[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
-Tinal Environmental 0-T OF "I Pk 12 CO. 4 Impact Statement Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary ;@'4 T S 0 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Coastal Zone ")anic and Atmospheric Administration Information Center 80" 10 BISCA YNE NATIONAL MONUMENT -25 CARD 25020'- SOUND FLORIDA ATLANTIC OCEAN Q) BARNES 0 SOUND A@ 4q- Al BLACKWArER '0 -25010' SOUND 250 10'- lz.@ BUTTONWOOD COASTAL ZONE SOUND INFORMATION CENTER 0 % 250- GC 512 S6 800'0' 'NE I L @JA NT K-54 80020' 80010, 1975 1 1 1 c.2 KEY LARGO CORAL REEF MARINE SANCTUARY Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary Table of Contents- Summary Property of CSC Library Comments Project Description U- S_ DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA Purpose COASTAL SERVICES CENTER Area 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE Biology and Geology CHARLESTON, SC_ 29405-2413 Uses Management System Administration Rules and Regulations Permits Certification Research and Monitoring Enforcement Penalities Relationship of the Proposed Action to Land Use Plans, Policies and Controls for the Affected Area Probable Impact of the Proposed Action on the Environment Probable Adverse Environmental (User) Effects Relationship Between Local Short-Term Use of Man's Environment and the Maintenance of Long-Term Productivity Alterna@ives to the Proposed Action No Sanctuary Different Boundaries Different Regulations Other Authority Coordination co C-11), List of Figures and Appendicies F ,Wr,e I I 2 0 Y., Aga of Marine Sanctuary Appendix A Proclamation No. 3339 and 16 USC 461 Appendix B List of Fishes of Alligator Reef, Florida with Comments on the Nature of the Florida Reef Fish Fauna Basic Plant and Animal Communities Bottom Community Seasonal Abundance and Migratory Patterns of Marine Life Appendix C Geology Appendix D Comments Received Final Environmental Impact Statement Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary Summary Responsible Office: NOAA's Office qof Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington,D.C. 20235 1. Name of Action (X) Administrative Designation of a marine sanctuary pursuant to authority of Title III of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. 2. Description of Action Establishment of a marine sanctuary to protect and conserve thecoral and coral reef ecosystem to reg- ulate use thereof to insure the health and well-being Of the coral,and associated1prqa and fauna, and to make available the continual opportunity for the esthetic and.recreational enjoyment,which healthy reefs afford. The area directly adjacent to the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park. Environmental impacts No irretrievable commitment of resources is involved. The management program is designed to provide for continued, controlled usage while retaining options for future usuage. 4. Alternatives Alternatives considered were to enlarge the boundaries, establishing different regulations, using another legal . authority or no sanctuary. Sections of either differ- ent boundaries or regulations is not precluded by this action, since procedures exist to do so. An analysis of legal-,authorities indicated the marine sanctuary approach was most suitable to establish the measure of protection needed to protect the reef. The rejection of the no sanctuary option was totally supported in all responses,to the DEIS. Comments The final environmental impact statement was revised from the draft state- ment based in written comments received land statements made at a public hearing. A total of 34 states, agencies, oranizations and individuals submitted responses. Twelve(12) presentations were made at the public hearing. All the written comments 2 were in favor of establishing a marine sanctuary. However, many offered suggested changes or raised clarification questions. Ten of the pre- sentations at the public hearing were favorable and two negative. Comments received are discussed below. 1. Many of the comment sthdicat ed the boundaries of the marine sanctuary should be expanded to include a larger area. The nomination for a marine.sanctuary in an original version encompassed an area including the State Park, Biscayne National Monument, and connecting waters. Discussions.with,i.the State of Florida, and the other Federal agencies involved, led to the decision to restrict the boundaries to those currently described. It was felt that most of the area in the early version of the nomination was sufficiently protected, and thus the complex problem of in- corporating established areas was not warranted. The outer boundary has been changed slightly to facilitate enforcement. Instead of the 300 foot isobath, lines have been drawn from the proposed outer north and south corners to a common point on the 300 foot isobath at 25 0 (degrees), 7.5' (minutes) north latitude and 80 0 (degrees), 12.5' (minutes) west longitude. This permits the use of navigational bearings rather than depth recording to mark the outer boundary. Figure I indicates the boundary. 2. A number of commentators requested clarification of the management system. Overall responsibility of implementing Federal law resides with the authorized Federal agency (NOAA). However, NOAA will contract with the State of Florida for on-site management of the marine sanctuary. Federal law, however, precludes the contracting of citing authority, to the State. Therefore, the Coast Guard will be responsible for the patrol and citing aspects. Administrative decisions will be made by the State representatives in accordance with Federal guidelines elaborated in the NOAA/Florida con- 3 tract. Details as to arrest procedures and VZosecution- of violations will be presented in the rules and regulations promulgated after designation, according to provisi6ns@of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, and the Administrative Proc edures Act. 3. Numerous suggestions were maae'to modify the proposed rules and regulations. The suggestions ranged from making them more strict to elim- ination of some. The following modifications were made: (a) Category 1, Removal or Destruction of Natural Features and Marine Life remains essentially unchanged. The phrase (whether temporary or permanent in character.) was deleted from (M.O. Category 2, Dredging, Filling, Escavating and Building Activities reyaains unchanged. W Category 3, Refuse and Polluting Substances was changed to re- flect requirements of other Federal laws in control of ocean disposal. W Category 4, Archaeological and Historical Resources, remains unchanged. (e) Category 5, Markers, remains unchanged. M Citing 6, Fishing has been modified. The requirements to mark trap floats with flags has been dropped, since the floats are color coded, and numbered under the present system. the des- cription of tropical fish and the capture thereof, is further described. Section 6 has been deleted, since ?rovisions of other Federal statues will be employ ed if circumstances warrant 4 seizure and-confiscation. The closure of portions of the marine sanctuary has been lim ited to 20% of the total area at any one time. Suggestions were made both to increase control of fishing, or to become less restrictive. we have elected to remain with the present situation and controls. (g)'Category 7, Skin Diving remains unchanged. (h) Category 8, Operation of Watercraft was modified to incorporate recognition of all applicable Federal laws. Minor clarification language has been added. (i) Category 9, Photography has been modified to clarify the restriction on use of props and cast. (j) Category 10, Advertising or Publicity remains unchanged. (k) Category 11, Explosives and Dangerous Weapons, has been modified to clarify the carrying or possession of dangerous weapons. Section lld has been deleted, as other Federal statutes will be employed if the need arises. (1) Category 12, Closing of'the Marine Sanctuary was modified as suggeste4 to restrict the total closed area at any given time. The level of 20% was selected. (m) Category 13, Report of Accidents was modified to conform to other Federal report requirements. The new damage or injury value is- $100.00. (n) category 14, Disorderly Conduct has been deleted as suggested, since other Federal statutes can be employed to deal with the subject if the need arises. 4. Permits. The permits section has been changed to clafily how permils will be issued, and checked by enforcement officials. Permits are not required for allowed activities, but only whena prohibited activity is contemplated. No fees are involved. 5. Enforcement. Questions were raised as to whether sufficient funds and manpower were available to enforce the rules and regulations. No changes were made in the impact statement in this regard. The United States Coast Guard,-and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have the responsibility to insure the Federal laws are enforced. Initial manpower and logistic capabilities have been identified, and will be employed in the marine sanctuary. Adjustments will be made if the need arises. Administrative hearing procedures have been established to insure adequate dispensation of violations. 6. Probable Impact of the Proposed Action on Environment. It was suggested that establishment of the marine sanctuary may channel prohibited activities to adjacent areas, thereby creating a negative impact. This is not foreseen since most of the area of the marine sanctuary has pre- viously managed under similar rules and regulations. Similarly, the reef to the north is protected by the Biscayne National Monument. It is possible, therefore, that the reefs to the south may be subject to additional pressure. Even so, this does not establish a case for no protection in the proposed area. 6 7 Alternatives to the Proposed Action. Comments were made that the alternatives of different boundaries was not fully developed, i.e., this should be the alternative of choice. The information presently available indicates the current boundaries are the most feasible at this time. 7 1.0 Project Description Purpose It is proposed to establish a.recreational and esthetic area encompassing corals and associated flora and fauna under Title III of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. The area will be managed to protect and -conserve the coral and coral reef ecosystems, to regulate uses.thereof to insure the health and well-being of the coral, and associated flora and fauna, and to make available the continual opportunity for the esthetic and recreational en- joyment which healthy r.eefs,afford the American people. Area The area nominated is adjacent to but excludes the State of Florida John Pennekamp Coral. Reef State Park, beginning at the outer boundary of.th.e Park, and extending seaward to abou.t-the 300 foot isobath (Figure 1). Includ-ed in the nominated area is the Key Largo Coral,Reef Preserve (Appendix A). Coordinates for the proppsed,marine sanctuary are: the.point of beginning (POB) is at geographic.coordinates 250. (degrees), 19.45' (minutes) north lati- tude, 800 .(degrees), 12..O'.(minute-s),west..longitude, said po in t being the northeast boundary corner of John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park. From said POB run thence southeasterly to geographic coordinates 250 (degrees), 16.2' (minutes) north latitude 800 (degrees), 8.7' (minutes) west longitude, said point also being on the 300 foot Isobath, thence in a southwesterly direction to geographic coordinates 250 (degrees), 07.5' (minutes) north latitude 800 (degrees), 12.5' (minutes west lo ngitude, the nce again run in a southwesterly direction to geographic coordinates 240 ('degrees), 58.3' (minutes) north 0 latitude, 80 (degrees), 19.8' (minutes) west longitude, thence leaving said 300 foot Isobath run northwesterly to geographic coordinates 25 0 (degrees), .8 2.2' (minutes) north longitude, 80 0 (degrees), 25.25' (minutes) west longitude, said point being the southeast boundary corner of John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, thence in a northeasterly direction along said easterly boundary of said state park to the POB. Biology and Geology The South Florida coral reef tract is the most extensive reef system of its type in the continental United States. The full reef complex or ecosystem includes a large array of West Indian corals, algae, sponges, shrimp, crabs, lobsters, mollusks, and a host of tropical fish'species. The major plant and animal life which includes the most important sediment- producing and sediment-modifying organisms of the coral reefs is provided in Appendix B. The major ecological zones are: (1) rubble, (2) millipora, (3) acropora, (4) open sand, (5) grass beds (primarily Thalaasia testudi- nium-turtle grass, (6) alcyonarian, (7) reef flat, and (8) back reef. Part of the appendicized information was developed for the Biscayne Bay National Monument. However, the area off Key Largo is very similar, therefore, the information should be applicable. The reef complex of interdependent organisms and its geological characteristics are discussed in Appendix C. Uses The nominated area is currently subjected to a number of commercial and recreational uses. Residents and tourists attracted to the area by the beauty of the reef system participate in the recreational endeavors of boating, sailing, snorkeling, swimming, diving, and sport fishing. A recent aerial survey indicated 260 craft in the area on a single day. The number of visitors to the John Pennekamp, State Park for last year was 343,484. Commercial enterprises that supply services forthese forms of recreational operate adjacent to the area and within the pro- posed boundaries. Other commercial enterpise also utilize the area.Lobster pot fishing occurs. Commercial transportation occurs where water depths permit. No petroleum resources have been'located in the area and no evidence of sand and gravel operations has been found. 2.0 Proposed Management System Administration NOAA's responsibilities under this legislation require that the Office of Coastal Zone Management review, comment and approve any activity that takes place pursuant to the adopted rules and regulations. On site administration of the marine sanctuary will be by the State of Florida, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, pursuant to an agreement between the Governor of the State of Florida and the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The State of Florida, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, will be assisted in administration by an advisory board consisting of representatives of the National Park Service; the U.S. Coast Guard; Department of Justice; the National Marine Fisheries Service; and the State of Florida's Division of Marine Resources, Division of W 10 Marine Law Enforcement, Department of Environmental Regulation, Local Citizens Association, and Association of Dive Boat Captains. Rules and Regulations ,Present and proposed future uses of the area include recreational boating and fishing, snorkeling and scuba diving, commercial transport, fisheries activities and scientific endeavors. Those activities'allowed within the marine sanctuary, however, will be subject to the following rules and regulations which are intended to provide for the maximum public use consistent with the primary purpose. Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary Rules and Regulations Categories 1. Removal of or Destruction of Natural Features and Marine Life. 2. Dredging, Filling, Excavating and Building Activities.' 3. Refuse and Polluting Substances. 4. Archaeological and Historical Resources. 5. Markers. 6. Fishing. 7. Skin Diving 8. Operation of Watercraft. 9. Photography. 10. Advertising or Publicity. 11. Explosives and Dangerous Weapons. 12. Closing of the Marine Sanctuary. 13. Report of Accidents Rules and Regulations Prohibited Activities (except by permit 6r'for'ptotection of life, property, or the environment). (1) Removal or Destruction of Natural Features and Marine Ltfe' (a) No person shall destroy, injure, harmfully disturb or rem ove beach .:and, gravel or minerals, corals, sea feathers and fans, shells and shell- ish (except lobster, crawfish and stone crab), starfishes or other marine invertebrates, seaweeds, grasses, or any soil,-rock, artifact, stone or other material. Nor sh all a person have possession of any of the above listed items in the boundaries of the marine sanctua-'ry'regardless of their place of extraction. (b) No person shall cut, carve, injure, multilate, move orldisplace orbreak off any bottom formation or growth. (c) No rope, wire, anchor, or other contrivance shill be attached to any coral, rock or other formation. (2) Dredging,,Filling, Excavating,and Building Activities (a) No dredging, excavating or filling operations,of any kind are to be carried out in this marine sanctuary., No m.aterials.ofany sort may be deposited in or on the waters thereof (b) No building or structure of any kind, whether permanent or tempor- ary, may be constructed or built. 12 (c) No public service facility may be constructed or extended into, upon or across this marine sanctuary, with the exception of marking and ro mooring buoys or stations. (3) Refuse andPolluting Substances. No person shall dump, deposit or discharge waste material into the waters of this marine sanctuary in violation of any Federal statute or regulation. Specifically prohibited are wastes, acids, oily liquid wastes or other deleterious chemicals, bottles, broken glass, paper, boxes, dirt, rubbish, waste, garbage, refuse or other debris or sub- stances which shall include human sewage. (4) Archaeological and Historical Resources No person shall willfully destroy, molest, deface, remove, displace or tamper with any archaeological or historical resources, cargo.pertain- ing to wrecks within the marine sanctuary. (5) Markers No person shall willfully mark, deface or damage in any way, or dis- place, remove or tamper with any signs, notices, or placards, whether temporary or permanent, or with any monuments, stakes, posts or other boundary markers installed by the sanctuary manager or markers for the pur- pose of lobster pot fishing. 13 Prohitibed'Activities W_ Fishing Note: Sport and commercial fishing is allowed within the marine sanctuary with hook and line for the purpose of taking surface, mid- water or bottom fishes, and with nets for the taking of 'surface and Midwater fishes, in accordance with the same provisions of the fishing laws of the State of Florida and the rules of the Department of Natural Resources. The taking of crawfish, spiny lobster and stone crab with traps is allowed for commercial purposes, in accordance with the same provision of the fishing laws of the State of Florida and the rules of the State of Florida Department of Natural Resources which requires that all trap floats %hall be marked, color coded, and num bered at all times. All traps must be removed from the waters of the marine sanctuary during the closed season. (a)' Fishes norImally'resident in the coral formations (often categor,ized as iropic'al'fishes which are of Ininimal sport and food vilue, and usually"brigh"tly' colored and thus used for aquaria purposes) and live in a directly interrelationship with the corals, may not be cIaught *except inadvertently by hook and line. (b) @The:use of-poisons,-electric-charges and similar,methods for the taking,or killing.of fish is prohibited. (c) Any device which is used in violation of the provisions of this'subsection is hereby declared a nuisance, and may be seized and confiscated to enforce the provisions of this section. (d).@Someportlions of the marine sanctuary may be set aside as control areas for research to assist in managing the sanctuary. Those 14 Prohibited Activities areas designated by the sanctuary manager will be closed to fishing. No more than 20% of the sanctuary may be closed at a time for this purpose. (7) Skin Diving Note: Skin diving for photography and for obs,ervation is allowed and encouraged as a compatable and desired use. (a) Skin divers will not handle corals, stand on coral formations, collect or otherwise disturb corals within t he sanctuary. (b) See 8d below, (c) See 8e below. (d) See 8f below. (8) Operation of Watercraft (a) All watercraft shall be operated,in accordance with applicable Federal rules and regulations. The following additional constraints should also be imposed within the boundaries of the sanctuary. (b) No watercraft should be operated in such a manner as to strike or otherwise cause damage to the natural features of the marine s anctuary. (c) Except in case 6f emergency situation, where life and property ffn may be endangered, no anchor should be cast or dragged in such a way as to damage any coral reef formations. Anchors shall be dropped on sand flats off the reefs and placed so as not to drift into the coral forma- tions. (d) No watercraft should be operated at greater than 4 miles per 15 Prohibited Activities hour or in such a manner to create a wake in.the vicinity of divers, sightseeing boats or fishermen, with the.exception of law,enf.orcement officials while in the performance of.their duties.. (e) All watercraft from which diving operati ons are being con- ducted shall fly in a conspicuous manner, the red and white "divers down" flag. (f) @.No boat-under powershall approach closer than 100 yards to a boat displaying the diving flag except a,t,a maximum speed of 4.miles per hour. Divers shall st.ay-with,in 1.00 yards of, theirldiving,flag. (g) Boats anchored or proceedin .g at slow speeds for fishing or. observation@.:shall be approached or.,passed at.such.s.low speed, that the wake of the approaching.or-passin boat does.no't di-sturb the fishing or., _9 observat*on boats. (h) Theoperation of all,waterc.raft,,within this marine sanctuary shall bein accordance with such.state and Federal laws. as, may be appli- cable to the operation:or navigation of watercraft. .(i) Watercraft must use mooring buoys, stations or anchoring-areas when such facilities and areas have been designated and are-available.. (9) Photography Note: Photography, both,surface and. underwater,, without involving the installation of special settings or structures,is encouraged. No person shall take still or motion pictures, either commercial or private, involving the use of special settings or structures, or the performance of a cast of persons, either amateur or professional. 16 Prohibited-Activities (10) Advertising or Publicity No person shall erect or cause to be erected, display, or cause to be displayed within this.marine sanctuary any signs, slogans or markers. (11) Explosives and Dangerous Weapons Note: Distress signalling devices are considered necessary for safe boat operation. Knives are frequently used by fishermen and swimmers and are not classified as weapons for purposes of these reg- ulations. (a) No person shall carry or possess, except while underway through the marine sanctuary or for law enforcement purposes, firearms of any description, air rifles, guns, bows and arrows, slings, spear guns, harpoons, or other'kinds of weapons potentially harmful to fish or wild- life or to the reef structure and dangerous to human safety. Use of such weapons within the sanctuary is strictly prohibited except for law en- forcement purposes. (b) The firing of weapons from beyond the boundaries of this sanctuary into this sanctuary is forbidden. (c) The use or possession of explosives within this marine sanctuary is prohibited. No person shall carry or possess explosives within the sanctuary, except while underway through the sanctuary. 17 Prohibited Activities (12) Closing of the Marine Sanctuary The marine sanctuary maIy be closed to public use in the event of emergency conditions endangering life or property. Certain areas may also be closed (but total area not to exceed 20% of the sanctuary at any one time) in order to (1) permit recovery of the living resources from overuse, -or (2) provide for scientific research relating to pro- tection and management. Public notice of closures will be made by informing the local news media. (13) Report of Accidents Accidents involving persona 1 injury or damage to property in excess of $100 shall be reported as soon as possible by the person or persons involved to the sanctuary manager. Permits Permits may be issued to conduct prohibited activities. Permits will be in letter format and are to be presented to appropriate law enforcement personnel,for inspection upon request. Issuance of permits 18 shall be for a limited term and a single activity subject to renewal before expiration of the permit. Permits m ay be extended at the dis- cretion of the marine sanctuary manager. A permit application may be filed with the sanctuary manager and shall indicate the purpose, the time period required, describing the proposed activitity including equipment , methods and schedule of events, the financial capability of the applicant to perform the proposed activ- ity, identifying all participants and prior experience in carrying out an analagous endeavor and evidence that all papers required by the United States Coast Guard or any other Federal agency have been obtained. The applicant will be notified in 30 days whether the permit appli- cation has been approved or not approved, and/or whether additional infor- mation is required.' An applicant may appeal a denial to the Administrator of NOAA by letter, stating his case and requesting a review of the action of the sanctuary manager. Permits may be cancelled by the sanctuary manager following notifica- tion to the;permit holder and after a hearing, if requested by the permit holder. Certification Once the marine sanctuary has been designated by the Administrator of NOAA, no permit, license or other authorization issued by any other agency shall be valid unless the Administrator of NOAA, pursuant to the authority delegated by the Secretary of Commerce, and upon recommendation 19 of the State of Florida, Division of Recreation and Parks,as NOAA's administrative officer, and the Advisory Committee, shall certify that the permitted activity is consistent with-the purposes-of this title and can be carried out within the regulations approve&and adopted. Research and Monitoring Research and monitoring of the effects of particular uses of the coral.reef ecosystem will be incorporated into the management procedures as needed to insure that the primary purpose for establishment of the sanctuary is carried out. Surveillance of development activities along the coast of Key Largo will be a function of the State of Florida to iksure that these activities do not adversely affect water quality, subsequent health of the coral reef ecosystem, or violate the sanctuary.rules andregulations. Enforcement Implementation and administration of governing rules and,regulations for the marine sanctuary will be by the State of Florida,.acting *n.its role as NOAA's contract manager. Purusant to 14 UiS.C. Sec. 89, the U.S. Coast Guard shall have the responsibilityi Accordingto provisions of an agreement between the Coast Guard and NOAA, for surveillance and enforcement of the rules and regulations promulgated fort,he marine sanctuary. 20 Penalities Any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States who violates any of -the provisions of the rules and regulations for the marine sanctuary promulgated pursuant to Title III of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-532, 86 Stat. 1061) will be liable to a civil penalty of not more than $50,000 for each such violation to be assessed by the Administrator. Each day of. a continu- ing violation would constitute a separate violation. A vessel used in the violation of a regulation promulgated herein shall be liable for any civil penalty assessed for such violation and could be proceeded against in the appropriate District Court of the United States havin g juris- diction thereof. Violation of any of the provisions of these regu- lations shall be a civil penalty punishable as provided by the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.Code 14.33). The Relationship of the Proposed Action to Land Use Plans, Policies and Controls for the Affected Area This action conforms to the well@established policy of Congress to preserve unique natural resources for their continued use, recreation and esthetic enjoyment. It also conforms to the evaluation of the general area made in,the State of Florida-Florida Keys Coastal Zone Management Study: "The Florida Keys represent a most unique and valu- able resource to all of the people of Florida and to hundreds of thou- sands of tourists each year." The study also contains the following recommendation: -"Imple- mentation of Title III of the Federal Marine Protection, Research and 21 Sanctuirlie-s' Act Of'1972-t6'includ'e John Pennekamp State-Park Ias a Imarine sanctuary' in cooperation with the Federal government Boundarie's of the'preserve should be enlarged to i ,nclude the entire fringing r@ef__system." Probable Impact of the Proposed Action on the Environment Designation of the area as a marine sanc.tuary,and,management accord- ing to the proposed regulations should control and minimize-.many of the stresses currently affecting this portion.of.the Florida reefs. Accord- ingly, the health and well-being'of the reefs and public enjoyment of same should be enhanced. Probable-i,Averse'Environmental (User) Effects the area,will be subject to regulation and some a'tivity c will-be,precludeC@ The actiVities'to be precluded are spear fishing, to the coral and associated flora and fauna, salvage, and 'souvenir collecting.. If certain areas of coral come under stress owing to intensive use, those areas will be temporarily closed to allow the coral eco- system to recover; this may cause minor inconvenience. When an.area is-closed; users will@be directed to other areas'which should provide a similar experience or level of enjoyment. Since most of this area was managed*under similar rules and regulations prior to the U.S. vs Maine decision, it is riot anticipated that reinstitution of these rules and regulations will affect the sanctuary nor adjacent areas. 22 The Relationship Between Local Short-Term Use of Man's Environment and the Maintenance of Long-Term Productivity No irretrievable commitment of resources is involved. The manage- ment program proposed is such as to provide for continued, controlled use while retaining options for future usuage. Alternatives to the Proposed Action Four alternatives are considered: no sanctuary, sanctuary with different boundaries, sanctuary with different regulations, and pro- tection under another authority. No Sanctuary Should this occur, the current stress conditions that prompted the nomination will continue and the valuable coral resources degraded. In addition, enforcement problems currently experienced in John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park will continue @ Thig is due to the shallow depths at the State Park Boundary which provide easy entry by anchoring just outside the boundary and diving into the Park. An outer boundary of about 300 feet precludes this form of entry without sophisticated diving gear and,expertise.* Larger Boundaries The original nomination proposed larger boundaries. However, the area is bounded on the north by both a shallow ship channel and the Biscayne Bay National Monument. Moreover, the principal reason is the ease of marking a boundary continuous from the State Park and the con- verse if it is not. 23 Although arguments could be made for a larger area, it is not necessary in this case for the.option for another nomination exists if it becomes evident a larger area is necessary to sustain the* ecological balance. Different Regulations This would involve either permitting, in the judgment of the nom- inators, activities that would stress the coral ecosystem or preclude uses not considered injurious. Although it is felt a proper balance is made in the nomination, modifications may be appropriate. One option is to preclude all bottom fishing. This would impact on those who fish for lobster, crawfish and stone crab. As a minimum, these fishermen would need to travel a much farther distance to set their traps. It is possible that total protection'of the species in part of their habitat could result in a greater total abundance in the non- protected areas. This option would preclude the possibility of damage to the corals'by the'pots. Similarly, spearfishing could be allowed. Doing so could in- crease the possibility of injury to those who use the park'and to the coral. Net fishing could be prohibited, which would eliminate the possibility of coral damage due to net contact with the reefs. How- ever, the reefs do considerable damage to the nets. The costly net repairs and lost fishing time usually make these fishermen very cautious in deploying their nets too close to the reef. 24 Other Authority Currently,no other authority for protecting living marine re- sources beyond the three-mile zone exists. The Department of the Interior can set aside areas of the Continental Shelf under pro- visions of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to conserve our marine mineral resources, but not to protect ecosystems. Another option is a specific Act to establish the equivalent of the marine sanctuary. This option would accomplish no more than what is proposed under the existing authority of P.L. 92-532, Title III, Marine Sanctuaries. Coordination The nomination was circulated to government agencies, industrial organizations and conservation groups and individuals for their review and comment. In addition, a press release was mailed to the newspapers, radio stations.and TV stations announcing the nomination. The press release was followed by phone calls to the newspapers of the area most@ affected to insure the nomination availability, an d its content was made known to the residents and users of the area. A public hearing was held September 30, 1975, at the Key Largo Elementa ry School, Key Largo, Florida. Press releases announcing the hearing were sent to all news media of the area 20 days prior to the MR hearing. Radio and TV news spots were made 1 to 5 days prior to the hearing, explaining the proposal and announciiig the public hearing. Over 100 persons attended. Formal comments were received from 12 participahts. 80030' 8002 80010, BISCA YNE NATIONAL N MONUMENT -25020' CARD FLORIDA Q SOUND 25020'- ATLANTIC OCEAN 6A RNES SOUND S Al BLACKWATER 'o N -25'@10' SOUND 250 10'- A BUTTONWOOD SOUND -250 250- 4@ ql@ 80030' 800 20' soolo, KEY LARGO CORAL REEF MARINE SANCTUARY FIGURE I APPENDIX A PROCLAMATION NO. 8889 Mar. 17, 1960, 25 F.R. 2352 ESTABLISHMENT OF KEY LARGO CORAL REEF PRESERVE WHEREAS there is situated seaward relinquished to the State of Florida by from the coast of Key Largo, Florida. the United States through the SUh- an undersea coral reef information, which merged Lands Act, apprved May 22. is part of the only living coral reef for- 1953 (67 Stat. 29; 43 U.S.C. 1301 et seq.) mation along the coast of North Ameri- (section 1301 et seq, of Title 43, Public ca; and Lands], and tile remainder ties oil thr WHEREAS this unique coral forma- sea bed of the outer Colitiliplital Shelf tion and its associated marine life are Of outside the seaward boundary of tilt' great scientific interest and value to stu- State of Florida and appertains too tile' dents of the sea; and United States, as declared by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, approved WHEREAS the coral reef is consid- August 7, 1953 (67 Stat. 402; 43 U.S.C. ered to be. one of the most beautiful for- 1331 et seq.) [section 1331 et seq. of Tilt,, mations of Its kind In the world; and 43); and WHEREAS the reef Is being subjected WHEREAS the United States livid Me to commercial exploitation and Is in State of Florida are desirous of vouper. danger of destruction; and sting for the purpose of preserving the WHEREAS it Is In the public interest scenic and scientific values of the "if" to preserve this formation of great scien- unimpaired for the benefit of future title and esthetic Importance for the bell- generations; and efit and enjoyment of the people; and WHEREAS by the terms of the outer WHERRAS a portion of this reef lies Continental Shelf Lands Art tile United Inside the three mile limit in the area States has Jurisdiction over the lands of Ch. la HISTORIC SITES, BUILDINGS, ETC. 16 � 461 me outer continental Shelf and has the westerly npproximately 5,500 yards to exclusive right to dispome of the natural Can Buoy "27"; thence southwesterly resources of the sea bed and subsoil approximately 5.000 yards to Flashing thereof; and Green Light "31BH" In Hawk Channel WHEREAS section 12(a) of the Outer southeast of Point Elizabeth; thence Continental Shelf Lands Act (section southwesterly approximately 10,050 yards 1341(a) of Title 431 authorizes the Presi- to Black Day Deacon "33" In Hawk Channel east of Point Willie; thence dent to withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the outer Conti- southwesterly approximately 9,800 yards nental Shelf; and to Flashing White Light "35";' on Mos- quitp Bank east of Point Charles. WHEREAS section 5 of the Outer Con- thence southwesterly approximately 5,400 tinental Shelf Lands Act [section 1334 of yards to Black Day Beacon "37" (ap- Title 43) authorizes the Secretary of the proximate Latitude 25 degrees 02' 25". Longi- Interior to prescribe rules and regula- tude 80 degrees 25' 30" W.), southeast of Rodri- tions for the conservation of the natural gues Key; thence southeasterly approxi- resources of the outer Continental Shelf mately 7,100 yards' (pass 600 yards and to cooperate with the conservation southwest of Flashing Light "2" at Mo- agencies of adjacent States in the en- lasses Reef) to the 60-foot depth curve forcemeat of conservation laws, rules, (10-fathom line) 800 yards due south of and regulations: said light at Molasses Reef (approximate NOW, THEREFORE, I, DWIGHT D, Latitude 25 degrees 00' 18" N., Longitude 80 degrees 22' EISENHOWER, President of the United 30" W.); thence northeasterly with the States of America, acting under and by 60-foot depth curve and 10-fatham line virtue of the authority vested in me by (passing easterly of French' Reef, Dixie the Constitution and the statutes of the Shoal, The Elbow, and Carysfort Reef) United States, particularly section 12(a) approximately 21 miles to the point of of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act beginning. [section 1341(a) of Title 43], do proclaim I call upon all persons to join in the that, subject to valid existing rights, the effort to protect and preserve this natu- fo Bowing- described area is designated as ral wonder for the benefit of future gen- the Key Largo Coral Reef Preserve, and erations. so much thereof as lies on the outer Continental Shelf is withdrawn from dis- The Secretary of the Interior Is re' position: quested to prescribe rules and regula. tions governing the protection and con- That portion of the outer Continental servation of the coral and other mineral Shelf situated seaward of a line three resources in this area and to cooperate geographic miles from Key Largo, Mon- with the State of Florida and its conser- roe County, Florida, lying and being vation agencies In the preservation of within the following described area: the reef. BEGINNING at a point on the 60-foot IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have depth curve (10-fathom line) as delineat- hereunto set my hand and caused the ed on Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart Seat of the United States of America to 1249 (approximate Latitude 25 degrees 17' 36" N., he affixed. Longitude 80 degrees 10' 00" W.), 200 yards south- east of Flashing White Light-Whistle DONE at the City of Washington this Buoy "2"; thence northwesterly approx- fifteenth day of March in the year of imately 7,000 yards through Whistle our Lord nineteen hundred and Buoy "2" to Can Buoy "21" (approxi- sixty and of the Independence mate Latitude 25 degrees 20' 06" N., Longitude [seal] of the United States of Ameri- 80 degrees 12' 36" W.) southeast of Old Rhodes ca the one hundred and eighty- Key; thence southwesterly about 6,900 fourth. yards to Can Buoy "25"; thence south- DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER Library References Armed Services qCq=54. C.J.S. Army and Navy 1 107. Woods and Forests 4=S. C.J.S. Woods and Forests if 11, 12. APPENDIX B A LIST OF FISHES OF ALLIGATOR REEF, FLORIDA WITH COMMENTS ON THE NATURE OF THE FLORIDA REEF FISH FAUNA1 Walter A. Starck,II Institute of Marine Science, University of Miami Abstract The fish fauna of Alligator Reef, Florida Is enumerated and the zoogeographic nature of the Florida reef fish fauna discussed. A total of 517 species are recorded, of which 389 are coral reef forms. Forty-five species are previously unknown from Florida and an additional eight are undescribed. The Alligator Reef fish fauna Is now the richest known of any single location In the new world. Only seven of the reef species are not recorded from else- where In the West Indian region outside Florida and this number Is expected to be further reduced with additional collecting In other areas. The Florida reef fish fauna Is believed to be composed of post-glacial Immigrants from the West Indies and Yucatan. INTRODUCTION Coral reefs, though harboring what Is probably the richest and certainly one of the oldest and most stable animal communities on earth, have been relatively little studied. The tremendous potential for biological research offered by coral reefs has been offset by their remoteness from'most centers of higher learning and by their being underwater. In recent years development of marine research Institutions In tropical regions, advances In various fields of technology, and Increased availability of funds for marine biological research have resulted In a considerable Increase In work on coral reefs. The West Indian coral reef fauna In general, and that of Florida reefs In particular, are better studied than reef faunas elsewhere In the world and of reef animals fishes are among the best.known. In the present list the presence of 45 species 'of reef fishes previously unrecorded from Florida or other U.S. waters and at least eight undescrlbed species Is Indicative of the Inadequate state of our knowledge of even the best known reef organisms In the most thoroughly studied region. An additional Indication of the status of our Inform- ation Is the fact that -35 species In the list have been described since 1955. Even among described species many systematic problems remain and beyond the systematic level very little Information is In print regarding the biology of most reef fishes. To an Important extent In coral reef studies we are still dealing with an unknown fauna. This list constitutes what Is apparent- ly the first reasonably definitive enumeration of a coral reef fish fauna. The present paper Is the second of a series dealing with the structure of the fish fauna of Alligator Reef (the first Is Starck and Davis, 1967). Future publications on color patterns, size and form, habitats and species associ- ations, general behavior, and other aspects of reef fish biology are In preper- at I oh. lContribution NQ890 from the Institute of Marine Science, University of Miami 6 STUDY AREA Alligator Reef Is a shallow knoll a n the Florida reef chain located about 3.5 nautical miles offshore of the town (if Islamorada Florida, In the Florida Keys. The area encompassed by the present checki Ist (U. S. C. & G. 1250) extends from the ocean shores of Upper and Lower Matecumbe Keys to the 100 fathom curve about nine nautical miles beyond the reef. Collections as far as the rim next reefs to the northeast and southwest of Alligator Reef have been Included. These adjacent reefs are Crocker Reef, six nautical miles northeast and Tennessee Reef, 10 ml les southeast of A I I Igator Reef. Shore habitats In the study area consist mainly of beaches of mixed coral and sh'el I rubble, calcareous sand, and finer material. The beach slope Is gentle so that a distance of about one nautical mile from shore Is reached before a depth of six meters Is encountered. A few shore areas consist of eroded coral rock and In one location, Indian Key, the rocky shore Is undercut with a water depth of one meter at shore. The lagoon or Hawk Channel extends for a distance of about 2.5 nautical miles from shore and the bottom consists of large beds of Thalassla alternating with areas of flat rocky bottom dominated by alcyonarlans, sponges, and Sargassum. Large groups of patch reefs occur In several locations In the lagoon and Isolated coral heads In many areas. The sandy back-reef begins about one mile Inside the outer-reef tract. The substrate consists largely of sandy bottom mixed with Increasing amounts of rubble toward the reef and with finer sediments nearer the lagoon. Many Isolated patches of Thalassia dot the back-reef and a number of rocky patches covered with alcyonarlans and sponges are also found. The reef-top consists largely of eroded coral rock and rubble Interspersed with smal I patches of sand. An eroded rocky ledge up to 2.5 meters high extends for several hundred meters along the reef-top at Alligator Reef and Is an Important concentration point for many species of fishes. Numerous corals and alcyonarlans occur In the rocky areas but coral growth on the reef-top at Alligator Reef Is not as luxuriant as at certain other reefs on either side of It along the Florida reef tract. Coral development, however, has little direct effect on the fish fauna as coral Is Important chiefly as shelter. Because of the shelter afforded by the rocky ledge and the presence of extensive and diverse back-reef forage areas Alligator Reef actually has a greater concen- tration of reef fishes than many other locations with more luxuriant coral growth. Depths on the reef-top at Alligator Reef vary from 1 .5 @o six meters with four to five meters over the ledge. Seaward of the reef-top the bottom slopes over a distance of 150 to 200 meters to a depth of 22 to 24 meters and then drops more or less abruptly to a Mill! depth of 29 meters (16 fathoms). The deep-reef makes up the outer edge of this zone. It consists of heavily eroded coral rock overgrown by profuse growths of live corals, alcyonarlons, and sponges. The outer face Is steep off onto silty sand and sandy rubble bottom at a depth of 28 to 29 ;,iaters. The deep-reef Is separated from the reef-top In most areas by a band of sand 100 meters or more wide In depths of 10 to 20 meters. Beyond the deep-reef the bottom shelves gently so that It Is necessary to go about one mile beyond the outer edge of the deep-reef before a depth of 45 meters Is reached and nine miles before a depth of IaO meters (100 fathoms) Is reached. The bottom over most of this area consists of various mixtures of calcareous silt, sand, and rubble. 7 Smal I rocky outcrops at a depth of 45 meters occur In one location and are a focal point for concentrations of a number of deep water reef species. Other areas of low relief are found In deeper water and an extensive zone of very rugged relief occupies the outer edge of the study area In depths of 145 to 180 meters. For the purposes of the present paper the reef community Is defined as that occupying the reef-top Itself and all of the reef associated habitats from the shoreward edge of the lagoon to a depth of 45 meters, about one mile beyond the outbr edge of the deep-reef. WORK AT AL-LIGATOR REEF The only reference to biological work at Alligator Reef prior to the present program Is a paper by Breder (1927). His report on the fishes collected by the first oceanographic expedition of the "Pawnee" In 1925 Includes about 15 species of reef fishes collected at Alligator Reef. The present work at Al I Igator Reef was begun by the author In 1958 and has continued for varying periods during each year of the subsequent nine years. Use of rotenone-based fish toxicants and SCUBA equipment has been the single most productive collecting technique. Wei I over 200 such collect- Ions have been mnde In al I major habitats from shore to 45 meters. Hundreds of additional collections have a.Iso been made by more selective methods. Spears, traps, handnets, costnets, trawls, angling, and other techniques have been used extensively. In depths greater than 45 meters bottom collections have been made by trawl and hook and I Ine only, and even these techniques have not been used exhaustively though perhaps 50 days of hook and line fishing at these depths have been carried out. In addition to collecting, several hundred days have been spent In observing with skin and SCUBA diving equipment. Over 100 night diving trips have also been made for observations and limited collecting. PUBLICATIONS Virtually all fishes collected at Alligator Reef have -been deposited In the Ichthyological museum of the Institute of Marine Science of the University of Miami. This material has been used by a number of Investigators and a total of 34 publications and thre,@@ studies In press now deal with fishes from Alligat- or Reef. Anderson, GehrInger, and Berry (1956), B8hlke (19157a, 1967b), 88hlke and Robins (1960a, 1960b, 1962), B8hIke and Springer (1961), B8hIke and Thomas (1961), Courtenay (1961 , 1967), Davis (1966), Eschmeyer (1965), Gilbert (1967), Hubbs (1963), Randall (1963b, 1965a, 1966), Randall and Bdhlke (1965), Robins and Starck (1951), Robins and Tabb (1965), Springer (1962), and Starck and Courtenay (1962), treat material from Alligator Reef In systematic studies. These papers Include 12 new Florida records and descriptions of ten new species from Alligator Reef. Clardeill (in press), Feddern (1963, 1965, In press), Gould (1965), McKenny (1959), Randall and Randall (1960), Randall (1962), Schroeder and Starck (1964), Starck (1960), Starck and Schroeder (1965), Starck (in press), Starck and Davis (1967), and Myrberg, Brahy, and Emery (1967) deal with biological aspects of fishes from Alligator Reef and Include one new record of occurrence for Florida. 8 Numerous black and white and color photographs of reef fishes and reef habitats at Alligator Reef may also be found In Starck and Brundza (1g66). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS From 1958 to 1960 collections at Al I Igator Reef were made by the author In co-operation with a study of the Inshore fish fauna of the Florida Keys headed by C. Richard Robins under National Science Foundation g'rants-In-aid 3881 and 9695. Field work In the summer of 1954 was connected with Investl- gations of the feeding habits and related morphology of selected reef fishes supported by NSF-GB-1456 of which Dr. Robins was principal Investigator. Since June 1965 work at Alligator Reef has been supported by NSF-GB-3628 of which the author Is principal Investigator. The National Geographic Society has also contributed considerable support to various facets of the work since 1962. Over the years, many Individuals have participated In fieldwork at Alligator Reef, Henry A. Feddern, Richard H. Chesher, Alan R. Emery and William P. Davis have been especially helpful and are, themselves, carrying out studies on the biology of various reef organisms. Robert E. Schroeder has also assisted In field operations at various times. John E, Randal I was Involved In early collecting efforts and has been most co-operative In subsequent years with his Ideas, observations, and data on reef fish biology. C. Richard Robins has made available all possible facilities of the Ichthyological museum of the Institute of Marine Science and has given Invaluable aid in taxonomic problems concerning reef fishes, He has also critically reviewed this manuscript. James E. B6hlke furnished a complete list of the known fish fauna of the Bahama Islands and solved several perplexing taxonomic problems. Jo D. Starck, the author's wife, assisted In all phases of the work from field operations and processing of collections and data to completion of the manuscript. DISCUSSION Alligator Reef now has what Is probably the most thoroughly known fish fauna of any single coral reef. The 517 species Included In the present list also considerably exceeds the 440 odd fishes recorded by Longley and Hilde- brand (1941) from the Tortugas; previously the richest known shore fish fauna of any single locality In the New World. This fact Is Indicative only of the richness of coral reef faunas In general rather than that of Alligator Reef In particular. With thorough collecting many other reefs In the West Indian Region will undoubtedly be found to have equal or even greater fish faunas. Of the 517 species recorded some 389 are actually members of the reef community and are normally found In the area from the shore to a depth of 45 meters. The remaining species are either offshore pelagic forms, demersal species from deeper water, or stragglers from adjacent Inshore areas. In the checklist reef species have been divided Into two groups to give some Idea of the composition of the reef community. Primary reef species (indicated in the I Ist by an asterisk) are those character I stica I ly associated with coral reefs (253 species here). Secondary reef species ore forms (indicated by a+) which, though normal residents of Alligator Reef and other reefs, are equally or even more characteristic of areas not associated with 9 reefs (136 species here). The latter includes a number of occu pants of sandy bottom and grass habitats as well as wide ranging species such as sharks. In recent years a considerable number of publications have expanded our knowledge of West Indian reef fishes. Systematic notes, descriptions of new species, and generic and familial revisions have clarified many problems. Thirty-six of the reef species In the present list have been described In the post 11 years (s-Ince 1955) and al I but one of the eight known new species Included here are now In the process of being described by various workers. To assist the non-systematist amid this welter of new names and changes in old ones common names follow the scientific ones. When common names were unaval.lable they were coined; otherwise the common names of Bailey 2t 21. (1960) were generally followed. In some cases the names recommended by Bailey et al-were apparently taken from those listed by earlier scientific [email protected] and or-, not coincident with names standardly used by aquarlsts, skindlvers, and fishermen. In these cases the commonly used name is follow- ed rather than the recommended one. In a few additional cases where des- criptive names suggested by Bailey et al.were misleading for the live fish a new name is glven. Wherever such 7ha-nges have been made the reasons are given. In addition to Bailey et al.who listed fishes of the United States and Canada Briggs (1958) also dealt comprehensively with Florida fisht@s In his list of Florida fishes. Both papers, though Important and useful works, contribut-@ to zoogeographic confusion by Including species which were not previously recorded from Florida Unfortunately these species were not differentiated from ones based on pubilshed record. In a number of cases In Briggs' work and In a lesser number in Bailey et al., species were anticipated on th;@ basis of a pattern of known distribution wRichwould probably Include Florida though no specimens had been collected there, Some of these speculations have been vindicated by subsequent collect- Ions. Others have not. Both publications also Included species which had been collected but not recorded though no Indication of this status Is given. In the case of Bailey et al,a number of these were based on material collected at Alligator Reef by the @3_uthor and curated by Dr. 0, Richard Robins, a co-outhor of that work. Therefore, 15 of the species from the present list are Included by Bailey et 21. but are not previously recorded . Whenever possible species binomens used are those recommended by recent studies. For convenience the familial order used by Bailey Lt 21.has been followed and 'species within a family listed alphabetically. Non-reef species are designated as offshore for those pelagic species which occur from the reef-top seaward and the demersal species which live In depths greater thar, .45 meters. Inshore species are those which normally live in Florida Bay and stray Into the reef area (for a more detailed list of Florida Bay fishes see Tabb and Manning, 1961). To Indicate the abundance of each species five qualitative categories are used. Rare species are those of which three of fewer specimens have been seen or collected among a number of collections In their habitat. Occasional ones are species collected or observed at Irregular Intervals. Species list- ed as frequent have been seen or collected on numerous occasions or are taken In a large percentage of collections from their habitat. Common specie-, are ones that may be found during virtual ly every dive* or collection In the proper area. Abundant Indicates a common species present In large numbers. Though the South Florida area Is often thought of as subtropical It Is 10 Important to emp hasize that the marine fauna and flora of the Florida Keys Is wholly tropical In nature as pointed out by Stephenson and Stephenson (1958: 393). While the Florida Keys do lie just outside of the Tropic of Cancer the Florida Current displaces tropical marine conditions northward. On rare occasions exceptionally cold weather may drop water temperatures near shore to the lower lethal limit for some organisms but the reef ar@ea from the lagoon seaward Is unaffected by these short cold spells. Faunal differences between th-- Florida reefs and Bahamian ones, for example, are evidently connected with other factors than temperature. The unusually heavily sedimented nature (for a coral reef) of much of the sea floor in the Keys Is perhaps the single most Important factor. Although ecological conditions at Alligator Reef restrict certain species many others are favored. Especially abundant and noticeable are the grunts (Pomadasyldae), snappers (Lutianidae), and sea basses (Serranidae), and the general underwater appearance of the reef fish population density Is not equal- ed on most other West Indian reefs. The fishes of Alligator Reef are typical of West Indian reefs in general and constitute a fauna that can hardly be considered Impoverished In reef forms. With adequate collecting many of the faunal differences between various locat- Ions In this faunal region are disappearing and those that remain are begin- ning to f It a pattern. Briggs (1958: 23") listed as Florida endemics 26 nominal species that are Included In or are synonyms of reef species In the present list. At the present tlm-. only'one of these (Hypoplectrus gernma)ls still known only from Florida. To this may be added two subsequently described species (Lythryenus phorellus and Ophidlan selenops), one undescribed species (Chrom@ s sp.),a species previously recorded erroneously from the West Indies 1',;catinus oceanops), and two species which range outside Florida along the continental coast (Llopropoma eukrines and Equetu umbrosus),for a total of seven out of 389 resf Inhabitants that are not recorded elsewhere In the West Indle's. With further collecting It Is probably that several of these seven will also be found outside Florida. Except for Ophldlon all other Western Atlantic species of the genera Involved are West Indian reef forms and even OpWdlon has sev eral West Indian reef representatives. Of the seven species found, so for, only In U.S. wat@'-Irs, two are small gobles, two are smal I serranids, one a dwarf cusk eel, -,ind one a pomacentrid. The tendency for zoogeographic differentiation within th, region to be restrict- ed to smal I species with I Imited abl I Ity to travel and I Itti- z or no pelagic larval period is apparent. Rosenblatt (1963: 176) has pointed c it these and addition- al factors which have contributed to rapid,evolution In s._@ch fishes. It Is also evident that most species of even these groups are not r,: stricted to Florida and the barrier has been effective for only a relatively -nited number of forms. Differences In faunal composition between reefs In & - West Indies can therefore be r.--r-ded primarily as ecological or quantl-*@ Aive rather than zoo- -'.@Jltatlve. With a much larger species c -mplement available tnan actually lives there the faunal composltlor@ 3f a given reef Is a function of what can I Ive there rather than what can get : @ere. Though two reefs may reveal similar species lists with extensive cc ectIng, the populations of each species are often quite dissimilar depending upc, differences In geography, hydrography, and biology of the reefs. Comparison of the fish fauna of Alligator Reef with c-,Iie"r areas on an equit- able basis Is difficult because of lack of adequate collec-,@ons elsewhere. Longley and Hildebrand (1941) report a total of 442 nom''ial species from the Tortugas of which about 300 may be considered reef Inhabitants. The species taken at Alligator but not at Tortugas largely reflect differences In techniques used. The groups showing the greatest difference are the burrowing eels and cusk eels, the smal I cryptic gobles, and the deeper, water labrids. In view of the nature of the differences In recorded species and collecting techniques no significant faunal differentiation between the Tortugas and A1.11gator Reef can be postulated and It Is probable none exists. Over recent years extensive collecting with rotenone-based lchthyocldes and SCUBA. -gear has greatly expanded our knowledge of the f Ishes of the Bahama Islands. The greatest part of recent Ichthyological work In the Bahamas has been carried out by'James E. B6hIke and Charles C.. G. Chapl In of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. Dr. B8hIke kindly furnl�--@- ed the author with a list of fishes known from the Bahamas and It Is on this basis that the following conparlsons are made. In this case collecting tech- niques are comparable bet1ween.the two areas and over 50 of the Bahamian collections were made by the author using Identical techniques to the ones used at Alligator Reef. However, It must still be considered that we are com- paring collections made In the 'many reef situations of a large group of Islands with those made on one reef. .Dr. B6hIke I s I Ist of Bahamian f Ishes Includes 496 species In total, of which about 450 may be found on coral reefs. Total fauna Is, therefore, slightly less than that of Alligator Reef but the reef dwelling component Is fifteen percent greater. Only one, family Involved Is not common to both areas. The serranoid family Grbmmidoe Is not represented at Alligator Reef and Is unrecorded from Florida. However, one species, Gromma loreto Is reportedly taken occa 'slonally by aquarium fish collectors In the region from Fort Lauderdale to. Palm Beach Florida. In that area the Florida current Is closer to shore than at any other point along the,Florlda coast. This feature coupled with the absence of extensive adjacent estuarine or bay areas permits clear oceanic water toprevall over the.cuter reef areas there. As a result a number of other species of fishes and Invertebrates characteristic of the West Indies but rare or absent elsewhere In Florida are found there. Among fishes these in- clude, In addition to Gramma loreto, the pygmy angelfish (centropyge argi) and the longsnout butte rf I yf I sh, (Rrognothodes aculeatus). s I tuat I @;n_f urthe r Illustrates that local conditions. and not zoogeographic barriers are the caus- ItIve agents behind much of the. apparent faunal differentiation between sepa- rate reef areas In the West Indian region. On the generic level 35 genera of reef fishes from the Bahamas have not been found at,AIlIgator Reef but IS of these have been taken elsewhere In Florida SIxteen.genera of reef fishes taken at Alligator Reef are unknown.in the Bahamas, but al I have been taken elsewhere In the West Indian region. Reef species occurring In the Bahamas but not collected at Alligator Reef total 126 but 46 of these have been taken elsewhere In Florida. Seventy@two reef species from Alligator Reef are unknown for the Bahamas; however, all but seven of these (see above) have been token elsewhere In the, West Indies. Four of these seven are normally found In depths greater than 15 meters at which depths relatively few rotenone collectio ns, or none at a I I, have been made over most of the West Indian Region. The 82 Bahamian reef species not known from Florida are scattered among 27 fami I les but the greatest number of these (51 %) occur in four faml I ies. These faml.lies, th,-@ CIInIdae (including the Tripteryglidae and Choenopsidae), Gobi Idoe, Apogonldae, and Gobiesocidae are al I composed of smal I species 12 with short or non-existent pelagic larval periods and which as adults do not range widely. The nature of the fish fauna of Allf-gator Reef and of the Florida reefs In general can be summarized as follows: During the lost glacial period tropical marine species were restricted to a much narrower latitudinal area and the Florida shore fauna was predominant- ,ly temperate In nature (Walters and Robins, 1961: 16). The present reef fish fauna consists of relatively recent Immigrants that have crossed the Florida Current from the West Indies or drifted with It from the Yucatan peninsula. This barrier has apparently been effective only for forms with very I Imited swimming powers as adults and with reduced or absent planktonic larval peri- ods. This category Includes the speclose gables and blennies. Certain other forms while able to cross the Straits have been unable to develop normal pop- ulations due to local conditions. Two factors are readily apparent which might adversely affect some West Indian reef species In Florida. One Is an unusually high degree of siltation for a coral reef area and the other Is a surprisingly dense popu!atlon of many species on the Florida reefs perhaps creating an unfavorable competitive sit- uation for some other species. Among the species which occur at Alligator Reef but for which local can- ditlons are apparently unfavorable are: Myrlprlstls jacobus, Plectrypops retrospints, Cepholopholls fulva, Liopropoma mowbrayl Lioproporna rubre, Mycteroperca tigris, Inermla vlttata Lutjanus mahogani, Centropygae argi, P@ognathodes aculeatus, Ballstes vetula, and Cantherhines macrocerus. In contrast to the faunal limitations Imposed by the barrier of the Florida Current and by local conditions, other factors have operated to permit a sur- prisingly rich reef fish fauna In Florida. The Florida Current maintains favorable temperatures over the reefs and brings an abundant supply of plank- tonic food. Adjacent and extensive Inshore regions of high product'IvIty furnish ra excellent forage areas for adults of a number of species and nursery grounds for juveniles of many. Finally a wide range of reef and reef-associated habitats are found. The net results of these factors are that the fish fauna consists of West Indian species with the exception of seven out of nearly 400 reef species and some of these seven will probably also be found In the West Indies with further collecting. Results of the favorable factors are such that not only are a large number of species found In a single area but populations of many are unusually dense. Outside the Western Atlantic the best known reef fish fauna Is that of Hawaii. In comparison, however, It must be remembered that In Hawaii we are considering the fauna of an archipelago 1 500 miles long and not that-of a single reef. Gosline and Brock (1960) report from Hawaii a total of 448 In- shore species from depths less than 100 fathorrs. Of these just under 400 species can be considered reef dwellers. The very similar number of reef species between Alligator Reef and the entire Hawaiian chain Including Johnston Island Is Indicative of the surprising richness of the Florida reef fauna Other than at Hawaii, which Is Impoverished In comparison, the rich Indo- Pacific fauna Is very poorly studied. Two areas have received more recent and extensive treatment than the rest. Schultz et al. (1951 , 1960, and 1966) report about 625 reef spec les from the Marshal I and Marianas Islands. The I ImIted nature of the collectlons on which their work was based Indicate an 13 actua Ifauna of at least 800 reef dwel I Ing fishes. Smith and Smith (19631) report approximately 740 reef species from the Seychelles. From personal observation and collecting there I would feel safe In estimating a total reef fish fauna of over 900 species. While these figures are totals for relatively large Island groups It appears probably that the fauna of tropical Indo-Pacific reefs Is approximately twice as speclose as that of West Indian reefs. In comparing. the general systematic composition of the Alligator Reef fauna or the West Indian fauna In general wilh that of the tropical Indo-Pacific area the most noticeable differences are the greater Importance of the ClInIdae and Pomadasyldae, In the West Indian Region and the Increased significance of-the Blennildoe and Aconthurldae In the Indo-Pacific. A few specialized Indo-West Pacific famlIles are not represented at al I In the West Indian Region. A. significant portion of.the Cllnidae, the Chaenopsldae, has been recog- nised as a separate family (Stephens, 1963) and together with the Dactyloscop- Idae are the only families of West Indian reef fishes which are known only from the New World. The remaining families are all represented In the Indo-Pacific. The Blennildae of the Indo-Pacific fill, to some extent, niches occupied by the ClInldae of the West Indian Region. The Pomadasyldae are represented In the Indo-Pacific by the closely related Gaterinidoe which are also ecologically similar and the two groups probably do not rate familial separation. The wide range of niches deflned by the many species of Indo-Pacific Acanthurlds are apparently exploited only by the four Western Atlantic species of Acanthurus. Other characteristic and speclose reef fish families of the Indo-Pacific such as the Muraenldae, Ophlcthidae, Holocentridae, Serranldce, Lutjanldae, Apogonidae, Carangidae, Mullidae, Chaetodon,tidae, Pomacentridoe, Labridae, Scarldoe, Goblidae, Scorpaenldae, BlennIldae, Ballstldae, Ostracildae and Diodontidae are all well represented at Alligator Reef. With the exception of the Mullidae (two species) and.the Ostraclidae (four species) all thesefamilles have five or more species at Alligator Reef. SUMMARY The f Ish fauna of, Alligator Reef is fully tropical West Indian In nature and surprisingly rich. The known fauna from this Reef -@nd Immediate environs now Includes a greater number of species than has been ,-,reviously recorded from any onelocbtlon In the New World, The reef fish fo,;na probably consists of post-glacial Immigrants and accordingly the most no-.1ceable differentiation from the fauna of the West Indian islands includes th@_@ absence of certain small- er demersal species with I Imited swimming power as adults and I Ittle or no pelagic larval period. In comparison with the tropical Indo-Pacific ree' fish fauna that of Alligator Reef Is similar In composition on the familial and ge.@-,erlc level. The total number of species Involved Is very close to that of 4 -s Hawaiian reef fish fauna but only about one-half that of the Marshall art- Marianas Islands or the Seychelles. A LIST OF FISHES OF ALLIGATOR REE z, FLORIDA The reef habitat, primary and secondary reef spacles, and categorie's of abundance have been defined above. Comments on @,c tent If Ic and common names used are also made above. 14 Where species b1nomens differ from those previously used reasons are g.lven as they are when common names differ from those suggested by Bailey et al. (1960). While stability in common names Is certainly desirable the author Is of the opinion that for Ichthyologists to Insist upon a common name In the face of uniform popular usage of another equally appropriate name contributes nothing to nomenclatural stabi I Ity. In other cases a suggested common name may be misleading and require change. One example Is the previously recommended whitel Ine goby which In I Ife has a bright yel low I Ine. Persons who use common names will probably never see a faded preserved specimen with a white line. Unfortunately, therefore, It appears that recommended common names I Ike scientific ones may sometimes have to be changed. Such name changes, If reasonable and conservative In nature, should In the long run contribute to stability rather than detract from It. Species of which specimens from Alligator Reef are In the Ichthyological museum of the Institute of Marine Science are identified by the letters UMML. The four species based on sight records only are so stated. All new records of occurrence for Florida are Identified as such and In a few cases where taxonomic status Is uncertain this Is also noted. LAMNIDAE - MACKEREL SHARKS Isurus oxyrinchu Raflnesque, MAKO, rare, offshore, one specimen examined but not preserved. ORECTOLOBIDAE - NURSE SHARKS +Sing lymostoma cirratum (Bonnaterre), NURSE SHARK, frequent, UMML. RHINCODONTIDAE - WHALE SHARKS Rhlncodon typus Smith, WHALE SHARK, rare, one specimen seen by the author near Duck Key about 17 miles west of Alligator Reef. CARCHARHINIDAE - REQUIEM SHARKS Carcharhlnus falciformis (Valenciennes), SILKY SHARK, common, offshore. +Carcharhinus leucas (Valenciennes), BULL SHARK, frequent to common. CarcharhInus limbatus (Valenciennes), BLACKTIP SHARK, occasional, Inshore. Carcharhinus obscurus (Lesueur), DUSKY SHARK, frequent, offshore. +Galeocerdo cuvieri (P7eron and Lesueur), TIGER SHARK, occasional tofrequent. +Negaprio brevlrostrls (Poey), LEMON SHARK, common to abundant Inshore, occasional reef, UMML. Prionac glauc (Linnaeus), BLUE SHARK, rare, one specimen caught around 1940 about 10 ml les SW of Al I Igator Reef, Identif led by the late A lbert Pflueder, Miami taxidermist. SPHYRNIDAE - HAMMERHEAD SHARKS +Sphyrna mokarran (R8ppell), GREAT HAMMERHEAD, occasional to frequent. +Sphyrna tiburo (Linnaeus), BONNETHEAD', occasional to frequent. Sphyrna zygaena (Linnaeus), SMOOTH HAMMERHEAD, occasional, offshore, UMML. PRISTIDAE - SAWFISHES Pristi pectinatu Latham, SMALLTOOTH SAWFISH, occasional, Inshore, UMML. RHINOBATIDAE - GUITARFISHES RhInobatos lentiginosus (Garman), ATLANTIC GUITARFISH, rare, Inshore. 15 TORREDINIDAE - ELECTRIC RAYS +Narclne brasillensis (Olfers), LESSER ELECTRIC RAY, frequent, UMML. RAJIDAE - SKATES Raja garman Whitley, ROSETTE SKATE, common, offshore, UMML. DASYATIDAE - STINGRAYS -+Dasyatls amerIcana Hildebrand and Schroeder, SOUTHERN STINGRAY, frequent reef, common Inshore. +Urolophus jamalcensis (Cuvier), YELLOW STINGRAY, common, UMML. MYLIOBATIDAE - EAGLE RAYS +Aetobatus narinarl (Euphrasen), SPOTTED EAGLE RAY, frequent. MOBULIDAE - MANTAS Mania birostrls (Walbaum), ATLANTIC MANTA, occasional, offshore. ELOPIDAE - TARPONS Elops saurus Linnaeus, LADYFISH, frequent, Inshore. Megalops atlantIca Valenciennes, TARPON, common, Inshore, UMML. ALBULIDAE - BONEFISHES Albula vulpe (Linnaeus), BONEFISH, common, Inshore. CLUPEIDAE - HERRINGS +Harengula humeralls Cuvler, REDEAR SARDINE,. common, UMML. +P-arengul Pensacola Goode crd Bean, SCALED SARDINE, common, UMML. +Jenkinsla lamprotaenla (Gosse), DWARF HERRING, common, UMML. *Jenkinsla maju Whitehead, LITTLE-EYE DWARF HERRING, common, UMML. First record for Florida. William N. Eschmeyer who Is presently studying the species of Jenkinsla and who Identified the material from Alligator Reef Informed the author that several species may be Involved in what Is now known as Jenkinsla majua. The Identification of Alligator Reef material under this name is, therefore, provisional. +Jenkinsla stall'fera Jordan and Gilbert, NARROWSTRIRE DWARF HERRING, f requent, UMML. OpIsthonema oglInu (Lesueur), THREAD HERRING, frequent, Inshore. +Sardlnelia anchovia (Valenciennes), SPANISH SARDINE, frequent, UMML. Hildebrand (1963) recognizes three species of SardInella from the Western Atlantic; pinnula known only from Bermuda, anchovia ranging from Woods Hole to Florida and probably to Brazil, and brasillensis which occurs from Florida to southern Brazil. Specimens from Alligator Reef fit descriptions of all three specles'with the smnliest specimens generally corresponding best with brasillensis, medium sized ones with anchovia and the largest specimens with pinnul . More than one type frequently occurs In the same school and it appears probable that only one biological species Is Involved. Only the oldest name, 6nchovia, Is therefore recognized here. This name has previously been used extensively for the Florida species. ENGRAULIDAE - ANCHOVIES Anchoa lyolepl (Evermann and Marsh), DUSKY ANCHOVY, common, Inshore, UMIAL. 16 Anchoa mitchllll (Valenciennes), BAY ANCHOVY, common, Inshore, UMML. SYNODONTIDAE - LIZARDFISHES +Saurlda normani Langley, SHORTJAW LIZARDFISH, frequent to common, reef and offshore, UMML. Synodu foetens (Linnaeus), INSHORE LIZARDFISH, frequent, UMML. +Synodu Intermedlus (SpIx), SAND DIVER, occasional reef, common offshore, UMML. +Synodu poeyl Jordan, OFFSHORE LIZARDFISH, occasional reef, common offshore, UMML. *Synodu synodu (Linnaeus), RED LIZARDFISH, common, UMML. +Trachinocephalu myop (Forster), SNAKEFISH, frequent, reef and offshore, UMML. ARGENTINIDAE - ARGENTINES Glossan6don pygmaeu Cohen, PYGMY ARGENTINE, rare, offshore, UMML. ARIIDAE - SEA CATFISHES Galelchthy fells (Linnaeus), SEA CATFISH, occasional, Inshore. XENOCONGRIDAE - PENCIL EELS +Chilorhinus suenson.1 L8tken, STUBBY PENCIL EEL, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. *Kauplchthy atlanticus B8hlke, GRAY PENCIL EEL, occasional, UMML. First record for Florida. CONGRIDAE - CONGER EELS +Arlosoma Impress (Poey), BANDTOOTH CONGER, rare, UMML. *Conge trlporlceps Kanazana, MANYTOOTH CONGER, rare, UMML. *Nystactichthy halls (B8hlke), GARDEN EEL, frequent, UMML. F-Irst record for Florida. -;Fbruconge caudlllmbatus (Poey), MARGINTAIL, CONGER, rare, UMML. MORINGUIDAE - SPAGHETTI EELS *Moringua edwardsi (Jordan and Boliman), SPAGHETTI EE L, frequent,. UMML. First record for Florida. Only one species of this family Is presently recognized In the West Indian Region but some workers believe that further Investigation may reveal more than one species Is Involved. The present species Identification is there- fore tentative. OPHICHTHIDAE - SNAKE EELS t,4hila egmontl (Jordan), KEY WORM EEL, occasional, UMML. *Aprognathodon platyventris B?3hlke, BANDED SNAKE EEL, occasional, UMML. +Bascanichthys scuticarls (Goode and Bean), WHIP EEL, rare, UMML. *Carolophia loxochila B6hlke, FLANGED SNAKE EEL, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. +Echlopsis mordox (Poey), SNAPPER EEL, rare, UMML. *Myrichthys acum1natus (Gronow), SHARPTAIL EEL, rare, UMML. +Myrlchthys oculatus (Koup), GOLDSPOTTED EEL, occasional, UMML. Included by BaIley�t_2_1_.(1960), but not previously recorded from U.S. waters. +Myrophl punctatu Lbtken, SPECKLED WORM EEL, occasional, UMML. +Sphagebranchus 0 111 n us (Evermann and Marsh), SURF EEL, frequent, 17 UMML. B8hlke (MS) has synonymized S. conklini with S. ophloneus leaving only one recognized species in the West Indian Region. +Vermo sp., AUGERNOSE WORM EEL, frequent, UMML. +Verma sp., BLUNTNOSE WORM EEL, frequent, UMML. Due to the present slate of systematic knowledge of this genus 11 Is not possible to give positive identifications. At least one species is new according to Dr. James E. B8hIke who is studying this material for a future report. MURAENIDAE - MORAYS *Echidno catenato (Bloch), CHAIN MORAY, rare, UMML. Enche lycore nigr icons (Bonnaterre), VIPER MORAY, common, UMML. Included by Bailey et al_. (1960) but not previously recorded from U.S. waters. *.Enchelycore sp. , DWARF VIPER MORAY, common, UMML. An undescribed species of moray closely related to E. nigricans but smaller. What appears to be the same species occurs in th(@_Bahamas and the Antilles. *Gymnothorax funebris Ranzani, GREEN MORAY, frequent to common, UMML. *Gymnothorax moringa (Cuvier), SPOTTED MORAY, common, UMML. +Gymnothorox nigromarginatus (Girard), BLACKEDGE MORAY, rare, UMML. *Gymnothorax vicinus (Costelnau), PURPLEMOUTH MORAY, common,UMML. Muraena millaris (Koup), GOLDENTAIL MORAY, frequent, UMML. Included by Bai ley.2t 21.' (1960), but not previously recorded from U.S. waters. *Uropterygius diopus B8hIke, FINLESS MORAY, occasional, UMML. BELONIDAE - NEEDLEFISHES Ablenne hian (Valenciennes), FLAT NEEDLEFISH, occasional, offshore, UMML. +Platybelon argalu (Lesueur), KEELED NEEDLEFISH, common, UMML. Strongylur marina (Walbaum), ATLANTIC NEEDLEFISH, common, inshore. Strongylure @_otata (Poey), REDFIN NEEDLEFISH, common, inshore, UMML. Tylosuru acus (Lac6p4de), AGUJON, occaslonal, offshore, UMML. +Tylosuru crocodilus (Peron and Lesueur), HOUNDFISH, common, UMML. HEMIRAMPHIDAE - HALFBEAKS Chrlodoru2 atherinoides Goode and Bean, HARDHEAD HALFBEAK, occasional, inshore, UMML. Euleptoramphu velox Poey, FLYING HALFBEAK, occasional, offshore,Ul'fML. Hemiramphus balao Lesueur, BALAO, frequent, offshore, UMML. +Hemiromphus brasiliensis (Linnaeus), BALLYHOO, common, reef and off- shore, UMML. Hyporhamphus unifasclatus (Ranzani), HALF-BEAK, frequent, offshore (Juvenile), and inshore (Adult), UMMIL. EXOCOETIDAE - FLYINGFISHES Cypseluru exsIllens (Linnaeus), BANDWING PLYINGFISH, offshore, UMML. Observations and collections of most species of flyingfishes are InsuffIcient to permit any realistic attempt at classification as to "occasional", "frequent", etc. Cypselurus furcatus (Mitchill), SPOTFIN FLYINGFISH, offshore, UMML. 18 Cypselurus heterurus (Raffnesque), ATLANTIC FLYINGFISH, common, offshore, UMML. Exocoetus obtusirostris Gdnther, OCEANIC TWO-WING FLYINGFISH, off- shore, UMML. Hlrundlchthys affinis (GOnther), FOURWING FLYINGFISH, offshore, UMML. Hlrundlchthys ron.deleti (Valenciennes), BLACKWING FLYINGFISH, offshore, UMML. Parexocoetus brachypteru (Richardson), SAILFIN FLYINGFISH, common, offshore, UMML. Prognichthys gIbblfr (Valenciennes), BLUNTNOSE FLYINGFISH, common, offshore, UMML. CYPRINODONTIDAE - KILLIFISHES Florldichthy carpio (Gbnther), GOLDSPOTTED KILLIFISH, common, Inshore, UMML. Fundulus confluentus Goode and Bean, MARSH KILLIFISH, common, Inshore, UMML. Fundulus simills (Baird and Girard), LONGNOSE KILLIFISH, common, Inshore, UMML. POECILIIDAE - LIVEBEARERS Gambust aff Ini (Baird and Girard), MOSQUITOFISH, common, Inshore, UMML. Poecilla latipinn (Lesueur), SAILFIN MOLLY, common, Inshore, UMML. AULOSTOMIDAE - TRUMPETFISHES *Aulostomus maculatus Valenciennes, TRUMPETFISH, frequent, UMML. FISTULARIIDAE - CORNETFISHES *F[stularia tabacarla Linnaeus, CORNETFISH, frequent, UMML. CENTRISCIDAE - SNIPEFISHES Macrorhamphosu gracill (Lowe), SLENDER SNIPEFISH, rare, offshore, UMML. SYNGNATHIDAE - PIPEFISHES AND SEAHORSES +Corytholchthys albirostrls Heckel, WHITENOSE PIPEFISH, rare, UMML. Corytholchthys brachycepholu (Poey), CRESTED PIPEFISH, common, Inshore, UMML. +Hippocampus erectus Perry, RIBBED SEAHORSE, frequent, UMML. This common name has been changed from that of Bailey et.!L1.0960) to avoid confusion with the following species. +Hlppocampus reldi Ginsburg, SPOTTED SEAHORSE, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. Hippocampus zosterae Jordan and Gilbert, DWARF SEAHORSE, frequent, Inshore. +Mlcrognothus crinigeru (Bean and Dresel), FRINGED PIPEFISH, frequent, UMML. +Micrognathu crlnltus; (Jenyns), INSULAR PIPEFISH, frequent, UMML. +Mlcrognathus vlttatus (Kaup), (both ensenodae and vittatus color patterns) BANDED PIPEFISH, occasional, UMML. Due to differences In ecology, and behavior, the author Is of the opinion that the two forms are probably separate species. +Syngnathus elucens Poey, SHORTFIN PIPEFISH, rare, UMML. 19 +Syngnathus loulsqlanae Ganther, CHAIN PIPEFISH, rare, UMML. Syngnathus pelagicus Linnaeus, SARGASSUM PIPEFISH, rare, offshore, UMML. +Syngnathus springer Herald, BULL PIPEFISH, rare, UMML. HOLOCENTIDAE - SQUIRRELFISHES *Adioryx bullis (Woods), DEEPWATER SQUIRRELFISH, frequent, UMML. *Adqloryx coruscus (Poey), REEF SQUIRRELFISH, frequent, UMML. *Adloyx vexlllarius(Poey), DUSKY SQUIRRELFISH, common, UMML. *Holocentrus ascenslonqis (Osbeck), SQUIRRELFISH, common, UMML. *Holocentrus rufus (Waqlbaum), LONGSPINE SQUIRRELFISH, frequent, UMML. *Myriprlstis jacobus Cuvler, SOLDIERFISH, occasional to frequent, UMML. *Plectrypops retrospqinqis (Guqichenot), CARDINAL SOLDIER6qPISH, one sight record only. Balley et al. (1960) Include It, but there Is no previous record from U.S. waters published or unpublished. CAPROIDAE - BOARFISHES Antigonia capro Lowe, DEEPBODY BOARFISH, rare, offshore, UMML. CENTROPOMIDAE - SNOOKS +Centropomus undecqimalls (Bloch), SNOOK, common, UMML. SERRANIDAE - SEA BASSES *Alpheste afer (Bloch), MUTTON HAMLET, rare, UMML. Anthqlas sp., unidentified), rare, offshore, UMML. *Cephalopholls fulva.(Linnaeus), CONEY, occasional, UMML. *Dermatolepls Inermqis (Valenciennes), MARBLED GROUPER, rare, UMML. +Dlplectru bivqittatum (Valenciennes), DWARF- SAND PERCH, common, UMML. -Dlplectru formosum (Linnaeus), SAND PERCH, frequent, UMML. 'Eplnephelus adscenslonqis (Osqbeck), ROCK HIND, common, UMML. Epqinephelus drummondhay Goode and Bean, SPECKLED HIND, common, off- shore, UMML. EpInephelus flavolimbatus Poey, YELLOWEDGE GROUPER, common, offshore. *Eplnephelus guttatus (Linnaeus), RED HIND, common, UMML. +Eplnephelus Itajara (Lichtenstein), JEWFISH, frequent, UMML. +Epqinephelus morqlo (Valenciennes), RED GROUPER, common, UMML. EpInephelus mystacqinus (Poey), MISTY GROUPER, rare, offshore, UMML. EpInephelus nqigrqitu (Pqlolbrook), WARSAW GROUPER, common, offshore, UMML. Epqlnephelus nIveatus (Valenciennes), SNOWY GROUPER, common, offshore, UMML *EpqInephelus strqiatus (Bloch), NASSAU GROUPER, common, UMML. *Hypoplectrus gemma Goode and Bean, BLUE HAMLET, common, UMML. (Figure q1) *Hypoplectrus guttavarius (Poey), FOUREYE HAMLET, occasional, UMML. (Figure 2) Not previously recorded from Florida. *Hypoplectrus nigricans (Poey), BLACK HAMLET, occasional, UMML. (Figure 3) Not previously recorded from Florida. *Hypoplectrus puellqa (Cuvier), BANDED HAMLET, occasional, UMML. (F Igure 4) *Hypoplectrus unicolor (Walbaum), BUTTER HAMLET, common, UMML. (Figure 5) In recent years most workers have relegated the many nominal species of Hypoplectrus to the synonomy of H. unicolor as a single highly variable species. Randal I, Bohike, and the author believe, on the 20 basis of ecology, zoogeography, and some morphometrqic and meristic evidence that a number of valid species are Involved. The five distinct forms found at Alligator Reef have therefore been recognized as species under the earl lest name clearly based on each form. Only H. gemma Is, on the basis of present evidence, restricted to Florida where it Is quite common. *Lqlopropoma eukrines (Storck and Courtenay), WRASSE BASS, frequent, UMML. aqo Placement In the genus Llopropoma Is based on the recent capture of a specimen of L. aberrans which proved to be Inseparable generically from Chorqlstqlstlum. This situation will be reported upon In detail by C. Richard Robins who brought this to the author's attention. For further explanation of generic relationships In this group of serranids see Starck and Court- enay (1962: 164-165). *Liopropoma mowbray Woods and Kanazawa, CAVE BASS, one specimen seen but not collected. Not previously recorded from Florida. *Llopropoma rubre Poey, PEPPERMINT BASS, occasional, UMML. *Mycteroperrca bonacl (Poey), BLACK GROUPER, common, UMML. *Mycteroperca interstitlalls (Poey), SALMON GROUPER, common, UMML. +Mycteroperca mlcrolepis (Goode and Bean), GAG, common, UMML. *Mycteroperca Jordan and Swain, SCAMP, common, UMML. *Mycteroperca Valenciennes), TIGER GROUPER, rare, sight record only. *Mycteroperca venenosa (Linnaeus), YELLOWFIN GROUPER, occasional, UMML. *Paranthqlas furcIfer (Valenciennes), CREOLE FISH, occasional, UMML. *Petrometopon cruentatum (Locepede), GRAYSBY, common, UMML. *Schultzetta beta (Hlldebrand), SCHOOL BASS, frequent, UMML. +Serranlculus pumillo Ginsburg, PYGMY SEA BASS, rare, UMML. *Serranus annularls (Ganther), ORANGEBACK BASS, common, UMML. Serranus atrobranchus (Cuvier), BLACKEAR BASS, rare, offshore, UMML. *Serranus baIdwinl(Evermann and Marsh), LANTERN BASS, common, UMML. +Serranus chqlonarala Robins and Starck, SNOW BASS, occasional, UMML. +Serranus notospillus Langley, SADDLE BASS, occasional, UMML. +Serranus phoebe Poey, TATTLER, common, UMML. *Serranus tabacarqius (Cuvier), TOBACCO FISH, common, UMML. *Serranus,tigrinus (Bloch), HARLEQUIN BASS, common, UMML. +Serranus tortugarum Longley, CHALK BASS, common, UMML. LOBOTIDAE - TRIPLETAILS Lobotes surqinamensqis (Bloch), TRIPLETAIL, occasional both offshore and In- shore, UMML. GRAMMISTIDAE SOAPFISHES *Pseudogrammus greq@c ryl (Breder), REEF BASS, occasional, UMML. P. bermudensIs (Kanazawa) and P. brederl (Hildebrand) are considered here to be junior synonyms. *Rypticus bltrispinus (Mitchill), FRECKLED SOAPFISH, occasional, UMML. The name used here Is that recommended by Walter R. Courtency In his manuscript review of the genus. This species was previously known as Rypticus arenatus. *Rypticus saponaceus (Bloch and Schneider), SOAPFISH, frequent, UMML. *Rypticus subbfrenatus Gill, SPOTTED SOAPFISH, common, UMML. Included by Bailey et al. (1960) but not previously recorded from U.S. waters. CIRRHITIDAE - HAWKFISHES *Amblyclrrhitus pinos (Mowbray), CARIBBEAN HAWKFISH, frequent, UMML. 21 LUTJANIDAE -SNAPPERS Apsllus dentatus Gulchenot, BLACK SNAPPER, rare, offshore, UMML. Included by Bailey et al. (1960) but apparently not previously 'recorded from U.S. waters. *Lutlanus analls (Cuvier), MUTTON SNAPPER, common, UMML. *Lutjanus apodus (Walbaum), SCHOOLMASTER, abundant, UMML. Lutjanu campechanus (Poey), RED SNAPPER, occasional, offshore, UMML. +Lutjanus buccanella (Cuvier), BLACKFIN SNAPPER, frequent, juveniles only, HMML. *Lutlanu cyanopterus (Poey), CUBERA SNAPPER, occasional, UMML. +Lutjanus griseus (Linnaeus), GRAY OR MANGROVE SNAPPER, abundant, UMML. *Lutjanu Jocu Bloch and Schnelder), DOG SNAPPER, frequent, UMML. *Lut anus mahogon (Cuvier), MAHOGANY SNAPPER, occasional, UMML. +Lutlanu synagris (Linnaeus), LANE SNAPPER,, frequent, UMML. +Lutjanus vqivanus (Cuvier), SILK SNAPPER, occasional, juveniles only,UMML. *Ocyuru chrysurus (Bloch), YELLOWTAIL, abundant, UMML. PRIACANTHIDAE - BIGEYES *Prlacanthus arenatus Cuvler, BIGEYE, rare, UMML. *Prqiacanthus cruentatus (Laccepede), GLASSEYE SNAPPER, frequent,UMML. +Prqistqigenys alto (Gill), SHORT BIGEYE, occasional, UMML. APOGONIDAE - CARDINALFISHES *Apogon aurqoqlqlneatus (Mowbray), BRIDLE CARDINALFISH, occaslonal,UMML. *Apogon bq1notatus (Poey), BARRED CARDINALFISH, frequent, UMML. Apogo conkqlqInqi (Silvester),- FRECKLED CARDINALFISH, common, UMML. *Apogon lachnerql Bohike, WHITESTAR CARDINALFISH, frequent, UMML. Inc I uded by Ba I I ey et a 1. (1960) but not prev lous I y recorded f rom U. S.. waters. *Apoqoon maculatus (Poey), FLAMEFISH, abundant, UMML. *Agogon pigmentarius (Poey), DUSKY CAR0DINALFISH, occasional, UMML. *Apogon sp., SADDLETAIL CARDINALFISH, rare, UMML. A-new species to be described by Bohlike and Randal I under the species name pillionatus. *Apogonplanifrons Longley and Hildebrand, PALE CARDINALFISH, frequent, UMML. *Apogon pseudomaculatus Longley, TWOSPOT CARDINALFISH, frequent, UMML. *Apogon quadrisquamatus Longley, SAWCHEEK CARDINALFISH, frequent, UMML. *Apogo townsendi (Breder), BELTED CARDINALFISH, occasional, UMML. Included by Bailey et al. (1960)but, apparently not previously recorded from U.S. waters. *Apogon sp., SPONGE CARDINALFTSH, rare, UMML. Anew species to be described by Bohlike and Rando i under the species name xenus. *Astrapogon alutus (Jordan and Gilbert), BRONZE CARDINALFISH, occasional, UMML. *Astrapogon puntlculatus (Poey), BLACKFIN CARDINALFISH, frequent,UMML. *Astrapogon stellatus (Cope), COMCHFISH, occasional, UMML. *Cheilodipterus affinis Poey, BIC TOOTH CARDINALFISH, occasional, UMML. First record for Florida. Synagrops bella (Goode and Berin), DEEPSEA CARDINALFISH, common, off- shore, UMML. BRANCHIOTEGIDAE - TILEFISHES Caulolatllus cyanops Poey, BLACKLINE TILEFISH, common, offshore, UMML 22 Lopholatilus chomaeqleonticep Goode and Bean, TILEFISH, rare, offshore, UMML *Malacanthus plumqler (Bloch), SAND TILEFISH, common, UMML. POMATOMIDAE - BLUEFISHES Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus), BLUEFISH, occasional In winter. RACHYCENTRIDAE - COBIAS Rachycentron canadum (Linnaeus), COBIA, occasional, reef and offshore. CARANGIDAE - JACKS, Alecis crinitu (Mitchill), AFRICAN POMPANO, frequent, UMML. *Caranx bartholomae Cuvier, YELLOW JACK, common, UMML. Caranx fusus Geoffrey, BLUE RUNNER, common, UMML. Coranx hIppos (Linnaeus), CREVALLE JACK, frequent, common Inshore, UMML. Caranx latus Agassiz, HORSE-EYE JACK, frequent, UMML. Caranx ruber (Bloch), BAR JACK, common, UMML. Chloroscombrus chrysuru (Linnaeus), BUMPER, occasional, sight 'record only. Decapterus punctatus (Agassiz), ROUND SCAD, frequent, UMML. *Elagati bipinnulatus (Quoy and Gaqlmard), RAINBOW RUNNER, frequent, UMML, 0llgoplItes sauru (Bloch and Schneider), LEATHERJACKET, frequent, In- shore. Selar crumenophthalmus (Bloch), BIGEYE: SCAD, occasional, UMML. Selene vomer (Linnaeus), LOOKDOWN, common, Inshore, UMML. Serlola dumerilll (Risso), AMBERJACK, common, UMML. Serloila rivollana Valenciennes, ALMACO JACK, frequent, offshore., UMML. Serfola zonata (Mitchill), BANDED RUDDERFISH, rare, offshore. Trachinotus carollnus (Linnaeus), POMPANO, frequent, Inshore, UMML. Trachinotus falcatus (Linnaeus), PERMIT, frequent. Trachurus lathaml Nichols, ROUGH SCAD, occasional, UMML. Vomer setapinni (MItchIll), MOONFISH, rare, UMML. CORYPHAENIDAE - DOLPHINS Coryphaena equisetls Linnaeus, POMPANO DOLPHIN, occasional to frequent, offshore, UMML. Coryphoena hippurus Linnaeus, DOLPHIN, common, offshore, UMML. GERREIDAE - MOJARRAS Euclnostomus argenteu Baird and Girard, SLENDER MOJARRA, common, UMML. Eucinostomus gula (Quoy and Galmard), SILVER JENNY, common, UMML. Gerres cinereus (Walbaum), YELLOWFIN MOJARRA,frequent, reef, common Inshore, UMML. POMADASYIDAE - GRUNTS *Anlsotremus surinamensls (Bloch), BLACK MARGATE, common, UMML. *Anlsotremus virginicus (Linnaeus), RORKFISH, common, UMML. Haemulon album Cuvler, MARGATE, common, UMML. *Haemulon aourollneatum Cuvler, TOMTATE, abundant, UMML. *Haemulon carbonarium Poey, CAESAR GRUNT, common, UMML. *Haemulon chrysorgyreum Ganther, SMALLMOUTH GRUNT, abundant, UMML. *Haemulon flavollneatum (Desmarest), FRENCH GRUNT, abundant, UMML. *Haemulon macrostomum Ganther, SPANISH GRUNT, common, UMML. *Haemulo melanuru (Linnaeus), COTTONWICK, occasional to frequent, UMML. *Haemulon parra (Desmarest), SAILORS CHOICE, common, UMML. *Haemulon plumler (Lacepede), WHITE GRUNT, abundant, UMML. *Haemulon sclurus (Show), BLUESTRIPED GRUNT, abundant, UMML. *Haemulon strlatum (Linnaeus), SMALLMOUTH TOMTATE, abundant, UMML. Orthoprlstis chrysopterus (Linnaeus), PIGFISH, rare, Inshore. SCIAENIDAE - DRUMS +Bairdlella batabana (Poey), BLUE CROAKER, occasional, UMML. *Equetu acuminatus (Bloch and Schneider), HIGH-HAT, common, UMML. As used here acumlnatus applies to the species formerly known as pulcher and the species formerly known as acuminatus Is umbrosus . This change is based on the unpublished recommendation of George Miller. The common names used here and for E. punctatu differ from those suggested by Bailey et al. (1960) In accordance with popular usage. *Equetus lanceolatus (Linnaeus), JACKKNIFE-FISH, occasional, UMML. *Equetus punctatus (Bloch and Schneider), SPOTTED HIGH-HAT, occasional, UMML. Included by Briggs (1958) and Bailey et 21. (1960) but not preViously recorded from U.S. waters. +Equetus umbrosus Jordan and Elgenmann, CUBBYU, occasional, UMML. *Odontosclon dentex (Cuvier), REEF CROAKER, common, UMML. Sclaenops ocellat (Linnaeus), RED DRUM-OR CHANNEL BASS, occasional, Inshore. MULLIDAE - GOATFISHES *Mulloiichthy martinicus (Cuvier), YELLOW GOATFISH, common, UMML. *Pseudupeneus maculatus (Bloch), SPOTTED GOATFISH, common,, UMML. SPARIDAE - PORGIES Archosargus probatocephalus (Walbaum), SHEEPSHEAD, frequent, Inshore, UMML. +Archosorgus rhomboldalls (Linnaeus), SEA BREAM, frequent, UMML. +Calamus arctifrons Goode and Bean, GRASS PORGY, occasional, UMML. Calamus bajonado (Bloch and Schneider), JOLTHEAD PORGY, occasional, UMML. Calamus calamus (Valenciennes), SAUCEREYE PORGY, frequent, UMML. +Calamus nodosus Randall and Caldwell, KNOBBED PORGY, frequent, UMML. +Calamus proriden Jordan and Gilbert, LITTLEHEAD PORGY, common, UMML. Lagodon rhomboides (Linnaeus), PINFISH, abundant, Inshore, UMML. EMMELICHTHYIDAE - BOGAS *Emmelichthyops atianticus Schultz, LITTLE BOGA, frequent, UMML. *Inermla vittata Poey, BOGA, occasional, UMML; First record for Florida. PEMPHERIDAE - SWEEPERS *Pempherls schomburgk Maller and Troschel, GLASSY SWEEPER, common, UMML. KYPHOSIDAE - SEA CHUBS *Kyphosis Inclsor (Cuvier), YELLOW CHUB, common, UMML. *Kyphosis sectatrix (Linnaeus), BERMUDA CHUB, frequent, common Inshore, UMML. EPHIPPIDAE - SPADEFISHES +Chaetodipterus faber (Broussonet), SPADEFISH, frequent to common, UMML. 24 CHAETODONTIDAE - BUTTERFLYFISHES AND ANGELFISHES *Centropyge argi Woods and Kanazawa, PYGMY ANGELFISH, occasional, UMML Included by Briggs (1958) and Bailey et al. (1960)but not recorded previous- ly from U. S. waters. Pygmy angelf I@h_ -r7a-ther than cherubf Ish (Bailey et al.) Is In wide use by aquarists. *Chci-etodon capistratus Linnaeus, FOUREYED BUTTERFLYFISH, common, UMML. *Chaetodon ocellatus Bloch, COMMON BUTTERFLYFISH, common, UMML. Common butte rf I yf I sh rathe r than spotf I n butte rf I yf I sh (Ba I I ey 2t al . , i g6o) Is widely used by aquarists and skIndivers. The spot Is frequently absent In the day. *Choetodo sedentarlus Poey, REEF BUTTERFLYFISH, common, UMML. *Chaetodo striatu Linnaeus, BANDED BUTTERFLYFISH, common,'UMMIL. *Holacanthus cillarls (Linnaeus), QUEEN ANGELFISH, common, UMML. *Holacant us Isabelita (Jordan and Rutter), BLUE ANGELFISH, common, UMML. *Holacanthus tricolor (Bloch), ROCK BEAUTY, common, UMML. *Pomacanthus arcuatus (Linnaeus), BLACK ANGELFISH, common, UMML, The species name arcuatus as used here applies to the species called aureus by most prevlous atuhors. Likewise paru as used here equals arcuatus of previous authors. This nomenclature and the use of Isabelita for the blue angelfish has been recommended by Henry A. Feddern (personal communication) who Is reviewing the Western Atlantic angelfIshes. The common name black angelfish rather than gray angelfish (Bailey 2t 21., 1960) is again a wide,ly used name by aquarlsts, skindivers, and fishermen whlle gray angelfish Is not. j *Pomacanthus paru (Bloch), FRENCH ANGELFISH, common, UMML. *Prognathodes aculeatus (Poey), LONGSNOUT BUTTERFLYPISH, occasional, UMML. Included by Bailey et al. (1960) but not previously recorded from U.S. waters. Subsequently recorded by Hubbs (1963). POMACENTRIDAE - DAMSELFISHES *Abudefduf saxatills (Linnaeus), SERGEANT MAJOR, abundant. UMML. +Abudefduf tauru (M81ler and Troschel), NIGHT SERGEANT, rare, Inshore, UMML. `:'Chromls cyanea (Poey), BLUE CHROMIS, abundant, UMML. Included by Bailey et al. (1960) but not previously reported. (Figures 6 and 7) *Chromis enchrysurus Jordan and Gilbert, YELLOWTAIL REEF-FISH, abund- ant, UMML. (Figure 8) *Chromis Insolatus (Cuvler), SUNSHINE FISH, abundant, UMML. (Figure 9) The common names of this species and of Chromis muftilineata, Mlcrospathodo chrysuru , and Eupomacentrus planifron below are In accordance with usage by oquarlsts and sklndlvers. Bailey 2t al. (1960) offer other names. *Chromls multi I Ineata (Guichenot), GRAY CHROMIS, abundant, UMML. ("lures 10 and 11) Sp., PURPLE REEF-FISH, common, UMML. An undescrIbed species closely related to Chromis Insolotus. (Figures 12 and 13) This species will k;e- -descrlb'ed In a forthcoming paper by Alan R. Emery under the species name scotti. *Eupomacentrus fuscus (Cuvier), DUSKY DAMSELFISH, common, UMML. (Figures 14 and 15) *Eupomacentrus leucostlctus (M(Jller and Troschel). BEAUGREGORY, common', UMML. (Figure 16) 25 *Eupomacentrus sp., HONEY GREGORY, frequent, UMML. An undescrIbed species close to E.'leucostictus. (Figure 17) This species will be described in a forthcoming paper by Alan R. Emery under the species name mellis. *Eupomacentrus Partitus (Poey), BICOLOR DAMSELFISH, abundant, UMML. (FIgures 18, 19, and 20) *Eupomacentrus planifron (Cuvier), YELLOW DAMSELFISH, common, UMML. ,(Figure 21) *Eupomacentrus varlablils (Castelnau), COCOA DAMSELFISH, abundant, UMML. (Figure 22 *MIcrospathodon chrysurus (Cuvier), JEWELFISH, common, UMML. (Figures 23 and 24) LABRIDAE - WRASSES *Bodlanus pulchellus (Roey), SPOTFIN HOGFISH, common, UMML. Included by Bailey et al. (1960) but not previously recorded from U.S. waters. Subsequently recorded by Randal 1 (1962). *Bodlanu rufus (Linnaeus), SPANISH HOGFISH, common, UMML. *Cleptlcus parral (Bloch and Schneider), CREOLE WRASSE, common, UMML. Included by Bailey et al. (1960) but not previously recorded from U.S. waters. Decodon puellarls (Poey), CUBAN HOGFISH, common, offshore, UMML. Doratonotus megal,ep GOnther, DWARF WRASSE, common, UMML. *Hallchoeres bathyphilus (Beebe and Tee-Van), GREENBAND WRASSE, rare, UMML. Included by Bailey et al. (1960) but not previously recorded from U. S, waters. Subsequently recorded by Randall and Bohike (1965). *Hallchoeres bivittatus (Bloch), SLIPPERY DICK, abundant, UMML. *Hallchoere, caudalls(Poey), PAINTED WRASSE, occasional, UMML. *Hallchoeres cyanocephalus (Bloch), YELLOWBACK WRASSE, frequent, UMML. *Hallchoeres garnot (Valenciennes), YELLOWHEAD WRASSE, abundant,UMML. *Halqlchoeres macullpqinna (Muller and Troschel), CLOWN WRASSE, abundant, UMML. *Hallchoeres pIctus (Poey), STRIPED WRASSE, frequent, UMML. First record for Florida. *Hallchoeres poey (Steindachner), BLACKEAR WRASSE, common, UMML. *Hallchoeres radlatus (Linnaeus), PUDDINGWIFE, common, UMML. *Hemipteronotus mortinicensis (Valenciennes), ROSY RAZORFISH, frequent, UMML. Randall (1965b: 499) has pointed out that the Xyrichys martInqIcensls of Langley and Hildebrand (1941) Is hemipteronotus splenders thus H. martinicensis Is previously unrecorded from Florida. Inclusion by Briggs (1958) and Bailey et al. (1950) Is apparently based on Langley and Hildebrand (1494). *Hemipteronotus novacula (Linnaeus), PEARLY RAZORFISH, common, UMML. *Hemipteronotus spfendens (Castelnau), GREENRAZORFISH, common, UMML. *Lachnola0lmus Maximus (Walbaum), HOGFISH, common, UMML. *Thalassoma bfasclatum (Bloch), BLUEHEAD WRASSE, abundant, UMML. SCARIDAE - PARROTFISHES *Cryptotomus roseus Cope, BLUELIP PARROTFISH, common, UMML. Nicho0lslna usta (Valenciennes), EMERALD PARROTPISH, frequent, UMML. *Scarus coelestInus Valenciennes, INDIGO PARROTFISH, common, UMML. The common names used here and for Sparlsoma rubrpInne differ from those used by Bailey et al. (1960) In order to conform to widespread usage. *Scarus coeruleus (Bloch9), BLUE PARROTFISH, common, UMML. 26 *Scarus crolcensIs Bloch, STRIPED RARROTPISH, common, UMML. *Scarus guacamal Cuvler, RAINBOW PARROTFISH, common, UMML. *Scarus taenlopterus Desmarest, RIBBON RARROTFISH, frequent, UMML. Not Included by Briggs (1958) or Bailey et al. (1960) as the name was In synonomy with Scorus crolcensis at that time. Randall (1963: 228) has pointed out the validity of this species. Breder (1948) correctly Identified the male of Sbcarus taenlopterus and stated that It reaches Florida. Scarus vetula Bloch and Schneider, QUEEN PARROTPISH, common, UMML *Sparlsomo atomarlum (Roey), DEERWATER RARROTFISH, common, UMML. *Sparlsom aurofrenatum (Valenciennes), WHITESPOT PARROTFISH, common, UMML. The common names suggested by Balley et al. (1960) for this species and for S. chrysopterum and S. viride are not In wide usage and are misleading for the I Ive fish; therefore, other names are suggested here. *Sparlsoma chrysopterum (Bloch and Schneider), TURQUOISE RARROTFISH if requent, UMML. *Sparlsom radians (Valenciennes), BUCKTOOTH PARROTFISH, common, UMML., *Sparlsoma rubrIpInne (Valenciennes), MUD PARROTFISH, common, UMML. *Sparlsom virlde Bonnaterre), GREEN RARROTFISH, common, UMML. ACANTHURIDAE - SURGEONFISHES *Acanthurus bahlanus Castelnau, OCEAN SURGEON, common, UMML. *Acanthurus chlrurgu (Bloch), DOCTORFISH, common, UMML. *Acanthurus coeruleu Bloch and Schneider, BLUE TANG, common, UMML. GEMRYLIDAE - SNAKE MACKERELS Gerrpylus serpen Cuvler, SNAKE MACKEREL, rare, offshore, UMML. SCOMBRIDAE - MACKERELS AND TUNAS Acanthocyblum solanderl (Cuvler), WAHOO, occasional, offshore.. Auxls thazard (Lacepedde), FRIGATE MACKEREL, occasional, offshore, UMML. Euthynnus alletteratus (Raflnesque), LITTLE TUNA, common, offshore, UMML. Euthynnus pelamIs (linnaeus), SKIPJACK OR ARTIC BONITO, common, off- 'shore, UMML. +Scomberomorus cavalla (Cuvier), KING MACKEREL, abundant In winter, UMML. Scomberomorus maculatus (Mitchill), SPANISH MACKEREL, frequent to abundant in winter. +Scomberomorus regalls (Bloch), CERO, common, UMMIL. Thunnus albacores (Bonnaterre), YELLOWFIN TUNA, frequent, offshore, UMML. Istqiantqicus (Lesson), BLACKFIN TUNA, common, offshore, UMML. Thunnus thynnus (LInnaeus), BLUEFIN TUNA, occasional, juvenile only, offshore, UMML. ISTIOPHORIDAE - BILLFISHES Istlophorus platypterus (Shaw and Nodder), SAILFISH, common, offshore,. UMML. This name follows Whitehead's (1964) paper painting out platv- pteru as the earliest available name for a sailfish (from the Indian Ocean) and James E. Morrow's unpublished study of the genus Istlophorus placing all nominal forms in one worldwide species. Makalra nigricans Lacepede, BLUE MARLIN, occasional, offshore, UMML. Tetrapturus albidus Poey, WHITE MARLIN, occasional, offshore. 27 Tetrapturus pflugerl Robins and deSylva, LONGBILL SPEARFISH, rare, offshore. XIPHIIDAE - SWORDFISHES Xlphias gladlu Linnaeus, SWORDFISH, rare, offshore. ELEOTRIDAE - SLEEPERS *Ioglossus callurus Bean, BLUE SLEEPER, common, UMML. GOBIIDAE - GOBIES +Barbullfer ceuthoecus (Jordan and Gilbert), BEARDED GOBY, frequent, UMML. Bathygoblu mystoclu Ginsburg, TIDEROOL GOBY, rare, Inshore, UMML. First record for Florida. Bothygoblus soporator (Valenciennes), FRILLFIN GOBY, common, Inshore, UMML. *Coryphopterus alloldes Bohike and Robins, SPLITFIN GOBY, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. *Coryphopterus dIcrus Bohike and Robins, DOUBLESROT GOBY, common,. UMML. *Coryphopterus eldolon Bohike and Robins, GHOST GOBY, common,- UMML. +Coryphopterus glaucofraenum Gill, BRIDLED GOBY, common, UMML. *Coryphopterus hyallnu BohIke and Robins, GLASS GOBY, occasional, UMML. *Coryphpterus Ilpernes Bohike and Robins, BLUENOSE GOBY, frequent, UMML. *Coryphoptpru personatus (Jordan and Thompson), MASKED GOBY, abundant. UMML. +Coryphopterus punctIpectorphorus Springer, SPOTTED GOBY, frequent, UMML. *Coryphopterus thrix Bohike and Robins, BARTAIL GOBY, occasional, UMML. First record for Florida. *Elacatinus oceanops Jordan, NEON GOBY, common, UMML. *Garmannlo grosvenorl Robins, DWARF SAND GOBY, occaslional,.UMML. +Garmanni mocrodo (Beebe and Tee-Van), TIGER GOBY, frequent, UMML. *Gnatholepqls thompsoni Jordan, GOLDSPOT GOBY, common, UMML. Goblonellus boleosoma (jordan Gilbert), DARTER GOBY, occasional, Inshore, UMMIL. *Goblonellus sp., DASH GO BY, frequent, UMML. An undescribed species. To be described by Gilbert and Randal I uncover the species name saepepalleri. +Goblonellus stigmalophlus Mead and Bohike, SPOTGIN GOBY, frequent, UMML Goblosoma robustum Ginsburg, CODE GOBY, frequent, Inshore. *Goblosoma sp., YELL0OWLINE GOBY, rare, UMML. This species has formerly been Identified as G. horstl which does not occur In Florida. It will be described by Hohlke and Robins under the species name xanthqiporc. *Lythrypnus neslotes Bohlke and Robins, -ISLAND G0GY, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. *Lythrypnus phorellus B0HLke and Robins, PRISONER GOBY, frequent, UMML. *Lythrypnus spilus B0hlke Qnd Robins, DARKSHUOLDER GOBY, frequent, UMML. *Microgoblus carrl Fowler, SEMINOLE GOBY, common, UMML. *Nes longus (Nichols), ORANGESPOTTED GOBY, occasional, UMML. Place- ment of this species In the genus Nes Is done on the unpublished, recommend- ation of C. Richard Robins. *Quisquillus hipolltl (Metzelar), REEF GOBY, common, UMML. 28 MICRODESMIDAE - WORMFISHES *Microdesmus florldanus (Langley), PUGJAW WORMFISH, occasional., UMML. SCORPAENIDAE - SCORPIONFISHES Pontinu rathbuni Goode and Bean, HIGHFIN SCORPIONFISH, occasion al, offshore, UMML. Scorpoena agassiz Goode and Bean, LONGFIN SCORPIONFISH, frequent, offshore, UMML. *Scorpaena albifimbria Evermann and Marsh, CORAL SCORPIONFISH, rare, UMML. *Scorpaena bergi Evermann and Marsh, GOOSEHEAD SCORPIONFISH, occasional, UMML. ra +Scorpaen calcarata Goode and Bean, SMOOTHHEAD SCORPIONFISH, f requent, UMML. +Scorpoena dispar Longley and Hildebrand, HUNCHBACK SCORPIONFISH, occasional, UV.ML. *Scorpaena elachy Eschmeyer, DWARF SCORPIONFISH, rare, UMML. +Scorpaen grandicornis Cuvier, PLUMED SCORPIONFISH, occasional,UMML. This name rather than " I ionf ish" of Boi ley et al . (1960) is used to avoid confusion with the Indo-Pacific lionfish (P@e_r@@is). *Scorpae inermis Cuvier, MUSHROOM SCORPIONFISH, occasional,UV.ML. *Scorpaena plumier Bloch, SPOTTED SCORPIONFISH, frequent, UrVML. *Scorpoenodes coribbaeus Meek and Hildebrand, REEF SCORPIONFISH, frequent, UrvIML. (Figure 25) *Scorpoenodes tridecimspinosu (Metzelaar), DEEPREEF SCORPIONFISH, occasional, UMML. First record for Florida. (Figure 26) TRIGLIDAE - SEAROBINS Bellator brachychir (Regan), SHORTFIN SEAROBIN, common, offshore,UMML. Bel lator egretta (Goode and Bean), STREAMER SEAROBIN, offshore,UMML. Bellator militaris (Goode and Bean), HORNED SEAROBIN, abundant, offshore, UMML. Peristedlon gracil Goode and Bean, SLENDER SEAROBIN, offshore. The record of this species was kindly furnished by George Miller. Peristedion platycephalum (Goode and Bean), FLATHEAD SEAROBIN, off- shore, UMML. Prionotus alatus Goode and Bean, SPINY SEAROBIN, offshore, UMML. DACTYLOPTERIDAE - FLYING GURNARDS +Dactviopterus volitans (Linnaeus), FLYING GURNARD, occasional, UMML. OPISTOGNATHIDAE - JAWFISHES +Lonchopisthus lindner! Ginsburg, SWORDTAIL JAWFISH, rare, UMML. *Oplstognothus curifrons (Jordan and Thompson), YELLOWHEAD JAWFISH, common, UMML. *Opistognothus cuvieri Valenciennes, PHANTOM JAWFISH, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. +Opistognothus lonchurus Jordan and Gilbert, MOUSTACHE JAWFISH, frequent, UMML. Longtail jawfish of Bailey et cLl. (1950) does not appear appropriate for this fish. +Opistognathus macrognathus Poey, LONGJAW JAWFISH, occasional, UMML. *Opistognothus whitehursti (Longley), DUSKY JAWFISH, common, UMML. 29 DACTYLOSCOPIDAE - SAND STARGAZERS +Dactyloscopus trqidigitatus Gill, SAND STARGAZER, occasional, UMML. *Glllellus greyae Kanazawa, ARROW STARGAZER, frequent, UMML. *Heteristlus rubrocinctus (Langley), SADDLE STARGAZER, common, UMML. CALLIONYMIDAE -DRAGONETS Callionymus agassIzl Goode and Bean, LANCER DRAGONET, common, offshore, UMML. *Calllonymus balrdl Jordan, CORAL DRAGONET, frequent, UMML. +Callionymus paucIradlatus Gill, SPOTTED DRAGONET, occasional, UMML. CLINIDAE - CLINIDS *Aconthemblemaria aspera (Longley), ROUGHHEAD BLENNY, common, UMML. Chaenopsis ocellata Poey, BLUETHROAT PIKEBLENNY, rare, UMML. *Chaenopsls I Imbaughl Robins, and Randall, SAND PIKEBLENNY, occasional, UMML; First record for Florida. *Emblemarlo atlantlca Jordan and Evermann, BANNER BLENNY, occasional, UMML. *Emblemarla pandionts Evermann and Marsh, SAILFIN BLENNY, occasional, UMML. *Emblemarlopsis bottomel Stephens, MIDNIGHT BLENNY, occasional, UMML. First record for Florida. *Emblemarlops diaphan Longley, GLASS BLENNY, occasional, UMML. *Enneonectes altivel Is Rosenblatt, LOFTY BLENNY, common, UMML. First record for Florida. it *Enneonectes boehlkel Rosenblatt, BOHLKE'S BLENNY, frequent, UMML. *Ennpanectes pectoralis (Fowler), REDEYE BLENNY, frequent, UMML. *Hemlembiemarla sImulus Longley and Hildebrand, WRASSE BLENNY, frequent, UMML. *Labrlsomus bucciferus (Poey), FRECKLECHEEK BLENNY, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. *Labrisomus goblo (Valenciennes), PALEHEAD BLENNY, rare, UMML. First record for Florida- *Labrlsomus guppyl (Norman), MIMIC BLENNY, frequent, UMML. *Labrisomus hatlensis Beebe and Tee-Van, HATIAN BLENNY, common, UMML. Not listed by Bailey et al. (1960) but Included for Florida by Longley and Hildebrand (1941), Briggs (1958), and Springer (1958). *Labrisomus kalisherae (Jordan), DOWNY BLENNY, frequent, UMML. *Labrisomus nIgrIcInctus Howel I Rivero, SPOTCHEEK BLENNY, occasional, UMML. *Labrisomus nuchipinnis (Quoy and Galmard), HAIRY BLENNY, common, UMML. *Malacoctenus ourollneatus Smith, ORANGELINE BLENNY, occasional, UMML. Not listed by Balley et al. (1960) but recorded from Florida by Springer (1958). Malococtenus sp. of Briggs (1958) Is possibly this species. *Malacoctenus macropus (Poey), ROSY BLENNY, frequent, UMML. Malacoctenus triangulatus Springer, SADDLED BLENNY, common, UMML. Paracllnus, fasclatus Steindachner), BANDED 8LENNY, abundant, UMML. *Paracllnus grandicomls (Rosen), HORNED BLENNY, occasional, UMML. *Paracllinus Infrons Bohlke, LONGNOSE BLENNY, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. +Paraclinus marmoratus (Steindachner), MARBLED BLENNY, occasional, UMML. *Paracllnus nigripinnis (Steindachner), BLACKPIN BLENNY, abundant, UMML. *Starksia ocellata (Steindachner), CHECKERED BLENNY, common, UMML. 30 *Stathmonotus hemphilli Bean, CLOWN BLENNY, occasional, UMML. BLENNIIDAE - COMBTOOTH BLENNIES Blennius cristatus Linnaeus, MCLLY MILLER, abundant Inshore, occasional reef, UMML. *BlennIus marmoreus Poey, SEAWEED BLENNY, common, UMML. Entomacrodus textilus (Quay and Galmard), PEARL BLENNY, common, UMML. Hypleurochllus bermudensis Beebe and Tee-Van, BARRED BLENNY, common, UMML. *Ophloblennius ationticus (Valenciennes), REDLIP BLENNY, common, UMML. BROTULIDAE - BROTULAS Brotula barbota (Bloch and Schneider), BEARDED BROTULA, rare, UMML. *Ogllbio cayoru Evermann and Kendall, KEY BROTULA, common, UMML. It Is generally accepted among systematists that a number of species are now classqified under this name. The Identification Is, therefore, tentative and it Is probable that more than one species Is found at Alligator Reef. *Ollgopus claudel (Torre), REEF BROTULA, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. *Petrotyx sangulneus (Meek and Hildebrand), RUDDY SROTULA, frequent, UMML. First record for Florida. *Stygnobrotula latebrIcola BOhlke, BLACK BROTULA, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. OPHIIDAE - CUSK-EELS, Lepophidlum jeannae Fowler, MOTTLED CUSK-EEL, rare, UMML. Ophi,dlo holbrooki (Putnam), BANK CUSK-EEL, occasional, UMML. Ophldio selenops Robins and Bohlke, MOONEYE CUSK-EEL, occasional, UMML. *Otophidion dormItator Bohlke and Robins, GHOST CUSK-EEL, occasional, UMML. First record for Florida. *Parophidlon schmidtql (Woods and Kanazawa), GRASS CUSK-EEL, -frequent, UMML. First record for Florida. CARAPIDAE - PEARL0PISHES *Carapus bermudensis (Jones), PEARLFISH, frequent, UMML. STROMAETEIDAE - BUTTERFISHES Arlomma regulus (Poey), SPOTTED DRIFTFISH, rare, offshore, UMML. Nomeus gronowl (Gmelln), MAN-O-WAR FISH, frequent, UMML. Pallnurlchthy perciformis (MItchIll), BARRELFISH, rare, offshore. Psenes cyanophrys Cuvler, FRECKLED 4DRIFTFISH, occasional, offshore, UMML. Psenes maculatus Ldtken, SILVER DRIFTFISH, occasional, offshore, UMML. SPHYRAENIDAE - BARRACUDAS *Sphyraena barracuda (Walbaum), GREAT BARRACUDA, common, UMML. +Sphyraena borealis DeKay, NORTHERN BARRACUDA, frequent, UMML. This common name differs from that of Balley et al. (1960) In accordance with general usage. MUGILIDAE - MULLETS Mugll cepholus Linnaeus, STRIPED OR BLACK MULLET, common, Inshore. Mugll curema Valenciennes, WHITE MULLET, frequent, Inshore. 31 Mugll galmardlana Desmarest, REDEYE MULLET, occasional, Inshore. Mugll trIchodon Poey, FANTAIL MULLET, abundant, Inshore, UMML.. ATHERINIDAE - SILVERSIDES +Allanetta harringtonensis (Goode), REEF SILVERSIDE, common, UMML. +0Atherlnomorus stipes (Maller and Troschel), HARDHEAD SILVERSIDE, common, UMML. BOTHIDAE - LEFTEYE FLOUNDERS Ancylopsetta dilecta (Goode and Bean), THREE-EYE FLOUNDER, offshore, UMML. *Bothus ocellatus (Agassiz), EYED FLOUNDER, common, UMML. Cltharlchthy arctifrons Goode, GULF STREAM FLOUNDER, abundant, off- shore, UMML. Cltharlchthys cornutus (G0nther), HORNED WHIFF, abundant, offshore, UMML. +Cltharlchthys macrop Dresel, SPOTTED WHIFF, occasional, UMML. +Cltharichthys sp. , rare, UMML. An unidentified species close to C. cornutus, possibly undescrlbed. +Cyclopsetta flmbriat (Goode and Bean), SPOTFIN FLOUNDER, occasional, UMML. +Syaclum gunteri Ginsburg, CHANNEL FLOUNDER, occasional, UMML. +Syaclum papillosum (Linnaeus), DUSKY FLOUNDER, common, UMML. SOLEIDAE - SOLES +-Achlrus Ilneatu (Linnaeus), LINED SOLE, rare, UMML. +TrInecte maculatu (Bloch and Schneider), HOGCHOKER, rare, UMML. CYNOGLOSSIDAE - TONGUEFISHES *Symphuru arawak Robins and Randall, CARIBBEAN TONGUEFISH, rare, UMML. First record for Florida. +Symphurus dlomedqlanus (Goode and Bean), SROTTEDPIN TONGUEFISH, occasional, UMML. ECHENEIDAE - REMORAS +Echenels naucrates Linnaeus, SHARKSUCKER, common, UMML. +Echenels neucratoldes Zuleuw, WHITEFIN SHARKSUCKER, rare, UMML. Rhthelrlchthys Hneatu (Menzies), SLENDER SUCKERFISH, rare, offshore, UMML. Remora brachVptera (Lowe), SPEARFISH REMORA, rare, offshore, UMML. Remor osteochi (Cuvier), MARLINSUCKER, frequent, offshore, UMML. GOBIESOCIDAE - CLINGFISHES +Acyrtops beryllinus (Hildebrand and Ginsburg), EMERALD CLINGFISH, occasional, UMML. +Gobiesox strumosus Cope, SKILLETFISH, occasional, UMML. TRIACANTHODIDAE - SRIKEFISHES Parahollqardia lineata (Longley), JAMBEAU, rare, offshore, UMML. BALISTIDAE - TRIGGERFISHES AND FILEFISHES Aluter monocero (Linnaeus), UNICORN FILEFISH, rare, offshore, YMML. *Aluterqa schoepfl (Walbaum), ORANGE FILEFISH, common, UMML. *Alutera script (Osbeck), SCRAWLED FILEFISH, occasional, UMML. +Ballstes capriscus Gmelin, GRAY TRIGGERFISH, common, UMML. 32 *Ballstes vetula Linnaeus, QUEEN TRIGGERFISH, occasional. *Cantherlne,s macrocerus (Hollard), HOOKTAIL FILEFISH, rare. *Cantherlnes pullus (Ranzanl), ORANGESPOTTED FILEFISH, frequent, UMML. +Canthidermis sufflamen (MItchill), OCEAN TALLY, common, UMML. This name differs from that of Bailey et al. (1960) In accordance with common usage. +Monacanthus cillatus (Mitchill), FRINGED FILEFISH, common, UMML. +Monacanthus hispldu (Linnaeus), PLANEHEAD FILEFISH, frequent, UMML. +Monacanthus setlfer Bennett, PYGMY FILEFISH,occasIonal, UMML. *Monacanthus tuckerl Bean, SLENDER FILEFISH, common, UMML. OSTRACIIDAE - TRUNKFISHES +Acanthostraclon quadricornis (Linnaeus), COWFISH, common, UMML. *Lactophry bicaudalls (Linnaeus), SPOTTED TRUNKFISH, frequent, UMML. +Lactophrys trigonus (Linnaeus), TRUNKFISH, occasional, UMML. *Lactophrys triqueter (Linnaeus), SMOOTH TRUNKFISH, common, UMML. TETRA0DONTIDAE - PUFFERS *Canthigaster rostrata (Bloch), SHARPNOSE PUFFER, common, UMML. +Sphoeroldes spenglerl (Bloch), BANDTAIL PUFFER, frequent, UMML. DIODONTIDAE - PORCUPINEFISHES *Chilomycterus antennatus (Cuvier), BRIDLED BURRFISH, frequent, UMML. Included by Bailey et al. (1960) but not previously recorded. *Chilomycterus atinga (Linnoeus), SPOTTED BURRFISH, frequent, UMML. Chilomycteru schoepf (Walbaum), SPINY BOXFISH, frequent, UMML. This common name differs from that of Bailey et al. (1960) In accordance with common usage. *Dlodon holacanthus Linnaeus, BALLOONFISH, frequent, UMML. *Dlodon hystrix Linnaeus, PORCUPINEFISH, frequent, UMML. MOLIDAE - MOLAS Mola lanceolata Lienard, SHARPTAIL MOLA, rare, offshore. Mola mola (Linnaeus), OCEA N SUNFISH, rare, offshore. BATRACHOIDIDAE - TOADFISHES Opsanus beta (Goode and Bean), GULF TOADFISH, abundant, Inshore. Porichthy porosissImus (Valenciennes), MIDSHIPMAN, frequent, offshore, UMML. LOPHIIDAE - GOOSEFISHES Lophlu americanus Valenciennes, GOOSEFISH, occasional, offshore, UMML. Genus sp. , an undescribed genus and species, rare, offshore, UMML. ANTENNARIIDAE - FROGFISHES Antennarius ocellatus (Bloch and Schneider), OCELLATED FROGFISH, occasional, UMML. Antennarlus pauclradiotus Schultz, DWARF FROGFISH, occasional, UMML. Not Included by Bailey et 21. (1960) but described by Schultz (1957) from Florida. *Antennorius scaber (Cuvler), SPLITLURE FROGFISH, rare, UMML. Histrio histrio (Linnaeus), SARAGASSUMFISH, frequent, offshore. OGCCEHALIDAE - BATFISHES 33 +Halleutlchthy aculeatus (MitchIll), PANCAKE *BATFISH, abundant, offshore, occasional reef, UMML. The common name spiny batfish of. Bailey et al. (1960) Is Inappropriate as this species In one of the least spiny of the family. +0gcocepholus cublfrons (Richardson), POLKA-DOT BATFISH, occasional, UMML. Ogcocephalus-nasutus (Valenciennes), SHORTNOSE BATFISH, rare, off- shore, UMML. +Ogcocephalus parvus Langley and Hildebrand, ROUGHBACK BATPISH, common offshore, occasional reef, UMML. +Ogcocephalus vespertillo (Linnaeus), LONGNOSE BATFISH, frequent off- shore, rare reef, UMML. Zalleutes mcginty (Fowler), TRICORN BATFISH, frequent offshore, UMML. LITERATURE CITED ANDERSON, WILLIAM W., JACK W. GEHRINGER AND FREDERICK H. BERRY. 1966. Family Synodontidoe, Lizardfishes. In Yngve H. Olsen and James W. Atz, Editors. Fishes of the Western North Atlantic. Sears Found. Mar. Res. , Mem. No. 1 , pt. 5: 30-102, flgs. 14-35. BAILEY, REEVE M., ERNEST A. LACHNER, C. C. LINDSEY, C. RICHARD ROBINS, PHIL M. ROEDEL, W. B. SCOTT, LOREN P. WOODS. 1960. A list of common and scientific names of fishes from the United States If and Canada (second edition), Amer. Fish. Soc. , Spec. Publ., 2:1-102. BOHLKE, JAMES E. 1967a. The descriptions of +three new eels from the Tropical West Atlantic. Proc. Acad. Not. Sci. Philadelphia, 118(4): 91-108, 3 flgs. 1967b. A new sexually dimorphic jawfish (OpIstognathus; Opistognothidae) of from the Bahamas. Notulce Nature, 407: 12 pp., 4 flgs. BOHLKE, JAMES E. AND C. RICHARD ROBINS. 10960a. A revision of the goblold fish genus Coryphopterus. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philad., 112(5): 103-128, 3 flgs. and 2 pis. 1960b. Western Atlantic goblold fishes of the genus Lythrypnus, with notes on Quisquillus hipolltl and Garmania pallens. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phllad. , 1l2(4): 73-101, 2 flgs. and 3 pl s. 1962. The taxonomic position of the West Atlantic goby, Eviot personato with descriptions of two new related species. Proc. Acad. Nat. Scl. Phi lad., 114(5): 175-189, 555 flgs. BOHLKE, JAMES E. AND.D VICTOR G. SPRINGER. 1961 . A review of the Atlantic species of the clInid fIsh genus Starksla. Proc. it Acad. Not. Sci. Phllad. , 113(3): 29-60,15 flgs. BOHLKE, JAMES E. AND LOWELL P. THOMAS. 1961. Notes on the West Atlantic jawfishes, OpIstognothus ourifrons, lonchurus and Gnathypops bermudezi. Bul I. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib., 11 (4): 503-516, 3 flgs. BREDER, C. M. , JR. 1927. Scientific results of the first oceanographic expedition of the "Pawnee" 1925. Fishes. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll., 1(1): 1-90, 36 flgs. 1948. Field book of marine fishes of the Atlantic coast from Labrador to Texas. G. P. Putnam & Sons, New York andLondon. 332 pp. , 16 pis. , many text I I lus. BRIGGS, JOHN C. 1958. A list of Florida fishes and their distribution. Bull. Fla. Mus.2,(8): 34 223-318, 3 flgs. CIARDELLI, ALEJANDRO. In press. Food and feeding of Microspathodon chrysurus (Pisces: Pomacentri- dae). Bull. Mar. Sci. COURTENAY, WALTER R., JR. 1961. Western Atlantic fishes of the genus Hoemulon (Pomadasyldae) systematic status and juvenile pigmentation. Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib. , 11 (1): 66-149, 17 flgs. 1967. Atlantic fishes of the genus RyptIcus (Grammistidae) : systematics and as- teology. Proc. Acad. Nat. Scl. PhIlad. 119(6): 241-293, 19 flgs. DAVIS, WILLIAM P. 1965. A review of the dragonets (Pisces : CaIllonymIdae) of the Western Atlantic. Bull. Mar. Sci. , 16(4): 834-862, 10 figs. ESCHMEYER, WILLIAM N. 1965. Western Atlantic scorpionfishes of the genus Scorpaeno, Including four new species. Bull. Mar. Scl. , 15(1): 84-164, 12 flgs. FEDDERN, HENRY A. 1963. Color pattern changes during growth of Bodlanus pulchellus and B. rufus (Pisces : Labridae). Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib. , 13(2): 224-241, 3 flgs. 1965. The spawning, growth, and general behavior of the bluehead wrasse, Tholassoma blfasclatum (Pisces : Labridae). Bull. Mar. Sci. , 15(4): 896-941, 33 flgs. In press. Hybridization between the Western Atlantic angelfishes Holacanthus Isabelita and H. cillaris. Bull. Mar. Sci. GILBERT, RTER 1967. A revision of the hammerhead sharks (Family Sphyrnidoe). U.S. Nat. Mus. , Proc. 119(3539): 88 pp. , 21 flgs . and 10 pls. GOSLINE, WILLIAM A. AND VERNON E. BROCK. 1960. Handbook of Hawaiian fishes. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, 1x + 372 pp. , 177 flgs. GOULD, WILLIAM R. 1965. The biology and morphology of Acyrotop beryllinus, the emerald clIng- fIsh. Bull. Mar. Sci. , 15(11): 165-188, 5 flgs. HILDEBRAND, SAMUEL F. 1963. Genus SardInella Cuvler and Valenciennes 1847, Spanish sardines. In Yngve H. Olsen, Editor, Fishes of the Western North Atlantic. Sears Found. Mar. Res., Mem. No. 1, pt. 3., 397-411, flgs. 98-101. HUBBS, CARL L. 1963. Chaetodon aya and related deep-living butterflyfishes, their variation, distribution and synonymy. Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib. , 13(1): 133-192, 14 flgs. LONGLEY, WILLIAM H. AND SAMUEL F. HILDEBRAND. 1941. Systematic catalogue of the fishes of Tortugas, Florida with observations on color, habits, and local distribution. Pap. Tortugas Lob. , 34: x 111 + 331 pp. , 34 pls. MCKENNEY, THOMAS W. 1959. A contribution to the life history of the squirrel fish Holocentrus vexillarlus Poey. Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib., 9(2): 174-221, 12 flgs. MYRBERG, ARTHUR A., JR; BRADLEY D. BRAHY, AND ALAN R. EMERY. 1967. Field observations on reproduction of the damselfish, Chromis multi- llneata (Pomacentridae), with additional notes on general behavior. Cope I a, 1967 (4): 819-827, 7 flgs. RANDALL, JOHN E. 35 1962. Fish service stations. Sea Frontiers, 8(1): 40-47, flgs. 1963c. Notes on the systematics of parrotfishes (Scarldae), with emphasis on sexual dichromatIsm. Copela, 1963(2): 225-237, 4 flgs. , 3 cold. PIS. 1963b, Review of the hawkfishes (family Cirrhltidae). Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 114(3472): 389-451, 16 PlS. 1965a. A redescription of Sparlsoma atomarium (Poey), a valid West Indian parrotfish., Notulae Naturae, Phi lad. , 378: 1-9, 3 flgs. 1966. The West Indian blennild fishes of the genus Hypleurochilus, with the description of a new species. Proc. Blol. Soc. Wash. ,79: 57-72, 1 flg. RANDALL, JOHN E. AND JAMES E. B0HLKE. 1965. Review of the Atlantic labrid fishes of the genus Hallchoeres. Proc. Acad. Not. Scl. Philad. , 117(7): 235-259, 11 flgs. RANDALL, JOHN E. AND HELEN A. RANDALL. 1965. Examples of mimicry and protective resemblance in tropical marine fishes. Bul I. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib. , 1O(4): 444-480, 15 figs. ROBINS, C. RICHARD AND WALTER A. STARCK, II. 1961 Materials for a revision of Serranus and related fish genera. Proc. Acad. Not. Sci. Philad., 113(11):259- 314, 8 flg s. ROBINS,. C. RICHARD AND DURBIN C. TABS. 1965. Biological and taxonomic notes on the blue croaker, Bairdiella batabana. Bull. Mar. Sci. , 15(2): 495-511, 2 fls. ROSENBLATT, RICHARD H. 1963. Some aspects of speclation In marine shore fishes. Systematic Assn. Publ. No. 5: 171-180, 2 fls. SCHROEDER, ROBERT E. AND WALTER A. STARCK, II. 1964. Photographing the night creatures of Alligator Reef. Nat. Geog. Mag. 125(l): 128-154, many cold. figs. SCHULTZ, LEONARD R. 1957. The frogfishes of the family Antennarlidae. Proc. U. S. Not. Mus., 107: 47-105, 8 fls. , 14 pl SCHULTZ, LEONARD P., WILBERT M. CHAPMAN, ERNEST A. LACHNER, AND LOREN P. WOODS. 1960. Fishes of the Marshall and Marianas Islands. Volume 2, families from Mullidae through Stromatoldae. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus. , 202(2): 1x + 438 pp. , pls. 75-123, text flgs. 91 -132. SCHULTZ, LEONARD P., EARL S. HERALD, ERNEST A. LACHNER, ARTHUR D. WELANDER, AND LOREN P. WOODS. 1953. Fishes of the Marshall and Marianas Islands. Volume 1 , families from Asymmetrontidae through Siganidae. Bull. U. S. Not. Mus., 202(l): xxx I I + 685 pp. , 74 pl s. , text flgs. 1 -90. SCHULTZ, LEONARD R., LOREN R. WOODS, AND ERNEST A. LACHNER. 1966. Fishes of the Marshall and Marianas Islands. Volume 3, families from Kraemerlldae through Antennarldoe. Bul I. U. S. Not. Mus. , 202(3): vil + 176 pp., pls. 124-148, figs. 133-154. SMITH, J. L. B. AND MARGARET M. SMITH. 1963. The fishes of Seychelles. The Department of Ichthyology Rhodes University, Grahamstown, 215 pp. , 98 PLS. SPRINGER, VICTOR G. 1958. Systematics and zoogeography of the clinid fishes of the subtribe Labrisomini Hubbs. Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci. Unlv. Tex. , 5: 417-492, 4 flgs. , 7 pls. 36 1962.A review of the blennild fishes of the genus Ophloblennius Gill. Copela, 1962 (2): 426-433, 4 fls. STARCK, WALTER A., II. 1960. Spear of swordfish, Xlphlasgladlus Linnaeus, imbedded In a silk shark, Eulamla florldano (S oeder and Springer). Quart. Journ. Fla., Acad. Sci., 23(2): 165-166. 1966. Marvels of a coral realm. Nat. Geog. Mag. , 130(5): 710-738, many cold. flgs. In press. The biology of the gray snapper, Lutjanu griseus (Linnaeus), In the Florida Keys. STARCK, WALTER A., II AND PAUL BRUNDZA. 1966. The art of underwater photography. American Photographic Book .Publishing Co., New York, 160 pp., many figs. STARCK, WALTER A., II AND WALTER R. COURTENAY, JR. 1962. Chorlstlstlum eukrines, a new serranid fish from Florida, with notes on related species. Proc. Blol. Soc. Wash., 75: 159-168, 1 flg. STARCK, WALTER A., II AND WILLIAM P. DAVIS, 1967. Night habits of fishes of Alligator Reef, Florida. Ichthyologica, 38(4): 313-356, 25 flgs. STARCK, WALTER A., II AND ROBERT E. SCHROEDER. 1965. A coral reefot night. Sea Frontiers, 11 (2): 66-79, flgs. STEPHENS, JOHN STEWART, JR. 1963. A revised classification of the blenniold fishes of the American family Choenopsldae. Univ. Cal If. Pub[. Zool. , 68: Iv + 165 pp., 11 flgs. , 15 PIS. STEPHENSON, T. A. AND ANNE STEPHENSON. 1950. Life between tide-marks In North America, 1 . the Florida Keys. J. Eco I . , 38(2): 354-402, pls. 9-15, 9 flg s. TABB, DURBIN AND RAYMOND B. MANNING. 1961. A checklist of the flora and fauna of northern Florida Bay and adjacent brackish waters of the Florida mainland collected during the period July, 1957 through September, 1960. Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib., 11 (4): 552-649, 8 flgs. WALTER, VLADIMIR AND C. RICHARD ROBINS. 1961 . A new toadfish 0Watracholdidae) considered to be a glacial rellct In the West Indies. Amer. Mus. Novitates, 2047: 24 pp. , 3 figs. WHITEHEAD, P. J. P. 1964. Xiphlas platypterus Shaw and Nodder, 1792 (Pisces) : application to validate this nomen oblitum for the Indian Ocean sailfish (Genus Istio- phorus). Z.N (S.)1657, Bull. Zool. Nomencl., 21(6): 444-446, 1 pl. Basic Plant and Animal Comt=ities .The plant and animal communities of the Biscayne National Monument area are extremely rich and varied. The following discussion is limit- ed to the dominant communities of the area. To list the species of plants and animals found in each community would,-be superfluous.in view of the extended list of animals and plants found-in the last section of 'this report. To use the list of animals and plants for community or ecological purposes, one should refer to the key to the zonations and ecological habitats given at the first of thelist. In the following discussions, the general code.number from the extended list has been_put in parentheses after the headings in order that the..interested reader may refer easily to these lists.. The plant and animal communities of the marine environment within the monument waters have been described-in part.by Stephenson and Steph- .enson (1950) and Voss and Voss (1955), and for details of many of these communities, these papers should be consulted. Stephenson and*Stephenson worked partly within the monument area and there are many direct refer- ences to Elliott Key and Old Rhodes Key. Voss and Voss did their report upon the nearby Soldier Key, separated fr6m,the Biscayne Monument-waters by a few miles of flats and coral areas. These papers deal with the intertidal area, the reef flat and the reef tract i tself. For a com- prehensive review of the infauna bottom communities of the mid-portion of the bay, the papers by H. Moore and his'colleagues should be consulted (McNulty, J. Kneeland, Robert C. Work, and Hilary B. Moore, 1962). These community assemblages should be found in the level bottom on the bay side of the monument. 1. Thalassia communi@y (Code 3). Within the bay, the most important community is.that of the turtle grass. The turtle grass community is composed of turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum)., the manatee grass (Syringodium. filiforme) and Diplanthera wrightii. These grasses form dense mats on the bottom, their rhizomes forming a thick mass penetrating the bottom for eighteen inches or more. Their leaves greatly increase the available surface for the attachment of various species of filamentous algae (Humm, 1964) diatomsi foraminifera, and various bivalve mollusks. The long leaves also function as a sedi- Inent trap and assist thus'in maintaining water clarity. D. Moore and Work (unpublished) made a detailed study of the Thalassia community 6-v er a three year period and concluded that it supported the richest assemb- lage in species and number of individuals, of any known marine commun- itY. The productivity of this community is very high (see Jones, 1968) and it is the known nursery ground for the early stages of the commer- cial shrimps of the genus Prenaeus, and the crawfish, Panulirus, as well as Many species of shore fishes. The main predator is the sea urchin, jtj @echin@us variegatumE, and certain of the parrot fishes in the vicinity Of l4oon patch reefs. On the borders of th6 Thalassia community, sever- al algae make inroads: Penicillus. Halimeda and Laurencia. Bay hard bottom communit (Code 9d). Much of the deeper portion of the bay and the eastern shore against the keys is composed of a soft,- calcium carbonate sediment overlaying the rock substrate. This calcium sand is in places very shallow and the whole region must be classed as hard bottom. The most conspicuous growth forms in this region are the various sponges, especially Hippiospongia gossypina, H. lachne, S2ongia barbara, S. cheiris, and S. graminia, (all commercial sponges), the loggerhead sponge, Spheciospongia vesparia, and the vase sponge Ircinia campana; the corals, Porites porites, Siderastrea siderea, S. radians and Solenastrea hyades, and the sea feathers of the genus Plexaurella and Pterogorgia an eps. This is not an area of high productivity and most of the enrichment is gained from the adjacent Thalassia beds and man- grove fringe. A considerable number of organisms live within the canals of the sponges varying in size from the large worm Eunice spongicola to thousands-of snapping shrimp. The nature of these relationships has not as yet been studied. This area is important in the life hist- ories of the crawfish Panulirus and is one of the major habitats for the stone crab, Menippe mercenaria. 3.,,Mangrove community (Code 8). Next to the Thalassia community, this is one of the most import- ant areas in tropical waters due to 1) its stabilization of the shor'e line, 2) filtering of land runoff and 3) the contribution to the organic nutrient's through its leaf fall and associated organisms. This com- munity is characterized by the three mangroves:red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle), black mangrove (Avicennia nitida) and the white mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa). Associated with these but more landward is the buttonwood (Conorarpus'erectus). The plant communities of this area have been described by J. H. Davis (1940, 1942) and Craighead (1964) has discussed their relationship to land building and the effect. on them of hurricanes. On the bay side of the keys, the mangroves attain their maximum development in the monument. The most conspicuous.organisms related to the mangrove community are those attached to the mangrove root props 'trunks and pneumatophores. These often double the diameter of the root' props themselves. These consist of the alga Bostrychia, numerous hydroids, such as Lytocarpus philippinus, encrusting sponges, coon or mangrove oy- sters Crassostrea rh_izophor@!e, the pearl oyster Pinctada radiata, several species of barnacles, the snails Littorina ingulifera and Tectarius muricatus, several species of small climbing crabs of the genus Pachygrapsus, the sea roach Ligia baudiniana and occasional sea urchins. Beneath the mangroves in the intertidal zone or just above can be found the gastropods Melampus. Detracia, and Truncatella and hunting in this area but living above the high tide mark, the large land crabsUcides, Cardisoma and Gecarcinus. 12 4e The supralittoraland intertidal. The east side'.of the keys is,mainly-rocky in the intertidal and has been well studied in -regards to its ecological zonations by Stephenson and Stephenson (1950) and Voss and Voss (1955). The Stephensons divided this region into the upper platform (from the line of land vegetation to the sea edge(?)), and the lower platform which extended from this out to the reef flat. These areas were further subdivided into color zones based upon exposure, weathering, algal mats and other factors. From the land outf these were -- upper platform (white, grey, black and yellow); lower platform (no color zones given). Voss and Voss in their study of Soldier Key did.not use this color zonation but divided the intertidal into upper platform, platform-face, and lower platform, features that can be seen.easily in most seaward areas in.the monument. Upper platform". White zone..--,This is-the actual meetingplAce of land and sea. It is bleached white by salt spray and no fully marine animals or marine plants live in it. Animals present are: the hermit 'Coenobita, the isopod Ligia, two crabs Sesarma and Cyclograpsus, and the snails Tectarius, Truncatella and Detracia. Grey zone. -- This lies between the white and the black zones. Plants are: Sesuvium, Batis, Salicornia and others. The animals are: Littorina ziczac. Tectarit@s -Muricatus and tuberculosus, Echininus nodulo .sus, Nerita peleronta and N@ versicolor (all gastropods), and the aforementioned crabs as well as the o r organisms mentioned above. Black zone..-- This zone is wetted at high water spring. its black color is deri.ved from the coloring effects of certain blue-green algae Entophysalis,:and.Brachytrichia, and the dry mats of the alga Bostrychia. Animals.in this zone are-most of those mentioned above with the addition of Planaxis lineatus, a snail and the common snail Batillaria minima which may occur in vast mats. Platform face (yellow zone) (Code 2). The platform facelis occupied by the yellow zone which is the true intertidal zone-of the inshore. The characteristic color is given by the wet mats.of algae, primarily such forms as Anadyamene'stellata. Cladophoropsis membranacea, Catanella repens. Centroceras clavulatum Ceramium fastigiatum, Polysiphonia howei. Higher up, Bostrychia and Valonia are dominant. All of these algaeform. dense mats that offer refuge to numerous small animals. The animals within the yellow zone are too numerous to list here but include numerous specimens of the barnacles Chthamalus stellatus and Tetraclita squamosa,,the vermetid mollusk Spiroglyphus, the false limpet jjR@onaria pectinata and alternata. various fissurellids, especially Riadora listeri, the snails BatiTi'a-ria minima, Thais rustica, Cantharus tinctus, the true limpet Acmaea and the slug Onchidium floridanum. The 13 large chiton, Acanthopleura granulata, is common along with the mussel Mytilus exustus and the oysters Isognomon alata and 'I. chemitziana. Numerous other animals are found in this zone. They are listed in the species lists. 5. Shallow water. Lower platform (Code 2) The lower platform is difficult to separate from the so-called reef flat. It begins at the bottom of the platform face. It is often distinguished by the somewhat steeper slope, very rough eroded stone floor, and the presence of'most of the area of the yellowish-green ra carpet of Laurencia papillosa and associated green and red algae. Dom- inant in many places in holes in the rock is the sea urchin Echinometra lucunter, the mussels Arca barbata and A. umbonata. Several'anemones are found here, Phymanthus crucifer, Aiptasia annulata and Condylactis ra gigantea. Many species of crabs are found under rocks in this area. For a more complete listing, see the species list. Reef flat (Code 5, 9, 10) This is a general term that takes in the entire area east of the keys except the reef itself. Distinct communities have not been recog- nized in that area except for the extensive Thalassia community already mentioned, and the lagoon patch reefs and the outer reef. These will be treated separately. 6. Lagoon patch reef (Code 7). One of the most prominent features found within the Hawk Channel is the lagoon patch reef. These are found around,Bache Shoal, Margot Fish Shoal, and back of Triumph Reef, Long Reef and Ajax Reef. These reefs have been studied in detail by Voss and Bayer (1968), Jones (1963), and Ebbs (1966). Commonly, the patch reef is a structure formed of living masses of na coral heads rising directly from the bottom in 10-20 feet of water. They have nearly perpendicular sides and rise to within two or three feet of the surface. The bottom around them is usually flat and covered with Thalassia except for a ring, several yards wide, of clear sand caused by the grazing of parrot fishes. The patch reefs in the monument area range in size from individual coral heads to masses several hundred feet across. The mass of the reef is made up of corals, primarily Diploria, Eusmilia, Isophyllia, Montastrea, Porites and Siderastrea, with associ- ated Acropora cervicornia, Agaricia, Dichocenia, a-d others. These corals are usually compacted and often filled in between wi-th coral rubble forming a reef top on which grow a profusion of sea feathers, whips and fans, of which the genera Eunicea. Muricea, Plexaura, - 14 PseudoRterogorgia. and Gorgonia are the most common. In these patch reefs mollusks are not.common except for the stubby coral shell Coralliophila abbreviata and its relatives, and a few cowries (Cypraea) and smaller forms. The crawfish or spiny lobster, Panul rus, is common. The main body of these patch reefs is often.soluted away by the waves' action and sea water to form caverns and chambers which are filled with a large number and variety oUreef fishes. These are not obvious on first examination for during the day most of them will be within the reef. In fact, these reefs support a dual popu- lation of fishes, day feeders and night feeders. These are reported upon by Starck (1968), Randall (1968) and Voss and Bayer (1968). 7. Outer reef. (Code 6). The outer reefs consist of those coral.reefs or dead coral reef jumble lying on the outer edge of the reef platform immediately adjacent to the drop-off into deep water and the Florida Current. These reef's have been well described by-Ginsburg and Goreau (the latter not listed as the work vas done in Jamaica) and the various reef types are well known. Two main outer reef types occur in the monument waters, Long Reef and Ajax Reef. Long Reef is a low, long, shallow structure formed by loose, coral rock and sheets of dead Acropora. Within this reef structure and beneath the rock slab exixts a wealth of marine life far too numerous to list here. A comprehensive listing of these species is found in the species list. Ajax Reef is a live coral reef largely made up of living Millepora colonies. The invertebrate life is not rich but numerous fish species are found.Yor a good description of this type of reef, see Starck (1968) who reported upon a similar struc- ture at Alligator Reef. Appendix B Bottom Community Chart. Past workers (e.g., K umpf and Randall, 1961: MacIntyre, 1968) have had moderate success making simple bottom community charts of the major faunal elements in limited geographical areas. We have attempted to make a similar chart covering the entire area of the proposed Biscayne National Manument. Of necessity, the resultant chart is to a very large extent.a simplified generalization. In those areas where sharp boundaries occur between major bottom types, such as along the eastward side of the monument, the chart rather accurately portrays the natural situation. But in many areas, such as Biscayne Bay itself, the bottom types gradually grade from one into another, or two or more types may occur intermixed over large regions. In such cases, the limits portrayed are largely arbitrary. In reality, the environment is much more complex than can be shown on any chart or map. In particular, the increased complexity-resulting from (1) the much larger area considered, (2) the involved interactions between the sea-land areas, and (3) the semi-closed system of Biscayne Bay itself, has created conditions that do not permit the precise delimitation of faunal boundaries commonly expected of a community chart. Southern Biscayne Bay, the portion of the bay incorporated into Biscayne Mational Monument, is a large shallow estuary bounded on the north by the shallow Featherbed Banks, to the south by Cutter Bank, to the east by the chain of islands from the Ragged Keys to Old Rhodes Key and to t'he west and southwest by the mainland coast. Water circula- tion is somewhat restricted by the land masses. Flushing occurs through a number of deep channels or cuts directly to the'ocean (eastward), to north Biscayne Bay and to Card Sound on the south; the primary cause of the water exchange is tidal flushing. In conjunction with the restricted circulation, the.southern part of Biscayne Bay is subject to a variable input of fresh water from many drainage canals along the mainland and subsurface fresh water percolation (Kohout and Kolipinsky, 1964, and personal observations). These conditions cause extremes of temperature and salinity -- both high and low -- not found in the oceanic environment. They also contrib- ute t3 the complexity of the bottom communities within the Bay. In addi- tion, the bottom of the Bay itself is of primary importance in determin- ing the faunal make-up. The Bay is underlain by a limestone rock bottom that is generally covered by small but varying depths of sand or silt. Even small changes in thickness of sediment influence the bottom commun- ities immensely, with the marine grasses (primarily Thalassia testudinum) and certain algae (e.g., Penicillus) dominating regions of thick sediment (e.g. 10 cm. or greater), and sponges, alcyonarians, and other algae dom- inating regions of thin or no sediment. Because of the diversity of conditions in Biscayne Bay, the bottom communities are diverse and their interrelationships complex. Eight dif- C i-erent environmental types are distihguished on the chart: (1) marine 16 grasses; (2) algae; (3) sand; (4) sponges and alcyonarians; (5) bare rock; (6) corals; (7) coral rubble; and (8) mangrove. The dominant bottom community throughout the monument is that char- acterized by the marine grasses. Thalassia testudinum is the most common component, but it is replaced by or found mixed with Syringodium filiforme in the deeper waters and Dipladthera wrightii in shallower regions. The Thalassia c-ounity actually can be further jivided into separate sub- communities. In some regions, especially the area east of the chain of islands, dense beds of almost pure grasses dominate.. In other regions the grasses grow less thickly, and the bottom is greatly worked over by burrowing polychaetes. Algae can invade the*grass beds to a varying- extent: Penicillus and Halimeda are two common forms, and Laurencia first mixes with, then replaces the grasses along the western shore of the Bay. The chart makes no attempt to separate the different species of marine grass, nor does it indicate the concentration of the grasses. r Although some algae (Penicillus and Halimeda) are found in deeper (10 m) waters mixed in with the grasses.' the algae as a dominant bottom community are restricted to shallow waters. They occur primarily in belts immediately surrounding the shore of the mainland and the islands,'al- though Laurencia is the dominant cover over a large segment of the south- west section of Biscayne Bay. The regions indicated by sand likewiie include more than a single type of bottom community. In the area to the east of the islands, be- tween the thick Thalassia beds and the outer coral reefst a region of isolated sand patches occurs. These range in size from quite small (a few meters) to several kilometers in length. They are quite clearly defined by a sharp, usually undercut border between the sand and the grasses. Generally no vegetation occurs in these sand patches . The sand is a fairly coarse, calcareous sand. In contrast, regions within the Bay that are similarly designated on the chart are not so clearly defined; their delimitation has necessarily been arbitrary, because of their indistinct boundaries. Actually Thalassia is found in varying densities, over almost the entire bay floor. It is concentrated in discrete dense patches, which are often distributed in irregular lines, and is found in sparse growth over the remainder of the bottom. There is an even continuum from dense.Thalassia growths to the sparsest re- gions, and the line delimiting a predominantly sandy area from a pre- dominantly grassy one is indeed arbitrary, although the authors believe, in view of the great differences between the types of bottom, that the distinction should be made. In addition to grass, the sandy areas of the Bay also contain many sparse patches of sponges and alcyonarians; again the delimitation is an arbitrary one. A third -type of sandy area, not shown on the chart, is a sandy halo surrounding the many coral patches in the zone to the east of the islands. This halo is a narrow belt of sand that surrounds virtually every patch reef and is considered to be the result of grazing by reef fauna. 17 Sponges and alcyonarians are fcund widespread over much of the monument area. Dense stands occur in the cuts between the islands, where swift currents flow. Sparse growths are found around the islands themselves and throughout the Bay as well. Sponges and alcyonarians, especially the latter, are also important components of the coral patches in the zone to the east of the islands; in this community they are in- cluded in the symbol for corals, and are not marked separately. Patches of the limestone base emerge as bare rocks in some regions, primarily in the surf zone around the islands. In addition to support- ing a distinct community, these regions are noteworthy because the rock ra is greatly eroded and pitted by solution, forming a very sharp, hard substrate that should be avoided by waders and boaters. Although some corals (e.g., Porites, Manicina, and Siderastrea are scattered throughout the monument area, large coral patches are found in only in two zones. Seaward of the dense Thalassia zone to the east of the islands is an area of dense but discrete coral patch reefs. In addition to large coral heads, these patch reefs Also include dense growths of alcyonarians and"sponges. Some of the patches, especially in the Margot Fish Shoals, contain large patches,of Acropora cervicornis, but this is not really widespread. The patch ree fs are scattered through- out a matrix of rather dense Thalassia; they do not form a solid bottom cover. A zone of outer reefs is located still farther to the east. This is largely an area of dead reefs (indicated by coral rubble) although there is some living coral in this region. Only in the southern end of the outer reef -- 'around Pacific Light -- do large, luxuriant growths of corals, primarily Acropora palmata, occur. Finally, in many regions around the islands and along the mainland, mangroves extend for varying distances into the water. This is a dis- tinctive community subject.to rather sharp delineation and therefore portrayed accurately on the chart. Considering all of the zones, the following can be summarized: generally, proceeding from the shore (either mainland or islands) seaward, one passes from either mangroves or bare rocky coast successively through an algal zone, a sparse alcyonarian-sponge zone, and a marine grass zone. The relative extents of these zones are influenced at least partially by depth, bottom type, and salinity. Finally, east of the islands, a coral patch reef zone, a sand patch zone, and a barrier reef coral rubble zone are encountered. The dominant feature of the Bay itself is the large rM central sand zone with scattered Thalassia, alcyonarians, and sponges. The most prominent features outside the Bay are the dense beds of Thalassia and secondarily the coral patch zone. 18 Appendix B Seasonal Abundance and Migrato ry Patterns',of.Marine Life. Tropical waters do not have a great seasonal range of temperature and as a result there are few evident seasonal migrations or movements of the fauna. Those migrations that,do take place are usually feeding migrations involved in the life history of the species. A few of the larger, more active long-ranging swimmers do show seasonal change.s. These will be mentioned below. In general among many of the tropical fishes and invertebrates, spawning is notrestricted to a few days or a week or two as in temperate regions but may take place over a period of several months or even throughout the year. As a.result, great in- creases in seasonal abundance are not generally seen. Long-term spawn- ing periods al�o are important for management practices, in that distinct year classes are not common in tropical forms, and.adverse weather con- ditions do not noticeably affect theyear's production of young. Plants. The life histories of few of the marine.plants of the region are known. Because of the rather small seasonal variation in water temperature,and especially the lack of.any period of extreme low temp- .erature, there is typically no period in the.year when the majority of adult marine plants disappear. However, some'types of algae, for ex- ample, the various species of Caulerpa, may show.periods of flourish- ing vegetative growth as well as periods of inactivity when outward: signs of the vegetative plants regress or even vanish. Suc ,h individual seasonal responses, however, have little effect-upon the appearance of the marine flora. The most prominent seasonal chang e in the plants is seen in Thalassia, which may suffer heavy loss of leaves during the brief@ periods of winter low and summer high temperatures. This marine grass and the larger green,red and brown algae may be covered over by,a mat- like growth of blue-green algae during the summer in semi-stagnant, areas, Invertebrates. There is little change in seasonal abund ance of most invertebrates and these are minor. only a few cases of seasonal migra- tion are known. 1. There is some change in the abundance of Octopus. In general, adult octopus move offshore during the summer into waters of 15-30 ft. depths, but in winter and spring they come inshore 'to spawn.and to find warm water. Most species are-common in depths of less than 10 ft. during the period from March to May when they are caring f6r their eggs under old coral heads and rock slabs. 2. Lower Biscayne Bay and Card Sound are important.nursery grounds for the pink shrimp,, Penaeus duorarum Burkenroad.. Spawning takes place in deep water offshore. The larval shrimp begin to appear in the Bay in quantity in March where they live in shallow water of 2 ft. depth or less. They grow rapidly in this nursery ground and by, September they have reached a fairly large size and have moved out into the Bay' into waters -.19 deepez tha,i 3 ft. where they are fished for in the bait shrimp fishery. These shrimp remain in the Bay as juveniles where they attain a consid- erable size. However, no adult gravid shrimp have been taken in the Bay. About the end of December, depending upon weather conditions and moon phase, the juvenile shrimp.move out of the Bay into.the ocean. Accord- ing to recent studies, this movement in the main is northward in the Bay and the majority of the shrimp pass, out through Cape Florida Channel, Bear Cut and Government Cut. Despite these migrations, there are always juvenile shrimp in the Bay, to the extent that the bait shrimp fishery flourishes. For some reason not now understood, there is a migration into the Bay of the Caribbean Brown shrimp (Penaeus brasiliensis) in the summer when, for several months, it accounts for up to 40 per cent of the bait catch. It is not found in the Bay during the rest of the year. 3. The spiny lobster, mainly Panulirus argus Latreille, also performs a general growth movement.- The larvae hatch out as phyllosomas and re- main drifting passively in the plankton for up to 5-6 months. After metamorphosis, the very young juvenile spiny lobsters are found in the ' grass beds in shallow water in the Bay, especially on the western side and on the east side of the Keys. With about]/3-1/2 growth they are found in deeper water in the Bay living under sponges, particularly the logger- head sponge Spheciospongia vesparia. As adults they are found in water of four feet or greater depth, living in rocky holes, under rocky or coral ledges, and various other sheltered situations. At certain times and places, particularly along the open ocean beach, spiny lobsters perform long mass migrations. Neither the cause, time nor duration are known. No such mass migrations have so'far been reported from the monu- ment region. Fishes. There is extensive movement of fishes within the Park area, much of which can be termed migration. Migrations are of three main types: 1) daily, 2) seasonal, 3)ontogenetic. Daily migrations are practiced by many of the so-called reef fishes and are usually associated with nocturnalfeeding activities in the grass,beds and open sand areas. Most grunts (Pomadasyidae) and snappers (Lutjanidae) which account for much of the mass of fishes to be found on the reefs by day undergo,such migrations. Seasonal migrations are of two types. One is associated with spawn- ing and mostly consists of estuarine, bay andreef species that move off- shore to spawn. The time and length of the spawning season varies with the species. The American eel moves on particular moon phases especially in the December and March season. Worm eels move again during particular moon phases most every month. Other notable migrants of this type within the park are the mullets (especially in November and December), the jack- knife fish, the black grouper (probably all groupers). The second group of seasonal migrants are fall and winter visitors from the north. Most important here are the smooth hammerhead, the black- tip shark, certain rays and the bluefish. Ontogenetic migrants are those that spend their juvenile life within the area, moving with growth into offshore waters or at least to a differ- - 20 ent habitat within the Park. Jackknife fish Young on the deep reef, adults in the Bay and mangroves: King mackerel Young in the Bay and grassy areas, adults oceanic. Grey snapper Young in grass beds, adults on outer reefs and in passes. Striped mojarra -- Larvae oceanic, juveniles along.the shore, adult estuarine. The larvae of many but not all shore and reef fishes are oceanic. -Life histories of only a few are known in detail. In somespawning takes place in shore waters with the eggs being swept out to sea. In others, hatching also occurs in inshore waters with the early larvae going to sea while in others the adults move offshore to spawn. Of the many fish species known within the monument, only certain reef species spend their entire life in a single environment. Of all phases of study needed on monument fishes, none ks more deserving from a resource management standpoint than basic life,history studies. 21 Geology Appendix C The Florida Keys form a crescentic chain of small limestone islands which extend from near Miami.in the north to, and incl@iding, Key West on the south and west, a total of about 150 miles. They form an arc bounded on the convex side by the Florida Current and on the concave side by Bis- cayne Bay, Florida Bay and adjoining waters. Basically they are made up of two main formations of Pleistocene age -- the Key Largo Limestone and the Miami Limestone. The former is an elevated coral reef rock and the latter an oblitic limestone. The Key Largo Limestone is the surface rock of the upper Keys, and the Miami Limestone covers the Lower Keys. Actual- ly, the Key Largo Limestone covers the entire 150 miles of the Florida Keys but in the Lower Keys is overlain by the Miami Limestone beginning near the east end of Big Pine Key. The Key Largo Limestone first appears at the surface near its north- ern boundary at Soldier Key just north of the Ragged Keys and forms the basis of the main keys contained within the monument. it is especially conspicuous as eroded ragged rock along the ocean side of the keys with major outcrops at Caesar's Creek and Old Rhodes Channel. It also forms the hard, smooth floor of several of-the passes where the tidal current keeps sediments scoured away. According to drillings investigated and/or made by 11offmeister and Multer, this limestone rests upon a quartzose calcareous sand base. The limestone is of varying thickness; near the northern end of Key Largo it C@ was 145 feet thick, 10 miles furtlier south 75 feet. In the lower Florida Keys it attains a thickness of nearly 200 feet. It is typical organic reef composed of-in situ, wave resistant elements, the important of which are hermatypic corals. These form the 'framework of the structure and are responsible for the trapping of large amounts of calcarenite in which 3 they are now embedded. The formation is made up,of these lithologic types (,in order of decreasing abundance): calcarenite, coralline lime- stone, and calcilutite. 1. Calcarenite. This rock consists of varying amounts of molluscan debris, Halimedaj coralline algae, foraminifera, bryozoans, coral and rock fragments bounded by microcrystalline and sparry.calcite. Minor constituents include pellets, echinoid spines, sponge spic- ules, ooliths and worm tubes. 2. Coralline limestone.* Large masses of coral, either in growth po- sition or as detached fragments, recrystallized to calcite occur. The principal corals.are Montastrea annularisi Diploria strigosa, D. clivosa, D. labyrinthiformis, and several species of Porites, principally P. astreoides. This limestone can be porous or dense, commonly with burrows of boring mollusks, the cavities often lined with drusy calcite or filled with varying amounts of sand-size de- bris.- About 30 per cent of the Key-Largo Limestone is made up of this,coral rock of which Montastrea makes up about half. Acropora cervicornis, Montastrea cavernosa and Siderastrea radians are also found in lesser amounts. All of these corals are found living to@- day within the monument boundaries. 3. Calcilutite. This dense rock made up of well-cemented silt-clay L carbonate commonly di plays pinpoint-to finger-size holes. imited. amoiinta:of skeletal h:sh are often present. The coral rock.where:exposed has a thin cap of very hard rock over-, laying it, formed either,by aerial exposure or microbial activity. It is extensively.quarried for,use in decorative walls and in floors and patios in'south Florida * In situ, below the hard cap, it is soft, and well p6ints@pierce it easily. Upon lengthy exposure it becomes very hard and durable. Quarries-are found throughout the-keys, @The method of formation of the Keys,themselves has been a matter of controversy, some claiming that the present keys represent the limits of a former outer coral reef of Pleistocene times, others claiming that they were formed from lagoon patch reefs in the back-reef area when the outer reef.was located some distance inshore of its present position. Studies [email protected] Multer.(loc. cit.) point to the latter hypothesis. They say:, .."Dur ing the last interglacial period, about 95,000 years ago (Broeckel and Thurber, 1965, pp. 58-60)., the coral reefs which,today make up the Key Largo Limestone of the Florida Keys were flourishing as a line of atch p reefs in the back-reef area of a broad-reef platform similar to the Flor- ida'reef tract of today. Seaward of them the.platform was occupied by parallel lines of other patch reefs and edged by an outer reef (Fig. 2). Subsequent marine and subaerial erosion following the withdrawal of the sea during the Wisconsin, possibly accompanied by a structural downwa: tilting or faulting of the area, or both, resulted in the lowering of the 4 platform to a depth of about 75 feet at its seaward edge and progressive- ly less farther inland. With the return of the sea, new reef growth be- gan on the eroded platform and cbntinued to the present (Fig. 3). F1 "Some of the main observations upon which it is concluded that the Key Largo Limestone of the Keys originated as a line of patch reef in a back reef environment are the following. (1) The species of corals and other organisms found fossil in the old reef are identical with those of the living patch reefs. (2) There is an absence of Acropora palmata, a coral species found commonly in the turbulent waters of living outer reefs. (3) There is a favorable proportion of other species common in all zones. (4) Since the community of coral species found in the Key Largo requires an environment of low-level energy and since it was de- termined that the water in which the corals grew was shallow, it becomes cle,ar that they must have developed in the protected area of a back reef zone. (5) The discovery of Acropora palmata in the Key Largo Limestone, underlying the more recent material of the outer reef, demonstrates its presence at the time the Keys were being formed and indicates that its absence in the rocks of the Keys is due to the unfavorable environment of a back reef. Its presence also indicates the existance of an outer reef at the edge of the platform during Key Largo time. (6) The elongated crescentic shape of the Keys, r1unning approximately parallel to the outer edge of the plat- form, is similar to the alignment of present day patch reefs." The soil of the Keys, overlying the Key Largo Limestone, is of organic origin, originally from materials trapped in the outcroppings but now mainly muck or humus from the hardwood hammocks and mangrove peat. Offshore of the Keys, the bottom is underlain by Key Largo Limestone with a layer of post-Pleistocene Key Largo Limestone overlying the older rock and increasing in thickness seaward. Upon this is a layer of calcium carbonate sediments'made up of mechanically precipated fine calcium car- bonate, and fine particles of calcium carbonate shells of a host of mar- ine organisms such as Halimeda segments, sea-urchin spines and ancyonarian spicules, and the shells of Foraminifera. The outer reef base is of po-st- Key Largo Limestone formation overgrown in large areas by stands of living coral. The lagoon and back-reef area is thickly interspersed" with patch reefs such as those forming Bache Shoal, Margot Fish Shoal, and the la- goon reefs behind Long Reef. Shoreward of the reef, the bottom is formed basally of Key Largo Lime- stone overlaid by soft calcium cakbonate mud or ooze, thick in the western half of Biscayne Bay, but thin the eastern half. A short but pertinent bibliography of sources concerning the geology pertaining to the monument area is given at the end of the report. A more detailed geological description of the coral reefs is given in the following references: 1967- Miami Limestone of Florida and its Bahamian Counterpart. Geol. Soc. Amer.Bull., 78:175-190. K. W. Stockman and H. G. Multer 1968-Geology and Origin of the Florida Keys. Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 79:1487-1502. H. G. Multer. APPENDIX D Following is a list of Federal, State, and local agencies, as well as private individuals, businesses, and organizations who have re- ceived copies of the DEIS or FEIS. FEDERAL AGENCIES Sea Grant Department of the Navy Department of Justice. Coast Guard, Marine Protection Branch Energy Research and Development Administration' National Ocean Survey Coast Guard, Office of Marin@ Environmental and Systems Department of State, Office of Environmental Affairs Environmental Protection Agency Department of Interior Department of Defense (Health and Environment) National Marine Fisheries Service Department of Housing and Urban Development National Aeronautics and Space Agency Executive Director of Civil Works Army Corp,pf Engineers Office of ETIVironmental Quality Soil Conservation Service Coast Guard, Department of Transportation Water Resources Council STATE AGENCIES Governor Reubin Askew Florida Department of Natural Resources Florida Division of State Planning John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park Director Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Florida Division of Recreation and Parks LOCAL AGENCIES Environmental Information Center South Florida Reg. Planning Council PRIVATE BUSINESS AND ORGANIZATIONS Environmental Policy Center National Parks and Conservation Association Florida Keys Citizens Coalition Belcher Oil Co. Underwater Society of America Sport Fishing Institute Tropical Audubon Society, Inc. National Audubon Society Organized Fishermen of Florida Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida Izaak Walton League of America, Florida Chapter Florida Power and Light Co. Florida Audubon Society Bailey and Post Jack McCormick & Associates, Inc. Florida Skin Divers Association nm Sea Farms Inc. Organized Fisheries of Florida Greenleaf Telesca, Inc. Florida Sierra Club Florida Wildlife Federation' Southeastern Fisheries Association Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. Natural Resources Council of America The Nature Conservancy American Littoral Society The Conservation Foundation Environmental Defense Foundation Florida Defenders of the Environment, Inc. Monroe County Audubon Rook'ery Bay Marine Laboratory Salt Water Fisheries Advisory Council INDIVIDUALS Marc J. Hershman Leonard J. Greenfield Walter M. Goldberg, Ph.D. Walter P. Stepien, Jr. Dorian Cowan Isadore Weintraub William and Gay Loring Gilbert L. Voss Jon C. Staiger Dr. Walter R. Courtenay, Jr. Alan Sirkin Meredith Ingham Iver M. Brook Robert C. Work Eva and George Wielander INDIVIDUALS Dennis O'Connor Dr. Rezneat M, Darnell T. N. Anderson David Anthony Mike Stewart Jim Redford Dr. Robert Livingston Dr. C. R. Robins Dr.,T. Alexander Jim Higgins Gary A. Soucie Nancy Hunt CONGRESSIONAL Hon. Richard Stone Hon. Lawton Chiles Hon. Dante Fascell Hon, Claude Pepper Hon. William Lehman House Merchant Marine Committee Senate Commerce Committee UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL SEA GRANT PROGRAM 3300 WHITEHAVEN STREET, N. W. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20235 September 11, 1975 Dr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs Office of the Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology U. S. Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Dr. Caller: With reference to your letter of August 18, the Office of Sqea Grant does not have information pertaining to the Key Largo area which would permit -us to critique the environmental impact statement.- As far as I can determine, this statement is adequate. Sincerely, Richard C. Kelf Associate Program Director Grants-Management National Sea Grant Program UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WASHINGTON, D.C. 20530 September 22, 1975 Addreas Reply to the Division Indicated and Refer to Initial* and Number MWR 90-4-03 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs United States Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230 Dear Mr. Galler: This is in response to your request of Mr. Rashkow for comments on an.environmental impact statement entitled "Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary." Creation of the Key Largo Sanctuary is a Federal action specifically designed to improve the human environment by protecting the natural resources of the Florida reef. Your environmental impact statement indicates that various alternatives were considered in determining how best to protect these resources. It appears from the statement that the proposed sanctuary permits the maximum public utilization of the area while providing the necessary protection for the reef. I would make one comment regarding section 2.0 of the statement. Under the heading "Administration," there follows a statement that: "NOAA's responsibilities under this legislation require that the Office of Coastal Zone Management review, comment and approve any activity that takes place pursuant to rules and regulations." The meaning of this statement is unclear. The proposed regulations permit numerous activities within the sanctuary. I am sure that NOAA does not intend to approve each entry into the sanctuary; and,, yet, no other interpretation seems possible from the language, @o@UTlo@ 2 I note your statement includes proposed,regula-, tions to govern administration and use of the sanctuary. These regulations raise a number of questions upon which I will take this oppor tu nityto comment Section, (1),(c) concludes with the phrase,."whether temporary or permanent in-character." I cannot tell from the language what that phrase is intended to modify; but, in any case, it-would appear to be unnecessary,and I would recommend that it.be deleted. Section (3)(a) I would recommend amending the final line to read "substances, including human sewage.", Section (6) I would recommend amending the second sentence, of the Note to, read, "The commercial trapping of crawfish, spiney lobster and stone crab, in accordance with the.,-. laws of the State of Florida and the rules and regulations of the State of Florida DePartment of Natural Resources, is allowed." Section (8) 1 would recommend amending subsection (d) to read, "No watercraft shall be operated at speeds greater than 4 miles per hour within 100 yards of a diver, a boat dis- playing-the "divers down" flag, sightseeing boats or fishing boats, The foregoing shall not apply to law enforcement officers while in-the performance of their duties."; subsection (e) to read, "All watercraft from which diving operations are being conducted shall conspicuously fly the red and white "divers down" flag. Divers,shall stay within 100 yards of their diving flag."; and,deleting, subsection(f). Subsection (i) should be in the negative. It might read as follows: "Watercraft may not moor or anchor in areas where mooring buoys, stations or anchoring areas are provided and available except through the use of such buoys, stations or areas." The Certification provision on page 11 appears to be broader than intended. As written., it would void such things as Coast Guard permits, Federal Communications permits and untold other authoriz ns field by people navigating through the sanctuary but having no real bearing on it, It should also be made clear that the provision applies only within the sanctuary. 3 The Research and Monitoring provision might be clarified by amending the first line to read, "Provisions for research and monitoring the effects of particular uses of the coral". The second sentence might read, "The State of Florida and the South Florida Regional,_Plannin the coast of Key Largo to insure that these activities do not adversely affect water quality, subsequent health of the coral reef ecosystem, or violate the sanctuary rules and regulations." The Enforcement provision is unclear. What exactly will Florida do? It would appear that the rules already exist and are to be enforced by the Coast Guard. I would recommend changing lines 6, 7 and 8 of the Penalties section to read: "a continuing violation constitutes a separate violation. A vessel used in violation of a reguqla- tion is liable for any civil penalty assessed for such violation and may be proceeded...." If you would like clarification of any of these comments, please feel free to call me on 739-275 0. Sincerely, Assistant Attorney General Land and Natural Resources Division By: Michael W. Reed Attorney, Marine Resources Section UNITED STATES ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20545 A September 26, 1975 Dr. Robert R. Kifer Marine Sanctuary Coordinator Office of Environmental Affairs U. S. Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Dr. Kifer: I have reviewed the draft environmental impact statement forthe proposed "Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary" recently transmitted to us. As.previously stated we believe a sound basis exists for the establishment of a sanctuary and that the addition of the proposed sanctuary to John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park represents a beneficial and appropriate action under the terms of the enabling legislation. We appreciate the opportunity to comment. Sincerely yours, D. Heyward Hamilton Aquatic Ecologist Environmental Programs Division of Biomedical and Environmental Research .,kr op C, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY KS Of Rockville, Md. 20852 C52/JLR SEP 2 6 1975 TO: Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary f# Environmental'Affairs FROM: v 6/rh-r A@on ft it Deputy Director National Ocean Survey SUBJECT: Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary The subject statement has been reviewed within the areas of NOS responsibility and expertise, and in terms of the impact of the proposed action on NOS activities and projects. As there are no NOS facilities or reference marks involved in this statement, and the proposed action is outside the program fields of NOS, no comment is required. too DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MAILING ADDRESS;, UNITED STATES COAST GUARD U.S. COAST GUARD(G-WS/73) 400 SEVENTH STREET SW. WASHIN T 20590 E. . @61)D.C PHON 426-2262 OCT 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Mr. Galler: This is in response to your letter of 25 August 1975 addressed to this Office concerning an environmental impact statement for the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary, Collier County, Florida. The Department of Transportation has reviewed the material submitted. . We, have no comments to offer nor do we have any, objection to this project., The opportunity to review this draft statement is appreciated. Sincerely, 6wa D. RILEY Captain, I", S- COW Guard DEPARTMENT OF STATE Washington, D,C. 20520 BUREAU OF OCEANS AND INTZRNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENTIWd6',AWFP,1RS October 14, 1975 Dr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs U.S. Department of Commerce 14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20230 Dear Sid: I refer to your letter of August 18 in which you requested the Department of State's opinion on the revised Environmental Impact Statement entitled "Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary." We have no substantive comments on the draft EIS, although we appreciate the opportunity to review it. The proposed regulations described in the EIS sub- stantially meet the objections we outlined in Lindsey Grant's March 18 letter to Dr. Kifer. However, we look forward to the opportunity to review any Notice of Proposed Rulemaking prior to the promulgation of the Sanctuary regulations. Sincerely yours, C"t J. Grant Burke office of Environmental Affairs UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY %;4t REGION IV 1421 PEACHTREE ST., N. E. ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30309 October 24, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs- U. S. Department of'Commerce Office of the'Assistant'Se6retary for Science and Technology Washington, D. C.,20230 Dear Mr. Galler: We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary in Florida, and in general'i:.%. have no objection to establishing the Key Largo-Marine Sanctuary@ In fact, it is probably-the' best;.meth-od of@_protecting-the area from sand dredging and canal mining which.c@ould!1n,turwaffem, the coral reefs in John Pennekamp Coral Reef@State-Park. ...Howeverj_ there are several points that should be clarified. 1. It is stated (Page 11) that "Research and monitoring of the effects of particular uses lof,the coral reef ecosystem will be incorporated into the management procedures as needed to insure that the primary purpose for establishment of the sanctuary is carried out." Just what agency oragencies will perform this activity should be specified and an indication of the research program planned would also be in order. 2. The EIS would be improved by a more ample and accurate intro- duction than that given under the heading of "Environmental Setting" (Page 2). The "current stress conditions that prompted the nomination ... and valuable coral resources degraded" (mentioned in discussion of "Alternates to the Proposed Action", Page 14) should be fully described from evidence gained by direct observa- tions made by personnel of Florida State agencies, NOAA, and the U. S. Coast Guard. 2 3. Since information on the flora and fauna of Biscayne Bay National Monument is used in lieu of primary data pertaining to the nominated area, a location map showing the proximity of the two areas should be provided. 4. An explanation of the relationship of Key Largo Coral Reef Preserve to the nominated sanctuary area should be given. 5. The treatment of "Uses" (Page 3) should include statistics on visitor days to the area, economic value of recreational activities, and especially that of boating and fishing. In.view of the foregoing, we have rated the impact of the action LO (lack of objection) and 2 (insufficient information) to the Impact Statement. IWe would appreciate receiving five copies of the final en- vironmental impact statement when it is available, and if we can be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, David R. Hopkins Chief, EIS Branch @ILN:D T10,,V 4@1 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 0 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20546 M cc z REPLY TO ATTN OF- ADA-1 September 23, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs United States Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230 Dear Mr. Galler: This responds-to-your letter of August 18, 1975, addressed to the NASA Comptroller, requesting that NASA domment-on 'the Draft Environmental Statement, ".Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary." NASA personnelhave reviewed the draft environmental -statement and have no comments to offer.- We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this draft environmental statement. Sincerely yours, ,U9 Nathaniel B. Cohen, Director Office of '^Pola*.cy Analysis DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION -A G ADDRESS: UNITED STATES COAST GUARD GUARD (G-WEP-5/73) ON, D.C. 20590 02-755-7938 no INS U. S. Department of Commerce Office of Environmental Affairs Washington, DC 20230 Dear Sir: The draft environmental impact statement for the Key Largo Coral Re ef Marine Sanctuary has been reviewed by-the concerned offices within the Coast Guard. The following comments apply: a. Format of the EIS - The EIS format does not follow that of the typical EIS. The majority of the EIS is contained in two basic categories, Project Description and Proposed Management System, the latter containing such unrelated topics as probable adverse effects and alternatives. b. Project Description - The area is described as adjacent to, but excluding, the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, beginning at the three mile territorial limit and extending seaward. The two geographical coordinates which supposedly mark the seaward boundary of the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park are located as much as 2.3 nautical miles inside the legal three mile limit as prepared by the Interdepartmental Baseline Committee. A copy of the chart is enclosed. The geographical extent of the existing state na park and Federal preserve need to be reviewed and addressed in the EIS. c. Project Description - The 300 foot isobath should not be used as the seaward boundary. When the 300 foot isobath is plotted on a chart it is obvious that two straight lines can be drawn which will approximate it very closely. It is recommended that the seaward boundary be defined as the two existing points marking its ends and the geographical coordinate,250 07.5' N, 800 12.5' W. This will facilitate enforcement, allow for possible future marking if desired, and closely approximates the 300 foot isobath. a. Administration - The authority by which NOAA can delegate the State of Florida to administer the sanctuary should be cited. It does not appear to be a provision of the Act. The authority of the state to administer non- state waters is questionable. e. Regulation (1)(a) - This regulation is far too broad. Read literally the sanctuary could not be used for fear that a few grains of sand might be ru disturbed or removed or a piece of seaweed might be dislodged thereby sub- jecting the violator to a $50,000 penalty. As in enclosure (1), it is suggested that this regulation be changed to read as follows: "No person shall Intentionally or negligently destroy, injure,....". f. Regulation (1)(b) - Delete - The prohibition of regulation (1)(a) adequately covers these activities also. 9 Regulation (2)(a) - Delete the last sentence. "No materials" is too vague. Every vessel puts some material into the'water during normal operations, such as oil from a shaft packing 81and or a thin sheen from an outboard motor's exhaust. ,h. Regulation (2)(c) - 11Public service facility" needs to be defined. i. Regulation (3)(a) - Recommend change to read:, "No person shall dump, deposit, or discharge waste material into the water of this sanctuary in violation of any Federal statute or regulation"., Similar wording was used in the regulations for the MONITOR sanctuary. The Coast Guard is especially opposed'to the reference to vessel sewage. Section 312 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act ade@iia_tely___a_d_d_r'_esses this source.of pollution and pro- vides a mechanism for designating no-discharg6.areas. It would not seem logical to prohibit such discharge in the sanctuary while discharges are per- mitted in the three mile area between,the sanctuary and the shore line. j. Regulation (6)(b) - Substitute the following: "No person shall carry or possess such poisons or devices, except while underway through the marine sanctuary. Seizure and con,fiscations are not remedies sanctioned by the Act. 0-nly civ.i.1-@-e--n-a-It-idi@-a-r-'e---@iu-t-F6-rized remedies and then only after proper notice and opportunity to be heard. (Note: The fishing laws of the State of Florida do not apply outside the 3 mile limit, except as.to its own citizens). k. Regulation (6)(c) - There is no definition as to,who the 11sanctuary manager" is, or how he is chosen. 1. Regulation (7)(a) - Delete - It will be impossible for the Coast Guard to enforce a regulation prohibiting a person from.touching coral, an activity which presumably will occur under water and out of sight., The remainder of this regulation addressing collection of or disturbing coral is adequately addressed in regulation (1)(a). M. Regulations (7)(b) through (d) - Delete n. Regulation (8)(a) - Change to read: in accordance with applicable Federal rules and regulations." 0. Regulations (8)(b) through (g) Recommend delete. The second sentence of regulation (8)(a) infers that these are-recommended procedures and not binding regulations. If it is desired to retain,them as-recommended procedures, then the word "shall" should bechanged to ",should"'throughout. As stated in enclosure (1), these appear to be personnel.safety mattersand not necessary for the preservation or restoration of the area.. p. Regulation (8)(b) - Delete - Adequately addressed in regulation (8)(a) as corrected in (n.) above. Also, there is no lls@alt@water" demarcation that governs the operation of watercraft. 2 q. Regulation (9) Note - Delete "or cast". Cast is not defined. Literally interpreted, this could mean that one person could not take the picture of another person, even on a boat when in the sanctuary. r. Regulation (9)(a) - Change to read: "...involving rhe installation of special settings or structures." s. Regulati on (11) Note - add a sentence reading: "Knives are frequently used by fishermen and swimmers and are not classified as weapons for purposes of this regulation". t. Regulation (11)(a) - Add the following to the end of the last sentence: if except for law enforcement purposes". na u. Regulation (11)(b) - Change to read: "The firing of weapons into the sanctuary from outside its boundaries is forbidden". The mere aiming of a weapon toward the sanctuary could be done from hundreds of miles away. V. Regulation (11)(c) - Delete "or possession" and add a second sentence as follows: "No person shall carry or possess explosiveswithin the sanctuary rM except while underway through the sanctuary." W. Regulation (11)(d) - Delete. See (j) above regarding seizure and confiscation. x. Regulation (12) - This regulation on closing of the sanctuary needs to be expanded to designate who has the authority to close the sanctuary and the mechanism by which it will be accomplished. Is it contemplated that closure will prevent all access to the area or will it simply restrict activities such as fishing or diving? y. Regulation (13) - Delete - CG regulations presently require reports of personal injury or property damage in excess of $100. See (k) above for com- ments concerning the definition of "sanctuary manager". z. Regulation (14)(a) - Delete. Summary removal is not a remedy sanctioned by the Act. Additionally, all persons -sing this sanctuary are subject to the penalty provisions of the Act. aa. Regulation (14)(b) - Delete. Adequately and more appropriately addressed under "Penalties". bb. Permits - Delete: "educational endeavors, scientific and industrial research". Permits are not required unless a prohibited activity is contem- plated. Insert the following after the first sentence: "Permits will be in letter format and are to be presented to appropriate law enforcement personnel for inspection on request". See (k) above regarding definition of "sanctuary manager". cc. Certification - Authority for NOAA to name the State of Florida as NOAA's administrative officer should be stated, as that authority is question- able. Also, the regulations do not actually name Florida's administrative 3 of f icer. dd. Enforcement It is questionable whether the State of Florida can be designated to administer and implement the rules and regulations. "Governing" should be deleted. "Contract manager" is another undefined term. Also, the Coast Guard's enforcement responsibilities should be more clearly stated. For example, will the Coast Guard be enforcing in conjunction with NOAA police? ee. Penalties - Change first sentence to read Provisions of the rules and regulations for the marine sanctuary promulgated pursuant to Title III... to be assessed by the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration". Change the word "would" to "shall" in the last sentence. ff. Page 13 -.If John Pennekamp State Park was ke",Tnended for inclusion in the marine sanctuary, the reason for its being so included should be stated. gg. Alternatives to the proposed action - Under "No sanctuary it change the last sentence to read "An outer boundary located at the 300 foot isobath pre- clude s.'. The Coast Guard feels that many of the proposed r2gulations are not "necessary and reasonable" as specified in the Act. The purpose against which these regulations must be measured for reasonableness are presumably the same pur- poses for which the Act was established, viz., "preservation or restoring such areas...". Wetherefore feel that regulations which are not directed specifi- cally toward preserving or restoring'the.area Are'not necessary and reasonable regulations. The Coast Guard has no further comments co otter, and appreciates the opportunity to review this impact statement. Siaeer@e, R. 1. PRICE Encl: Fear Adrnlral. U. S. Co' (1) Copy of COMDT(G-WEP-5/73) ltr of 5 May 75 .2f, Office of Marlrl. (2) Charts and Sv ims 4 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD MAILING ADDRESS U.S. COAST GUARD (G-WEP-5/73) 400 EVENTH STREET NW. WASHINGTON, D.C. PHONE 202-426-8578 Administrator National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U. S. Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Sir: The nomination by the State of Florida of the area to be known as the e Florida Keys Coral Reef Sanctuary has been reviewed by the concern d offices within the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard supports the efforts to preserve the coral reef as a habitat preserve but is opposed to tile establishment of the sanctuary as proposed by the State of Florida. The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act calls for issuance of regulations which are both "necessary and reasonable." It is felt that the majority of the proposed regulations are rot "necessary and reasonable" to carry out he purpose for which sanctuaries are established as stipulated in Section 302(a) ofthe Act, to preserve or restore this area. Specific comments are as foilows: a. Section VII.c - Neither the MPRSA nor any other known mechanism provides for the deputizing of state law enforcement officers to allow them to enforce Federal law on the high seas. b. Section VIII ((2)(a) - This section should be changed as follows: "No person shall intentionally or negligently destroy, injure ... except in accordance with a permit or as necessary for the protection of life, property, or the environment." c. Section VIII ((2)(b) Delete as unnecessary. Adequately addressed in Section VIII(2)(a). d. Section VIII(2)(d) - Change to read "...except in accordance with a permit." e. Section VIII 1. (3)(a) - Change first sentence to read "...sanctuary except in accordance with a permit." Delete last sentence as unnecessary, Existing authoity in FWPCA and Title I of the MPRSA is adequate to Protect the reef and marine life from, potentially harmful discharges. This portion should be changed to prohibit the discharging of waste material into the water in violation of any Federal statute or regulation. Subj: Review of Florida Keys Coral Reef Sanctuary f. Section VIII(3)(b) - Change to read "...built without a permit." g. Section VIII(3)(c) - Change to read "...with the exception of naviga- tional aids or qiooring@buoys or stations or in accordance with a permit." h. Section VIII(4)(a) - Delete as unnecessary for same reasons given L' in (E) above for Section VIII(3)(a). The Coast Guard is especially opposed to the reference to vessel sewage; Section 312 of the F11PCA adequately addresses this source of pollution and provides for no-discharge areas. i. Section VIII(7)(d) - Delete. Seizure and confiscation are not remed fes sanctioned by the Act. j. Section VIII(8)(b) - Delete as unnecessary. It is interesting to note that indecent exposure appears to be of concern only if the person enters the water. k. Section VIII(8)(c) Delete as unnecessary. Adequate safeguards contained in Section VIII(2)(a). - L. Section VIII(10)(a) an d (b) - Delete as unnecessary. Adequate safeguards contained in Section VIII(2)(a) as amemdbd in (B) above to protect the coral reef. m.l. Section (10)(c) through (i) - Delete as unnecessary. These appear to be personnel safety matters and are not necessary for the preservation or restoration of the area. Issues of vessel and personnel safety are not unique to this area and are subject to the jurisdiction of the Coast Guard on the high seas. n. Section VIII(11) and (12) - Delete as unnecessary. Adequate safeguards contained in Section VIII(2)(a) as amended in (B) above to protect the coral reef. 0. Section VIII(13)(a), (b), and (c) - Delete is unnecessary. Pre- ceeding sections provide adequate protection. These sections would prevent the arming of law enforcement personnel , prevent di,yers from carrying anti- shark weapons and prevent the carrying of certain t@ypes of distress signal- ling devices on board vessels. p. Section VIII(13)(d) - Delete. Seizure and zonfiscation are not remedies sanctioned by the Al c 41.- . q. Section VIII(15)(a) - Delete as unnecessary to the purpose of pre- serving or restoring the area. r. Section VIII(16) Delete. Removal of pers3ns is not a remedy sanctioned by the Act. 2 Subj: Review of Florida Keys Coral Reef Sanctuary s. Section VIII(17)(a) - Delete. This would more appropriately be the subject of a State law, not a Federal regulation. t. Section VIII(17)(b) - Delete. Precedinq sections provide adequate protection. The Coast Guard feels that the proposed regulations must be necessary and reasonable and must be directed specifically toward preserving or restoring the area. As the Federal agency responsible for enforcement on the high seas, this is of vital concern to us. Many of these proposed regulations are redundant in that they address in a variety of ways the basic prohibition rim against destroying the coral reef as addressed in Section VIII(2)(a). Others either duplicate existing authority or call for procedures which are not sanctioned by the Act. In evaluating the necessity to establish the proposed sanctuary, you should be aware of related statutorit and regulatory authorities. The Outer Ccn- tinental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq., administered generally by the Department of the Interior, authorizes withdrawing from disposal of any OCS lands, 1341(a); provides authority for the promulgation of.regulations, 1334.; and establishes a criminal penalty, 1334(a)(2). The Key Largo Coral Reef Reserve was established by Proclamation No. 3339, March 17, 1960, 25 F.R. 235@. See note under 16 U.S.C. 461. Regulations promulgated by. the Department of the Interior can be found at 43 C.F.R. 15. Another enforcement vehicle is the Bartlett Act, 16 U.S.C. 1081, which relates to coral as a creature of the continental shelf. The Coast Guard has no further comments to offer and appreciates the opportunity to review the proposal. Sincerely, r) W. E. CALMNELL Captain, U. S. Coa,@t Guard Acting Chief, G-rfice of Marinle" 0 Environment aand SysiernS 3 r, N P ;4 T L A N T I C A 0 -C -E N 1ARNW3 SOUND 'k T4@ -s- -7 CAUTION THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT FOR USE IN NAVIGATION The lines drawn on this document delimit provisionally the . ..... .. 0 territorial sea, cont,guovs zone, and certain internal waters of the United Stores. They have been prepared by on it,ter- departmental committee a d represent its interpretation of j S applie relevant legal principle , d to the geog,ophico information shown on - t4-'ior`- I Ocean Survey nautical chart which has been used as a base. These lines ore subject to revision whenever it is required by amplification or correction of the information shown on the chart or by reintei-ptetalion 8f the legul prirciples involved This document does not otter" Pt to del neate international boundaries and is not to be understood as asserting or implying where they are located. 2.d Edifi-, R..i-d J., 1973. . . ... . ........ .. ...... ..... . . . . . . . 'S 12 9 (,1-- C lk-( 4, ENCLIMEW --7 V"@ V 'W i4 T L A N A T I C N 0 C E BAHNAW Cl J. Z "A CAUTION THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT FOR USE IN NAVIGATION The lines drawn on this document delimit provisionally the territorial sea, contiguous zone, and certain internal waters of she United States. They have been prepared by an inter departmental committee and represent its nterpre totion of rel vant legal principles as applied to the geographical T inf:rmation shown on a National Ocean Survey nou 'ic.1 chart which has been used as a base. These lines are su b,ect to revision whenever it is required by amplification or correction of the inf rmotion shown on the chart or by reinterpretation 8f a the legal principles involved. This document does not attempt to delineate international boundaries and is not to be understood as asserting or implying where they ore located. 2nd Edition, PAviwd Jan. 1973. 16. lk. 4 r A ft- 11- "A L A JV T I C 0 _C F .4 jV ;% 7' '2 "Z ME N, - E -TV CAUTION L THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT FOR USE IN NAVIGATION 4'- lines cli-n on this d.c-nt del'rnit provisionally the "I territorial sea. con!ig,ous zone, and certc,n inf-of oter, of z the U.'ltd' S'.!". fi,y have o@- p-p.re. by n '., ': t" -11 -p,-nt -1, n',rp-w- of relevomf ,.9-, P, iple' as 1. file g-g'o a @h;,h h- b,- -d as . b.- Th- I- lvvi@6- or C.11-1- of e W.". i 0-n a,, P'@ -a,t 11,11-pret.l.an the 1@g@l P. rr,pl,' "vol -d Tn., C---' dots at tj_ 1" " 71 be-d-,- -d , -f 1. be .-1,-f-J 0 -Slell-ng a' -mPly-r,g -here lh,y we lc-l@d Edt-, [email protected] J_ 19) 3. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT, OF AGRICULTURE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE State Office, P. 0. Box 1208, Gainesville, FL 32602 September 12, 1975 -Sidney R. Galler Deputy,Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs U. S. Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Mr. Galler: RE: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary We concur in your draft environmental impact statement and have no further comments to offer. We appreciate the opportunity to r,eview this proposal. Sincerely, 2 Wil@ 'iam, E., Austin State Conservationist cc: R., M.' Davis F. G. Maxwell Is 01 'TVA ESr4,@@ RLUBIN O'D. ASKEW Governor 0 BRUCE A. SMA'rHERS 2 Secretary of State State of Florida 0 ROBERTL. SHEVIN Fin Attorney General w GERALD A. LEWIS con""'"ll" PHILIP F. ASHLER 3ErART1v\F-NT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 'rreasurer DOYLECONNER Commissioner of Agriculture HARMON W. SHIELDS CROWN BUILDING / 202 BLOUNTSTREET /TALLAHASSEE 32304 RALPH D.TURLING'rON Executive Director Commissioner of Education September 8, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs U. S. Department of Commerce The Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology Washington, D. C. 20230 U Dear Mr. Galler: Thank you for the copies of the environmental impact state- men*t and proposed regulations for the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary. The only area of concern that I see at the moment is in Section (6) of the regulations in which it requires all trap floats to be marked with flags. This might prove to be burdensome and expensive and will be a controversial issue with the fishermen. If the Florida State regulations are adhered to, as called for in the proposals, the trap buoys will have to be color coded and numbered and these criteria should be sufficient for recognition and identification of the trap locations. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Col. C. A. Willis, Director Division of Law Enforcement CAW/nd CC: Mr. Harmon W. Shields Mr. Edwin A. Joyce Lt. Col. John J. Brown Mr. Bob Jones Mr. Thomas Fulford DIVISIONS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - LAWENFORCEMENT - MARINERESOURCES .,vvtE sw STATE OF FLORIDA Repartment of Abrainistration Division of State Planning 660 Apalachee Parkway - IBM Building Reubtn O'D. Askew GOVERNOR R. G Whittle, Jr. TALLAHASS-EE STATE PLANNING DIRECTOR 32304 Lt. Gov. J. H. *Jlirn" Williams (ACTING) SECRITAItY OF ADMINISTRATION (904) 488-1115 September 16, 1975 Dr. Robert R. Kifer Marine Sanctuary Coordinator Office of Environmental Affairs 'Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology United States Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Dr. Kifer: . I am pleased to respond to your recent request for comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, "Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary." This proposed action is one which is highly desirable and of major importance to the State of Florida, as well as to the nation. The pro- tection of the fragile and irreplaceable coral ecosystems which this action will implement is long overdue. I enthu- siastically endorse this action except for the minor ex- ceptions noted below. It is my strong feeling that regulations for operat- ing the Sanctuary should preclude all bottom fishing. I find it inconsistent within the stated objectives of the DEIS: "to protect and conserve the coral and coral reef ecosystems, to regulate uses thereof to insure the health and well-being of the coral, and associated flora and fauna, and to make available the continual opportunity for the esthetic and recreational enjoyment which healthy reefs afford the American people," to allow activities such as bottom fishing and lobster and crab trapping which are known to be detrimental and alterative to the coral eco- system. If the goal of the sanctuary is to provide maximum protection to this ecosystem as well as to provide for Dr. Robert R. Kifer September 16, 1975 Page Two esthetic and recreational opportunities, I do not feel that the economic benefits to be derived by a relatively few per- sons within the area should take precedence over the potential for maximum protection which may be provided the ecosystem. Additionally, I feel that all 4_et fishing within the proposed Sanctuary should be banned for the same reasons. I would also note that in the DEIS it-i t stalt-e-cT-that a proposed goal of the Sanctuary is to provide economic opportunities, destructive em, and alterative to the ecosys@ for the benefit of local com- mercial fishermen. Thank you for providing me the opportunity to comment on this highly significant action. If you should desire further elaboration on any of my statements or views, or to participate in any of the public formal activities involved in the imple- mentation of this proposed action, I am at your service. Sincerely, James I. Jones, Ph.D. Special Projects Officer Division of State Planning and Marine Science Advisor to the Governor JIJ/bj REUBIN O'D.ASKEW Governor RICHARD (DICK) STONE Secretary of State ROBERT L. SHEVIN Atorney General FRED O. DICKINSON, JR. Comptroller THOMAS D. O'MALLEY Treasurer DOYLE CONNER Commissionor of Agriculture FLOYD T. CHRISTIAN Commissioner of Education State of Florida DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES RANDOLPH HODGES LARSON BUILDING / TALLAHASSEE 32304 /TELEPHONE 224-7141 Executive Director PLEASE ADDRESS REPLY TO: John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park P.O. Box 487 Key Largo, Florida 33037 September 22, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary For Environment Affairs Department of Commerce Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Mr. Galler: Dr. Kifer has already provided me wit a similar proposal, which I commented on and returned to him. I have no reccomendations or changes, other than the ones I have already provided him with. I think it is very good and will be had to improve on. Sincerely yours, Jack Gillen Superintendent John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park CC: Park Files DIVISIONS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PROTECTION INTERIOR RESOURCES MARINE RESOURCES RECREATION AND PARKS FLORIDA GAME AND FRESH WATER FISH COMMISSION OGDEN M. PHIPPS, Chairman RANDOLPH R. THOMAS, Vice Chairman HOWARD ODOM E@ P. "SONNY" BURNETT DONALD G. RH 'ODES D.D.S. U Miami Jacksonville Marianna Tampa Satellite Beach JILISH DR, 0. E. FRYE, JR., Director H.E. WALLACE, Assistant Director Farris Bryant Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 MIS Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs United States Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Key Largo Coral Peef Marine Sanctuary, Monroe County Dear Mr. Galler: The E nvironmental Protection Bureau of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission has reviewed the above referenced impact statement and offers the following comments. Due to the unrestricted development that has occurred in recent years throughout the Florida Keys and the concomitant increase in permanent residents and seasonal visitors, the Florida Reef Tract has suffered considerably from such human activities as dredge and fill projects, commercial exploitation of corals, and abusive boating and diving practices. The establishment of the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary would serve to preserve an important portion of this reef tract through the control or elimination of present stresses, and would further buffer the existing natural features of the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park. Therefore the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission supports the proposed action. If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, E. Frye, Jr. Director OEF/DB/rs Florida Keys Citizens Coalition Rt. 2 - Box 310 Summerland Key, Fla. 33042 Sidney R. Galler Jeputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs U.S. Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230 Dear Mr. Galler: This letter contains comments on the environmental impact state- ment prepared by the Department of Commerce for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, office of Coastal Zone Management entitled "Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary." These comments repre- sent the aggregate viewpoint the nineteen Monroe County citizens, or- ganizations included in the Florida Keys Citizens Coalition. The FKCC strongly supports implementation of the proposal based upon needs assessment and long term direct experience with the area under study 'We believe that the proposed action is in accordance with developing land use plans and policies in the Florida Keys and that the proposed resource management systems would help to reduce the increasing negative impact on this area by the large and diverse user groups. We would,recommnd however that all of the proposed management systems '.,;including rules, regulations and prohibitions also be placed to the adjacenT John Pennekamp, Coral Reef State Park. We believe that an area larger than the boundaries of the proposed marine sancturay must be carefully managed in order to maintain the integrity of the Florida Keys Coral reef ecosystem both structurally and functionally. maintenance of "whole systems" ecologically balanced requires whole system management. ideally the entire reef tract should be managed according to national guidelines and by an agency of government which supports this philosophy. We realize that at present, circumstances have mitigated against larger boundaries for the proposed marine sanctuary. We do believe however, that the present need for strict management controls in John Pennekamp State Park outweigh the considerations which have led to the proposed.'boundaries. Moreover, the current stress conditions which exist throughout the reef tract make it evident that a larger area should be carefully protected. We therefore recommend that your agency collaberate with the State of Florida with the expressed purpose of extending the proposed management system to include John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park Yours truly, Arthur H. Weiner Phd. Chairman cf:AW cc: Fla. Dept. Nat. Res. BELCHER OIL. G oxPANx P. 0. BOX 011751 MlAml, FLORIDA 33101 September 25, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE The Assistant Secretary ftir Science and Technology Washington, D.C. 20230 Dear Sir: The Draft Impact Statement for the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary has been reviewed. As explained to Dr. Robert R. Kifer, Marine Sanctuary Coordinator, after review of the original nomination, Belcher Oil Company has no objections to the establishment* of this sanctuary as long as it does not limit the use of the navigable water w-ay Kno n as Hawk C annel. The presently proposed boundrtes--do nTt--1ffc-1r1!d-e- awk unanne'l. We offer the observation that commercial shipping, much of it under foreign flags, habitually stays close in to the reef markers when south bound to escape the north flowing current. Swimmers and sightseers should not be encouraged to feef-safe from ship traffic-in water depths r) f Subject to these comments, we are glad to see this effort to preserve the reefs. Sincerely, L. C. MORRIS Asst. Vice President LCM/lpf UNDERWATER SOCIETY OF AMERICA AMBLER, PENNSYLVANIA 19002 Route 2, Box 368-A, Kissimmee, Fla. 32741 September 22, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assitant Secretary Environmental of Commerce U.S. Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230 Re: Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Statement Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary The proposed Marine Sanctuary is a badly needed addition to the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park and the draft environmental impact statement appears adequate -- except for the following objections tot he proposed regulations. Page 7, item 6 of Porhibited Activities states, "The taking of crawfish, spiny lobster and stone crab with traps for commercial purposes ... is allowed." the item also tates that sport and commercial fishing with hook and line... and with nets ... is allowed within the marine sanctuary." In our opinion the above provisions make a mockery of the allowed purpose of the sancturary which is stated as, "The area will be managed to protect and conserve the coral and coral reef ecosystems, to regulate uses thereof to insure the health and well-being of the coral, and associated flora and fauna, and to make available the continual opportunity for esthetic and recreational enjoyment which healthy reefs afford the American people." (emphasis added) There is ample evidence that lobster trapping and commercial fishing with nets (and with powered reels and sire lines) significantly damages corals and assocaited reed ecosystems. Allowing these activities in a marine sanctuary is, in our opinioin, equivalent to allowing commercial trapping and hunting in a forest sanctuary such as Yellowstone or Yosemite. We are in favor of the prohibition of spearfishing in the santuary, but there is no evidence that this acitivity poses a greater threat to corals than lobster trapping or commercial fishing -- and we believe the preferential treatment proposed for commercial activities is rank discriminition. If conservation is necesary, everybody should be required to conserve. Respectfully, Wm. R. Barada Environmental Advisor An Organized Diver Is A Safe Diver 608 THIRTEENTH STREET, N.W. (SUITE 801) WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 (202) 737-0668 August 29, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs U.S. Department of Commerce Washinton, DC 20230 Dear Mr. Galler: Thank you for furnishing a copy of the Draft EIS for the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary and providing an opportunity for us to comment on that document. The sport Fishing Institute endorses the proposed Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary and commends the efforts of all those responsible. The protection of such valuable coral reef ecosystems is a major purpose of the Marine Sanctuaries Act, reflecting a concepts this Institute has long supported. The Draft EIS appears to be particularly well-organized, and we especially appreciate its conciseness. The uses of the Sanctuary which are to be prohibited will provide all the protection that will be needed, while still allowing for appropriate compatible public utilization. We concur in and commend the decision to assign administrative responsibility to the Flordia Department of Natural Resources. Regarding Page 7 of the Draft EIS, we have two specific comments concerning Prohibited Activities (6) Fishing, vis: Subdivision (a) now reads, "The use of poisons, electric charges, and similar methods for the taking or killing of fish is prohibited." We suggest that an additional clause, "except for purposes of scitentific in- vestigation with written approval and supervision by the sanctuary's admin- istrative agency", be added at the end of that sentence. Subdivision (c) provides for setting aside some portions of the marine sanc- tuary as control areas for research to assist in managing the sanctuary and that such area will be closed to fishing. We se merit in such provisions, but we are concerned that they be judiciously limited. In this regard, we The National Non-Profit Fish Conservation Organization Mr. Sidney R. Galler Page 2 August 28, 1975 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs : uggest that appropriate language be added to provide that such inviolate areas hall in no case exceed 10 percent of the total sanctuary area. We appreciate the opportunity to comment. Sincerely yours, Ric ard H. Stroud Executive Vice President IRS:mjw ..Cc to:,,, Mr. Russell Peterson CZQ .-Mr. Harmon ShieldIa Florida DKR Richard H. @Stroud Tropical Audubon Society, Inc. 7615 S.W. 62nd Avenue MIAMI, FLORIDA 33143 President PETER A. QUINCY 9 September 1975 Vice-Presidents ROBERT L. KELLEY. PH.D. Mr. Sidney R. Galler LILLIAN S. DICKMON DOUGLAS C. PASLEY, JR. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Recording Secretary Affairs BETTY TALBURT Corresponding Secretary U.S. Department of Commerce MARIL MC CONNELL Washington, D.C. 20230 Treasurer PHYLLIS M. WICKS Directors RE: KeV Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary KATHLEENS.ABRAMS IRA JOEL ABRAMSON. SALLY BLACK Dear Mr. Galler: NANCY BROWN GLORIA CALHOUN BERNICE COHEN I greatly appreciate the 'opportunity to review RICHARD N. COOK ELIZABETH A.FALCONE the environmental impact statement for the Coral FLOYD M. POOR ROBERT A. MYERS Reef Marine Sanctuary. FLORA E. O.BRIEN WILLIAM G. PARDO. PH. D. DIANNE G. PECKHAM I am completely in favor of such a sanctuary BRUCE Z. RIDDLE RONALD Y. STILLMAN being established in the Keys. The proposed rules MARK TRAFTON, JR. and regulations,particularly those regarding President Emeritus the removal or destruction of marine life are ALICE C. WAINWRIGHT long overdue. Ex 0fficio Directors CHARLES M. BROOKFIELD GORDON HUBBELL, PH,D. The enforcement of these rules and regulations OSCAR T. OWRE, PH,D. MARGERY RADOMSKI will be the responsibility of the U. S. Coast ALEXANDER SPRUNT, IV Guard, as proposed on page 12. Does or perhaps, JACK ST ARK DONALD J. STARKEY will the Coast Guard receive the additional man- DADE W. THORNTON JAMES W. TODD, power, funds and surface craft to adequately Advisory Board carry out these added duties? This is absolutely RICHARD BRUSUELAS DONALD P. DESYLVA, PH.D. necessary if the sanctuary is to be a reality. LEONARD DISILVESTRO With a reported 260 surface craft using the area ERMA J. FISK JUANITA GREENE on a single day, enforcement will require constant JAMESH.HARTWELL GARY Y. HENDRIX vigilance. DAVID G. JOPLING CHARLES LEE ARTHUR R. MARSHALL The Tropical Audubon Society is completely sup- ALLAN MILLEDGE FRANK A. NIX portive of these proposals and the sanctuary, JOHN OGDEN LESTER PANCOAST question the enforceability of these rules. JAMES F. REDFORD, JR. JANE L. RIEKER JACK ROBERTS If I can be of further assistance please feel WILLIAM B. ROBERTSON. PH.D. HARVEY RUVIN free to contact me at any time. PARKER D. THOMSON ALBERT R. VERI AL VOLKER SUSAN U. WILSON Sincerely, Honorary Directors IRMA B. BENTLEY H. STORRS BRIGHAM MELVILLE BELL GROSVENOR, PH.D Peter A. Quincy HERBERT W. HOOVER. JR. JOHN PENNEKAMP President Junior Director JERRY C. COUTURE PQ/mr (To NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY RESEARCH DEPARTMENT - 115 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL, TAVERNIER, FLA. 33070 (305) 852-502 September 12, 1975 MR Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs United States Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Mr. Galler: Thanks very much for sending the draft environmental impact statement for the proposed Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary for my comments and review. The proposal is certainly a very timely one. Additional control over human activities in the coral reef tract off the Florida Keys is badly.needed, and this proposed marine sanctuary*will provide the mechanism for more adequate protection, at least In one of the more heavily used sections of the reef tract. I certainly concur with most of the comments and proposals contained in the draft. I do have some questions and comments on one point on page five under the section headed Proposed Rules and Regulations, subsection I-C, which states that "No rope, wire, anchor, or other contrivance shall be attached to any coral, rock or other formation, whether temporary or permanent in character." I believe this to be somewhat ambiguous and in need of clarification. If taken In It's literal sense it would preclude any anchoring within the reef tract proper almost entirely. Within the reef tract there are a number of areas of sand where an anchorcan be placed safely and not touch or otherwise impinge on the coral surrounding these patches, but in many of these there are rocks which in some cases are necessary for the security of an anchor, and under the rules and regulations so stated here it would seem to be illegal to anchor anywhere In the reef tract where the anch(r might be in contact with a'rock. Perhaps this Is nitpicking, but I really think that it should be clarified. Certain areas could be designated as no anchoring zones and marked by buoys, or, as Is mentioned in another section, mooring buoys should be provided within certain heavy-use areas and their use required exclusively. This last might be a method of not on-ly preventing the damage of corals by anchors but also a method of limiting the number of boats using any given area at a given time. If "X"numbeis of buoys were provided and boats were required to use them this might cut down some of the congestion that presently occurs over the most scenic and popular areas of the reef. Here in the Florida Keys in the total reef tract running from the Biscayne National Monument to the Dry Tortugas, there are a number of serious resource- use problems which can only be attacked and regulated through some form of Federal action. The fact that the state can only legally control operations inside the three mile limit and the further fact that at least half of the reef tract lies outside of the three mile limit createa great many problems in the regulating of such things as lobster fishing, spear fishing, collection of tropical fish by aquarists, collection of coral and a host of other things. I believe that it is incumbent on the U. S. Department of Commerce,through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and/or the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, to seek methods-of alleviating some of the serious problems which this situation creates. The present proposal is a start but much more needs to be done. Sincerely yours, Alexander Sprunt, IV Director of Research AS/jcg ORANIZED FISHERMEN of FLORIDA September 20, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs U.S. Department of Commerce The Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology Washington, D.C. 20230 Dear.Mr. Galler: Thank you for the copies of the environmental impact statement and propoosed regulations for the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary. There is a definite area of concerning section (6) of the regulations which requires all trap floats to be marked with flags, This will prrove to be burdensome, expensive, and will be Impossible to comply with. If the Florida State regulations are followed,as called for in the proposals, the trap buoys alone will be sufficient for recognition and identification of the trap locations and owners. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Thomas "Blue" Fulford Exec. Director, qUFF 4507 99th St. W. Bradenton, FL 33507 FLORIDA 01 VISION THE IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA rim Box 1093 Jupiter, Florida 33458 RESOLUTION The United States Supreme Court has recently ruled that the State has no jurisdiction to enforce its laws beyond the three-mile limit. As a result, live coral is being collected in the deeper reefs outside the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, thus hastening their destruction., The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has announced that it is considering the creation of a federal marine sanctuary in an area up to five miles seaward of the John Pennekamp Park's outer boundry. Therefore, be it resolved that the Floriaa Division, izaak, Walton League. of Americat urges that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency proceed with all possible speed to establish the proposed sanctuary tLnder the Federal Marine Sanctuary Act. Passed by the Directors of the Florida Division, Izaak Walton League of America at Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 23 1,17arch 1975 Mary Ann Peters, Secretary 13UILDING A BETTER OUTDOOR AMERICA. FLORIDA DIVISION THE IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA P. 0. Box 1093 Jupiter, Florida 33458 5 September 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assitant Secretary for Environmental Affairs U. S. Department of Cameros Washington, D.C. 20230 Subjects Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary Dear Mr. Galler, This Is in responce to your request for comments the Draft eviron- mental Impact Statement on the subject. The, Florida Division, Issak Walton League of America is in support of the creation of this Sanctuary, witness our resolution enclosed. I request that consideration be given these comments on Proposed Rules and Regulations, Prohibited Activities, paragaph 11 (a) page 9. It to conceivable that a vessel vacationing in the Keys, dive in the Sanctuary, yet have aboard a spear gun for use where not prohited, This should not be a violation. Admittedly, enforcement is made more difficult, yet enforcement problems should not be mood with further abridgement of other rights. Sincerely, Ken Peters President BUILDING A BETTER OUTDOOR AMERICA THE IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA Florida Keys Chapter INCORPORATED P.O. Box 4, Islamorada, FL. 33036 September 20, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs U. S. Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Mr. Geller: The Florida Keys Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America strongly urges that the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary designation be made a reality as expeditiously as possible. We also feel very strongly that the marine area of John Pennekamp Park be included in this designation. We strongly urge placing mooring buoys of sufficient numbers in strategic areas, and no anchoring be allowed. Sincerely, Ron Bell President P. 0. BOX 013100, MIAMI, FLORIDA 331011 FLORIDA POWER LIGHT COMPANY September 17, 1975 Mr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs United States Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230 Dear Mr. Galler: The draft environmental impact statment on "Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary" was passed on to me for review and comment by Dr. Donald Dunlop. I find no problems with the DEIS. I would like to congratulateyour Department of the idea of the proposed marine sanctuary. I have visited John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park many times and always wished that the boundaries could be extended I was'pleased to see your proposal and wish you every success*. Sincerely, J. Ross Wilcox, Ph. D Ecologist JRW:mg HELPING BUILD FLORIDA )OUBO 4, SINCE NINETEEN-HUNDRED "THE VOICE OF CONSERVATION" ra OF VA@' Office of Coastal Zone Management 29 September, 1975 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary Dear Sirs: We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary, and most strongly support the proposal. In our review, we found two areas of concern: A. Recognizing that regulations are only effective if they are enforced, we recommend athat adequate patrol boats and personnel be assigned to the sanctuary. B. We believe that there is inadequate protection offered for the spiny lobster and would support research to determine their status as well as research on the impact of authorized uses on all of the marine life in the sanctuary. We very much appreciate the opportunity to review this document and continue our support for your program. Sincerely yours, /'Al&ea der ri an Vice President AJF/ i s' @ri an 921 Lake Sybelia Drive P. 0. Drawer 7Maitland, Florida 32751 (305) 647-2615 SIERRA CLUB Miami Group P. 0. BOX 011776 Miami, Florida 33101 30 September 1975 Dr. Robert R. KIfer Marine Sanctuary Coordinator U.S. Dept. of Commerce The Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology Washington, D.C. 20230 RE: Draft EIS Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary Dear Dr. Kifer: We applaud the federal governments move to establish the Key Largo coral reef as a marine sanctuary. This is something that should have been done years ago when the Everglades National Park was created,but it is never too late! As residents of this area and explorers of the,coral roofs, we do not see how the creation of this marine sanctuary can be anything but a positive environmental impact. The is a good start toward protection of one of the nation's treasured resources. In the long run, however,it will have to be followed up by more rigid rules and more effective en- forcement. We would like to see the entire chain of Florida coral reefs protected and manpower assIgned to prohibit the possession of the coral. Our thanks to you for a fine report and we hope to soon have an established marine sanctuary off Key Largo. very truly yours, Alan Sirkin Chairman /as Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. 15 WEST 44TH STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. ioo36 Washington Office BOARD OF TRUSTEES 212 869-ol5O 417 157tH STREET, N.W. Stephen P. Duggan WASHINGTON, D-C- 20005 Chairman 202 737-5000 James Marshall Vice Chairman Western Office Dr. George M. Woodwell Vice Chairman September 24, 1975 664 HAMILTON AVENUE Dr. Dean E. Abrahamson PALO ALTO, CALIF. 94301 Mrs. Louis Auchincloss Boris 1. Bittker 415 327-io8o Frederick A. Collins, Jr. Dr. Rene J. Dubos James B. Frankel Sidney R. Galler Robert W. Gilmore Deputy Assistant Secretary Lady Jackson, D.B.E. Hamilton kean for Environmental Affairs Dr. Joshua Lederberg Department of Commerce Anthony Mazzocchi Paul N. McCloskey, Jr. Washington, DC 20230 Michael McIntosh Eleanor Hol es Norton Owen Olpinm Franklin E. Parker Dear Mr. Galler: Dr. Gifford B. Pinchot Charles B. Rangel John R. Robinson The proposal to establish a recreational-and Laurance Rockefeller esthetic area off Key Largo pursuant to Title III Of J. Willard Roosevelt Whitney North Seymour, Jr. the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act David Sive of 1972 is a worthy proposal and one that should be Beatrice Abbott Duggan adopted. U.N. Representative John H. Adams Executive Director With respect to the draft environmental impact statement, the agency does not appear to discuss the stress and concentration of activities on non-protected coral reefs caused by the establishment of the coral ',Feef preserve. It should be possible to make some /evaluation as to whether coral reefs existing outside of the-protected boundaries will be harmed by overuse in a concentrated area. As a second consideration, the reasons for restric- ting the boundarie-s appear to be -w-e-al-. The-manner in w Ic 7ffie proposed boundaries have been established A verlooks the basic purpose of designation of these aluable resources - to protect them from current stress conditions". This is particularly so since the boundaries selected appear to be wholly arbitrary and do not appear to have been selected with respect to actual coral reef configuration. Y-ery truly yours, RS/p Ross Sandler @@andle@r -40P- 73 iooO/, Recycled Paper UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI CORAL GABLES, FLORIDA 33124 DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY P. 0. BOX 249118 September 16, 1975 Dr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Asst. Secretary for Environmental Affairs U. S. Dept. of Commerce Coastal Zone Management NOAA Rockville, Md. 20852 Dear Dr. Galler: I am returning the draft on the Key Largo Sanctuary, and the following comments apply. P. 5, para. (2)(a). ..Vnless you allow for a "holiday" area around the sanctuary,.especially to the north and south, any dredging, operations within a mile of the borders willbe as effective,in silting the sanctuary as if it occurred within its borders. I am not saying that silting is the pro lem in the area since the banks .,silt the area in rough seasall th( time, however, you will not be able to differentiate the silt type or quality unless the borders are "protected".'. P. 6, para.. 3:an'd P. 8, para. 8 1 would suggest that unless you are dealing with ;sailboats or pror-ein-operated skiffs, most of the operating craft.are.po'lluters in that oil,, fuel, and other hydrocarbons from the engine-exhaust &o-rig@@Jnto the-;Wa-ter. If-, as,a result of the-sanctuary, boat traffic increases, you may want to control the density under given conditions [email protected] have the con- sequence of sufficient exhaust waste'to.cause as much pollution as a few boats pumping their b,ilges. I hope that inyour-monitoring/research plans that you are going..to maintain checks on hydrocarbons on the surface ., dispersed, m They (the hydrocarbons) can be cumula- and in t e u@pper -se@di ents tive. Also, I hope thatyou institute a study on the quality and quantity of sediment transport. The nature of the bottom and its continuance is one of the prime physical factors in this area. Also sediment deposition on live organisms and its ultimate disposal is extremely valuable information. Sinc ly) Vinc@te Leonard J. /Greenfield Chairman, &a'partment of Biology LJG:lg A private, independent, international university An equal opportunity employer FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY 1965 TAMIAMI TRAIL * MIAMI, FLORIDA 33144 3 0 52 2 32 3 0 0 Biological Sciences rim September 15, 1975 J Dr. Robert Kifer Marine Sanctuary Coordinator Office of Coastal zone Management 11400 Rockville Pike Rockville, Md. 20852 Dear Sir: I have read the draft E.I.S. and nominations concerning the pro- posed Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary. I am in agreement with the statements and proposals made by O'Connor and Darnell in their original nomination and feel that their sanctuary boun- daries form a more realistic framework for the protection of Florida's coral reef resources. My only comment on the proposed rules and regulations concerns (1) the removal or destruction of natural features and marine life. I would like to add a clause that would allow limited removal-of specimens by scientific personnel'from authorized state or local agencies. This might eliminate some of the pro- blems concerned with issuance of permits to individuals from authorized institutions such as university faculty. An alter- native to this co*uld be language under the heading "Permits" (Page 10, E.I.S.) which includes issuance of permits to autho- rized institutions to cover a variety of otherwise prohibited activities. The present language does not distinguish insti.- tutional (or permanent) from individual (or temporary) permits, since all seem to fall into the latter category. On page 14.of the E.I.S., alternatives to the proposed action are given. The first of these includes no sanctuary and pro- poses an outer boundary to Pennekamp State Park of 300 feet. rru In my judgement this is insufficient to preclude illegal park activities. Such a boundary should extend a minimum of 1000 feet. Thank you for your kind attention to these comments. Yours sincerely, dZAr Walter M. Goldberg, Ph.D. Assistant Professor THE STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF FLORIDA 1252 Walsh Ave. Apt.'_28K_ Coral Gables, Florida 33146 Septenber 11, 1975 Dr.'Robert Kifer Marine Sanctuary Coordinator Office of Coastal Manageinent, NOAA 11400,Rockville Pike Pockville, Maryland 20852 Dear Dr. Kifer: I am pleased to learn of the proposed Key Largo Coral Reef Marine @:,anctuary. This is an important step forward in the preservation of the South Florida coral reef tract. The extension of the protectedzeef area offshore from the seaward edge of Pennekarp Park to the 300 foot isobath is an excellent idea. This will prevent the current practice of divers anchoring outside the boundary and entering from the@east. The prohibition against spearfishing will aid g reatly in preserving the natural fish population of the sanctuary. In general the regulations prohibit most activities within the sanctuary which might be detriniental. to the reef eco- systern. I wish to take issue with som of thern, however. 6. Fishing. The present regulations allow cmmrcial fishing of spiny lobster and stone crab within the sanctuary. The Draft EIS speaks of managermt to avoid "excessive stress" on the ecosystem and to acheive a proper balance of uses. This is a comnendable attitude but I feel is not the best philosophy of management for the proposed sanctuary. The Draft EIS is proceedLng on the "nultiple use" philosophy much like the.manaqen-ent-of the U.S. National Forests. A wore desireable approach is-- the "wilderness" approach, that is attempt to keep the area in its natural state. - ---- ------ In terms of fishing this would'entail a prohibition of all bottom fishing, which is one of the options discussed on p. 15 of the Draft EIS. The species involved are valuable camnercial species- spiny lobster, stone crab, snapper and grouper- but the extension of the protected region to the 300 foot isobath offers a unique opportunity to protect a sample of the deeper organisms. The general concept of wilderness areas is discussed further below. A second option would be to detenmne the effect of ccmercial pot fishing on the reef ecosystem. This has scme potential for damage to the reefs. Spiny lobster pots are ballasted with concrete and.weigh about 40 lbs. Lobstermen try to place them on the reef flats because lobster move from the reefs to the reef flats at night to feed. Some pots may inadvertently be dropped on the reef, especially with the increased fishing effort applied this year subsequent to the closing of the Bahamian shelf. A 40 lb lobster pot can be expected to do damage to a reef and weighs more than many anchors, which are no properly treated in the proposed regulations. If the increased fishing effort proves detrimental to the reefs corrective measures must be taken. 8d. Operation of Watercraft. my preference is to have a "no wake" prohibition, expressed as in 8g. A speed limit is difficult to enforce and most boat operators have no way of judging their speed. Also, a displacement hull moving at 4 mph can leave a large wake p.12-16. There is evidence of an ostrich philosophy in this discussion of future action or another -nomination "... if it becomes evident a larger area is necessary to sustain the ecological balance..." 1 1. Draft EIS p. 14. It is evident now,that the major threats to thereefecosystemof both Pennekarnp Parkand,the proposed Sanctuary are frcm,activities outside the preserved area.,,'.'.The,jbbn Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, off Key Wgo, Florida, was established in-1960, the first and one of-the most beautiful underwater reserves in.-the w,orld. Yet.within only 12 years, substantial sections,of coral reef were dying fram excessive sewage and industrial wastes, as well as from turbidity.caused by dredging ... Strict control over dredging and 2 other activities is needed now in a buffer zone upstream.of the proposed,: Sanctuary to control the quality of. water going into the park. The reef is. only the most.visible part of a biotic and physiochernical. continuum- All parts must be healthy or the reef will die. Reccmmndations 1. An effective enfor cement system must be developed, with adequate funding and heavy fines. Many persons in the area make their living fricin activities which Will be prohibited in'.the sanctuary@and-,small fines will not deter them. 2. An. active, research program should, be funded to monitor the sanctuary and 'to further document the need for expansion of the controlled area. 3. A strong advisory group with advise and consent power over sanctuary regulations. Representation should be included frcin all groups concerned with the coral reef ecosystem. Groups which ccne to mind are coral reef biologists, conrercial and sport fishermen, local dive boat operators, and enforcement officials. 2. Allen, R., 1975. Marine parks: the Cinderella of conservation. New Scientist, 14 August. p.366-369. 4. The proposed sanctuary should be managed as a "Wilderness",area,' not as a "Multiple-use" area. The South Florida coral reef tract is an unusual and delicate ecosystem. The sanctuary should try to preserve a section of it in as natural a state as possible. Such areas are needed as reservoirs of genetic diversity and as control areas against which to measure man's impact on the environment. Today extracts of Caribbean reef coral show great promise in developing a "morning after" contraceptive and a Red Sea reef fish is yielding a 100% effective shark repellant. If representative samples of all ecosystems are not preserved in their natural state they and their benefits to mankind will be lost forever. Sincerely, Walter P. Stepien, Jr. M.S. Fisheries- University of Miami Associate Member- American Institute of Fishery Research Biologists J. D. student- Ocean and Coastal Law Program, University of Miami School of Law UNIVERSITY OF MIA MI CORAL GABLES, FLORIDA 33124 SCHOOL OF LAW P. 0. BOX 248087 September 16, 1975 Dr. Robert Kifer Marine Sanctuary Coordinator Office of Coastal Zone Management NOAA 11400 Rockville Pike - Rockville, Maryland 20852 Dear Dr. Kifer: In reviewing your Environmental Impact Statement for the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary I was deeply im- pressed not only by its thoroughness but by its detailed description of unique coral formations and related fauna and flora located therein. I. Salient Features of Environmenta 1 Impact Statement A. Project Description The area nominated as a recreational and esthetic marine sanctuary specifically excludes the State of Florida John Penne- kamp Coral Reef Park, but embraces a marine area adjacent thereto beginning at@the three-mile territorial limit and extending sea- ward to the 300 foot isobath. Included in the nominated area, however, is the Key Largo Coral Reef Preserve established March 17, 1960, by President Dwight D. Eisenhower under provisions contained in the Federal Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. B. Proposed Management of Nominated Area Administration of the marine sanctuaryis reposed in the State of Florida, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks pursuant to an agreement between the Governor of the State of Florida and Administrator of the..National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). C. Proposed Rules and Regulations These include 14 individual categories that deal with such prohibited activities as (1) Removal and Destruction of Natural A private, independent, international university An equal opportunity employer Dr. Robert Kifer 2 Sept. 16, 1975 Features; (2) Dredging, Filling, Excavation and Building Activi- tiesa.nd (3) Refuse and Polluting Substances, but limited exer- cise of such recreational pursuits as (6) Fishing, (7) Skin Diving, (8) Operation of Water Craft and (9) Photography. Others pertain to (11) Explosives and Dangerous Weapons, (12) Closing of the Marine Sanctuary, (13) Report of Accidents and (14) Dis- orderly Conduct. (See pp 4 and 5 of Statement.) D. Implementation of Rules and Regulations The Statement declares that"implementation and administra- tion of governing rules and regulations for the marine sanctuary will be by the State of Florida, acting in its role as NOAA's contract manager; and that pursuant to 14 U.S.C., Sec. 89 the U.S. Coast Guard shall have the responsibility for surveillance and enforcement." (See p 12 of Statement.) II. Suggested Policies withRespect to Administration and Enforcement A. The Statement further declares that "any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States who violates any of the provisions of the governing regulations pursuant to Title III of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-532) will be liable to a civil penalty of not more than @50,000 for each such violation to be assessed by the Administrator. Each day of a continuing violation would constitute a separate viola- tion." Also, "A vessel used in violation of a regulation promul- gated herein would be liable for any civil penalty assessed for such violation and could be proceeded in the appropriate District Court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof." (See p 12 of Statement.) Since these violations and prohibitions are so broad in scope, many instances of which may be factually insignificant, it is evident that enforcement policies and procedures be established that will allow the Administrator of the sanctuary to properly assess civil penalties commensurate with the character and extent- ---------- EF ------ in f _r--- --ot e - on.-- B. Enforcement Recommendations. 1. While impleme ntation of governing rules and regu- lations of the marine sanctuary is by agreement reposed in the State of Florida "acting in its role as contract manager" responsibility for Dr. Robert Kifer 3 Sept. 16, 1975 surveillance and enforcement is assigned to the U.S. Coast Guard. 2. This assignment is evidently made necessary by a provision in the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (14 U.S.C., Sec. 89), which statute vests sole ju- risdiction over these lands in the U.S. Government. 3. To facilitate enforcement of governing rules and regulations it is urged that a hearing officer be appointed by the Sanctuary Coordinator who will h'a-'v-e'-'EF6-r6s-p6ii-s-if-i-li-ty of deterRi@iI@S_:@he nat_ure __zi_n_d@i:R_ten-E__of the infraction and assess such pen- alty deemed appropriate under the circumstances. 4. Such hearing officer need not be a member of the legal profession. For the protection and better- ment of the Sanctuary it is preferable that he be enerally versed in scientific and marine matters. 5. All infractions of governing rules and regulations brought to the attention of the hearing officer are - sublect to review of the Coordinator; provided that written application for such review is made in 3.0- (thirty) days-. 6. Where major violations are involved, however, such as taking of fish by commercial vessels; extensive removal or debasement of coral formations and other natural features; introduction of poisons and other prohibited substances; etc., for which a. penalty of $5,000 (five thousand dollars) or more has been as- sesse judicial review by a U.S. District Court of competent juris- Trusting that these recommendations will be given due con- sideration, I remain Sincerely yours, CO, Dorian Cowan Research Associate DC:by Ocean and Coastal Law Program UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI ORAL GABLES, FLORIDA 33124 SCHOOL OF LAW P. 0. BOX 248087 September.24, 1975 Dr. :,Iobert Kifer Mari.ae Sanctuary Coordinator Should All Bottom Fishing in Nominated Area be Prohibite&? 1. Though not identical in all respects the proposed rules and regulations set forth in the Environment Impact Statement of August, 1975, generally adhere to those recommended by Harmon W. Shields, Executive Director Department of Natural Resources of the State of Florida. (See communication of Jan. 23, 1975, ad- dressed to you as Marine Sanctuary Coordinator.) 2. Rule #6 of the proposed regulations, which pertains exclu- sively to fishing, (see p. 7 of Impact Statement) is a particu- larly interesting example of following Florida's recommendations. Though sport and commercial fishing are specifically prohibited, it further states: "The taking of crawfish, spiny lobster and stone crab with traps for commercial purposes in accordance with the fishing laws of the State of Florida Depart- ment of Natural Resourc3s is allowed. All trap floats shall be marked with flags at all times. All traps must be removed from the waters of the marine Sanctuary during the closed season A private, independent, international university An equal opportunity employer ma 3. It should be mentioned, however, that the Impact Statement recognizes the possibleneed for adoption of different regula- tions. "This would involve either permitting, in the judgment of the nominators, activities that would stress the coral ecosystems or preclude uses not considered injurious. (p. 14 of Statement) 4. One such option, of course, is to preclude all bottom fish- ing. This, as explained on p. 15, would have a direct impact on thos.e who fish forlobster, crawfish and stone crab. "Such fishermen would need to travel a much farther distance to set their traps. It is possible that total protection of the species is part of their ';,habitat and would,result in a greater abundance in the unprotected areas. This option would preclude the possibility of damage to the corals by the pots." 5. We are in full agreement with the substance of these obser- vations and hold the opinion that the governing rules and.regula- tions be revised to prohibit all bottom fishing in the nominated area. There is little question that lobster, crawfish and stone crab are in diminishing supply in adjacent unprotected waters .and such measure would aid materially in the replenishment of these species. Needless to say it would also preclude the possibility of damage to corals and other natural features from submergence of traps and related equipment. Dorian Cowan Research Associate, Ocean and Coastal Law Program September 12, 1975 Senator Richard Stone ,Suite 200 B 2639 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL 32303 Dear Senator Stone: This is in reply to your correspondence of September 9, 1975, con- cerning the "Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary". After reading the proposal and giving it some afterthought, I feel such would be of bene- fit to the vast proportion of the electorate and citizenry. I fully realize some, particularly those in the land fill industry or those in the collection and sale,of shells or coral, might feel it is an in- fringement on their right to free enterprise, however, ultimately it would benefit all in assuring the non-depletion of our natural resour- ces. While the proposal allows for bottom fishing and crawfish pots these might later be restricted and such would allow for a breeding and maturity of those species which could then swim to non-restricted waters where they could be taken by sportsmen and commercial fisher- men alike. It is the quality of life which must be preserved and such is best found in a rational control of one's environment between the extremes of free enterprise and conservation. Thank you for the confidence you have placed in my opinion and if I can be of further help, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Isadore Weintraub William J. Loring 500 Gronnel St. Key West, Fl. 33040 September 26, 1975 Director Office of Coastal Zone Management NOAA 3300 Whitehaven St. N.W. Washington, DC 20235 Dear Sir As a property owner in Monroe County, 6th Key West and Upper Keys, I request that you favorably consider the proposal to set aside the land and water adjacent to Pennekamp State Park for use as a National Marine Sanctuary. There is little enough space left to natural beauty and estuarine productivity to warrant the risk of more ----- and fill operations. Please help save what is left of the Floriday Keys. Sincerelyl, -- --- Sept 26, ---- Director Office of Coastal Zone Management NOAA 3300 Whitehaven St. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Sir: As a land owner in Monroe County Florida, I want to urge you to support the proposed sanctuary adjacent to Pennekamp Sate Park. Much of our beautiful land and water in the Keys have been ruined by -------- and ------- operations. Let us keep what little natural beauty that is left. Sincerely, --- ------ (over) Sept 26, 1975 Director Office of Coastal Zone Management NOAA 3300 Whitehaven St. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Sir: As a land owner in Monroe County, Florida, I want to urge you to support the proposed sanctuary adjacent to Pennekamp State Park. Much of our beautiful land and water in the Keys have been ruined by -------- and --lling operations. Let us keep what little natural beauty that is left. Sincerely, --- ------ (over) UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI Dorothy H. and Lewis Rosenstiel SCHOOL OF MARINE AND ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE 10 RICKENBACKER CAUSEWAY MIAMI, FLOITDA 33149 15 September 19';5 (305) 350-7211 Cable: UOFMIAMI Dr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary Office of Environmental Affairs U. S. Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Sia, Thanks for the opportunity to comment upon the draft statement on the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary. As you may know, I first proposed the Key Largo Coral Reef Preserve, worked hard to make it a reality, and wrote, in draft form the original regulations for its policing. At the time we established the boundaries-we did not foresee that coral collectors and spear fishermen could violate the .regulations by anchoring offshore of the 10 fathom contour and swimming into park waters. I have read the proposed legislation and am in full accord with it. I regret, however, that the wider coverage was not accepted. The Biscayne National Monument to the northward is plagued by theosame troubles as the Key Largo Coral Reef Preserve. The inclusion of the-Monument would have harmed no legitimate interests and would have helped in the safe- guarding of its resources. In the original proposal drafted by Mr. Dennis O'Connor I haa specifically requested that the hiatus between the Key Largo Coral Reef Preserve and the Monument be included as its omission endangers both areas at their respective ends. on page 14 of the statement it says that the reason for. leaving this hiatus out is because it contains a ship channel and also makes for easier boundary marking. Neither of these statements is true. The hiatus contains a small boat channel but I can assure you that no ship, in any sense of the woral...-c-arl pass through this channel. The continuation of the boundary line northeastward along the Monument would leave no doubt that the waters of the hiatus were included and would not leave doubts as to limits. I believe the omission of these northward areas will orove to be a serious error of judgement. An Equal Opportunity Employer A private, independent, international university The follov.,ing are a few specific comments: 1. p. 6-3,a.-The last wording of the final sentence can be .interpreted that all of the above specifically stated substances are prohibited only if they include the discharge of human sewage. This could be corrected by deleting the words "which shall include" and inserting a comma after substances and the word "includingli. 2. p. 7-7,a Skin divers cannot cross over the higher part of Largo Dry Rocks, especially at low water, without touching or standing on coral formations. However, the top of the Dry Rocks is not living coral and would not be harmed by contact. I suggest changing the wording from "stand on coral formations" to "staod on living..coral". 3. p. 8-8,c. The problem concernin@j anchor damage has long been of deep concern. Few small boat operators are familiar with proper anchoring techniques. The last sentence should be changed to not to drag into the coral formations". Anchors do not drift at least in my experience. f@rankly, I would permit no private anchoring around major coral areas but have planted moorings which the boats would be forced to use. This would both prevent coral damage and, within limits, control the numbers of persons on a given locality at a given time. 4. p. 15-1ts parggraph. I xtrongly object to the possibility of excluding bottog -fishing when and where it does not., hz�rm EN& diFFs. It was the promise of permitting this type of fishing that saved us from public opposition when the park areas were originally proposed. I can see no valid biological reason for prohibiting it now. 5. D.15-2nd paragraph. The option on permitting spearfishing should not even remotely be considered. 6. p. 15-3rd paragraph. I had hoped that the possibility of excluding net fishing would not arise. The controversy between sport and commercial net fishing is psychological and sociological, not biological. No net fisherman would dream of endangering several thousands of dollars worth 0 of webbing by setting where the nets might come in contact with razor sharp coral formations. I urge that this option be expunged. I think that you and your staff have done an excellent job in preparing this draft statement. My only regret is that it does not cover the larger area originally proposed. Is it too late to do so? I hope to be at the hearing in the keys on September 30. Its been a long time since we last met. I still have fond memories of the Compleat Angler in Bimini! With best wishes Sincerely, A @- @4-@ Gilbert L. Voss UNIVERSITY OF -MIAMI Dorothy H. and Lewis Rosenstiel SCHOOL OF MARINE AND ATMOSPHERIC. SCIENCE 4600 RICKENBACKER CAUSEWAY MIAMI, FLORIDA 33149 @305) 350-7211 11 September 1975 Cable: UOFMIAMI Dr. Sidney R. Galler Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Affairs Office of Environmental Affairs U. S. Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Dr. Galler: I appreciate the opportunity to review the draft environmental impact statement for the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary. I feel very strongly that the establishment of such a sanctuary is long overdue. I have two comments on the draft impact statement. The use of the term, 11 ship channel" on page 14,-in the paragraph headed Larger Boundaries, is misleading. The channel in question is not in fac a ship channel, but rather a shallow ch@7n_nel navi able by small craft only.. The second comment pertains to the proposed boundaries of the sanctuary. I feel that the n9rthern boundar of the sanctuary Should at least coincid with the southern boundary of the Biscavne National Monument. This northern extension would-merge the Biscayne@N@tional Monument, the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary, and the John Pennecamp.Coral Reef State Park into one large preserve. To perpetuate an uncontrolled corridor between these conservation areas is to invite continuing attempts to dredge a.deep channel into south Biscayne Bay. Such development, I feel, would be disastrous to the ecology of both the Bay and the-Florida.reef tract. Yours,sincerely, jc---Staiger Research Associate Professor Division of Biology and Living Resources JCS:Jms An Equal Opportunity Employer A private, independent, international university rM America Ww yologists 3 OF A 24 September 1975 Dr. Robert Kifer Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Dr. Kifer: I am writing in regard to the proposed Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary on behalf of the Committee on Environmental Quality of the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists. This is a very fine and, perhaps, long over- due proposal which we hope will become reality in the near future. The impact that this sanctuary would have on the environment is obviously beneficial. Three questions have arisen with regard to the draft environ- mental impact statement on this proposed marine sanctuary. On page 7, the term "tropical fishes" is used. This should definitely BTe clarified as to what is mea__n_t__.__I would assume that tropical fishes as used here refers to fishes within the proposed sanctuary area that are of no sport or food value and would include brightly-colored reef fishes that would be suitable for use as aquarium fishes. Again on page 7, first paragraph, third line down, reference is made to allowing the use of "nets for the taking of surface and midwater fishes ... 11 we uestion the adviseability-of-thiq as (1) nets are far more effectiv-e in removi _Tjftd@_r@ of fishes than are both hook and line fishing and spearfishing, and (2) the use of nets, particularly nets operated in mid- ni waters, around stands of coral does provide the potential for direct damage to corals as well as to the nets. Furthermore, what kinds of nets might j)_e_ajj_oxe_d? For example, would hand nets for collecting reef fishes be included? Dr. Robert Kifer 24 September 1975 Page 2 On pa 1� es 14 and 15, caution is urged with regard to "modifica- tions * Perhaps the statement on Different Regulations needs strengthening and/or greater clarification. For example,.if this is to be truly a sanctuary, one would not permit the removal of plankton-picking fishes (which are reef dwellers) by nets hut one could perrait the tak ne of sport or foQd, fishes by hook and line,. Finally, I personally regret that I will not be able to attend the public hearing on 30 September in Key Largo, but my teaching duties will prevent this. Please be assured, however, that this'pro'posa'l has the support of this'Committee and, I suspect; the entire membership of the American Society of Ichthyol6gists and Herpetologists. Sincerely, all Walter R. Courtenay, Jr., Ph.D. Chairman Committee on Environmental Quality cc: Dr. James W. Atz Dr. Aruce B. Collette WRC:bjr V@T j 7 T@ 7 UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI Dorothy H. and Lewis Ro@enstiel SCHOOL OF MARINE AND ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE '305, 35C-7211 September 24, 1975 Dr. Robert R. Kif er Marine Sanctuary Coordinator Office of Environmental Affairs U. S. Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Dr. Kif er: U. The delay in returning my comments on the Draft E.I.S. for the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary is due to my return from vacation this past week, not a lack of interest in the proposal. Northern Card Sound is the area U in which I did my dissertation research, and at present I am a Co-Principal Investigator on a project entitled "Determination of the primary food sources utilized by the benthic, epibenthic and cryptic fauna in a coastal lagoon in southeast Florida" funded by ERDA. The recent Supreme Court decision limiting the coastal waters of Florida to three miles caused concern about the future of the fringing reefs of Pennekamp State Park. Placing of the reefs under the aegis of this Federal Government is a necessity if these areas are to be maintained in their present 13 condition. a From my observations, Carysfort Reef is one of the finest shallow reefs to be found in western Atlantic. It compares favorably with those found in the na Bahamas and Grand Cayman. New growth of Acropora cervicornis and A. palmata is spreading and the fish population is high. Molasses Reef is not -as attractive based on its coral growth, but it is known for its diverse, abundant and unusual fish fauna. Unusual because it is possible to observe many shy inshore game fishes in a habitat with which they are not associated. Large snook, permit and tarpon were observed by me on a recent trip. Since most of the recreational and commercial uses occur in waters less than 100 feet I am curious about the reasons for the selection of the 300 foot isobath as the seaward boundary. Another question is raised by use of the term lobster and crawfish. I assume that "lobsters" refer to the slipper lobsters of the family Scyllaridae while crawfish are spiny lobsters, members of the family Palinuridae. Under Florida law only Panuhrus argus the spiny lobster is protected while the two other species of the genus Panuilrus, gurmaTmtis--an-d 'P@@aevica jda ar @ not. An Equal Opportunity Employer A private, independent, international university Page Two The recent events in this lobster fishery and the lack of agreement between the Bahamas and the U.S. have, in my opinion, changed the management goals of this fishery. The inability of the lobstermen to fish Bahamian waters has resulted in a proliferation of the traps along the Florida coast. We do not have sufficient data to state that the resource is overfished, but certainly the eff ort has increased this year., Our knowledge of the resource is also limited. Life history, age and growth, the area from which the local stocks are recruited require extensive study. These factors are mentioned to give some background for the recommendation. that commerciaL trapping be excluded tram the sanctuary and that only a limited sports fishery De permitted. A closer control 'over anchorage areas would prevent the destruction of coral formations by careless, boaters. Anchorage areas should be marked by buoys particularly in heavily used areas such as Molasses Reef, Caryslort Reef and the "Christ of the Deep" statue. Many local scientists have a personal interest in the management of this system, unique in continental U. S. watersi It is my suggestion that-provision for participation by the scientific community be included in @.rnanagernent of the sanctuary. in addition, funding should be provided for research on the fit her y, resources, the understanding of coral reef ecosystems and the socio- economic-. impact of thi- -proposidd--sa-nciuary an d t'Ke__'_91s -cayn-eNati-on-al Monument on the Southi6ast Florida comm"unity. strongly support the plan. for the. Key. r Largo. Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary, but adequate provisions must be made for cooperation with the State of Florida on policing of the inshore areas. Expansion of Coast Guard facilities to monitor the use of the sanctuary and enforce the recent directive prohibiting the taking of coral must also be provided. Thank you for thechance to air my views. Most sincerely, Iver M. Brook Division of Biology and Living Resources IMB/sm UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI Dorothy H. and Lewis Rosenstiel DEPT OF MARINE AND ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE 4600 RICKENBACKER CAUSEW MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33149 (305) 3-0-7211 Cable: UOFMIAMI Sept. 12, 1975 Dear Dr. Galler: The draft environmental impact statement concerning the Key Largo Coral Roof Marine Sanctuary appears to be adequately comprehensive and carefully assembled. It is,however, unfortunate that all corals, gorgonians, non-commercial sponges, and other attached organisms cannot be fully protected throughout all of our coastal waters. This would perhaps, preclude the need and ex- pense for so many underwater parks, sanctuaries, monuments, ate, I am enclosing copies of pages 11 -14, and 18 of Appendix B in the draft, There are corrections on these pages, some of which are just corrections or updatings of scientific names* I am part- icularly disturbed by the statement on page 11 concerning "my con- clusions" on Thalassia productivity. It also seems incredible that a sponge, extinct since 1838, could be considered among the common sponges of the monument area (p.12); and,contrary to the statement on page 18, there are no luxuriant growths of coral and no Acropora palmata at Pacific Light. Sincerely yours, Robert C. Work Research Associate, BLR Basic Plant and Animal Communities The plant and animal communities of the Biscayne National Monument area are extremely rich and varied. The following discussion is limit- ed to the dominant communities of the area. To list the species of plants and animals found in each community would be superfluous in view of the extended list of animals and plants found in the last section of this report. To use the list of animals and plants for community or ecological purposes, one should refer to the key to the zonations and ecological habitats given at the first of the list. In the following discussions the general code number from the extended list has been put in parentheses after the headings in order that the interested reader my refer easily to these lists. The plant and animal communitie of the marine environment within the monument waters have been described in part by Stephenson and Steph- enson (1950) and Voss and Voss (1955), and for details of many of these communities, these papers should be consulted. Stephenson and Stephenson worked partly within the monument area and there are many direct refer- ences to Elliott Key and Old Rhodes Key. Voss and Voss did their report upon the nearby Soldier Key, separated from the Biscayne Monument waters by a few miles of flats and coral areas. These papers deal with the intertidal area, the reef flat and the reef tract itself. For a com- prehensive review of the infauna bottom communities of the mid-portion of the bay, the papers by H. Moore and his colleagues should be consulted (McNulty, J. Kneeland, Robert C. Work, and Hilary B. Moore, 1962). These community assemblages should be found in the level bottom on the bay side of the monument. 1. Thalassia community (Code 3). Within the bay, the most important community is that of the turtle gras. The turtle grass community is composed of turtle grass (Thalasia testudinum), the manate grass (Syringodium filiforme) and Diplanthera wrightii. These grasses form dense mats on the bottom, their rhizomes forming a thick mass penetrating the bottom for eighten inches or moew. Their leaves greatly increase the available surface for the attachment of various species of filamentous algae (Humm, 1984) diatoms, foraminifera, and various bivalve mollusks. The long leaves also function as a sedi- ment trap and assist thus in maintaining water clarity. D. Moore and Work (unpublished) made a detailed study of th Thalassia community over a three year period and concluded that is supported (the richest assemb- lage in species and number of individuals, of any known marine commun- ity.) The productivity of this community is very high (see Jones, 1968) and it is the known nursery ground for the early stages of the commer- cial shrimps of the genus Penaeus, and the crawfish, Panulirus, as well as many species of shore fishes. The main predator is the sea urchin, Lytechinus variegatus, and certain of the parrot fishes in the vicinity of lagoon patch reefs. On the borders of the Thalassia community, sever- al alagae make inroads: Penicillus, Halimeda and Laurencia. - 11 - Much of the deeper portion of the bay and the eastern shore against the keys is composed of a soft, calcium carbonate sediment overlaying the rock substrate. This calcium sand is in places very shallow and the whole region must be classed as hard bottom. The most conspicuous growth forms in this region are the various sponges, especially (Himmiospongia gossypina, extinct since 1938, disease) H. lachne, Spongia barbara, S. cheiris, and S. graminia, (all commercial sponges), the loggerhead sponge, Spheciospongia vesparia, and the vase sponge Ircinia campana; the corals, Porite porite, Siderastrea siderea, S. radians and Solenastrea hyades, and the sea feathers of the genus Plexaurella and Pterogorgia anceps. This is not an area of high productivity and most of the enrichment is gained from the adjacent Thalassia beds and man- grove fringe. A considerable number of organisms live within the canals of the sponges varying in size from the large worm Eunice spongicola to thousands of snapping shrimp. The nature of these relationships has not as yet been studies. This is important in the life hist- ories of the crawfish Panulirus and is one of the major habitats for the stone crab, Menippe mercenaria. 3. Mangrove community (Code 8) Next to the Thalassia community, this is one of the most import- ant areas in tropical waters due to 1) its stabilization of the shore line, 2) filtering of land runoff and 3) the contribution to the organic nutrients through its leaf fall and assaciated organisms. This com- munity is characterized by the three mangroves: red manrove (Rhizophora mangle), black mangrove (Avicennia nitida) and the white mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa). Associated with these but more landward is the buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus). The plant communities of this area have been described by J. H. Davis (1940, 1942) and Craighead (1964) has discussed their relationship to land building and the effect on them of hurricanes. On the bay side of the keys, the mangroves attain their maximum development in the monument. The most conspicuous organisms related to the mangrove community are those attached to the mangrove root props, trunks and pneumatophores. These often double the diameter of the root props themselves. These consist of the alga Bostrychia, numerous hydroids, such as Lytocarpus philippinus, encrusting sponges, coon or mangrove oy- sters Crassostrea, the pearl oyster Pintada imb------ , several species of barnacles, the snails LIttorina a-gulifera and Tectarius muzicatus, several species of small climbing crabs of the genus Pa------psus, the sea roach LIgia baudiniana and occasional see urchins. Beneath the mangroves in the intertidal zone or just above can be found the gastropods Melampus, Detracia, and Truncatella and hunting in this area but living above the high tide mark, the large land crabs Ucides, Cardisoma and Gecareinus. - 12 - 4. The supralittoral and intertidal. The east side of the keys is mainly rocky in the intertidal and has been well studies in regards to its ecological zonations by Stephenson and Stephenson (1950) and Voss and Voss (1955). The Stephensons divided this region into the upper platofrm (from th line of land vegetation to the sea edge (?)), and the lower platform which extended form this out to the reef flat. These area were further subdivided into color zones based upon exposure, weathering, algal mats and other factors. From the land out, these were -- upper platform (white, grey, black and yellow); lower platform (no color zones given). Voss and Voss in their study of Soldier Key did not use this color zonation but divided the intertidal into upper platform, platform face, and lower platform, features that can be seen easily in most seaward area in the monument. Upper plaform. White zone. -- This is the actual meeting place of the land and sea. It is bleached white by salt spray and no fully marine animals or marine plants live in it. Animals present are: the hermit Coenomita, the isop Ligia, two craps Sesarma and Cyclograpsus, and the snails Tectarius, Truncatella and Detracia. Grey zone. -- This lies between the white and the black zones. Pla are: Sesuvium, Batis, Salicornia and others. The animals are: Littori ziczac, Tectarius muricatus and Nodilittopina Tulier, Echininums nodulosus, Nerit pelronta and N. vericolor (all gastropods), and the aforementioned era as well as the other organisms metioned above. Black zone. -- This zone is wetted at high water spring. Its black color is derived from the coloring effects of certain blue-gree algae Entophysalis and Brachytrichia, and the dry mats of the alga Bostrychia Animals in this zone are most of those mentioned above with the addition of Planaxis lineatus, a snail and the common snail Batillaria nimima which may occur in vast mats. Platform face (yellow zone) (Code 2). The platform face is occupied by the yellow zone which is the true intertidal zone of the inshore. The characteristic color is give by the wet mats of algae, primarily such froms as Anadyomene stellate, Cladophoropsis membranacea, Catanella repens, Centroceral clavulatum Ceramium fastigiatum, Polysiphonia howei. Higher up, Bostrychia and Valonia are dominant. All of these alge form dense mats that offer refuge to numerous small animals. The animals within the yellow zone are too numerous to list here but include numerous specimens of the barnacles Chthamalus stellatus and Tetractlita squamosa, the vermetid mollusk Spiroglyphus, the false limpe Siphonaria pectinata and alternate, various fissurellids, especially Diadora listeri, the snails Batillaria minima, Thais rustica, the true limpet Acmaea and the slug Onchidella floridanum. The - 13 - large chiton, Acanthopleura granulata, is common along with the mussel Brachydontes exustus and the oysters Isognomon alata and I-bicolor Numberous other animals are found in this zone. They are listed in the species list. 5. Shallow water. Lower platform (Code 2) The lower platform is difficult to separate from the so-called reef flat. It begins at the bottom of the platform face. It is often distinguished by the somewhat steeper slope, very rough eroded stone floor, and the presence of most of the area of the yellowish-green carpet of Laurencia papillosa and associated green and red algae. Dom- inant in many places in holes in the rock is the sea urchin Echinometra lucunter, the mussels Barbatia and A. imbricata. Several anemones are found here, Phymanthus crucifer, Bartholomea annulata and Condylactis gigantea. Many species of crabs are found under rocks in this area. For a more complete listing, see the species list. Reef flat (Code 5, 9, 10) This is a general term that takes in the entire area east of the keys except the reef itself. Distinct communities have not bee recog- nized in that area except for the extensive Thalassia community already mentioned, and the lagoon patch reefs and theouter reef. These will be treated separately. 6. Lagoon patch reef (Code 7). One of the most prominent features found within the Hawk Channed is the lagoon patch reef. These are found around Bache Shoal, Margot Fish Shoal, and back of Triumph Reef, Long Reeb and Ajax Reef. These reefs have been studied in detail by Voss and Bayer (1968), Jones (1963), and Ebbs (1966). Commonly, the patch reef is a structure formed of living masses of coral heads rising directly from the bottom in 10-20 feet of water. They hav nearly perpendicular sides and rise to within two or three feet of the surface. The bottom around them is usually flat and covered with Thalessia except for a ring, several yards wide, of clear sand caused by the grazing of parrot fishes. The patch reefs in the monument area range in size from individual coral heads to mases several hundred feed across. The mass of the reef is made up of corals, primarily Diploria, Eusmilia, Isophyllia, Montastrea, Porites and Siderastrea, with associ- ated Acropora cervicornis, Agaricia, Dichocoenia, and others. These corals are usually compaacted and often filled in between with coral rubble forming a reef top on which grow a profusion of sea feathers, whips and fans, of which the genera Eunicea, Muricea, Plexaura, - 14 - Sponges and alcyonarians are fcund widespread over much of the monument area. Dense stands occur in the cuts between the islands, where swift currents flow. Sparse growths are found around the islands themselves and throughout the Bay as well. Sponges and alcyonarianis, especially the latter, are also important components of the coral patches in the zone to the east of the islands; in this community they are in- cluded in the symbol for corals, and are not marked separately. Patches of the limestone base emerge as bare rocks in some regions, primarily in the surf zone around the islands. In addition to support- ing a distinct community, these regions are noteworthy because the rock is greatly eroded and pitted by solution, forming a very sharp, hard substrate that should be avoided by waders and boaters. Although some corals (e.g., Porites, Manicina, and Siderastrea are scattered throughou t the monument area, large coral patches are found in only in two zones. Seaward of the dense Thalassia zone to the east of the islands is an area of dense but discrete coral patch reefs. In addition to large coral heads, these patch reefs also include dense growths of alcyonarians and.'sponges. Some of the patches, especially in the.Margot,Fish Shoals, contain large patches of Acropora cervicornis, but-this is not really widespread. The patch reefs are scattered through@ out a matrix of rather dense Thalassia; they do not form a solid bottom cover.@ .A zone of outer reefs is located still farther to the east. This is largely an area of dead reefs (indicated by coral rubble) although there is sorae living'coral in this region. Only in the southern end of the ok outer reef around.Pacific Light -- do large coral prima.rily occur. - (IM/ei J /M IT)a r_ Xcy-17,--,-eq1 S 7-e e Finally, in many regions around the islands and along the mainland, mangroves extend for varying distances into the water. This is a dis- tinctive community subject to rather sharp delineation and therefore portrayed accurately on the chart. Considering all'of the zones, the following can be summarized: generally, proceeding from the shore (either mainland or islands) seaward, one passes from either mangroves or bare rocky coast successively through an algal zone, a sparse alcyonarian-sponge zone, and a marine grass zone. The relative extents of these zones are influenced at least partially by depth, bottom type, and salinity. Finally, east of the islands, a coral patch reef zone, a sand patch zone, and a barrier reef coral rubble zone are encountered. The dominant feature of the Bay itself is the large central sand zone with scattered Thalassia, alcyonarians, and sponges. The most prominent features outside the Bay are the dense beds of Thalassia and secondarily the coral patch zone. 18 SEA TRAIL MOTEL UNDERWATER GUIDE - REEF TRIPS - PHOTOGRAPHY - CERTIFIED SKIN & SCUBA INSTRUCTION P.O. BOX 91 ROUTE 1, KEY LARGO, FLORIDA 33037 305-852-8001 Oct. 6, 1975 Office of Coastal Zone Mangaement 3300 White Haven Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Gentlemen: We are writing to you as suggested by Dr. Robert kifer, Program Manager of the Marine Santuary's Program, who represented NOAA at the town meeting in Key Largo Sept. 29th. First of all we would like to receive a copy of the Final Environmental Impact Statement when it is completed. Next we wouldl like to list our suggetions which we hope will be reviewed and incorporated into the final statement. 1. Put the diver flag down when divers are not in the water, whether you are traveling, anchored, at dock, or whatever. 2. When diving at the reefs, anchor the boat on either side of the reef, in the sand. Most of the reefs are only about 1000 yards wide. Divers may swim to the reefs rather than achor on them. We have affirmative proof that anchoring on the coral tears, breaks and stresses the coral. This damage allowed to continue would certainly eventually kill the reefs. 3. Make it mandatory that dive trips must have an underwater guide in the water with the people to keep them together and keep them from stressing the coral. MOst people including thoes in private or rental boats do not know how britle the coral is an how easily it can be broken or stressed. 4. No boats should be allowed out in rough weather. Many boaters pay no attention to the Coast Guard small craft warning. If winds are 14 knots or more, dive trips and boat retals or what- ever should be cancelled. Approximately 90% of the people cannot handle boating, diving, etc, in rough water and consequently smash against the coral, breaking and stressing it. Thank you for allowing us to voice our suggestions. We sincerely hope that they will be of value to you in your final decision making. Very truly yours, Eva and George Wielander Proprietors GAR'Y AJRSOUCIE STILL POND. R.F.D. NO. 1NORFOLK, CONNECTICUT 06058 16 October 1975 Office of Coastal Zone Xanagement National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Rockville, MD 20852 Gentlemen: RE: Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Key Largo Coral Reef Ifarine Sanctuary I fully support the draft EIS and the nomination of a portion of the coral reef complex off- Key Largo and the Florida Keys in general. In amplification, I should like to offer the following specific comments: 1) The most serious, and. in fact the only real, defect in the DEIS is the total absence of information concerning the procedure and timetable for review and commentary. It is not enough merely to comply with the public- participation sections of the law; it is necessary that federal agencies actively solicit public input and aid the public in itiaking it (see the Court of Appeals' so- called Storm King decision, 1965). 2) Preserving the options for management, for enlarging the sanctuary, and for nominating other coral reef.sanctuaries in the future are especially important, and I am happy that OCZM/NOAA included these options. a) I suggest that OCZI@I/NOAA solicit from Congress an appropriation to study other areas of the Keyst coral reef and to establish some sort of monitoring system so that future endangerment or degradation of the coral reef complex outside the sanctuary can be detected as early as possible and so that nomination in the future of some other tract might not go by the boards purely out of ignorance. .;b) The agreement between the federal government and the State of Florida for administration and management of' the sanctuary by the latter should contain specific reverter provisions so that both parties and the general public shall be informed as to the conditions under which the people of the United States and their agents are turning over to the people of Florida'and their agents the stewardship of property and resources owned by all tne people of,the United States. c) The reefs and other marine environments adjacent to the Harquesas and the Dry Tortugas should be studied at an early date so that options for management, administration, use, and preservation can be developed in. a timely manner. As the other islands of' the United States wtiicn. are more accessible become bridged, roaded, developed, and thereby degraded as island environments, these little known extensions of the Keys will become in- -_-jcreasiriglj important for tiaeir recreational, scien.tific, and.conservation potential. Again, let me state my endorsement and support of the draft EIS. And thank you f'or sending ine a copy and giving me an opportunity to comment on it. Sin.cer ly, PAGE 1 October 2, 1975 Nancy Hunt 484 N.E. 59 St. #B Miami, Fla. 33137 Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 White Haven St., N.W. PAGE 1 Washington, D.C. 20235 Gentlemen: I'm writing to you concerning the Draft Environmental Impact Statement proposed for the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary. I very rarely write letters to any government officials because it never seemed to do any good. The very men elected into their positions listen to the majority, and the majority is controlled by the love of money instead of conservation and preservation. The man who is capable of purchasing a large amount of "usless" and "nonproductive" wooded land to built condominiums is usually successful in going over the heads of the local folks who want the woods to remain intact. The same goes for the Key Largo coral reefs. The government officials in that locality will listen to the people who make their living from exploiting those reefs or else they won't get votes in the the next election. I was there,l at the haring, and saw this happening. I went there as a representative for New England Divers, Inc. which is in Miami. Many of the concerned citizens present at the hearing were there to stand up for their own personal, selfish interests such as diving and lobster fishing. The dive shops (a handful) feared a slack in business since divers would'nt want to visit a reef where they could'nt take anything. The fishermen, already suffering from lost investments, feared even more technicalities. Then a simple, long haired young man from an educated background stood up for his love of the reefs and its inhabitants by putting all these selfish people back in their places and explaining in a calm and absolutely correct manner that the reefs will die soon if something is not done. He siad everything I wanted to say, and so well that I began to weep. And then, the whole room full of bickering people became one for this lover of the ocean was darn right about everything he said. PAGE 2 Now, I know you will recieve hundreds of letters about why someone, wants this or that done about the reefs. You'll hear many sugestions and different points of views including my own The decision lies in your hands, possibly without ever experiencing the beauty involved in scuba diving. I've only been artified for a couple of years in the field of scuba diving. Yet I have, in these few years, seen the horrible facts of the death of many once beautiful reefs in the middle keys. A once brilliantly colored environment filled with all forms of life is now nothing but a mass of white formations, dead coral. A few tropical fish and lobsters live there, but only until someone takes them. This reef in particular is named L--- Key and it's dead on one side while strugling to survive on the other. All types of people who visit these reefs are all there to take something. A butterfly can't be beautiful in the clenched fist. I know his matter only concerns one proposed designation, but I want you fellas to know how serious this matter is while on the subject. Everybody wants to protect their own invetments and interests regarding the marine sanctuary which is a human natural desire. Personally, I feel a person spearfishing is earsier on the delicate balance of a reef than one fishing. He chooses his catch selectively, aims, and can hit, if good. Most spearfishermen are lucky to hit their prey. They he must, if smart, ------ to the boat with his catch, 1 fish, in order to avoid complications with baraccudas and sharks. Now, a person fishing his prey on a basis of whatever fish happens to bite the hook and often keeps what he catches, which is usually young, ignorant, in the protection of reefs, not ocean depths) little fish. Think of all the offspring that is denied life from ten little fish going home with the boad instead of one or more larger fish, caught by selection. I can't understand why the government thinks fishing by bait and hook is better than selective spearfishing except for 1) the majority catches fish by bait and hook and 2) the official would'nt get a vote if he said yes, I think spearfishing is more proper than other means of fishing, let's change some laws in order to protect our marine creatures. Anyway I propose that if people can't spearfish in this santuary they shouldn't be able to fish in any manner at all. Why can't this small Key Largo area, and I mean small because there is many miles of other reefs, be a complete, total, and true sanctuary; not just the proposed area, but Pennecamp as well. It would be the only reef in this continent that would be set aside to protect. PAGE 2 and preserve it's inhabitants, untouched by the selfish hands of our kind. There would be no lobster traps, no fishing, be it by net, trap, hook, or spearfin, and no taking of anything except those researches dedicated in learning more about our oceans. A true underwater laboratory in it's natural state. A place where one can visit to feed fish by hand, take pictures of everything pleasing as well as educational, and enjoy the beauty of a reef that has be protected from monetarial exploiters. Le me tell you, if this dream came true, Key Largo would be more famous than Disney World. While all the other reefs are taken over by man and dying more with each passing day, thousands would want to see and experience the beauty of a true reef, a free butterfly. These very men that raised all kind of care at that initial hearing would have so much business showing the reef(s) to others, they wouldn't need to. Of course, Key Largo would be unable to hole oodles of tourists without more hotels and the likes, but if they could stick together and pay attention, some building could be done without destroying what land and trees is there. I bet you didn't know that the millions of birds that fly internationally make Key Largo their resting point coming or going from their lengthy ocean flights. I'm getting carried away, I know, but I've wanted for so long to see a group of people like NOAA to finally start something because alone, I am nothing. I'm willing to work for this Key Largo preservation even though I'm not pat of it. In a way, I'm thankfult I'm not, casause the people who live there also earn a living there, and I refuse to exploit the ocean. I couldn't make a living preaching the preservation of coral reefs without someone's support, so with NOAA, maybe I'll make it. It's the city's government system I'm concerned about because it is the network that listens to the voting citizens, who are the expoiters. But, the only thing I can do is help you undertand how important this matter is for we all know life depend on our oceans. Without a nest of coral reef, life in the ocean can't grow strong with age. And Florida is the only state with our kind of coral reefs. Please help others to understand and join together in celebration of being the wealthiest of all men, those that are rich enough to leave this butterfly free for all to admire. Thank you for your time. Yours, Nancy Hunt STATE OF FLORIDA Department of Administration Division of State Planning 660 Apa---he- Parkway - IBM Building TALLAHASSEE 3230(904) 488-2401 November 17, 1975 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Zone Management Rockville, Maryland 20852 Dear Sir: Functioning as the state planning and development clearinghouse contemplated in U. S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-95, we have reviewed the following draft environmental impact statement: Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary SAI #76-0612E During our review we referred the environmental impact statement to the following agencies, which we identified interested: Depart- ment of Administration, Bureau of Land and Water Management; Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services; Department of Commerce; Department of Community Affairs; Department of Legal Affairs; Department of Natural Resources; Department of Environmental Regulation; Department of State; Department of Transportation; and Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Agencies were requested to review the statement and comment on possible effects that actions contemplated could have on matters of their concern. Letters of comment on the statement are enclosed from the Department of Administration, Bureau of Land and Water Management and Special Projects -Office; Department of Natural Resources; Department of State; Department of Legal Affairs; Department of Community Affairs; and Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. We have reviewed the draft statement and the state agency comments thereon. Based on our review, we find the proposal to be in conformance with state goals and policies. Specifically, Policy #29, "State of Florida Land Development Guide," DSP-BCP-16-75, "Maintain and enhance Florida's natural amenities, especially unique natural features." How- ever, we are disappointed on the overall quality of the draft statement and suggest a review of the guidelines for preparing an Environmental Impact Statement prior to preparing the final report. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration November 17, 1975 Page 2 In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality guidelines concerning statement on proposed federal actions affecting the environ- ment, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and U. S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-95, this letter, with attachments, should be appended to the final environmental impact state- ment on this project. Comments regarding this statement and project con- tained herein or attached hereto should be addressed in the statement. We request that you forward us copies of the final environmental impact statement prepared on this project. Sincer ly, 10 t #te , J @r_@@ R * G, i Acting Director RGWjr:kc Enclosures cc: Mr. John Bethea Mr. Charles Blair Mr. Bruce Burkley ivir. William Ravenall Mr. J. Landers Mr. W. N. Lofroos @Mr. Harmon Shields Mr. Eastern Tin Mr. E. J. Trombetta Mr. if. E. Wallace Mr. Robert Williams Mr. Walter Kolb S@n cer ly, it /R 4G Division of Technical Asistance A-95 COMMENTS Originator U.S. Department of Commerce Subject EIS Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary SAI# 76-0612E Reviewer James H. Sayes Date 10/21/75 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Staff has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed to establish the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary. We would support the proposal. We would point out that the EIS is certainly not of outstanding quality. If draft was submitted on a proposal which would have an adverse affect on the environment, it would not be approved. Perhaps a review should be made of the EIS requirements to further needed improvements. STATE OF FLORIDA Department of Administration Division of State Planning 660 Aplaa---- Parkway IBM Building TALLAHASSEE 32304 (904) 488-2371 TO: Mr. Williams Ravenell, Sec. Department of Community Affairs 2571 Ex. Center Circle East Tallahassee, Fla. 32301 FROM: Bereau of Intergovernmental Relations SUBJECT: SAI: 76-0612E Please review and comment to us on the above draft environmental impact statement, copy attached. In reviewing the statement, you should consider possible effects that actions econtemplated could have on matters of concern to your agency. If you feel that a conference is needed for discussion of the project or resolution of conflicts, or if you have questions concerning the statement please call Mr. Walt Kolb at (904) 488-2401. Please check the appropriate box below, attach any commments on your agency's stationary and return to ---- or telephone "no adverse comments" by the above due date. On that date, we intend to consider all review comments received and develop a state position on the project. In both telephone and written corres- pondence please refer to the above SAI number. Sincerely, Chief Bureau of Intergovernmental Relations Enclosure ******************************************************************************************** TO: Bureau of Intergovernmental Relations FROM: COMMUNITY AFFAIRS SUBJECT:---S Review and Comments NO COMMENTS Comments --- ---- Reviewing Agency: Signature: H. Achmertmann Date: 10/23/75 -----: Bureau Chief DIVISION 0, STATE Pi-Ayw46, STATE OF FLORIDA F-U-.,IU ()f . IntelF,womr,,,@; THE CAPITOL TALLAHASSEE 32304 5 1975 RECEIVED ISAI N BRUCE A. SMATHERS ROBERT WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR SECRETAR@ OF STATE October 31, 1975 DIVISION OF ARCHIVES. HISTORY. AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT 4204) 4U-1460 ':Nd REPLY REFER 70; Mr. E. E. Maroney, Chief Bureau of Intergovernmental Relations Division of State Planning 660 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Re: SAI 76-0612E: DEIS for Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary. Dear Mr Maroney:. Our agency has reviewed the Dra ft Environmental Impact Statement for this project for possible impact on archaeological,. historical, National Register or National Register eligible sites, and we have therfollowing comments. Although current files show no recorded sites within the project area the proposed marine sanctuary is.within the Bahamas. Channel, a major route for Spanish shipping during the-Spanish Colonial Period, and very likely contains historic shipwreck sites. However, because of the administrative nature of this project we do not anticipate,any effect upon cultural resources in the area and find the consideration of archaeological and historical resources outlined on page 6 of the Draft Environmental.Impact Statement to be adequate. Thank you for your interest in Florida's historical resources. If we can be of further service in this matter, please do not hesitate to call. Sincer ert iams State Historic Preservation Officer 'jin W. RW/Msh "P@ G@ure')u CO!!@TENT OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS OTI THE KEY LARS'O CANAL REEF MARINE SANCTUARY D-RAF117 ENVIRON"'IENTAL IMPACT STATE'NENT SA I jV0. Since the primary purpose for establishing the Sanctuary is to protect and preserve the coral and coral reef ecosystems and to insure the health and well being of the coral and associated flora and fauna, it appears wiser to amend the proposed regulations to prohibit bottom fishing within the sanctuary. The logic of this change is supported by the recitation on page 15 of the Draft Statement of the possible increased productivity in nonprotected areas due to the pr Io- tection in the Sanctuary. We agree that spear fishing should be prohibited in this area, as provided by the proposed regulations. Further, while not disagreeing with the continued allowance of net fishing in the Sanctuary, provision should be made for monitoring the use of r;ets and making the appropriate amendment to the regulations to prohibit such use should destruction of coral or coral reef occur. Other than the above comments, the Draft Statement meets the approval of this Department. We give our whole-, hearted support to this proposed Federal Action. 46 ISA STATE OF FLORIDA Department of Administration Division of State Planning 660 Apalachee Parkway - IBM Building TALLAHASSEE 32304 (904) 488-1115 September 16, 1975 Dr. Robert R. Kifer Marine Sanctuary Coordinator Office of EnvironmentAl.Affairs Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology United States Department of Commerce Washington, D. C. 20230 Dear Dr. Kifer: am,pleased to respond to your recent request for comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, "Key Largo Coral.Reef Marine Sanctuary." This proposed action is one which is highly desirable and of major importance to the State of Florida, as well as to the nation. The pro- tection of the fragile and irreplaceable coral ecosystems which this action will implement is long overdue. I enthu- siastically endorse this action except for the minor ex- ceptions noted below. It is my strong feeling that regulations for operat. ing the Sanctuary should preclude all bottom fishing. I find it inconsistent within the stated objectives of the DEIS: "to protect and conserve the coral and coral reef ecosystems, to regulate uses thereof to insure the health and well-being of the coral, and associated flora and fauna, and to make available the continual opportunity for the esthetic and recreational enjoyment which healthy reefs afford the American people," to allow activities such as bottom fishing and lobster and crab trapping which are known to be detrimental and alterative to the coral eco- system. If the goal of the sanctuary is to provide maximum protection to this ecosystem as well as to provide for Dr. Robert R. Kifer September 16, 1975 'Page Two esthetic and recreational opportunities, I do not feel that the economic benefits to be derived by a relatively few per- sons within the area should take precedence over the potential for maximum protection which may be provided the ecos@stem. Additionally, I feel that all net fishing within the proposed Sanctuary should be banned for the same reasons. I would also note that in the DEIS it is not stated that a proposed goai of 'the Sanctuary is to provide economic opportunities, destructive and alterative to the ecosystem, for the benefit of local com- mercial fishermen. Thank you for providing me the opportunity to comment F1 on this highly significant action. If you should desire further elaboration on any of my statements or views, or to participate in any of the-public formal activities involved in the imple- mentation of this proposed action, I am at your,service. U Sincerely, James I. Jones, Ph.D. Special Projects Officer Division of State Planning and Marine Science Advisor to the Governor na JIJ/bj ,rre STATE OF FLORIDA Department of Administration Division of State Planning 660 Apa-ach-- Parkway - IBM Building TALLAHASSEE 32304 (904) 488-4925 October 30, 1975 MEMORANDUM TO: Wayne Voigt FROM: Eastern Tin SUBJECT: SAI 76-0612E The Bureau of Land and Water Management has reviewed the draft EIS for the-Key Largo Coral Reef Mariner Sanctuary. The coral reefs of the Florida Reef Tract are a. valuable natural, resource of Florida and of the Nation. The value and the present stresses which. the reefs,are presently undergoing were described in the Final Report and Recommendations for the Proposed Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern., The regulations And restrictions which' would accompany the marine, sanctuary are compatible with the objectives ,outlined in. the, rule (Chapter 22F-8, F.A.C.) designating the Florida Keys, as an area of critical state concern and would provide for a greater degree of protection. We, therefore, would recommend that the proposed area desig- nated as a marine sanctuary. EWT/TFpk cc: Walter Kolb cc: Walter Kolb STATE OF FLORIDA Department of Administration Division of State Planning 660 Apalachee Parkway - IBM Building TALLAHASSEE 32304 (904) 488-2371 DATE: 10/10/75 DUE DATE: 10/04/75 To: Mr. Harmon Shields, Ex. Dirl Department of Natural Resources 202 Blount St. Crown Building Tallahassee, Fla. 32304 FROM: Bureau of Intergovernmental Relations SUBJECT: SIA: 76-0612E Please review and comment to us on the above draft environemental impact statement, copy attached. In reviewing the statement, you should consider possible effects that actions contemplated could have on matters of concern to your agency. If you feel that a conference is needed for discussion of the project or resolution of conflicts, or if you have questions concerning the statement, please call Mr. Walt Kolb at (904) 488-2401. Please check the appropriate box below, attach any comments on your agency's stationery and return to BIGR or telephone "no adverse comments" by the above due date. On that date, we intend to consider all review comments received and develop a state position on the project. In both telephone and written corres- pondence please refer to the above SAI number. Sincerely, Chief Bureau of Intergovernmental Relations Enclosure ******************************************************************************************** TO: Buruau of Intergovernmental Relations FROM: Department of Natural Resources SUBJECT: DEIS Review and Comments x Comments Attached (Also, the Department staff concurs in project.) Reviewing Agency: Department of Natural Resources Signature: JS Smith Date: 11/3/75 Administrative Assistant X Comments Attached (Also, the Department staff concurs in project.) Reviewing Agency: Department of Natural Resources Signature: Date: 11/3/75 Aministrative Assistant State of Florida DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM October 30, 1975 TO : Jim Smith FROM: Paul Dars SUBJ: SAI 76-0612E The Division of Recreation and Parks has coordinated closely with NOAA on this project from the beginning. It will protect and enhance the existing Coral Reef State Park. We strongly favor it. RPD/sc Enclosure cg@ @3 6668 "00000 5233