----,-----J1tK----.. - -----.. .
FLORIDA,
PANTHER,
HABITAT
PRESERVATION
PLAN
SOUTH FLORIDA POPULATION
November 1993
Prepared by
Todd Logan, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Andrew C, Eller, Jr., US. Fish and Wildlife Service
Ross Morrell, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission
Donna Ruffner, Florida Department of Environmental Protection
lim Sewell. National Park Service
forthe
Florida Panther Interagency Committee
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Volume 1- TEXT: Anumberofindividualswroteorcontributed background information,
analyses, proposals, figures, tables, etc. for the text. Mike Allen IFlorida Game and Fresh
Water Fish Division (FGFWFC) J - Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission; Ken
Alvarez [Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) 1- Collier-Seminole State
Park, Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, Mercury Contamination; Peter Anderson (FDEP)
- Highlands Hammock State Park; Terry Bates (South Florida Water Management District)
- Water Management Districts; AI Bonsack IU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)I National Wildlife Refuge System; Hugh Boyter (FGFWFC) - Wildlife Management Areas; Ed
Carlson INational Audubon Society (NASlI - Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary; lames W.H.
Cates (FDEP) -Cattle Industry; Jeff DiMaggio (FDEP) - Myakka River State Park; Kim Dryden
(FGFWFC) - Habitat for Associated Wildlife; Charles DuToit (FDEP) - Fakahatchee Strand
State Preserve; Paul M. Elliott (Southwest Florida Water Management District) - Jack Creek,
Myakka River, GDC/Peace River, Lake Manatee Lower Watershed, Upper Myakka River
Watershed, Prairie/Shell Creek and Ringling MacArthur; David Epstein (The Conservation
Fund) - Pal-Mar; Charles Facemire (FWS) - MercuryContamination; Lauren Frey (The Nature
Conservancy) -The Nature Conservancy; Scott Hedges(NAS) - Kissimmee Prairie Sanctuary;
Bill Hoeft (USFWS) -Section 404; Tom Logan (FGFWFC) - Recreation; Dennis Jordan
(USFWS) -Overview of Florida Panther Recovery Program, Purpose of the Habitat Preservation
Plan, Highways and Highway Mortality; David Land (Collier Enterprises) - Citrus Industry,
Vegetable Industry; lim Layne (Archbold Biological Station) - Archbold Biological Station;
Sidney Maddock (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) - Panther Habitat and
Mankind; Dave Maehr (FGFWFC) - Panther Description, Life History and Demographics;
Janice Nicholls (USFWS) - Endangered Species Act; John O'Meara (Florida Division of
Forestry) - Arbuckle State Forest. Dupuis Reserve State Forest; B. D. Ott (Bureau of Indian
Affairs) - Big Cypress Seminole, Brighton Seminole, and Miccosukee Indian Reservations;
Bob Progulski (Department ofDefense) - Avon Park Bombing Range; Zachary Prusak (FDEP)
- Lake Kissimmee State Park; Bruce Rodgers INational Park Service (NPS)! - Everglades
National Park; U.S. Man and Biosphere Reserve Program; Scott Sanders (FGFWFC) - Forest
Stewardship Program; Buck Thackeray (NPS) - Big Cypress National Preserve; and Lynn
Zippay (FDEP) - Mineral Industry.
Volume 11- MAPS: contains I :250,OOO-scale color maps of the study area. Base maps
and acetate overlays show geographic features, public lands, panther telemetry data,
forested areas (>250 acres). land ownership patterns, future land use patterns, and areas
proposed for habitat preservation. Thanks to Jim Cox (FGFWFC) for the forested habitat and
ownership overlays. Thanks to National Park Service cartographers Dave McKim, Dick Gill,
and Paul Denning for the future land use and forested habitat overlays. Working group
members generated the base maps and the proposed habitat preservation area overlays
Data for the panther telemetry overlays was provided by Chris Belden (FGFWFC). Dave
Maehr (FGFWFC), Oron Bass, Jr. (NPS) and Deborah lansen (NPS).
Thanks to the FPICTechnical Subcommittee members; Tom Logan (FGFWFC), chairman, Dennis jordan (USFWS - Florida
Panther Recovery Coordinator), lim Stevenson (FDEP). Dominic Dottavio (NPS) and to the Florida Panther Technical
Advisory Council members; jack O. Pons (FDEP). chairman, Dr. Melvin Sunquist (University of Florida). Dr. Stephen
Humphrey (University of Florida). Dr. lim Layne (Archbold Biological Station) and Wallace Hibbard (NPS) for
editorial assistance.
For information on obtaining copies of this plan or the map set please contact Mr. Dennis B. jordan, Florida Panther
Recovery Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 117 Newins-Zeigler Hall, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
32611-0307, telephone 904-392- J 861.
-ii-
Florida Piwther BalJit.at Preservation Plan
he Florida Panther
Interagency
Committee
(Committee)
was established
May 28, 1986 to
provide a coordinated recovery effort for the
Florida panther, Felis concolor cory!. The
Committee is comprised of the Southeast
Regional Directors of the US Fish and Wildlife
Service and the National Park Service, the
Executive Director of the Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission and the Secretary
of the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection The Committee provides the overall
guidance and direction for the Florida panther
recovery program.
Habitat preservation is critical to maintaining a
self-sustaining population of panthers in south
Florida. The Committee established a fivemember Habitat Preservation Working Group in
1991 to develop a comprehensive plan for
habitat preservation
The Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan
identifies occupied and potential panther
habitat, threats to these habitats, and the
options available to maintain sufficient habitat
for a self-sustaining population of panthers in
south Florida. Population viability analysis data
indicate that from a demographic and genetic
standpoint a self- sustaining population should
consist of a minimum of 50 adult panthers.
Preserving natural habitats in south Florida will
benefit the panther, other
wildlife and humankind.
The Habitat Preservation
Working Group used 17,386
radio telemetry locations
collected on 43 panthers from 1981-1991,
existing reports and publications, and the
expertise of field biologists, and
concluded that:
1
2
The range of the Florida panther occupied
at least 31 million acres;
3
The south Florida panther population
may be below the 1989 Viability Analysis
& Species Survival Plan's minimum goal
of 50 adult animals;
4
Site-specific habitat preservation
strategies are needed for 926,300 acres of
panther habitat on privately owned land
in south Florida; and
5
Retention of private ownership should be
emphasized in the preservation methods
of those lands that continue to support
essential habitat for Florida panthers.
-,
-iii-
Approximately 53 percent of the
occupied range and 34 percent of all
radio telemetry locations occurred on
private lands;
Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan
---.. . . . .- ---Iff!\---------.. .
The Florida Panther
Interagency Committee
recommends the following actions:
1
6
Develop site-specific habitat preservation
strategies for 468,600 acres south of the
Caloosahatchee River considered
essential to maintaining the present
south Florida panther population.
2
Develop site-specific habitat preservation
strategies for 457,700 acres north of the
Caloosahatchee River. These lands would
contribute significantly to the goal of
achieving a viable, self-sustaining panther
population in south Florida.
3
support completion of current
acquisition programs affecting those
lands identified as essential to
maintaining a self-sustaining panther
population in south Florida.
8
9
4
Evaluate the need to designate "Critical
5
Establish a full-time position within the
us. Fish and Wildlife Service to promote,
coordinate, and monitor multi-agency
implementation of the Florida Panther
Habitat Preservation Plan.
:...-~H:.::a:.::b.:.:it_a~.:.:t.._f_o_r_
th_e_F_I_o_ri_d.-:..ap_a_n_th_e_r_.
7
10
_
51
•
The Florida Game and Fresh Water
Fish Commission will work with
landowners in developing
Management/Conservation Plans for
lands identified in Recommendations
1 and 2.
-iv-
Design and develop landowner incentives
to preserve panther habitat on private
lands; initiatives may include tax reforms
and other financial incentives that require
State and/or Federal legislative action.
Applicable agencies should review and
coordinate compliance with existing
wetland regulations.
The US. Fish and Wildlife Service should
util ize Section 7 and Section 9 provisions
of the Endangered Species Act in the
preservation of suitable panther habitats
where applicable.
Develop a plan for working
through Florida's Growth Management
Act to preserve lands essential to
panther recovery.
Provide habitat preservation data to the
Forest Stewardship Program
Coordinator of the Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission for plans
prepared for private lands essential to
panther recovery.
=
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
.. ..
.
.
OVERVIEW OF FLORIDA PANTHER RECOVERY PROGRAM.....
.
.
PURPOSE OFTHE HABITAT PRESERVATION PLAN
.
THE FLORIDA PANTHER: DESCRIPTION, LIFE HISTORY, AND DEMOGRAPHICS ..... .
PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT.
PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION AND ASSOCIATED WILDLIFE ..
PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION AND HUMANKIND ...
.
PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION AND EDUCATION .'
MINIMUM PANTHER POPULATION IN SOUTH FLORIDA ....
..... 1
I
2
3
... 5
.
6
.
7
7
..... 9
... 1I
.... ... 11
PANTHER HABITAT EVALUATION ."
STUDY AREA ....
PANTHER HABITAT ANALYSIS.
... 12
... 15
... IS
... 15
....... 16
THREATS TO PANTHER HABITAT ....
MERCURY CONTAMINATION ."
URBAN DEVELOPMENT .,
AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT ...
HIGHWAYS
.
RECREATION
.
... 20
... 21
SOUTH FLORIDA CONSERVATION LAND INVENTORY ...
METHODS OF HABITAT PRESERVATION ..
LESS-THAN FEE TITLE PRESERVATION OPTIONS ...
FEE TITLE PRESERVATION OPTIONS.
PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION AND THE ECONOMY ...
PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION AND COUNTY TAX ROLLS.
.23
. . . 27
... 27
.. 29
... 30
... 31
AREAS PROPOSED FOR HABITAT PRESERVATION.
..33
RECOMMENDATIONS
... 37
REFERENCES .,.
.41
APPENDIX A
.
APPENDIX B .
APPENDIX C.
..... A-I
................... B-I
.C-I
-v-
Introduction
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ---11'«-...- -..------INTRODUCTION
Florida Panther Milestones: The Florida
panther, Felis concolor coryi, was designated a
Federal endangered species by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service on March 11, 1967 (Federal
Register 32:400 I). A Recovery Team was
appointed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
in luly 1976 to prepare and assist in
coordinating the implementation of a Florida
Panther Recovery Plan. The plan was approved
on December 17, 1981 and revised june 22,
1987. Peer review of panther recovery activities
is accomplished through the Florida Panther
Technical Advisory Council (Council). The
Council, comprised of five members appointed
by the Governor, was established by Florida law
on june 22, 1983. The Council is organized as a
component of the Florida Game and Fresh
Water Fish Commission and the members have
backgrounds in research and management of
large mammals. Finally, recognizing that
panther recovery could not be accomplished by
anyone agency the Florida Panther Interagency
Committee was established May 28, 1986 The
Committee is comprised of the Southeast
Regional Directors of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and National Park Service, the
Executive Director of the Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission and the
Secretary of the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection.
OVERVIEW OF FLORIDA PANTHER
RECOVERY PROGRAM
he habitat preservation needs identified in
this document reflect only one of many
elements critical to a successful Florida panther
recovery program. Details of the program are
T
provided in the Florida Panther Recovery Plan
(USFWS 1987). The objective of the recovery
program is to secure three viable, selfsustaining populations within the historic
range of the Florida panther. Current recovery
efforts focus on; 1) Stabilizing the south Florida
population, 2) Preserving and managing genetic
resources, and 3) Reestablishing at least two
additional populations within the historic
range. These three elements must proceed
simultaneouslly if recovery of the Florida
panther is to be successful.
Stabilizing the south Florida population:
Most recovery actions to date have been
devoted to this element. Data on all aspects of
panther biology, population demographics,
prey resources, genetic viability, disease
threats, habitat preferences, habitat threats,
etc. were needed before meaningful recovery
tasks could be identified and implemented.
ecovery actions implemented to reduce
highway related panther mortality and
injury include reduced speed zones, highway
real ignments to provide for safe panther
crossing conditions, and the construction of
wildlife underpasses on 1-75. Recovery actions
implemented to reduce impacts on panther
movements and prey resources include special
hunting and off.·road vehicle regulations. Some
land management programs to improve habitat
conditions for the panther and its prey have
been incorporated on public lands. Many
important panther habitats have been
preserved. The south Florida population
appears to be stable at 30 to 50 adults.
R
-1-
Introduction
----------IftK---------Preserving and managing genetic resources:
A captive population is considered an essential
tool for managing genetic resources under
present genetic conditions, The captive
population provides; 1) Security against
extinction of the taxon (the single wild
population provides virtually no security). 2)
Opportunities for genetic management needed
to preserve existing genetic variabillity, and
3) A source of animals for future population
reestablishment programs,
ctions to establish a captive population
were initiated in i991 when six kittens were
removed from the wild, Four more kittens were
removed in 1992, However, the focus of the
captive breeding program could change
pending approval of a genetic restoration
program currently under consideration, The
concept of genetic restoration or outbreedi ng
has gained conceptual approval from the
Florida Panther Interagency Committee and is
currently being evaluated for compliance/
applicability under provisions of the
Endangered Species Act
A
Reestablishing two populations: A minimum
of two additional populations need to be
reestablished within the historic range in order
to meet the objectives of the 1987 Florida
Panther Recovery Plan, Candidate
reintroduction sites in Alabama, Arkansas,
Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee have
been identified and are being evaluated. Final
evaluations, upon which site selections will be
based, may include experimental
reintroductions using surrogate western
cougars, One experimental reintroduction study
is underway at a north Florida/south Georgia
site. Habitat preservation may be necessary at
reintroduction sites,
PURPOSE OF THE HABITAT
PRESERVATION PLAN
he purpose of the Florida Panther Habitat
T
Preservation Plan is to promulgate actions that will
assure the long-term preservation of habitats considered
essential for maintaining a seff-sustaining population of
panthers in south Florida. Population viability data
indicate that, demographically and genetically,
a self-sustaining population should consist of a
minimum of 50 adult panthers, The northern 53
percent of occupied panther range is in private
ownership, These private lands are higher in
natural soil fertility and contain forested
habitats that support over half of the panther
population, Panthers inhabiting this northern
range are healthier and more productive than
those in the southern range (Roelke 1989)
Important panther habitat is being lost daily,
Urban development and agricultural expansion
in occupied panther range without
consideration for habitat needs of the panther
are expected to accelerate as Florida's
population increases, Development activities
could reduce the available habitat to a level
below the minimum threshold essential for a
self-sustaining panther population,
rogress has been made towards land
preservation for the panther. Various
government and private entities are involved in
land preservation; however, these efforts have
been pursued independently, This document
has been prepared to serve as a planned
approach to habitat preservation for the
panther. It identifies occupied and potential
panther habitat. the threats to these habitats,
and the preservation options available to
maintain sufficient habitat for a
minimum population of 50 adult panthers
in south Florida.
P
An effective habitat preservation effort of the
scale needed must be well planned and
-2-
Introduction
---------1«---------coordinated. Habitat preservation strategies
must involve federal, state. regional and local
agencies. non-governmental organizations and.
most importantly. private landowners.
Initiatives which emphasize continued private
ownership and management are recommended.
THE FLORIDA PANTHER: DESCRIPTION,
LIFE HISTORY, AND DEMOGRAPHICS
Taxonomy
he Florida panther was first described as a
separate geographic race of Felis concolor by
Charles B. Cory (1896). Nelson and Goldman
(1929) revised the taxonomic classification and
reassigned the Florida panther's subspecific
status as Felis concolor cory; Bangs. The most
recent taxonomic review of the species.
including detailed subspecies descriptions. was
made by Goldman (1946).
T
Species Distribution
Dlis concolor has the widest distribution of any
r
terrestrial mammal in the Western
Hemisphere. There are 27 subspecies of cougar
in North. Central. and South America
(Anderson 1983). Felis concolor cory; is the last
known extant subspecies in the eastern United
States. The Florida panther had been
eliminated from most of its historical range by
the early 1900s. Road kills. tracks, scat. etc.
collected since 1970 and a decade of radio
telemetry (Figure I) have documented a
reproducing panther population only in Collier.
Dade. Hendry and Lee Counties in south
Florida. Sightings and specimens have been
reported from Broward. Glades (Roof and
Maehr 1988). Highlands (Layne and Wassmer
1988). Martin. Osceola. Palm Beach. St. Johns
and Vol usia Counties. However. no
reproduction has been documented. Restricted
Physical Description
he Florida panther is a
medium-sized carnivore
with a short and rather stiff
pelage Long limbs. small feet,
and a rich ferruginous color
(Bangs 1898). particularly in
the mid-dorsal region.
distinguish it from other
cougar subspecies. The skull
has a broad. flat frontal region
with broad and highly arched
nasals. Adult males examined
in the wild weighed from 106154 pounds. and measured
nearly seven feet from the
nose to the tip of the tail.
Females are smaller. weighing
65-100 pounds (USFWS 1987)
T
Panther Radio Locations
Existing Conservation Areas
Figure I. Radio telemetry locations of 43 panthers, 1981-1991.
-3-
int.roduction
--------IIfJf------access to some privately owned land has
hindered efforts to understand panther
distribution patterns in certain counties.
(Grow 1984). Preferred prey is more abundant
in the northern Big Cypress Basin, therefore,
panthers inhabiting this area are healthier and
more productive than those inhabiting the
southern Big Cypress basin (Roelke 1989).
Home Range and Movements
ome ranges of male panthers average
200 square miles and overlap with other
males is minimaL The home ranges of breeding
males can encompass the ranges of several
females and may reflect the density and
distribution of adult females. Females maintain
smaller, overlapping home ranges that average
75 square miles. Home range overlap among
males and females is facilitated by temporal
isolation. Habitat quality and prey density
influence female home range size and litter
surJival (Maehr et al 1989). Kitten-rearing
activities reduce the movements of, and areas
used by, females. Annual movement patterns of
both sexes vary little. However, in winter,
panthers are more active during the day than in
warmer months. Daily panther activity peaks
around sunset and sunrise (Maehr 1992).
H
Population Estimate
The Florida Panther Interagency Committee.
based on data collected from \ 981-1991 by the
Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission and National Park Service has
estimated the population at 30 to 50 adult
panthers. Maehr et al ( 1991 ) estimated
there were 46 adult panthers in the Big
Cypress basin.
Florida panthers are solitary except during
courtship and while the female is raising young.
Males are polygamous and may breed with
several females in overlapping horne ranges.
Breeding activity in the south Florida
popu lation peaks during fall and winter
although reproduction can occur year-round
(Maehr 1992).
The Florida panther's reproduction and
population dynamics are similar to those of the
western subspecies of Felis wnw/or. Observed
litter sizes range from 1-4 (D. Maehretal.,
FGFWFC, unpublished data). Prenatal litters
range from 3-4. Gestation lasts 90-96 days.
Kittens, weighing about 500 grams each, are
usually born in a dense thicket and remain at
the den until they are abolit two months old;
then they begin to accompany their mother on
hunting forays. The young usually disperse at
an age of about 18 months. The earliest
published instance of first reproduction in the
Florida panther was an 18-19 month old female
that raised 4 kittens in her mother's home
range (Maehr et aI1989a).
Disease
Diet
The Florida panther'S diet varies geographically.
South Florida studies show that white-tailed
deer and feral hogs are the preferred prey
(Maehr et al 1990) Raccoons, armadillos, and
rabbits are also eaten, especially in areas where
large prey are scarce. Panthers will also eat
birds and alligators. An adult panther can eat
the equivalent of 30 to 50 deer per year.
Females raising young generally require more
J\iYill\ll;W
Reproduction
~
tJWillanm: WID!
mJ.lIm.i&&
anthers are susceptible to a number of
diseases and parasites, ranging from
benign infections to potential epizootics.
Known parasites include 1 protozoan, 2
trematodes, 3 cestodes, 8 nematodes, and 7
arthropods (Forrester et al 1985, Roelke 1986).
The hookworm can cause severe anemia, weight
loss, and may contribute to kitten mortality.
Little is known about the life cycle of
this nematode.
P
=
, til'&!!
-4-
'1!!1
Introduction
.........- - - - - - -.......... IIfK--........- -........- - ost panthers examined have been
exposed to parvovirus and about half
have been exposed to calicivirus. Varied
infection rates among south Florida bobcats
suggests that environmental conditions and
population density influence parvovirus
dynamics. No panther deaths have been
attributed to either virus, but both viruses
could be potentially devastating.
M
Little is known about pseudorabies in wild
felids, but. the disease deserves close attention
because it is carried by feral hogs. Rabies
caused the death of a subadult male panther in
Hendry County in 1989 (Maehr 1992).
Mortality
Mortality of Florida panthers was examined
from December 1979 through May 1991 in
southwest Florida (Maehr et al 1991a). Average
annuai mortality (17.2%) among radio-collared
panthers over a four year period (1987-1990)
was simiiar to unhunted populations of
mountain iion. Highway collisions caused 46.9
percent of documented mortality in the total
population followed by natural causes (281 %),
illegal shooting (6.2%), and research activities
(6.2%) Road mortality was greater from
November to lanuary and more likely among
male panthers and panthers residing adjacent
to State Road 29 and State Road 84. However,
natural mortality, especially intraspecific
aggression, was more prevalent than road
mortality among radio-collared panthers
property for panthers and panther prey. Fire, a
historical component of the south Florida
ecosystem, is used under controlled conditions
to reduce fuel hazards and improve browse for
deer. Prescribed burning is a management tool
used by most public agencies in south Florida.
Fertilization is used in conjunction with
prescribed burning on many privately owned
ranches to improve livestock range. This
practice also benefits the white-tailed deer.
Livestock range on privately owned lands is
often overseeded with legumes to provide
cattle (and deer) a higher source of nutrition.
Experiments with feed crops and supplemental
feeders are being conducted on some public
lands. The experiments will evaluate the health
and density of panther prey and associated
panther responses in relation to the feeding
program. However, a lack of areas suited for
agricultural production, poor soil fertility, and
extended hydroperiods iimit the potential use
of feed crops on most public lands.
Supplemental feeders can be heavily used by
deer. hogs and bear. However, deer and hog
use decreases with increased bear use and
large-scale supplemental feeding is thought to
be cost prohibitive.
PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION
AND LAND MANAGEMENT
ncroachment of exotic vegetation
constitutes a major threat to panther
habitat in many areas. Melalueca, brazilian
pepper and Australian pine readily colonize
disturbed soils and replace native vegetation
Eradication and control of exotic vegetation is
underway on all publicly owned lands and
actively managed private lands.
and management plays an important role in
panther habitat preservation Several
Federal and State agencies own or manage
properties inhabited by the panther. Within
existing financial, legal and philosophical
restraints each agency is managing their
Hunting management philosophies vary
between and within public and private
ownerships. The Florida Panther National
Wildlife Refuge, Fakahatchee Strand State
Preserve and Everglades National Park are
L
E
-5-
III trod u: c ti OEi
-------,--J!II!K
closed to hunting. Portions of Big Cypress
National Preserve are also closed to hunting.
Most of Big Cypress National Preserve is open
to regulated hunting as are the Water
Conservation Areas and several Wildlife
Management Areas. Most private lands that are
occupied by panthers are open to hunting
under lease arrangements.
PANTHER }UIHTAT I'RESERVA'fION
AND ASSOCIATED WILDLIFE
reservation of Florida panther habitat will
playa vital role in the protection of regional
wildlife populations in south Florida. Florida
has more threatened and endangered species
(56) than any state in the continental U.s
except California. About 43 percent of Florida's
native habitat has been converted to urban and
agricultural use (Kautz 1989). The state's forests
declined about 4.3 million acres (21'7'0) and
wetlands declined 4 million acres (60%)
between 1936 and 1990. Urban land increased
650 percent from 0.7 million to 4.6 million acres
during the same period.
P
Hardwood hammocks and pine flatwoods, the
most preferred of all panther habitats, are
considered uplands in south Florida. Uplands
are not subject to dredge and fill regulations
and may therefore be subject to intensive urban
and agricultural development. The loss of
upland habitat has affected not only the Florida
panther, but the Florida black bear, bald eagle,
red-cockaded woodpecker, southeastern
American kestrel. Big Cypress and Sherman's
fox squirrels, and eastern indigo snake. Habitat
fragmentation has aiso reduced the long-term
viability of cypress forests "protected" as
wetlands by state and federal law. Some water
management practices alter the hydroperiod,
increasing the fire frequency and drying out the
forests. improperly designed projects impede
water movement. Wetland alterations have
mu
TW
©1ii&J
'
reduced the size, diversity, and number of
south Florida wading bird colonies (Runde
1991). Species experiencing the greatest
impacts include the wood stork, white ibis,
limpkin, little blue heron, tri-colored heron,
snovlY egret, and roseate spoonbill.
Seasonal wetlands appear to be in greater
decline than forested wetlands, probably due to
the Section 404(f) agricultural exemption.
Seasonal wetlands and pine flatwoods were the
most drastically altered habitats in a South
Florida Water Management District agricultural
study area (IFAS 1991) Seasonal wetlands are
critical to mottled ducks, sandhill cranes, snail
kites, and wood storks.
mproved and unimproved livestock range, wet
and dry prairies interspersed with cabbage
palm, and pine and oak forests are typically
found on private lands in Collier, Hendry,
Highlands, and Glades Counties. Other
endangered and threatened species using these
habitats include the Florida sandhill crane,
Audubon's crested caracara, Florida
grasshopper sparrow, and the burrowing owl.
I
Endangered and threatened wildlife species
receive more attention from resource agencies
and the public than non-listed species. Entire
communities of non-listed wildlife are in dire
need of a regional protection strategy. A Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission study
(MillsapetaI1990) indicated that 294 (44%) of
Florida's vertebrate taxa were in decline.
Imperiled taxa - those in need of research,
monitoring and protection - include species
in coastal zones, sandhills and scrub habitats,
tropical hardwood hammocks, pine rocklands
and interior dry prairies. Geographically
restricted subspecies and disjunct populations
of widespread species are the most imperiled
Unlisted species becoming increasingly rare
include the American swallow-tailed kite. short=P
Wi&BJiilmiin
-6-
&7%
~2{Wl:
1iiliiJi:i£j
IUI,roduction
- - - -..........- ---I1ff\------.. . . . .- - - - tailed hawk. wood duck, mottled duck, barred
and great-horned owls, hai ry and red-headed
woodpeckers, and various warblers.
reserving and connecting large land areas in
a contiguous system of native habitat IS
recognized as a necessary wildlife protection
strategy. Listed and non-listed game and nongame wildlife face certain decline if
preservation efforts do not focus on habitat
quantity and quality Successful habitat
preservation for the Florida panther would also
accomplish substantial protection of regional
wildlife diversity in south Florida.'
P
south Florida. Swamps and other wetlands
purify water, stabilize soil, and store flood
waters. Trees and other vegetation exchange
the carbon dioxide humans exhale for oxygen
humans can breathe. Natural areas provide a
psychological and physical escape from a
burgeoning human population and the
associated urban stresses. Over fifty percent of
the American population ages 16 and older
participated in some form of consumptive and
non-consumptive wildlife related recreation in
1991 and they spent $59 billion dollars in the
process (USFWS 1993)
ost importantly, people care about game
and non-game wildlife and threatened
and endangered species People care about
wildlife species for their aesthetic beauty and
the thrill of seeing them. People care about
wildlife for scientific and educational purposes
and for their ecological, historical and cultural
val ues. Preserving natural habitats in south
Florida will benefit the panther, other wildlife
and humankind.
M
PANTlIER IIABITAT PRESERVATION
AND IIUMANKIND
It is not until something unique is about to be
lost that certain segments of society begin to
appreciate its value. However, there are many
different reasons to value the continued
existence of panthers Some people believe
panthers are inherently valuable, apart from
any utilitarian benefit, to humankind. Others
view the panther from an ecological
perspective, where its value is based on the role
it plays as a top level predator in the south
Florida ecosystem, regardless of its
endangered status.
Public awareness of the value of natural
systems that support threatened and
endangered species of wildlife is increasing
nationwide. The steady growth of the
environmental movement since the 1970s
reflects an increasingly educated, aware and
supportive public. The scientific community
supports the preservation and management of
natural systems for their benefits, not only to
wildlife, but to the humans that depend on the
same ecosystems.
Agricultural and urban user groups draw water
from aqUifers recharged by natural areas in
PANTHER IIAIBITAT PRESERVATION
AND EDUCATION
he State of Florida established the Florida
panther automobile license plate to fund
programs that educate the public about the
habitat needs of the Florida panther. Forty
percent of the proceeds from license plate sales
go to the Si1ve Our State Environmental
Education Trust Fund in the Department of
Environmental Protection
T
State statutes direct the Florida Advisory
Council on Environmental Education to
recommend projects for funding. Proposals are
accepted from federal, state, or locai
government agencies; private individuals; state
or private colleges; universities, school
systems, and other education facilities;
-7-
Minimum Panther Population in South Florida
--------IfIlK------in the south Florida population, as
recommended in the Florida Panther Viability
Analysis and Species Survivai Plan
(Seal et iii 1989).
25
20 1
•••
11& 1111. . . . . . .
151
iii.
101
111111 I iii I 11!II. . . .1IIH1IIH1IlI
51
iii
°1234123412341234123412341234123412341234123
18111~~83~84118511~~871188~89~9011911
Year & Quarter
Figure 2. Number of radio-collared panthelS monitored by year and quarter.
-10-
Panther Hahitat Evaluation
PANTHER HABITAT EVALUATION
STUDY AREA
he study area covers 22,000 square miles in
20 south Florida counties. It is bounded on
the north by Florida Highway 60, which extends
from Tampa to Vero Beach; on the east by
Interstate 95 and the Florida Turnpike; on the
south by the Gulf of Mexico; and on the west by
Interstate 75. About 50 percent of the state's
population - 6.3 million people - reside in
the counties encompassing the study area.
Most of the population is concentrated along
the urban east coast. About 3.4 million acres of
publicly owned (state and federal) lands lie
within this area. The
remaining lands consist of
urban areas and privately
owned cattle ranches, citrus
groves, and vegetable farms.
These agricultural lands are
interspersed with areas of
undeveloped native habitat.
The State of Florida has five
Regional Planning Councils
(Figure 3) and three Water
Management Districts within
the study area.
T
The Regional Planning
Councils serve as an
intermediary between the
Department of Community
Affairs and county planning
departments on issues
pertaining to implementation
of the 1985 Growth
Management Act. The Water
Management Districts are
responsible for flood control;
water supply, water quality protection and
natural resources management on District
lands. District boundaries are drawn along
surface water hydrological divides (Figure 4).
lthough suitable panther habitat may occur
in other areas of Florida (and possibly
other southeastern states), and anecdotal
evidence suggests that panthers may exist
elsewhere in the study area, the focus of this
preservation plan is on priority habitats nearest
the lands currently known to be occupied by
panthers monitored via radio- telemetry.
A
,
Central
Flori~~
I0
Existing Conservation Lands
Figure 3. The study area includes Dve Regional Planning Councils.
-11-
P(wther Hahitl1t EvahutHoH
-1flJr ,---.....--------------..
m
2. Native Vegetation Forested areas greater than
250 acres in size (Figure 5)
are a critical habitat
component for radiocollared panthers studied
between 1981 and 1991.
Hardwood hammocks are
preferred, followed by pine
flatwoods, cypress swamp,
and cabbage palm forests
(Maehr et a11991).
Freshwater lnarshes, thicket
s\varnps, mixed swamps,
and agriculturaildisturbed
habitats were used or
avoided in proportion to
their availabiiity (Maehr et al
199 i) Panthers using the
Fakahatchee Strand
[ I Existing Conservation Lands
preferred mixed swamps
(Beiden et al 1988) Day-use
sites are usually dense
Figure 4. The study area includes three Water Management Districts.
thickets of saw palmetto
surrounded by swamp, pine flatwoods, or
PANTHER HABITAT ANALYSIS
hardwood hammocks (Maehr et al 1990a).
Potential Panther Habitat
Large areas of native habitat suitable for
panthers still exist in Florida. Certain areas
already support panthers; others could
accommodate an expanding population if the
habitat is preserved and managed properly.
Panther habitat capable of sustaining a
population has six important characteristics:
3. Adequate Prey - Adequate populations of
1. Adequate Size - Areas greater than 400
square miles predominated by native habitat
initially ranked high as potential
reintroduction sites (Belden and
Frankenberger 1987). However, after an
experimental release of surrogate western
cougars in a north Florida/south Georgia
candidate reintroduction area, the preferred
size was revised to 500-2,500 square miles (e.
Belden, FGFWFC, personal communication).
4. Low Disturbance Levels - Panthers prefer
remote woodlands and have exhibited a
limited tolerance to certain types and levels
of human intrusion. However, panthers
coexist with properly regulated recreational
activities, which include recreational hunting,
on both public and private lands.
.
~
deer, feral hogs, and other prey are required.
Certain types of management techniques,
such as prescribed burning, food plantings,
and harvest regulations, can be used to
increase prey populations for the benefit of
the panther (Schortemeyer et al 1991).
5. Low Highway Densities - Highways fragment
native habitat, fragment panther populations
~I
-12-
Panther Habitat Evaluation
and are a source of
panther mortality in
that portion of
occupied panther
range bisected by, or
adjacent to, major
highway systems
(MaehretaI1991a).
Wildlife crossings
constructed under
Interstate 75 in
Collier County show
that some panther/
highway conflicts
can be resolved
(Foster and
Humphrey 1992).
6. Connectivity Potential panther
habitat must be
connected by similar
habitat to assure
that panthers
occupying core
habitat areas can
interact as a
population.
Occlipied
Panther Habitat
Forested Area
County
Boundary
- - Public Land
Boundary
Figure 5. Forested areas greater than 250 acres in the study area.
abitats occupied
by panthers in south Florida include pine
flatwoods, mixed pine/hardwood forests,
hardwood hammocks, hardwood swamps,
cypress domes, and wet and dry prairies. These
habitats are present in public preserves such as
the Florida Panther Nationa! Wildlife Refuge,
Big Cypress Seminole indian Reservation,
Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, Miccosukee
Indian Reservation, Everglades National Park,
Big Cypress National Preserve, and private
preserves such as the National Audubon
Society's Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary. The
H
panther also occupies private ranches in
Hendry and Collier Counties which contain
native habitat interspersed with 1m proved
.Iivestock range, citrus groves and
vegetable farms.
ccupied panther habitats were identified
using radio telemetry data. The Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission and
the National Park Service captured, collared,
and tracked 43 panthers between February,
1981 and August, 1991. The home range of each
O
-13-
Pantller llabHat Evaluation
F1W IH!1r ......
bWii\
panther was derived by
connecting the outermost
telemetry observations.
Occupied panther habitat was
determined by combining all
home range polygons. The
composite home range of 43
panthers (Figure 6)
encompasses 3.1 rnlillon acres
or 4.844 square miles. Based
on 199\ land ownership
patterns, 47 percent of
occupied panther habitat Is
publicly owned and 53 percent
is privately owned.
The ten year telemetry study
has provided valuable
information on land use and
habitat preferences of
panthers in the Big Cypress
physiographic region Efforts
to capture and radio-collar
panthers focused on public
lands and private lands
accessible to research
biologists.
........."L""
~ 'II
!
I
!
a
I'
.,
=,-~-----~~t,.-=I
I
c_J
__
~_
i
\
\.
I
J
Composite Horne Range
Existing Conservation Lands
Figure 6. The composite home range of 43
radio-collared panthers (1981-1991).
----------
- -
mz;
-14-
&lEA WIiliW
Threats T. Panther Hahltat
THREATS TO PANTHER HABITAT
MER.CUR.Y CONTAMINATION
ercury contamination was not recognized
as a threat to habitat occupied by Florida
panthers until 1989 when a female panther was
found to have died of mercury toxicosis. Three
sources of mercury contamination in south
Florida have been suggested: 1) atmospheric
emissions from solid waste incinerators, 2)
atmospheric emissions from the burning of
sugar cane, and 3) emissions from the
oxidation of peat soils drained for agriculture.
M
Preliminary investigations show that mercury is
accumulating in the waters of south Florida.
Mercury is taken up by fish, crawfish and other
aquatic organisms which in turn contaminate
the birds, raccoons, and alligators that feed on
them. Panthers that fed heavily on raccoons, or
alligators, were found to have elevated levels
of mercury.
The extent of mercury contamination in
panthers varied with location. Average levels of
mercury were greatest in panthers from the
Shark River Slough in Everglades National Park
and lowest in panthers north of Alligator Alley
Mercury levels in panthers sampled in
Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve have
dropped significantly since 1987 (Roelke et al
1991). coinciding with an apparent increase in
deer (McCown 1991).
ersonnel from various universities, Florida's
Water Management Districts, the Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, the
National Park Service, the U.S Fish and Wildlife
Service, and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency are conducting studies to determine the
P
source, effects and fate of mercury in Florida's
complex ecosystems. One study involves the
analysis of selected tissues from raccoons
collected at Okefenokee National Wildlife
Refuge, a potential reintroduction site for
captive-bred Florida panthers, and several
locations in south Florida currently occupied by
panthers including Florida Panther National
Wildlife Refuge, Fakahatchee Strand State
Preserve, Everglades National Park, and Big
Cypress National Preserve. Efforts to locate and
monitor sources of mercury are ongoing, The
results of the south Florida mercury study
should be available in 1997
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
he rapid and extensive loss of native habitat
is a result of Florida's burgeoning human
population, Florida ranked 33rd (1900), 10th
(1960) and 4th ( 1990) in total population in the
United States (Morris 1991). The population
(Figure 7). now over 13 million, has doubled
every 20 years since 1830 (Shermyen 1990), The
density statewide has increased from 0.10
persons per square mile (1900) to 240 persons
per square mile (1990)
T
Only 5 percent of the state's residents lived in
the counties encompassing the south Florida
study area in 1900, Today 50 percent live there.
Florida had nine of the ten fastest-growing
metropolitan areas in the nation according to
the 1990 census. Five of them - Punta Gorda,
Naples, Fort Pierce, Fort Myers, and West Palm
Beach - are located in the study area.
-15-
Threats To Panther "ahlta!
---------IftK--------REGIONAL
PLANNING COUNCIL
Central Florida
COUNTY
1970
CITRUS
(acres)
1980
CITRUS
(acres)
1990
CITRUS
(acres)
Desoto
Hardee
Highlands
Okeechobee
Polk
25,478
50,716
38,803
3,597
150,122
268,716
36,157
45,161
37,767
4,281
132,124
255,490
52,584
51,069
57,048
8,541
99,718
268,960
42
-II
-3
19
-12
-5
Subtotal
TOTAL
LAND AREA
(acres)
1990
CITRUS
as % of
land Area
45
13
51
100
-25
5
407,040
407,680
658,560
493,440
1,166,720
3,133,440
13
13
9
2
9
9
CHANGE CHANGE
197tf-80 1980-90
(%)
(%)
East Central Florida
Osceola
19,051
16.457
16,101
-14
-2
864,000
2
Tampa Bay
Manatee
18,943
14,802
20,331
-22
37
478,080
4
51,815
41,385
17,566
75,397
186,163
58,262
40,768
16,797
75,140
190,967
66,116
46,283
15,545
94,878
222,822
12
-I
-4
0
3
13
14
-7
26
17
318,080
355,200
1,275,520
366,720
2,315,520
21
13
I
26
10
Broward
Dade
Monroe
5,030
4,531
0
9,561
2,147
6,142
0
8,289
589
6,074
0
6,663
-57
36
0
-13
-73
-I
0
-20
755-040
L251,200
661,760
2,688,000
0
0
0
0
Charlotte
Collier
Glades
Hendry
Lee
Sarasota
6,122
6,706
3,395
30,086
5,451
1,538
53,298
11.718
23,565
7,523
73,754
9,692
2,127
128,379
-9
33
116
34
-27
-5
19
91
251
122
145
Subtotal
6,734
5,052
1,572
22,447
7,439
1,612
44,856
38
141
441,600
1.276,160
488,320
744,320
513,920
371.840
3,836,160
3
2
2
10
2
I
3
Study Area Total
266,590
268,254
318,289
1
19
3,457,280
9
State Total
941,471
845,283
732,767
-10
-13
34,657,920
2
Treasure Coast
Indian River
Martin
Palm Beach
St. Lucie
Subtotal
South Florida
Subtotal
Southwest Florida
78
Table I. Regional and county citrus acreage trends from 1970 to 1990.
Large citrus monocultures can be detrimental
to the panther. However, new groves, if kept
small and developed in a habitat mosaic rather
than uninterrupted miles of grove
monocultures (as existed in central Florida
before the freezes of the] 980s), may not be
detrimental to panthers and their prey.
Properly designed groves of limited acreage
also can provide corridors and cover areas for
the panther.
-17-
----_.. . . . _ -.«------Threats To Panther H.bit.t
Florida has replanted all citrus acreage lost to
the freezes of the 1980s. In addition, Brazil and
Mexico have planted nearly one million new
acres based on the false expectation that
Florida's citrus industry would not recover.
Consequently recent world citrus supplies have
outpaced demand, and prices fell to a 25 year
low in 1992-93 Current prices are below 8100
per pound and are expected to remain so, in
constant dollars, through the year :1000 without
natural supply disruptions, e.g. freeze, disease,
and hurricanes. Citrus prices must exceed 81.20
per pound over a sustained period of time for
citrus growers and financial institutions to
consider new citrus investments.
Final results of a citrus feasibility study indicate
that 704,000 acres (46%) ofa 1,536,000 acre area
encompassing the Immokalee Rise
physiographic region in Hendry County and
Collier County is suitable for citrus development
(Mazzotti e[ al 1992). The timing, location and
amount of citrus development will depend on
market conditions, the outcome of the proposed
North American Free Trade Agreement, future
freezes and technological advances. Now is an
opportune time to pursue habitat preservation,
when citrus markets are low.
Vegetable Industry
istorically, a vegetable grower would clear
virgin land, farm it for several years,
abandon it due to nematode, weed or other
pest problems, clear a new piece of land, and
repeat the process. At any given time, there
were several cleared but abandoned acres of
land for every acre in vegetable production
However, the land dearing cycle was broken
with the advent of pesticides. Previously
cleared but unused or unneeded lands were
then converted to improved pasture. In fact,
nearly all existing improved pasture in
southwest Florida was originally cleared for
vegetable farming, not cattle ranching. The
H
-
--
southwest Florida production area (Figure 8)
encompasses the six- county core of occupied
panther range.
Acreage for the major crops in southwest
Florida (tomato, pepper, watermelon,
cucumber, eggplant. squash) has increased
about 20,000 acres over the past two decades
Row crop acreage increased 2I percen t between
1986 and 1990 (Townsend 1991). Much of this
was former vegetable fields and improved
pasture being brought back into production.
Thus, little clearing of native habitat occurred.
The economics of winter vegetable production
are such that no more than 1,000 acres per year
are expected to be put into production for the
next two decades and production will likely
occur on lands formerly cleared for vegetables.
Two factors actually suggest that total crop
acreage may decline. First, the best land is
already in production, ie., it has the best soils,
drainage, irrigation potential, and/or lowest
freeze risk. New lands put into production will
have lower expected returns and be less
attractive for development Second, the
proposed North American Free Trade
Agreement may make vegetable production
more attractive in Mexico and less so in
southwest Florida. The impact of vegetable
expansion on panther habitat cannot
be predicted
Land cleared for row crops generally lacks
adequate cover to support panther use.
However, panthers will use forested strands,
such as Camp Keais Strand, running through
open fields, and have been documented
crossing vegetable fields under cover of
darkness (D. Maehr, FGFWFC, unpublished
data) Land put into vegetable production may
not impact panther survival if designed
properly as part of a habitat mosaic.
...
-18-
-
m
_-----Threats To Panther lIaLitat
---------~-_.........
PRINCIPAL VEGETABLES BY PRODUCING AREAS
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Brevard
WEST CENTRAL
K. Plant City-Balm - Bush and pole beans, lima
beans, cabbage, cucumbers, eggplant. field
peas, greens squash, strawberries,
watermelons
L. Palmetto-Ruskin - Cabbage, cauliflower.
potatoes, strawberries, tomatoes,
watermelons.
M. Sarasota - Cabbage, celery, sweet corn,
escarole, lettuce radishes.
N. Wauchula - Cucumbers, eggplant. peppers,
tomatoes, watermelons.
EAST CENTRAL
O. Ft. Pierce - Tomatoes, watermelons.
SOUTHWEST
P. Ft. Myers-Immokalee - Sweet corn,
cucumbers, eggplant, peppers, potatoes,
squash, tomatoes, watermelons.
EVERGLADES
Q. Bush beans, cabbage, celery, Chinese
cabbage, sweet corn, escarole, greens,
lettuce, potatoes, radishes.
SOUTHEAST
R. Martin County - Cabbage, potatoes,
tomatoes, watermelons.
S. Pompano - Bush beans, lima beans, sweet
corn, cucumbers, eggplant. peppers, squash,
tomatoes.
T. Homestead - Bush and pole beans, cabbage,
sweet corn, cucumbers, potatoes, squash,
strawberries, tomatoes.
J
(")scP.ola
Polk
Brmvard
c:::,
Dade
00
Monroe
8
Commercial
Vegetables
Watermelons
Figure 8 Principal vegetable production areas in south Florida (FDACS 1991).
Cattle Industry
here are about 3.6 million acres of cattle
range in the study area. Based on data from
eleven of the twenty counties in the study area,
about 50 percent of the range is native and 50
percent is improved. Range acreage is steadily
decreasing, primarily due to citrus
development, but with some loss to urban
development. Cattle range in southwest Florida
decreased 1I percent from 1.5 million acres to
1.34 million acres between 1986 and 1990
(Townsend 1991).
T
Florida ranks lOth in the United States for the
total number of cows and calves. The majority
of these cattle are raised on south Florida
ranches. Though livestock are prevalent in
south Florida, losses to panthers are rare
(Maehr et al 1990). Conversion to extensive
monocultures of exotic grasses can adversely
impact suitable panther habitat. However, like
citrus development, pasture improvement is a
function of market trends and is an expensive
undertaking. Many larger ranches prefer a
combination of native grasslands (wet and dry
-19-
-------JlfJr------TIIreats To Panther I1ahitat
prairies) and improved pastures that minimize
operational costs while providing
grazing options.
Improved pastures overseeded with legumes
and then fertilized provide food for the whitetailed deer, the primary prey of the panther. The
value of pasture as panther habitat depends on
the size and configuration of the pasture and
the interspersion and connectivity of native
cover adjacent to the pasture.
Mineral Industry
il and Gas: Oil and gas reserves are drilled
in Collier, Lee and Hendry Counties. There
are about 26 active wells, 100 abandoned wells,
and 80 permitted, yet undrilled wells in the
Sunniland ReefTrend Region. The potential for
important oil deposits increases on a gradient
from Palm Beach to Collier County.
O
Seismic survey crews seeking oil- and gasbearing strata lay cable connecting explosives,
geophones and recording equipment through
remote areas. Viable wells may pmduce for
years prolonging localized disturbance. Narrow
strips of vegetation are cleared to permit
equipment access on seismic survey lines.
Native habitat is cleared for wells, storage
tanks, and pipelines. All weather roads provide
access to formerly remote regions and
fragment habitat.
Reclamation efforts focus on the removal of
drilling pads and access roads following closure
of the site. This includes removing all waste
and debris, restoring the original contour of the
land, and revegetating the affected site with
native vegetation as specified by the
Department of Environmental Protection.
Retention of the access road and pad may be
granted to the landowner only where deemed
environmentally appropriate. Overall impacts
to panther recovery from oil and gas activities
are expected to be minimal by incorporating
careful consideration of drilling pad and
access road siting and use of appropriate
reclamation measures.
Open-Pit Mining: Open-pit mining is used to
extract sand (27,362 acres). shell (80 acres).
peat (49 acres), Iimerock (54,235 acres). and
phosphate (426,000 acres). The level of human
activity associated with the operation of trucks
and equipment is high. Native vegetation is
removed during the mining process. Access
roads fragment native habitat.
Phosphate mining is conducted on such a large
scale that large areas of habitat are rendered
unsuitable for panthers during the mining
process. However, the Department of
Environmental Protection is in the process of
implementing a region-wide Integrated Habitat
Network that attem pts to secure and connect
important wildlife habitats through land
restoration (Cates 1992).
HIGIlWAYS
he number of vehicles registered in
southwest Florida increased three-fold, to
almost I million, between 1974 and 1987
(SWFRPC 1990). Panther/vehicle collisions were
the greatest source of reported panther
mortality during that period. The Florida
Panther Interagency Committee and Florida
Department of Transportation have taken the
following steps to reduce panther mortality on
highways (Logan and Evink 1988):
T
1. Five speed zones on State Road 29, State
Road 84, and US Highway 41 were posted in
1985 to notify motorists of panther crossings
and 55 mph (day) and 45 mph (night) speed
limits. The Collier County Sheriff's Office,
Florida Highway Patrol, and the Florida Game
and Fresh Water Fish Commission enforce
the speed limits.
2. A brochure on panther highway mortality was
produced in 1985. Toll clerks on State Road
-20-
Threats To Panther Habitat
---------/l(!jf--------84 passed them out for several years.
Distribution ceased, however, when careless
motorists created a litter problem around
toll booths.
3. Nine miles of State Road 29 adjacent to Bear
Island were realigned in 1986. Wide grass
shoulders were established using an
abandoned railroad right-of-way. Wider
shoulders provide more visibility for
motorists and panthers. Another 18 miles of
State Road 29 between US Highway 41 and
Bear Island will be realigned by 1995.
4. Protective features of the State Road 84/
Interstate 75 conversion include 36 wildlife
underpasses and associated fencing in
Collier County. The underpasses are used by
panther, bear, deer, and other wildlife (Foster
and Humphrey 1992).
5. Discussions regarding placement of wildlife
underpasses under State Road 29 were
initiated in 1990. Preliminary design and cost
planning are complete. Construction of the
first wildlife underpass is underway.
Although vehicle related mortalities are of
concern, they may not be as significant as the
long term impacts of highway construction, i.e.
habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, and
increased human activity.
RECREAlION
O
utdoor recreation in undeveloped portions
of south and central Florida revolve
primarily around hunting and fishing. While
other activities such as hiking, birdwatching,
and camping occur locally, activities associated
with consumptive fish and wildlife uses prevail.
The use of off-road vehicles and airboats are
the primary methods of transportation within
remote areas of south Florida.
Schortemeyer et al (1991) reported hunting as a
popular activity that has been much less
disruptive to the landscape than has
agricultural or urban development and has
been a traditional activity in southern Florida
since first occupied by humans. Native
Americans in southern Florida, principally the
Calusa and Tequesta Cultures, depended
heavily on white-tailed deer and other wildlife
species for food and implements (Wing 1965).
The development of modern firearms and selfpropelled off-road vehicles created the hunting
conditions prevalent today. Jansen (1987)
surveyed hunters in Big Cypress National
Preserve and found the two most popular game
animals were deer and hogs.
Opportunities for hunting in southern Florida
have changed as have land ownerships and
uses. Hunting today occurs on public areas
such as the Big Cypress National Preserve and
on private ranches where hunting rights are
leased to individuals or small groups. Hunting
leases may cost from $8.00 to $2500 per
hectare and cover up to several square
kilometers (M. Ramsey, Collier Enterprises,
personal communication). Hunting
opportunities on public lands vary from
complete closures (Collier-Seminole State Park,
Everglades National Park. Fakahatchee Strand
State Preserve, Florida Panther National
Wildlife Refuge) to 170 days annually of
combined hunting seasons on Big Cypress
National Preserve.
t is difficult to understand the relationships
between different levels and types of
recreation with panther use of certain areas.
Human activity is only one of several factors
influencing panther behavior. The south Golden
Gate Estates, which generally is unregulated in
terms of human access, is presently only
occasionally used by panthers, despite
containing over 40,000 acres of suitable panther
habitat. Panthers occurring in Everglades
National Park, where access is controlled and
no hunting has occurred in nearly five decades,
I
-21-
Threats To Panther Habitat
--------~--------
become functionally extinct in 1990. While
environmental factors (mercury, hydrology, etc.)
likely contributed to the decline of Everglades
panthers, human recreation did not. However,
unregulated human activity is likely responsible
for panther avoidance of the south Golden
Gate Estates.
Panthers co-exist with recreational activities,
including hunting, on public and private lands
throughout their range, but in virtually all
cases, those activities are properly
regulated. Efforts should continue towards
better management of recreation on public
lands to assure the needs of panthers are met.
-22-
South Florida Conservation Land Inventory
SOUTH FLORIDA CONSERVATION
LAND INVENTORY
onservation land ownership may be public
consist of habitats which are less suitable for
or private. There are about 3.4 million
panther use. An inventory of conservation lands
is useful in determining future habitat
acres of public and private conservation lands
preservation strategies. The south Florida
in south Florida (Table 2). The combined home
inventory includes existing conservation lands,
ranges of 43 panthers tracked by the Florida
active acquisition projects and inactive
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission and
acquisition projects.
the National Park Service from 1981 to 1991
totals 3. I million acres.
However, telemetry data show
that only 47 percent of the
occupied panther range occurs
on public lands. The publicly
owned lands used most by the
panther include; the Florida
Panther National Wildlife
Refuge (26,916 acres), Big
Cypress Seminole Indian
Reservation (52,338 acres),
Fakahatchee Strand State
Preserve (74,374 acres)
Miccosukee Indian
Reservation (267,600 acres),
Everglades National Park
(450,000 acres excluding
water), and Big Cypress
National Preserve (728,000
Existing Conservdt!O!l An~',l"
acres). However, large
!\clive Acquisiliol} A[c,1\
portions of the southern Big
In,lClivc Acquisitiol} Areas
Cypress basin and the
Everglades National Park
Figure 9. South Florida conservation land inventory. Letters key to Table 2.
C
-23-
----_.. ._. . . . . . «-'-----South Florida Conservation Land Inventory
EXISTING CONSERVATION LANDS - FEDERAL
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Big Cypress Seminole Indian Resenration
Brighton Seminole Indian Reservation
Miccosukee Indian Reservation
Avon Park Bombing Range
Big Cypress National Preserve
Everglades National Park (excluding water)
Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge
Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge
AGENCY
ACREAGE
Bureau of lndian Affairs
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Department of Defense
National Park Service
National Park Service
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Fish and Wildlife Service _ _ ~
SUBTOTAL
52,338
35,796
267,600
110,106
728,000
450,000
26,916
_ _ _ 145,666
1,816,422
EXISTING CONSERVATION LANDS - STATE
1
I
K
L
M
N
o
P
o
R
S
T
U
V
Collier~Seminoie
State P~-Hk
Fakahatchee Strand Sute Preserv2
Highlands Hammock State Park
Myakka River Stat'.:: Park
Dupuis Reserve State Forest
Lake Arbuckle State Forest
Cedi M Webb Wildlife Management Area
Everglades Wildlife Management Areas
Ft. Drum Wildlife Management Area
].W. Corbett Wildlife Management Area
KICCO WildHfe Management Area
Southern Glades Wildlife ff Environmental Area
Nicodemus Slough
Strazulla
Department of Environmental PHJtection
Department of Environmental Protection
Department of Environmental Protection
Department of Environmental Protection
Division of Forestry
Division of Forestry
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission
South Florida Water Management District
South Florida Water Mana~,:m~~~.oi~tric_t_ _,
SUBTOTAL
6,423
74,374
4,604
45,540
21,875
10,697
65,343
739,451
7,198
57,892
7,426
29,643
2,219
,~_,8~~
1,074,550
EXISTING CONSERVATION LANDS - PRIVATE
W
X
Y
Archbold Biological Station
Audubon's Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary
Audubon's Kissimmee Prairie Sanctuary
14,840
10,560
8,020
Archbold Biological Statlun
National Audubon Society
National Audubon Society
SUBTOTAL
33,420
ACTIVE ACOUISITION PROJECTS - FEDERAL
Z
East Everglades
_ _ _ _ _~()4,08.'!
National Park Service
SUBTOTAL
ACTIVE ACQUISITION PROjECTS - STATE
M
South Golden Gate Estates
BB
Lake Wales Ridge Ecosystems
CC
Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed
DD
Paradise Run
EE
Kissimmee River
FF
GDCJPeace River
GG
lack Creek
HH
Lake Manatee Lower Watershed
11
Upper Myakka River Watershed
INACTIVE ACQUISITION PROIECTS - STATE
II
Belle Meade
KK
Fisheating Creek
LL
Loxahatchee Slough
MM
Model Land Basins
NN
Pal-Mar
00
Telegraph Swamp
PP
Myakka River
00
Prairie/Shell Creek
RR
Ringling MacArthur
104,084
DepartmentDLEnvironmental Protection
Department of Environmental Protection
South Florida Water Management District
South Florida Water Management District
South Florida Water Management District
Southwest Florida Water Management District
Southwest Florida Water Management District
SouthwestFlorida Water Management District
Southwest Florida Water Managem~nt District _
SUBTOTAL
42,000
32,480
54,712
4,265
75,000
8,568
3,200
24,700
9,466
254,391
South Florida Water Management District
South Florida Water Management District
South Florida Water Management District
South Florida Water Management District
South Florida Water Management District
South Florida Water Management District
Southwest Florida Wate'r Management District
Southwest Florida Water Management District
Southwest Florida Water Managen:ent District
SUBTOTAL
40,846
43,872
13,000
31,000
28,433
10,000
2,400
9,377
8,538
187,466
TOTAL ALL CONSERVATION LANDS
3,470,333
Table 2. South Florida conservation land inventory.
-24-
South Florida Conservation Land Inventory
---------«---------Existing: Existing conservation lands are
projects that are 50 to I 00 percent complete,
and have active natural resource management
programs. There are 24 projects managed by
four federal agencies and three state agencies.
Private non-profit groups manage three
projects (33,420 acres).
Active: Active acquisition projects are
approved projects in which less than 50 percent
of the land has been acquired. Three major
efforts are underway to protect I 96,660 acres
used by the panther. The National Park Service
is expanding Everglades National Park (104,084
acres). Two state projects, Corkscrew Regional
Ecosystem Watershed (50,576 acres) and
South Golden Gate Estates (42,000 acres), will
protect panther habitat in Lee County and
Collier County.
Inactive: Inactive acquisition projects are
formally designated projects where little, if any,
land acquisition has occurred due to fiscal
constraints, time constraints, landowner
preference, dr other factors. Four areas used by
the panther have been identified for state
acquisition. They are Model Lands Basin
(31,000 acres) located in Dade County; Belle
Meade (40,846 acres) located in Collier County,
Fisheating Creek (43,872 acres) located in
Glades County, and Telegraph Swamp (10,000
acres) located in Charlotte County. See Figure 9
and Appendix A for details on south Florida
conservation lands.
-25-
--91:-
Methods of HalJitat Preservation
----------IIf!f:---.-------METHODS OF HABITAT PR,ESER,VATION
Conservation Easements
ccupied and potential panther habitat can
be preserved using conservation
easements; landowner incentives, tax reform,
existing regulations, acquisition, etc. The habitat
preservation mechanisms available are briefly
described and discussed in relation to panther
habitat preservation. More detailed information
on each of the foilowing methods of habitat
preservation can be found in Appendix B.
a) Voluntary: The landowner agrees to
voluntarily maintain portions of their
property comprised of suitable panther
habitats. The lands to be preselved and the
length of time for which they will be
preserved are determ i ned on a case by case
basis.
LESS-TiIAN FEE TITLE PRESERVATION
OPTIONS
b) Compensatory: The landowner is paid to
maintain portions of their property
comprised of suitable panther habitats. The
lands to be preserved, the length of time for
which they will be preserved and the price
paid to the landowner to preserve the land
are determined on a case by case basis.
O
Native range grazing and sustained yield
forestry are tolerated more by panthers than
citrus groves, vegetable farms, improved
pastures or urban developments. Incentives
that encourage landowners to retain, and
maintain, suitable panther habitats are needed.
The following list of less-than fee title options
and incentives can help preserve suitable
panther habitats while allowing the landowner
to retain title to, and derive income, from
the property.
Management/Conservation Plans: The Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, the
South Florida Water Management District, and
other appropriate agencies could work with
certain landowners to develop a master plan for
each ownership. The plan, once drafted, would
need to meet the approval of the Florida
Panther Interagency Committee.
Landowner Agreements: The landowners
could be surveyed to ascertain current and
projected development plans This would help
the Florida Panther Interagency Committee
identify those lands slated for development and
focus habitat preservation efforts accordingly.
Ideally the landowner could sign an agreement
stating that development is not anticipated for
x number of years. The agreement could be
renewed periodically as determined by
the landowner.
forest Stewardship Program: A list of south
Florida landowners with a minimum of forty
acres could be developed by the Florida
Panther Interagency Committee. The
landowners would receive a detailed package
explaining the program and encouraging them
to sign up. The mail out should be coordinated
through the Florida Division of Forestry. The
Florida Advisory Council on Environmental
Education has expressed interest in possibly
funding the mail out
-27-
Methods of Habitat Preservat.ioil.
lIti
Ii@!
I1ffI: ...-......-
Ii
U.S. Man and Biosphere Program: The
objective of the U.s Man and the Biosphere
Program is to develop a scientific basis linking
the natural and social sciences for rational use
and conversion of the biosphere, that portion
of the Earth which contains living organisms.
and to improve the relationship between
humans and their environment. Established in
i 970 by the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO),
the U.s. Man and the Biosphere Program
provides a formal mechanism for uniting and
coordinating diffuse national and international
research, conservation and training activities.
Tax Reforms
a) Inheritance Tax: Two bills have been drafted
that would give landowners within 50 miles
of a national park or metropolitan area an
estate tax exemption for a perpetual
conservation easement on the property.
Representative L.F. Payne (D-Va.) introduced
H.R. 2031 and Senator lohn Chaffee (R-R.I.)
introduced the Senate version IS. 1013). The
legislation is subject to a joint House-Senate
vote. Estates with a conservation easement
that meets Section 170( h) criteria of the 1986
Internal Revenue Service Code would be tax
exempt on that portion of land covered by
the easement. The value of development
rights retained are not exempt from estate
taxes but payment would be delayed until
the rights were sold. The bill could also
reverse recent IRS rulings that consider the
donation or sale of a conservation easement
on some farmland as a disposition of
property that triggers the recapture of estate
taxes. Disadvantages: The Federal
government anticipates a loss of revenue.
Advantages Landowners retain title to the
property, the land remains on the local real
estate tax rolls.
mmBlliJ1Wll.
i.ill_~iWilWJM!.
r .?l
f[Ti1I*,i\\WM*)ffim'i&1ii!t~_
m:
...
...
..,_...__.......
b) Greenbelt Law: The greenbelt law grants a
tax exemption for agricultural land uses but
does not distinguish between agricultural
practices such as sustained yield forestry or
native range cattle grazing which are
considered "greener" and more conducive to
panther habitation than agricultural practices
such as uninterrupted citrus groves,
vegetable farms, and improved pastures. The
law is green in that it encourages agricultural
land uses (as opposed to commercial,
industrial or residential land uses) but does
not address maintaining native habitats. The
law could be amended to include lands idled
for preservation of suitabie panther habitats.
The law could also be amended to grant a
more favorable tax exemption to lands where
native habitat is retained and maintained
for wildlife.
c) Bluebelt Law: A state referendum
authorizing tax exemptions for lands
maintained for aquifer recharge was adopted
in 1988. The enabling legislation was never
passed The State of Florida could be
encouraged to pass the legislation.
Wetland Regulations: The Army Corps of
Engineers administers Section 404 of the Clean.
Water Act which regulates dredge and fill
projects in federal jurisdictional wetlands. The
Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service have oversight on federal
permits. Two wetland identification processes,
the Special Area Management Plan
administered by the Corps of Engineers and the
Advanced Identification program administered
by the Environmental Protection Agency, have
been used in Broward and Collier Counties. The
Florida Department of Environmental
Protection issues, and the Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission has oversight
(with respect to fish and wildlife protection), on
state wetland permits
1m
-28--
k
ZL&
&
Methods of Hallitat Preservation
---------JllK----------
The 1985 Growth Management Act: The 1985
Growth Management Act has helped preserve
suitable panther habitat by halting large scale
subdivision of lands ill suited for urban
development. The Act discourages leapfrog
development, promotes urban infill
development, promotes urban redevelopment
and sets low zoning densities in rural areas.
Open space and recreational elements of
County Comprehensive Plans protect native
habitats. Additional panther habitat
preservation could be accomplished through
the Intergovernmental Coordination Element of
County Comprehensive Plans. Appropriate
agency personnel should actively monitor
comprehensive plan amendments and
renewals, with respect to panther habitat
preservation and related issues, for those
counties encompassed by this plan.
Endangered Species Act: The Endangered
Species Act governs all aspects of the Florida
panther recovery program. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service). through the Secretary
of the Interior, is authorized to: designate the
land, water, and air space a listed species
needs for survival and recovery as "critical
habitat" (Section 4); consult with other federal
agencies on activities that may affect lIsted
species (Section 7), restrict take and trafficking
of listed species (Section 9). and finally the
Service is authorized to issue an incidental take
permit in return for a habitat conservation plan
(Section 10).
Purchase of Development Rights
a) Agricultural Lands: The American Farmlands
Trust could purchase commercial, industrial
and residential development rights on
agricultural lands threatened by urban
development. This would prevent the loss of
panther habitats to reestablishment of
agricultural lands displaced by urban
development. The transaction would be
recognized in a legal instrument recorded
with the property deed and could preserve
agricultural lands in perpetuity.
b) Native Habitat: Several private non-profit
conservation organizations and members of
the Florida Panther Interagency Committee
could provide funds to purchase agricultural
and urban development rights on suitable
native habitats. The transaction would be
recognized lin a legal instrument recorded
with the property deed and would preserve
panther habitats in perpetuity.
FEE TITLE PRESERVATION OPTIONS
ee title acquisition is the most direct
method of habitat preservation. A fee title
interest could be acquired when (I) the area's
natural resources, flora and fauna require
permanent preservation not otherwise assured,
(2) a proposed land use could adversely impact
the area's natural resources, flora or fauna, or
(3) when it would be the most practical and
economical way to assemble small tracts into a
viable resource management unit. The
emphasis of fee title acqUisition is on willing
sellers only. The status of fee title acquisition
by federai agencies, state agencies and private
non-profit conservation groups can be found in
Appendix B.
F
Right of First Refusal: For an agreed upon
price the landowner would grant an agency of
the Florida Panther Interagency Committee the
opportunity to negotiate for purchase of the
property if and when the landowner decides it
is in their best interest to sell or the
Interagency Committee would void their right
to negotiate for purchase of the property thus
allowing it to be soid on the open market.
Mitigation Banks: Two Southwest Florida
Regional Mitigation Parks have been
-29-
~
,---- l S ,
"'wm ImWilW!(JiW:ll!DJ
Tlf
WIgs!
"~
w
~M
_
""
Areas Prol,osed for Hahitat Preservation
AREAS PROPOSED FOR
HABITAT PRESERVATION
elemetry data were collected on 43 Florida
the lands occupied by panthers monitored via
panthers between 1981 and 1991. Total data radio-telemetry.
points were 17,386, wi th two-thirds ( I 1,487) of
The habitat analysis process used in this plan
those collected on publicly owned lands and
identified 1,253,102 acres of panther habitat
one-third (5,899) on privately owned lands.
considered essential in maintaining a selfLikewise, ten years of telemetry data show that
sustaining population of panthers in south
panthers used at least 3.1 million acres in
south Florida. About 47 percent of the occupied Florida, thus warranting preservation.
Approximately 326,802 acres of this total are
range is publicly owned and 53 percent is
already included in existing federal and state
privately owned. Use of public lands and areas
preservation programs unrelated to this plan.
proposed for preservation are shown for each
This
plan recommends the development of
panther (Figure 10). Only four panthers ranged
additional site-specific habitat preservation
exclusively on publicly owned lands. Twentystrategies for the balance, 926,300 acres.
four panthers were located on privately owned
Habitats identified for preservation have been
lands more than twenty percent of the time.
Fourteen panthers
%
spent more than
120r-------------------------,
fifty percent of
Proposed Areas
. . Public Lands
their time on
100
privately owned
lands
T
80
Although suitable
panther habitat
may occur in other 60
areas of Florida
(and possibly
other southeastern 40
states), and
anecdotal evidence 20
suggests that
panthers may exist
elsewhere in the
o0 0 0 3 0 1 342 2 3 2 0 1 4 3 3 001 001 2 1 134 1 234 1 321 2 2 3 2 1 2
1 6 7 8 8 4 6 0 2 6 9 3 3 5 3 2 7 2 9 2 4 5 6 791 0 1 0 5 4 2 7 1 931 0 3 8 8 4
study area, the
focus of this
Panther #
preservation plan
Figure 10. Evaluation of the percentage of radio telemetry points
is on priority
per panther on public lands (solid black) and areas proposed for habitat
habitats nearest
preservation (grey). Panther numbers are read vertically.
-33-
-------I1fIJ(-------
Areas Proposed for Habitat Preservation
organized into discrete ecological units. See
Appendix C for details.
interest ownership patterns, fiscal limitations,
and time constraints.
Information used in the identification of
habitats warranting preservation included
telemetry data, a forested habitat analysis,
county land use plans, and land ownership
patterns. Native habitat was identified using
Florida Department of Transportation and/or
Mark Hurd aerial photographs and then verified
by ground inspections and/or aerial overflights.
For identified habitats to meet the needs of the
panther they had to be of sufficient size to
support several panthers or be contiguous with
occupied range, contain significant forest cover,
contain few residences, and few highways.
Habitats identified for preservation have been
classified as either Priority 1 or Priority 2, based
on panther use and/or habitat quality.
South of the Caloosahatchee River 741,530
acres, contiguous with the south Florida public
land base occupied by panthers, have been
identified for preservation. Approximately
272,930 acres here have already been
designated for acquisition by existing federal
and state programs unrelated to this plan. The
balance, 468,600 acres, is divided into Priority I
lands (203,500 acres) and Priority 2 lands
(265,100 acres). See Figure Ii and Appendix C
for details.
Habitats north of the Caloosahatchee River
meeting the survival requirements of the
Florida panther have also been identified. There
is anecdotal evidence of panthers in the Myakka
Priority I: The lands most
frequently used by the panther
and/or lands of high quality
native habitat suitable for the
panther should be preserved
first. The preservation option
utilized will depend on
landowner preference, agency
interest, ownership patterns,
fiscal limitations, and time
constraints
Priority 2: The lands less
frequently used by the panther
and/or lands of lower quality
native habitat interspersed
with intensive agriculture serve
as buffer zones to urban
development and other forms
of undesirable encroachment
and should be preserved
second. The preservation
option utilized will depend on
landowner preference, agency
iI!IIMiil!l"
Existing C0r15prvation Areas
1 Habitat
r=t=~
:===J Pr!oritv 2 Habitat
.' -
Figure i I. Areas proposed for habitat preservation
-
south of Caioosahatchee River.
-34--
!WW7
' fSj'ij
-
Areas ProJlosed for Habitat Preservation
identified for preservation.
Approximately 53,872 acres
have been designated for
acquisition by existing state
and county programs
unrelated to this plan. The
balance, 457,700 acres, is
divided into Priority 1 lands
(324,800 acres) and Priority 2
lands (132,900 acres). See
Figure 12 and Appendix C for
details.
Habitat linkages (connecting
the various ecological units) to
facilitate dispersal and gene
flow will be important to
_
Priority I Habitilt
achieving and maintaining
§
Priorily 2 Habitat
population viability. Actions to
identify habitat linkage needs/
I±H±l Priority Habitat South of River
locations. and the
Existing Conserviltion Lands
development of strategies to
achieve successful
Figure 12. Areas proposed for habitat preservation
establishment
and
north of Caloosahatchee River.
maintenance of linkages are
considered an integral
component of this plan and panther recovery.
River/Peace River basin and limited telemetry
Linking lands north and south of the
data on panthers in the Fisheating Creek basin.
Caloosahatchee River by corridor would require
Translocation of panthers across the river may
be necessary to meet genetic and demographic
maintenance of existing native habitats east of
LaBelle, FL and/or restoration of native habitats
management needs if natural dispersal is
west of LaBelle, FL.
insufficient A total of 511,572 acres have been
m
-35-
-%-
Recommendations
RECOMMENDATIONS
I. Develop site-specific habitat preservation
strategies for the lands (Figure II)
considered essential to maintaining the
Florida panther population south of the
Caloosahatchee River at its present level.
Strategies should emphasize preservation
of suitable panther habitat 011 private lands
by methods that retain private ownership of
those lands to the extent possible, and
implement management practices on public
lands that, based on existing data, would be
expected to result in improved habitat
conditions for the panther.
mplementing Recommendation #1 would
preserve 98 percent of the land used by 39 of
the 43 panthers monitored between 198] and
1991. The three exceptions are female #21 who
used what are now mostly developed areas
southeast of Florida City in Dade County, male
#28 who spent several months north of
Corkscrew Swamp in Lee County, and male #24,
the only panther captured and tracked north of
the Caloosahatchee River in Glades County.
I
A total of 741,530 acres south of the
Caloosahatchee River and adjacent to public
lands in south Florida have been identified as
suitable panther habitat. Approximately
272,930 acres have been designated for
acqUisition by existing federal and state
programs unrelated to this plan. The balance,
468,600 acres, is divided into Priority 1 lands
(203,500 acres) and Priority 2 lands (265,100
acres). The areas proposed for habitat
preservation, in conjunction with existing
public lands, will protect 75 percent '
(2,325,000 acres) of known occupied panther
range, Of 17,386 telemetry points collected
between 1981 and 1991, 16,986 (98%) occurred
on existing public lands and areas proposed for
habitat preservation, Implementing
Recommendation #1 would preserve the lands
where the 43 panthers studied were found 98
percent of the time, Please see Appendix C for
detailed descriptions and maps of the areas
proposed for habitat preservation
2. Develop site,·specific habitat preservation
strategies for the lands (Figure 12) which lie
north of the Caloosahatchee River. These
lands, if not presently occupied by panthers
are suitable for occupation by panthers
dispersing, or translocated, from south
Florida and, in combination with the lands
described in Recommendation #1, would
contribute significantly to the goal of
achieving a viable, self-sustaining panther
population in south Florida.
total of 511,572 acres north of the
Caloosahatchee River have been identified
as suitable panther habitat. Approximately
53,872 acres have been designated for
acquisition by existing state and county
programs unrelated to this plan, The balance,
457,700 acres, is divided into Priority 1 lands
(324,800 acres) and Priority 2 lands (132,900
acres). Panther #24 was tracked in eastern
Glades County for eight months in j 988. Over
77 percent of the telemetry data collected on
this individual occur in the Fisheating Creek
Ecological Unit. Please see Appendix C for
detailed descriptions and maps of the areas
proposed for habitat preservation.
A
-37-
Recommendations
-------Jff!K-------
3. Support completion of current acquisition
programs affecting those lands identified as
essential to maintaining a self-sustaining
panther population in south Florida.
ey properties in south Golden Gate Estates
and Fakahatchee Strand have been
scheduled for acquisition but progress is slow.
The 79,000-acre Fakahatchee Strand State
Preserve is interspersed with 2.5-acre inholdings
totaling 5,500 acres. The Department of
Environmental Protection has acquired 6,000
acres of the 42,OOO-acre South Golden Gate
Estates since 1990. Golden Gate Estates is also
comprised of 2.5-acre lots. The state needs
administrative assistance to process deeds,
offers, and other administrative paperwork in
order to accelerate acquisition. The Florida
Panther Interagency Committee, in order to
support completion of these
two projects could; I) Request
that the Florida Legislature
apportion some Preservation
2000 funds for acquisition
operations, and 2) Request
assistance from private nonprofit organizations for
administrative support.
K
Finally, the State Road 29
corridor between Big Cypress
National Preserve, Fakahatchee
Strand State Preserve and the
Florida Panther National
Wildlife Refuge merits close
monitoring to preclude
development. Eminent domain
should be utilized if necessary
as prOVided for by State
legislation in reference to
this project.
4. Evaluate the need to
designate "Critical Habitat"
for the Florida panther.
esignation of critical habitat for the south
Florida panther population could increase
public awareness and sensitize federal. state,
regional and county agencies, private
organizations, and landowners to the habitat
needs of the panther. Critical habitat
designation would not infringe on private
property rights. Critical habitat designation
would only apply to activities having a federal
connection, such as Corps of Engineers and
Environmental Protection Agency wetland
permitting, Federal Highway Administration
road construction and funding, and u.s.
Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home
Administration programs. The minimum area,
3.0 million acres, recommended for evaluation
is shown in Figure 13. Seventy-two percent or
2,160,000 acres is publicly owned and twentyeight percent or 834,000 acres is privately
D
A
o
PROPOSED
CRITICAL HABITAT
mm Public Lands
~ Private Lands
Figure 13. Minimum area that should be evaluated
for critical habitat designation.
-38-
Recommendations
---------J«----------
owned. Of the 834,000 acres that are privately
owned thirty-one percent or 258,500 acres are
being acquired by a public agency under land
acquisition projects unrelated to the Florida
Panther Habitat Preservation Plan.
5. Establish a full-time position within the u.s.
Fish and Wildlife Service to promote,
coordinate, and monitor multi-agency
implementation of the Florida Panther
Habitat Preservation Plan. The person in this
role will utilize guidance from the Florida
Panther Interagency Committee and will work
closely with the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service
Florida Panther Recovery Coordinator, state
agencies, regional planning councils, local
governments, landowners, and special
interest groups to accomplish the goals of
the Habitat Preservation Plan.
Implementation of the Habitat Preservation
Plan will be accomplished through a variety
of tasks assigned to, or taken on by, the
members of the Florida Panther Interagency
Committee.
5.1 The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission will coordinate activities
associated with working with landowners
in the development of specific
Management/Conservation Plans for
lands identified in Recommendations I
and 2. The plans will be subject to
Florida Panther Interagency
Committee approval as they pertain to
the Florida panther.
6. Design and develop landowner incentives
to preserve panther habitat on private
lands; initiatives may include tax reforms
and other financial incentives that require
State and/or Federal legislative action.
I
ncentives that encourage the retention of
native habitat are emphasized. Landowners
willing to retain and maintain native
landscapes should receive tax relief equal to or
exceeding that of the so called "Greenbelt
Exemption". Private non-profit representatives
and appropriate agency representatives could
write and promote legislation to encourage tax
relief for retention of native cover as part of the
"Greenbelt Exemption". The State of Florida
could be encouraged to pass the enabling
legislation for the Bluebelt Exemption to
provide tax relief on lands maintained for water
purification, aquifer recharge, etc. Inheritance
tax relief may be possible for lands within 50
miles of Everglades National Park and Big
Cypress National Preserve if the "Rural Land
Conservation Act of 1993" is passed. Federal
legislation for a "Panther Reserve Program"
similar to the Conservation and Wetlands
Reserve Programs administered by the
Department of Agriculture would authorize
subsidies for land maintained as suitable
panther habitat
7. Applicable agencies should review
and coordinate compliance of existing
wetland regulations.
ignificant portions of the areas proposed for
preservation are dominated by wetlands.
The Us. Fish and Wildlife Service, Army Corps
of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency,
Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission, the Water Management Districts,
and county governments should review and
coordinate compliance of existing
wetlands regulations.
S
8. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should
utilize Section 7 and Section 9 provisions of
the Endangered Species Act in the
preservation of suitable panther habitats
where applicable.
-39-
Recommendations
--------I!I!'K------u.s.
T
F
he
Fish and Wildlife Service should
inform appropriate federal agencies of the
Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan and
ensure that they consult with the Service as
required by Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act. Areas proposed for habitat
preservation should be monitored to the
maximum extent possible to obviate adverse
habitat modifications.
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act
describes certain circumstances under which
habitat destruction may be a "take" violation
under the act. Take includes "significant habitat
modification or degradation where it actually
kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing
essential behavioral patterns, including
breeding, feeding, and sheltering." This plan
identifies the minimum habitat needed to
support the south Florida population. Ongoing
telemetry studies may show panther range
shifts caused by habitat destruction from
specific development projects. Some displaced
animals may succumb to intraspecific
aggression or highway mortality because of
adverse habitat modifications in their range. In
such cases the u.s Fish and Wildlife Service
may seek to invoke Section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act.
9. Develop a plan for working through Florida's
Growth Management Act to preserve lands
essential to panther recovery.
lorida's growth management regulations
provide an opportunity to address
protection of endangered species habitat at the
state, regional, and local levels. Review of, and
participation in, the Habitat Preservation Plan
process by the Department of Community
Affairs, Regional Planning Councils, and county
planning staff is encouraged. The Florida
Panther Interagency Committee should work
with county and regional planning staff to
establish habitat preservation measures in
comprehensive plans.
10. Provide habitat preservation data to the
Forest Stewardship Program Coordinator of
the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission for plans prepared for private
lands essential to panther recovery.
he Forest Stewardship Program should be
promoted on lands in, and adjacent to, the
areas proposed for habitat preservation. A
mailout should be prepared that explains the
goals of the Forest Stewardship Program in
relation to preservation of suitable panther
habitat and how the landowner may enroll.
Emphasis should be focused on wildlife
management and forest restoration. The
Division of Forestry should be requested and
encouraged to integrate the goals of the
Habitat Preservation Plan into all south Florida
Forest Stewardship management plans.
T
-40-
References
REFERENCES
I. Anderson, A.E. 1983. A critical review of literature on puma (Felis concolar). Colorado Division
of Wildlife, Special Report Number 54. 91 pp.
2. Anonymous. 1984. The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal. American Institute of Real Estate
Appraisers. Chicago, IL. 368 pp.
3. Bangs, O. 1898. The land mammals of peninsular Florida and the coast region of Georgia.
Proc. Boston Society of Natural History 23: 157-235.
4. Belden, R.e., and W.B. Frankenberger. 1987. Candidate panther reintroduction sites. Florida
Panther Captive BreedinglReintroduction Feasibility Annual Performance Report.
Endangered Species Project E-I-11. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.
Tallahassee, FL. 14 pp.
5.
_ _ ' _ _ ,KT. McBride, and S.T. Schwikert. 1988. Panther habitat use in southern
Florida. lournal of Wildlife Management 52:661-663.
6. Cates, lames W.H. 1992. A Regional Conceptual Reclamation Plan for the Southern
Phosphate District of Florida. Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Mine
Reclamation. Tallahassee, FL. 55 pp.
7. Cory, e.B. 1896. Hunting and Fishing in Florida. Estes and Lauriat. Boston, MA. 304 pp.
8. Diehl. Janet. and Thomas S. Barrett. 1988. The Conservation Easement Handbook. The Trust
for Public Land and The Land Trust Exchange. San Francisco, CA and Alexandria, VA. 269
pp.
9. Environmental Protection Agency. 1991. Fact Sheet - Advance Identification of Wetlands
Program. Atlanta. GA. 6 pp.
10. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 1991. Vegetable summary 19891990. Florida Agricultural Statistics Service. Orlando, FL. 76 pp.
II. Florida Department of Community Affairs. 1991. Overview of the Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. Tallahassee, FL. 16 pp.
12. Forrester, D.J., 1.A. Conti, and R.e. Belden. 1985. Parasites of the Florida Panther (Felis cancolar
coryl). Proc. HelminthoL Soc. Wash. 52( I ):95-97.
-41-
References
-------«------13. Foster, M.S., and S.R. Humphrey. 1992. Effectiveness of wildlife crossings on Alligator Alley
(1-75) in reducing animal/auto collisions. Final performance report. Florida Game and Fresh
Water Fish Commission. Gainesville, FL. 120 pp.
14. Goldman, EA 1946. Classification of the races of the puma. Pp. 175-302 in S.P. Young and
EA Goldman, (eds.). The Puma, Mysterious American Cat. American Wildlife Institute,
Washington, D.e. 358 pp.
15. Grow, G. 1984. New threats to the Florida Panther. ENFO, Florida Conservation Foundation.
Environmental Information Center, Winter Park, FL.
16, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences and Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife
Research Unit. 1991. Species use of citrus groves and f1atwoodJprairie ponds. IFAS citrus/
wildlife study task report 2.1, 7 August 1991. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
17. Jansen, D.K. 1987. Big Cypress use study. FJorida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.
Tallahassee, FL. 240 pp.
18. Kautz, R. 1989. A comprehensive statewide wildlife habitat system for Florida, project outline
(unpublished). Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Office of Environmental
Services, Tallahassee, FL. 6 pp.
19. Land AcqUisition Programs Integration Committee (CARL). 1990. Florida Preservation 2000
Needs Assessment - Final Report. 37 pp.
20. Layne, J.N., and DA Wassmer. 1988. Records of the panther in Highlands County, Florida.
Florida Field Naturalist. 16:70-72.
21. Logan, TH., and G. Evink. 1988. A Plan for Florida Panther Safety on Collier County
Highways. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission and Florida Department of
Transportation. Tallahassee, FL. 6 pp.
22. Maehr, OS. 1990. The Florida panther and private lands. Conservation Biology 4(2): 167-170.
23.
_ _ . 1992. Florida panther. In S.R. Humphrey, ed. Rare and endangered biota of Florida.
2nd edition. University Presses of Florida. Gainesville, FL.
24.
_ _ , E.D. Land, I.e. Roof and I.W. McCown. 1989. Early maternal behavior in the Florida
panther. American Midland Naturalist. 122:34-4 3.
25.
_ _ ' I.C. Roof, E.D. Land and I.W. McCown. 1989a. First reproduction of a panther (Felis
conca/or coryi) in southwestern Florida, U.S.A. Mammalia 53: 129-131.
26.
_ _ , R,e. Belden, E.D. Land and L. Wilkins. 1990. Food habits of panthers in southwest
Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 54( 3):420-423.
-42-
References
----------.«--------27.
_ _ ' E.D. Land, I.e. Roof and J.W. McCown. I 990a. Day beds, natal dens, and activity of
Florida panthers. Proc. Annual Conference of Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies.
28.
_ _ ' E.D. Land, and J.e. Roof. 1991. Social Ecology of Florida Panthers. National
Geographic Research and ExpJoration 7(4):414-431.
29.
, E.D. Land, and M.E. Roelke. 1991 a. Mortality Patterns of Panthers in Southwest
Florida. Proc. Annual Conference of Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies. 45:201-207.
30. Mazzotti, F.J., LA Brandt, L.G. Pearlstine, W.M. Kitchens, TA Obreza, F.e. Depkin, N.E.
Morris, and e.E. Arnold. 1992. An evaluation of the regional effects of new citrus
development on the ecological integrity of wildlife resources in southwest Florida. Final
Report. South Florida Water Management District. West Palm Beach, FL. 188 pp.
31. McCown, J.w. 1991. Big Cypress deer/panther relationships: Deer herd health and
reproduction. Final Performance Report, Endangered Species Project E-I 11- £-5a. Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Tallahassee, FL. 85 pp.
32. Millsap, BA, IA Gore, D.E. Runde, and e.1. Cerulean. 1990. Setting priorities for the
conservation of fish and wildlife species in Florida. Wildlife Monograph III. 57 pp.
33. Morris, A. (ed). 1990. The Florida Handbook 1991-1992. Peninsular Publishing Company,
Tallahassee, FL.
34. Nelson, E.W., and EA Goldman, 1929. List of the pumas with three described as new.
Journal of Mammalogy. 10:345-350.
35. Roelke, M.E. 1986. Florida panther health and reproduction. Annual Performance Report.
Statewide Wildlife Research. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission,
Tallahassee, FL.
36.
_ _ . Florida Panther Biomedical Investigations. Annual Performance Report, luly I, 1988lune 30, 1989, Endangered Species Project E-I-12 7506 Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission. Tallahassee, FL. 36 pp.
37.
_ _ , D.P. Schultz, C.F. Facemire, S.F. Sundlof, and H.E. Royals. 1991. Mercury
Contamination in Florida Panthers. A Report of the Florida Panther Technical
Subcommittee to the Florida Panther Interagency Committee. 55 pp.
38. Roof, I.C.. and D.S. Maehr. 1988. Sign surveys for Florida panthers on peripheral areas of
their known range. Florida Field Naturalist. 16:81-85.
39. Runde, D.E. 1991. Trends in wading bird nesting populations in Florida 1976- 1978 and 19861989. Non-game Wildlife Section, Division of Wildlife, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission, Tallahassee, FL. 90 pp.
-43-
__ _--_ _
References
........
.........
...
..........
_~----------_ .....
40. SeaL us, KC Lacy, and the Workshop Participants. 1989. Florida Panther (Felis col1color cor~i)
Viability Analysis and Species Survival Plan. Gainesville, FL. 255 pp.
41. Schortemeyer, J.L, OS Maehr, I.W McCown, E.D. Land, and p.o. Manor. 1991. Prey
management for the Florida panther: A unique role for wildlife managers. Pages 512"526 in
Trans. 56th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference.
42. Shermyen, A.H. (ed). 1990. Florida Statistical Abstract University of Florida, Gainesville,
FL. 723 pp.
43. South Florida Water Management District 1993. Save Our Rivers Five Year Plan. 158 pp.
44. Southwest Florida Regional Planning CounciL 1990. Southwest Florida Comprehensive
Regional Policy Plan 543 pp.
45. Southwest Florida Water Management District 1993. Save Our Rivers Five Year Plan. 64 pp.
46. St John's River Water Management District 1993. Save Our Rivers Five Year Plan.
47. Townsend, D. 1991. An Economic Overview of the Agricultural Expansion in Southwest
Florida. 17 pp.
48. US Department of the interior, US Fish and Wildlife Service and US Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1993. 1991 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildiife-Associated Recreation. US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C
49. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Florida Panther Recovery Plan. Prepared by the Florida
Panther Interagency Committee for the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA. 75 pp.
-44-
APPENDIX A - SOUTH FLORIDA
CONSERVATION LAND INVENTORY
EXISTING CONSERVATION LANDS - FEDERAL .
Big Cypress Seminole Indian Reservation
.
Brighton Seminole Indian Reservation
.
Miccosukee Indian Reservation
.
Avon Park Bombing Range ..
Big Cypress National Preserve.
.
Everglades National Park
Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge ...
Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge
EXISTING CONSERVATION LANDS - STATE.
Collier-Seminole State Park
Fakahatchee Strahd State Preserve .....
Highlands Hammock State Park
Myakka River State Park ....
Dupuis Reserve State Forest.
Lake Arbuckle State Forest.
Cecil M. Webb Wildlife Management Area ..
Everglades Wildlife Management Areas ..
Fort Drum Wildlife Management Area ..
J.w. Corbett Wildlife Management Area.
KICCO Wildlife Management Area ..
Southern Glades Wildlife and Environmental Area.
Nicodemus Slough ..
Strazulla
.
.. ..... A-3
.... A-3
.. ..... A-3
..A-3
..
..
..
A-4
A-4
A-5
..
A-6
....... A-6
.. ... A-7
......... A-8
. .... A-8
........ A-9
A-9
.
...... A-IO
..
A-IO
..
..
..
A-II
A-i i
A-II
.
.
A-12
A-I2
.
A-13
.
A-13
.
A-13
EXISTING CONSERVATION LANDS - COUNTY .
..
A-14
EXISTING CONSERVATION LANDS - PRIVATE ...
Archbold Biological Station.
National Audubon Society's Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary ..
National Audubon Society's Kissimmee Prairie Sanctuary..
.
A-14
ACTIVE ACQUISITION PROIECTS - FEDERAL ..
East Everglades.
.
.
ACTIVE ACQUISITION PROJECTS - STATE.
South Golden Gate Estates.
Lake Wales Ridge Ecosystems
.
Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed ..
Paradise Run.
Kissimmee River.
GDc/Peace River ..
lack Creek ..
Lake Manatee Lower Watershed ..
Upper Myakka River Watershed ....
..A-i6
.
A-2i
INACTNE ACQUISITION PROIECTS - STATE.
Belle Meade ...
Fisheating Creek ..
Loxahatchee Slough ..
Model Lands Basin ..
Pal-Mar.
Telegraph Swamp ..
Myakka River ....
Prairie/Shell Creek ....
Ringling MacArthur
..
A-21
.
A-21
-A-I-
.. A-14
.. .. A-15
.. .. A-15
A-i6
A-16
..
A-16
.
A-17
. A-18
. .. A-19
..A-19
..... A-I9
. A-20
.
A-20
.. A-22
. A-22
. .. A-22
.. A-23
.. A-23
.. A-24
.
A-24
...... A-24
--l-V-
Appendix A-South Florida ConservatioIl Land Inventory
EXISTING CONSERVATION LANDS - FEDERAL
T
he 22,000 square mile Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan study area encompasses over 3.4
million acres (5,421 square miles) of existing conservation Ilands. Over 1.8 million acres (2,838
square miles) are owned and managed by Federal agencies.
Three Department of the Interior agencies manage five key areas inhabited by the Florida panther. They
are the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Big Cypress Seminole Indian Reservation, Miccosukee
Indian Reservation, Everglades National Park, and Big Cypress National Preserve. Panther activity has
been documented near two other federal properties; Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge and Avon
Park Bombing Range.
Ilig Cypress Seminole Indian Reservation
The Big Cypress Reservation of the Seminole Tribe of Florida is located in the
northern Everglades in Broward County and Hendry County. Through purchases over a
long period of years and by President Taft's Executive Order 1379 of June 28, 1911,
some 23,062 acres were set aside. Today the Reservation covers about 52,338 acres.
The Big Cypress Reservation qualified for acqUisition under the Reorganization Act of
1934 (25 Us.c. 465 (6)(18)(1934)
The land is held in Trust by the United States Government for the benefit of the
Seminole Indians. All lands are managed as "trust resources" and require development
for the economic benefit of the Reservation while protecting the resources for future
generations. Reservation lands are managed for improved pasture (irrigated), wildlife
habitat, and some citrus production.
Although not specifically managed for the Florida panther and other endangered
species, the Big Cypress Reservation is subject to all Federal endangered species
regulations. This mostly undeveloped tract provides habitat for many wildlife species.
/lrighton Seminole Indian Reservation
The Brighton Reservation of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, Glades County, began
with a 1,920 acre land exchange. The remainder was acquired by Executive Order 7868
of April 15, 1938 when 27,086 acres were transferred from Department of Agriculture to
the Department of Interior. The Brighton Reservation qualified for acquisition under
the Reorganization Act of 1934 (25 U.s.c. 465 (6) 18)( 1934). Later, 6,790 acres,
purchased with Indian Reorganization Act funds, brought the total to 35,796 acres. The
land was declared a Seminole Indian reservation pursuant to the Act of July 20, 1956.
Most of the developed land is cattle pasture. A catfish farm and processing plant are
also housed on the Brighton Reservation. The land is held in Trust by the United
States Government for the benefit of the Seminole Tribe. All lands are managed as
"trust resources" and require development for the economic benefit of the Reservation
while protecting the resources for future generations. Reservation lands are managed
for improved pasture (irrigated), wildlife habitat. and some citrus production.
Although not specifically managed for the Florida panther and other endangered
species, the Brighton Reservation is subject to all Federal endangered species
regulations. This mostly undeveloped tract provides habitat for many wildlife species.
Miccosukee Indian Reservation
The Department of Interior approved the Miccosukee Tribe of Florida's Constitution
and Bylaws January II, 1962, thus granting them legal recognition as an Indian Tribe.
The Florida Indian Claims Settlement Act, Public Law 97- 399, was enacted
December 31, 1982, and provided the Miccosukee Tribe with a reservation of
78,600 acres of land owned in fee title and 189,000 acres on a perpetual lease.
-A-3-
Ajtpendix A-South Florida Conservation La,nd Inventory
The land is held in Trust by the United States Government for the benefit of the
Miccosukee Tribe. Ali lands are managed as "trust resources" and require development
for the economic benefit of the Reservation while protecting the resources for future
generations. Reservation lands are managed for improved pasture (irrigated). wildlife
habitat, and some citrus production.
Although not specifically managed for the Florida panther and other endangered
species, the Miccosukee Reservation is subject to all Federal endangered species
regulations. This mostly undeveloped tract provides habitat for many wildlife species.
AVOll I'al'k Ilombing Range
The Avon Park Air Force Range, originally comprised of 218,88 i acres, was acquired
for Department of Defense use by condemnation, lease, or license between 1942 and
1959. Between 1946 and 1966 the United States disposed of all but 106,209 acres.
Today, the 110,106 acre installation is operated by the 56th Combat Support Squadron
to provide a realistic environment for training Tactical Air Command aircrews and
other military units. There are no plans to purchase additional land.
Natural resource programs include cattle grazing, forest management, outdoor
recreation, wildlife habitat management, and endangered species conservation.
Prescribed burning is the primary management tool used to enhance and maintain
native plant communities. Other habitat management activities are mowing, rollerchoppinK and discing.
Eight federally listed threatened/endangered species inhabit Avon Park Bombing
Range. These include the Florida grasshopper sparrow, Florida scrub jay, red-cockaded
woodpecker, wood stork, bald eagle, Audubon's crested caracara, eastern indigo snake,
and wireweed. The bluetail mole skinkand Florida sand skinkhave not been found but
probably occur here. Panther sign was verified at adjacent Lake Arbuckle State Forest.
Big CYlll'ess NaHllllall'l'escrvc
Big Cypress National Preserve was established by the 93rd Congress October II,
1974, when Public Law 93-440 (88 STAT. 1258) was enacted. The purpose of PL 93-440
is "to assure the preservation, conservation, and protection of the natural, scenic,
hydrologk, floral, faunal, and recreational values of the Big Cypress Watershed." The
preserve encompasses 577,000 acres (50%) of the Big Cypress Swamp physiographic
region which consists of cypress, pine flatwoods, hardwood hammock and marsh in
Southwest Florida. The boundar; was expanded in 1989 to include an additional
147,000 acres. Acquisition under PL 93-440 is 90 percent complete while the addition
is just beginning.
The National Park Service attempts to provide a reasonable balance between
congressionally mandated uses not normally found in units of the National Park
system and protection of a fragile wetland ecosystem. Planning, research, and
management must provide for off-road vehicle recreation, hunting, grazing, mineral
extraction, and Native American occupancy, while protecting natural resources.
External threats to water quality and quantity from citrus conversion, urban
development; and degradation of adjacent lands complicate management.
Research efforts focus on hydrology; fire as a major component of south Florida
ecosystems, deer as prey for the Florida panther and recreational hunter, and
eradication of exotic plants.
Resource programs emphaSize long-term monitoring of hydrology, wildlife, vegetation,
and humans. Big Cypress National Preserve has one of the largest fire management
-A-4-
Appendix A-Sonth Florida Conservation Land Inventory
programs (75,000 to 100,000 acres per year) in the National Park system. The
prescribed fire program began in 1979. On the average 20,000 acres were burned each
year, mostly for hazard fuel reduction along roads and around structures, as well as for
grazing leases. The Turner River system has been restored and numerous roads and fill
pads removed. Exotic plant eradication on 60 square miles using conventional
methods such as; mowing, discing, bulldozing, burning, and herbicides continues
while awaiting development of bio-controls.
Endangered wildlife species found here include the Florida panther, wood stork, redcockaded woodpecker, bald eagle, snail kite, eastern indigo snake, and Cape Sable
Seaside Sparrow. Endangered and threatened plants are quite numerous.
EVeI"glades National Park
Everglades National Park was established on December 6, 1947 with a 4,000 acre
donation and now contains 1,398,939 acres. It was designated an International
Biosphere Reserve in 1976, a World Heritage Site in 1979 and a Wetland of
International Significance in 1987.
The park provides habitat for more than 400 species of birds, 25 species of mammals,
60 species of amphibians and reptiles, 125 species of fish from 45 families, more than
120 tree species, 1,000 species of seed bearing plants and numerous epiphytic plant
species including 24 different orchids. Fourteen of these plant and animal species are
on the federal threatened and endangered list.
As south Florida urbanized over the past few decades, scientific documentation
verified the decline of wildlife populations, changes in vegetation, serious water
deficiencies, and general deterioration of the Everglades system. Examples include:
Development; The continued growth of metropolitan Miami demands increasing
amounts of water, and urban development is pushing westward to the park boundary.
Agriculture: Over 700,000 acres of drained Everglades are now in agriculture.
Mercury: High levels have been found in the fish and other wildlife of the Everglades.
Health warnings prohibiting human consumption of fish have been issued and there is
evidence that mercury has played a role in the recent deaths of 3 Florida panthers.
Exotic Species: Introduced plants, such as Brazilian pepper and Melaleuca, spread
rapidly in disturbed soils, out-competing native plants, and changing vegetation
patterns. Exotic animals compete with native species for food and habitat and often
displace the natives.
The holistic concept of perpetuating a natural ecosystem, as opposed to
protecting individual features or species, is a distinguishing aspect of National Park
Service managemen t.
The National Park Service manages an ecosystem by maintaining the natural
abundance, behavior, diversity, and ecological integrity of native animals and plants.
With respect to the Florida panther, they are developing management programs that
perpetuate the natural distribution and abundance of the Florida panther and the
ecosystem on which it depends. Specific examples are the prescribed fire program and
the exotic vegetation removal program. The Everglades National Park prescribed
burning program began in 1959. It is the first such ecosystem management effort in the
National Park Service and is the oldest burning program on public lands in south
Florida. The total number of acres burned in the I 980s exceeded 184,000. About 12,000
to 17,000 acres are prescribed burned annually. The exotic vegetation removal program
has cleared 2 million Melaleuca trees from over 91 ,000 acres to date. A four mile wide
-A-5-
Appendix A-Sonth Florida Conservation Land Inventory
Dupuis Reserve State Forest
"'
The White Belt Ranch was purchased from Mrs. Susan H. DuPuis, wife of the iate
John G. Dupuis, Jr., by the South Florida Water Management District in 1986 with
money from the Water Management Lands Trust Fund (Section 373.59, Florida
Statutes), A 1990 Memorandum of Agreement authorized the Florida Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Forestry to manage the property as the
DuPuis Reserve State Forest.
Acquisition of the 21,875 acre ranch, located in Martin County and Palm Beach
County, protected one of the largest remaining tracts of natural south Florida slash
pine flatwoods from agricultural development. Except for the J. W. Corbett Wildlife
Management Area which borders the forest on the east it is surrounded by orange
groves and sugar cane fields. The biggest threat to Dupuis Reserve State Forest is
isolation of native fauna. Proximity to Corbett Wildlife Management Area is
beneficial but protecting wildlife corridors to other public land in south Florida is of
the utmost importance.
Prior to acquisition, the DuPuis Reserve State Forest was a working cattle ranch. The
hydrology was altered by construction of ditches designed to drain wetlands and
"improve" pasture for livestock grazing. The Water Management District has begun a
project to restore the hydrology of the wetlands.
Management efforts focus on habitat improvement and ecosystem preservation using
prescribed fire, eradication of Brazilian pepper and Melaleuca. Recreational activities
include hiking, horseback riding, and limited hunting. The hunts are managed by the
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.
Endangered and threatened species that occur here include the Florida panther,
Florida sandhill crane, bald eagle, red-cockaded woodpecker, snail kite, and eastern
indigo snake.
Lake Arbuckle State Forest
The 10,697 acre Lake Arbuckle State Forest was established lune 8, 1987. Acquisition
began im 1984 and was completed in 1986. The land was purchased under provisions of
Conservation and Recreation Lands program with money from the CARL Trust Fund
(Section 253.023, Florida Statutes). The land, located in southeast Polk County, is
managed by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division
of Forestry.
Management efforts focus on protection of natural communities, including ancient
scrub islands, flatwoods, and seepage slopes. These communities and their associated
endangered and threatened species are maintained with prescribed fire. Recreational
activities include hiking, picnicking, nature study and limited hunting. The hunts are
managed by the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Forest management goals
enhance the ecosystem.
Residential and agricultural development threaten to isolate the native flora and
fauna. A 640 acre inholding (an operational dairy farm), and surrounding tracts need to
be acquired to solidify state forest boundaries.
There are 17 species of federal or state endangered or threatened plants here. Listed
animal species that occur here include the eastern indigo snake, short-tailed snake,
blue-tailed mole skink, sand skink, bald eagle, Florida scrub jay, snail kite, wood stork,
red-cockaded woodpecker, southeastern American kestrel, Florida black bear, and
Florida panther.
-A-IO-
AJlJlendix A-South Florida
Consf~rvation
Land Inventory
Cecil M. Webb Wildlife Management. Area
Cecil Webb Wildlife Management Area was purchased in 1941 by the Commission of
Game and Fresh Water Fish, the predecessor of the present Commission. The area was
acquired with Pittman-Robertson funds; a federal excise tax collected from the sale of
firearms and ammunition. The area encompasses 65,343 acres in south~ central
Charlotte County. Prior to purchase, it was used for cattle and timber production. By
the time the Commission acquired the land, at about $3.00/acre, the timber had been
c1earcut. and cattle were grazed on open range.
The goals of the Cecil Webb Wildlife Management Area are to; manage for healthy,
productive wildlife and fish communities, and provide public hunting, fishing, and
other compatible outdoor activities. Management objectives include restoration of
native habitats and the protection of nongame and threatened or endangered species.
A number of factors, including past land uses, contributed to the disturbed character
of the tract However, the Commission has sought to restore the hydrology and the
vegetation. The main objective with regard to plant communities has been to manage
them to increase the wildlife carrying capacity by stimulating growth of desirable
plants and eliminating undesirable exotics.
The primary objective for many years was to produce quail habitat Only during the
past two decades have resources become available to restore forests and wetlands.
The hydrology has been restored to that in existence prior to the 1920s and 1930s
drainage projects. Hardwood and cypress trees have been planted but much of the
area remains open. Thus, it is not high quality habitat for white-tailed deer or the
Florida panther. However, the large land area, and the intent of the Commission to
regenerate pine mixed with oaks, bodes well for the future of both species.
Everglades Wildlife Management. Areas
Rotenberger, Holey Land, Brown's Farm, Everglades and Francis S Taylor Wildlife
Management Areas encompass 739.451 acres of Everglades habitat in Palm Beach,
Broward, and Dade County. The ownership pattern is a mosaic of
state-owned and South Florida Water Management District owned land mixed with
private inholdings.
The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission was authorized to manage fish
and wildlife resources in 1952. when the first Wildlife Management Area was
established. Management efforts focus on maintaining and restoring the habitat and
wildlife matrix found in the historic Everglades. while maximizing public recreation
Much of the area is used for water storage and flood control Water levels fluctuate
depending on precipitation. Game species are managed at a density compatible with
high water carrying capacity in order to prevent large scale die-offs during years of
excessive rainfall Panther prey species common here include white-tailed deer, feral
hog, and raccoon.
The Everglades Wildlife Management Areas are considered suitable panther habitat
because of the size, juxtaposition of wildlife management areas and presence of an
adequate prey base. Sub-adult panthers tracked by the Commission frequently use
the area.
Fort Drum Wildlife Management Area
Fort Drum Wildlife Management Area was purchased in 1986 by the South Florida
Water Management District under provisions of the Save Our Rivers legislation
-A-II-
AI'I,eudix A-South Florida Conservation Land Inventory
(Chapter 373, Florida Statutes). All land acquired is managed ".. .in an environmentally
acceptable manner, and to the extent practicable in such a way as to preserve their
natural state and condition."
A cooperative agreement entitles the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission to
manage Fort Drum for game and nongame wildlife and public recreation. The area
contains 7,198 acres and is comprised of pasture, pine flatwoods, dry prairie, oak/palm
hammocks and freshwater wetlands.
Fort Drum has an excellent deer herd with nearly one deer per 12 acres. Water
Management District plans for hydrological restoration may result in habitat changes
unfavorable to deer. Even so, deer and feral hog numbers, will be adequate for the
long term.
Fort Drum is a high ridge (ancient dune) which forms a natural linkage between the
Everglades and the upper St. lohns River basin. This linkage could be important for
genetic interchange between panther populations located in the two areas.
J,W. Corbett Wildlil'e Managemcnj, Area
Corbett Wildlife Management Area encompasses 57,892 acres in northwestern Palm
Beach County. Like Cecil Webb Wildlife Management Area, Corbett is owned by the
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Beginning in 1947 the land was acquired by
the Commission with Pittman-Robertson funds, a federal excise tax on the sale of
firearms and ammunition. Prior to acquisition the primary land uses included timber
harvesting, grazing and vegetable farming. The management goals are to:
I.
2.
3.
4.
Maintain native plant communities;
Maintain/restore water levels and the natural hydroperiod,
Manage wildlife for healthy, self-sustaining populations and,
Provide public recreation consistent with other goals.
Corbett Wildlife Management Area is considered suitable habitat for the Florida
panther because of its size, location on the historic east boundary of the Everglades,
and its proximity to other public lands. Panther use has been documented here and on
the adjacent Dupuis Reserve State Forest.
KICCO Wildlil'e Management Area
The 7,426 acre KICCO Wildlife Management Area was purchased in 1983- 1985 by the
South Florida Water Management District under provisions of the Save Our Rivers
program (Chapter 373, Florida Statutes). All land acquired must be managed "... in an
environmentally acceptable manner, and to the extent practicable in such a way as to
preserve their natural state and condition."
A cooperative agreement, signedlanuary 9, 1987, entitles the Game and Fresh Water
Fish Commission to manage fish and wildlife resources and public recreation. The
Commission focuses on management of communities for natural species abundance,
composition and distribution. Other goals are to restore upiands and wetlands, and to
restore the historic hydroperiod of the Kissimmee River.
Although KICCO is confined to the historic Kissimmee River corridor, the habitat is
considered suitable for use by the panther. Management of habitat and recreation by
the Commission will result in long term benefits to the panther:white-tailed deer, wild
turkey, and other game and nongame species.
-A-12-
A Ppelldix A-S0111 til Florid a eonservatioll Land Inven tory
Southern Clades Wildlife aud Environmental Area
The Southern Glades Wildlife and Environmental Area, located in Dade County, was
purchased by the South Florida Water Management District under provisions of the
Save Our Rivers program (Chapter 373, Florida Statues) between 1983-1991. All land
acquired must be managed " .. .in an environmentally acceptable manner, and to the
extent practicable in such a way as to preserve their natural state and condition."
Over 90 percent of the 29,643 acre proiect has been acquired. The Game and Fresh
Water Fish Commission was designated lead management agency in 1985 and since
1988 has had a full time biologist on site. The boundary was surveyed and posted in
1992 allowing the Commission to police the property.
Increased law enforcement and habitat management may increase deer densities. The
Southern Glades Wildlife and Environmental Area has a history of panther use despite
a low white-tailed deer density. Raccoons and olher small prey are common here.
Two radio-collared panthers used the Southern Glades Wildlife and Environmental
Area until their deaths in 1988 and 1991. An adult female established a territory in
Southern Glades and eastern Everglades National Park. A dispersing sub-adult female
established a territory in Southern Glades and areas to the north and east. The land
north of Southern Glades is comprised of marshes and woods bordering agricultural
land. The National Park Service is acquiring the land as part of the East Everglades
Expansion. The Turkey Point Wildlife Refuge, and Model Lands Basin (a Save Our
Rivers proposal) are located east of, and separated from, Southern Glades by US
Highway I. The Florida Department of Transportation plans to build four wildlife
crossings to facilitate safe movement of panthers between the areas. Management by
the Commission and acquisition of adiacent land will protect the habitat and prey
base used by panthers.
Nicodemus Slough
Nicodemus Slough, located in Glades County, was purchased by the South Florida
Water Management District with money from the Water Management Lands Trust Fund
(Section 373.59, Florida Statutes). The 2,219 acre property, formerly used for cattle
grazing, was purchased for hydrological restoration. Acquisition is complete.
Management activities will include prescribed burning, exotic species control, water
quality and biological monitoring. Non-consumptive recreational opportunities such
as fishing, picnicking, canoeing, nature observation and photography will be available.
The wet prairies, broadleaf marshes and lransitional cordgrass wetlands are heavily
used by wading birds.
Strazulla
Strazulla, located in Paim Beach County, was purchased by the South Fiorida Water
Management District with money from the Water Management Lands Trust Fund
(Section 373.59, Florida Statutes). The 2,007 acre property was purchased for
hydrologicai restoration.
Management activities will focus on hydrological restoration and eradication of exotic
species. The District has contracted with a private security firm with certified iaw
enforcement personnel to provide road patrols in an attempt to curtail trespass, illegal
hunting and inappropriate vehicular access. The South Florida Water Management
District Cooperative and License Agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge was amended in 1993 to include Strazulla.
The invasion of Melaleuca on the eastern half of Strazulla constitutes a maior threat.
Hydrologic restoration would curtail the invasion of this pervasive exotic. The western
-A-13-
Appendix A-South Florida Conservation Land Inventory
half of Strazulla is sawgrass marsh. Cypress sloughs mixed with low pine flatwoods
and wet prairies dominate the eastern half. The property is used by wading birds.
EXISTING CONSERVATION tANDS - COUNTY
T
he 22,000 square mile Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan study area encompasses over 3.4
million acres (5,421 square miles) of existing conservation lands. Most county owned land was
deemed unsuitable for the panther since it is used for recreation, ball fields, etc. and "greenspace" in
urban areas. However, large undisturbed tracts acquired for landfills or water well fields may be
suitable.
The Florida Growth Management Act requires counties to address the protection of natural areas. Nine
counties in the 22,000 square mile study area have funded land acquisition programs. Sarasota County
purchased over 8,000 acres of potential panther habitat adjacent to Myakka River State Park in 1984.
EXISTING CONSERVATION tANDS - PRIVATE
T
he 22,000 square mile Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan study area encompasses over 3.4
million acres (5,421 square miles) of existing conservation lands. Private non-profit organizations,
dedicated to protecting sensitive land, own and manage 33,420 acres. The National Audubon Society's
Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary (10,560 acres) has a history of panther use. The Corkscrew Regional
Ecosystem Watershed, a joint acquisition effort between the state and private non- profit
organizations, will ensure the long term connection of the Sanctuary with panther habitat to the south.
The Archbold Biological Station may be important for future expansion of the panther population.
Archbold Biological Station
The Archbold Biological Station is a private, non-profit organization whose primary
focus is ecological research and conservation, with a major emphasis on southern
Lake Wales Ridge ecosystems in south-central Florida. Research is conducted by four
full-time resident scientists; four research associates; several postdoctoral fellows,
support personnel, graduate and undergraduate students; and by visiting
investigators.
The Station also manages a 4,840 acre property and three outlying parcels as nature
reserves and operates the John D. MacArthur Agroecology Research Center on the
I O,OOO-acre Buck Island Ranch located seven miles east. The Station also has an active
environmental and public education program.
The main property is located in Highlands County, 8 miles south of Lake Placid.
Elevations range from 110 to 213 feet, and topographic features include the crest of
Lake Wales Ridge, the Intraridge Valley and the 100-acre Lake Annie. The habitats are
xeric uplands, including sand pine scrub, scrubby flatwoods, and southern ridge
sandhill. Other habitats found on the properly are flatwoods, swales, bayheads,
seasonal ponds, and small areas of altered habitat including old fields, a decadent
ornamental tree grove, and landscaped grounds. The property contains a network of
fire lanes, primitive roads, foot trails, and paved roads. The management objective is
-A-14-
Appendix A-So>lth Florida Conservation Land Inventory
to maintain and enhance the natural values of the property, with emphasis on the
endemic biota. The primary strategy is use of natural and prescribed fire to
approximate as close as possible the pre-settlement landscape.
Archbold Biological Station supports an unusually diverse biota characterized by a
high level of endemism. Native vertebrate species include 24 fishes, 17 amphibians, 44
reptiles, 200+ birds, and 34 mammals. Federal andlor state-listed species found on the
property include 16 vertebrates and 21 plants. Another 12 species (3 vertebrates, 7
invertebrates, and 2 plants) are candidates for listing by the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Except for the panther, black bear, and Sherman's fox squirre!. which occur rarely or
sporadically, and the red-cockaded woodpecker, which has been extirpated, all of the
listed or candidate species maintain viable populations here.
An important factor contributing to the Station's high wildlife diversity and abundance,
particularly of larger species such as bear, panther. bobcats, sandhill cranes, and
raptors, is the fact that it is located in a region of extensive ranchlands, which extend
both south to Big Cypress and north to the 5t lohns River valley
National Audubon Society's Corks(:rew Swami} Sanctuary
The National Audubon Society, in March of 1954, formed an association of public
and private organizations to raise funds for acquisition of Corkscrew Swamp. The effort
was driven by the intensive logging of Florida's last old growth bald cypress forest
Participants included: National and Florida Audubon Societies, Florida Federation of
Garden Clubs, Florida Board of Parks and Histor:ic Memorials, The Nature Conservancy
and Collier Enterprises. Major gifts were received from Theodore Edison, lohn D.
Rockefeller, Lee Tidewater Cypress Company and Collier Enterprises. By December of
1954, a target area of 4,000 acres had been acquired or leased for future purchase with
private funds. A second phase of acquisition, also financed with private funds,
eniarged the sanctuary to 10,560 acres in 1968. No further acquisition is anticipated.
Disruption of natural hydrology by residential and agricultural development is the
greatest threat to the sanctuary. The hydrology of Corkscrew Swamp is monitored by a
network of shallow wells and stage recorders to insure historic levels and flows are
maintained. Exotic vegetation is controlled by chemical and mechanical methods.
Appropriate habitats are prescribe burned. Audubon staff work with state wildlife
officers to control human intrusion.
Corkscrew is the preferred nesting site of the endangered North American wood stork.
All indigenous species of herons and egrets also nest there. Several Florida panthers
have been documented using Corkscrew as part of their range. Black bear frequent the
sanctuary and deer are common. It is also an important nesting and roosting area for
swallow-tailed kites.
National Andubon Society's Kissimmee Prairie Sanctuary
With funding from the Katherine Ordway estate and the George Whittel bequest,
National Audubon, cooperating with The Nature Conservancy, purchased the
Kissimmee Prairie Sanctuary in 198 I. This 6,900 Gicre purchase, plus two subsequent
additions and a 320 acre conservation easement comprise the 8,000 acre tract situated
in north central Okeechobee County. While surrounding lands would make desirable
additions to the sanctuary, no acquisitions are planned. The sanctuary is a well
maintained example of central Florida's most distinctive ecosystem: dry prairie. This
somewhat misleading name describes the expansive treeless regions of wiregrass and
palmetto flats which are dotted with shallow ponds, sloughs and tree islands, and
extend north and west from Lake Okeechobee. Teday, only a small fraction of the
region's prairie remains in native cover. Direct and indirect threats to the sanctuary's
ecology arise from landscape alteration of hydrology, conversion of land to tame
-A-15-
Appendix A-Sontlt Florida Conservation Land Inventory
pasture, citrus and dairy farms, and to a limited extent locally, by residential
development. The property is located near the top of the watershed and inflow impacts
are minimal. downstream drainage is mitigated by a levee which blocks historical off
site flows.
Management of the sanctuary is targeted at maintaining the open prairie communities,
with fire being the critical factor influencing this habitat's structure. Fire is prescribed
to mimic the lightning season fire pattern with which the present plant community
evolved. Photo points are set up in representative sites. A boundary fence has
excluded cattle from the site for 12 years and a regular Audubon presence discourages
trespass. Water level data has been collected for 3 years.
While the prairie ecosystem is itself considered an endangered entity, few listed plants
occur on the site, this inconstancy is because prairie flora is very similar to the
understory of flatwoods which is the most extensive habitat in the state. Bird species
commonly associated with grasslands like the sandhill crane, crested caracara,
burrowing owl. and mottled duck use the sanctuary and the surrounding ranches. The
federally endangered Grasshopper Sparrow nests here and is restricted to native
prairie habitat. subsequently this species is found only on a handful of sites statewide.
The sanctuary's impressive biotic diversity is due to the tight interspersion of different
habitats on site and the relatively benign land uses evident on adjacent ranches.
ACTIVE AC QUISITION PROJECTS - I{EOERAL
East Everglades
The East Everglades National Park Expansion was enacted on December 13, 1989 by
Public Law 101-229. The Law provides for protection of land, water, and natural
resources in Everglades National Park. The State of Florida agreed to provide 20
percent of the acquisition funding and to donate all state-owned land in the expansion
area. The expansion encompasses 104,084 acres and about 6,134 ownerships. The
National Park Service has acquired 500 tracts totaling 46,969 acres.
ACTIVE ACQUISITION PROJECTS - STATE
South Golden Gate Estates
South Golden Gate Estates is part of the Save Our Everglades project which ranked
#52 on the 1993 Priority List. It was first added to the list in 1984. Defined as
"Environmentally Endangered Land"1253.023(3), Florida Statutes and 18-8.003, Florida
Administrative Codel the project contains natural, relatively unaltered flora or fauna in
an area unique to, or scarce in Florida. Preservation 2000 funding was granted because
this natural community supports listed species that are in imminent danger from
development 1259.101(4), Florida Statutes\.
About 42,000 acres (46%) of the 143 square mile subdivision will be acquired. South
Golden Gate Estates lies south of Interstate 75 and north of Tamiami Trail in Collier
County. So far 6,000 acres have been acquired.
-A-16-
Appendix A-South Florida Conservation Land Inventory
The main threat to South Golden Gate Estates is drainage. As part of the Big Cypress
basin the land is Uat and swampy with cypress strands, pine isiands, and wet and dry
prairies. The historic ground water table was high and the area was inundated with
several feet of water during each wet summer season. Surface water moved slowly
seaward in poorly defined sloughs. canal construction first began in the I 920s.
Drainage accelerated with construction of additional canals for the Golden Gate
Estates subdivision in 1960. Drainage is altering the habitat of endemic epiphytes.
South Golden Gate Estates consists of 5 acre lots (30%), 2.25 acre lots (32%), and I
acre lots (24%). The remaining 14 percent is large acreage tracts. Collier County
enacted regulations in 1989 stipulating a maximum density of one unit per 2.5 acres
to prevent further subdivision of lots. About 97 percent of the lots had been sold to
50,000 individuals by 1980.
Over 1,600 homes, most of them north of Interstate 75, had been built by 1984. South
Golden Gate Estates is sparsely developed with dilapidated hunting camps and single
family residences. Some residences were built without permits. The Department of
Community Affairs and Collier County are working on a comprehensive plan
amendment that would decrease the zoning density and restrict infrastructure and
residential development in South Golden Gate Estates. If implemented, the
amendment would enhance project acquisition.
The Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs, Division of Forestry is the lead
management agency. Management will focus on restoring natural systems and
passive recreation (B. Helm, FDOF, personal communication). Effective management
will depend in part on the success of restoration. The South Florida Water
Management District will be responsible for hydrological restoration once enough
land has been acquired. The District, however, deleted the project from its 1991 Public
Works Funding List (T. Miller, SFWMD, personal communication). The decision was
based on I) Slow acquisition (restoration depends on lot consolidation); and 2) A
Corps of Engineers' determination that restoration costs would exceed benefits. The
Governor's Office has convened and will coordinate a working group to facilitate
acqUisition, restoration and management of South Golden Gate Estates.
Many rare orchids and other endemic epiphytes are found in South Golden Gate
Estates. Threatened or endangered animals found here include the Florida panther,
Florida black bear, mangrove lox squirrel, Everglades mink, American alligator,
eastern indigo snake, wood stork, bald eagle, snatil kite, red-cockaded woodpecker,
Arctic peregrine falcon, and Cape Sable sparrow.
South Golden Gate Estates is used only sporadically by panthers due to the presence
of canals which restrict access, unregulated human activity and lack 01 proper habitat
management. However, it is suitable habitat, and as acquisition continues and proper
management programs are implemented, more panther use is expected.
Lake Wales Ridge Ecosystems
The Lake Wales Ridge Ecosystems project spans approximately 80 miles and
contains 20 separate sites on the Lake Wales Ridge in Polk and Highlands Counties.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has targeted all. or portions of seven of these sites.
The Nature Conservancy has an active role in the project. The boundary lor this
project was approved December 6, 1991. Funding for the project is provided through
state (Preservation 2000) and federal (Land and Water Conservation Fund) channels.
The project encompasses 32,840 acres or 20 percent of all that remains 01 Florida's
ancient scrub and surrounding lakefront, swamps, black water streams, pine
flatwoods, seepage slopes, hammocks, and sandhills. As of February 9, 1993 about
1,309 acres had been acquired.
-A-17-
Appendix A-Sooth Florida Conservation Land Inventory
If acquired the Division of Recreation and Parks would manage one tract, the Division
of Forestry would manage two tracts, and the Nature Conservancy, under contract to
the Game and Fish Commission would manage the remaining seventeen. Detailed
biological inventories will be done on each site. Controlled burning is considered key
to restoring and perpetuating the ecosystems. Control measures will include
restricting vehicular abuse, removing exotic plants, animals and trash dumps. Most of
the sites are near populated areas, are adjacent to developed areas, or are already
subdivided with some infrastructure in place. Because of growth pressures and threats
from citrus conversion, the overall endangerment is extremely high. The ancient scrub
of Lake Wales Ridge supports a large number of Florida endemics rapidly nearing
extinction. The project provides habitat for 17 federally listed plants and 22 state listed
plants. There are five federally listed vertebrate species. An additional 18 plants and 6
vertebrates are under federal review for possible listing.
Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed
The goal of the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) project is to
acquire and manage 55,000 acres that will complement the National Audubon
Society's Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary. Corkscrew Swamp is surrounded by, and
dependant on wetlands that give birth to a water course that flows south for 40 miles,
through Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve,
Ten Thousand Islands National Aquatic Preserve and the estuaries of Florida Bay into
the Gulf of Mexico.
A Trust was created in September 1989 to protect this critical ecological relationship.
Inter-disciplinary and inter-jurisdictional in nature, the CREW Trust is an alliance or
"joint venture" between federal, state, regional and local governments, national
conservation organizations and local landowners. The Trust will assist in the
management, planning, acquisition and funding of this wetlands preservation project.
The CREW Trust includes members from Lee County, Collier County, the South Florida
Water Management District, the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, the
National Audubon Society, the Trust for Public Land, the Nature Conservancy, the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service, and private landowners.
Lee County Commissioners committed $2.7 million per year to land acqUisition for
three years in October 1989: the South Florida Water Management District earmarked
$ I 0 million of Save Our Rivers funds as a matching "challenge grant" to the CREW
Trust in lanuary 1990: and the Department of Environmental Protection allocated $ I 0
million for land acquisition in luly 1990.
The Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed project ranked #43 on the 1993 CARL
priority list. Preservation 2000 funds were insufficient in 1991 to be disbursed to lower
ranked projects. The same will be true in 1992-93 even though the CREW project is a
wetland ecosystem containing important panther habitat,
When funds are available acqUisition will focus on Camp Keais Strand which links
Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge with Corkscrew Swamp. The Land Acquisition
AdvisOly Council may request that the South Florida Water Management District, Lee
County and the CREW Trust allow more flexibility in the distribution of CARL funds,
i.e. allowing funds to be disbursed, on a matching basis, throughout the project, rather
than restricting funds to acquisition of Camp Keais Strand.
As of June 1992 about 14,076 acres had been acqUired. Acquisition is coordinated by
the South Florida Water Management District under provisions of the Save Our Rivers
program. A male panther (#28), spent several months north of here in Lee County.
Uncollared panthers have been seen by Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary staff.
-A-18-
Appendix A-South Florida Conservation La.nd Inventory
Paradise Run
Paradise Run was added to the South Florida Water Management District Five Year
Plan in 1988. The land is being purchased by the District with money from the Water
Management Lands Trust Fund (Section 373.59, Florida Statutes). As of June 1992
about 1,406 acres or thirty-three percent of the 4,265 acre project had been acquired.
Paradise Run is being acquired for purposes of hydrological restoration. The property
has degenerated due to a lack of flow that resulted in stagnant conditions and low
dissolved oxygen levels. Management of the property will include a grazing lease,
contract security force and exotic plant control. Invasion of exotic plants and
overdrainage are the primary threats.
If acquired and restored the property has excellent potential for canoeing, fishing and
wildlife observation. It is also possible that the Florida National Scenic Trail could be
extended through Paradise Run. Remnant river oxbows are still present and the land,
according to the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, is heavily utilized by
waterfowl and wading birds.
Kissimmee River
Kissimmee River was added to the South Florida Water Management District Five
Year Plan in 1986. The land is being purchased by the District with money from the
Water Management Lands Trust Fund (Section 373.59, Florida Statutes) and
Preservation 2000. As of lune 1992 about 30,385 acres or forty percent of the 75,000
acre project had been acquired.
The Kissimmee River once meandered over 98 miles between Lake Kissimmee and
Lake Okeechobee. The construction of Canal 38 shortened the river to a straight 56
miles in length. More than 47,000 acres of wetlands were altered in the process. All of
the attributes of a free fJowing river; such as, attenuation of flood discharges, providing
year round base flow, water quality improvement:. and wildlife habitat were lost when
the Kissimmee River was channelized. The Kissimmee River is being purchased for
purposes of hydrological restoration.
Management activities will include exotic plant control and eradication; fill ing or
blocking of drainages to restore sheet flow, prescribed burning and law enforcement.
Improvement and restoration of the historic waterflows would allow for power boating,
fishing, waterfowl hunting, canoeing, and nature observation. The Florida National
Scenic Trail is being extended along the river.
The Florida sandhill crane and other wading birds will benefit from the restoration. The
Sherman's fox squirrel and various ferns, orchids and bromeliads will also benefit.
GDC/Peace River
The GDClPeace River project consists of about 8,568 acres of which 5,932 acres were
acquired in December of 1992 by the Southwest Florida Water Management District
funded by the Save Our Rivers Program. About 2,636 acres remain to be acqUired. The
GDClPeace River project will be managed and maintained in an environmentally
acceptable manner, and to the extent practical, in such a way as to restore and protect
the projecf s natural state and condition. The site surrounds the Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority which contains a water treatment facility,
an 85 acre offstream reservoir and an aquifer storage recovery system. The acquisition
of these lands supports and protects this potable water supply and provides for
potential future expansion.
The Southwest Florida Water Management District staff are currently preparing plans
for maintenance and restoration of the project area. The GDClPeace River project is
-A-19-
Appendix A-South I'Jol"ida Conservation Land Inventory
comprised of mixed hardwood forest, pine flatwoods, rangelands, pastures and pine
plantations, However, much of the land has been cleared and converted to agricultural
and silvicultural uses by the previous landowner. therefore, the wildlife values for the
area are limited, Once restored the project area will contribute to the regional wildlife
corridor system.
Common wildlife expected to inhabit the project area include bobcats,
white-tailed deer, numerous wading birds, wild turkey, quail, several species of
woodpeckers, hawks, owls and numerous song birds, In addition, the area contains
numerous reptiles, such as the eastern indigo snake and gopher tortoise, and
numerous amphibians.
Jaek Creek
The lack Creek project consists of about 3,600 acres of which 1,259 acres were
acquired in July of 1991 by the Southwest Florida Water Management District funded
by the Save Our Rivers Program, About 1,941 acres remain to be acquired, The Jack
Creek project will be managed and maintained in an environmentally acceptable
manner, and to the extent practical, in such a way as to restore and protect the
project's natural state and condition,
The project includes lack Creek, its 100 year floodplain, lack Creek Swamp and outlying
forests dominated by loblolly bay, sweet bay, southern Magnolia, red maple, black
gum and cypress, The project also includes transitional marshes and meadows, as
well as extensive sand pine and mixed scrub habitats,
Jack Creek and its associated swamp lands selVes as the natural drainage basin for the
immediate area, as well as the water conveyance system for the lakes in the area (Le"
Lake Frances), The well drained scrub uplands surrounding Jack Creek appear to offer
good year-round recharge potentiaL
Southwest Florida Water Management District Staff have developed bum prescriptions
to manage and maintain the unique fire climax communities on the uplands
surrounding lack Creek, The control bum program will begin in 1994, Preliminary tIora
and fauna sUlVeys have been conducted to verify species presence and assist in
management planning, Exotic cogon grass, found outside the eastern boundary of the
project, is being monitored to ensure it does not become a resident in the project
area, The project boundary will be fenced to exclude motorized vehicles, Access to the
property is by foot only,
Wildlife benefiting from the acquisition include the Florida panther (one radiocollared panther was documented using Jack Creek), the Florida black bear, numerous
wading birds, the gopher tortoise, eastern indigo snake and Florida scrub lizard,
Bioiogical surveys of the property indicate that as many as 29 listed species may be
using Jack Creek,
Lake 11J\allatee Lower Watershed
The Lake Manatee Lower Watershed project consists of about 24,700 acres of which
2,137 acres were acquired in October of 1991 by the Southwest Florida Water
Management District funded by the Preservation 2000 Program, About 22,563 acres
remain to be acquired, The Lake Manatee Lower Watershed project will be managed
and maintained in an environmentally acceptable manner, and to the extent practical.
in such a way as to restore and protect the project's natural state and condition,
The purpose of the project is to protect and restore the watershed of Lake Manatee, a
reselVoir which selVes 250,000 people in Manatee County, Increasing residential and
agricultural development in the watershed are cited as common threats to water
resources of the area, Public acquisition will protect the floodplain and allow
-A-20-
Appendix A-South Florida Conservation Land Inventory
restoration of wetlands in the headwaters. Once restored the project area will
contribute to the regional wildlife corridor system.
Land management options for the Lake Manatee Lower Watershed are currently being
evaluated. Public access control, bum prescriptions, and restoration of disturbed
lands are under consideration.
No wildlife surveys have been conducted. However, based on the quality and quantity
of habitats, regional literature suggests 257 vertebrate species are expected to inhabit
the Lake Manatee Lower Watershed. Listed species expected to inhabit the area
include the wood stork; bald eagle, snowy egret. Florida scrub jay, Florida mouse,
gopher tortoise and eastern indigo snake.
Upper Myakka RiveI' Watershed
The Upper Myakka River Watershed project consists of about 9,466 acres of which
2,357 acres were acquired in October of 1991 by the Southwest Florida Water
Management District funded by the Preservation 2000 Program. About 7,109 acres
remain to be acquired. The Upper Myakka River Watershed project will be managed
and maintained in an environmentally acceptable manner, and to the extent practical.
in such a way as to restore and protect the project's natural state and condition.
The purpose of the project is to protect the forested floodplain swamps and marshes
along Maple Creek, Ogleby Creek and Sand Slough from land development activities.
The confluence of these and other tributaries of the Myakka River form Flatford
Swamp, a large water detention and retention area. Important water resources and
existing wildlife corridors would be protected.
Land management options for the Upper Myakka River Watershed are currently being
evaluated. Public access control, burn prescriptions, and restoration of disturbed
lands are under consideration. Restoration of range land adjacent to the river swamp
is proposed for the 1995 fiscal year.
No wildlife surveys have been conducted. However, based on the quality and quantity
of habitats, regional literature suggests 233 vertebrate species are expected to inhabit
the Upper Myakka River Watershed. Listed species expected to inhabit the area
include the wood stork; Florida sandhill crane, limpkin, gopher tortoise, gopher frog
and eastern indigo snake.
INACTIVE ACQUISITION PROJECTS - STATE
Belle Meade
The Conservancy, Inc., a private non-profit conselvation group in Naples, filed an
Acquisition Proposal Form with the CARL Land Acquisition Advisory Council for this
40,846 acre project in January 1992.
The Belle Meade project lies in southwestern Collier County adjacent to the South
Golden Gate Estates. The area is bounded on the north and east by Golden Gate
Estates, on the south by Collier-Seminole State Park and U.S. 41 and Six L's Farms,
and on the west by County Road 95 I. The land is comprised mostly of wetlands in the
form of cypress strands, hydric pine flatwoods and wet prairies with a scattering of
pine uplands. Part of the area is used for cattle grazing and recreational hunting.
Purchase of the Belle Meade area would protect 40,846 acres of the western Big
Cypress basin which forms the headwaters of the Rookery Bay National Marine
-A-21-
Appendix A-Sonth Florida Conservation I.and Inventory
Estuary. The area has been used by the panther, and use would increase with the
acquisition and management of adiacent South Golden Gate Estates, The area is also
inhabited by Florida black bears and red-cockaded woodpeckers.
Fisheating Creek
Fisheating Creek was added to the South Florida Water Management District Five
Year Plan. in 1989. The land, if acquired, would be purchased by the District with money
from the water Management Lands Trust Fund (Section 373.59, Florida Statutes) and
Preservation 2000.
The 43,872 acre project, the only free flowing tributary to Lake Okeechobee, lies in
Glades County. Agricultural development and wetlands drainage are potential threats.
If acquired prescribed burning, exotic plant control and eradication, and grazing would
be likely management activities. Exotic weeds would need to be removed from the
creek channel and lakes to facilitate canoeing and fishing Hiking, nature observation
and public education are potential uses of this scenic drainage
The Fisheating Creek corridor is heavily forested and largely intact. Habitat types
include cypress sloughs/mixed hardwood swamp forest. emergent marsh, willow
thickets and open water ponds and runs. Wading birds; Including wood storks, white
ibis and great egrets use Fisheating Creek. A male panther (#24), is the only panther
captured and tracked north of the Caloosahatchee River in Glades County. Game and
Fish Commission biologists tracked it through the headwaters of Fisheating Creek for
eight months until it was struck and killed by a car. Biologists have been unable to
access the area to document other panther activity.
Loxahai,cbee Slough
Loxahatchee Slough was added to the South Florida Water Management District
Five Year Plan in 1992. The land, if acquired, would be purchased by the District with
money from the Water Management Lands Trust Fund (Section 373.59, Florida
Statutes). the Preservation 2000 program and the Palm Beach County Environmentally
Sensitive Lands Acquisition Program.
This 13,000 acre South Florida Water Management District proiect is located in Palm
Beach County east of I.W. Corbett Wildlife Management Area and west of the Florida
Turnpike. The six parcels of this project will supplement the Loxahatchee River
corridor. This system is an important watershed for Canal 18 and the Loxahatchee
River. Loxahatchee Slough is threatened by urban and agricultural development.
invasion of exotic vegetation, and drainage. Palm Beach County has expressed an
interest in assisting with hydrological restoration, exotic plant control and prescribed
burning. Environmental education, hiking and equestrian trails are proposed uses.
Loxahatchee Slough contains a mixture of habitat types, including pine flatwoods,
cypress forest. and wet prairie. The Florida sandhill crane and other wading birds will
benefit from the restoration. The Sherman's fox squirrel and various ferns, orchids and
bromeliads will also benefit.
Model lallds Basin
Model Lands Basin was added to the South Florida Water Management District Five
Year Plan in 1991. The land, if acquired, would be purchased by the District with money
from the Water Management Lands Trust Fund (Section 373.59, Florida Statutes), the
Preservation 2000 program and the Dade County EnVironmentally Sensitive Lands
Acquisition Program.
The Model Lands Basin is a 31,000 acre Save Our Rivers proposal in Dade County. The
project lies east of U.S. I and surrounds the 6,400 acre Florida Power and Light Turkey
-- A-22--
Appendix A-Sonth Florida Conservation Land Inventory
Point Nuclear Energy Plant on Biscayne Bay. Agricuitural development, rock mining
and invasion of exotic plants threaten the integrity of the property.
The majority of the tract is undisturbed fresh and salt water wetlands. The dominant
habitat type is wet prairie, interspersed with tree islands. The northwestern corner has
been invaded by Australian pine and Brazilian pepper. Management of the property
would include hydrologic restoration, prescribed burning, exotic plant control and
public education. Fishing and hiking are anticipa:ted recreational uses.
A sub-adult female panther (#21) dispersing from Everglades National Park used the
Model Lands Basin before being struck by an automobile while crossing Card Sound
Road. She has been kept in captivity since then. Protection of the property will benefit
the Florida panther, American crocodile, wood storks, coast leather fern, silver palm
and numerous wading birds as well as guarantee high quality freshwater flows to Card
Sound, Barnes Sound and Manatee Bay.
Pal-Mar
Pal-Mar is a 28,433 acre project located in Palm Beach and Martin Counties. The site,
defined as "Environmentally Endangered Land" 1253.023(3). Florida Statutes and 188.003, Florida Administrative Code). is currently ranked 47th on the 1993 Conservation
and Recreation Lands Priority List. Martin County has also committed SI million from
its "Lands For You" bond issue to acquire this site. Although no acquisitions have
been completed to date, the South Florida Water Management District and Martin
County hope to acquire an initial 1,850 acre tract from the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation during 1993.
Pal-Mar lies in a broad geographic transition zone between the Everglades and the
extensive pine flatwoods country to the north. The general landscape is a poorly
drained mosaic of some of the most diverse pine tlatwoods in south Florida (FNAI,
1991) pocketed with numerous shallow depression marshes, cypress ponds, cypress
savannas and open, wet, wiregrass prairies. Due to the lack of positive drainage outfall,
this site represents one of the last hydrologically intact natural systems remaining in
south Florida. Pal-Mar is a key component of a proposed regional wildlife corridor
system which will link all of the existing and proposed major conservation areas in
northern Palm Beach County and southern Martin County with the Everglades. Such a
wildlife corridor system would connect approximately 200,000 acres of conservation
lands with the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge.
Pal-Mar is presently zoned for agricultural and residential development (one unit per
twenty acres). If permits could be obtained to drain the area, the intense development
pressures in this region would be high since much of the project has been subdivided
into 5-20 acres parcels between more than 1,000 owners. Scattered residential
development throughout the site would interfere with the potential natural resources
management of Pal-Mar.
It is proposed that Pal-Mar be managed by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission as an addition to the I.W. Corbett Wildlife Management Area. The tract
would be managed under a multiple use concept for natural population levels of
native plant and animal species and would be available for public access including
hunting, fishing, hiking, horseback riding, camping and picnicking.
Telegraph Swamp
Telegraph Swamp was added to the South Florida Water Management District Five
Year Plan in 1989. The land, if acquired, would be purchased by the District with money
-A-23-
AIJpendix A-South Florida Conservation Land Inventory
from the Water Management Lands Trust Fund (Section 373.59, Florida Statutes) and
the Preservation 2000 program.
Telegraph Swamp, located in Charlotte County, is a mixture of low pine flatwoods,
cypress heads, and emergent fresh water wetlands. The 10,000 acre proposal is in
excellent condition. Due to the size and healthy condition of the system, management
requirements would be minimal. No exotic vegetation has been observed. Agricultural
development is a potential threat.
Game species induding deer, turkey, wild boar and quail are found in the swamp.
Many wading birds and songbirds utilize Telegraph Swamp. Alligators are abundant.
Myakka River
This Southwest Florida Water Management District has identified 2,400 acres of the
IOO-year floodplain of the Myakka River for possible acquisition. Funds for this
proposal would be obtained from the Save Our Rivers program or Preservation 2000,
depending on availability.
The proposal includes a 4.5 mile portion of Myakka River and its forests of Southern
magnolia, cabbage palms, red cedars, live oaks and laurel oaks. Broad wetland prairies
and willowheads extend into the Myakka valley. The proposal is in the vicinity of areas
designated as a Wild and Scenic River by the u.S. Department of the Interior and
would complement existing State (Myakka River State Parkl and Sarasota
County ownerships.
Maintenance and restoration are required to perpetuate existing habitats. Prescribed
burning will be needed to maintain upland fire climax communities. Ditches in the
proposed acquisition area may have to be filled to restore the original drainage
patterns. The proposal is well suited for fishing, canoeing, hiking, nature appreciation
and picnicking.
The area proposed for acquisition is utilized by various wildlife species. Listed species
using the area indude the Florida panther (anecdotal evidence), Florida black bear,
southern bald eagle, and the gopher tortoise.
Prairie/Shell Creek
The Southwest Florida Water Management District has prepared a resource
evaluation of 9,377 acres along Prairie Creek and Shell Creek in Charlotte and DeSoto
Counties. Funds for this proposal would be obtained from the Save Our Rivers
program or Preservation 2000, depending on availability.
Prairie Creek and Shell Creek are narrow, meandering creeks characterized by willow
stands and sparse cypress swamps. The surrounding uplands consist of cabbage palm!
oak hammocks and xeric oak uplands. Acquisition would aid in the protection and
availability of quality water for the City of Punta Gorda. Wetlands and other natural
habitats within the project area would be protected from increasing land development.
The proposal could also help protect existing natural habitat and corridors important
to 311 vertebrate wildlife species. Listed species found along Prairie Creek and Shell
Creek indude the Florida sandhill crane, gopher tortoise and eastern indigo snake.
Ringling MacArthur
The Southwest Florida Water Management District has prepared a resource
evaluation on 8,538 acres in Sarasota County. Funds for this proposal would be
obtained from the Save Our Rivers program or Preservation 2000, depending
on availability.
-A-24-
AlllJendix A-Soul.l. Florid;l Conservation Land Inventory
The Ringling MacArthur proposal consists of extensive shrub and brushlands, pine
flatwoods and pastures. Smaller areas of wetland hardwoods, cypress, mixed upland
hammocks and wet prairies are also common. The land, currently used for cattle
grazing, is threatened by potential residential development.
The property, if acquired, would complement existing State and County ownerships in
forming a regional green space, protect water resources and wildlife habitat.
Management requirements and recreation potential is similar to that of Myakka River
State Park.
The Ringling MacArthur proposal is considered to provide habitat for the
Florida panther, Florida black bear, gopher tortoise, white-tailed deer and other
wildlife species.
-A-25-
-9G-V-
APPENDIX B METHODS OF HABITAT PRESERVATION
CONSERVATION EASEMENTS
...... B-3
INCENTIVE PROGRAMS
.
Forest Stewardship Program
.
United States Man and the Biosphere Program
Tax Incentives
.
Inheritance Tax
.
Greenbelt Exemption
Bluebelt Exemption ........
..
..
..
.
..
B-3
B-3
B-4
B-4
.. B-4
...... B-4
.. ... B-5
REGULATORY PRESERVATION .......
Federal Regulations
..
The Clean Water Act.
The Endangered Species Act.
State Regulations.
Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.
Water Management Districts
..
.
Department of Environmental Protection.
Department of Community Affairs.
Regional Regulations ..
Land Use Element.
Natural Systems and Recreational Lands Element ..
County Regulations ......
Local Comprehensive Plans.
Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern .
.. ... B-5
..B-5
.. .... B-5
.B-6
.
B-9
.
B-9
.. .. B·IO
.. .. B·II
...B·ll
... B-12
.... B·12
.. B·12
.... B·12
. B·12
..... B·13
FEE TITLE ACQUISITION.
Federal Land Acquisition.
National Park Service
.
National Wildlife Refuge System .
..
State Land Acquisition..
Conservation and Recreational Lands
Save Our Rivers (SORI ..
County Land Acquisition.
Broward County.
Charlotte County ...
Collier County.
Dade County ..
Indian River County ..
Lee County ...
Manatee Cou nty ..
Martin County..
..
..
Palm Beach County ..
Sarasota County ........
Private Land Acquisition
The Trust for Public Land.
The Nature Conservancy ..
American Farmland Trust.
..
.
.
.
.
-&-1-
..
.
..
B·13
B·14
B-14
B-14
B·14
B·15
. B·15
..B·16
. B·16
. B·16
.. B-16
B·16
.. .. B·16
.B-16
.... B·16
... B·16
..B·16
.... B·17
.... B-17
... 8-17
..B·17
...8-17
Appendix B-Methods of Hahitat Preservation
Company's proposed construction of the northern road
corridor (II-mile Road extension) and pipeline corridor
without strict access control and enforcement would
jeopardize the continued existence of the panther.
• The Serv.ice issued a "likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of the panther" biological opinion to the
Federal Highway Administration's proposed conversion
of Alligator Alley (State Road 84) to Interstate 75 in
February 1984. The opinion presented several
alternatives which, if implemented by the Federal
Highway Administration, would remove the jeopardy
determination. The Administration chose to implement
the alternative of providing wildlife crossings, bridge
extensions, and associated wildlife exclusion fences.
• The Service issued a "not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the Florida panther" biological
opinion to the U.S. Corps of Engineers in lanuary 1987
relative to the Collier Enterprises' permit application
for citrus production. This "no jeopardy" opinion was
based on a number of provisions and conditions
negotiated as a result of the South Florida Water
Management District permit, including panther and
deer surveys and telemetry work on the subject area.
• The Service issued a biological opinion on the National
Park Service's Big Cypress General Management Plan in
February 1991, which provides for management of a
wide variety of activities including hunting, off-road
vehicle use, fire management, and oil and gas related
activities. The Service's opinion was that the General
Management Plan may adversely affect the panther but
would not jeopardize the continued existence of the
species. Several conservation recommendations were
included in the opinion to reduce the adverse impacts
of certain activities.
Section 9 - Law Enforcement Section 9(a)( I) makes it
unlawful for any person to "take" an endangered animal
species within the United States or the territorial sea of
the United States. "Take", defined broadly, means "to
harass, harm, pursue, hunt. shoot. wound, kill, trap,
capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such
conflict. Harm is further defined to include "significant
habitat modification or degradation that kills or injures
wildlife by impairing essential behavioral patterns,
including breeding, feeding or sheltering" (50 CFR 17,3).
Section 9 prohibitions do not apply to threatened animal
species. Instead, the Act requires that any prohibition
necessary and advisable for conservation of the species
must be promulgated under Section <I(d) during the
formal listing process. These prohibitions mayor may
not be as restrictive as Section 9. Endangered and
threatened plant species receive less protection. It is
unlawful to remove and reduce to possession. or
"maliciously damage or destroy" any listed plant species
on federal lands, or to destroy any such species on other
lands in violation of state law or state criminal trespass
provisions. States may have more stringent laws of their
own restricting take of state and/or federally listed
animals and plants.
An individual who violates Section 9 may be assessed a
civil penalty or charged with a criminal violation. Civil
penalties range from $500 per violation for an unknowing
taking to $25,000 per violation for a knowing taking.
Criminal penalties have a maximum fine of $50,000 and
one year imprisonment for each knowing taking.
There are few documented cases of illegal take of a
Florida panther. The Chief lames Billie case in 1987 is
noteworthy because of the implication involving future
prosecutions of illegal take of thiS endangered species.
After admitting to killing a panther for tribal ceremonies,
Chief Billie of the Seminole Indian Tribe was acquitted
because of the purported difficulty in proving that the
specimen was an endangered Florida panther versus
another unprotected subspecies. A similar law
enforcement problem arose concerning the protection of
experimentally released panthers. Five Texas cougars
were released in a north Florida candidate reintroduction
site in 1988 to test the suitability of the habitat for
Florida panthers. One cougar was known, and another
suspected, to be killed illegally.
In order to avoid these law enforcement dilemmas, the
Service, on August 14, 1991, designated all freeliving Felis
concolor as threatened under the "similarity of appearance"
provisions of the Act wherever they occur in Florida.
Under Section 4ie) of the Act, species which are not
considered to be endangered or threatened may be
treated as such due to their similarity of appearance to a
listed species. Because of the difficulty of distinguishing
Florida panthers, at a distance, from other unlisted
subspecies of Felis conc%r, the "threatened due to
similarity of appearance" rule will further protect the
Florida panther from illegal take. The rule protects
panther escapees and/or released indiViduals, such as
the western cougars in the north Florida experimental
reintroduction. Thus, no panther may be killed under the
assumption or justification that it is an escaped or
released mountain lion.
Section 10- Habitat Conservation Plans: Congress
responded to a conflict in the Act by amending Section
lOin 1982 to establish the habitat conservation planning
process. Prior to 1982, private parties undertaking
-8-8-
AJlpendix B-Metbods of HalJitat Preservation
development actions not requiring federal authorization,
funding, or approval faced Section 9 prohibitions. The
Section 10 amendment provides a regulatory mechanism
for private parties to take listed species, if the take is
deemed "incidental to, and not the purpose of carrying
out otherwise lawful activities." Section lOis intended to
reduce conflicts between the conservation of listed
species and private development and to provide a
framework that would encourage "creative partnerships"
between the private sector and local, state, and federal
agencies in the interest of conserving endangered
species and their habitat. The procedure, when approved
by the Service, results in the issuance of a Section
I O(a)( I )(B) permit authorizing the incidental take
provided the applicant institutes conservation measures
for habitat maintenance, enhancement, and protection
coincident with development.
To obtain an incidental take permit. an applicant must
submit an application which includes the preparation of
a habitat conservation plan (HCP) The HCP must specify
the impacts of the incidental taking on the species; the
measures the applicant will take and fund to minimize
and mitigate those impacts; the alternative actions that
were considered and why they were rejected; and any
other measures the Service believes are necessary or
appropriate for the purposes of implementing the plan.
The Service's role in the HCP process is to provide
technical assistance, including preapplication advice;
National Environmental Policy Act analysis; and an intraService biological opinion on the proposed issuance of
an incidental take permit. a decision on whether to issue
the permit, and future monitoring for permit compliance.
After providing an opportunity for public comment, the
Service is required to issue a permit, if it finds that: the
taking will be incidentai to, and is not the purpose of, the
action; the applicant will, to the maximum extent
practicable, minimize and mitigate the impacts of the
taking; the applicant will ensure that adequate funding is
provided to implement the HCP; and the taking will not
appreciably reduce the species' likelihood of survival and
single-party HCP can provide demonstrable results in
species recovery (Coachella fringe-toed lizard and the
Coachella Valley HCP in Palm Springs, California). Plans
covering several developments or local jurisdictions may
have more players, take longer, and commit more
resources, but in the end they have the potential to allow
more development flexibility to individual landowners
and, more importantly, to provide greater and more
comprehensive coverage and long-term habitat
protection for listed species.
The HCP process has its inherent pros and cons. An
excellent critique of the process was published in 1991
by the World Wildlife Fund. This publication, entitled
"Reconciling Conflicts Under The Endangered Species
Act," touted the HCP process as a way to resolve conflicts
between private developers and the regulatory needs of
the Service to protect and conserve endangered species.
Although the process allows the incidental take of some
individuals of a listed species, it requires in exchange the
creation and implementation of a plan that offsets the
incidental take by promoting conservation of the species.
The HCP and its associated permit provide a greater
measure of certainty as to the landowner's rights and
responsibilities. For the Service, it provides a means of
securing long-term protection for listed species and their
habitat on non-federal lands.
The HCP process may be appropriate in certain
situations to protect panther habitat in south Florida.
Private lands with panther use documented by radiotelemetry would be targeted because of a direct Section
9 responsibility. Landowners proposing to alter known
panther habitat could face a potential take violation. In
these cases, the HCP process may be useful in allowing
limited development in some areas, while securing longterm protection for other areas. However, for those
landowners who are willing to sell or protect all or part of
their property, fee title acquisition
O[
use of conservation
easements is advocated.
recovery.
HCPs have appeared in a variety of forms, ranging from
plans addressing the effects of a single development on
a small parcel of land (Delano Prison HCP in Kern
County, California) to land use strategies covering
several hundred square miles (Balcones Canyonlands
HCP, Austin, Texas). Most often, HCPs are the product of
elaborate negotiations among landowners, developers,
local governments, natural resource agencies, and
conservation advocates, with close involvement by the
Service. Only a handful of incidental take permits have
been issued to date; however, as many as thirty HCPs are
being developed. Experience has demonstrated that a
State Regulations
Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. The
Florida Game and Fn~sh Water Commission makes
habitat protection recommendations in applications for
development of regional impact. sub-development of
regional impact, dredge and fill. and surface water
management permits. Coordination between developers
and the Commission during the application review
process is mandated in many regional and county
comprehensive plans.
-8--9-
AIlpcndix H-Methods of Habitat PreserviHioll
Anticipated adverse development impacts can invoke
mitigation. On-site mitigation protects and manages
habitat in the development. Off-site mitigation protects
and manages habitat outside the development. Past
efforts favored on-site protection of upland habitat.
However, the viability of a development project is
threatened when listed species protection entails setting
aside large areas relative to total development size.
Development orders issued by the counties or regional
planning councils seldom provide the means to sustain
target species and may result in ineffective mitigation.
because protected areas tend to be small,
isolated parcels surrounded by residential and
commercial development.
The Commission developed and implemented a
Mitigation Park Program which allows the state to accept
funds from developers for off-site habitat acquisition and
management. The Commission has the lead role in
program administration, but relies on private non-profit
organizations that function as agents during a real
estate transaction.
Developers deposit monies to the Fish and Wildlife
Habitat Trust Fund in care of a regional mitigation park.
About 78 percent of the money is used for land
acquisition, 15 percent for management, and 7 percent is
transferred to the Comptroller's Office pursuant to
Section 215.20, Florida Statutes. The management fee
and service charge are added to the land acquisition
costs in order to ensure that the acreage protected onsite and the acreage acquired at the mitigation park are
equal. The Commission and a non-profit organization
share the role of evaluating, selecting and prioritizing
acquisition sites. Lands approved for acquisition are
purchased according to Section 253.025, Florida Statutes.
Title is vested with the State of Florida Board of Trustees
of the Internal Improvement Fund. The interest that
accrues on the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Trust Fund is
disbursed annually for management activities in the
mitigation parks.
The Mitigation Park Program has three benefits: I)
Protection efforts are directed to biologically important
sites, 2) Small, isolated tracts are consolidated into
larger units maximizing resource protection, and 3) The
parks are owned and managed by the Commission to
enhance listed species populations and complement
local nongame and environmental awareness programs.
A Mitigation Park is initiated by signing and executing a
Memorandum of Understanding to administer the
financial transactions and to provide a process for land
acquisition and management. Each mitigation park is
tailored to regional planning council conselVation needs,
and all councils are invited to sign.
So far, the Mitigation Park Program has received over
S I ,600,000. Two mitigation parks have been established
in south Florida. The first, Hickey Creek, is a Southwest
Florida Regional Planning Council Mitigation Park for
gopher tortoises, scrub jays, indigo snakes and other
xeric upland species. The 1,000 acre park is jointly
administered by the Commission and Lee County and
will help the county meet Growth Management Act open
space requirements. Hickey Creek ranked at the top of
the 1993-94 Florida Communities Trust funding list.
Hickey Creek has been used by a dispersing sub-adult
male panther.
The second, Belle Meade, is a Southwest Florida
Regional Planning Council Mitigation Park for redcockaded woodpeckers located in Collier County. It lies
adjacent, and is supplemental. to a 40,846 acre
Conservation and Recreation Lands project of the same
name. Belle Meade, the CARL project. ranked 48th in
1993. The area is used by panthers.
Water Management Districts, Ditching, draining, diking
or any activity affecting surface water flows require a
Surface Water Management Permit. Projects less than ten
acres in size with less than two acres of impervious
surfaces are exempt if there are no wetland impacts.
Projects 10-40 acres in size with no wetland impacts may
receive a general permit unless located in a special basin
(example C-51 basinl. Projects greater than 40 acres are
issued an individual permit but are subject to review by
the District governing board if wetlands are involved.
Applications for surface water management permits are
reviewed by the Water Management District staff for
environmental impacts, pursuant to state law. The
reviews address potential wetland impacts and impacts
to species listed as endangered, threatened or of special
concern. When reviewing projects located near or in
occupied panther range, the District utilizes tracking
maps prepared by the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish
Commission and consults with Commission staff.
During the review process, the Commission may
recommend that the uplands be protected as habitat for
listed species. The District may give credit for protection
of upiands as mitigation for unavoidable wetland
impacts, if the uplands provide corridors or habitat for
listed species. Protected wetlands and uplands set aside
as mitigation areas are subject to use restrictions. A
change in ownership does not nullify permit restrictions.
Requests for changes in a permit require additional
review by District staff and governing board approval. The
Commission staff also comments on requested changes
in the permit. "Set-aside areas" of limited or no
development that are not considered as mitigation lands
-13-10-
Appendix B-Methods of Habitat Preservation
are considered in the permit. These "set-aside areas" are
negotiated in letters of agreement between a landowner
and the Commission or delineated on project site plans.
The long-term viability of such agreements may be
subject to legal challenge. The District operates under
statutory time frames in the review of surface water
management permit applications. Sometimes an
applicant has not yet agreed to comply with Commission
recommendations but the project must be presented to
the Water Management District governing board for final
action in order to meet the statutory time frame. In cases
where the negotiations with the Commission are
incomplete, the District includes a special condition in
the permit that states:
"The project contains
. These endangered,
threatened anelior species of special concern have
been observed on-site anelior the project contains
suitable habitat for these listed species. It shall be
the permittee's responsibility to coordinate with the
Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission aneli
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for appropriate
guidance, recommendations anelior necessary
permits to avoid impacts to listed species."
The District. like the Commission, has a mitigation
banking program. The District and the Commission also
cooperate to encourage the participation of large
agricultural developers in the Forest Stewardship
Program. This program helps to ensure that the
mitigation areas, as established in surface water
management permits, will be managed for wildlife.
Department of Environmental Protection. Dredge and
fill activities in Florida are regulated by the Department
of Environmental Protection. Legislative dredge and fill
goals are found in Chapter 253 and Chapter 403, Florida
Statutes. Federal and state jurisdiction are identical
except as noted: I) The state requires permits for work in
all but intermittent streams. The Corps of Engineers
requires permits for all work downstream of a point at
which the 1I0w of the stream is five cubic feet per second.
Therefore the state exercises more extensive jurisdiction
in streams than the Corps of Engineers. 2) The Corps has
jurisdiction in isolated wetlands adjacent to waters of the
United States. The state has no jurisdiction in isolated
wetlands unless the wetlands are contiguous with waters
specified by Section 17-4.28 (2), Florida Administrative
Code. In such a case the state has jurisdiction over the
first fifty (50) feet (measured from the transition line
between the isolated wetland and surrounding uplands),
or one quarter (1/4) of the entire area of the isolated
wetland, whichever is greater. The state regulates
excavation in state waters while the Corps only regulates
filling. In this regard the state is more stringent.
Overall, the areas regu lated by the state and Corps are
the same, with gaps in the jurisdiction of one agency
covered by another. However, the state has limited
jurisdiction of isolated, interior wetlands in occupied
panther range.
Department of Community Affairs. The Local
Government Comprehensive and Land Development
Regulation Act was passed by the Florida Legislature in
1985. The Act is embodied in Chapter 163, Part II,
Florida Statutes and is administered by the Department
of Community Affairs. The Act confers statutory authority
on local officials to plan and regulate land use: confers
broad standing on citizens and affected parties, requires
procedures for assuring public participation in the
planning process, and requires the adoption of local
comprehensive plans and land development regulations.
Implementation of the Act is accomplished through rules
in the Florida Administrative Code. The integration of
planning activities, public participation and concurrency
are key concepts of the Act.
Integration of Planning Activities: The State
Comprehensive Plan sets broad goals that are refined by
Comprehensive Regional Policy Plans and further refined
by Local Comprehensive Plans. County land
development regulations must be consistent with and
implement the local comprehensive plans required of
each county. The Department of Community Affairs
oversees 469 local comprehensive plans.
Public Participation: Section 163.3181 (I) of the Act
states "it is the intent of the Legislature that the public
participate in the comprehensive planning process to the
fullest extent possible." Local governments must provide
effective public participation by; I) Notifying real
property owners of official actions affecting the use of
their property; 2) Keeping the general public informed; 3)
Providing the public opportunities to submit written
comments, 4) Holding the required public hearings, and
5) Assuring that all public comments are considered.
Concurrency: An important concept of the Act is
concurrency because it sets the pace of development.
Section 163.3177( 10)(h) of the Act states "it is the intent
of the Legislature that public facilities and services
needed to support development shall be available
concurrent with the impacts of such development." In
other words, local governments must adopt adequate
and realistic standards for sewage treatment, solid waste
disposal, water drainage, potable water supplies, parks
and recreation, and roads. They may not issue
development permits that do not meet the established
-B-II-
AI'I,endix E-MetllOds of lIabitat Preservation
standards. Each locality must set forth a feasible fiveyear plan which demonstrates that the local government
can achieve and maintain the established standards.
Natural Systems and
Recreational Lands Element
Public Lands Management: "By 20 I 0, the acreage of
unique natural habitat and ecological systems being
publicly owned or managed will increase by I percent
over 1990 levels." Goal success will be measured by gross
acreage of public lands and preserved habitat.
Implementation of public management plans; promotion
of agricultural practices compatible with wildlife and
natural systems protection, establishment of regional
wildlife corridors, upland protection programs, and offsite mitigation are expected to achieve this goal.
°
Regiollal Reglliatiolls
The study area encompasses twenty counties in six
Regional Planning Councils. Comprehensive Regional
Policy Plans for each council were approved by the
Department of Community Affairs during 1990 and 1991.
The Southwest Florida Regional Pianning Council
encompasses Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Lee, and
Sarasota Counties. The largest portion of occupied
panther range is in Collier County and Hendry County.
Panther activity has been documented in all counties
except Charlotte County and Sarasota County.
Regional comprehensive plans have 26 standard
elements. The "Natural Systems and Recreational Lands"
and "Land Use" elements address issues applicable to
panther habitat protection. The exemplary text quoted
below is from the Southwest Florida Comprehensive
Regional Policy Plan. The text shows how Regional Policy
Plans required by the Growth Management Act could
help preserve suitable panther habitat.
Land Use Element
Balanced and Planned Development: "By 20 I 0, 95
percent of growth occurring since 1990 will occur in
urbanized areas, or areas provided with adequate urban
services, such that vacant unused urban lands will be
reduced by 30 percent of 1990 levels." Goal success will
be measured by an urban and vacant land inventory.
Balanced development plans will identify sensitive lands
that need to be protected from agricultural. industrial.
and urban development. Educational and research
programs that promote compact urban development are
expected to achieve this goal.
Natural Resources Preservation: "By 1991, all forecasted
growth of urban areas will be directed away from and out
of natural resource protection areas, and by 2010, the
acreage or overall quality of natural resource protection
areas will increase by I percent over that of 1990." Goal
success will be measured by the quantity and quality of
natural resource protection areas. Education programs
that emphasize designing with nature; mitigation and
prevention of negative development impacts, and
°
incentive or disincentive programs that separate urban
and rural land uses can achieve this goal.
Protection of Natural Systems: "By 20 I 0, the diversity
and extent of the region's protected natural systems will
have been expanded beyond that in 1990." Goal success
will be measured by the acreage of protected natural
systems. Prohibition of agricultural practices that
endanger natural systems and establishment of wildlife
corridors by federal, state, regional, county and private
non~profit organizations are policies that can achieve
this goal.
Protected Species Requirements: "From 1990, the
mortality rate of the Florida panther population will
begin to decline. Furthermore the diversity of all
endangered and threatened species and species of
special concern will begin to increase." Goal success will
be measured by species population information and
panther mortality. Public awareness campaigns;
interagency agreements on listed species protection,
establishment of an integrated regulatory program and
development and implementation of a Florida panther
protection plan by all appropriate levels of government
can achieve this goal.
Coullty Regulatiolls
Local Comprehensive Plans: The local comprehensive
plan is made up of elements that refine Comprehensive
Regional Policy Plans. The following elements are
required (FDCA 1991): capital improvements, future land
use, traffic circulation, sanitary sewer, solid waste,
potable water, natural groundwater aquifer recharge,
conservation, recreation and open space, housing, and
intergovernmental coordination.
The elements most relevant to the Florida Panther
Habitat Protection Plan include the "Future Land Use"
element and "Conservation" element. These two
planning elements contain goals, policies and objectives
that will affect occupied and potential panther habitat.
Future Land Use Element. This key element frames and
coordinates the other elements. It provides direction and
-8-12-
AI,pcndix B-Methods of IIltbitat Preservation
£
policy guidelines for the distribution, location and extent
of housing, business, industry, agriculture, recreation,
conservation, education, and public facilities.
Conservation Element: The purpose of this element is
to identify, protect and ensure the wise use of natural
resources. It describes the functions and potential uses
of natural resources, as well as problems and needs.
Goals, objectives and policies in local comprehensive
plans are county- and city specific. Important resources,
growth trends, wants and needs have been identified for
proper management. Despite the difference in language
from one county comprehensive plan to the next, each
county's goals are guided by the state and regional
comprehensive plans.
The goals of a local comprehensive plan must conform
with Chapter 91-5 of the Florida Administrative Code A
goal is defined as the long-term end toward which
programs and activities are directed. Each goal is
followed by one or more objectives. An objective is
defined as a specific, measurable, intermediate,
achievable end that marks progress toward the goal.
Objectives are in turn supported by policies. A policy is
defined as the way in which programs and activities are
conducted to achieve the goal. County comprehensive
pian policies are implemented with land development
regulations and land use regulations. All counties are
required to enact land development regulations
implementing comprehensive plan goals, policies and
objectives within a year after comprehensive plan
adoption.
Comprehensive plans were adopted by each of the
twenty counties in the study area between December
1988 and April 1991. All counties are required to adopt
land development regulations within one year after the
county comprehensive plan is approved by the
Department of Community Affairs. It would be
appropriate forthe Florida Panther Interagency
Committee to evaluate the extent to which these
regulations protect occupied and potential panther
habitat. Those counties which have already adopted land
development regulations generally do not regulate the
conversion of native habitat to agricultural uses, a
primary concern to agencies charged with protecting
habitat for the Florida panther.
Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern: The
800,000 acre Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern in
Collier, Dade, Hendry and Monroe Counties was
established in 1973 to "conserve and protect the natural,
environmental and economic resources and the scenic
beauty of the Big Cypress Area.. It is the purpose of
these regulations to provide a land and water
management system that will preserve water quality,
provide for the optimum utilization of the limited water
resources of the area, facilitate orderly and well-planned
development, and protect the health, welfare, safety and
quality of life of the residents of the state." The law states
that "these regulations should be implemented by local
governments through existing administrative processes
and all existing rights of private property should be
preserved in accordance with the constitutions of the
State of Florida and the United States."
The regulations: I) Limit site alteration to 10 percent of
the area being developed, 2) Restrict disturbance of
permeable surface area, 3) Require restoration of mining
spoil areas, and 4) Limit wetland drainage. While these
regulations have restricted some development, most
agricultural activities are exempt. Collier County has
adopted the regulations and identified the Big Cypress
Area of Critical State Concern as a Special Treatment
Area on their Future Land Use map.
All developments must comply with state regulations.
Although the lands within the Big Cypress Area of Critical
State Concern are monitored, they are still being
developed. Clearing for agriculture is not restricted. The
Collier County Board of Commissioners approved a
rezoning request in 1990 for the construction of a
convenience store despite formal objections by the
Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission and the
U.S Fish and Wildlife Service.
FEE TITLE ACQUISITION
Fee title acquisition is the most direct method of habitat
preservation. A fee title interest is normally acquired
when; I) The area's natural resources and flora and fauna
require permanent protection not otherwise assured, 2) A
proposed land use could adversely impact the area's
resources, or 3) When it would be the most practical and
economical way to assemble small tracts into viable
parcels for resource management.
Fee title acquisition transfers all ownership rights to the
purchaser and provides the best assurance of long-term
resource protection. A fee title interest may be acquired
by donation, exchange, or purchase. The status
of fee title acquisition by federal and state agencies,
and private non-profit conservation groups is
summarized here.
-8-13-
Appendix B-Methods of lIal'itat Preservation
Federal Land Acquisition
Two Department of Interior agencies, the National Park
Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, own and
are acquiring land in south Florida.
National Park Service. The National Park Service
acquires land for new parks or expansions of existing
parks with approval from the United States Congress.
Public Law 93-440 was enacted on October II, 1974
creating the Big Cypress National Preserve. The purpose
of the Act is to assure the preservation of natural. scenic,
hydrologic, floral, faunal and recreational values of the
Big Cypress watershed, and the re-establishment of
indigenous plants and animals. About 570,000 acres are
being acquired from 50,000 owners. Florida transferred
all of its state-owned lands within the Preserve boundary
to the United States along with $40 million in previously
appropriated state land acquisition funds. Additional
funds are requested annually from Congress to maintain
a high level of acquisition.
The Big Cypress National Preserve Addition was signed
into law on April 29, 1988. The addition totals 146,000
acres involving 5,000 owners. The State of Florida agreed
to provide 20 percent of acquisition costs. About 70,000
acres are included in the Collier-phoenix exchange,
which has yet to be finalized.
Public Law 101-229 was enacted creating the East
Everglades National Park Expansion and modifying the
park boundaries on December 13, 1989. The State of
Florida has agreed to provide 20 percent of the
acquisition costs and to donate all state-owned land
within the boundary. This expansion totals 104,084 acres
and involves 6,134 owners.
The Big Cypress Land Office was established in Naples in
1975. The office, once staffed with 140 employees,
acquired about 8,000 ownerships in Big Cypress each
year during the first five years of operation. The office has
been scaled back but continues to acquire land for Big
Cypress National Preserve, Biscayne National Park. and
the East Everglades expansion. When the East
Everglades expansion became part of the Big Cypress
Land Office workload, the title of the office was changed
to Southeast Region, Land Acquisition Field Office. Since
its establishment, this office has acquired 642, 176 acres
from 45,604 owners.
National Wildlife Refuge System. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service acquires lands and waters consistent
with legislation or other congressional guidelines and
executive orders for the conservation of fish, wildlife and
their related habitats. The purpose of the land
acquisition program is to; I) Protect nationally important
wetlands, 2) Protect important habitats for the
preservation and recovery of federally-listed endangered
and threatened species and other important wildlife and
plants, and 3) Provide wildlife-oriented public use for
educational and recreational purposes. Funds are
requested annually for land acquisition projects and for
support activities associated with non-purchase
alternatives. The Service's annual land acquisition budget
has grown from $ 16.5 million in 1982 to $ I 00.6 million in
1991. The program is expected to maintain at least its
current funding level in order to meet future
needs for preserving wetlands and other important
wildlife habitats.
The Service's Southeast Regional Office in Atlanta,
Georgia conducts an active land acquisition program.
About 71,567 acres have been acquired in Florida since
1980. About 69,762 acres were purchased at a direct cost
of $47.4 million, There are 26 National Wildlife Refuges in
Florida totalling 524,020 acres, This includes 193,945
acres purchased at a direct cost of $64.8 million. The
remaining acreage was reserved from the public domain
(4,594 acres). received as gifts (2,435 acres), acquired
through agreements, easements, or leases (151,918
acres). and acqUired through other federal agencies
(171,128 acres).
The relationship of Florida refuges to endangered and
threatened species is very important. For example, three
new refuges - Crystal River, Archie Carr, and Florida
Panther - are devoted to the preservation of the Florida
manatee, sea turtles, and the Florida panther, respectively.
State Land Acquisition
Florida has the largest state land acquisition program in
the nation, Florida's Preservation 2000 Act. passed in
1990, provides up to $300 million annually for 10 years,
contingent on annual legislative appropriations, Eighty
percent of the money supplements the Conservation and
Recreational Lands and Save Our Rivers programs. The
money is disbursed as follows (LAPIC 1990);
I. Department of Environmental Protection: 50% ($150
million) for public land acquisition under the
Conservation and Recreation Lands Program: 2,9%
($8.7 million) to purchase state park additions and
inholdings: 1.3% ($3.9 million) for the Florida Rails to
Trails Program.
2. Department of Environmental Protection: 30% ($90
million) for the Save Our Rivers Program, to be
-B-14-
AI'llelldix B-Metbods of Habitat Preservation
disbursed as follows;
30% " South Florida Water Management District
($27.0 million)
25% - Southwest Florida Water Management District
($22.5 million)
25% - St. lohn's Water Management District
($22.5 million)
10% - Suwannee River Water Management District
($ 9.0 million)
i 0% - Northwest Florida Water Management District
($ 9.0 million)
3. Department of Community Affairs; 10% ($30 million)
for the Florida Communities Trust to provide land
acquisition awards to local governments.
4. Division of Forestry, 2.9% ($8.7 million) to purchase
agreements with the Florida Department of
Transportation and National Park Service at Big Cypress
and East Everglades. The main focus in Collier County,
however, has been to consolidate ownerships in
Fakahatchee Strand and South Golden Gate Estates.
Save Our Rivers (SOR). The Florida Legislature enacted
the "Save Our Rivers" program in 1981 and created the
Water Management Lands Trust Fund. This fund is used
to acquire fee title or less-than-fee title interest in lands
needed for water supply, water management, and the
protection and conservation of water resources. The fund
cannot be used for the acquisition of canal and pipeline
rights-of-way. Water management districts also receive
$90 million (30%) of the annual Preservation 2000 funds
as a supplement for land acquisition.
state forest additions and inholdings.
5. Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, 2.9% ($8.7
Save Our Rivers projects are evaluated on water
management. supply, resource conservation and
million) to purchase wildlife mana.gement area
protection criteria. Secondary evaluation criteria include
additions and in holdings.
land management, habitat and species diversity,
continuity, rarity, vulnerability, and recreation potential.
The land acquisition activities of the three water
management districts that own, manage and regulate
land in the study area are summarized below.
Conservation and Recreational Lanas. The
Conservation and Recreational Lands Program was
established in 1979 and superseded the $200 million
i 972 Environmentally Endangered Lands Program. The
State of Florida buys land "(a) To conserve and protect
environmentally unique and irreplaceable lands that
contain native, unaltered flora and fauna representing a
natural area unique to, or scarce in, a region of Florida or
larger geographic area; (b) To conserve and protect native
species habitat, or endangered or threatened species; (c)
To conserve, protect, manage, or restore important
ecosystems, landscapes, and forests, if the protection
and conservation of such lands is necessary to enhance
or protect significant surface water, ground water,
coastal, recreational, timber, fish or wildlife resources
which cannot otherwise be accomplished through local
and state regulatory programs; (d) To provide access,
including recreational trails for natural resource-based
recreation; or (e) To preserve significant archaeological
or historical sites." As of February 9, 1993 about 653,557
acres valued at $772A million had been acquired. The
Governor and Cabinet have approved options on 43,278
acres valued at $77.3 million.
Collier County has the largest and most important
expanse of panther habitat, and has received the most
funds. The 1991-92 Conservation and Recreational Lands
Workplan allocated $ i 0 million for "multi-parcel"
Everglades projects. Funding is expected to remain at
this level or be increased to expedite acquisition. About
one-third was earmarked for interagency acquisition
St. John's River Water Management District: Potential
panther habitat has been identified in the Upper St.
John's River Basin, i.e. Indian River County north, east
and south of Blue Cypress Lake. The District, as of
January 15, 1991,owns 143,347 acres there (SJRWMD
1993). About 10,218 acres (seven ownerships) remain to
be acquired. There are sporadic reports of panther
sightings along the St. John's River. Panthers sighted in
the St. John's River Basin may be dispersing east or west
around Lake Okeechobee from the south Florida
population.
Southwest Florida Water Management District: Annual
continuity is maintained by dividing projects into the
following groups (SWFWMD 1993):
Group A: A resource evaluation has been completed and
acquisition authorized. The study area
encompasses seven projects in Charlotte,
DeSoto, Highlands, Manatee, Polk, and
Sarasota Counties. About 11,685 acres have
been acqUlired with 54,384 acres remaining.
Group B: Projects have been evaluated and await
Governing Board approval. There are no Group
B projects in the study area.
-8-15-
Appendix B-Methods of Habitat Preservation
Group Co The study area encompasses seven projects in
Charlotte, DeSoto, Hardee, Highlands,
Manatee, and Sarasota Counties.
Approximately 166,720 acres are scheduled for
evaluation during the current and upcoming
fiscal year.
Group D: One project totaling 5,302 acres is scheduled
for later evaluation.
South Florida Water Management District: The Habitat
Preservation Plan study area encompasses six active
acquisition projects in the South Florida Water
Management District totaling 345,854 acres. As of lune
30, 1992 about 88,142 acres have been acquired and
257,712 acres remain to be acquired (SFWMD 1993). The
study area also encompasses 8 proposed acqUisition
projects in the South Florida Water Management District
totaling 174,026 acres. Two acquisition projects totaling
24,094 acres have been completed. The South Florida
Water Management District encompasses the 3.1 millionacre range occupied by the Florida panther between 1981
and 1991 and most of the potential panther habitat
identified in this plan.
County Land Acquisition
The Department of Community Affairs' Florida
Communities Trust helps the counties fund projects that
implement iocal comprehensive plans. The projects are
designed to conserve natural resources or resolve land
use conflicts.
Revenues are derived from; I) The operation,
management, sale, lease, or other disposition of land,
water areas, related resources, and facilities acquired or
constructed by the Trust; 2) 25 percent of the Florida
Panther license plate proceeds; 3) Donations, grants,
loans, and other aid; and, 4) $30 million (10%) from
Preservation 2000, the primary funding source. At least
$15 million is available to counties as I: I matching
grants. Six of the counties located in the study area
(denoted by an asterisk 1'1 below) have initiated land
acquisition programs to garner these matching funds.
'Broward County, Voters in Broward County approved a
$75 million capital improvement program in 1988 for
land acquisition. The money will match Preservation
2000 funds.
Charlotte County, Charlotte County has a Land
Acquisition Advisory Council, comprised of county and
environmental representatives, similar to the
Conservation and Recreational Lands Council. There is
no funding source, but $300,000 has been appropriated
for acquisition of the Tippecanoe Scrub site. The county
has applied for Florida Communities Trust funding. The
county also supports acquisition of the Charlotte Harbor
Flatwoods west of Cecil Webb Wildlife Management Area.
Collier County, The Board of County Commissioners
intends to provide $ I 0 million for land acquisition in the
Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed. A property tax
referendum to fund land acquisition was prepared in
1991. So far, the referendum has failed to make the ballot
and the Commissioners have not embraced this method
of acquisition funding. The Environmental Policy
Technical Advisory Board "wish list" includes important
panther habitat.
'Dade County, Voters in Dade County approved a two
year, 0.75-mill ad valorem tax increase in 1990 that will
generate $90 million. The county hopes to obtain
matching Preservation 2000 funds and to establish a
trust fund of several million dollars, using the interest
earned to manage and restore acquired lands.
'Indian River County, Indian River County voters passed
a 0.50-mill ad valorem tax referendum to acquire
environmentally sensitive lands on November 3, 1992.
The program is expected to generate $26 million over a
fifteen year period.
*Lee County. Voters in Lee County approved a three
year, 0.25-mill ad valorem tax increase in 1990 to raise
$ I 0 million. The county is working with the South Florida
Water Management District, the Trust for Public Lands,
and the Department of Environmental Protection to buy
land in the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed.
Manatee County. Manatee County does not have an
ongoing land acquisition program. but it has raised $25
million for matching Conservation and Recreational
Lands purchases.
'Martin County. Voters in Martin County approved a $20
million bond issue in 1989, financed by a 20-year, 0.625mill ad valorem tax increase. The funds are used as
follows: $12.5 million for open space, $5 million for
community parks. and $2.5 million for contingency funds.
Martin County has developed joint projects with the
Conservation and Recreational Lands, Save Our Rivers
and Save Our Coast programs.
'Palm Beach County, Voters in Palm Beach County
approved a $100 million bond issue in 1991 to acquire 14
sites containing endangered and threatened species. The
county hopes to receive matching funds from
Preservation 2000.
-8-16-
Appendix lI-Metltods of Habitat Preservation
'Sarasota County. Sarasota County is acquiring the T.
Carlton Mabry Reserve adjacent to Myakka River State
Park. They support expansion of Oscar Scherer State
Park and state acquisition of the Myakka Prairie.
Private Land Acquisition
The Trust for Public Land. The Trust for Public Land is
a national non-profit organization that protects land as a
living resource for present and future generations. It
works in partnership with federal and state agencies to
acquire land of environmental, recreational, historic or
cultural significance.
Irs first Florida project began in the lower Keys. where it
assisted the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service in acquiring
5.000 acres of endangered Key Deer habitat. Since then.
the Trust's Southeast Regional Office in Tallahassee has
protected over 71.000 acres of urban parks, historic sites.
rural wildlife habitat and coastal wetlands in Florida.
The Trust for Public Land is assisting Lee County and
South Florida Water Management District land
acquisition efforts in the 40.000-acre Corkscrew Regional
Ecosystem Watershed. The project will complement the
National Audubon Society's Corkscrew Swamp
Sanctuary and connect the sheet-flow ecosystems of
southwest Florida with Everglades National Park, thus
helping to protect the largest wood stork rookery in the
nation. as well as valuable habitat for the Florida black
bear and Florida panther.
The Nature Conservancy. The Nature Conservancy is an
international. non-profit, membership organization. Its
mission is to find, protect and maintain endangered
species, natural communities and ecosystems.
The Florida Natural Areas Inventory was established by
The Nature Conservancy to compile computer data on
the location of rare plants and animals. This information
establishes plant and animal rarity and the level of
protection needed. Since 1960, the program has worked
at the local, state and national level to protect 440,000
acres of natural areas and associated species.
The Nature Conservancy acquired 5,760 acres in 1954 to
help establish the National Audubon Society's Corkscrew
Swamp Sanctuary. Now The Nature Conservancy is
assisting Collier County and South Florida Water
Management District land acquisition efforts in the
40,000-acre Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed.
The 3,663-acre Fisch property, which comprises most of
Bird Rookery Swamp, was acquired by The Nature
Conservancy and transferred to the District.
The Nature Conservancy accepted from the Diamonstein
family a donation of 293 acres of sawgrass marsh in
southeast Dade County used by the Florida panther. This
land, which comprises part of the Model Lands Basin,
will be transferred to Dade County. Finally, the Nature
Conservancy has made additions to The Fakahatchee
Strand State Preserve since 1969, thus helping to protect
panther habitat on three projects.
American Farmland Trust, The American Farmland
Trust is a private, non-profit organization founded in
1980 to protect agricultural resources. It specializes in
the development of conservation easements and
purchase of development rights on agricultural land
threatened by development. Protecting farmlands from
urban development reduces the clearing of native
vegetation for new farms. The American Farmlands Trust
became involved in farmland preservation in Collier,
Dade, and Palm Beach Counties in 1991.
-&-17-
FIGURE Col: OVERVIEW
SOUTH FLORIDA
ECOLOGICAL UNITS
FLORIDA PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION PLAN
K_ _ W~Oroup
FIoDdo_~"","",""",
I«>v=I>="I~l
Priority 2 Hab;1a!
~"'~
"Ii
,.,S;
o
APPENDIX C - DESCRIPTION OF
ECOLOGICAL UNITS
MODEL LANDS BASIN
........ C-3
.
EAST EVERGLADES
...C-3
.
...C-3
GUM SWAMP ..
DEVIL'S GARDEN
..
.
OKALOACOOCHEESLOUGH
SOUTH GOLDEN GATE ESTATES
BELLE MEADE
..
C-4
....................................................... C-5
.
.
..
C-5
CORKSCREW REGIONAL ECOSYSTEM WATERSHED
FISHEATING CREEK ....
C-4
.
C-6
.......... ,
.............
TELEGRAPH SWAMP ..
MYAKKA RIVER/PEACE RIVER ..
-C-I-
C-6
..
C-7
..
C-7
-<:-J-
Sl!uf1I"!~010'310 uO!1d!J,saa-~
xlpuaddV
. __ .
~
-----
"" v-~....
~
~
.
..r--"
..r-.-r-
~~
~~
,I
~
~
L~
L~
I~
~
i
---~--~--~--
J ","
,
I
')"~ --',"_ T~Jr
Ai~TIi!lI
WdrnS
-''''
---
.,
I ....
,
",~.
n.-Had ~"
--:::,
,I
L
'\ ,-
\ _,, r
~
\ -,t
• I
1.1
""
"
----"-------'---"
'.
~+
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
~
EAST
EVERGLADES
-,•
./ -,
=.
.I
~,
..
FIGURE C-3
MODEL LAND BASINS AND
EAST EVERGLADES ECOLOGICAL UNITS
FLORIDA PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION PLAN
Florida Panther In~cy Committee
Habit:lt Prcserv8tion working Group
Nowmber 1993
[lif,llii~!~ ~oo~ Hooi~t
Priority 2 Habitat
I
1
1-
~'
i
,
~
l'
I'I • ~
AllPClldix C-Dcscrijltion of Ecological Units
perimeter. The Gum Swamp Ecological Unit is high quality habitat used extensively by
radio-collared panthers over the last decade.
The Immokalee Rise physiographic region was the subject of a citrus feasibility study
conducted by the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences for
the South Florida Water Management District. Results of the study indicate that 45
percent of the 2,457 square mile study area is unsuitable for citrus conversion.
However, about 8,600 acres in the Gum Swamp Ecological Unit are permitted for citrus
irrigation water withdrawal. Conversion schedules of permitted lands are unknown at
this time.
IlEVIL'S GARDEN
The Devil's Garden Ecological Unit (Figure D-4) encompasses 139,000 acres of Priority
2 lands in central Hendry County.
Devil's Garden is bisected east to west by County Road 846 and north to south by
County Road 833. It is bounded on the west by the Okaloacoochee Slough
Ecological Unit (138, 100 acres) and on the south by the Gum Swamp Ecological Unit
(69,700 acres).
Devil's Garden is a mixture of seasonal wetlands, wet prairie, dry prairie and scattered
uplands that have been converted to pasture through drainage and vegetation
removal. Citrus groves, agricultural fields and improved pasture are evident but native
range or unimproved pasture predominates. However, some of the larger landowners
are actively converting their land to improved pasture; first by logging all
merchantable pine, then by roller-chopping the saw palmetto understory. Some oakpine·palmetto hammocks are left but they are small and scattered. Conversion of
native range to improved pasture accounts for untold losses of occupied and potential
panther habitat.
The Immokalee Rise physiographic region was the subject of a citrus feasibility study
conducted by the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural SCiences for
the South Florida Water Management District. Results of the study indicate that 45
percent of the 2,457 square mile study area is unsuitable for citrus conversion.
However, about 50,600 acres in the Devil's Garden Ecological Unit are permitted for
citrus irrigation water withdrawal. Conversion schedules of permitted lands are
unknown at this time.
OKALOACOOCHEESLOUGH
The Okaloacoochee Slough Ecological Unit encompasses 50,500 acres in Collier
County and 87,600 acres in Hendry County. Approximately 46,700 acres in Collier
County and 79,000 acres in Hendry County are classified as Priority I lands.
Approximately 3,800 acres in Collier County and 8,600 acres in Hendry County are
classified as Priority 2 lands. A total of 138, I 00 acres have been identified as suitable
for preservation (Figure D-4).
The Okaloacoochee Slough Ecological Unit is bisected by County Road 832, bounded
on the east by County Road 846 and the Hendry/Collier County line, bounded on the
south by Big Cypress National Preserve and Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge
and bounded on the west by th.e Immokalee Agricultural Area and State Road 29.
Okaloacoochee Slough is comprised of freshwater marsh; wet and dry prairies, cypress
sloughs, hydric pine flatwoods and oak-pine-palm hammocks. The land is used
primarily for native range cattle grazing but may contain some agricultural fields and
citrus groves.
-C-4-
-J
~j:::
,
i.
,~
j
C/)
,.
f2Cl::
~
U
<!J
ii'J
FIGUREC-4
OKALOACOOCHEE SLOUGH, GUM SWAMP,
AND DEVILS GARDEN ECOLOGICAL UNITS
FLORIDA PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVAnON PLAN
Florida Panther 1ntcnIgency Committee
Habitat Ptes.ervation WOIrking Group
November 1993
li!i;:liilii
fuoory I
HM~
.rlllll)1I1
fuoriry 2 HM;W
Ul I I I , • ,
i
'ltV.
• • .. •
•
•
••
•
_. -
7I j. i. II
FIGURE C-5
SOUTH GOLDEN GATE ESTATES AND
BELLE MEADE ECOLOGICAL UNITS
FLORIDA PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION PLAN
Florida Panlher brtentgency Committee
Habitat Presetve.tion Work:ing Group
November 1993
li~'fi~iiil ~ori~ Habi~1
I
~ori~
2 Hab;W
I
',I'
•
I
,
~~_----l+--.;...--r---+----r::=.=--..../~)l';7 +
~
ApJlendix C-Description of Ecological Units
The Immokalee Rise physiographic region was the subject of a citrus feasibility study
conducted by the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences for
the South Florida Water Management District. Results of the study indicate that 45
percent of the 2,457 square mile study area is unsuitable for citrus conversion.
However, about 14,900 acres in the Collier County portion, and 12,800 acres in the
Hendry County portion of the Okaloacoochee Slough Ecological Unit are permitted for
citrus irrigation water withdrawal. Conversion schedules of permitted lands are
unknown at this time.
Okaloacoochee Slough has been identified by the CARL Land Acquisition Advisory
Council and the Collier County Environmental Policy Technical Advisory Board as an
area worthy of preservation. Preserving the slough would provide 138, I 00 acres of
forested habitat contiguous with the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (23,000
acres) and Big Cypress National Preserve (716,000 acres) which comprise the bulkof
the breeding range of Florida panthers. Ten years of radio telemetry data collected by
the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission indicate that Okaloacoochee
Slough is used by dispersing sub-adult males and females rearing young.
SOUTH GOLDEN GATE ESTATES
South Golden Gate Estates (Figure D-5) is a 42,000 acre Florida Department of
Environmental Protection Save Our Everglades acquisition project comprised of
Priority I lands. It is bounded on the north by Interstate 75, on the east by Fakahatchee
Strand State Preserve, on the south by Tamiami Trail and on the west by Belle Meade.
South Golden Gate Estates is comprised of 2.5 acre lots in about 20,000 ownerships. It
is sparsely developed with single family residences and small, dilapidated hunting
camps. Some structures were built without permits.
The Gulf American Corporation dug canals and built roads here in the 1950s and I 960s.
South Golden Gate Estates is comprised of altered wetlands; cypress strands, hydric
pine flatwoods, wet prairies and scattered pine islands. Extensive restoration, such as
road removal and canal filling, will be attempted once enough land is acquired. The
area appears to be under-utilized by panthers. Use of prescribed fire, public use control
and canal crossings would improve its suitability for panthers.
The Florida Panther Interagency Committee should offer monetary support to the
Department of Environmental Protection. It will take ten years, at current rates, to
complete acquisition. A minimum of two, and ideally four, clerks are needed to pull
deeds at the Collier County Courthouse in Naples and to process offer letters at the
Department of Environmental Protection office in Tallahassee. The estimated costs are
S12,000 per year per clerk. The Department of Environmental Protection and The
Conservancy of Naples would be responsible for training and supervising the clerks.
BELLE MEADE
Belle Meade (Figure D-5) encompasses about 40,846 acres of Priority i lands in
southwest Collier County. Fee title acquisition is recommended throughout. The Belle
Meade proposal was submitted by the Naples Conservancy, Inc. to the Conservation
and Recreational Lands Committee in 1992.
The area is bounded on the north by 1-75, on the east by South Golden Gate Estates,
on the south by Tamiami Trail and Six L's Farms, and on the west by the Collier County
urban services boundary (one mile east of County Road 951). The land is comprised of
cypress strands; hydric pine flatwoods, wet prairies and scattered pine islands.
Portions of Belle Meade are used for cattle grazing and recreational hunting, the rest
consists of vacant lots.
Acquisition of Belle Meade will preserve the western Big Cypress basin which forms the
headwaters of the Rookery Bay National Marine Estuary. Panther activity could
increase with the acquisition and proper management of Belle Meade and South
-C-5-
Apilendix C-Dcscrilllion or Ecological Units
Golden Gate Estates. The area is also' inhabited by Florida black bears and redcockaded woodpeckers. The Florida Panther Interagency Committee should encourage
and support acquisition of 40,846 acres in Belle Meade by the Department of
Environmental Protection.
CORKSCREW REGIONAL ECOSYSTEM WATERSHED
The Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed is a 55,000 acre Save Our Rivers project
funded by Preservation 2000 through the South Florida Water Management District
with Lee County and Collier County providing matching funds. The Trust for Public
Lands is assisting Lee County with the acquisition of 12,700 acres while The Nature
Conservancy is assisting Collier County with the acquisition of 42,300 acres.
Approximately 19,200 acres in Collier County and 3,800 acres in Lee County are
classified as Priority I lands. Approximately 25,800 acres in Collier County and 73,000
acres in Lee County are classified as Priority 2 lands. A total of 176,800 acres, including
the 55,000 acre Save Our Rivers project, have been identified as suitable for
preservation (Figure D-6).
The Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed is bounded on the north by State Road
82, on the south by Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, on the east by the
Immokalee Agricultural Area, and on the west by northern Golden Gate Estates and
Interstate 75. The project surrounds the National AUdubon Society's 10,500 acre
Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary. Corkscrew Swamp is surrounded by a mixture of land
uses such as; row crops, citrus, recreational hunting, traditional rural housing and
modern subdivisions.
The Immokalee Rise physiographic region was the subject of a citrus feasibility study
conducted by the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences for
the South Florida Water Management District. Results of the study indicate that 45
percent of the 2,457 square mile study area is unsuitable for citrus conversion.
However, about 23,000 acres in the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed
Ecological Unit, primarily in the Camp Keais Strand, are permitted for citrus irrigation
water withdrawal. Camp Keais Strand forms a hydrological and biological link between
Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and the National Audubon Corkscrew Swamp
Sanctuary. Conversion schedules of permitted lands are unknown at this time.
Corkscrew Swamp flows south through Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge into
the Fakahatchee Strand and out through the Ten Thousand Islands into the Gulf of
Mexico. The Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission has tracked radio-collared
panthers from the refuge north through Camp Keais Strand and into Corkscrew
Swamp. With proper management the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed
would serve as a foraging and dispersal area for the Florida panther.
FISHEATING CREEK
Fisheating Creek bisects Glades County from west to east as it flows toward Lake
Okeechobee. It originates in Highlands County and is also fed by Rainey Slough which
drains south-southeast from DeSoto County. Fisheating Creek consists of freshwater
wetlands, wet and dry prairies, scrub/shrub wetlands and scattered oak-pine-palmetto
uplands. There is an upland ridge 15 feet in elevation between Fisheating Creek and
the Caloosahatchee River. The predominate land use pattern is improved and
unimproved pasture. The South Florida Water Management District has proposed
acquisition of 43,872 acres along Fisheating Creek.
Approximately 144,400 acres in Glades County and 22,600 acres in Highlands County
are classified as Priority I lands. Approximately 51,500 acres in Glades County and 500
acres in Highlands County are classified as Priority 2 lands. A total of 262,872 acres,
-C-o-
o
~y~"" ~-Jlj
\\br
I:
,Fit-
1111'
ttlt--
+
'l~
---~.~
--;W:i~~
r,
,.,.
~~. ~
C\-1~'1"';y'.-'r'=====~====='~~~=ilIi
I'.
. In
FIGUREC-6
CORKSCREW REGIONAL ECOSYSTEM
WATERSHED (CREW) ECOLOGICAL UNIT
FLORIDA PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION PLAN
Pkrrida Panther I~ Committee
Habitat PrC56lVlltion Wotking Group
November 1993
f~f;it;ltti~;1 ~ority H~iW
Priority :2 Habitat
I
?,"
r-
..
..... -!
1-
~-"'"" : . ~.'
L:::-'
........ - 1--... _.
-_. ----
-- ,,-,.,...
~.
~-..
5;.
~_
a-
- ~-
.........., """'"
~
- = -~
\.
,(-b)~(,.
"'l.f'~
':'.....:~
_
4\. \t-r.Jt_ -
FLORIDA PANTHER. A,'f:~rn
'M.o,<
'-""£i?" -..
IJ NA TlONAL WILDLIFE 1""";,---61~ -- -~....
- - _ REFUGE >~-,,..- .' - - \ I ' .
.~
\,~:-=.--::,"':.
~-:;_. ~
~ ..
Ni'!nk,"
::-.,:~__, .~
"
",~, ~
I~""~~_-=:_~~_ ~"
AiL
\
Appendix C-Description of Ecological Units
including the 43,872 acre Save Our Rivers project, have been identified as suitable for
preservation (Figure D-7).
Construction of the Herbert Hoover dike around Lake Okeechobee and channelization
of the Caloosahatchee River and Nicodemus Slough in the I 930s first altered
Fisheating Creek. Examination of 1990 Florida Dept. of Transportation aerial
photography revealed the extent to which seasonal wetlands have been linked by
drainage ditches. This type of drainage is prevalent in northeast Glades County. About
1,400 acres have been converted to eucalyptus plantations. Native habitat is being
converted to pasture by clearcutting the pine and roller-chopping the understory. This
"semi-improved" pasture is then bulldozed, burned and planted to exotic grasses.
Conversion of native range to improved pasture accounts for untold losses of occupied
and potential panther habitat.
A large portion of this Ecological Unit was leased, up until 1985, by the Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission as a Wildlife Management Area. Commission bioiogists
believe, but have been unable to ascertain that. the area supports a remnant panther
population. Panther #24 was captured and radio-collared lanuary 1988 near Palmdale
and spent much of it's time in northeast Glades County. The panther was tracked for 7
months in Highlands County untO it died of unknown causes in August 1988.
The Fisheating Creek Ecological Unit (262.872 acres). combined with the Telegraph
Swamp Ecological Unit (98.300 acres) and the C.M. Webb Wildlife Management Area
(65,343 acres) if not presently occupied by panthers is suitable for occupation by
panthers dispersing from areas south and is considered essential to achieving a viable,
self-sustaining panther population in south Florida.
TELEGRAPH SWAMP
Telegraph Swamp drains south-southeast through east Charlotte County into the
Caloosahatchee River. It is characterized by cypress strands, freshwater wetlands, wet
and dry prairies, hydric pine flatwoods and oak-pine-palmetto hammocks. The land
use pattern includes improved and unimproved pasture, agricultural fields, citrus
groves and wooded tracts used for recreational hunting. The South Florida Water
Management District has proposed acquisition of 10,000 acres in Telegraph Swamp.
Approximately 75,400 acres in Charlotte County and 2,600 acres in Lee County are
classified as Priority I lands. Approximately 7,700 acres in Charlotte County and 2,600
acres in Lee County are classified as Priority 2 lands. A total of 98,300 acres, including
the 10,000 acre Save Our Rivers project. have been identified as suitable for
preservation (Figure D-8).
The Telegraph Swamp cological Unit (98,300 acres). combined with the Fisheating
Creek Ecological Unit (262,872 acres) and the eM. Webb Wildlife Management Area
(65,343 acres) if not presently occupied by panthers is suitable for occupation by
panthers dispersing from areas to the south and is considered essential to achieving a
viable, self-sustaining panther population in south Florida.
MYAKKA RIVER/PEACE RIVER
The Myakka River/Peace River Ecological Unit (Figure D-9) encompasses about 150,400
acres in southeast Manatee County, northeast Sarasota County and southwest DeSoto
County. Approximately 24,600 acres in Manatee County, 49,300 acres in Sarasota
County and 5,900 acres in DeSoto County are classified as Priority I lands.
Approximately 16,200 acres in Sarasota County and 54,400 acres in DeSoto County are
classified as Priority 2 lands.
The Ecological Unit is bounded on the north by Florida State Highway 70, on the east
by the Peace River, on the south by the sprawling North Port subdivision and on the
-C-7-
\"""
...,.,
.. (.I
.J
~,
.~
[~J ;'-<cf-t;;ji7~..C,;,I" j':J.,
,
tiUL
L d ~k<"r'I'_.- :::;;;C.J
J
~
_
~,.,t",
~ M~.····Oo~.~r~L
. ",.I V '~4' I-1
Ls
',=:
".
I
,.
i/ DEISOTO'"CO
)
/,
,-::;r'l__~v"~1
e. ,
7'j/
,
-~
"
,
"
"T\-
I_',.(10
'~;~
~,~
"
I'
.\
}~
'~l
'~$
:~'
':.
',. All slf\lIlI islalld$ are" t'
'::""-'':}i-', ' '"
~~¥;
~'''''.'i.':il"'.
,
~ by ~n.~ . >~~.~
I
'"
,(:/
9, ... Pirate i--!ar~~
:.1 .':1.
,~--
I
~
II
:: <:c~ II
..~,
"':' ~
==
II
FIGURE C-8
TELEGRAPH SWAMP
ECOLOGICAL UNIT
"
1
1.1'4'£
FLORIDA PANTHER HABITAT PRESERVATION PLAN
Fklrida PantlJer Interagency COlJ\miltee
Habitat Preservation Worlcing Group
November 1993
Priority I Habitat
"ooc,",
lillelan~
I
,
TraiIQul
r
-
': j
o·
";J, \~..-""''''',
.;
,1-"
P;ne Isla-Fid"'Center ,
,1
,,-:
Llm.£
PINE
'.
-~~'
""'I'jJ
I
I
!
II
'
J'
L
-
---~ ~ - - - - - - -
i
---'
l!
".'.J
!
r--:.~)
rr-1~", '~! "L __ -,
-",,' i,d.-
to..'
n'~1
,cJ"i1~r-··'
,I d ,.,
I."
~ '\fy"jJ.---j'
I 1/
i
' '
."-.'
',f
I
.;;"
I
h,.
1 ~)
(
'"
Velna
'V~(."I>
1
~~i
'~
,
1
I
1J ,,'",-
,,-
"
\
/'
_ -,<,..::;-.;.;::-f--:::
i':i. .1'1\
/~I- -"-
') I)""",
I
J
MYAKKA RIVERI
PEACE RIVER
'1
I
)1,,,",/,
\
!fc~~~
rl),I!~ ;,. I>
'\P0:~:i~~~~r
.r'
\ ' - --
1/1
.
rol-Y
, LJ
1'1'" <
<
/-
Priority 2 I iahital
.
--....
"'""'''''''''--,
_
'-'-, [
--=:.J.
-- i
Florida PantheJ tllteagency Committee
!!~bita! Pr~"fV;Uan Working Group
Novembel' 1993
.
Ij
-E-~
FLORIDA PANTHER IIAHITAT PRESER VATION PLAN
Priority I Habitat
ee"
E-~
FIGURE C-9
MYAKKA RIVERIPEACE RIVER
ECOLOGICAL UNIT
.....-
"
[11F;t~L_I'-'
':'
"
(\,
,I\ c.l)lrf--.rJ+JwV ~
I Job"" 1L0 \ \
-.-----_
.._--"-
il/J
~
I
\")
~,~~_\,=!:1%t?;;;;;U
j .._--1+"';'
- ---+---