., R.W. Virnstein and W.G. Nelson. "The Relationship Between
Fish Abundance and Algal Biomass in a Seagrass-Drift Algae Community".
Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 12:341-342. 1981.

Lakela, 0. and R.W. Long. Ferns of Florida. Banyan Books, Miami, FL, 178 pp.
1976.

Lao, P.U., J.T. Einerson, J.A. Einerson and A. J. Mehta. A Survey of
Small-craft Recreational Marinas In Florida. Depart t of Coastal and
Oceanog.raphic Engineering. UniversTity -of Florida, Gainesville.
Technical paper #18. 1980.

LaPointe, B.E. and P.K. Miller. In Situ Nutrient Limited Photosynthesis and
Growth of a Red Seaweed in the Florida Keys, UTS.A.: Nitrogen and
Phosphorous. Center for Marine Biotechnology. Harbor Branch Foundation.

Layne, J.N. Land Mammals of South Florida, pp 386-413. In: Environments of
South Florida, Past and Present. Mem._2, Miami Geo. Soc. 1974.

Leahy, T.M. Marine Education and Research Or2anization in Florida. Florida
Sea Grant CoTTege. Sea 9-rant project #A/MAP-7. 1984.

Livingston, R.J. "Trophic,Organization of Fishes i.n a Coastal Seagrass
System". Marine Ecology Progress Series, 7:1-12. 1982.

Lochner, H.W., Inc. Supplemental Report: Biological Considerations for the
Florida Keys Bridge Replacement Program.

Longley, W.H. and S.F. Hildebrand. "Systematic Catalogue of the Fishes of
Tortugas, Florida With Observations on Color, Habits and Local
Distribution". Pap Tortugas Lab, 34:1-331. 1941.

Lugo, A.E. and 'S.C. Snedaker. "The Ecology of Mangroves". Annu. Rev. Ecol.
Syst., 5:39-64. 1974.

Maloney, F.E. and Bram D.E. Canter. Protecting Coastal Waters: Model
Ordinances for Runoff Control and-Sewerage Disposal Florida SeY Grant
College. Technical Paper #14. 1979.

Maloney, F.E., Bram D. E. Canter and R.G. Hamann. Legal Aspects of
Recreational Marina Sitings in Florida. Florida Sea Grant College.
Report #36. 1980.

Marszalek, D., G. Babashoff, M. Noel-and P. Worley. Reef Distrubution in
South Florida. pp 223-230. In: Proceedings: Third International Coral
Reef Symposium, Vol. 2. UniV-ersity of Miami, Miami, Floria. 1977.

Mazzotti, F.J., W. Ostrenko, and A.T. Smith. "Effects of Exotic Plants
Melaleuca quinquenervia and Casuarina equisetifolia on Small Mammal-
Populations in the Eastern Fl5rida Everglades". FTa. Scientist,
44(2):65-71. 1981.

McMillan, C. "Reproductive Physiology of Tropical Seagrasses". Aquatic
Botany, 14:245-258. 1982.

McNulty, J.K. Effects of Abatement of Domestic Sewage Pollution on the
Benthos, Volumes of "Zooplankton, and tFe Fouling Organisms f Biscayne
Ba@, Florida. Stud. Trop. Oceanography. University of Miami, Coral
Gables, Fl6rida. Vol. 9, 107pp. 1970.

McRoy, C.P. "Seagrass Productivity: Carbon Uptake Experiments in Eelgrass,
Zostera marina". Aquaculture, 4:131-137. 1974.

Milon, J.W. and G. Johns. A Handbook for the Economic Analysis of Coastal
Recreation Projects.. Florida Sea Grant College. Report #45. 1982.
Milon, J.W., D. Mulkey, P.H. Riddle and G.H. Wilkowske. Economic Impact of
Marine Recreational Boating on the Florida Econom FooU and Resource
Economics. Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. University of
Flori-da. Sea Grant Report #54. 1983.

Monroe County. Hazardous Waste Assessments: Monroe County Florida Component
Two: I.D. of AbandonFd -Dump Sites.
Monroe County. inventory of Land (excluding 'roads and eight of ways) Owned_@X
Monroe County. Monroe County Planning Department. 1979.

Monroe County, Coastal Zone Protection and Conservation Element, Marine
r- -28
Resources Tection of the Monroe County @omprehensive Plan. pp. 23
1979.

Monroe County Code of Ordinances. Chapter 4 - Beaches and Shorelines; Chapter
6 Buildings and Construction; Chapter 14 - Pollution Control; Chapter
17 Subdivision Regulation; Chapter 18 - Trees and Vegetation and
Chapter 19 - Zoning.

Monroe County Planning Department. Monroe County Statistics. December 1982.

Montgomery, J.R. and M.T. Price. "Release of Trace Metals by Sewage Sludge
and Subsequent Uptake by Members of a Turtle Grass Mangrove Ecosystem".
Environmental Science and Technology, 13:546-549. 1979.

Moore, D.R. "Distribution of the Sea Grass, Thalassia, in the U.S". Bulletin
of Marine Science of the Gulf and Caribbean, 13(2):329-342. 196@_.

Mulhern, F.J. Draft Environmental Statement: Fleming Key Animal Import
Center, Key West, Florida. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service. May 1975.

Multer, H.G. Holocene Cementation of Skeletal Grains into Beachrock, Dry
Tortugas, Florida. p. 25-26. In: Carbonate Cements, O.P. Bricker, ed..
The Johns Hopkins University Pr@_e__ss, Baltimore, 376 pp. 1971.

Multer, H.G. Field Guide to Some Carbonate Rock Environments - Florida Keys
__-Fa C
and Weste7rn Ba mas. Kendall/Hunt Publishing ompany. 425 pp. 1917.

Multer, H.G. and J.E. Hoffmeister. "Petrology and Significance of the Key
Largo (Pleistocene) Limestone, Florida Keys". Geol. Soc. Amer. Annual
Meetina, Mexico City. 1968.

Munro, J.L. Aspects of the Biology and Ecology of Caribbean Reef Fishes:
Mullidae (goat-fishes). J. Fish Biol., 9:79-97. 1976.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. World Weather Records
1951-1960. Vol. 1 North America, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOTA
Weather Bureau. 1965.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. World Weather Records
1961--1970, Vol. 1 North America, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA
Weather Bureau. 1979.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Coastal Zone
Management. Final Environmental Impact Statement Proposed Looe Key
National Mari7e Sanctuary. October 1980.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Sanctuary Programs Division.
Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan. 70 pp. 1983.

Neumann, A.C. "Observations on Coastal Erosion in Bermuda and Measurements of
the Boring Rate of the Sponge Cliona lampa". Linnol. Oceanographic.,
11:92-108. 1966.

Odum, H.T. "Productivity Measurements in Texas Turtle Grass and the Effects
of Dredging an Intracoastal Channel". Publ. Inst. Marine Sciences Texas,
9:48-58. 1963.

Odum, W.E. Pathways of Energy Flow in a South Florida EstuarX. University of
Miami Sea Grant Bull. 7. 162pp. 1970.
Odum, W.E., C.G. McIvor, and T.J. Smith, III. The EcoloV of the Mangroves of
South Florida: A Community Profile. U.S. and Wildlife Service,
b-ffice of Biological Services. Wa hington, D.C. FWS/OBS-8/24. 144pp.
1982.

Ogden, J., R. Brown and N. Salesky. "Grazing by the Echinoderm Diadema
antillarum Philippi: Formation of Holes Around West Indian PatcF Reefs".
Scienc@, 182:715-716. 1973.

Ogden, J.C. and P.R. Ehrlich. "The Behavior of Heterotypic Resting Schools of
Juvenile Grunts (Hapmulidae)". Mar. Biol., 42:273-280. 1977.

Ogden, J.C. and O.C. Zieman. Ecological Aspects of Coral Reef - Seagrass
Contacts in the Caribbean. pp 377-382. In: Proceedings: Third
International Coral Reef Symposium. Vol. 2. University of Miami, Miami,
Florida. 1977.

Olla, B.L., W.H. Pearson and A.L. Studholme. "Applicability of Behavioral
Measures in Environmental Stress Assessment". Rapp. P.-V. Re'un Cons.
Int. Explor. Mer, 179:162-173. 1980.

Olmstead, I., W.B. Robertson, Jr., J. Johnson, and O.L. Bass, Jr. The
vegetation of Long Pine Key, Everglades National Park. National Park
Service, South Florida Research Center, Homestead, Fl. SFRC 83/05 64 pp.
1983.

Orth, R.J. "Effect of Nutrient Enrichment on Growth of the Eelgrass Zostera
marina in the Chesapeake Bay, Virginia, USA". Marine Biology,
44:187-194. 1977.

Palmer, R.S. (Ed.) Handbook of North American Birds. Vol. 1, Yale Univeristy
Press, New Haven, CT, 567 pp. 1962

Parker, G.G., G.E. Ferguson, S.K. Love and others. Water Resources of

Southeastern Florida with Special Reference to the Geology and Ground
Water of the Miami Area. USGS Water Supply Paper, No. 1255. 1955.

Parks, J., Working Plant List of Lignumvitae Key State Botanical Site. Unpub-
lished. 7 pp.

Patriquin, D.G. "Migration" of Blowouts in Seagrass Beds at Barbados and

Caribbean, West Indies and is Ecological and Geological Implications.
Aquatic Botany, 1:163-189. 1975.

Patterson, J. and G. Stevenson. Native trees of the Bahamas. Published by
the authors. 128 pp. 1977.
Patton, T., M.L. Robertson, K. Achor and A. Weiner. Florida Keys Growth
Management Plan (National Environment). Tentative Draft #1. pp. 55-62.
1984.

Perkins, R.D. and P. Enos. "Hurricane Betsy in the Florida-Bahama Area -
Geologic Effects and Comparison with Hurricane Donna". Jour. Geol.,
76:710-717. 1968.

Phillips, R.C. Observations on the Ecologocal Distribution of the Florida
Seagrasses. Profile pop. Ser., Florida Board of Conservation. 2:1-72.
1960.

Phillips, R.C. "Ecology of floating algal communities in Florida". Quart

J. Fla. Acad. Sci., 26(4):329-334. 1963.

A10

Prochaska, F.J. and R.A. Morris. Primary- Economic Impact of the Florida
Commercial Fishin2 Sector. Florida Sea Grant College. Report #257.
November 1978.

Prochaska, F.J. and J.C. Cato. An Economic Profile of Florida Commercial
Fishinq Firms: Fisherman, Commercial Activities and Financial
Consi3e-rations. Florida Sea Grant College. Report #19. February 1977.

Provost, M.W. "Mean high water mark and use of tidelands in Fl-orida".
Florida Science, 36:50-66. 1974.

Pulver, T.R. Transplant Techniques for sa2ling mangrove trees, RhizoRhora
mangle, Laguncularia racemosa, and Avicennia germinans, in Florida.
Florida Marine Research Publications #ZZ. Department of NaturaT_
Resources Marine Research Laboratory. 1976.

Rabinowitz, D. "Dispersal Properties of Mangrove Propagules". Biotropica,
10(l):47-57. 1978.

Randall, J.E. "An Analysis of the Fish Populations of Artifical and Natural
Reefs in the Virgin Islands". Caribbean J. Sci., 3:1-16. 1963.

Randall, J.E. "Grazing Effect on Seagrasses by Herbivorous Reef Fishes in the
West Indies". Ecology, 46(3):255-260. 1965.

Research Planning Institute, Inc. The Sensitivi'ty of Coastal Environments and
Wildlife to Spilled Oil in Sou-tF-77orida. South Florida Regional
P anning Council. 1981T

Research Planning Institute, Inc. South Florida Oil Spill Sensitivity Atlas.
South Florida Regional Planning Council. 1981b.

Robertson, P.B. A Survey of the Marine Rock-Boring Fauna of Southeast
Florida. Un@_ublished Masters Thesi-s-7-15-st. Mar. Sci., Universify of
Miami.- 1963.

Robertson, W.B., Jr. and J.A. Kushlan. The Southern Florida Avifauna. Miami
Geological Society Mem., 2:414-452. 1974.

Roessler, M.A. and J C. Zieman. "The Effects of Thermal Additions on the
Biota of-Southe;n Biscayne Bay, Florida". Proc. Gulf and Carribean Fish.
Inst., 22:136-145. 1969.

Salmon, J., D. Henningsen and T. McAlpin. Dune Restoration and Revegetation
Manual. Sea Grant College, Report #48. Sept_e_mF_e_r_1MZ.

Sammarco, P.W. Some Aspects of the Ecdlogy of Diadema antillarum Philippi -
Food Preference and Effect of GraziM. Special problem report of the
West Indies Laboratory of Fairleigh Dickinson University, Christiensted
St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. 47 op. 1972.

All

Sammarco, P.W., J. Levinton and J. Ogden. "Grazing and Control of Coral Reef
Community Structure by Diadem antillarum Philippi (Echinodermata:
Echinoidea). A preliminary study". J.- Mar. Res., 321:47-53. 1974.

Savis, J.H., Jr. Stabilization of Beaches and Dunes bv Vegetation in
Florida. Sea Grant College. Report #7. SeptemB@r 1975.

Schmall, G.P. Sponges. pp. 40-48. In: W. Jaap The Ecology of the South
Florida Coral Reefs: -A Communiizcrofile. 6ra-f-t7inal Report. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/09. 1984.

Scholl, D.W. Florida Bay. A Modern Site of Limestone Formation. p. 282-288.
In: The Encyclopedia of Oceanography. R.W. Fairbridge, ed. Reinhold
N-bli-i-Ri-ng Corp, New York. 1021 pp. 1966.
Schomer, N.S. and R.D. Drew. An Ecological Characterization of the Lower
Everglades, Florida Bay and the Florida Keys. State of Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, U- Fish and Wildlife
Service and Bureau of Land Management. FWS/OBS 82/58.1. 246 pp.
1982.

Sea Grant College. A System for the Determination of Chronic Effects of
Pollutants on the Physioro-gyand Behavior of Marine OrganisFs. Report
July 1974.

Sensabaugh,*W.M. The Beach - A Natural Protection From the Sea. Florida Sea
Grant College. SUSF-SG-75-002. January 1975.

Shinn, E.A. "Selective Dolimitization of Recent Sedimentary Structures"
0our. Sed. Pet., 38:612-616. 1968.

Shinn, E.A., J.H. Hudson, R.B. Halley and B. Lidz. Topographic Control and
Accumulation Rate of Some Holocene Coral Reefs: South Florida and Dry
Tortugas. pp 1-7. In: Proceedin2s: Third International Coral Reef
Symposium. D. Taylor, ed. Uni ersity of Miami. Miami, Florida. 1977.

Simberloff, D.S. and E.O. Wilson. "Experimental Zoogeography of Islands: A
Two Year Record of Colonization". Ecology 51:934-937. 1969.

Simpson, R.H. and M.B. Lawrence. Atlantic Hurricane Frequencies Along the
U.S. Coastline. NOAA Tech. Memorandum, 7WS SR-58, Fort Worth, Texas. 14
p 1971.

Skinner, R. and G.. Avery,. Partial List of Plants Identified on Key Largo.
Unpublished. 3pp. 1983.

Skinner, R. and W. Jaap. Effects of Boat Traffic and Land Development on
Key Largo's Coral Reefs and Adjacent Marine Environments. T report to
the Governor and Cabinet by the Department of Natural Resources, January
1984.

A12

Snedaker, S.C. and M.S. Brown. Water uality and Mangrove Ecosystem
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-600/54-81-022. August

Snyder, N.F.R. "Breeding Biology of Swallow-tailed Kites in Florida. Living
Bird, 13:73-97. 1974.

Springer, V.C. and A. McErlean. "A Study of the Behavior of some Tagge South
Florida Coral Reef Fish." Am. Midl. Nat., 67:386-397. 1962.

Spitzer, N.C. and J.D. Lazell, Jr. "A New Rice Rat (genus Oryzomys) from
Florida's Lower Keys." J. Mamm., 59(4):787-792. 1978.

Sprunt, A., Jr. Florida Birdlife. Coward-McCann, Inc., New York. 527cc.
1954.

Starck, W.A., II and W.P. Davis. "Night Habits of Fishes of Alligator Reef,
Florida." Ickthyol Auar. Jour., 38:313-356. 1966.

Stephenson, T.A. and A. Stephenson. "Life Between Tide Marks in North
America, 1. The Florida Keys." Jour. Ecology, 38:354-402. 195 .

Stevely, J. and L. Rabinowitz. Mangroves: A Guide for Planting and
Maintenance. Florida Coop. Extension. Marine Advisory Bufletin. Sea
Grant.

Stevely, J.M., O.C. Thompson and R.E. Warner. The Biology and Utilization of
Florida Commercial Sponges. Florida Sea Grant College. Technic per
#8. October 1978.

Stevenson, G. Trees of Everglades National Park and the Florida Keys.

Published by the author, 32pp. 1969.

Straughan, R.P.L. "Pollution, Dredging Decimating Florida's Reefs." Na.
Fisherman, Camden Maine, 52(13):46-48. 1972.

Swanton, J.R. The Indians of the Southeastern United States. Smithsonian
Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 943 pp. 1979.

Sweat, D. and J. Stevely. A Report on the Availability of Commercial

Within the Gulf Waters of Monroe,County, Florida and the Impact
Commerical Diving Operations Upon this Resource. Gulf and South Atlantic
Fisheries Development Foundation. February 1981.

Tabb, D.C., D.L. Dubrow, and R.B. Manning. The Ecology of Northern Florida
Bay and Adjacent Estuaries. Florida Board of Conservation. Tech. Serv.
39. 79pp. 1962.

Taylor, R.B. Simplified Methods for the Prediction of Hurricane Surge and
Wave Runup. Florida Sea Grant College. Technical Paper #7. October
1978.

A13

Thomas, T.M. A Detailed Analysis of Climatological and Hydrological
Records of South Florida with References to Man's Influence Upon
Ecosystem Evolution. pp. 82-122. In: Environments of South Florida:
Present an d Past. P.J. Gleason, e7d. Miami Geol. Soc. Memoir 2. 1'974.

Thomas, L.P., D.R. Moore and R.C. Work. "Effects of Hurricane Donna on the
Turtle Grass Beds of Biscayne Bay, Florida." Bulletin of Marine Science
of the Gulf and Caribbean, 11(2):191-197. 1961@-
Tomlinson, P.B. The Biolog@ of Trees Native to Tropical Florida, Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 480pp.-r99U-.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and
Plants. Department of the Interior. 24 pp. 1984.

United State Geological Services. Florida Land Use and Cover Classification
System. 1976.

Upper Keys Airport Advisory Board, Monroe County Aviation Department and
BRR/PBS&J: A Joint Venture (Technical Consultants). Upper Keys Airport
Site Selection Public Hearing #2. 19 pp. 1984.

Urban, N. Fire History of Hammocks in East Everglades. Department of
--rUa-Tt -
-Biological Sciences, Florl 7antic University and South Florida Water
Management District, West Palm Reach, Florida. (Presented at Native
Plant Society Conference, May 4, 1984). 1978.

Vaughn, T.W. Investigations of the Geology and Geologic Processes of the Reef
Tracts and Adjacent Areas in the Bahamas and Florida. Carnegie Inst.,
Washington, D.C. Yearbook 12:183. 1914.

Vittor, B.A. and P.G. Johnson. Polychaete Abundance, Diversity, and Trophic
Role in Coral Reef Communities at Grand Bahama Island and the Florida
Middle Ground. pp 163-168. In: Proceedings: Third International Coral
Reef Symposium. D. Taylor, ed-.- University of Miami, Miami, rlorida.
1977.

Voss, G.L. "Sickness and Health in Florida's Coral Reefs." Natl. Hist.,
82:40-47. 1973.

Voss, G.L. An Environmental Assessment of the Key Largo National Marine
Sanctuary. Draft Final Report, NOAA Contract No. NA-79-SAC-U=. 99pp.
1982.

Wade, R.A. Some Effects of Pollution on the Aquatic Environment. Dade County
Department of Public Health. November 13, 1963.

Walker, N.D. "January Water Temperatures Kill Florida Fauna." Coast
Oceangraphic Climotol News, 3:30. 1981.

A14

Walton, T.L., Jr. and T.M. Leahy. Papers-Presented at Beach Seminar 1978.
Florida Sea Grant College. University of Florida, Gainesville, F orida.
Technical Paper #7. 1978.

Wanless, H.R. Sediments of Biscayne Bay - Distribution and Depositional
History. Te-ch. Report 69-2, Inst. Mar. Sci., University of Miami, Miamij
Florida. 260 p. 1969.

Warner, G.F. "The Life History of the Mangrove Tree Crab, Aratus pisoni."
Jour. Zool., 153:321-335. 1967.

Warzeski, E.R. Storm Sedimentation in the Biscayne Bay Region. pp 33-38. In
Biscayne Bay Symposium 1, April 2-3, 1976. Published as part of
- Fe-p o
University, of Miami Sea Grant Speciar rt No. 5. 1976.

Weiner, A. The Florida Keys Hardwood Hammock Atlas. National Audubon Society
and Florida Keys Land Trust. 1979.

Weiner, A. The Hardwood Hammocks of the Florida Keys. An Ecological Study.
National Audubon Society and 7`orida Keys LanT-T'Fi st. 1979.

Weinstein, M.P. and K.L. Heck, Jr. "Ichthyofauna of Seagrass Meadows Along
the Carribean Coast of Panama and in the Gulf of Mexico: Composition,
Structure and Community Ecology." Marine Biology, 50:97-107. 1979.

Woodson, R.D., M.J. Tanuen and J.J. Corbett. Local Control Over the Onshore
Impacts of Offshore Energy Development in FIorida. Center for
Gover@m`entil-Responsfbility. University of FTo-rida. Technical Paper
#13. 1979.

Yonge, C.M. "The B.iology of Reef Building Corals." Sci. Rep. Great Barrier
Reef Expd. 1928-1929. 1:353-391. 1940.

Yonge, C.M. "The Nature of Reef Building (Hermatypic) Corals." Bulletin Mar.
Sci., 23:1-15. 1973.

Zieman, J.C. The Effects of a Thermal Effluent Stress on the Seagrasses and
Macroalgae in the Vicinity of Turke Point, Biscayne Bay, Florida. Ph.D
Uivssertation, Institute of Marine Sciences, niversity of Miami, 'Coral
Gables, Florida. 129pp. 1970.

Zieman, J.C., Jr. "Origin of Circular Beds of Thalassia (Spermatophyta:
Hydrocaritaceae) in South Biscayne Bay, Fl-o-rivd-a--a-n-J their Relationship to
Mangrove Hammocks." Bulletin of Marine Science in Gulf and Caribbean,
22(3):.559-574. 1972.

Zieman, J.C. "Seasonal Variations of Turtle Grass, Thalassia testudinum
Konig, with Reference to Temperature and Salinity Effects." Aqua@Fic
Botany, 1:1.07-123. 1975.

A15

Zieman, J.C. "The Ecological Effects of Physical Damage from Motor Boats on
Turtle Grass Beds in Southern Florida." Aquatic Botany, 127-139. 1976.

Zieman, J.C. The Ecology of the Sea Grasses of South Florida: A Community
Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Publication #FWS/OBS-82/25.
M -pp. and appendix. 1982.

Zieman, J.C. and E.J.F. Wood. Effects of Thermal Pollution on a Tropical Type
Estuary. In: Tr ine Pollution. R.E. Johannes and E.J.F.
opical Mar
Wood, eds. Elsevier Oceanography Seri@s, Vol. 12. pp. 75-98. 1975.

A16

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

Bibl iography

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

USGS 7.5 Minute quadrangle topographic maps

R
3 6668111 4'
Appendices Contents (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 Monroe County

CZM Maps--Monroe County

Navigation Charts

DOT County Maps--Monroe County
SE VICES CTR LIBRARY

3 6668 14111764- b"

B-2