Item 03 Conservation & Coastal ManagementMonroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT
Table of Contents
Item
Page
3.0. CONSERVATION
AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT......................................................1
3.1
Introduction
..................................................................................................................................
3.2
1
Climate
3.3
............................................................................................................................................9
Physiography, Geology, and Mineral Resources
3.3.1
....................................................... 9
Physiographic Features.............................................................................................. 9
3.3.2
Geology
3.3.3
...........................................................................................................................11
Mineral Resources
3.4
Soils
......................................................................................................13
...........................................................................................................................................16
3.4.1
Soils Inventory.............................................................................................................16
3.4.2
Soil Limitations for Developed Uses
3.4.3
...................................................................23
Areas Known by the Local Soil and Water Conservation District to
Have Experienced Soil Erosion Problems
3.5
.........................................................24
Marine Water Resources
3.5.1
........................................................................................................29
Hydrographic Setting
3.5.2
................................................................................................29
Ambient Water Quality Conditions
3.5.3
......................................................................32
Known Existing Point and Non -Point Source Pollution Problems .......... 40
3.5.4
Actions Needed to Protect Water Quality/State, Regional, and Local
Regulatory Programs which will be Used to Maintain or Improve
Water Quality/Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Water
Resources.......................................................................................................................5 3
3.5.5
Impacts of the Future Land Use Plan on Water Quality
3.6
Fresh
..............................62
Surface Water Resources..........................................................................................63
3.6.1
Occurrence of Fresh Surface Water Resources
3.7
...............................................63
Floodplains..................................................................................................................................64
3.7.1
Floodplain Occurrences
3.7.2
...........................................................................................64
Existing Commercial, Recreational, or Conservation Uses in
Floodplains....................................................................................................................65
3.7.3
Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to
FloodingHazard..........................................................................................................65
3.7.4
Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Floodplains
3.8
Living
..................65
Marine Resources
3.8.1
........................................................................................................66
Mangroves.....................................................................................................................67
3.8.2
Seagrass Beds.......................................................
3.8.3
..................................................77
Coral Communities
3.9
Wetlands
...........................................
3.9.1
....................................................
Wetlands Permitting and Wetlands Protection Planning in Monroe
County.............................................................................................................................93
3.9.2
Monroe County Advance Identification of Wetlands (ADID)
Program..........................................................................................................................96
%.u..bCi vauun ana Loastai management i Technical Document: May 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.9.3 Mangrove Communities...........................................................................................97
3.9.4 Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands...............................................................97
3.9.5 Beaches........................................................................................................................105
3.9.6 Salt Ponds...................................................................................................................105
3.9.7 Freshwater Wetlands.............................................................................................107
3.9.8 Disturbed Wetlands................................................................................................115
3.9.9 Exotic Vegetation.....................................................................................................117
3.10
Beach/Berm Communities.................................................................................................118
3.10.1 Beach/Berm Communities of the Florida Keys...........................................118
3.10.2 Flora of Beach/Berm Communities..................................................................121
3.10.3 Existing Commercial, Recreational, or Conservation Uses of
Beach/Berm Communities...................................................................................122
3.10.4 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Beach/Berm
Communities.............................................................................................................122
3.10.5 Past Trends in Beach Erosion and Accretion................................................123
3.10.6 Effects of Coastal or Shore Protection Structures on Beach/Berm
Communities.............................................................................................................128
3.10.7 Existing and Potential Beach Renourishment Areas.................................128
3.10.8 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Beach/Berm
Communities.............................................................................................................128
3.11
Upland Vegetation.................................................................................................................128
3.11.1 Tropical Hardwood Hammocks.........................................................................129
3.11.2 Pinelands....................................................................................................................136
3.12
Wildlife.......................................................................................................................................140
3.12.1 Wildlife of the Biological Communities of the Florida Keys....................141
3.12.2 Existing Commercial, Recreational, and Conservation Uses of
Florida Keys Biological Communities..............................................................149
3.12.3 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Wildlife
Communities.............................................................................................................149
3.12.4 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Wildlife
Communities.............................................................................................................151
3.13
Threatened and Endangered Species.............................................................................152
3.13.1 Occurrences of Threatened and Endangered Species...............................152
3.13.2 General Recommended Conservation Actions for Protection of
Threatened and Endangered Species...............................................................156
3.13.3 Schaus' Swallowtail Butterfly (Heraclides aristodemus ponceanus) ....
160
3.13.4 Stock Island Tree Snail (Orthalicus reses).........................................................161
3.13.5 Corals............................................................................................................................162
3.13.6 Smalltooth Sawfish (Pristis pectinata)...............................................................164
3.13.7 Marine Turtles..........................................................................................................165
3.13.8 American Crocodile (Crocodylus acutus)...........................................................
167
3.13.9 American Alligator (Alligator mississippiensis)............................................169
3.13.10 Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymachron corais couperi)................................170
3.13.11 Southern Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus).........................................172
3.13.12 Wood Stork (Mycteria americana).....................................................................172
3.13.13 Bachman's Warbler (Vermivora bachmanii).................................................173
Conservation and Coastal Management ii Technical Document: May 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.13.14 Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus)..................................................................174
3.13.15 Roseate Tern (Sterna dougallii)...........................................................................174
3.13.16 Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow (Ammodramus maritimus mirabilis) ..... 176
3.13.17 Key Largo Wood Rat (Neotoma floridana smallii)....................................176
3.13.18 Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium)....................................................177
3.13.19 Silver Rice Rat (Oryzomys argentatus).............................................................180
3.13.20 Key Largo Cotton Mouse (Pero myscus gossypin us allapaticola).......... 181
3.13.21 Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris hefneri)..........................182
3.13.22 Florida Manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris)....................................183
3.13.23 Key Tree -Cactus (Cereus robinii).........................................................................184
3.13.24 Small's Milkpea (Galactia smallii).......................................................................185
3.13.25 Garber's Spurge(Chamaesycegarberi).........................................................18S
3.14
Fisheries....................................................................................................................................186
3.14.1 Fisheries of the Florida Keys...............................................................................186
3.14.2 Existing Commercial, Recreational, or Conservation Uses of
Fisheries......................................................................................................................188
3.14.3 Known Problems Related to Fisheries and the Potential for
Conservation, Use, and Protection of Fisheries...........................................189
3.14.4 Essential Fish Habitat............................................................................................199
3.15
Air Quality
.................................................................................................................................
3.15.1 Ambient Air Quality Standards and Statewide Air Quality
200
Monitoring Programs .......................................
3.15.2 Monroe County Ambient Air Quality...............................................................
201
3.15.3 Known Sources of Air Pollution in Monroe County ...................................
202
3.15.4 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Air Quality in
MonroeCounty.........................................................................................................202
3.16
Water Needs and Use...........................................................................................................
204
3.16.1 Current (Year 2010) Water Needs and Sources..........................................204
3.16.2 Projected (Year 2035) Water Needs and Sources ......................................
204
3.16.3 Water Conservation Strategies..........................................................................
204
3.17
Hazardous Wastes and Hazardous Materials.............................................................
205
3.17.1 Solid Waste Disposal Sites...................................................................................205
3.17.2 Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites
........................................................................205
3.17.3 Hazardous Waste Generators
.............................................................................206
3.17.4 Household Hazardous Wastes
............................................................................206
3.17.5 Underground and Aboveground Storage
Tanks..........................................207
3.17.6 Drycleaning Facilities.............................................................................................208
3.17.7 Brownfields
................................................................................................................208
3.17.8 Hazardous Material Spills
3.18
...................................................................................
Areas of Special Concern to Local Government
208
.........................................................210
3.18.1 Areas of Critical State Concern...........................................................................210
3.18.2 Areas of Critical County Concern
.......................................................................212
3.18.3 Conservation Lands
................................................................................................213
3.18.4 Units of the Coastal Barriers Resources System ..........................................
222
3.18.5 Historic Resources..................................................................................................
224
Conservation and Coastal Management in Technical Document: May 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan update
3.19 Effects of Future Land Use on Natural Resources..................................................... 224
3.19.1 Natural Resource Protection by Reducing Growth Rates: the Rate of
GrowthOrdinance...................................................................................................224
3.19.2 Natural Resource Protection by Directing Growth Away from
Sensitive Areas: the Tier Overlay Ordinance................................................229
3.19.3 Natural Resource Protection by Prohibiting
Development in Wetlands....................................................................................233
3.19.4 Natural Resource Protection through Stronger Environmental
DesignCriteria..........................................................................................................233
3.19.5 Natural Resource Protection through Land Acquisition ..........................233
3.19.6 Implementation of Measures to Reduce Pollutant Discharges into
Ground and Surface Waters of the Keys.........................................................234
3.19.7 Implementation of the Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan and
Stormwater Management Plan for Monroe County...................................234
3.19.8 Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, including the
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and
NoName Key.............................................................................................................235
3.19.9 Restoration of Disturbed Habitats....................................................................238
3.19.10 Cooperative Planning Efforts to Protect State and Federal
Conservation Lands..............................................................................................238
3.20
Existing Land Use in the Coastal Area............................................................................238
3.20.1 Existing Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses.................................239
3.20.2 Conflicts among Shoreline Uses.........................................................................240
3.20.3 Need for Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses ...............................
262
3.20.4 Areas in Need of Redevelopment in the Coastal Area...............................264
3.21
Analysis of the Economic Conditions and Trend of the Coastal Area................264
3.22
Effects of Future Land Uses on the Coastal Environment......................................264
3.22.1 Effects of Future Land Uses on Natural Habitats ........................................
265
3.22.2 Effects of Future Land Uses on Historic Resources....................................280
3.22.3 Effects of Future Land Uses on the Built Environment.............................280
3.23
Natural Disaster Planning..................................................................................................
280
3.23.1 Hurricane Evacuation Planning.........................................................................280
3.23.2 Coastal High Hazard Area.....................................................................................289
3.23.3 Existing Infrastructure within the Coastal High Hazard Area ...............
290
3.23.4 Post -Disaster Redevelopment............................................................................291
3.24
Public Access Facilities........................................................................................................296
3.24.1 Existing Public Access Facilities........................................................................
296
3.24.2 Coastal Roads and Facilities Providing Scenic Overlooks ........................299
3.24.3 Capacity of and Need for Public Access Facilities .......................................
300
3.25
Existing Infrastructure in the Coastal Area.................................................................
300
3.26
Energy Conservation and Reduction of Greenhouse Gases...................................300
3.26.1 Energy Reduction and Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction ................
301
3.26.2 Land Use and Natural Resource Factors that Affect Energy
Conservation and Reduction of Greenhouse Gases....................................301
3.27
Literature Cited......................................................................................................................
303
Conservation and Coastal Management iv Technical Document: May
2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
List of Tables
Table
Page
Table 3.1:
Monroe County Soils - Physical and Chemical Properties of Soils......................18
Table 3.2:
Monroe County Soils - Soil and Water Features........................................................20
Table 3.3:
Monroe County Soils- Soil Limitation Ratings for Selected
DevelopedUses.......................................................................................................................25
Table 3.4:
Monroe County Beach Advisories and Closings (2001)..........................................39
Table 3.5:
Inventory of Mangrove Habitats.......................................................................................70
Table 3.6:
Inventory of Scrub Mangrove Habitats..........................................................................72
Table 3.7:
Inventory of Salt Marsh Wetlands...................................................................................99
Table 3.8:
Inventory of Buttonwood Wetlands............................................................................101
Table 3.9:
Inventory of Freshwater Wetlands..............................................................................110
Table 3.10:
Inventory of Freshwater Ponds and Salt Ponds......................................................111
Table 3.11:
Inventory of Exotic Vegetation Habitats....................................................................119
Table 3.12:
Inventory of Beach/Berm Habitats..............................................................................120
Table 3.13:
Monroe County Critically and Non -critically Eroded Beaches ..........................124
Table 3.14:
Inventory of Tropical Hardwood Hammock Habitats...........................................130
Table 3.15:
Inventory of Pineland Habitats.....................................................................................137
Table 3.16:
List of Threatened and Endangered Species in Monroe County .......................153
Table 3.17:
Summary of Threatened and Endangered Fauna and Flora in
Table 3.18:
MonroeCounty.....................................................................................................................156
Inventory of Federal, State, and Other Conservation Lands...............................214
Table 3.19:
Inventory of Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses ....................................
241
Table 3.20:
Summary of the Acres and Percentages of Natural Habitat Located within
Each Future Land Use Designation..............................................................................267
Table 3.21:
Summary of Acreage of Each Natural Habitat Type Included in Each Tier
Table 3.22:
Category..................................................................................................................................
Public Access Facilities Summary
274
Table 3.23:
.................................................................................297
Coastal Roads and Facilities Providing Scenic Overlooks
..................................299
...,..au. -LA-1 aiiu uuaswi management v Technical Document: May 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.0 CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
The Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Monroe County (County)
Comprehensive Plan addresses the data inventory requirements of 9J-5.005(2) of the
Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The data inventory requirements will support the
development of goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs for the
Conservation and Coastal Management Element.
The Conservation and Coastal Management Element is a required comprehensive plan
element under Florida's Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land
Development Regulation Act (Chapter 163, Florida Statutes), The Conservation Element
and Coastal Management Element are identified as separate elements in the Florida
Statutes, but are combined herein because the requirements for the two elements are
nearly identical for Monroe County. The purpose of the Coastal Management Element
(Rule 9J-5.012, F.A.C.) is to plan for, and where appropriate, restrict development activities
where such activities would damage or destroy coastal resources; and protect human life
and limit public expenditures in areas that are subject to destruction by natural disaster.
The purpose of the Conservation Element (Rule 9J-5.013, F.A.C.) is to promote the
conservation, use, and protection of natural resources.
3.1 Introduction
The County is made up of the low-lying limestone islands comprising most of the Florida
Keys (the keys north of Key Largo along Biscayne Bay are within Miami -Dade County) and
the southwesternmost portion of the Florida peninsula. The mainland part of the County is
made up of Everglades National Park and the southern portion of Big Cypress National
Preserve. The Florida Keys extend 233 miles southwestward in a gradual arc from
Biscayne Bay to the Dry Tortugas in the Gulf of Mexico. Southeast of the Keys is the Florida
Reef Tract, a band of coral reefs bordering the Straits of Florida, lying five to seven miles
offshore and extending 220 miles from Soldier Key to the Dry Tortugas. To the northwest
of the Upper Keys and the northern part of the Middle Keys is Florida Bay, a shallow
embayment with an extensive network of carbonate mud shoals and seagrass beds
(Kruczynski, 1999). At the top of the Upper Keys, Card Sound and Barnes Sound are
shallow embayments that connect to Biscayne Bay. West of Florida Bay, to the north of the
Lower Keys and north of the southern part of the Middle Keys, is the Gulf of Mexico.
The southern tip of Florida and the Florida Keys contains one of the Country's most diverse
assemblages of terrestrial, estuarine, and marine flora and fauna. The region includes the
vast freshwater wetlands of the Florida Everglades and Big Cypress, the transitional areas
where the waters of the Everglades discharge into the estuarine environment of Florida
Bay, one of the world's largest coral reef tracts (the only one in the continental United
States), the largest contiguous seagrass community in the world, and the subtropical
habitats of the island chain. The environmental setting of the Keys is exceptional and
unique, making the region a major travel destination.
Quu11 ai,u �uasLai management 1 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The protection of the environment has been the focus of much of the land use planning
effort since the adoption of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan in the early 1990s. Since that
time, three major changes have been implemented to protect the Keys unique environment.
The first significant action was the establishment of the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary (FKNMS) in 1990. The Sanctuary encompasses approximately 2,600 square
nautical miles of nearshore waters extending from just south of Miami to the Dry Tortugas.
The FKNMS Comprehensive Management Plan was implemented in 1997 and the Revised
Management Plan went into effect in 2007. A key feature of the FKNMS Management Plan
was the establishment of the FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program (WQPP). The
program identified actions to restore and/or maintain water quality conditions to maintain
healthy native plant and animal populations in FKNMS waters. The Program has funded
three long-term monitoring projects to monitor overall water quality, coral reef and
hardbottom community health, and seagrass community health.
The second significant action was the enactment and implementation of the Rate of Growth
Ordinance (ROGO) in 1992 and the Non-residential Rate of Growth Ordinance (NROGO) in
2002. ROGO and NROGO have slowed the rate of growth and have directed development to
already disturbed lands or to infill areas. Subsequently in 2006, the Tier Overlay
Ordinance, a zoning map overlay, was developed, which established open space
requirements for environmentally sensitive lands. The Tier Overlay Ordinance also
modified the ROGO/NROGO point system to help steer development away from
environmentally sensitive lands. On Big Pine Key and No Name Key, particular attention
was made to land use protection with the adoption of the Habitat Conservation Plan (with
the Incidental Take Permit) and the Livable CommuniKeys Management Plan for these
keys. These plans were implemented to complement ROGO/NROGO and the Tier Overlay
Ordinance to protect habitat on Big Pine Key and No Name Key for Key Deer, Eastern
Indigo Snake, and Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit.
The third significant action was the initiation of major steps to improve nearshore water
quality throughout the Keys. Historically, development in the Keys relied on on -site
cesspits and septic tanks, which resulted in water quality degradation of inshore areas. In
1985, the Florida Keys were designated as Outstanding Florida Waters. In 2002, the
Florida Keys were designated as a No Discharge Zone, which prohibits the discharge of
boater sewage into all State waters of the FKNMS. Water quality is monitored under the
FKNMS WQPP and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Strategic Targets for
the Water Quality Monitoring Project. County efforts to improve nearshore water quality
have included measures such as new criteria for on -site sewage treatment and disposal
systems, and connection of individual homes and subdivisions to County wastewater
treatment plants.
This document describes the existing conditions of the County, as specified by Rule 9J-5
F.A.C., for the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. The entire County is located
within the coastal area. Thus, this element describes the existing geology and
physiography, soils, marine resources, freshwater resources, wetlands, upland resources,
wildlife, threatened and endangered species, fisheries, air quality, water quality, and
Conservation and Coastal Management 2 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
conservation areas. The effect of future land uses on these natural resources is examined.
Throughout this element, problem areas are identified and recommendations are made to
address them.
This element also examines water -dependent and water -related uses, especially the
competition for shoreline development uses. The element examines natural disaster
planning and includes an inventory of public access facilities and existing infrastructure.
Finally, the element examines energy consumption and energy conservation areas.
This Technical Document provides the data inventory necessary to support the Policy
Document. It does not establish the policies, which is done in the Policy Document.
However, some recommendations for improvement in policies are readily evident and are
discussed in this Technical Document, including but not limited to the following:
• Regarding abandoned mine sites, additional regulations are needed to more fully
address the environmental and public safety issues. The County should undertake
coordination with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to review existing State and local
mine reclamation standards for consistency and to determine the appropriate revisions
to the County Code which will better protect the environment and residents of the
County from the impacts of mining. The County should prepare an inventory of
abandoned mining sites and, working where possible with landowners, develop plans
for the cleanup and productive reuse of these sites.
• Given the potential for offshore oil and gas drilling to affect the County, the County
should continue to be engaged in issues related to potential drilling in State and federal
waters.
• Further improvements in sewage treatment practices are needed to improve canal and
other nearshore waters.
• Further study of the benefits and adverse impacts associated with the use of aerators in
artificial canals is needed, including evaluation of alternative aerator technologies.
• The USEPA and the FDEP, in consultation with the National Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), were given the responsibility for developing a
comprehensive WQPP for the FKNMS. The WQPP was developed to reverse the trend of
environmental degradation and restore and maintain the Florida Keys marine
ecosystem. County participation in the WQPP studies and monitoring is important.
• Because most of the Keys are located within the 100-year floodplain, potential activities
for conservation, use or protection of floodplain are related to those which (1) prevent
disturbances to areas which provide critical flood water storage and filtration functions,
including mangroves, salt ponds, saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands, and freshwater
wetlands; (2) prevent excessive clearing and disturbance to natural upland vegetation
Conservation and Coastal Management 3 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
within the floodplain; and (3) minimize the alteration of natural drainage patterns
within the floodplain. Lands that retain natural floodplain functions or water storage
and filtration (wetlands) should be retained where possible, in their natural condition.
Development activity should be directed away from areas of high quality upland
vegetation which lies in the floodplain, including hardwood hammocks and pinelands.
Land clearing, grading, and filling should not disturb natural drainage patterns.
• Regarding wetlands, the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) should be revised to (1)
provide a definition of wetlands that is consistent with the State definition and/or the
federal definition and provide a definition of wetland boundaries that is the same as
those established through wetland jurisdictional determinations; (2) specify setbacks
from wetlands that are based on the jurisdictional wetland boundary line; and (3)
remove the reference to and use of the Keys Wetland Evaluation Procedure (KEYWEP)
for the determination of migation requirements because this evaluation method, while
highly useful to evaluate wetlands in the Keys, is not used elsewhere in Florida. In
addition, the use of the Uniform Mitigation and Assessment Method (UMAM) is
mandated by State law. The use of KEYWEP is appropriate and is consistent with State
law in determining whether the County will authorize impacts to wetlands.
• The map series produced for the Advance Identification of Wetlands (ADID) program
were produced on hand -drawn maps that were then digitized. The analysis of the data
for the inventory of natual habitats for this Technical Document revealed that the ADID
data did not correspond to the other databases (i.e., the maps did not line up exactly).
The ADID data can be useful for an individual parcel to determine if it contains a
wetland with a KEYWEP score but, because of the mapping limitations, the ADID data
could not be used as an inventory tool on a County -wide basis. The County should
reconcile the ADID mapping with the parcel -based maps/databases so that this
information can be available for land use analyses.
• Currently in the regulations, disturbed wetlands that are suitable for filling have a
KEYWEP score below 7.0 (or are assigned a green flag). However, based on the
Technical Summary Document for the Advance Identification of Wetlands of the Florida
Keys (Kalla, 2000), the County should consider revising that definition, with agency
coordination, to those wetlands that receive a KEYWEP total functional index of 5.5 or
less.
• The County should determine when and how the Keys Environmental Restoration Fund
(KERF) should be used for wetland mitigation. The LDRs should be revised to reflect
this policy. The County should provide a definition of "environmentally sensitive land"
so that wetlands can be adequately included in the ROGO/NROGO and Tier Overlay
Ordinance.
• Section 118-4 of the LDRs prohibits development activities in mangroves, freshwater
wetlands, and in undisturbed saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands. The LDRs should be
amended to include salt ponds determined to be of high quality in this prohibition.
Conservation and Coastal Management 4 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Regarding freshwater wetlands, continued government acquisition of freshwater
wetlands in the Lower Keys offers the greatest opportunity for conservation of these
critical resource areas. Acquisition efforts should continue to focus on freshwater
wetlands, freshwater ponds, buffer areas, and the critical recharge areas of the
groundwater lenses which sustain freshwater flows into the wetland habitat areas.
• Projects undertaken by the Keys Environmental Restoration Fund, the Florida Keys
Invasive Exotic Task Force, and the County Land Steward routinely include disturbed
wetlands as well as other disturbed habitat types. In addition, mitigation projects
implemented as part of larger residential or commercial projects have also restored
areas of privately -owned disturbed wetlands throughout the Florida Keys. If practical
and desired, restoration of these wetlands should be undertaken to restore biological
functions.
• Beach management plans are needed for public beaches to address problems of erosion
and invasive plants.
• Numerous efforts are underway in the Florida Keys to control the proliferation of exotic
plants and animals. Since 2005, the Monroe County Land Steward has undertaken
numerous exotic plant removal projects in County -owned parcels, using annual grant
funding from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Invasive Plant
Management Section. The Land Steward is a partner with the Florida Keys Invasive
Exotics Task Force. Task Force partners include the County, State and federal agencies,
non -profits and public utilities. The Task Force coordinates efforts to eliminate
invasive, non-native plant and animal species. The County should continue this
partnering with the Task Force.
• The County can continue to work cooperatively with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC), and Florida
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) to promote the recovery of
designated wildlife species. The County can cooperate with these agencies to locate
potential introduction sites for designated species, particularly for those which are
federally- or State -listed. The County should assist, to the extent that it is able, with
acquisition of reintroduction sites and sites having known populations of designated
species. The County Biologist should participate in development of new recovery plans
and revisions to old recovery plans for federally -designated species. When State or
federal agencies undertake specific recovery actions in the County, the County should
support these activities as appropriate through public education, law enforcement, and
data collection.
• The County should develop brief information brochures for use by developers and
landowners within critical habitat areas to inform them regarding activities disruptive
or harmful to specific wildlife species. As appropriate for each species, the guidelines
should address items such as feeding, free -roaming domestic pets, noise, traffic, fencing,
Conservation and Coastal Management 5 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Pian Update
pesticide applications, invasive exotic species, and other threats. Existing laws and
penalties for their violation should be identified. Guidelines should be made available
to the general public.
• Regarding free -roaming domestic pets, the County Biologist should work cooperatively
with the Animal Control Department to develop and implement an animal control plan.
This plan should identify areas within the County where priority should be placed in
enforcing animal control laws so as to protect native wildlife populations, particularly
listed species. These priorities should be reviewed periodically. The Animal Control
Department should be responsible for addressing the long-term staffing, facility and
financial requirements to support implementation of the plan.
• The County prohibits the planting of some highly invasive exotic plants throughout the
County and should continue in its efforts to educate the public of the need to remove
invasive plant materials from existing developed areas.
• The spread of the Burmese python and the red lionfish (among others) into the Florida
Keys demonstrates the need to address the introduction of exotic wildlife. The County
Biologist is a partner with the Florida Keys Invasive Exotics Task Force. The County
should consider adoption of an invasive exotic wildlife ordinance which shall prohibit
and/or restrict the sale and handling of listed undesirable exotic species.
• Fee title acquisition by public agencies generally guarantees the permanent protection
of conservation lands from development. However, it does not ensure the long-term
health and stability of the natural systems present on a property. A primary threat to
upland habitats is loss and fragmentation of habitats and the resultant loss of
ecosystem function due to residential and commercial development. Canals, mosquito
ditches, fill, and roads have altered natural hydrologic processes. Residential
development has impacted management capabilities for fire -adapted pinelands by
expanding the wildland -residential edge. This has resulted in the alteration of natural
fire processes and a demand for fire suppression. Although many wetland and upland
habitats have been restored, continued restoration is needed to help mitigate habitat
loss elsewhere.
• The County should continue to support the conservation efforts of State and federal
agencies by working cooperatively with resource managers at publicly -owned refuges,
parks, and special -interests sites to address adjoining lands issues. Prescribed fire is an
important tool for effectively managing and restoring pinelands. Fire can also manage
the encroachment of overstory vegetation and restore open habitat features of coastal
salt marsh and freshwater marsh habitats. The County can continue to support the
habitat management strategies of resource agencies to include measures of the
effectiveness of prescribed fire treatments. Such monitoring is essential for an adaptive
management process to maintain and restore habitat. The County should continue its
outreach efforts to increase the public's awareness and understanding of this
management technique.
Conservation and Coastal Management 6 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Exotic, invasive, and nuisance species cause habitat loss by disrupting natural
communities. They can displace native species and alter ecosystem functions. The
most widespread and problematic plant species include Brazilian pepper, Australian
pine, latherleaf, seaside mahoe, lead tree, and non-native grasses. Federal and State
agencies, as well as the Florida Keys Invasive Exotics Task Force and the County Land
Steward, have invested substantial time and money in removing invasive exotic plant
and animal species. Continual monitoring and maintenance treatment is required to
keep exotics under control, prevent new infestations, and detect new species invasions.
Adjacent private lands and roadways can serve as seed sources that may re -infest
conservation lands. The use of non-native, invasive plants in landscaping causes the
introduction of exotics to conservation lands. Feral and free -roaming domestic cats are
a predator of the endangered Lower Keys marsh rabbit, silver rice rat, and native birds
and reptiles. Free -roaming dogs can attack and injure or kill Key deer. The County
should continue to support programs to control exotic, invasive, and nuisance plant and
animal species.
• Hurricanes and tropical storms and sea level rise have consequences for the
management of conservation lands. It is predicted that the Florida Keys will experience
changes from global climate change, particularly from changing temperatures in the air
and water, rising sea level, and coastal storms. Saltwater intrusion into the freshwater
lens from sea level rise and saltwater inundation of surface freshwaters from storm
surges can alter pinelands and freshwater marshes resulting in more salt -tolerant plant
communities. Species that are found only in pinelands may disappear as the pine
forests die out. Storm events can cause considerable physical damage to beach/berm
and coastal habitats. The County should continue to support the resource agencies as
they gather scientific data to understand the natural processes and subsequent changes
from sea level rise and to assist in the development of adaptive management strategies
for future conservation needs.
• To protect and manage conservation lands, the County should maintain its land
stewardship program and continue its existing partnerships, and develop new ones as
needed, with resource agencies, organizations, and individuals. Partnerships can
achieve the goals of complex programs and can considerably reduce costs.
• In general, future development in the County should be directed to the maximum extent
possible away from the Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) units. This should be
accomplished through land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan and its
implementing LDRs. Other actions which the County should take to discourage further
private investment in CBRS units include (1) no new bridges, causeways, paved roads
or commercial marinas should be permitted to or on CBRS units; (2) shoreline
hardening structures should not be permitted along shorelines of CBRS units; (3) public
expenditures on CBRS units should be limited to property acquisition, restoration and
passive recreation facilities; (4) privately -owned undeveloped land located within the
CBRS units should be considered for acquisition by the County; and (5) the County
Conservation and Coastal Management
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
should coordinate with the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FKAA) and private
providers of electricity and telephone service to assess measures which could be taken
to discourage extension of facilities and services to CBRS units. Since the intent and
effect of the CBRS has been to discourage development (prohibiting flood insurance and
other federal program funds) in the County's designated coastal barriers, the County
should consider whether to maintain the existing comprehensive plan policies related
to the CBRS, or to focus on the development impacts on endangered species and habitat
should unsubsidized development still occur. Further, the County can review the areas
designated as CBRS units to determine the validity of those CBRS units.
• Long-term protection of natural resources is best accomplished through acquisition for
permanent conservation purposes by the federal, State, or local government, or by non-
profit conservation organizations. While acquisition is not a realistic solution for most
lands in the Keys, it should be pursued aggressively for those which are determined by
County staff, local scientists, and regulators to be the most ecologically sensitive and the
most susceptible to development or environmental threat, despite the protections
afforded by the Comprehensive Plan. However, effective management of that land is
necessary to ensure it remains in a condition to support the viability of natural systems
being protected.
• Research is needed to investigate impacts on habitats of commercial and recreational
fishing gear and methods.
• Research is needed on the decline of certain populations of reef animals, such as
staghorn coral and other corals.
• Improved management techniques are needed to mitigate or reduce physical damage to
corals and other benthic communities caused by visitors to the reefs. The FKNMS
Management Plan addresses the number of visitors that a reef can support annually and
still be ecologically viable.
• Several anchorage sites need improved anchorage management and facilities, including
but not limited to engineered mooring fields and pump -out facilities.
• During canal clean-up efforts following Hurricane Georges in the 1990s, it became
apparent that official ownership of canals in the Florida Keys was inconsistent or not
easily determined. Legal descriptions and parcel data have property lines ending at the
canal banks, extending 10 feet into the canal, or to the center of the canal, or a
combination of these variations. Plat maps have indicated that some canal systems may
be owned by the property owners of a subdivision, or that ownership could potentially
revert back to the developer of the subdivision. To pass ordinances or regulate the
maintenance of canals, the ownership of canals needs to be clarified when ownership is
used to determine responsibility.
Conservation and Coastal Management 8 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.2 Climate
The Florida Keys experience a subtropical savanna -type climate characterized by warm
humid summers and mild dry winters. The mean annual sunshine is 3,300 hours, 10
percent more than the Florida peninsula to the north.
The average temperature in the Florida Keys ranges from a summer high of 89 degrees in
July to a winter low of 63 degrees in February. Temperatures below freezing have not been
recorded in the Keys, primarily due to the moderating effects of the warm marine waters in
the area and the presence of the warm Gulf Stream along the coast.
The normal annual total precipitation in the Keys is about 40 inches (41.00 inches in
Marathon, and 38.94 inches in Key West; www.srh.noaa.gov). Most of the rainfall comes in
the wet season during the months of May through October. Winter rainfall accounts for
less than one-third of the annual precipitation. Thunderstorms are the primary source of
precipitation during the wet season. During hot summer days, moist oceanic air heats up
over the land, becoming unstable as it rises. As the moisture condenses, thunderstorms
form. During the dry winter season, most of the rainfall is due to cold fronts, which pass
over the area on the average of once a week. Day -long dry -season storms are rare.
There is a decrease in precipitation and seasonal differences in precipitation southward
from the Upper Keys to the Middle Keys to the Lower Keys. This is due to two factors.
Winter cold fronts do not pass into the Lower Keys as often as they pass into the Upper
Keys. Further, convective thunderstorms do not develop as readily over small islands as
they do over the mainland.
Prevailing tradewinds from the east and southeast in the Keys are relatively mild,
averaging 11 to 12 knots throughout the year. The strongest winds occur during the
winter months from December through March, when cold fronts move over the area from
the north.
The Keys lie in an area which is susceptible to tropical cyclones and hurricanes. These low
pressure systems vary in intensity and orientation. Tropical depressions or disturbances
are cyclones with winds of less than 38 miles per hour (mph). By comparison, tropical
storms exhibit distinct circulation patterns, with winds exceeding 38 mph. When the
maximum winds exceed 74 mph, the storm is categorized as a hurricane.
3.3 Physiography, Geology, and Mineral Resources
3.3.1 Physiographic Features
The Florida Keys belong to the Southern Zone of the Coastal Lowlands physiographic
province. This area lies south and southeast of Lake Okeechobee, is primarily underlain by
Pleistocene limestone, and is characterized by low relief, poor drainage, and extensive
areas of coastal mangrove swamps. Elevations on the Keys are low, generally less than 5
Conservation and Coastal Management 9 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
feet above sea level. Most of the land area is only 2 to 3 feet above high tide. The highest
point lies on Windley Key, where the maximum elevation is 18 feet above sea level.
The islands generally slope gradually up from the sea to flattened, gently rounded tops
(Lane, 1986). Irregularities of the rock surfaces are a result of the heterogeneous
topography of the coral reefs that created the islands, and also as a result of erosion and
solution of the limestone rocks (Lane, 1986). Solution features, such as pitted and
pinnacled surfaces, occur throughout the Keys. There are also many sinkholes, filled with
peat or carbonate sediments, up to several feet in diameter and several feet deep (Lane,
1986).
Geologically and physiographically, the County can be divided into four main areas: the
mainland, the coral reef keys; the oolitic keys; and the distal atolls.
3.3.1.1 Mainland
The mainland part of the County is made up of Everglades National Park and the southern
portion of Big Cypress National Preserve. The mainland is part of the low-lying wetland
system of the Everglades that historically extended over 200 miles from the Kissimmee
chain of lakes south through Lake Okeechobee into the freshwater marshes of the
Everglades and to the mangrove estuaries. In the northwest portion of the mainland, the
swamps of Big Cypress National Preserve define the western boundary of the Everglades.
This area is slightly higher in elevation than the Everglades basin. Throughout the
Everglades, freshwater flows slowly southward over a vast flat plain (the "river of grass"),
eventually reaching Florida Bay. The southern reaches of the Everglades transition to the
coastal marshes and mangrove swamps along the coastlines of Florida Bay and the Gulf of
Mexico. The transitional zone is comprised of bands of swamps and brackish marshes just
above sea level.
3.3.1.2 Coral Reef Keys
The coral reef keys are a linear chain of islands made up primarily of limestone coral rock
(Randazzo and Halley 1997). The main axis of each island lies parallel to the main axis of
the island chain. They include the islands of the Upper Keys and Middle Keys planning
areas, and extend from Key Largo to the Newfound Harbor Keys (just south of Big Pine
Key) in northeasternmost part of the Lower Keys.
3.3.1.3 Oolitic Keys
The oolitic keys are primarily composed of oolites, small spherical grains of calcium
carbonate, cemented together to form an oolitic limestone (Randazzo and Halley 1997).
The axis of each island runs at a right angle to the general trend of the island chain rather
than parallel to it, as in the coral reef keys. The islands are separated by numerous long
narrow channels. The oolitic keys extend from Big Pine Key (except the southern tip of the
island, which belongs geologically to the coral reef keys) to Key West.
Conservation and Coastal Management 10 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
3.3.1.4 Distal Atolls
West of Key West, the distal atolls represent the last outlier islands of shallow sediments of
the Florida Platform. These include approximately 30 roughly circular sand keys. Moving
west from Key West, major features are the Boca Grande island group, the islands forming
the Marquesas, the Quicksands Banks through Rebecca Shoals, and the islands of the Dry
Tortugas, which are separated from Rebecca Shoals by a trough of relatively deep water
(CSA, 1991).
3.3.2 Geology
3.3.2.1 Structure and Geologic Setting
The Florida Keys, Florida Bay, and Everglades National Park are on the Floridan Plateau.
This plateau separates the Gulf of Mexico from the Atlantic Ocean, extending offshore
beyond the present land mass beneath all of the submerged areas surrounding the State to
the edge of the continental shelf at approximately the 300 foot depth contour (SFWMD,
1991). In the Gulf, the plateau slopes gently to the west and extends out 150 miles
offshore; on the south and east, the plateau drops off sharply into the Bahamas Trench
approximately 5 to 7 miles offshore.
Marine carbonate sediments nearly 20,000 feet in depth underlie the Keys. These
sediments range in age from Jurassic to Holocene and have accumulated over a period of
136 million years above a Triassic -Jurassic basement of volcanic rocks (Antoine and
Harding, 1963). Beneath the Florida Peninsula, the basement is comprised of various
igneous and sedimentary rocks of chiefly Precambrian and early Paleozoic age (SFWMD,
1991).
3.3.2.2 Strati graphy
Although the Mesozoic sediments represent thicknesses well in excess of 10,000 feet, only
the more recent Cenozoic sediments have a direct bearing on the history and formation of
the Keys. Of these, the most important are the sediments deposited since Miocene time,
including the Miami Oolite, the Key Largo Limestone, the Tamiami Limestone, and the
Hawthorne Group.
Reconstruction of the past is complicated by oscillations in sea level which have occurred
since Middle Tertiary Miocene times. Some 20,000 years ago, sea level may have been as
low as 450 feet below present Ievel. Geologic evidence, such as the presence of peat under
Crane Key 4 to 10 feet below present sea level, indicates a much lower sea level as recently
as 4,000 years ago. Recent indications are that sea level has risen approximately 8 to 10
inches during the past century.
Conservation and Coastal Management 11 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.3.2.2.1 Key Largo Limestone
The Key Largo Limestone outcrops at the surface from Soldier Key to the southernmost end
of Big Pine Key - a distance of 110 miles. Subsurface drilling indicates that it is present
beneath the land surface from Miami to the Dry Tortugas. It varies in thickness from 70 to
over 170 feet. It is a fossil coral reef whose main structure is a network of coral heads with
intervening spaces filled with detrital reef material. Star coral, and less commonly brain
corals, are the dominant species found in the exposed Key Largo Limestone, indicating that
the reef was once a patch reef. Oceanward drilling away from the exposed portion of the
limestone reveals the presence of elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata), a species
characteristic of fringe reefs. The lowering of the sea which allowed cementation of the
Miami Limestone killed the reef as it emerged. The subsequent rise of the sea, which
reshaped the oolitic limestone of the Lower Keys, also destroyed most of the outer fringe
reef. Only the inner patch reef is visible today and forms the backbone of the Upper and
Middle Keys.
The Key Largo Limestone is a very porous coralline limestone. It is riddled with solution
features and voids, allowing water ready passage, both vertically and horizontally.
Although an excellent potential aquifer, it contains very little freshwater because its
permeability allows ready outflow of freshwater and inflow of saltwater.
3.3.2.2.2 Miami Oolite
The Miami Oolite overlies Key Largo Limestone as a surficial deposit from Big Pine Key
through Key West, gradually increasing in depth from east to west to as much as 35-40 feet
in Key West. It is a medium to hard limestone, white to yellowish in color, oolitic in places,
rich in bryozoans in part, and may also contain some quartz sand. It underlies most of the
Florida Bay where it is covered by varying thicknesses of calcareous mud derived from the
disintegration of calcareous algae. This limestone is primarily represented by the oolitic
facies and the bryozoan facies.
The Miami Oolite is a porous limestone containing numerous vertical solution features
most likely formed during the Pleistocene. Because these features are not commonly
connected, water does not move laterally as readily as in the Key Largo Limestone.
Freshwater lenses floating on top of saline water occur in the Lower Keys oolitic deposits
have historically been used as freshwater sources, and some wells are still used by local
residents, mostly for landscape irrigation purposes. The freshwater lenses also support
differing vegetation, including the pineland forest on Big Pine Key. However, dredging of
canals has disrupted the lenses in many areas, resulting in saltwater intrusion (Ross et al.,
1994).
3.3.2.2.3 Tamiami Limestone
The Tamiami Limestone is the oldest formation outcropping in South Florida. It is a tan to
light grey limestone, quite variable in appearance with some sandy units and some reef
Conservation and Coastal Management 12 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
rock units. The Tamiami Limestone reaches a maximum thickness of 150 feet in the Miami
area. To the west, the formation thins rapidly.
In the Miami area, the upper portion of the Tamiami Formation is one of the most
permeable and productive formations of the Biscayne Aquifer. The upper portion is
separated from the lower portion by an unconformity, which locally corresponds to a
hydrologic separation as well. The upper productive zone is composed of permeable
limestones, underlain by relatively impermeable marls and limestones of the Lower
Tamiami and Hawthorne Formations, which in part, form the confining beds between the
deeper Floridan Aquifer and the shallower Biscayne Aquifer.
Although the Floridan has sufficient water pressure to allow artesian flow in the Keys, the
high concentration of dissolved materials renders the water unfit for public consumption
without treatment. Pennekamp Spring on Key Largo is a 6-inch artesian well 1,300 feet
deep in the Florida Aquifer. It has a chloride concentration of 2,440 mg/L, nearly ten times
the recommended U.S. Public Health Service levels (Rosenau et al., 1977).
3.3.2.2.4 Hawthorne Groun
The Hawthorne Group underlies both the Miami Oolite and Key Largo Limestone and acts
as a confining layer, which inhibits the downward movement of groundwater. It separates
the surficial aquifer system from the Floridan Aquifer System. It is relatively impermeable
and consists of silt, clayey sand, and sand. It is phosphatic and greenish in color. The
formation averages approximately 200 to 300 feet in thickness throughout the Florida Keys
area.
3.3.3 Mineral Resources [Rule 9J-5.O13(1)(a)3., F.A.C.]
3.3.3.1 Known Sources of Commercially Valuable Minerals andExistin Mineral
Resource Extraction Activities
Mineral commodities that are available for production in South Florida generally include
sand, limestone, and oil and gas (Lane, 1981). Mining in the County is regulated by two
agencies: FDEP and SFWMD. FDEP regulates mines that have onsite processing, such as
limestone mines. The SFWMD processes the Environmental Resource Permit (ERP)
application if the mine is a borrow pit and will not have on -site material grading or sorting
facilities. The FDEP mandatory nonphosphate program administers the laws and
regulations related to the reclamation of mined land and the protection of water resources
(water quality, water quantity and wetlands) at mines extracting heavy minerals, fuller's
earth, limestone, dolomite and shell, gravel, sand, dirt, clay, peat, and other solid resources
(except phosphate).
Based on the FDEP Bureau of Mine Reclamation Mandatory Nonphosphate web mapping
site (http://ca.dep.state.fl.us/imPfocus=mannon), there are no mines in the County that
are regulated by FDEP. Based on a review of the SFWMD online ePermitting database
Conservation and Coastal Management 13 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
(http://my.sfwmd.gov/ePermitting), SFWMD has no active or pending permits for mining
in the County.
3.3.3.1.1 Limestone
In the Florida Keys, the resource extraction industry has historically been limited to
limestone mining. Over most of the Keys, limestone occurs at the surface or at relatively
shallow depths, beneath thin sand or peat deposits. Abandoned limestone mining pits, or
"borrow pits" can be found throughout the Keys, where, because of the low relief, they are
typically filled with water. In the early 1990s, nine limestone mining operations in the
Keys had active Monroe County permits. These were found throughout the Keys. None
were located on the mainland portion of the County. Material was mined by blasting and
by shovel removal. Generally water was not pumped from mining pits. Excavated material
was used in the construction trades for fill, landscaping, cement manufacture, road
construction, and shoreline protection.
By 2010, most mining operations had ceased. Borrow pits on Rockland Key (Pinewood
Enterprises, Inc.), Rockland Key (CTB, Inc.), Shark Key (Keevan), Cudjoe Key (CTB, Inc.),
and Big Pine Key (CTB, Inc.) were no longer active (Monroe County, pers. comm., August
25, 2010). On Big Pine Key, a borrow pit managed by A & B Land Investments was inactive
in 2010 with all machinery removed from the site and the application for permit renewal
(County permit #10101485) had not been approved. On Rockland Key, the borrow pit
managed by Toppino was active under permit #09101026 and an application for permit
renewal #10101476 submitted.
On No Name Key, a borrow pit owned by Pinewood Materials, Inc. had equipment on site
and appeared to be active in 2010; the last readily -available issued permit was #02101421.
This pit had been in operation since the early 1970s. The Pinewood property is
approximately 20 acres in size, and an existing conditions report dated 2002 (attached to
the permit renewal application) indicated the mining pit was a deep saline lake about 18
acres in size. The 2002 existing conditions report indicated that that invasive exotic
vegetation control measures had been implemented for the prior decade and invasive
exotic vegetation was almost completely eradicated. The exiting conditions report also
noted that soil spreading had occurred in 1989 to promote natural regeneration of native
vegetation. No additional information was available. Review of a 2010 aerial photograph
revealed a second borrow pit on No Name Key. The second borrow pit is southwest of the
intersection of Spanish Channel Drive and Marginella Drive. Permit information was not
readily available, but a local resident indicated that the borrow pit was active as recently as
2010, and that the mining process has included blasting using dynamite.
3.3.3.1.2 Sand
Compared to the rest of Florida, there is very little quartz sand on the Keys (Lane, 1986).
Some offshore sand extraction has been undertaken by the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT) to obtain fill for local improvements to U.S. 1. Bare sand substrate
is known to occur adjacent to the Keys' shoreline only in the vicinity of tidal channels of the
Conservation and Coastal Management 14 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Lower Keys and in the nearshore region of Boca Chica Key, Big Munson Island, Bahia Honda
Key, Ohio Key, and Grassy Key (Marszalek, 1984).
Low beach berms have formed along the south -facing shoreline of several of the Lower
Keys, including Big Pine Key, Sugarloaf Key, and Big Coppitt Key. These berms are
composed of calcium carbonate sediments biogenically produced in nearshore waters,
which are deposited in accumulating layers by major storm events. They are typically
approximately 50 feet deep and 6 to 8 feet in elevation at the highest point, so are much
smaller than beach berms along larger, silicate beaches in northern Florida, but serve a
similar function in providing some localized protection from storm surge.
3.3.3.1.3 Oil and Gas
A total of seven oil wells have been drilled in State of Florida waters of the South Florida
Basin near the Florida Keys from 1947 through 1983 (Lloyd, 1991). One of these wells
(drilled in 1959), located north of the Marquesa Islands, had a significant oil show (Lloyd,
1991) but no commercial production was ever undertaken. No further drilling or
geophysical oil exploration activity has occurred in the vicinity of the Keys. Effective July
1990, all oil drilling activity was prohibited in State of Florida waters. Oil drilling within
the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) is prohibited by the Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary and Protection Act, passed in 1990. There have been no sales of
federal oil and gas leases in the Straits of Florida Planning Area (Lloyd, 1991). This area
encompasses the Straits of Florida on the Atlantic side of the Keys extending offshore from
the Keys to the "Three League Line." Florida banned drilling in State waters in 1992, and
has opposed additional drilling in federal waters off Florida. However, some major oil
companies have continued to evaluate the potential for exploratory drilling off the Keys,
and various proposals were evaluated in 2009 and 2010 for exploratory drilling in waters
outside the FKNMS.
3.3.3.2 Known Pollution Problems and or Issues Related to Mineral Resource
Extraction Operations
Environmental problems at abandoned mining sites or sites at which extraction activities
are no longer in operation are related to: stormwater and groundwater management;
erosion and sedimentation control; safety to persons, wildlife and adjoining property;
control of invasive exotic vegetation; and visual impacts. Reclamation requirements of the
County and the FDEP address each of these problem areas, exclusive of mitigation of visual
impacts from inactive sites.
3.3.3.3 Potential for Conservation Use or Protection of Mineral Resources
3.3.3.3.1 Limestone and Sand
Additional regulations are needed to more fully address the environmental and public
safety issues related to abandoned mine sites. The County should undertake coordination
Conservation and Coastal Management 15
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
with FDEP and SFWMD to review existing State and local mine reclamation standards for
consistency and to determine the appropriate revisions to the County Code which will
better protect the environment and residents of the County from the impacts of limestone
mining. The County should prepare an inventory of abandoned mining sites and, working
where possible with landowners, develop plans for the cleanup and productive reuse of
these sites. An example of productive reuse is Lazy Lakes RV Resort, located off Johnson
Road on Sugarloaf Key, where a seven -acre borrow pit has been converted into a resort
amenity.
3.3.3.3.2 Oil and Gas
The National Marine Sanctuary Act (H.R. 5909) prohibits leasing, exploration, development,
or production of minerals or hydrocarbons within the FKNMS. This has provided effective
protection of oil and gas resources and protection against environmental damage from oil
and gas drilling within the boundaries of the FKNMS. Drilling outside the FKNMS also has
the potential to affect the County and the County should continue to be engaged in issues
related to offshore drilling in State and federal waters outside the FKNMS.
3.4 Soils
3.4.1 Soils Inventory
Soils in the Keys are sparsely distributed and are generally confined to hammocks at the
higher elevations and mangrove stands in the lower lying areas of the islands. Soil
thickness is generally less than 10 inches. The Natural Resource Conservation Service
(NRCS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has mapped 16 soil units in the
Florida Keys (exclusive of the mainland) (USDA 2010). These include:
• eleven soil series found only in the Keys,
• beach soils, and
• four soil complexes comprised of natural soils in combination with other substrate,
such as rock outcrops, fill and/or crushed limestone.
Soil characteristics are correlated with topographic, hydrologic and vegetation conditions.
Based upon these factors, the 16 soil units in the Keys can be divided into six general
groups, as follows:
• Beach Soils:
• Beaches (B)
• Marine Wetland Soils: (Mangroves, Saltmarsh and Buttonwood Wetlands)
• Cudjoe Marl (CM)
• Keywest Marl (KW)
• Lignumvitae Marl (LM)
• Islamorada Muck (IM)
Conservation and Coastal Management 16 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Key Largo Muck (KM)
• Rock Outcrop-Cudjoe Complex (tidal) (RCT)
• Rock Outcrop -Tavernier Complex (RT)
• Tropical Hardwood Hammock Soils•
• Bahia Honda Fine Sand (FS)
• Matecumbe Muck (MM)
• Pennekamp Gravelly Muck (extremely stony) (PM)
• Saddlebunch Marl (SM)
• Pineland Soils:
• Keyvaca Very Gravelly Loam (KL)
• Freshwater Wetland Soils•
• Rock Outcrop-Cudjoe Complex (frequently flooded) (RCF)
• Filled and Developed Land•
• Udorthents-Urban Land Complex (U)
• Urban Land (UL).
Table 3.1 summarizes selected physical and chemical properties of the soil units. Table
3.2 summarizes the water features for each soil unit. Map Series 3.1 depicts the soil units
found in the Florida Keys. The soil maps are for informational purposes only and the data
were not field verified in connection with the Comprehensive Plan update.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 17
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.1- Monroe County Soils - Physical and Chemical Properties of Soils
Saturated Soil
Soil Depth Conduc-tivity tion matter
Symbol Name (in.) Texture (mni/sec) (pH) 00) Kw lu T
Beach Soils
B
Beaches
0-6
Sand
>6.0
<0.1
0.05
0.05
5
6-60
Coarse sand,
>6.0
<0.1
0.05
0.05
sand, fine sand
Marine Wetland Soils
CM
Cudjoe marl
0-9
Marl
4-42
6.6-8.4
1-5
0.32
0.32
1
9-16
Marl
4-42
6.6-8.4
0.0-0.5
0.32
0.32
-
16-20
Weathered
14-141
-
-
-
-
bedrock
KW
Keywest
0-9
Marl silt loam
4-42
6.6-8.4
1-5
0.32
0.32
2
marl
9-15
Muck
42-141
6.1-7.8
60.0-80.0
0.32
0.32
15-27
Mucky silt
14-42
6.6-8.4
10.0-20.0
0.28
0.28
loam
27-65
Marly silt loam
4-42
6.6-8.4
0.0-1.0
0.32
0.32
65-69
Weathered
14-141
-
-
-
bedrock
LM
Lignumvitae
0-4
Marl
4-42
6.6-8.4
1-5
0.32
0.32
2
marl
4-32
Marl
4-42
6.6-8.4
0.0-0.5
0.32
0.32
-
32-36
Weathered
14-141
-
-
-
bedrock
IM
Islamorada
0-35
Muck
42-141
6.1-7.8
75-90
-
1
muck
35-39
Weathered
14-141
-
bedrock
KM
Key Largo
0-70
Muck
42-141
6.1-7.8
75-90
3
muck
70-74
Weathered
14-141
-
-
bedrock
RCT
Rock
0-60
Unweathered
Outcrop -
bedrock
Cudjoe
complex
tidal
RT
Rock
0-60
Unweathered
-
Outcrop -
bedrock
Tavernier
complex
tidal
Tropical
Hammock Association Soils
FS
Bahiahonda
0-8
Fine sand
42-141
6.6-7.8
1-3
0.05
0.05
5
fine sand
Conservation and Coastal Management 18 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.1- Monroe County Soils - Physical and Chemical Properties of Soils
(continued)
Saturated Soil
Hydraulic Reac- Organic
Soil Depth
Conduc-tivity tion matter
Symbol Name (in.) Texture (mm/sec) (pH) Kw Kf T
8-35 Fine sand 42-141 6.6-7.8 1 0.0-1.0 0.05 0.05
35-68 Sand 42-141 6.6-7.8 0.0-1.0 0.05 0.05
68-82 Very gravelly 141-282 7.4-8.4 0.0-1.0 0.02 0.05
sand
82-86 Weathered 14-141 - - _
bedrock
MM
Matecumbe
muck
0-6
Muck
42-141
5.6-7.3
80-90
1
6-10
Weathered
14-141
bedrock
PM
Pennekamp
gravelly
0-3
Gravelly muck
14.12-42.36
5.6-6.5
40-70
muck
3-8
Very gravelly
14.12 42.36
7.4 8.4
1.0-5.0
0.10
0.37
-
loam
8-12
Weathered
14.12-141.20
-
-
bedrock
SM
Saddlebunch
marl
0-5
Marly silt loam
4-42
6.6-8.4
1-5
0.32
0.32
1
5 17
Marlv silt loam
4-42
6.6-8.4
0.0-1.0
0.32
0.32
-
17-21
F
Weathered
14-141
-
_
bedrock
E_
Slash PineIland
Soils
KL
Keyvaca
very
0-4
Very gravelly
loam
14-42
7.4-8.4
2-6
0.05
0.20
1
gravelly
loam
4-8
Weathered
14-141
-
0
_
bedrock
Freshwater Wetland Soils
RCF
Rock
0-60
Unweathered
-
_
Outcrop -
bedrock
Cudjoe
complex -
frequently
flooded
Filled and Develo ed Land
U
Udorthents
0-32
Extremely
ravAi sand
42-141
7.4-8.4
1-2
0.02
0.10
1
32-60
Marl silt loam
4-42
6.6-8.4
0.0-0.5
0.32
0.32
60-64
Weathered
14-141
-
bedrock
UL
Urban land
0-6
Variable
Smirra• TIUM
?1)1 n l,r+,,.
i i.., w
a ..----_ _--_-- -
- .• _ _
-
-
--- --- r., / -1., VIL3UL vCy.III L:!,.usua.gov/app (�,oii maps version 1, Aug 2, 2007; Soil Data
Version 2, Jan 13, 2010). Absence of an entry indicates that data were not available or were not estimated.
—_-1 vauuu auu uuasrai management 19 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe Countv Co
Table 3.2 - Monroe County Soils - Soil and Water Features
hensive Plan Update
Water
Tabic 'I able
Upper Lower
Hydrologic Flooding Flooding Flooding Linlit Limit
Symbol Soil Naine Soil Group Frequency Duration Months (it) (tt)
Beach Soils
B I Beaches Frequent I Very bief Jan -Dec 1 0.0-0.5 1 >6.0
Marine Wetland Soils
CM
Cudjoe marl
B/D
Frequent
Very brief
Jan -Dec
0.0-0.5
>6.0
KW
Ke west marl
A/D
Frequent
Very brief
Jan -Dec
0.0-0.5
>6.0
LM
Lignumvitae
B/D
Frequent
Very brief
Jan -Dec
0.0-0.5
>6.0
marl
IM
Islamorada muck
A/D
Frequent
Very brief
Jan -Dec
0.0-0.5
>6.0
KM
Key Largo muck
A/D
Frequent
Very brief
Jan -Dec
0.0-0.5
>6.0
RCT
Rock Outcrop -
B/D
Frequent
Very brief
Jan -Dec
0.0-0.5
>6.0
Cudjoe complex
tidal
RT
Rock Outcrop -
A/D
Frequent
Very brief
Jan -Dec
>6.0
>6.0
Tavernier
complex tidal
Tropical
Hammock Association Soils
FS
Bahiahonda fine
A
Rare
Very brief
Jun -Nov
2.5-3.5
>6.0
sand
MM
Matecumbe
D
Occasional
Brief
Jul -Dec
1.5-3.0
>6.0
muck
PM
Pennekamp
D
Rare
Very brief
Jun -Nov
3.5-5.0
>6.0
gravelly muck
SM
Saddlebunch
B/D
Occasional
Long
Jun -Nov
0.5-1.0
>6.0
marl
Slash Pineland Soils
KL
Keyvaca very
D
Rare
Very brief
Jun -Nov
3.0-5.0
>6.0
gravelly loam
Freshwater Wetland Soils
RCF
Rock Outcrop -
B/D
Frequent
Brief
Jun -Nov
0.0-0.5
>6.0
Cudjoe complex
- frequently
flooded
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 20 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.2 - Monroe County Soils - Soil and Water Features (continue
Filled and Developed Land
U Udorthents A Rare Ve brief Jun -Nov
UL Urban land - Rare l brief Jun -Nov
Source: USDA, 2010. http://websoilsurv'ey.nres.usda.gov/app (Soil Maps Version 1, Aug 2, 2007; Soil Data
Version 2, Jan 13, 2010).
Absence of an entry indicates that data were not available or were not estimated.
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups
according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet,
and receive precipitation from long -duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four
groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist
mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of
water transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately
deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately
coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a
layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture.
These soils have a slow rate of water transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a
claypan or clay layer at or near'the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These
soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the
second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual
classes.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 21 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe Countv Coranrehensive Plan Undate
3.4.1.1 Beach Soils
Approximately 49 acres of Beach (B) soils occur in the Keys (includes incorporated and
unincorporated areas). These include beaches adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean on Long Key
and the Lower Keys. Slopes are generally 1 to 2 percent.
3.4.1.2 Marine Wetland Soils (Mangroves, Saltmarsh, and Buttonwood Wetlands)
Cudjoe Marl (CM), Keywest Marl (KW), and Lignumvitae Marl (LM) occur on tidal, sparsely
vegetated mangrove swamps. Cudjoe and Keywest soils occur primarily in the Lower Keys.
Cudjoe soils are loamy, carbonatic, isohyperthermic, shallow Tropic Fluvaquents (5,564
acres). Keywest soils are coarse silty, carbonatic, isohyperthermic Thapto-Histic Tropic
Fluvaquents (648 acres). Lignumvitae soils, more common in the Middle Keys, are coarse,
silty, carbonatic isohyperthermic Tropic Fluvaquents (1,653 acres). All three soils are
frequently flooded for very brief durations by tidal action and tropical storms.
Islamorada Muck (IM), Keylargo Muck (KM), Rock Outcrop-Cudjoe Complex (tidal; RCT),
and Rock Outcrop -Tavernier Complex (RT) occur on tidal, densely vegetated mangrove
swamps. Islamorada and Keylargo soils occur primarily in the Upper Keys. Islamorada
soils are euic, isohyperthermic Lithic Troposaprists (7,425 acres). Keylargo soils are euic,
isohyperthermic Typic Troposaprists (11,796 acres). Both soils are frequently flooded by
daily tidal action. The Rock Outcrop-Cudjoe Complex is found throughout the Keys, and
consists of 60 percent rock outcrop and 40 percent Cudjoe Marl (8,675 acres). The Rock
Outcrop -Tavernier Complex occurs primarily in the Upper Keys, and consists of 65 percent
rock outcrop and 35 percent Tavernier Muck (899 acres). Both soil complexes are
frequently flooded by tidal action and tropical storms.
3.4.1.3 Tropical Hardwood Hammock Soils
Bahiahonda Fine Sand (FS) occurs on approximately 412 acres of coastal dunes and
tropical hammocks on Long Key and Bahia Honda Key. The soils are isohyperthermic,
uncoated Aquic Quartzipasamments. They are rarely flooded and have a high water table
of 2.5 to 3.5 feet below land surface.
Matecumbe Muck (MM) occurs on tropical hammocks throughout the Keys (3,998 acres).
The soils are euic, isohyperthermic Lithic Tropofolists. They have a high water table of 1.5
to 3 feet and are occasionally flooded by hurricanes and other tropical storms.
Pennekamp Gravelly Muck (extremely stony; PM) occurs on tropical hammock uplands of
the Upper Keys (7,443 acres). Pennekamp soils are loamy -skeletal, carbonatic,
isohyperthermic Lithic Rendolls. Approximately 20 percent of the surface is typically
covered by stones. The soils are rarely flooded by hurricanes and other tropical storms
and have a high water table of 3.5 to 5 feet.
Conservation and Coastal Management 22 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Saddlebunch Marl (SM) occurs on tropical hammock uplands of the Lower Keys (1,870
acres). Saddlebunch soils are loamy, carbonatic, isohyperthermic shallow Tropic
Fluvaquents. They are occasionally flooded for brief periods by surface runoff from
adjacent higher land.
3.4.1.4 Pineland Soils
Keyvaca very gravelly loam (KL) occurs in the pinelands of Big Pine Key and adjacent keys
(2,517 acres). The soils are loamy, skeletal, carbonatic, isohyperthermic Lithic Rendolis.
Approximately 10 percent of the surface is typically covered by stones. The soils are rarely
flooded by hurricanes and other tropical storms and have a high. water table of 3 to 5 feet.
3.4.1.5 Freshwater Wetland Soils
The Rock -Outcrop Cudjoe Complex (RCF) occurs on the sawgrass-dominated freshwater
wetlands of Big Pine Key and adjacent keys (1,491 acres). It consists of 55 percent rock
outcrop and 45 percent Cudjoe Marl. The soils are frequently flooded by surface runoff
from adjacent higher land.
3.4.1.6 Filled and Developed Land
Filled and developed lands characterized by the Udorthents-Urban Land Complex (U) and
Urban Land soils occupy approximately 16,105 acres of the Keys, or 23 percent of the land
area. The Udorthents-Urban Land Complex (U) occurs on coastal uplands. These areas
were created to allow for new development by placement of crushed limestone over marl
and other soil materials (13,481 acres). Up to 40 percent of the mapped areas are covered
by urban structures. Urban Land (U) occurs on uplands that are 80 percent covered by
urban development on Key West and adjacent keys (2,624 acres).
3.4.2 Soil Limitations for Developed Uses
Soils in the Florida Keys are "very limited" for developed uses, including shallow
excavations, dwellings without basements, local roads and streets, and septic tank
absorption fields (see Table 3.3). The USDA defines very limited as follows:
"the soil has one or more features that are unfavorable for the specified use. The
limitations generally cannot be overcome without major soil reclamation, special
design, or expensive installation procedures. Poor performance and high
maintenance can be expected" (USDA, 2010).
In the Keys, the soils are most commonly limited due to shallow depth to bedrock, flooding,
and wetness. Localized limiting characteristics include flood potential, inadequate depth to
bedrock or saturated zone, tendency to cave, low strength, poor filtration capability,
subsidence potential, and presence of large stones. Soils characterized as "urban land" are
potentially better development sites when compared to natural soils in the Keys. These
�a��a, Managemenr 23 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
soils have "variable" limitations for developed uses, reflecting their history of disturbance.
Most of these areas are already fully developed.
3.4.3 Areas Known by the Local Soil and Water Conservation District to Have
Experienced Soil Erosion Problems [Rule 9J-5.013(1)(a)4., F.A.C.]
3.4.3.1 Identification of Soil Erosion Problem Areas
The USDA NRCS has a District Conservationist in Florida City that provides soil and water
conservation assistance to Miami -Dade and Monroe Counties. The County does not have a
county soil and water conservation district, but receives assistance from the South Dade
Soil and Water Conservation District.
Outside of former mining and current construction activities in the County, shoreline and
canal banks erosion have been identified by the USDA NRCS as soil erosion problem areas.
Shoreline and canal bank erosion are expected during hurricanes and tropical storms. The
degree of erosion will depend on wind speed, direction of wind and wave action, duration
of storms, as well as rainfall rates associated with each storm event (USDA NRCS District
Conservationist, May 3, 2010).
The County Department of Environmental Resources has identified several types of sites
where accelerated erosion and sedimentation has or may occur in the Florida Keys:
• construction sites;
• existing developments where there is inadequate stormwater management;
• limestone mining sites;
• unstable dredged spoil disposal sites;
• beaches; and
• altered shorelines.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 24 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table
Beach Soils OW
B I Beaches 49 0.1 Not rated Not rated Not rated Not rated
Marine Wetland Soils
CM
Cudjoe marl
5564
7.9
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
(D, DS, F, U)
(F, DS, 0, D)
(DS, D, F)
(F, D, DS,
KW
SE
Keywest marl
648
0.9
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
(DS, 0, F, U)
(F, DS, 0)
(DS, F)
(F, DS, SE,
LM
D
Lignumvitae
1653
2.3
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
marl
(DS, 0, F, D, U)
(F, DS, 0)
(DS, F)
(F, DS, D,
IM
SE
Islamorada
7425
10.5
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
muck
(DS, 0, F, D
(S, F, DS, 0)
(DS, S, F)
(F, DS, SE,
KM
D, FC)
Key Largo
11,796
16.7
Very limited
Very limited
Verylimited
Very limited
muck
(DS, 0, F)
(S, F, DS, 0)
(DS, S, F)
(F, DS, S, SE,
-ET
Rock Outcrop
FC
- Cudjoe
8,765
12.4
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
x tidal
utcrop
Very limited
rnier 899 1.3 Very limited Very limited Very limited
F, D, DS,
complex tidal (D, DS, F) (S, DS, 0, D) (DS, D, F)
FEe
SE
k Association Soilsonda
412
0.6
Very limited
Very limited
Somewhatand
Very limited
(U, DS)
(F)
limited (F)
(DS, SE, FC,
F
umbe
3998
57
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
PM
muck
.
D,DS, F
F,0,D,DS)
D,F,DS)
F,D,DS)
Very limited
Pennekamp
7443
105
Very limited
Very limited
Somewhat
gravelly muck
.
(D, DS)
(F, 0, D)
limited (D,
(D, SE, DS,
SM
F
F
Very limited
Saddlebunch
1870
2.6
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
marl
(D, DS, F, U)
(F, DS, 0, D)
(DS, D, F)
(F, DE,)DS,
_ __ ____ _ _ ,,,. , .....u6....�..� 4 5 'Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.3 - Monroe County Soils - Soil Limitation Ratings for Selected Developed Uses
continued
Soil Soil 7,
Percent Limitations, Dwelling", �or Loc�d Tank
Mal) (d l'otal lor Shallow without Roads and Absorption
Symbol Soil Name Acres Acres Excavations Basements Streets Fields
Slash Pineland Soils
KL
Keyvaca
very
Very limited
Very limited
Somewhat
Very limited
gravelly
2517
3.6
(D, DS)
(F, D)
limited (D, F)
(D, SE, DS, F)
loam
Freshwater Wetland Soils
RCF
Rock
Outcrop -
Cudjoe
1491
2.1
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
complex -
frequently
flooded
Filled and
Developed Land
U
Udorthents
13,481
19.1
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
UL
Urban land
2624
3.7
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Source: USDA, 2010. http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app (Soil Maps Version 1, Aug 2, 2007; Soil Data
Version 2, Jan 13, 2010)
The information on this table does not eliminate the need for on -site investigation.
Percent of Total Acres is based on a total of 70,635 acres, which excludes 3,638.0 acres mapped as Water,
12,879.2 acres mapped as Waters of the Atlantic Ocean, and 56.9 acres not mapped.
Includes incorporated and unincorporated areas.
Not limited indicates that the soil has features that are very favorable for the specified use. Good performance
and very low maintenance can be expected. Somewhat limited indicates that the soil has features that are
moderately favorable for the specified use. The limitations can be overcome or minimized by special
planning, design, or installation. Fair performance and moderate maintenance can be expected. Very limited
indicates that the soil has one or more features that are unfavorable for the specified use. The limitations
generally cannot be overcome without major soil reclamation, special design, or expensive installation
procedures. Poor performance and high maintenance can be expected.
Major limiting conditions (up to five shown):
D depth to bedrock
DS depth to saturated zone
F flooding
FC filtering capacity
0 organic matter content
S subsidence
SE seepage, bottom layer
U unstable excavation walls
Conservation and Coastal Management 26 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.4.3.2 Existing Commercial Recreational or Conservation Uses in Soil
Erosion Problem Areas
The potential for construction site erosion occurs anywhere there is development activity.
In the Keys, as in most communities, development includes a mix of residential,
commercial, and industrial activities, as well as limited development of active recreation
facilities.
Problems with accelerated erosion and sedimentation due to inadequate stormwater
drainage also occur throughout the Keys and include a mix of residential, commercial, and
industrial activities. Unstable dredged material disposal sites occur in isolated locations
along residential canals in developed and partially developed subdivisions.
Beach erosion is typically due to natural causes, exacerbated by human activities (walking,
off -road vehicles, and disturbances associated with adjacent development) that have
disturbed natural beach vegetation, facilitated colonization by invasive plants, and
weakened the sandy beach substrate. The beaches with erosion problems are identified in
Section 3.10 (Beach/Berm Communities).
Accelerated shoreline erosion (exclusive of beaches) occurs in the Florida Keys where
natural shorelines are disturbed or altered and then left unstabilized and exposed to the
erosive forces of marine waters, precipitation and stormwater runoff. Although not
widespread, such areas can be found in limited locations on most keys in residential areas
along artificial canals where fringing mangroves have been disturbed. Shoreline erosion is
not common on open water shorelines, except for the beaches noted above.
3.4.3.3 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Soil Erosion Problem
Areas
Sediment can be deposited or redistributed in waterways impacting navigation in canals
and shallow inlets. In 1989, Hurricane Georges resulted in 124 miles of canals in the
Florida Keys being cleaned out with the assistance of the USDA NRCS and the Florida
Department of Community Affairs (DCA). Canals in the Florida Keys are not maintained by
homeowner associations or the County government, which compounds the impact that
storms have on sediment and debris deposition in navigable waterways (USDA NRCS
District Conservationist, May 3, 2010).
Exposure of unstabilized soil during construction is a source of stormwater pollutant
loading. Runoff collects unstabilized soil material and pollutants from the ground surface,
transporting them to surface drainage channels and ultimately to groundwater or
nearshore waters.
Erosion due to poor stormwater management is typically a problem of older subdivisions
in the Keys where drainage is inadequate to handle runoff discharges from major short -
duration, high intensity storms. During such events, the concentration of runoff in
Conservation and Coastal Management 27 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
unstablized and undersized drainageways results in localized accelerated erosion and
consequent sedimentation of ditches and residential canals.
Although dredging is limited to maintenance dredging which primarily occurs in the
incorporated areas, dredged spoil is a potential soil pollution problem. Dredged spoil is
comprised of bottom sediments removed from the dredging site. Typically these sediments
are fine -textured silts and muds which are very susceptible to erosion. When deposited on
upland sites and not properly stabilized, they can be carried in stormwater and discharged
into surface drainage channels or nearshore waters. Unstabilized dredge spoil containing
contaminants such as heavy metals are a source of pollutant loadings and turbidity.
Unstabilized shoreline areas are directly exposed to the erosive potential of tides, boat
wakes, and storm waves. Consequently they are a source of sedimentation and nearshore
turbidity.
3.4.3.4 Potential for Conservation Use or Protection of Soil Erosion Problem
Areas
Beach erosion can be mitigated through a combination of beach renourishment and
restoration of natural beach vegetation. Beach management plans are needed for public
beaches to address problems of erosion and invasive plants. Beach erosion and
management is discussed in Section 3.10.5 (Past Trends in Beach Erosion and Accretion).
Shoreline erosion problem areas could be controlled using vegetative or structural
stabilization techniques. Along open water shorelines, and along altered shorelines where
shoreline erosion is less severe and there is a residual mangrove fringe remaining, it is
preferable and possible to restore the natural shoreline. This will retain and/or restore the
biological functions of the shoreline community providing shoreline stabilization, local
storm buffering habitat, and water quality benefits. Along altered shorelines where erosion
is advanced and where the mangrove fringe is destroyed, riprap, sloping rock revetments,
or vertical shoreline structures may be necessary to curb further shoreline erosion.
Improvements to shoreline erosion areas are required at the time of permit issuance for
work of any kind on a property on which such erosion problems are occurring. Shoreline
stabilization plans need to consider future sea level rise.
A canal maintenance program could be implemented to address current erosion and
sediment issues and minimize future impacts. Responsibilities could include depth
surveys, tree trimming, bank restoration and stabilization, revegetation, inspection of
water quality, and canal bank stability before and during construction activities, debris
removal, and education of homeowners along canals.
During canal clean-up efforts following Hurricane Georges in the 1990s, it became apparent
that official ownership of canals in the Florida Keys was inconsistent or even
undetermined. Legal descriptions have property lines ending at the canal bank, extending
10 feet into the canal, or to the center of the canal, or a combination of these variations. To
Conservation and Coastal Management 28 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
pass ordinances or regulate the maintenance of canals, the ownership of canals needs to be
clarified when ownership is used to determine responsibility.
3.5 Marine Water Resources [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(d), F.A.C.]
3.5.1 Hydrographic Setting
3.5.1.1 Overview
The Florida Keys lie between the oceanic waters of the Straits of Florida of the Atlantic
Ocean (to the south and southeast), and the lagoonal system of Florida Bay and the gulf
system of the Gulf of Mexico (to the north and northwest). In the northern part of the
Upper Keys (northern Key Largo), the major waterbodies to the north and northwest are
Card Sound and Barnes Sound - these are the southernmost embayments of the Biscayne
Bay watershed. In the rest of the Upper Keys and the northern part of the Middle Keys, the
major waterbody to the north and west is Florida Bay. In the southern part of the Middle
Keys and in the Lower Keys, the major waterbody to the north is the Gulf of Mexico. Waters
of Florida Bay, the Gulf of Mexico, Biscayne Bay, and the Straits of Florida ( Atlantic Ocean)
are tropical and oligotrophic, characterized by a mosaic of interacting biological
communities, including coral reefs, seagrass beds, and mangrove forests.
The configuration and orientation of the Keys control the nature of tidal mixing between
the estuarine/gulf waters and the oceanic waters. The islands comprising the Upper Keys
constitute a generally continuous barrier to the exchange of water between Florida Bay,
Biscayne Bay, and the Atlantic Ocean. In this area, only a few small tidal creeks on Key
Largo allow interaction between the bays and the ocean. The largest of these are Tavernier
Creek and the Broad Creek/Angelfish Creek inlet complex (from Card Sound in the
Biscayne Bay estuary system to the Atlantic Ocean) in the northernmost portion of North
Key Largo.
In the Middle and Lower Keys, the islands are separated by numerous channels. These
channels, or tidal passes, allow for tidal- and wind -driven circulation between the bay /
gulf waters and ocean waters.
Some cyclical lateral flow of groundwater occurs throughout the Keys from one side of the
islands to the other (Ginsburg, 1956; Chester, 1974; and Enos, 1977). This is the result of
the high porosity of the geologic layers, tidal gradients, and the narrow width of the Keys.
3.5.1.2 Florida Bay
Florida Bay is an extensive shallow estuary. It is defined by the Everglades National Park to
the north, the Florida Keys to the southeast, and the Gulf of Mexico to the west, which is a
gradational boundary near Long Key in the Middle Keys. It has an area of approximately
600 square miles and a typical depth of 5.0 to 6.5 feet. The most characteristic feature of
Florida Bay is an anastomosing array of shallow mud banks composed of shelly calcareous
Conservation and Coastal Management 29 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
silts that cordon the bay into a lacework of interconnected shallow oval -shaped basins,
referred to as "lakes" (Multer, 1977). These basins are generally shallow, 5 to 6 feet deep,
and nowhere do they exceed depths of 10 feet (Ginsburg, 1964). To the west, these banks
gradually mix with the rock fragment sediments of the southwest continental shelf (U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1995).
Florida Bay is a receiving basin for runoff from the mainland. The Bay varies from a
positive functioning estuary during high rainfall years to a tropical, highly saline, lagoon
during years when evaporation exceeds upland runoff and oceanic exchange (Tilmant,
1989). Circulation within the Bay is primarily tidal- and wind -driven. Florida Bay is
generally isolated from the Gulf Loop Current and Florida Current. The most significant
environmental parameters affecting Florida Bay are the quantity, quality, distribution, and
timing of freshwater runoff from the Florida mainland. Contributing drainage routes to the
Bay include Shark Slough and associated estuaries on the western side; and Taylor Slough
and the C-111 basin on the east. There is an inverse relationship between salinity in
northern Florida Bay and the height of the south Florida groundwater table (Tabb, 1967;
Thomas, 1974; SFWMD, 1991).
Much of Florida Bay is characterized by extensive seagrass beds. The majority of the
carbonate sediments on the bayside of the Keys have been trapped by marine seagrasses
and calcareous green algae (Schomer and Drew, 1982). Because of the shallow depth, it is
common to observe large seasonal variations in temperature and salinity, and abundant
sediment loads contribute to high turbidity levels. As winter storms pass through the area,
large amounts of sediment -rich water are transported through the channels between the
Keys to the Florida Reef Tract. During periods of warm, stable weather, tidal currents can
transport high -temperature waters in the same direction. This influx directly affects reef
production by changing water temperature, salinity, and turbidity levels (Jaap and Hallock,
1990a).
Florida Bay was historically known for its commercial and sport fishing and abundant
birdlife. In the 1960s, the C-111 Canal was constructed near the eastern boundary of the
Everglades National Park. Combined with other drainage modifications, the C-111 diverted
flows from Taylor Slough, which historically emptied into Florida Bay through a broad
sheet flow. The new release was into Barnes Sound where it created a pulsed and
concentrated release point. Diverted freshwater flows resulted in periods of hypersalinity
in Florida Bay. Declines in these natural resources and water quality were noted beginning
in the 1970s. Between 1987 and 1990, about 15 square miles of seagrass beds died in the
western half of the bay and about 90 square miles were damaged (Robblee et al., 1991).
Sporadic algae blooms and losses of wading birds, fish, spiny lobsters, shrimp, sponges, and
mangrove islands were documented (Boesch et al., 1993). Because of the degradation of
Florida Bay, a number of research projects were initiated and are discussed in various
sections of this element.
Conservation and Coastal Management 30 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.5.1.3 Atlantic Ocean
The shallow submerged seastrate on the east side of the Florida Keys extends from the
shoreline to the shallow shelf break at the edge of the Floridan Plateau. There, at 300 feet
deep, approximately 3 to 7 miles offshore, the bottom falls off into the Bahamas Trench.
The Florida Current, running south and east of the Keys generally controls the hydrology of
the oceanic waters landward of the Straits of Florida. Circulation is influenced by tides and
winds, both of which vary by season. In winter, water movement is toward the south-
southwest, caused in part by changes in atmospheric pressure. In summer, waters move in
a northeastern pattern in response to southeast winds.
Shoreline features of the Atlantic coastline include small tidal creeks, harbors, and
embayments. Major tidal channels connecting to the northern basins of Florida Bay include
Tea Table Channel, Indian Key Channel, Lignumvitae Channel, Channel Two, and Channel
Five. In the Middle and Lower Keys, numerous large channels provide connections
between the oceanic waters and the bay/gulf waters.
Major habitats include the mangrove fringe and nearshore hardbottom, inshore patch reef,
Hawk Channel (mid -channel) reef, seagrass and softbottom, and reef tracts (U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1995). The reef tract community is composed of habitats
including offshore patch reef, seagrass, back reef/reef flat, bank reef/transitional reef,
intermediate reef, deep reef, outlier reef, and sand and softbottom environments (U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1995).
Shallow water, less than 20 feet in depth, extends approximately two miles offshore in the
Upper and Middle Keys. In the Lower Keys, depths drop to 20 feet within one to two miles
of the shoreline. The nearshore area is typified by a belt of exposed rocky bottom. The
intertidal zone is a broad, shallow shelf of exposed bedrock material with a thin veneer of
sediment. The bedrock surface is crenelate and contains many solution holes, the result of
the soluble nature of limestone and the burrowing and boring organisms that inhabit the
intertidal zone (Florida DNR, 1991a).
In subtidal areas, the hardbottom is interspersed with accumulations of calcareous mud
associated with areas of restricted circulation. This mud is extremely fine and is the
product of the decomposition of calcareous algal skeletons (Enos, 1977). Some mud is
produced within Florida Bay and is introduced through tidal channels. Where mud depth
exceeds three inches and where current velocities are low, the mud bottom is often
stabilized by seagrasses (Scoffin, 1970). In contrast, where sediment is thin, the bottom is
colonized by hardbottom coral communities. Patch reefs develop on the sand, mud, and
rock substrate of the Straits of Florida where light, nutrient, and current conditions are
favorable and where the bottom is protected from high nutrients and sediment circulating
from Florida Bay. Bank reefs of the Florida Reef Tract occur at or near the shallow shelf
break at the edge of the Straits of Florida, where they are bathed by warm waters of the
Florida Current.
Conservation and Coastal Management 31 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Bare sand substrate is known to occur adjacent to the Keys' shoreline in the vicinity of tidal
channels of the Lower Keys and in the nearshore region of Boca Chica Key, Big Munson
Island, Bahia Honda Key, Ohio Key, and Grassy Key (Marszalek, 1984).
3.5.1.4 Gulf of Mexico
In the southern part of the Middle Keys and in the Lower Keys, the major waterbody to the
north is the Gulf of Mexico. The Gulf of Mexico is west of Florida Bay and has a gradational
open -water boundary with Florida Bay near Long Key in the Middle Keys. All areas of the
Gulf of Mexico north of the Keys, including the Dry Tortugas, are on the continental shelf
and have relatively shallow water and relatively warm water compared to the Straits of
Florida.
3.5.2 Ambient Water Quality Conditions [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(d), F.A.C.]
Declining water quality throughout south Florida, from Lake Okeechobee through the
Everglades into Florida Bay and ultimately to offshore waters of the Keys, is well
documented (Brand, 2002; Lapointe et al., 2002). Path analysis of nutrient concentrations,
however, reveals an extremely low nutrient system through Everglades National Park and
into Florida Bay (Stober et al., 2001), indicating a general lack of connection between the
Everglades system and the waters surrounding the Keys. Sewage pollution from local
sources and possibly untreated stormwater runoff is the primary cause of water quality
degradation and ecosystem decline in the Keys (Lapointe et al., 1990; USACE and SFWMD,
2004).
Although it is difficult to distinguish between natural events and man-made impacts, the
most important environmental factors affecting coral reefs are nutrification and
overfishing, followed by turbidity, temperature changes, pesticides, metals, and
hydrocarbons (Szmant and Forrester, 1996). It should be noted that several other studies,
including Cook (1997) and Rudnick et al. (1999), identify Florida Bay and the Gulf of
Mexico as significant contributors of nutrients to the marine waters of the Keys. Other
researchers have demonstrated large fluctuations in background nutrient concentrations
due to strong tidal upwelling. While scientific research regarding the sources of nutrient
inputs into the marine ecosystem in the Keys continues, there is widespread consensus that
conditions of the coral reef environment have changed dramatically in recent years and
that man-made activities are a major cause (Porter and Porter, 2002). Additional research
is necessary to identify the relative contributions of the various sources of nutrient input
into the ecosystem and associated water quality degradation in the nearshore and offshore
waters of the FKNMS (USACE and SFWMD, 2004).
In general, studies have found effects of nutrient pollution from inland sources within the
Keys are greater for nearshore than offshore due to greater dilution from currents and tidal
movement in nearshore waters. Szmant and Forrester (1996) measured distribution
patterns of nutrients to determine whether the nutrients may be reaching the outer coral
Conservation and Coastal Management 32 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
reefs in the Keys. In the middle Keys, water column nitrogen, and chlorophyll were
elevated near marinas and canals, but returned to low nutrient conditions within three
miles of shore (Kruczynski, 1999, Szmant and Forrester, 1996). Phosphorus
concentrations were higher at offshore stations and were attributed to upwelling of deep
water along the shelf edge at the time of sampling (Kruczynski, 1999; Szmant and
Forrester, 1996; USACE and SFWMD, 2004).
Historically, development in the Keys relied on the use of cesspits and septic tanks which
provide little treatment of domestic wastewater in porous lime rock substrates. In
addition, stormwater flows untreated into nearshore surface waters. Lack of nutrient
removal from domestic wastewater and stormwater has resulted in the addition of
nutrient -rich waste waters into confined waters and adjacent nearshore areas. The
cumulative effects of these discharges have led to water quality degradation of these
inshore areas (Kruczynski, 1999). Kruczynski (1999) provided the following summary
statements on water quality issues in the Florida Keys:
• There is a rapid exchange of groundwater and surface waters in the Keys that is driven
by tidal pumping.
• Cesspits are not appropriate for disposal of wastewater because they are illegal,
provide very little treatment, and are a health hazard. Cesspit effluent can rapidly
migrate to surface waters.
• Properly functioning septic tank systems remove very little nutrients (4 percent
nitrogen, 15 percent phosphorous) from wastewater and, depending upon their
location, effluent from septic tank drainfields can rapidly migrate to surface waters.
• Sewage discharged from cesspits and septic tanks are a source of nutrients and human
pathogens to ground and surface waters.
• Contaminants in stormwater runoff contribute substantially to the degradation of
nearshore water quality.
• Water quality problems due to on -site sewage disposal practices and stormwater runoff
have been documented in residential canals. Water quality parameters that are
degraded include nutrient enrichment, fecal coliform contamination, and biochemical
oxygen demand.
• Long, dead-end canal systems, deep canals of any length, and poorly flushed basins
accumulate weed wrack and other particulate matter.
• The water column of many canals over six feet deep is stratified and bottom waters are
oxygen deficient. Because they usually violate Class III Surface Water Quality
Standards, canals were excluded from Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW) designation.
• Artificial aeration of canals does not eliminate the sources of excessive nutrients in
canal waters but may result in better mixing which may facilitate nitrogen cycling.
• Improving flushing of degraded canal systems may improve .the water quality within
the canal, but will also result in adding additional nutrients to the adjacent waters.
• Canal systems and basins with poor water quality are a potential source of nutrients
and other contaminants to other nearshore waters.
• Seagrass beds located near the mouths of some degraded canal systems exhibit signs of
eutrophication, such as increased epiphyte load and growth of benthic algae.
C, vauon anu %_oasrat management 33 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
• Vessel generated turbidity (re -suspended sediments) is a growing concern in many
areas with high boat traffic including canals and open waters.
• Aerobic treatment units and package plants provide secondary treatment, removing 80
percent (90 percent of the total suspended solids (TSS) and organic wastes that are
responsible for biochemical oxygen demand). In poor soil conditions with high
groundwater tables, where drainfields are rendered inefficient, secondary treatment
systems are better than septic tanks at removing organically bound nutrients
associated with the TSS. These systems, however, are not designed to remove dissolved
nutrients.
• Disposal of wastewater from package treatment plants or on -site disposal systems into
Class V injection wells results in nutrient enrichment of the groundwater. However, it
is not known whether discharges into Class V wells results in substantial nutrient
loading to surface waters.
• In areas where groundwater is saline, injected wastewater is buoyant and rapidly rises
to the surface.
• Tracer studies have demonstrated rapid migration of Class V effluent to surface waters
(hours to days). These studies demonstrated that tracers were greatly diluted before
reaching surface waters and that some phosphorus was stripped from groundwater by
the substrate. The long term ability of phosphorus stripping by the substrate is under
investigation.
• Sewage discharges from vessels degrade the water quality of marinas and other
confined water anchorages.
• Florida Bay discharge, oceanic and Gulf of Mexico upwelling and currents, rainwater
and other natural sources add nutrients to surface waters of the Keys.
• Net water movement through the tidal passes between the Keys is toward the Atlantic
Ocean. Once entering Hawk Channel, water direction and speed is controlled by
prevailing winds and ocean currents.
• Coral habitats are exhibiting declines in health; coral diseases are more common and
benthic algae have increased in abundance and spatial coverage.
• There are no definitive studies on the geographic extent of the impact of human -caused
nutrient enrichment. Scientists agree that canal and other nearshore waters are
affected by human -derived nutrients from sewage. Improved sewage treatment
practices are needed to improve canal and other nearshore waters. Impacts further
from shore that may be due to human -derived nutrients may be reduced or eliminated
by cleaning up nearshore waters.
• Planning and implementation of improvements to wastewater treatment are underway.
• A long term monitoring program has been implemented to provide information on the
status and trends of water quality, coral, and seagrass communities.
• The costs of water quality improvements are a small fraction of the long term asset
value that natural resources (such as reefs, hard bottoms, and seagrasses) provide to
the economy of the Florida Keys.
FDEP's Florida Keys Reasonable Assurance Plan (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/
water/watersheds/docs/bmap/fkrad-northern-keys.pdf), prepared in December 2008,
provides the following summary of water degradation in the Keys. In 1985, when the
Conservation and Coastal Management 34 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Florida Keys were made an OFW, water quality data were collected to define the existing
ambient water quality at the point of designation. Data were collected at 165 stations from
January to February 1985 in three areas: Bayside (49 stations north and northwest of the
islands), Oceanside (46 stations south and southeast of the islands), and Canal (70 stations
within the artificial waterways interior to the islands in canals, boat basins, and marinas).
Parameters measured included dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, conductivity, salinity,
nitrogen species, total phosphorus, and fecal coliform. For the Bayside and Oceanside, the
results for nutrients were as follows:
1985 FDEP OFW Water Quality Data
Total Nitrogen µ L
Total Phos horus L
Location
Average
Minimum
Maximum
Avera e
Minimum
Maximum
Bayside
370
130
697
14
1
54
Oceanside
288
145
489
15
4
g0
The above table represents the range of nutrient water quality at the time of OFW
designation and the water quality that needs to be protected according to the OFW
designation. The following table provides estimated nutrient concentrations as a result of
the nutrient models prepared for the Florida Keys Reasonable Assurance Plan and
represent the ambient nutrient content of the nearshore waters in 1999.
1999 Baseline Nutrient Concentrations
Total Nitrogen L
Total Phos horus µ L
Location
Avera e
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Minimum
Maximum
Bayside
381
211
782
19
10
50
Oceanside
159
119
275
15
6
48
These data show that average total nitrogen and total phosphorus values (except
Oceanside) exceed those of the 1985 OFW data, indicating, according to OFW criteria, a
degradation of nutrient concentrations.
Anecdotal information and observations from FDEP staff, scientists, and engineers working
in the Keys, and other observers, point out increasing problems with water clarity,
proliferation of macrophytic and epiphytic algae in the nearshore waters which can be
linked to nutrient enrichment [see Section 3.8.2 (Seagrass Beds)].
Boyer and Briceno (2008) provide an annual summary of the Water Quality Monitoring
Project for the FKNMS as part of the Water Quality Protection Program. The period of
record for the 2008 report is March 1995 through December 2008 and includes data from
50 quarterly sampling events at 154 stations within the FKNMS including the Dry Tortugas
National Park. Field parameters measured at each station included salinity, temperature,
dissolved oxygen, turbidity, relative fluorescence, and light attenuation. Water quality
variables include the dissolved nutrients nitrate, nitrite, ammonium, dissolved inorganic
nitrogen, and soluble reactive phosphate. Total unfiltered concentrations include those of
nitrogen, organic nitrogen, organic carbon, phosphorus, silicate, and chlorophyll a.
Lonservatnon and coastal Management 35 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) developed Strategic Targets for the
Water Quality Monitoring Project, which state that beginning in 2008, they will annually
maintain the overall water quality of the nearshore and coastal waters of the FKNMS
according to the 2005 baseline. For reef sites, chlorophyll a should be less than or equal to
0.2 µ/L and the vertical attenuation coefficient for downward irradiance (light attenuation)
should be less than or equal to 0.13 per meter. For all monitoring sites in FKNMS, dissolved
inorganic nitrogen should be less than or equal to 0.75 micromolar (µM) and total
phosphorus should be less than or equal to 0.2 µM. The following data shows the number
of sites and percentage of total sites exceeding these Strategic Targets for 2008 (Boyer and
Briceno, 2008):
• 88 of 136 reef values are greater than 0.2 µg/L chlorophyll a (64.7 percent)
• 33 of 129 reef values are greater than 0.13/m light attenuation (25.6 percent)
• 106 of 1,003 total values are greater than 0.75 µM ammonium (10.6 percent)
• 530 of 1,005 total values are greater than 0.20 µM phosphorus (52.7 percent)
Boyer and Briceno (2008) noted elevated nitrate in the inshore waters of the Keys. The
distribution implies an inshore source which is diluted by low nutrient Atlantic Ocean
waters. Since the 2005 hurricane season, water quality on the reef, especially dissolved
inorganic nitrogen, were elevated but have mostly returned to normal levels. Boyer and
Briceno (2008) note that it is clear that some of the trends observed inside the FKNMS are
influenced by regional conditions outside the FKNMS boundaries and are not in the control
of the County.
3.5.2.1 Florida Bay Water Quality
A number of studies were initiated to identify the causes of water quality degradation in
Florida Bay. These studies were reviewed in Lodge (2005) and are summarized as follows:
• Due to drainage modifications, the freshwater and nutrient inputs to Florida Bay from
the Everglades are negligible compared to tidal exchanges through the passages in the
Middle Keys and across the western connection of Florida Bay with the Gulf of Mexico.
• Nutrients and water quality problems in the bay are drawn from currents from the
eastern Gulf of Mexico. This implicates enriched discharges of waters from Lake
Okeechobee and the Caloosahatchee River.
• The limiting nutrient for the western Florida Bay is nitrogen, not phosphorus
(phosphorus is an important pollutant in inland waters). Nitrogen from agricultural
sources has enriched eastern and central Florida Bay, where phosphorus is limiting.
Nitrogen combined with phosphorus from the west has caused algal blooms and
turbidity problems.
• Pulsed freshwater releases carry contamination loads from agricultural runoff. The
pulses also result in low salinities, which is seldom a problem (unless the biota that
receives the pulse is intolerant). These pulses have been implicated in the occurrence
of algal blooms (Rudnick et al., 2006).
Conservation and Coastal Management 36 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Roseate spoonbills are an indicator of the health of the bay. Their abundance and
reproductive success is tied to the production of juvenile fishes.
• Many studies have demonstrated the complexity of the bay because it has a range of
characteristics over its extent. No data exist to provide a pre -drainage baseline that
could serve as a restoration target.
3.5.2.2 FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program (WQPP)
To support the resource protection purpose of the FKNMS, Congress directed the USEPA
and the State of Florida, represented by FDEP, to develop a Water Quality Protection
Program (WQPP) for the Sanctuary. The purpose of the WQPP is to recommend corrective
actions that restore and maintain the water quality conditions needed to maintain healthy
native plant and animal populations in FKNMS waters. The Act also requires the
development of a water quality monitoring program.
The WQPP consisted of a set of initial recommendations for corrective actions, monitoring,
research and special studies, and education and outreach. Recommendations for
monitoring and special studies were conducted by the USEPA and FDEP. Most
recommendations for corrective actions require coordination activities by numerous
agencies. The Program has funded three long-term monitoring projects: overall water
quality, coral reef and hardbottom community health, and seagrass community health.
3.5.2.3 Water Quality Hot Spot Areas
The USEPA prepared the Water Quality Protection Program for the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary: Phase 1 Report, which listed 84 water quality hot spots. These areas
have been identified as sites of known or suspected water quality degradation, based upon
workshops and discussion groups. The list was later increased to a list of 88 hot spots in
1996, primarily as a result of water quality issues and wastewater influences. Hot spot
locations correspond with higher density urban areas, representing neighborhoods and
subdivisions with the poorest sewage treatment and strongest need for central sewage
facilities. During preparation of the Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan, a
priority ranking system was developed to determine the order in which these areas should
be provided with wastewater collection and treatment facilities, using Best Available
Technology. Three recommendations were made for all higher priority, poorly designed
canal systems:
• install Best Availiable Technology sewage treatment,
• collect and treat stormwater runoff, and
• improve canal circulation (Kruczynski, 1999; USACE and SFWMD, 2004).
3.5.2.4 Nutrient Loadings to Nearshore and Offshore
Water quality monitoring data have been collected in and around the Keys by Florida
International University since 1995 as part of the WQPP. These studies revealed significant
Lonservauon and Coastal Management 37 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
increases in total phosphorus and nitrate (a form of nitrogen) in the Keys and Tortugas
over a five year sampling period. Increases did not occur in areas influenced by Florida Bay
water transport and these results may suggest that increasing nutrients outside the
influence of Florida Bay are due to local influences of nearshore waters. In contrast, total
organic nitrogen decreased over the five year sampling period and may be a result of
regional circulation patterns of the Loop and Florida Currents (Jones and Boyer, 2001;
USACE and SFWMD, 2004).
Results from the WQPP (1995-2006) indicated that Middle and Lower Keys inshore waters
had higher nitrate concentrations than waters from the reef tract. In the inshore waters of
the less populated Upper Keys and the Tortugas, nitrate levels were low and similar to
those found on the reef tract. This difference suggests that shoreline development may be
the source of nitrate in the Middle and Lower Keys.
The USEPA estimates that nutrient loadings from the Keys to nearshore marine waters
total 2,377 lbs/day of total nitrogen and 544 lbs/day of total phosphorus. About 80
percent of this total nitrogen and 56 percent of the total phosphorus were attributed to
wastewater disposal, while the remainder was attributed to stormwater runoff. An
analysis of inputs from municipal wastewater, live -aboard boats, and stormwater indicated
nutrient rich groundwater accounts for about 63 percent of total nitrogen and about 44
percent of total phosphorus loading from the Keys to the nearshore marine waters (USEPA,
1996; USACE and SFWMD, 2004).
3.5.2.5 Health Advisories
In addition to nutrient loading and anaerobic conditions, degraded water quality in canals
and isolated waterbodies also pose a human health concern. Multiple studies have been
conducted to determine the presence of pathogens and their origins. One study in 1997
involved the testing of 19 sites throughout the Keys, including 17 residential canals and
two nearshore sites selected from a USEPA hot spot list based on suspected poor water
quality. The testing detected the presence of viruses, but did not determine whether they
were infectious in nature. In the survey, 15 of the 19 sites tested positive for enteroviruses
and 12 sites tested positive for the hepatitis A virus. Clinical symptoms of enteroviruses
are generally mild, but occasional infections may cause serious disease such as paralytic
poliomyelitis, meningitis, or myocarditis (USACE and SFWMD, 2004).
Another study, funded by the USEPA (Fuss, 2000), showed that at least one Keys canal
contained live infectious viruses linked to human waste. Among the viruses identified in
the water sampling were those that cause polio and viral meningitis, along with a variety of
others that cause lesser viral illnesses. Researchers sampled water at six sites from Key
Largo to Key West, and one canal in lower Matecumbe Key that was defined as a hot spot.
Test results indicated the presence of live enteroviruses, including polio, Coxsackie A and B
and echoviruses in Captains Cove, a canal basin in the Port Antigua neighborhood of lower
Matecumbe Key. Coxsackie A and B can cause diseases such as herpangina and
myocarditis. Echoviruses can cause a variety of illnesses, ranging from fever to viral
Conservation and Coastal Management 38 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
meningitis. Coxsackie B has also been repeatedly implicated as a causal agent for chronic
fatigue syndrome (USACE and SFWMD, 2004).
These studies indicate that current wastewater treatment practices are contributing to
health hazards in the canals in the Keys. All of the detected viruses are transmissible
through human feces and are believed to have been transported into Keys canals in raw
sewage from leaking cesspools and septic tanks (Fuss, 2000) (USACE and SFWMD, 2004).
Clean public beaches and nearshore water quality are leading health concerns in the
County. The number of beach health advisories due to elevated contamination levels has
risen during recent years. Of 15 County beaches monitored in 2001, five were found to
have elevated bacterial levels and received water quality advisories (Table 3.4; USACE and
SFWMD, 2004).
In 2002, 15 Keys beaches were tested, and two, John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park in
Key Largo and Higgs Beach in Key West, were found to have high concentrations of
enterococcus indicating contamination from mammalian waste through wastewater or
stormwater. While there were no beach closings reported in 2001, the total number of
advisories was up substantially from earlier years. A total of 30 days of beach advisories
and closings were reported in 2000 as compared to 60 in 2001 (FEMA, 2002). The total
number of beach advisories and closings for 2002 was 138 days for all health advisories.
These advisories were issued throughout the year, with little apparent association with
time of year (USACE and SFWMD, 2004).
Table 3.4 - Monroe County Beach Advisories and Closings (2001
Bahia Honda
Oceanside
Advisory
2
24 and 11
Elevated
Enterococci
Coco Plum
bacteria levels
Enterococci
Beach
Advisory
2
11 and 11
Elevated
bacteria levels
Curry
Hammock State
Park
Advisory
1
1
Elevated
Enterococci
Marathon
bacteria levels
Higgs Beach
Advisory
4
14, 11, 24, and
Elevated
Enterococci and
.(KeyWest
Veteran's Beach
27
bacteria levels
fecal coliform
Enterococci
Marathon
Advisory
1
4
El evated
Source: Florida Department
of Health,
2003, online data.
bacteria levels
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 39 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.5.3 Known Existing Point and Non -Point Source Pollution Problems
[Rule 9J-5.012(2)(d), F.A.C.]
3.5.3.1 Point Sources Affecting Water Quality
Point sources of water pollutants are defined as discharges from any discernible, confined,
and discrete conveyance, such as a pipe, ditch, container, etc., which flow directly into
surface water. In the County, point source discharges include releases from concrete batch
plants, a sanitary wastewater treatment plant, and urban runoff. Some stormwater
discharges (urban runoff) are considered point sources according to the USEPA and some
are non -point sources. In this document, urban runoff is discussed in Section 3.5.3.2.8
(Urban Runoff) below. All point sources are required to operate under a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act. In
1995, the USEPA authorized the FDEP to administer the NPDES Wastewater Program in
Florida. Consequently, the NPDES permit requirements are now included in the State -
issued permit for most wastewater facilities providing the permittee with one set of
requirements for each facility. In 2000, FDEP was authorized to administer the NPDES
Stormwater Program.
3.5.3.1.1 Inventory f Permitted Point Sources
Since 1974, there has been a steady decline in the number of permitted facilities
discharging wastewater into surface waters in Monroe County. According to USEPA data,
the number of NPDES Permits dropped from 70 in 1974, to 35 at the beginning of 1991,
and to 23 in November 1991 (CSA, 1991). The FDEP data, as of July 2010, list five
dischargers in Monroe County (incorporated and unincorporated areas): four are concrete
batch plants and one is a domestic sanitary wastewater plant (FDEP 2010). Discharges
have been discontinued as a result of a combination of business closures, stringent water
quality standards, and/or permits for alternative disposal methods such as regional deep
well injection facilities. Pursuant to Section 62-302.700(9), F.A.C., the waters in the Florida
Keys have been designated as OFW, which are afforded special protection. Because
discharges must meet these stricter surface water quality standards, it is difficult to obtain
a surface water permit. Therefore, most treatment facilities elect to discharge into Class V
injection wells (boreholes), which are considered non -point discharges [see Section
3.5.3.2.8 (Urban Runoff)]. FDEP anticipates that eventually all point source discharges will
be eliminated in favor of the deep well injection method.
To ensure that discharges meet surface water and groundwater criteria, the permitted
facilities are required to submit monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports to FDEP. The
reports provide effluent monitoring data for toxicity, effluent quality, fecal coliform, and
discharge rates. Together with FDEP site inspections, the reports help FDEP ensure that
the facilities are meeting their discharge limitations and are operating in accordance with
the permitted requirements.
Conservation and Coastal Management 40 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.S.3.2 Non -Point Sources Affecting Water Qualit
Non -point sources of water pollutants are defined as discharges made directly or indirectly
to overland flow or groundwater. They are associated with land use and activities
associated with everyday life, such as: vehicles and machinery leaking gas, oil and grease;
disposal of oil in storm drains; overuse of fertilizer and pesticides; litter; and pet waste. In
addition, typical non -point sources in the County include domestic and industrial
wastewater facilities, on -site sewage treatment and disposal systems (OSTDS), erosion and
sedimentation from unvegetated lands, abandoned and inactive landfills, marinas, live -
aboard vessels, application of mosquito control pesticides, and urban runoff.
3.5.3.2.1 Wastewater Facilities
For permitting purposes, wastewater facilities are designated as industrial or domestic
based on the type of wastewater the facility treats. Domestic wastewater is generated by
dwellings, business buildings, and institutions. All wastewater that is not defined as
domestic is considered industrial. Industrial wastewater sources include manufacturers
and commercial businesses, such as concrete batch plants, laundries, and dry cleaners
(http://www.dep.state.fl.us/ water/wastewater/permitting.htm).
In addition to the five point source dischargers described above, FDEP records (FDEP
2010) indicate that there are 234 domestic and seven industrial wastewater treatment
facilities with operating permits in Monroe County (incorporated and unincorporated
areas). These facilities provide wastewater treatment and disposal for municipalities,
schools, hospitals, restaurants, hotels/motels, trailer parks, campgrounds, marinas, office
buildings, condominiums, resort complexes, shopping centers, and laundries. FDEP data
indicate that on July 6, 2010, 46 domestic wastewater permits and one industrial
wastewater permit were under review (http://appprod.dep.state.fl.us/
www_pa/county_summary.asp?county=MONROE).
To ensure that discharges meet surface water and groundwater criteria, the permitted
facilities are required to submit monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports to FDEP. The
reports provide effluent monitoring data for toxicity, effluent quality, fecal coliform, and
discharge rates. Together with FDEP site inspections, the reports can help FDEP ensure
that the facilities are meeting their discharge limitations and are operating in accordance
with the permitted requirements.
Wastewater treatment plants in the County treat effluent to advanced standards and
discharge via deep well injection. This methodology is the preferred method according to
FDEP staff. It is anticipated that regional wastewater treatment plans will be constructed
using deep well injection. Improved properties within the service areas of these facilities
will be required to connect to the regional plants, reducing the use of septic tanks. Well
construction and discharge are regulated by FDEP pursuant to Chapter 62-528, F.A.C.
L.onservanon and Coastal Management 41 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.5.3.2.2 On -Site Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems (OSTDS)
The Florida Department of Health (FDOH) regulates and permits the use of OSTDS.
However, FDOH does not permit the use of an OSTDS where the estimated domestic
sewage flow is over 10,000 gallons per day (gpd) or the commercial sewage flow is over
5,000 gpd (www.doh.state.lf.us/ environment/ostds/index.html). In the early 1990s, it
was estimated that there were 24,000 septic tanks and 5,000 cesspits in the Florida Keys.
In the late 1990s, it was estimated that there were 20,000 septic tanks and 4,000 cesspits
(Kruczynski, 1999). Based upon best estimates presented in Kruczynski (1999),
approximately 80 percent of nitrogen loadings to nearshore waters came from wastewater.
OSTDS (septic tanks and aerobic treatment systems) and cesspits accounted for 40.3
percent of nitrogen loadings. For phosphorous, approximately 55 percent of phosphorus
loadings were from wastewater. OSTDS and cesspits accounted for 33.2 percent of total
phosphorus loadings (Kruczynski, 1999). According to The Florida Statewide Inventory of
Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems, June 4, 2009, there is no comprehensive
database for the number of OSTDS in the County. Based on the number of known OSTDS
(permitting records) and the number of improved parcels, that report estimated that there
may be as many as 46,977 OSTDS in the Keys. Improperly designed, constructed, and
maintained OSTDS can allow wastewater to enter canals, groundwater, and other
nearshore waters. The 2010 Florida Legislature passed Senate Bill 550 (SB 550) to ensure
proper management of OSTDS to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public.
Governor Crist signed the bill on June 4, 2010 and site ealuations will begin in 2011. As a
result of SB 550, FDEP is mandated to adopt a special rule for the OSTDS in the Florida
Keys. The new criteria will:
• increase setbacks from surface waters, saltmarsh, and buttonwood association habitat
areas;
• preclude discharges from OSTDS by December 31, 2015 if higher discharge standards
are not met;
• require basic disinfection for systems discharging to an injection well;
• require all new, modified, or repaired OSTDS to meet new criteria as of July 1, 2010
unless the area will be served by a regional sewer by December 31, 2015; and
• require documented inspections of OSTDS once every five years.
3.5.3.2.3 Inactive LandFlls and Abandoned Dumps
The County does not have any active landfills receiving solid waste for on -site disposal.
Solid waste collection is provided by several private franchise operators, each servicing a
specific geographical area of the County. Disposal of solid waste is currently handled by
three transfer station operations (Cudjoe Key Transfer Station at Mile Marker (MM) 21.5,
Long Key Transfer Station at MM 68, and Key Largo Transfer Station at County Road 905)
where waste is prepared for transportation and disposal out of the County
(http://www.monroecounty-fl.gov /Pages/MonroeCoFL_Waste/index).
Conservation and Coastal Management 42 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
In years prior to 1992, unincorporated Monroe County operated municipal landfills at Long
Key Landfill, Cudjoe Landfill, and Key Largo Landfill. Both the Long Key and Key Largo
facilities operated under a FDEP Consent Order.
In addition to the three inactive municipal landfill sites, USEPA identified five abandoned
dump sites in the County (USEPA, no date). These include the following:
• Boca Chica Key (south U.S. 1 SR 5, MM 8). Site owned by the U.S. Government, operated
as a landfill from 1947 to 1955. It is currently part of the runway on the Naval Air
Station;
• Saddlebunch Key (north U.S. 1 SR 5, MM15). Site owned by the U.S. Government.
Operated by Bland Disposal as a landfill from 1957 to 1977;
• Middle Torch Key (north U.S. 1 SR 5, MM 27). Privately owned. Operated by Bland
Disposal 1969 to 1978;
• Boot Key (south U.S. 1 SR 5, MM 48). Privately owned, operated by the County as a
landfill 1951 to 1977; and
• Key Largo (SR 905, 4 miles NE U.S. 1 SR 5). Privately owned, operated by Key's Sanitary
Service as a landfill 1957 to 1980.
All landfill sites in the Florida Keys, with the exception of the Cudjoe Key expansion, were
developed prior to current regulations that require bottom liners and leachate collection.
At many sites, filling with solid waste probably occurred below the water table in the early
stages. Consistent with common practice at the time, there was probably little or no
control over materials deposited in the landfills. These conditions result in a significant
potential for groundwater and surface water contamination. The underlying strata is
either the Miami Oolite or Key Largo Limestone, both of which are highly porous and
permeable and subject to saltwater intrusion and mixing (CSA, 1991). Leachate, when
introduced to this type of substrate can migrate off -site through a number of subsurface
cavities, fracture zones, or cavernous zones (CSA, 1991). Conditions favor the migration of
materials that tend to upwell a considerable distance away (e.g., at an offshore location)
(CSA, 1991). Although the potential exists for problems, monitoring data do not indicate
leaching or water quality degradation due to landfills (U.S. Department of Commerce,
2007). The NOAA Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Revised Management Plan (U.S.
Department of Commerce, 2007) recommends searching for and assessing abandoned
landfills and dumps, intensifying existing monitoring programs around landfills to ensure
that no significant leaching into marine waters is occurring, and implementing remedial
actions if problems are discovered.
3.5.3.2.4 Marinas
Water quality in the vicinity of marinas is affected by general marina operations, such as
boat scraping and painting operations, fueling, and engine repair, as well as by discharges
from live -aboard vessels docked in marina slips. Data are not available to quantify loadings
of pollutants from marina operations (Kruczynski, 1999). Some of the more potentially
toxic or harmful materials associated with marinas include paints and wood preservatives
Conservation and Coastal Management 43 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
containing copper and other heavy metals (Snedaker, 1990). Metal corrosion and
oxidation represents an additional source of metal contamination due to the widespread
use of zinc to protect boat hulls. Bilge waste is a source of oils, coolants, lubricants, and
cleaners.
Research suggests that toxic materials, which normally accumulate in organic bottom
sediments, are more dispersed in nearshore marine environments such as are typical of the
Keys where there is an absence of rich organic bottom sediments (Snedaker, 1990). A
study of a marina in Marathon (FDER, 1987) indicated that water quality was significantly
impacted in comparison with ambient conditions based on dissolved oxygen, pH, coliform
bacteria, biological oxygen demand, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, total phosphorus, copper, and
zinc. The presence and distribution of coprostanol in bottom sediments within and
adjacent to the marina confirmed that the marina basin, particularly beneath boat slips,
was acting as a sink for sewage contaminated water (FDER, 1987). Water quality studies
for Boot Key Harbor (FDER, 1990) and Campbell's Marina on Key Largo (FDER, 1988) have
also linked marina activities to water degradation.
Although there is the potential for toxic materials in water and sediments of marinas, poor
water quality in marinas is more often attributed to poor onsite wastewater systems in the
area, poor stormwater treatment, and live-aboards releasing wastewater.
3.5.3.2.5 Live -Aboard Vessels
Live -aboard vessels are found throughout the nearshore waters of the Florida Keys. In
1988, the total number of live -aboard boats in the Keys was estimated to be 1,410, housing
some 3,000 residents (Antonini et al., 1990). This estimate included vessels used for
continuous overnight stays of at least two months. Live-aboards include a large number of
permanent and seasonal residents. The most common type of live -aboard boat was a
sailing vessel, comprising 69 percent of the total. Most live -aboard vessels were tied up in
marinas, although a sizable number were anchored offshore. Approximately 70 percent of
live -aboard vessels were found at shoreside sites (marinas, clubs, boat yards, piers,
seawalls) and 30 percent of live-aboards anchor in coastal waters. Shoreside live -aboard
sites are found throughout the Keys while anchorages tend to be concentrated. Over half of
them were in Boot Key Harbor in the Middle Keys. Other major anchorage locations were
Cow Key Channel and Wisteria Island (locally known as Christmas Tree Island) in the
Lower Keys, which accounted for 27 percent of the anchorages.
In 2002, the Monroe County Department of Marine Resources (now referred to as the
Marine Resources Office) prepared the Keys -Wide Mooring Field System Preliminary
Planning Document which included a survey of 15 anchorage sites throughout the Keys. A
variety of site data were collected, including physical and biological data (depth, seagrass,
etc.), cultural data (types of boats and boaters), and logistical data (where boaters access
land, availability of pump -outs, etc.) An Anchorage Site Evaluation Form was generated for
each site using the collected data. Based on the evaluation forms, approximately 500 to
800 boats were anchored at the sites, with approximately 200 to 250 in unincorporated
Conservation and Coastal Management 44 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
areas. The type of each boat was not described, but most anchorage sites were described
as containing predominantly live -aboard vessels.
Wastewater flows from live -aboard vessels have been estimated at 100 gpd per boat
(FDER, 1988). Antonini et al. (1990) reports that disposal of sanitary waste is by one or
more methods: overboard by flushing, holding tank storage and subsequent shoreside
pump -out, and/or on -board pretreatment and discharge. Antonini et al. (1990) estimated
that less than 10 percent of the live -aboard vessels use sewerage pump -out facilities. A
Monroe County Grand Jury received testimony that up to 80 percent of live -aboard vessels
do not use sewage dumping facilities (Kruczynski, 1999).
Kruczynski (1999) reported that disposal of wastewater from live -aboard vessels is a
significant localized problem because of the low level of treatment, the tendency for live -
aboard vessels to congregate in certain marinas or anchorages, and potential adverse
health effects of discharging untreated wastewater.
The Clean Vessel Act of 1992 (Florida Statute 327.53) prohibits the discharge of raw
sewage from any vessel, houseboat, or floating structure into Florida waters. A houseboat
is a vessel that is used primarily as a residence (21 days out of any 30 day period) and its
use as a residence precludes its use as a means of transportation. Houseboats and floating
structures must have permanently installed toilets attached to Type III Marine Sanitation
Devices (MSD) or connect their toilets directly to shoreside plumbing. A Type III MSD is
one that stores sewage onboard in a holding tank for pump -out. Houseboats may also have
other approved MSD on board; but, if they do, the valve or other mechanism selecting
between devices shall be selected and locked to direct all sewage to the Type III device
while in State waters. All vessels that have MSD capable of flushing raw sewage directly
overboard or of being pumped into a holding tank, must set and secure the valve directing
all waste to the holding tank, so that it cannot be operated to pump overboard while in
State waters. All waste from a Type III MSD or from portable toilets must be disposed in an
approved sewage pump -out or waste reception facility (Kruczynski, 1999).
While the Clean Vessel Act prohibited the dumping of raw sewage, treated wastewater
from transient vessels still could be discharged into State waters. Wastewater treatment
(disinfection) by Type I and II MSD does not remove nutrients from wastewater.
Graywater did not have to be stored or treated from any vessel and could be discharged
directly into waters of the State. Thus, many live -aboard vessels and most transient vessels
discharged wastewater into surface waters. It was estimated that live -aboard vessel
wastewater account for 2.7 percent of nitrogen and 2.9 percent of phosphorus loadings
into nearshore waters of the Keys (Kruczynski, 1999). Although nutrient loadings from
vessels may be relatively minor contributions to the total loading, loadings from vessels are
a significant localized source to harborages and result in eutrophication of waters that
typically exhibit poor circulation/flushing (Kruczynski, 1999).
The USEPA, State, and the County designated the Florida Keys as a No Discharge Zone for
boater sewage. Effective June 19, 2002, the No Discharge Zone designation prohibits
discharging sewage into all State waters of the FKNMS. This includes treated sewage from
conservation and Coastal Management 45 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
marine sanitation devices but does not apply to gray water from showers or sinks, only
sewage. The No Discharge Zone strengthened existing regulations under the Florida Clean
Vessel Act so that even chemically -treated sewage cannot be discharged overboard.
All State waters of the FKNMS are included in the No Discharge Zone. Waters of the State
extend to three miles from land on the Atlantic side of the Florida Keys and 9 miles from
land on the Gulf of Mexico side of the Florida Keys.
Pump -out facilities are available for boaters at various locations throughout the Florida
Keys. The Monroe County Marine Resources Office periodically updates a list of facilities in
the Keys (incorporated and unincorporated areas) that offer pump -out service. The
October 2010 list indicated that 16 marinas provide pump -out service for private use by
their guests (5 in the Upper Keys, 9 in the Middle Keys, and 2 in the Lower Keys), and 27
other marinas provide pump -out service for the general public (7 in the Upper Keys, 8 in
the Middle Keys, 4 in the Lower Keys excluding Key West, and 8 in Key West).
Many live -aboard vessels are permanently anchored and mobile pump -out facilities are
required to service those vessels. In 1999, there were no mobile pump -out facilities in the
Keys, but by October 2010 five vessels were providing mobile pump -out services. Mobile
pump -out service areas include (1) Key Largo oceanside and bayside, (2) Duck Key to Key
Colony Beach, (3) Boot Key Harbor area, (4) Stock Island area and Boca Chica basin, and (5)
Key West area including Fleming Key and Wisteria Island. Even in areas having mobile
pump -out service, some anchored live -aboard vessels do not take advantage of mobile
pump -out facilities and can degrade water quality by discharging their waste overboard.
The FFWCC and its marine law enforcement partners (FDEP, U.S. Coast Guard, and Monroe
County Sheriffs Office) occasionally conduct inspections. From Key Largo to Key West,
officers check live -aboard occupants for compliance with Coast Guard -required safety
equipment, State registration requirements, nighttime anchor lighting, and marine toilet
specifications.
3.5.3.2.6 Seafood Processing Facilities
Seafood processing facilities generate large amounts of wastewater and historically
discharged wastewater to open waters. FFWCC maintains data on the amount of seafood
harvested in the County. In the County, the average seafood harvest for 2004-2008 was 12
million pounds annually (http://research.myfwc.com/ features/
view_article.asp?id=19224). Wastes from seafood processing operations include fish
carcasses, cooking water, and wash -down water. Seafood processing facilities must now be
connected to an approved wastewater treatment system in compliance with Sections
403.086 and 403.087 F.S. Seafood processing facilities no longer discharge to open waters.
3.5.3.2.7 Application of Mosquito Control Pesticides
The Florida Keys Mosquito Control District (http://www.keysmosquito.org/index.htmi)
conducts year-round applications of pesticides for mosquito control. These applications
Conservation and Coastal Management 46 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
are a source of atmospheric and land -based non -point loading on the Florida Keys
environment (CSA, 1991).
Ground spraying by truck is the current method for controlling the adult mosquito
population. However, aerial spraying is initiated only when the mosquito population
reaches a certain threshold, as determined by mosquito landing counts at test sites.
Although the Florida Keys Mosquito Control District attempts to avoid marine areas during
aerial spraying, there is the potential for pesticides to reach marine waters. Use of ultra
low -volume aerial spray in recent years has significantly reduced the volume of pesticide
applied and has eliminated the use of fogging oil contamination. However, the area being
sprayed is now harder to define because the spray is not visible, and the finer particles are
susceptible to greater drift. The Florida Keys Mosquito Control District refines flight lines,
evaluates alternative spray technologies, and makes equipment improvements to reduce
the amount of pesticide released over water.
Housing patterns, design, and landscaping affect the demand for mosquito control. Most
pesticide applications are limited to areas surrounding residential communities,
commercial and light industrial site locations, within the boundaries of the County's
inactive landfills, and within areas of standing water (CSA, 1991). Applications are
restricted on most conservation lands owned by the State and federal governments,
particularly on North Key Largo due to the presence of the State- and federally -listed
endangered Schaus' swallowtail butterfly.
The Florida Keys Mosquito Control District uses several larvicides (products to control
mosquitoes in their larval stage) and adulticides (products to control adult mosquitoes)
depending on the situation. Both of the adulticides (naled and permethrin) are also used in
agriculture. They may be used on food crops at rates much higher than are used for
mosquito control. They are also used in pet shampoos (permethrin) and flea collars
(naled). Permethrin is also applied directly to livestock to control pest insects, and is the
active ingredient in some human louse shampoos.
• Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis, or Bti, is a naturally -occurring soil bacterium. It is
applied for control of mosquito larvae in large areas of water.
• Bacillus sphaericus, or Bs, is a common soil -inhabiting bacterium. It is applied to control
mosquito larvae in highly polluted water, such as sewage treatment plants.
• Methoprene is a synthetic mimic of juvenile hormone, a hormone found in insects.
Methoprene is used in situations like cisterns and abandoned swimming pools.
• Temephos is used very sparingly and infrequently. It is applied only to temporary pools
that contain mosquito larvae but do not support nontarget organisms.
• Chlorpyrifos is used to treat ornamental bromeliads (water -holding plants).
• Oils and monomolecular surface films are used to control pupae and larvae by
interfering with their ability to breathe. These products are used only when an adult
emergence will occur without treatment.
• Gambusia are a species of mosquito -eating fish. The Florida Keys Mosquito Control
District raises these fish and stocks them in permanent freshwater bodies.
Lonservanon and Coastal Management 47 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Naled is used to control adult mosquitoes with the aerial program. Naled is a fast
acting, non -systemic contact, and stomach poison in insects and mites. It is used as a
short-term fumigant to control agricultural pests on ornamental in greenhouses, animal
and poultry houses, kennels, and food processing plants.
• Pyrethrum is used to control adult mosquitoes with spray trucks. Pyrethrum is a
botanical insecticide produced primarily from the flowers of a species of the
chrysanthemum plant family. Pyrethrum is made up of six complex chemical esters
known as pyrethrins that work in combination to repel and kill insects.
The specific pesticides used have varied over time. In the early 1990s, the most commonly
used insecticides (by tradename) included the following (CSA, 1991):
Dibrom 14C
Teknar
Artosurf
Malathion
Biomist 4 + 12
Scourge
Acrobe
Bactimos
Fog Oil
Abate
Altosid
Fyntex
Ortho Additive
Bectobac
Diesel Oil
Material Safety Data Sheets from the Pesticide Information Office of the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service indicate that many of these chemicals are toxic to fish,
aquatic life and/or wildlife and should not be applied directly to water (CSA, 1991).
Some pesticides used in mosquito control are nonspecific; that is, in addition to controlling
mosquitoes, the chemicals also affect the larval stages of crustaceans, fish, and other
natural mosquito predators. Pesticides used for mosquito control, or their toxic
breakdown products, have been found in some canals in concentrations high enough to
adversely affect marine organisms. USEPA funded a study in 1997 to assess potential
impacts of mosquito spray chemicals and their breakdown products. Although the study
was not conclusive, it did determine that sprayed chemicals reach surface waters in
concentrations that are of concern. Additional data concerning pesticide concentrations in
sediments and biological tissues throughout the FKNMS are being collected through the
Water Quality Research Program.
In the past, the USEPA has not required an NPDES permit for point source discharges from
the application of pesticides to surface waters. Instead, this activity was regulated through
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). However, effective April 9,
2011, an NPDES permit will be required for discharges to surface waters of biological and
chemical pesticides that leave a residue. Florida will be developing its own rule to cover
such discharges. (http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.dfm?program_id=410).
3.5.3.2.8 Urban Runoff
Non -point source contamination of nearshore waters in the Keys by urban runoff is limited
by the small area of developed land in the County in relation to the surrounding water area,
and by the natural high permeability of the underlying limestone (FDER, 1987). However,
Conservation and Coastal Management 48 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
despite these conditions, researchers warn that given the low assimilation threshold of
oligotrophic waters, the potential impacts on non -point source loading from urban runoff
should be recognized (Snedaker, 1990). Some evidence suggests that when stormwater
discharges are located in artificial waterways, contamination from runoff can be magnified,
with the result that even minor inputs may become harmful over extended periods (FDER,
1987). Water quality parameters which are typically degraded in areas receiving
contaminated stormwater include DO, pH, phosphorus, total coliform bacteria, heavy
metals, and petroleum hydrocarbons.
In Florida, the water management districts and local governments now impose a minimum
level of stormwater treatment for all new developments, and the standards that apply to
the Florida Keys are the most stringent in the State. The criteria are intended to protect
surface waters according to their use classification. Much of the development in the Florida
Keys occurred prior to the existence of these criteria. Similar to other parts of the State at
the time, stormwater was considered a nuisance since it resulted in flooding. Therefore, if
stormwater control systems were employed at all, they were typically designed to
efficiently convey water off land surfaces as quickly as possible. These old systems are
considered to be the most liable to cause water pollution and, therefore, policies now in
place seek to retrofit them whenever possible (Kruczynski, 1999).
In the Keys, stormwater runoff from roadways, bridges, driveways and yards, roof tops,
and shopping center parking lots contribute stormwater loading to surface waters. The
amount of pollutant load caused by stormwater runoff can be estimated mathematically
from rainfall quantity, imperviousness (i.e. the degree to which rainwater cannot soak into
soil), and land use. Estimates of total loadings of nitrogen and phosphorus from
wastewater and stormwater were summarized in Kruczynski (1999). These estimates
attributed about 20 percent of the nearshore nitrogen load and about 45 percent of the
phosphorus to stormwater. These estimates, however, can vary widely depending on the
magnitude of each factor (Kruczynski, 1999).
3.5.3.2.9 Hazardous Wastes and Hazardous Materials
Hazardous waste sites and hazardous materials are addressed below in Section 3.17
(Hazardous Wastes and Hazardous Materials). The discussion addresses:
• hazardous waste disposal sites;
• hazardous waste generators;
• household hazardous wastes;
• underground and aboveground storage tanks; and
• terrestrial and marine hazardous material spills.
Included is a brief inventory of existing hazards and incident reports as well as a brief
summary of soil, groundwater, and/or surface water quality monitoring studies for specific
sites where hazardous waste contamination has occurred.
Conservation and Coastal Management 49 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.5.3.2.10 Marine Litter
Marine litter originates from a variety of sources including intentional and unintentional
releases from recreational boaters, shoreline users, commercial fishing operations,
sportfishing and diving boats, and oceanic sources such as merchant ships, cruiseships, and
oil drilling vessels. In addition, litter on the land blows into the waterways of the Keys.
Entanglement and ingestion of marine litter can directly damage wildlife. Birds, sea turtles,
and other animals can die when they become entangled in fishing lines, six-pack rings and
other trash, or when they mistake garbage for food. Marine litter can also cause habitat
destruction including smothering of seagrasses and coral (UNEP, 2010). According to
Chiappone et al. (2002), fishing gear (hooks and lines) and debris from lobster traps causes
damage to the coral reefs in the Florida Keys.
Marine litter along beaches and waterways can reduce the beauty and enjoyment of those
areas, and hence, negatively affect tourism. Maintaining the beauty of these areas also
costs time and money for both the private and public sectors (UNEP, 2010).
Discarded fishing line, rope, and plastic trash or food bags can disable boats and ships by
wrapping around boat propellers or being sucked into outboard boat engines. Medical
wastes transported onto beaches by winds and waves can threaten public health through
disease transmission and broken glass and other sharp objects (UNEP, 2010).
3.5.3.3 External Sources of Pollutant Loads
Natural and man-made sources of pollutants affect waters of the FKNMS, including
increased turbidity or suspended solids, temperature changes, increased nutrients, salinity
changes or increased levels of heavy metals, synthetic organic chemical, and man-made
organic chemicals (CSA, 1991).
3.5.3.3.1 Florida Bav
Water quality in Florida Bay is highly variable depending upon prevailing weather and
climatic conditions (Schomer and Drew, 1982; SFWMD, 1991) and is the result of natural
and man-made causes (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007). Causes of poor water quality
include wind -driven transport of suspended particulates; the presence of soluble nutrients;
decomposition; transport of mangrove detritus; seagrass decomposition with associated
biologic activity; and naturally -occurring low dissolved oxygen at night attributed to plant
respiration (CSA, 1991). The Bay has shown man-made contaminants with freshwater
inputs (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007). Elevated nutrients in the Bay have been
documented due to releases from the C-111 Canal and other drainage modifications
(Lodge, 2005).
Conservation and Coastal Management 50 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.5.3.3.2 C-111 Canal
The C-111 Canal is the southernmost canal of the Central and Southern Florida (C&SF)
Project, completed in 1967 and operated by the SFWMD. The C-111 drains agricultural
areas in south Miami -Dade County and discharges into Manatee Bay (Barnes Sound) west
of Key Largo. The canal functions are: to supply water to the eastern panhandle of
Everglades National Park; to prevent saltwater intrusion (with the construction of a water
control structure to prevent the inland movement of salt water), and; to provide flood
protection for upstream agricultural uses (SFWMD, 1991). Large episodic releases of
freshwater have occurred from the C-111 basin into Card Sound and Barnes Sound. These
releases have been due to the periodic opening of the S-197 structure from the mouth of
the C-111 Canal to alleviate upstream flooding (SFWMD, 1991). They have had severe
impacts on marine biota and may have impacted water quality in the estuary due to the'
potential presence of suspended sediments containing contaminants from the urban and
agricultural areas of south Miami -Dade County (SFWMD, 1991). These impacts are
exacerbated by the tendency of large volumes of freshwater to move as freshwater pulses
and by the restricted circulation and increased residence time of water in Card Sound and
Barnes Sound.
The C-111 spreader canal is one of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP)
projects. This project will help restore the quantity, timing, and distribution of water
delivered to Florida Bay via Taylor Slough, improve hydroperiods and hydropatterns in the
Southern Glades and Model Lands, and return coastal zone salinities in western Florida Bay
as close as possible to pre -drainage scenarios.
The recommended plan for the "Western" part of the project (Project Implementation
Report 1) includes the 590-acre Frog Pond detention area and a 225 cubic feet per second
(cfs) pump station; creating a mound of groundwater to the south and west, by reducing
groundwater seepage to the east and improving water deliveries (quantity, timing, and
distribution) to eastern and central Florida Bay. It also includes a second 225 cfs pump
station and modifications to increase the water level in the Aerojet Canal to further reduce
groundwater seepage to the east. A Draft Project Implementation Report and Draft
Environmental Impact Statement was completed in 2009 and published in the Federal
Register on April 24, 2009. Expedited construction of the C-111 Spreader Canal Western
Project began in January 2010.
The "Eastern" (Project Implementation Report 2) project will replace existing portions of
the lower C-111 Canal with a spreader canal to enhance sheetflow to Florida Bay, and
restoration efforts within the Southern Glades and Model Lands. Due to numerous
uncertainties associated with the actual spreader canal feature, a spreader canal design test
is being implemented to gain information that will guide planning efforts for the Eastern
project. The Eastern project will address the restoration of the remainder of the project
area through such features as a spreader canal and backfilling the C-111 Canal.
conservation and Coastal Management 51 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.5.3.3.3 Biscayne Bay
Biscayne Bay is a potential source of poor water quality to the FKNMS due to flows of
various types from the City of Miami, other local municipalities, and Miami -Dade County
(CSA, 1991). North Biscayne Bay, extending from Dumfounding Bay to Rickenbacker
Causeway, is contaminated by large numbers of man-made sources including
manufacturing, boat building and repair, urban runoff, raw sewage from illegal
connections, degraded systems and overflows during heavy rains (CSA, 1991). The Miami
River has the poorest water quality in Biscayne Bay (CSA, 1991). Offshore disposal of
dredged Miami River sediments may potentially have detrimental effects on the reef tract
due to longshore transport from the north (CSA, 1991).
3.5.3.4 Other Water Quality Issues
3.5.3.4.1 UnplugginaArtificial Canals
Several artificial canals in the Keys have been plugged to prevent connections to open
water, or were never connected to open water when the canals were dredged. In some,
water quality conditions have deteriorated due to excessive depths (frequently as much as
20 feet), nutrient loading from adjacent OSTDS, and lack of flushing. Residents along many
of these canals seek relief from FDEP and USACE, requesting that the canals be opened.
Removal of plugs requires federal, State and County permits. Permit agencies recognize
that existing open canal systems often represent a source of degraded water quality to
receiving waters and that water quality within open canals may violate State water quality
standards, because the receiving waters are designated OFW by the State, thus
implementing a zero degradation water quality standard. Therefore, there is a reluctance
to consider requests to open additional canal systems. Before such a request can be
considered, there must be strong evidence that the canal system does not violate water
quality standards and that the opening of the canal system will not degrade receiving
waters. In general, currently plugged canal systems will not meet those requirements
(Kruczynski, 1999). In a limited number of cases, the FDEP and USACE have permitted
opening of plugged canals where water quality in the canals meets the standards of the
water outside the canal. Typically, unplugging requires backfilling the canal to depths of
four to six feet. New dredging is not currently permitted by the County in conjunction with
canal unplugging.
3.5.3.4.2 Dead End Canals and Aerators
Deep, dead end canal systems exhibit poor water quality due to the geometry of the canal
system. The orientation of some canals make them susceptible to accumulation of wind -
driven, floating organic matter, predominantly seagrass leaves, known as weed wrack
(Kruczynski, 1999).
Several physical alterations have been considered to improve canal water quality
(Kruczynski, 1999). These include:
Conservation and Coastal Management 52 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Physically preventing transport of floating organic matter into canals by installing
floating booms, air curtains, and other devices used as weed gates at the mouths of
canals;
• Dredging canals or otherwise treating canal bottoms to remove accumulation of
organic, oxygen -demanding sediments;
• Backfilling canals to a maximum of -6 feet mean sea level at the mouth of the canal and
sloped to -4 feet mean sea level at its distal end;
• Installing flushing channels/culverts in suitable areas if actions will not degrade
receiving waters; and
• Aerating canal waters to assist vertical circulation..
Poor water quality in artificial canals in several areas of the Keys has led residents to
request permits from FDEP for installation of aerators. Artificial aeration of canals does
not eliminate the sources of excessive nutrients in canal waters but may result in better
mixing which may facilitate nitrogen cycling (Kruczynski, 1999). Further study of the
benefits and adverse impacts associated with the use of aerators in artificial canals is
needed, including evaluation of alternative aerator technologies.
3.5.3.4.3 Shoreline Setbacks
The County LDRs (Section 118-12, Monroe County Code of Ordinances) currently prohibits
uses within a shoreline setback that would have an adverse water quality impact. The
shoreline setback is typically 20 to 50 feet from the mean high water line, depending on the
type of structure and shoreline. Where no adverse water quality impacts are anticipated
from a proposed activity within a shoreline setback, structures can be permitted provided
that stormwater and pollutant runoff is contained on site. Pools, spas, fish cleaning tables,
and similar pollutant sources are not allowed to discharge directly to surface waters.
3.5.4 Actions Needed to Protect Water Quality/State, Regional, and Local Regulatory
Programs, which will be Used to Maintain or Improve Water Quality/Potential
for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Water Resources
3.5.4.1 Florida Kevs National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan
The FKNMS was established on November 16, 1990 with the signing of the Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary and Protection Act (Public Law 101-965). The purpose of this
act is "to protect the resources of the FKNMS, to educate and interpret for the public
regarding the Florida Keys marine environment, and to manage such human uses of the
FKNMS consistent with the Act."
The FKNMS consists of all submerged lands and waters, along with all the living marine and
other resources within and on those lands and waters, from the mean high water mark to
the offshore FKNMS boundary described in Public Law 101-965, generally lying at the 300-
foot depth contour line. Included within this designated area are approximately 2,600
Conservation and Coastal Management 53 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
square nautical miles of nearshore waters extending from just south of Miami to the Dry
Tortugas. Excluded from the FKNMS are Everglades National Park, Biscayne National Park,
and Fort Jefferson National Monument (now the Dry Trotugas National Park). On
December 18, 1990, the Governor and Florida Cabinet passed a resolution to include State
lands and resources within the boundary of the FKNMS, subject to certain provisions which
retained State ownership and management responsibilities of State-owned land until
completion of the FKNMS Comprehensive Management Plan.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of
Commerce was charged with responsibility for developing a Comprehensive Management
Plan and implementing regulations to achieve the policy and purpose of Public Law 101-
965. The Comprehensive Management Plan was implemented in 1997. The Revised
Management Plan went into effect in December 2007 (U.S. Department of Commerce,
2007).
The management plan focused on ten action plans that involved educating citizens and
visitors, using volunteers to build stewardship for local marine resources, appropriately
marking channels and waterways, installing and maintaining mooring buoys for vessel use,
surveying maritime heritage resources, and protecting water quality. In addition to action
plans, the 1997 management plan designated five types of marine zones to reduce
pressures in heavily used areas, protect critical habitats and species, and reduce user
conflicts. The efficacy of the marine zones is monitored Sanctuary -wide under the
Research and Monitoring Action Plan (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007). By the 2007
review of the program, a number of plan goals were completed:
• "Area to be Avoided" Designation. This maritime designation in 1990 resulted in a
significant decrease in the number of major ship groundings on coral reefs.
• Oil Drilling and Hard Mineral Mining Ban. A ban on these activities was established
when the Sanctuary was created.
• The FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program. This program has produced the first
Water Quality Protection Program for a national marine sanctuary and has fully
implemented 26 of 49 high -priority activities, many of which are carried out in
cooperation with other action plans.
• The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). One of CERP's goals is to
protect the ecosystem's water quality by eliminating large releases of freshwater along
the coastal waters of South Florida (including Florida Bay) following rain events.
• Designation of the Florida Keys as a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area. In November 2002,
the United Nations International Maritime Organization approved designation of the
Florida Keys as a PSSA. The non -regulatory designation elevates public awareness of
the threat of oil spills and hazardous materials to sensitive marine environments.
• Long-term and continuing progress in the Research and Monitoring and Zoning action
plans. Research and monitoring has produced scientific data, hypothesis testing,
mapping, trend documentation, and wide dissemination of these findings.
• Education, Public Outreach, Sanctuary Stewardship, and Volunteerism. Information is
flowing from scientists to managers and then to educators.
Conservation and Coastal Management 54 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
• Enforcement and Regulations. The State of Florida has declared Florida Keys waters as
"no -discharge" zones. Cooperative efforts have occurred among the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission, the Florida Park Service, the U.S. Coast Guard, and
NOAA, which allow them to enforce State and federal laws.
• Damage Assessment and Restoration. Cross disciplinary strategies have been useful in
reducing the number of vessel groundings and restoration of damaged resources.
• Maritime Heritage Resources. The Maritime Heritage Resources Action Plan balances
resource protection, investigation and interpretation of submerged historic resources.
• Mooring Buoys and Waterway Management. This action plan has implemented simple
but effective strategies for reducing vessel damage to the coral reef and to seagrass
beds due to a unique interface of education, outreach, enforcement and research and
monitoring activities.
• Operations. The administrative functions of two former sanctuaries (at Key Largo and
Looe Key) were combined into a single headquarters with two regional offices.
3.5.4.2 FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program
The USEPA and the FDEP, in consultation with NOAA, were given the responsibility for
developing a comprehensive Water Quality Protection Program (WQPP) for the FKNMS.
The WQPP was developed to reverse the trend of environmental degradation and restore
and maintain the Florida Keys marine ecosystem. The WQPP has had some major
accomplishments. In 2002, State waters of the FKNMS were declared a No Discharge Zone
for vessels. Since then, the new vessel pump -out facilities have processed thousands of
gallons of wastewater that would have otherwise gone untreated into nearshore waters.
Thousands of pounds of nitrogen and phosphorus are also being kept out of Key West
waters each year now that Key West is using advanced wastewater treatment. However,
many Keys residents and businesses still need to upgrade their wastewater treatment
systems to meet the treatment standards set by the State of Florida. As required by Public
Law 101-965, the FKNMS WQPP is a coordinated effort of federal, State, and local
regulatory agencies designed to protect the living marine resources and waters of the
Florida Keys.
The WQPP has funded three long-term monitoring projects: overall water quality, coral
reef and hardbottom community health, and seagrass community health. These three
projects represent a five-year commitment by the USEPA to assess the health of coral reef,
hardbottom, and seagrass communities within the FKNMS focusing on issues and health
concerns related to water quality. There is also a research/special studies component
which consists of a multitude of smaller, more focused studies looking at specific cause and
effect relationships and the impacts of specific environmental perturbations.
The Southeast Environmental Research Center (SERC), headquartered at Florida
International University, conducts the monitoring project. The function of the SERC Water
Quality Monitoring Network is to address regional water quality concerns. Biscayne Bay,
Florida Bay and Whitewater Bay, Ten Thousand Islands, and Marco -Pine Island Sound are
sampled monthly, while the FKNMS and the Southwest Florida Shelf are sampled quarterly.
Conservation and Coastal Management 55 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The data summary maps are produced on a quarterly basis by integrating the individual
projects into one data file for the month sampled (http://serc.fiu.edu/ wqmnetwork/
County/). County participation in these studies is important.
3.5.4.3 Surface Water Improvement Management Plans
In the late 1980s, it was determined that Florida had to do more to protect and restore its
surface waters. While point sources (end -of -pipe sewage and industrial wastes) were
being controlled, nonpoint source pollutants that enter water bodies in less direct ways
were still a major concern. In 1987 the Florida Legislature enacted the Surface Water
Improvement and Management (SWIM) Act. SWIM was the first major State program to
address a waterbody's needs as a system of connected resources rather than simply as
isolated wetlands or water bodies. The SWIM Act requires each of the State's water
management districts to design and implement plans and programs for the improvement
and management of surface waters for priority water bodies.
SWIM develops plans for at -risk water bodies, and directs the work needed to restore
damaged ecosystems, prevent pollution from stormwater runoff and other sources, and
educate the public. SWIM plans are used by other State programs, like Save Our Rivers, to
help make land -buying decisions, and by local governments to help make land -use
management decisions (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/watersheds/swim.htm).
Originally, the Florida Legislature funded the SWIM program annually, matched by moneys
raised by the water management districts. This original dedicated annual funding was
ended after the 1997-98 fiscal year. However, many SWIM water bodies have benefited
from significant individual legislative appropriations throughout the years, associated with
the Community Budget Issue Request water project funding process under Section 403.885
F.S. (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/watersheds/swim.htm).
The list of priority water bodies within the SFWMD was updated in January 20031 and
includes the following:
Tier 1'-
• Biscayne Bay
• Florida Keys
• Lake Istokpoga
• Lake Okeechobee
• Lake Trafford
• Lower Charlotte Harbor (including Charlotte Harbor, Estero Bay, and Caloosahatchee
River and Estuary)
• Loxahatchee River
• St. Lucie Estuary
1 Source: FDEP (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/watersheds/swim.htm) Last updated: July 9, 2008.
2 These tiers are used by the SFWMD under the SWIM program. They are not to be confused with the Tier
System used to rank land under the ROGO/NROGO ordinance.
Conservation and Coastal Management 56 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Tier 2
• Florida Bay
• Indian River Lagoon
• Lake Worth Lagoon
• Naples Bay/Gordon River
• Rookery Bay/Marco
Tier 3
• Lake Arbuckle
• Lake Butler
• Lake Weohyakapka
• Upper Kissimmee Chain of Lakes
Within the County, the Florida Keys is identified as a Tier 1 priority, and Florida Bay is
identified as a Tier 2 priority. As of 2010, there are no SWIM Plans for the Florida Keys or
Florida Bay, and none are planned. Surface water improvement planning is accomplished
through the County's Stormwater Management Master Plan and the Florida Keys Water
Quality Improvements Program Management Plan (USACE and SFWMD, 2006) as well as
through FDEP's Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/
water/ watersheds/bmap.htm).
3.5.4.4 Coastal Barriers Resources Pro ram
The Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982 established the Coastal Barrier
Resources System (CBRS). The CBRA legislation is specifically designed to restrict Federal
expenditures and financial assistance which have the effect of encouraging development of
coastal barriers to minimize the loss of human life, reduce the wasteful expenditure of
Federal revenue, and reduce damage to habitat and other valuable natural resources of
coastal barriers. Today, the CBRS is comprised of undeveloped coastal barriers along the
Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts, including the coasts of the Keys, Puerto Rico and the
Virgin Islands. The CBRS includes 25 units listed in the County. Designated Units of the
Coastal Barrier Resource System in the County are listed in Section 3.18.4 (Units of the
Coastal Barriers Resources System). The Federal policy against subsidizing development of
designated coastal barriers has impacted the amount and rate of development of those
units.
Since the intent and effect of the CBRS has been to discourage development (prohibiting
flood insurance and other federal program funds) in the County's designated coastal
barriers, the County should consider whether to maintain the existing comprehensive plan
policies related to the CBRS, or to focus on the development impacts on endangered species
and habitat should unsubsidized development still occur.
L.onservanon ana Loastal Management 57 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe Countv Comprehensive Plan U
3.5.4.5 Monroe County Programs, Plans, and Special Studies that Protect Water
uali
3.5.4.5.1 Monroe County Marine Resources Office
The Monroe County Marine Resources Office (formerly Department of Marine Resources)
was established in 1991. It's mission is to help protect and conserve the marine
environment of the Florida Keys within Monroe County, consistent with the Monroe County
2010 Comprehensive Plan, and provide for the adequate and appropriate use of the Keys'
marine resources.
The focus of the Marine Resources Office is on public water access, provision of maritime
infrastructure, and protection of the marine environment. In support of these objectives,
the Office maintains a Keys -wide system of Aids to Navigation and boating regulatory zones
designed to both assist boaters and protect valuable shallow water resources. In its
coordination with other County offices and State and Federal agencies, the Marine
Resources Office provides vessel launching facilities, disposes of derelict and abandoned
vessels, and addresses a wide variety of public concerns regarding boating issues and
shoreline protection.
3.5.4.5.2 Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan
The County completed a Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan (SWMP) in June 2000 (CH2M
Hill, 2000) to provide an equitable, ecologically sound, and economical implementation
strategy for managing wastewater and improving the water quality in the Florida Keys.
The scope of the SWMP is presented in Chapter 10.0 Sanitary Sewer Element.
3.5.4.5.3 Stormwater Management Master Plan
The County prepared a Stormwater Management Master Plan (SMMP) (Camp, Dresser, and
McKee, 2001) to guide stormwater management facilities. The scope of the SMMP is
presented in Chapter 11.0 Drainage Element.
3.5.4.5.4 Florida Keys Water Quality Improvements Program (FKWQIPZ
On December 21, 2000, Public Law 106-554 authorized the USACE to assist local
municipalities in the County with the development and implementation of wastewater and
stormwater improvements as part of the Florida Keys Water Quality Improvements
Program (FKWQIP). The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) is the non-
federal Sponsor for the FKWQIP. FKWQIP is designed to:
• Reduce nutrient loading to nearshore waters of the FKNMS;
• Improve water quality throughout waters of the FKNMS; and
• Meet relevant federal and State regulatory standards.
Conservation and Coastal Management 58 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan
The FKWQIP will be accomplished through the implementation of several wastewater and
stormwater master plans that have been prepared for the County and other local
municipalities in the County. These plans are designed to provide cost-effective,
environmentally sound, and feasible programs for managing pollutants that are now, or
have the potential to, adversely impact the water quality of the Keys and the FKNMS. The
FKWQIP is intended to provide the technical and financial assistance for planning,
engineering, and construction of wastewater and stormwater treatment improvement
projects (USACE and SFWMD, 2006). A Program Delivery Team has been formed to ensure
effective and coordinated actions are undertaken for successful implementation of the
FKWQIP. Membership of the Program Delivery Team consists of one representative from
each municipal governmental agency in the County as well as State and federal agency
representatives.
3.S.4.6 Federal. State. and Local Regulatory Programs Protecting Water Quality
3.5.4.6.1 Applicable Federal Water Quality Standards
The federal Clean Water Act provides the statutory basis for State water quality standards
programs. The regulatory requirements governing these programs (Water Quality
Standards Regulation) are published in 40 CFR 131, Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act
requires all states to develop a list of priority surface waters that do not meet applicable
water quality standards (impaired waters) after implementation of technology -based
effluent limitations. Florida currently employs narrative nutrient standards to guide the
management and protection of its surface waters; standards that were previously reviewed
and approved by the USEPA. Florida conducts site -specific assessment of the proposed
discharges for a project to determine whether the proposed action will cause an
"imbalance".
In July 2008, several environmental groups initiated a lawsuit to force USEPA to establish
numeric nutrient criteria (versus narrative standards) for all of Florida's surface waters.
By letter dated January 14, 2009, USEPA notified FDEP that numeric water quality
standards for nutrients would be necessary for the State to comply with the requirements
of the Clean Water Act. The State of Florida's efforts to establish primarily freshwater
numeric nutrient criteria had been ongoing for at least six years. With a lawsuit in the
background, the efforts to establish numeric criteria were accelerated and became
litigation driven. On August 19, 2009, USEPA settled the lawsuit by entering into a consent
decree with the environmental groups whereby USEPA agreed to establish numeric
nutrient criteria for all lakes, streams, and canals by January 2010, to be implemented by
October 2010. The deadlines for South Florida canals have been extended until August
2012. In addition, timelines for development of criteria for estuarine and for coastal
waters have also been extended are expected to now be proposed by November 2011 and
promulgated by August 2012. In addition, USEPA will undergo a peer review through its
Scientific Advisory Board for both the South Florida canals as well as estuarine and coastal
waters likely over the next six to twelve months.
Lonservanon and coastal Management 59 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.5.4.6.2 Applicable State Water Quality Standards
FDEP has been delegated the responsibility of reviewing, establishing, and revising the
reclassification of surface waters under Chapter 62, F.A.C. Water quality criteria for Class II
waters are set forth in Rule 62-302.400, F.A.C. The FDEP has classified the nearshore
waters of the County as follows:
• Class II Waters: Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting: from Collier and Miami -Dade
County lines southward to and including that part of Florida Bay within Everglades
National Park.
Current Class II standards allow FDEP to legally issue permits for activities that would
lower water quality to the minimum for that particular water quality classification, but in
recognition of the exceptional ecological and recreational significance of the waters of the
Florida Keys, FDEP has further designated most of the waters of the County as Outstanding
Florida Waters (OFWs), including the following:
• Waters within Biscayne National Park and Everglades National Park;
• Waters within Bahia Honda State Recreation Area, John Pennekamp Coral Reef State
Park, and Long Key State Recreation Area;
• Waters within Lignumvitae Key State Botanical Site and New Mahogany Hammock State
Botanical Site;
• Waters within Biscayne Bay, Card Sound Aquatic Preserve, Coupon Bight Aquatic
Preserve, and Lignumvitae Aquatic Preserve; and
• All Class III waters of the County, excluding the following three areas:
- Key West Sewage Outfall (being a circle 150 feet in radius from the point of
discharge);
- Stock Island Power Plant (being a circle 150 feet in radius from the end of the power
plant discharge canal; and
- Artificial waterbodies, defined as any waterbody created by dredging, or excavation,
or by filling in of its boundaries, including canals as defined in Chapter 62-312, F.A.C.
The OFW designation prohibits any human activity or discharge which will degrade the
existing ambient water quality.
Canals in Monroe County are not part of the OFW designation. There are more than 200
canals and access channels that were dredged from the 1950s to 1970s; FDEP has
specifically designated them an "area of concern".
In May 2010, the State of Florida Enviromental Regulatory Commission approved a new
"Class III limited" designation. The new Class III limited designation is only available for
certain man-made or altered waterbodies, it is not available for any toxic substances, and it
cannot result in any degrading of current water quality. For each waterbody, there will
have to be a determination of what the appropriate uses are for that waterbody, and a
petition for a reclassification will have to include proposed site -specific alternative criteria
that will adequately protect those uses. The Rule also specifically allows local governments
Conservation and Coastal Management 60 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
to have more stringent standards. The new Rule approved by the Enviromental Regulatory
Commission must be approved by USEPA.
In 1999, the Florida Legislature set statutory effluent standards and associated compliance
schedules for existing and new wastewater treatment systems in the County. These
standards address treatment for several water quality constituents and require best
available technology (BAT) standards for flows less than 100,000 gallons per day (gpd) and
advanced wastewater treatment (AWT) standards for design flows greater than 100,000
gpd. The law prohibited new surface water discharges of wastewater and required
elimination of existing surface water discharges by July 1, 2006. These requirements apply
to the owners of the facilities and OSTDS systems, whether they are local governments,
public or private utilities, other private entities, or individual homeowners. Section 6 of
Chapter 99-395, Laws of Florida; requires all new sewage facilities in the County, including
OSTDS permitted after June 18, 1999, to comply with the following standards by July 1,
2010 (USACE and SFWMD, 2006):
Constituent BAT (mg/L) AWT (mg/L)
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) 10 5
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 10 5
Total Nitrogen (TN) 10 3
Total Phosphorus (TP) 1 1
States are required to establish TMDLs which designate the maximum amount of a
pollutant a water body can assimilate without exceeding water quality standards. Chapter
99-223, Laws of Florida, sets forth the process by which the 303(d) list is refined through
more detailed water quality assessments. It also establishes the means for adopting
TMDLs, allocating pollutant loadings among contributing sources, and implementing
pollution reduction strategies. Implementation of TMDLs can include any combination of
regulatory, nonregulatory, or incentive -based actions necessary to reduce pollutant
loading. Non -regulatory or incentive -based actions may include development and
implementation of BMPs, pollution prevention activities, and habitat preservation or
restoration. Regulatory actions may include issuance or revision of wastewater,
stormwater, or environmental resource permits necessary for consistency with the TMDL.
Permit conditions may be quantitative effluent limitations or, for technology -based
programs, a combination of structural and non-structural BMPs necessary for achieving the
desired pollutant load reduction (USACE and SFWMD, 2006).
Florida is comprised of 52 major hydrologic basins, which have been categorized
geographically into TMDL groups, and will be assessed for pollutant levels. The five phases
of the study for each group are as follows:
• Phase I Preliminary Basin Assessment;
• Phase II Strategic Monitoring;
• Phase III Data Analysis and TMDL Development;
• Phase IV Management Action Plan; and
• Phase V Implementation.
Lonservanon and Coastal Management 61 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The Keys are in the fifth group of water bodies to undergo TMDL implementation and were
scheduled to undergo Phase I from 2005 to 2009 (USACE and SFWMD, 2006).
In lieu of a TMDL for Monroe County, a Reasonable Assurance Plan was developed in
December 2008 for the Florida Keys (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/ watersheds/
bmap.htm) to set forth and accelerate the actions that have been taken or are planned to be
taken to reduce nutrient loadings to nearshore waters throughout the Florida Keys so that
water quality standards are met and beneficial uses are restored. The Reasonable
Assurance Plan is based on achieving Total Phosphorus levels of 1 mg/L and Total Nitrogen
levels of 10 mg/L (3 mg/L for AWT standards). The plan was sent to USEPA for review and
comment in February 2009. Because it has not yet been accepted by USEPA, the
Reasonable Assurance Plan is not an accepted alternative to establishing TMDLs under the
Clean Water Act.
The Reasonable Assurance Plan consists of separate documents for four geographical
regions of the Keys. To provide reasonable assurance, the following are provided in the
Plan:
• Description of the Impaired Water;
• Description of the Water Quality and Aquatic Ecological Goals;
• Description of the Proposed Management Actions to Be Undertaken;
• Description of Procedures for Monitoring and Reporting Results; and
• Description of Proposed Corrective Actions.
The Plan identifies the applicable standard as Chapter 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C. - "in no
case shall nutrient concentrations of a water body be altered so as to cause an imbalance of
natural populations offlora and fauna."
Since the farfield sources (see Section 3.5.2) dominate the nutrient concentrations in
nearshore waters, the water quality target is defined to be "an insignificant concentration at
500 meters increase above natural background, insignificant means less than 10 µg/L for
Total Nitrogen and 2 µg/L for Total Phosphorus and background means the Halo Zone (an
area from the coastline to offshore within which the impairment has been defined) condition
in the absence of anthropogenic loads. Another target is that the nearshore ambient nutrient
concentrations at 500 meters average less than the ambient concentrations measured for the
Outstanding Florida Water designation". The Plans identify management actions for each
geographical area of the Keys to reduce nutrient loads.
3.5.5 Impacts of the Future Land Use Plan on Water Quality
Natural and man-made pollutant loadings will determine the future quality of the waters of
the Florida Keys. Man-made loadings will be most affected by the level of population
growth, the spatial distribution of the increased population, required treatment efficiencies
Conservation and Coastal Management 62 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
of wastes from the existing and additional populations, and selected disposal mechanisms
for wastewater (CSA, 1991).
Nutrient loadings are expected to be reduced through implementation of nutrient effluent
and water quality standards. County water quality levels of service, particularly for OSTDS
nutrient removal, have become stricter following completion of the Sanitary Wastewater
Management Plan and the Stormwater Management Master Plan. Other programs
targeting specific nutrient loading sources of the County, combined with State and federal
actions resulting from implementation of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
Program, are also expected to further reduce loadings.
Recent direction of USEPA to promulgate numeric nutrient criteria for all lakes, streams,
and canals by January 2010 (and to be implemented by October 2010, with criteria for
coastal waters to be established by January 2011 and implemented by October 2011) will
result in more requirements for proposed new development. With a numeric standard, the
issuance of an NPDES permit will be a comparison of proposed discharge numbers versus
actual benchmark numbers and it is likely future development will have to meet more
stringent water quality standards.
3.6 Fresh Surface Water Resources [Rule 9J-5.013 (1) (a)1. and (b), F.A.C.]
3.6.1 Occurrence of Fresh Surface Water Resources
Within the Keys, there are no natural freshwater lakes or streams. Rainfall is the only
natural source of freshwater in the Keys. Discharge is by evapotranspiration, surface
runoff, pumpage, and lateral seepage from the shallow groundwater table. On most islands,
groundwater throughflow moves quickly down -gradient into marine nearshore waters. In
many areas, mosquito control ditches and canals dug from the coast to inland parts of the
islands to obtain fill for housing construction, have reduced the historical residence times
of freshwater on the islands, thereby accelerating surface water runoff (Schomer and Drew,
1982; Hanson, 1980). On the mainland, the freshwater of the Everglades flow into Florida
Bay.
In areas on several larger islands in the Lower Keys, freshwater infiltrating from the
surface enters the groundwater table and forms freshwater lenses (see Chapter 12.0
Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element). The size of these lenses is controlled by
rainfall, freshwater discharge (seepage, pumpage, runoff, and evapotranspiration),
response to tidal fluctuations, proximity to saltwater bodies, permeability of the subsurface
materials, and elevation of the island above sea level (Klein, 1970; Hanson, 1980).
Permanent freshwater lenses occur on the larger keys, specifically Key West and Big Pine
Key. Ephemeral or brackish lenses are present on the smaller keys, including Sugarloaf
Key, Little Torch Key, Cudjoe Key, No Name Key, Little Pine Key, and Ramrod Key. The
Lower Keys are more likely to have lenses because of their geometry and geology (see
Chapter 12.0 Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element). On many of these keys,
Conservation and Coastal Management 63 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
freshwater wetlands are associated with these freshwater lenses [see Section 3.9.7
(Freshwater Wetlands) below].
The Keys contain natural, shallow, inland depressions that collect rainwater but also fill
with salt water directly from the sea. With evaporation, the water in these depressions can
become very saline and these depressions are termed salt ponds. Historically, some salt
ponds were improved to capture the flow of seawater and were used to harvest salt (see
Section 3.9.6 (Salt Ponds).
3.7 Floodplains [Rule 9J-5.013(1)(a)2. and (b), F.A.C.]
3.7.1 Floodplain Occurrences
Most of the land area in the Florida Keys is 2 to 3 feet above high tide. Maximum elevations
reach 18 feet in two locations. As a result, the Keys are extremely susceptible to storm
flooding.
Floodwater sources potentially affecting the Keys include the Atlantic Ocean, Florida Bay,
Biscayne Bay, and the Gulf of Mexico. In general, coastal areas which border these water
bodies are subject to storm surge flooding as a result of hurricane and tropical storm
activity. Large tidal surges, combined with wave action and heavy rainfall that accompany
these storms, can result in severe flooding.
In 1989, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) completed a detailed coastal
flooding analysis of the complete coastline of the County (FEMA, 1989). This study
investigated the existence and severity of flood hazards. Floodplain maps and flood
elevations were developed. Analyses were carried out to establish the peak elevation -
frequency relations for each flooding source. Hydraulic analyses, considering storm
characteristics and the shoreline and bathymetric characteristics of the flooding sources,
were completed to provide estimates of the elevations of floods of the selected recurrence
intervals along all shorelines in the Keys (FEMA, 1989).
Map Series 3.2 depicts the flood zones present in the County. Flood zone designations
which have been assigned to areas within the County are:
• Zone AE - A Special Flood Hazard Area subject to inundation by the 1 percent annual
chance flood (the 1 percent annual chance flood, also known as the 100-year flood or
base flood, is the flood that has a 1 percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any
given year.) In Zone AE, the base flood elevations are determined (derived from
detailed hydraulic analyses).
• Zone VE - A Special Flood Hazard Area subject to inundation by the 1 percent annual
chance flood. In Zone VE, the base flood elevations are determined (derived from
detailed hydraulic analyses) and there are additional coastal hazards associated with
storm wave action.
Conservation and Coastal Management 64 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Zone X - An area determined to be outside the 0.2 percent annual chance flood. Also
includes areas subject to inundation by the 0.2 percent annual chance flood, areas of 1
percent annual chance flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage
areas less than 1 square mile, and areas protected by levees from 1 percent annual
chance flood.
3.7.2 Existing Commercial, Recreational, or Conservation Uses in Floodplains
Because of the extensive nature of the 100-year floodplain (Zone VE and Zone AE) in the
Florida Keys, most developed land uses within the Keys lie within the flood zone.
Conservation lands are almost exclusively located on land within the 100-year floodplain.
Only a few keys have land which lies above the 100-year flood elevation (within Zone X).
This includes residential and commercial land along U.S. 1 on Key Largo, Plantation Key,
Windley Key and Upper Matecumbe Key, comprised of a strip encompassing the highway
right-of-way and adjacent lands.
3.7.3 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Flooding Hazard
The potential for surface water contamination from flooding in the Keys arises primarily
from the widespread use of poorly functioning OSTDS or complete lack of a system. When
flooded, these systems typically can provide little or no treatment and wastewater is
discharged relatively untreated into the soil or directly into adjacent surface waters. This
condition persists following subsidence of flood waters until soil moisture is reduced to
normal levels. Pollutant loadings to surface water from urban runoff would be elevated
during major storms.
The potential for surface water contamination from flooding also exists where hazardous
materials and hazardous wastes are stored. Aboveground and underground storage tanks,
if constructed and maintained according to current State and federal regulations, should be
adequately protected from rupture by flood waters and should not constitute a serious
threat of contamination. However, a number of tanks in the Florida Keys have leaked and
are part of the State cleanup program. While most are rated as providing a low threat to
public health and safety and are low on the cleanup priority list, the fuel contaminants -
which contain a number of known carcinogens - remain in soil and groundwater and are
flushed into nearshore waters during flood events.
Sea level rise will exacerbate flooding hazards.
3.7.4 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Floodplains
Because most of the Keys are located within the 100-year floodplain, potential activities for
conservation, use or protection of floodplain are related to those which:
Conservation and Coastal Management 65 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• prevent disturbances to areas which provide critical flood water storage and filtration
functions, including mangroves, salt ponds, saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands, and
freshwater wetlands;
• prevent excessive clearing and disturbance to natural upland vegetation within the
floodplain; and
• minimize the alteration of natural drainage patterns within the floodplain.
Lands that retain natural floodplain functions or water storage and filtration should be
retained where possible, in their natural condition. In the Keys these include all wetlands.
Development activity should be directed away from areas of high quality upland vegetation
which lies in the floodplain, including hardwood hammocks and pinelands. Land clearing,
grading and filling should not disturb natural drainage patterns.
3.8 Living Marine Resources [Rule 9J-5.013(1)(a) and (b), F.A.C.]
The waters of the Florida Keys include three unique and critically important marine
biological communities (CSA, 1991):
• mangrove forests along the shorelines of the Keys;
• seagrass beds (estimated to be among the largest in the world) located off mainland
Florida, on both sides of the Keys, extending offshore to the reef tract; and
• The Florida reef tract, containing the only true coral reefs within the continental United
States.
For the inventory of mangrove habitats, the County's Geographic Inventory System (GIS)
was examined. For each parcel within the Florida Keys3, the GIS databases include
separate files for natural habitats, conservation lands (County -owned lands), existing land
use, property ownership from the County Property Appraiser, presence of listed species,
tier designation, and wetlands identified by the Advance Identification of Wetlands
Program (ADID). Because the County files did not identify those parcels contained within
parks and refuges (e.g., John Pennecamp Coral Reef State Park), the Florida Managed Land
Use database was obtained from the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI). In addition to
parks and refuges, this database identifies local and non-profit conservation lands. All of
these databases were combined into one file so that information could be generated for
each parcel and the combined databases could be queried. Habitat type (land use) was the
governing attribute (e.g., tropical hardwood hammock) and key characteristics were
generated and summarized for each land use: the acreage of parcels within the given
habitat, tier designations, and ownership (public, private, non-profit, utility, or military).
The analysis was compiled separately for the Upper, Middle, and Lower Keys. A similar
analysis was completed for future land uses [see Section 3.22 (Effects of Future Land Uses
on the Coastal Environment)].
I Because the mainland portion of the County is comprised of the federally -owned Everglades National Part,
and Big Cypress National Preserve, the inventory of natural habitats did not include these lands.
Conservation and Coastal Management 66 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Due to the combination of the various databases, the GIS analysis for existing conditions
revealed some inconsistencies. The database for the identification and extent of natural
habitats and the database for the presence of listed species was compiled and generated by
the USFWS; the database for the ADID was generated by the USACE/USEPA using hand -
drawn maps that were then digitized; the Tier Overlay Ordinance maps were generated
using parcel data from the County Property Appraiser's maps. The combination of these
databases demonstrated that the various mapping methods yielded areas that could not be
reconciled (i.e., the maps did not line up exactly). This led to the generation of areas that
did not have corresponding data attributes. These areas accounted for approximately 1-3
percent of the given land use type. Given the small area, the County decided to omit these
areas from the analysis. Similarly, while the ADID is useful for the examination of wetlands
present on an individual parcel, it could not be used for the analysis because the mapping
information did not correspond to parcel information.
Map Series 3.3 depicts the terrestrial habitats in the County. Detailed mapping of the coral
communities and seagrass beds of the Florida Keys has been conducted under the FKNMS
Management Plan and its ongoing WQPP. The map of benthic habitats from the
Management Plan is depicted in Map Series 3.4.
3.8.1 Mangroves
The natural margins of the Florida Keys are characterized as dense, low forests occurring
along relatively flat, intertidal and supratidal shorelines of low wave energy along Florida
coasts (FNAI, 1990). Approximately 234,000 acres of mangroves are found within the
County, the majority lying within the boundaries of Everglades National Park and the small
islands in Florida Bay (Meyers and Ewe], 1990). Approximately 23,000 acres of mangroves
are present in the unincorporated parts of the Keys (Upper, Middle, and Lower).
3.8.1.1 Flora of Mangrove Communities
The mangrove community is comprised of a diverse association of salt tolerant plants that
provide food and habitat for a characteristic fauna. The major environmental conditions
that characterize mangrove communities are:
• loose, wet, saline soil;
• periodic tidal submergence;
• occasional tropical storms and/or hurricanes; and
• low -energy wave and current regimes.
In South Florida and the Keys, three species of mangroves occur. Red Mangrove
(Rhizophora mangle) has characteristic stilt, prop and aerial roots and bears the cigar -
shaped, viviparous seedlings, and is located at the lowest elevations supporting mangrove
communities. Black Mangrove (Avicennia germinans) has pneumatophores (breathing
roots) and gray -green leaves encrusted with excreted salts. White Mangrove (Laguncularia
racemosa) has rounded leaves with a pair of salt glands on the petiole. Black and White
uunservauon ana Loastai Management 67 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Mangroves occupy slightly -higher elevations than Red Mangroves. Buttonwood
(Conocarpus erectus) is often associated with mangroves but is not considered a mangrove
itself. It occurs more frequently in the transitional zone that lies on slightly higher ground
between the mangroves and upland systems. Other plants commonly associated with the
mangroves include a number of fleshy halophytes, such as Saltwort (Batis maritima) and
Glasswort (Salicornia virginica).
Four major factors limit the distribution of mangroves and determine the extent of
mangrove ecosystem development: climate; salt water; tidal fluctuation; and substrate
(Odum et al., 1982). Mangroves do not develop where the annual average temperature is
below 66 degrees Fahrenheit or where water temperatures exceed 107 degrees to 113
degrees Fahrenheit Mangroves are facultative halophytes, which do not thrive in
freshwater environments because they are not able to compete successfully with other
plants in that environment. However, they can be found locally in freshwater systems.
Hurricanes have blown propagules of red mangrove far into the Everglades where they
have become well -established (e.g., Nine -Mile Pond).
Lugo and Snedaker (1974) and FNAI classifies mangrove systems into six subtypes based
upon their physical structure and hydrologic flushing: overwash forest, fringe swamps,
riverine swamps, basin swamps, hammock swamps, and scrub swamps. However, the land
use maps for the County are based on the Advance Identification of Wetlands (ADID)
categories [see Section 3.9.2 (Monroe County Advance Identification of Wetlands (ADID)
Program)] and distinguish only between Scrub Mangroves and Mangroves (which include
the other subtypes). The inventory of mangroves is shown in Table 3.5. The inventory of
scrub mangroves is shown in Table 3.6. There are a total of 31,800.2 acres of mangrove
and scrub mangrove habitat in unincorporated parts of the Keys (Upper, Middle, and
Lower). Most of the mangrove habitats (85.8 percent) are publicly -owned or owned by
non-profit organizations and 14.2 percent are privately owned. Similarly, most of the scrub
mangroves (81.2 percent) are publicly -owned or owned by non-profit organizations and
18.8 percent are privately owned.
3.8.1.1.1 Overwash Mangrove Swamps
Overwash swamps are found on small keys or peninsulas. In many cases, overwash forest
is the only community on a small island. These swamps are regularly overwashed by tides
and often contain no land that rises above mean high water. All three mangrove species
may be present, but Red Mangroves are usually the dominant form, with canopy height
ranging as high as 20 to 25 feet. Because of the regular tide sheet overflow, leaf litter does
not accumulate and organic export rates are high.
3.8.1.1.2 Fringe Mangrove Swamps
Fringe swamps form a relatively narrow fringe along waterways and embayments along
low -energy shorelines. Mangrove islands are included in this category. They are variable
in width and canopy height, with trees typically widely spaced and medium to large
(ranging as high as 20 to 30 feet in height). They exhibit traditional zonation patterns. Low
Conservation and Coastal Management 68 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
tide and current velocities allow for colonization by mangroves and for the import and
subsequent accumulation of sediments. The prop roots of Red Mangrove and the
pneumatophores of Black Mangrove are particularly effective in sediment accumulation.
Fringing swamps that face open bodies of water to the north accumulate vast amounts of
detritus, much of which is generated by the productive nearshore seagrass communities.
The organic sediments that accumulate within the fringe forest are often strongly
anaerobic, comprised of a mixture of organic sediments and coarse, calcareous sand. In
these soils, Black Mangroves tend to dominate, probably because their pneumatophores
allow access by underground portions of the tree to atmospheric gases. In fringe swamps,
populations of succulent, salt tolerant plants often form a dense ground cover, most
commonly including Saltwort and Glasswort.
3.8.1.1.3 Riverine Mangrove Swamps
Riverine swamps occur along creeks and rivers on the mainland. In the Keys, they occur
only along tidal creeks. All three species of mangroves may occur, but the dominant form is
usually Red Mangrove. On the mainland, this forest contains the largest trees of all the
forest types, with canopy heights in excess of 60 feet; however, in the Keys the structure is
similar to that of the fringe forest. Regular tidal influence promotes relatively high rates of
nutrient export.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 69 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
,
Lower Keys
Bahia Honda State Park
171.2
KD
Florida Keys Wildlife and
263.0
0.5
0.1
12.0
KD, MR, SR
Environmental Areaz
Great White Heron
1,285.0
176.9
0.8
2.3
33.5
KD, MR, SR
National Wildlife Refuge
John J. Pescatello
TOFchwood Hammock
29.5
KD
Preserve
Monroe County Managed
18.3
0.2
KD, SR
Areas
National Key Deer Refuge
3,667.4
53.9
0.4
KD, SR
Naval Air Station
1,064.5
0.1
14.9
MR
Saddlebunch Key
2.6
SR
Sanctuary
Saddle BunchKe s
158.2
SR
Outside of Parks/Refuges
213.0
327.9
147.4
111.9
0.2
156.7
1,920.3
Lower Keys Total
9,832.7
6,229.9
1,011.3
148.7
304.6
077156.7
1,981.3
Middle Keys
Lignumvitae Key
25.8
Botanical State Park
Long Key State Park
524.8
0.4
Outside of Parks/Refuges
7.0
1.6
0.3'
101.8
Middle Keys Total
661.7
557.6
2.0
0.3
101.8
Upper Keys
Crocodile Lake National
5,232.8
64.9
0.1
30.7
12.9
SS, TS, IS,
Wildlife Refuge
WR, CM, TC
Crocodile Lake Sanctuary
12.7
0.1
102.6
Cross Key
125.8
Dagney Johnson Key
SS, IS,
Largo Hammock
1.4
722.9
0.1
WR, CM, TC
C
Botanical State Park
Everglades National
805.7
10.4
Park6
Florida Keys Wildlife and
275.2
0.1
1.6
Environmental Areal
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 70 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.5 - inventorof
Man
gurrove
Hanitats i continued
Site Name
Total'
Ownership
Noll-
Federal
State County
Profit
Cities Utilities
Private
Species
Recorded5
John Pennecamp Coral
Reef State Park
0.1
2,911.1 0.3
36.9
Monroe County
Managed Areas
73.5
0.7
Naval Air Station
24.2
Tarpon Basin
9.7
3.8
461.3
Outside of
SS, TS, IS,
Parks/Refuges
118.9
192.8
49.8
40.4
112.81
1,133.6
WR, CM,
TC
Upper Keys Total
12,569.9
6,205.5
4,254.7
50.3
760.8
0
112.8
1,185.8
Total County
23,064.3
12,435.4
5,823.E 1
201.0 1
1,065.4
0.2
269.8 13,268.91
unincorporated areas only.
1 Site names are from the FNAI GIS database.
Z Florida Keys Wildlife and Environmental Areas are managed by the FFWCC for the preservation of listed
species that inhabit mangroves, tropical hardwood hammocks, and salt marshes.
3 Total in acres.
4 Ownership information is from the Monroe County Property Appraiser.
s Species recorded are those threatened and endangered species recorded by the USFWS for a particular
parcel; a blank cell does not necessarily indicate an absence of protected species on that parcel(s).
SS = Schaus Swallowtail Butterfly; TS = Tree Snail; IS = Eastern Indigo Snake; WR = Key Largo Woodrat; CM
= Key Largo Cottonmouse; SR = Silver Rice Rat; KD = Key Deer; TC = Tree Cactus
6 Portion of the Everglades National Park that extends into Florida Bay; acreage does not necessarily include
Mainland habitats.
Florida Keys Aqueduct Commission
a Florida Keys Mosquito Control District
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
uonservanon and coastal Management 71 Technical! Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.6 - Inventory of Scrub Mangrove Habitats
Site Nanic Totol I-ederill Staw Comm, Noll- Cities Ljtifitie.'� Privat'(Species
Profit Recorded
Lower Keys
Bahia Honda State
Park
22.5
KD, MR
Florida Keys
Wildlife and
Environmental
626.8
0.8
0.1
11.5
KD, MR, SR
Areaz
Great White Heron
National Wildlife
1,652.6
18.7
0.1
16.7
KD, MR, SR
Refuge
John J. Pescatello
Torchwood
92.8
KD, MR
Hammock Preserve
Monroe County
Managed Areas
29.3
KD, SR
National Key Deer
Refuge
2,467.6
200.5
4.0
KD, MR, SR
Naval Air Station
593.1
0.8
MR, SR
Saddlebunch Key
Sanctuary
18.6
MR, SR
Saddle Bunch Keys
70.5
KD, MR, SR
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
166.0
617.5
193.8
25.5
1,586.3
KD, MR, SR
Lower Keys Total
8,416.1
4,879.3
1,515.3
194.6
207.6
0
0
1,619.3
Middle Keys
Long Key State Park
25.9
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
3.2
Middle Keys Total
29.1
25.9
3.2
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 72 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.6 - Inve
UPPCI 11C S
Crocodile Lake
National Wildlife
62.0
Refuge
Crocodile Lake
Sanctuary
7.7
23.4
Dagney Johnson
Key Largo
Hammock
6.3
Botanical State
Park
Everglades
National Park6
93.2
Florida Keys
Wildlife and
Environmental
8.2
Areaz
John Pennecamp
Coral Reef State
92.7
0.5
Park
Monroe County
Managed Areas
0.1
Tarpon Basin
1.6
3.1
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
2.4
5.7
2.9
31.2
Upper Keys Total
341.0
166.9
113.0
2.9
26.5
0
0
31.7
Total
County
8,786.2
5,046.2
1,654.2
197.5
234.1
0
0
1,654.2
r oo LnOLes same as I au1C 3.5
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 73 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.8.1.1.4 Basin Mangrove Swamps
Basin swamps typically occur in the Keys where large shallow depressions in the caprock
foster the accumulation of soil and channelize tidal flow. Most are located on Key Largo.
Basin forest structure is similar to overwash swamps, but the Red Mangrove is not as
dominant. The occurrence of Black and White Mangroves becomes more frequent with
increasing soil elevation and diminishing tidal influence.
3.8.1.1.5 Hammock Swamps
Hammock Swamps are similar to Basin Swamps except they occur at higher elevations.
They receive less frequent tidal flushing. Like Basin Swamps, Black and White Mangroves
become more dominant as hydrological conditions become drier. They may grade into
Buttonwood forest types.
3.8.1.1.6 Scrub or Dwarf Mangroves
Scrub or dwarf mangroves are best developed in the Lower Keys. These communities lack
the canopy height and high productivity characteristic of the other forest types. Both the
scrub and dwarf associations are characterized by small trees (generally less than five feet
tall) with an understory of scattered, salt tolerant shrubs, herbs, and grasses. The scrub
community generally contains all three species of mangrove but is usually dominated by
Black Mangroves. Most trees are widely spaced and stunted. Dwarf mangrove associations
contain trees less than five feet in height, with less distance between trees than in scrub
swamps. The association is dominated by dwarfed Red Mangroves. Both the scrub and
dwarf swamps occur in intertidal areas that occur on marl substrates and do not
experience daily tidal flushing. The minimal flushing may be attributable to natural
waterward impediments to flow or to a great spatial separation from open water that
alternates tidal flow. Dwarf Red Mangroves appear to occur on slightly lower elevations
than scrub black mangroves.
In many areas of the Lower Keys (e.g. Sugarloaf, Saddlebunch and Torch Keys), scrub and
dwarf swamps occur where a number of conditions exist making it difficult for mangroves
to colonize. The oolitic caprock is emergent in these areas, providing limited opportunity
for soil accumulation. Where soils do occur, they are characteristically thin, saline marls
within shallow caprock depressions. Due to the lack of regular tidal flushing, soils often
become hypersaline during the dry season and dilute during the wet season. Propagules
are less likely to reach these areas since they are dispersed by the tides.
3.8.1.2 Fauna of Mangrove Communities
Wildlife found in Mangrove Communities is discussed in Section 3.12.1.1 (Wildlife Typically
Inhabiting Mangrove Communities).
Conservation and Coastal Management 74 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.8.1.3 Existing Commercial Recreational or Conservation Uses of Mangroves
3.8.1.3.1 Uses in Mangroves on Private Lands
Section 118-4 of the Monroe County LDRs does not permit any development activities,
except with a written deviation issued by the County Biologist, in all mangroves, freshwater
wetlands, and undisturbed saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands. A 100 percent open space
requirement is specified.
Section 118-10 (4)(a) of the LDRs provides further protection to mangroves by specifying
the restrictions for projects located in mangroves. Only docks and docking facilities, boat
ramps, walkways, water access walkways, water observation platforms, boat shelters, non -
enclosed gazebos, riprap, seawalls, bulkheads, and utility pilings are permitted on or over
mangroves, wetlands, and submerged lands. Mangrove trimming is permitted by FDEP
pursuant to the Mangrove Trimming and Preservation Act (Sections 403.9321-403.9333,
F.A.C.) The SFWMD can also authorize mangrove trimming (and alteration) as part of an
environmental resource permit. These regulations restrict mangrove trimming to the
minimal alteration necessary to maintain navigation in existing navigable channels and
canals, where necessary to allow an upland owner limited ingress and egress to open
waters, and/or to maintain views of the water. Current regulations specify the heights and
amount of trimming. In addition, a certified professional mangrove trimmer must conduct
the work. Mangrove alteration is defined as anything other than mangrove trimming.
3.8.1.3.2 Conservation Lands Encompassing Large Tracts of Mangroves
Conservation lands in the Florida Keys that encompass large tracts of mangroves include:
• Everglades National Park;
• Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary;
• National Key Deer Refuge;
• Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuge;
• Key West National Wildlife Refuge;
• Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge;
• John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park;
• Lignumvitae Key Aquatic Preserve;
• Biscayne Bay -Card Sound Aquatic Preserve;
• Coupon Bight Aquatic Preserve; and
• Coupon Bight State Aquatic Preserve.
3.8.1.4 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Mangroves
Until 1975, mangroves habaitats in the Florida Keys were filled routinely for purposes of
providing dry land for development. In 1986, the County adopted its current LDRs which
effectively stopped such activities in the Keys.
iu %.vaINwi Management 75 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Pollution problems and other concerns related to mangroves which remain today include:
• problems related to mangrove trimming by private landowners;
• problems related to removal of fringing shoreline mangroves for construction of
shoreline structures, particularly docks;
• problems related to water quality deterioration in the nearshore environment as a
result of existing population levels and practices;
• problems related to marine debris; and
• problems related to sea level rise.
Mangrove trimming may be allowable under permit or permit exemptions from FDEP to
maintain navigational access or water views. However, there are occasional reports of
some homeowners and business owners that perform unauthorized mangrove trimming,
which may damage the mangroves if done improperly.
Fringing shoreline mangroves occur along much of the Keys' unaltered open water
shorelines as well as along altered shorelines and shorelines of artificial waterways. Where
mangroves are growing in partially built -out residential subdivisions, they provide
biological functions locally beneficial to nearshore water quality and wildlife. Typically,
when development occurs on lots with shoreline mangroves, the developer/landowner
seeks to stabilize the shoreline, to backfill, and to construct shoreline structures and/or
structures over the water, such as docks. Current LDRs limit this type of development
disturbance in mangroves, but unauthorized alteration occurs.
To date there are no documented reports of mangrove losses in the Keys due to water
quality. Mangroves are generally insensitive to nutrient loading and are not adversely
affected by highly eutrophic waters (CSA, 1991; Odum and McIvor, 1990). However, some
studies have revealed sensitivities to certain contaminants. Mangroves, particularly red
mangroves, are highly susceptible to herbicides (CSA, 1991; Teas and Kelly, 1975).
Petroleum and petroleum byproducts have deleterious effects on mangroves due to the
toxic effects of oil and to the prevention of aeration caused by clogging of root lenticels and
pneumatophores (CSA, 1991; Lewis 1980; de la Cruz, 1982). Mangroves can be killed by
heavy suspended loads of fine, flocculent material which clog root lenticels and
pneumatophores (CSA, 1991).
3.8.1.5 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Mangroves
The FKNMS Management Plan provides the basis for future federal, state and local
conservation activities affecting the resources of the FKNMS, including its mangrove
forests. The Plan identifies the regulatory strategies and alternative institutional
responsibilities for resource protection. It includes a plan for public education regarding
mangrove conservation, as well as recommendations for a mangrove research program.
This has been completed through a memorandum of agreement with NOAA, USEPA,
SFWMD, and FDEP.
Conservation and Coastal Management 76 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.8.2 Seagrass Beds
The seagrass community is a highly productive, faunally rich system that covers an area
larger than any other ecosystem in the County (see Map Series 3.4). Research from the
FKNMS WQPP has identified three million acres of Seagrass beds that lie within and
adjacent to the FKNMS. Some variability in seagrass cover and abundance has been
identified since the monitoring program began in 1996, although populations seem
relatively stable (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007). Seagrass meadows are important
in stabilizing sediments that would otherwise exist as shifting sand and mud. Thus, they
are critical in preventing, or at least retarding, the erosion of continental materials to the
deep ocean. They are also highly productive systems and provide habitat to a wide variety
of commercial and recreational species as feeding grounds, nurseries, and refuges from
predation. Their position at the base of detrital food webs provides food for various
organisms. The seagrasses themselves act as substrates for epiphytic algae, which are an
important component of the Seagrass food webs.
In areas where seagrass beds are patchy, between seagrass beds, and in the intertidal zone,
the bottom is typically composed of sediment including sand and mud. These areas of
unconsolidated sediment provide habitat for many species, especially invertebrates, and
are an important habitat in the food web.
3.8.2.1 Flora of Seagrass Beds
The seagrass beds in the County are dominated by three species: Turtle Grass (Thalassia
testudinum), Manatee Grass (Syringodium filiforme), and Shoal Grass (Halodule wrightii).
These species persist from year to year in the same general location and form large,
complex, and extremely significant biological habitats. These grasses make up
approximately 95 percent of the total submerged vegetation biomass in the FKNMS (U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1995).
Turtle grass is the most robust and widespread of the seagrasses, forming extensive
meadows throughout its range. It is a climax species, and as such, is considered the
primary producer of the seagrass community. Manatee Grass is more surficially rooted
than Turtle Grass and rarely forms extensive meadows, occurring most commonly mixed
with other species or in small dense monospecific patches. Shoal Grass is found primarily
in disturbed or less stable areas that have little Turtle Grass or Manatee Grass and is an
important early colonizer of such sites and in seagrass restoration areas. It thrives in water
too shallow or too deep for the other species and is the most tolerant to variations in
temperature and salinity (Zieman, 1982; Livingston, 1990). Less common seagrass species
include three species of Halophila (Halophila decipiens, H. engelmanni, and H. johnsonh).
Grassbed distribution is determined primarily by factors influencing light intensity, current
velocity, and sediment depth. Turtle Grass requires sediment depths of from 3 to 20 inches
(Scoffin, 1970; Zieman, 1972) for optimum growth. Areas with thin sediments may be
-1-11 ally uuasuu management 77 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
more readily colonized by less -selective Shoal Grass or species from the hardbottom
community (Florida DNR, 1991a).
Monitoring of benthic communities by the National Undersea Research Center and the
University of North Carolina at Wilmington has documented that algae of various species
are present in bottom habitats at all sites throughout the FKNMS, notably members of the
genera Halimeda, Penicillus, Caulerpa, Rhipocephalus, and Udotea. These species are early
colonizers of marine sediments which act to stabilize the substrate so that seagrasses may
become established bottom habitats at all sites throughout the FKNMS. They are highly
variable, depending on the region being surveyed and the time of year. Among the many
species of benthic macroalgae commonly seen in FKNMS waters, several have creeping
rhizoids that help anchor them in sediments, while others are capable of forming large
mats. Laurencia, a genus of drift red algae, also commonly occurs in grassbeds. Seagrass
leaves also provide substrate for some 66 species of epiphytic algae (Ballantine and Humm,
1975).
3.8.2.2 Fauna of Seagrass Beds
The seagrass beds are transitional habitats between the coral reef and mangrove habitats.
As such, they are important to many species of both ecosystems. They provide abundant
food and shelter for a myriad species of fish, and invertebrates. They represent the richest
nursery and feeding grounds in South Florida's coastal waterways. In addition to
representing a primary resource for grazers, seagrasses provide vast amounts of energy via
detritus that may cycle internally or be exported to mangrove or coral reef communities.
Faunal constituents of the marine grassbed community include a diversity of microscopic
zooplankton, infauna, epiphytic biota, invertebrates, fishes, and mammals. Infaunal
organisms live buried in sediments and include a variety of polychaetes, burrowing
crustaceans, tube -dwelling annelids, and mollusks. Representative benthic species include
gastropods such as horse conch (Pleuroploca gigantea) and echinoderms such as the
cushion sea star (Oreaster reticulatus) and cornet star (Echinaster sentus). Soft corals are
rare because of the relative lack of hard bottom for attachment and stony corals are
represented by only a few species including rose coral (Manicina areolata), tube coral
(Cladacora arbuscula), and various species of finger corals (Porites spp.). The only reptile
for which seagrass constitutes a principal feeding habitat is the Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia
mydas). A large number of birds feed extensively in shallow seagrass meadows:
Common Name species Name Preferred Feeding Tide
Waders
Great Blue Heron
Ardea herodias
Low
Great White Heron
A. herodias
Low
Great Egret
Casmerodius albus
Low
Snmvy Egret
E retta thula
Low
Little Blue Heron
E. caerulea
Low
Tricolored Heron
E. tricolor
Low
Reddish Egret
E. ru escens
Lo\v
Conservation and Coastal Management 78 Technical Document: MayZU11
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Common Name
White Ibis
Species Name
Eudocimus albus
Preferred Feeding Tide
Low
Roseate Spoonbill
A'aia a •a "a
Low
Black -bellied Plover
Pluvialis s uatarola
Low
Wilson's Plover
Charadrius wilsonia
Low
Semi almated Plover
C. semi almatus
Low
Willet
Cato tro horus semi almatus
Low
Ruddy Turnstone
Arenaria inter res
Low
Red Knot
Calidris canutus
Low
Western Sandier
C. mauri
Low
Least Sandier
C. minutilla
Low
Dunlin
C. al ina
Low
Short -billed Dowitcher
Limnodromus riseus
Low
Swimmers
Horned Grebe winter only)
Podice s auritus
High
American White Pelican
(winter only)
Pelecanus erythrorhynchos
High
Double -crested Cormorant
Phalacrocorax auritus
High
Red -breasted Merganser Mer us serrator High
Flying Plungers
Brown Pelican
Osprey
Bald Ea le
Pelecanus occiden tails
Pandion haliaetus
Haliaeetus leucoce halus
Hi h
High
High
Lau hin Gull
Larus atricilla
High
Rm -billed Gull winter onl
Herrin Gull winter onl
L. delawarensis
L. ar entatus
High
High
Ro al Tern
Forster's Tern winter only)
Least Tern summer only)
Sterna maxima
S. Lorsteri
S. antillarum
High
Hi h
Hi h
--- --____.....,.,_. .Y ,, },,.,,,,.- Ulf Ica IIill jig, 17ao (wirn current taxonomy)
Seagrass beds support several commercially important species vital to South Florida's
shrimp fishery. Although the brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus) and the pink -spotted shrimp
(P. braziliensis) are present in Gulf waters, the pink shrimp (P. duorarum) is the most
important commercially. It is the dominant species within the Dry Tortugas shrimping
grounds and in Florida Bay. Juvenile shrimp spend 2-7 months in the bay's seagrass
nursery grounds before moving into the deeper shrimping grounds (U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1995). Section 3.14 (Fisheries) discusses the numerous fish common to
seagrass beds. Seagrass beds are especially important for juvenile fishes, providing both
food and refuge. The West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus) and the Bottlenose
Dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) also commonly utilize seagrass communities, whether
consuming it directly (manatees) or indirectly by feeding on the various fishes and
invertebrates that use it for refuge.
-1-11 a,iu 1_uaswi management 79 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.8.2.3 Existing Commercial, Recreational, or Conservation Uses of Seagrass Beds
Recreational boating and fishing are the primary activities that occur in seagrass beds in
the Florida Keys. Popular sportfishing in seagrass beds is for tarpon (Megalops atlanticus),
bonefish (Albula vulpes), and permit (Trachinotus falcatus).
The FKNMS encompasses all of the submerged lands and waters of the Florida Keys
extending from the mean high water mark to the offshore FKNMS boundary. This lies at
the approximate 300-foot depth contour line (Public Law 101-965). The FKNMS overlaps
four national wildlife refuges, six state parks, three state aquatic preserves, and has
incorporated the Key Largo and Looe Key National Marine Sanctuaries. Everglades
National Park, Biscayne National Park, and Dry Tortugas National Park are excluded from
FKNMS waters, but each shares a contiguous boundary with the FKNMS. All seagrass beds
within these designated FKNMS boundaries are protected and subject to management
through the FKNMS Management Plan and the FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program
[see Sections 3.5.4.1(Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan) and
3.5.2.2 (FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program)]. Marine resources presently under
State management on State-owned lands are subject to memoranda of agreement between
NOAA, FDEP, and SFWMD (Co -Trustees Agreement for Cooperative Management, effective
May 19, 1997). Areas outside the FKNMS are managed by federal programs.
Submerged conservation lands within the boundaries of the FKNMS characterized by
seagrass communities include:
• John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park;
• Lignumvitae Key State Aquatic Preserve;
• Coupon Bight State Aquatic Preserve;
• Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuge; and
• Key West National Wildlife Refuge.
Other submerged conservation lands outside the boundaries of the FKNMS that have
extensive seagrass communities include:
• Everglades National Park;
• Biscayne National Park; and
• Dry Tortugas National Park.
3.8.2.4 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Seagrass Beds
Impacts on seagrass communities can be categorized as direct physical damages or indirect
effects related to water quality [see also discussion in Section 3.8.3.3 (Known Pollution
Problems and/or Issues Related to Coral Communities)]. Direct human impacts to seagrass
beds include mechanical dredging, vessel groundings, anchor damage, and propeller
damage. Boat propellers and large ships have damaged over 30,000 acres of seagrasses
and more than 20 acres of coral reef habitat in the FKNMS (U.S. Department of Commerce,
Conservation and Coastal Management 80 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
2007). Dredging in seagrass beds has historically caused the greatest amount of man -
induced direct damage to nearshore submerged vegetation. Since the turn of the century,
an estimated 5,000 acres of seagrass beds have been lost by mechanical destruction,
primarily dredging on submerged lands within the FKNMS, representing a loss of
approximately 0.35 percent of the total seagrass acreage (CSA, 1991). Dredged areas are
rendered unsuitable for seagrass recolonization for long periods or permanently in
locations where dredged depths exceed those tolerated by seagrasses or where repeated
boat passage renders the area unsuitable for recolonization (as sometimes occurs in boat
channels).
Today, damage from boat propellers is the most common type of man -induced direct
damage to seagrass beds in the Florida Keys, and is characterized by the FKNMS as the
single -largest threat to seagrasses (NOAA, 2004). Damage occurs when recreational
boaters take watercraft and jet skis through shallows, and propellers cut through beds of
seagrass and shallow sediments. Damage from a single prop scar recovers slowly, if at all,
because seagrass plants are not capable of growing downward, away from light, into the
damaged area. Currents can also wash away loose sediments and prevent the
establishment of new plants. Boat mooring and dock construction in the vicinity of
seagrass beds have potential adverse impacts on seagrasses both directly through bottom
disturbances and shading, and indirectly through pollutant discharges from vessels.
Since 1995, seagrasses in the Florida Keys have been studied as part of the Water Quality
Protection Program for the FKNMS. Four kinds of data are being collected in seagrass beds
in the FKNMS:
• Document the distribution and abundance of seagrasses and other benthic plants and
animals using rapid assessment surveys;
• Seagrass nutrient availability using tissue concentration assays;
• Nutrient quality information using stable isotopic composition of seagrass leaves; and
• Water quality data collected with the seagrass data (Fourqurean and Escorcia, 2008).
Over time, scientists have noted various trends within seagrass beds in the FKNMS. Turtle
grass thrives in shallow waters with relatively low -nutrient levels. When nutrient levels
are high, other plants that are adapted to a nutrient -rich environment can out -compete
turtle grass. The monitoring project has documented nutrient enrichment (eutrophication)
which can cause the decline of seagrass meadows. Under very high nutrient levels,
microalgae flourish and can become so dense that they block sunlight promoting the
growth of small plants that grow directly on the grass blades. Both situations make it
difficult for the seagrass to absorb the sunlight needed for photosynthesis (Fourqurean and
Escorcia, 2008).
The monitoring project compares the concentrations of two important nutrients found in
the blades of turtle grass: nitrogen and phosphorus. For turtle grass, when the ratio of
nitrogen to phosphorus reaches 30:1 (called the Redfield Ratio), turtle grass will decline
and will be replaced by nutrient -loving plants like seaweeds and microalgae. To obtain the
Conservation and Coastal Management 81 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
nitrogen to phosphorus ratio data needed for the monitoring model, leaf tissue samples
were taken from 30 permanent monitoring sites throughout the FKNMS. The nitrogen to
phosphorus ratio was determined for each sample. For the sites monitored in 2007, five
exhibited trends toward the 30:1 Redfield Ratio, which means nutrient levels at these sites
were approaching those conditions that may eventually result in the loss of turtle grass.
However, a few sites trended away from the Redfield Ratio, indicating lower nutrient
availability. These sites had likely been scoured clean by hurricanes, and the new plant
species that colonized the bare areas rapidly used up available nutrients. Even small
changes in a limiting nutrient can translate to shifts in the kinds of plants inhabiting an area
(Fourqurean and Escorcia, 2008).
Sea level rise can threaten seagrass communities as water depths increases. Deeper water
can reduce sunlight penetration to the seafloor and can change tidal patterns. These
changes can alter seagrass distribution and the quality of seagrass habitats.
3.8.2.5 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Seagrass Beds
The FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program tracks changes in grassbeds over time,
particularly changes in seagrass cover caused by eutrophication. No significant overall loss
of Seagrass coverage has occurred in the FKNMS, but major changes have occurred in the
composition of species in plant communities. In 13 of the 30 monitoring sites in 2007, the
dominant species had shifted from turtle grass to another species, suggesting higher
availability of nutrients. In most of these sites, turtle grass decreased, but sites with
increases in turtle grass density were also observed. Both trends indicate that nutrients
are increasing in those locations. As nutrient levels rise, an increase in turtle grass density
occurs first, and then with more nutrients, dense turtle grass dies and is replaced with
faster -growing species (Fourqurean and Escorcia, 2008).
Good water quality is an essential ingredient for healthy seagrass meadows and the marine
ecosystem. Many of the causes of local seagrass changes due to water quality problems
originate beyond the jurisdiction of Monroe County. Like the health of coral reefs
(discussed in the next section) water quality is influenced by nutrients and water currents
from southwest Florida and the Everglades. However, research suggests that regional -
scale changes in nutrient availability are causing changes in seagrass beds over a wide
portion of the FKNMS (Fourqurean and Escorcia, 2008). Implementing solutions that will
preserve the Florida Keys seagrass beds will require action on local as well as regional and
global scales.
While propeller damage to benthic communities is prohibited within the FKNMS, only
about 2 percent of damage annually is the subject of enforcement action, as law
enforcement officers are seldom present and able to identify offending vessels when the
damage occurs (Precht, 2010). Therefore, extensive boat -caused damage throughout the
FKNMS accumulates each year, and often grows substantially larger through erosion. To
address this, the FKNMS prepared the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for
Seagrass Restoration in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (PEIS), published in
Conservation and Coastal Management 82 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
2004, which prioritizes restoration of orphan damage to seagrass and identifies measures
to prevent this damage in the future (NOAA, 2004).
The PEIS studied a variety of methods to restore propeller scarring and adopted specific
methods that have shown significant success. In most restoration efforts, scarred areas are
first filled to restore continuity of the substrate with the surrounding seagrass habitat. This
is usually done using either a patented method called "sediment tubes" or similar device
that contains appropriately -sized sediments within a cloth lining that breaks down over a
four- to six-month period. This prevents currents and storms from eroding fill material.
Then, the damaged areas are planted with shoal grass, and, where appropriate, "bird
stakes" or fertilizer spikes are installed along the scar.
T-shaped bird stakes are pounded into the sediments along the length of the prop scar.
They are attractive to cormorants, terns, and other birds, which, while resting on the
stakes, defecate in the water, adding nutrients that promote the growth of seagrass,
especially shoal grass. Nutrient input from seabirds roosting on the bird stakes has been
shown to speed recovery of shoal grass. Once the scar has been stabilized by shoal grass,
the stakes are removed to allow succession to turtle grass, because it appears shoal grass
may out -compete turtle grass in a fertilized environment. Some estimates for recovery to
complete coverage by shoal grass are as short as 1.5 years, but usually range from 3 to 7
years. Although methods of restoration exist for damaged seagrass meadows, they can be
costly and take years to restore. Prevention of groundings and prop dredging is the
preferred way to protect seagrass habitat.
The FKNMS Management Plan provides the basis for future federal, State, and local
conservation activities affecting the resources of the FKNMS, including its seagrass beds.
Monroe County's Comprehensive Plan and LDRs provide similar goals, strategies, and code
regulations to provide protection to seagrass communities of the Florida Keys. Efforts to
maintain or improve water quality that are provided in FKNMS Water Quality Protection
Program are discussed in Section 3.5.2.2 [FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program
(WQPP)1-
The physical protection of seagrass beds can be achieved through the Monroe County LDRs
and the actions of the Monroe County Marine Resources Office. The LDRs currently
prohibit new dredging in the Florida Keys and prohibit maintenance dredging within areas
vegetated with seagrass beds. Exceptions for maintenance dredging in seagrass bed areas
are currently permitted only for public navigation channels. Maintenance dredging is
performed in several incorporated areas within the County, including Marathon and Key
West, as well as in certain parts of unincorporated Monroe County. Dredging is also
regulated by the FDEP, SFWMD, and the USACE. Permits to conduct new or maintenance
dredging from these agencies are required prior to the issuance of a County permit. In
addition, FDEP has adopted a rule specifically regulating docks in the Florida Keys. These
prohibitions and permitting requirements have eliminated the most historically significant
direct impact of man's activities on seagrass beds in the Keys. However, as many existing
docking facilities and canals are surrounded by shallow flats, and boaters new to the
conservation and Coastal Management 83 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Florida Keys are often unaware of how to navigate in the shallow conditions, significant
and cumulative damage to benthic resources continues to occur.
As part of the management plan for the FKNMS, the Mooring Buoy and Waterway
Management Action plans have implemented simple but effective strategies for reducing
vessel damage to seagrass beds (as well as coral reefs and other benthic communities).
Mooring buoy strategies have been used in local FKNMS waters since 1981 when they were
introduced at the Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary and their success has been due to a
unique combination of education, outreach, enforcement, and monitoring activities (U.S.
Department of Commerce, 2007). The Marine Resources Office identifies mooring fields
and acquires funding to install buoys. Mooring buoy sites are not permitted over seagrass
beds, regardless of water depth. This eliminates potential concentrated impacts of bottom
disturbances and pollutant discharges from moored vessels in the immediate vicinity of
seagrass beds. The Marine Resources Office coordinates with FDEP to develop a consistent
policy related to the prohibition of mooring buoy fields over seagrass beds. The Marine
Resources Office identifies derelict vessels and receives assistance from FEMA to remove
vessels after hurricanes.
The LDRs regulate the placement of new docks, marina facilities, and walkways. They must
be constructed at least 4 feet at mean low water over seagrass beds (or hardbottom, corals,
macro algae, sponges, or other sessile communities with at least 4 feet of depth from the
docking facility to open water). Dock location and design are also regulated by the FDEP
and the USACE and permits from these agencies are required prior to the issuance of a
County permit.
The Waterway Management Action Plan (formerly known as the Reef/Channel Marking
Action Plan) component of the FKNMS Management Plan addresses the challenges of the
physical damages to seagrass beds. The plan includes strategies that implement and
maintain a comprehensive and effective waterway marking and management system for
boaters within the FKNMS. The plan incorporates improvements to channel markers as
well as surveys and databases to aid waterway management. The Monroe County Marine
Resources Office has primary responsibility for implementing this action plan in County
waters. The USCG has primary responsibility for marking federal navigation channels,
including the Intracoastal Waterway, and shipping lanes. The FKNMS is responsible for
marking its regulatory zones. The FKNMS also coordinates the Waterway
Management/Marking Working Group and promotes cooperation among the different
agencies. The Fish and Wildlife Research Institute and the FKNMS created the vessel
grounding database from FFWCC grounding citations. "Hot spots" of resource damage can
be illustrated by plotting the data. These data are then used to design/improve waterway
marking schemes through partnering with USCG and the County (U.S. Department of
Commerce, 2007).
Conservation and Coastal Management 84 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.8.3 Coral Communities
Florida is located at the convergence of the subtropical and temperate climate zones. The
Gulfstream has a major influence on water temperature and the transport of flora and
fauna to the region. The Gulfstream intrudes into the Gulf of Mexico as the Loop Current
and reverses flow to return to the Straits of Florida, joining the main body of the Florida
Current before flowing northeast towards Europe. The influence of the Gulfstream
together with the presence of a broad -shallow continental shelf around Florida and the
absence of any major rivers have provided conditions for the development of extensive
coral reefs (Andrews et al., 2008; Jaap and Hallock, 1990b). Coral communities are among
the Earth's most complex and productive natural systems. The Florida Reef Tract of the
Florida Keys is the only living coral reef system in the continental United States. It lies at
the northern edge of the geographic range of coral systems. It extends southeast from Cape
Florida, forming an arc paralleling the Keys for 220 miles from Soldier Key to the Dry
Tortugas. Coral communities are found from almost intertidally to 8 miles offshore, in
depths ranging from less than 3 feet to depths of 135 feet (CSA, 1991). Oceanward of the
reef tract, the Florida Current provides a constant source of warm, tropical waters allowing
coral development. The Florida Reef Tract reaches optimum development in the deeper
waters, oceanward of Hawk's Channel and landward of the Straits of Florida (Jaap and
Hallock, 1990b).
The structural framework of coral communities is composed of colonies of tiny organisms
collectively called coral. The hard corals most prevalent in reef formation include Boulder
Coral (Montastrea annularis), Large -cupped Boulder Coral (Montastrea cavernosa), Brain
Coral (Diploria spp.) and Round Starlet Coral (Siderastrea sidereo) (Japp, 1984). Elkhorn
Coral (Acropora palmata) and Staghorn Coral (Acropora cervicornis) were formerly
dominant members of reef communities but their numbers have been reduced due to a
variety of factors [see Section 3.13.5 (Corals)]. The tiny organisms making up these
colonies extract calcium carbonate from seawater to secrete calcareous chambers within
which they live (the hard coral skeleton).
The pattern of reef development in the Keys approaches the "barrier reef' model. The
most oceanward component of this barrier complex is an outer reef system that develops
at the crest of the escarpment at the outer edge of the shallow continental shelf that occurs
along the Atlantic edge of the Keys. Because of the linear regularity of this
geomorphological feature, outer reefs tend to be linear systems that parallel the Keys.
Landward of the outer reef a shallow lagoon is present and the coral system is
characterized by an irregular distribution of "patch reefs," which have various shapes and
sizes.
In the Keys, the linear pattern of reef development is more broken than is typical of reef
development in more southerly waters. It is actually composed of a narrow band of
disjunctive reefs with many horizontal gaps or breaks in the reefs (U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1995). This generally reflects the discontinuities in the chain of islands
comprising the Keys, corresponding with the creeks, cuts, or passes between the islands.
conservation and Coastal Management 85 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The islands comprising the Upper Keys constitute a fairly continuous barrier to the
exchange of water between Florida Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. Consequently, the Florida
Current's thermally moderating influence is more constant than in the Middle or Lower
Keys, where the archipelago is fragmented and there is greater tidal exchange between
Florida Bay/Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean. This exchange allows more pronounced
differences in seasonal temperatures and generates more turbid water. Consequently, the
Middle and Lower Keys reefs tend to be characterized more by isolated patches or marginal
reefs rather than bank/barrier reefs. In the Lower Keys, the best developed communities
occur in the southern "shadows" of the major Lower Keys islands where environmental
conditions are more constant (e.g., the Sambo Reefs south of Big Coppitt and Geiger keys,
and Looe Key Reef south of Big Pine Key).
3.8.3.1 Biota of Coral Communities
Coral communities can be divided into four types based upon physical habitats and
community structure patterns: bank reef, transitional reef, patch reef, and hardbottom
(also referred to as livebottom) (Jaap, 1984). Differences in the types of reef are reflected
in the differing environments of their dominant coral species. The patch reefs of the lagoon
area and the Lower Keys inhabit shallow water that is more strongly influenced by wave
action that can increase turbidity, and by weather changes that can result in a range of
thermal variation that is not present in the deeper waters of the outer reef. As a result,
massive boulder -shaped corals whose morphology is better able to withstand high wave
energy and turbidity dominate the reef system. By comparison, the corals along the outer
reef do not experience such stressful conditions. In deeper waters, thermal conditions are
stabilized by the influence of warm Florida Current waters, and sediments that could
contribute to turbidity are instead transported into the ocean's depths by sand channels.
As a result, in part, many corals with branched and plated morphologies characterize the
outer reef.
3.8.3.1.1 Bank Reefs
Bank reefs are located parallel to the coast at or near the shallow continental shelf break.
The elongated reefs form a discontinuous belt that is best developed oceanward of Key
Largo and the Lower Keys, where the size of the major islands protect the reefs from the
detrimental influence of Florida Bay waters (Jaap and Hallock 1990b). This community
receives the most beneficial nutrients, displays the most diverse associations, and exhibits
the most highly developed super -structure (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1995). Many of
the massive, reef -building corals in the reef banks do not occur in the other coral
community types. Kissling (1977) identified over 350 macrobenthic species, including 42
species of stony corals, 41 species of soft corals, and 21 species of brittle stars on nine outer
reefs off the Lower Keys. Somerfield et al. (2008) found a high degree of variability among
reef types over time (shallow offshore, deep offshore, patch) and reef location (Lower,
Middle, Upper Keys). Over the time of the study (1996-2003), some sites were affected by
particular events (e.g., hurricanes, high and low water temperatures). The changes in
Conservation and Coastal Management 86 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
composition were small in comparison to differences between different reefs. In other
words, each reef type and location was relatively unique.
Representative biota of the outer reefs includes Mustard Hill Coral (Porites astreoides),
Lettuce Coral (Agaricia agaricites), Massive Starlet Coral (Siderastrea siderea), Elkhorn
Coral (Acropora palmata), Staghorn Coral (A. cervicornis), Pillar Coral (Dendrogyra
cylindrus), various brain corals (Diploria spp.), the Alcyonarians or soft corals such as sea
rods (Plexaura spp. and Eunicea spp.), sea fans (Gorgonio ventalina), and sea whips
(Pterogorgia spp.), the hydrozoans (Millepora complanata and M. alcicornis), the green
algae (Halimeda spp,), the Brittle Stars (Ophiothrix orstedii and Ophocnida spp.), and
various coralline algae.
3.8.3.1.2 Transitional Reefs
Between bank reefs and patch reefs there is frequently a coral community with fauna found
in both communities, referred to as the transitional reef. Under more favorable conditions
(higher sea level), the transitional reef may in time develop into the more diverse reef bank
(Florida DNR, 1991a). It also occurs on artificial substrates, such as sunken ships or other
debris used to construct artificial reefs (Jaap, 1984).
3.8.3.1.3 Patch Reefs
There are over 6,000 patch reefs between Miami and the Marquesas Keys (U.S. Department
of Commerce, 1995), with over 80 percent between northern Elliott Key and southern Key
Largo. Most occur in areas of sand, mud or rock substrate located in a band 2 to 4 miles
from the islands between Hawk Channel and the outer reefs (Marszalek et al., 1977).
Colonization occurs where light, water temperature, and nutrient conditions are favorable
and where patch reef organisms are protected from the excessive sediments, temperature
and salinity fluctuations of water circulating from Florida Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. Patch
reef development in nearshore waters (landward of Hawk's Channel) is known to occur in
only a few locations in the Keys (Florida DNR, 1991a).
There are two basic types of patch reefs (Marszalek et al., 1977; Japp, 1982). Dome patch
reefs usually occur in clusters in water depths of less than 30 feet and vary in size from
several square feet to more than 2,300 square feet (Schomer and Drew, 1982). They are
typically circular or elliptical and are surrounded by a halo of barren substrate. Prior to a
massive die -off in 1983, the long-spined urchin (Diadema antillarum) was a common
inhabitant of these reefs. It is an effective grazer and keeps algae away from the reefs,
producing the halo around certain patch reefs (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1995). The
community's biota varies greatly depending on reef age and environmental condition (Jaap,
1982), but typically consists of scleractinian and alcyonarian corals, other coelenterates,
mostly erect sponges, echinoderms, crustaceans, molluscs, red and green algae, and a
variety of fishes. Species diversity and density generally increase in proportion to the size
of the patch reef (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1995).
Lonservanon and Coastal Management 87 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Jones (1977) described a successional sequence for dome patch reefs in which the pioneer
corals are likely to be Porites spp., Manicinia areolata, and Favia fragum. These forms are
replaced by primary reef -building corals like Starlet Coral (Siderastrea siderea), Brain Coral
(Diploria labyrinthiformis and D. strigosa), Star Coral (Montastrea annularis and M.
cavernosa), Finger Coral (Porites furcata), and Boulder Brain Coral (Colpophyllia natans).
The coral assemblage of linear patch reefs is similar to that of dome patch reefs, but where
present, Elkhorn Coral joins Star Coral as a principal reefbuilder. Linear patch reef usually
occur oceanward of dome patch corals and lie roughly in a chain parallel to the outer reefs.
Both types of reefs commonly have the algae Gonialithon sp. and Halimeda opuntia,
numerous erect sponges, bivalves of the genera Acra, Lithophaga, and Barbatia; the
gastropods Strombus gigas and Corallophils abbreviata, Spiny Lobster (Panulirus argus),
Stone Crab (Menippe mercenaria) the echinoids Diadema antillarium (when present) and
Echinometra lucunter, numerous ostracods, bryozoans, foramnifera, and fishes (Enos,
1977; Multer, 1977; Jaap, 1982; U.S. Department of Commerce, 1995).
3.8.3.1.4 Hardbottom
Hardbottom communities occur on large portions of the Atlantic sea floor and smaller
portions of the lagoon bottom, extending from less than 3 feet deep to depths greater than
100 feet. The main criterion is solid substrate upon which members of the epibiotic
community can attach. Substrate can consists of reef limestones to rocky outcrops on the
sea floor to artificial reefs, seawalls, buoys, bridge piling, and boat bottoms (Jaap and
Hallock, 1990b). Marine grassbeds, sand, and mud bars are usually intermixed with the
hardbottom, occupying shallow depressions in the limestone. Distribution of macrofauna
is generally scattered in random patterns and is never as compact or diverse as are
seagrass beds or coral reefs (Jaap and Hallock, 1990b).
This habitat does not actively accrete or build massive coral reef structures but does
support a diverse sessile and motile biota and provides important nursery and foraging
habitat for a variety of recreationally and commercially important species, including spiny
lobster, snappers, and grouper (Jaap and Hallock 1990b; U.S. Department of Commerce,
1995).
Hardbottom habitat supports a diverse invertebrate and vertebrate fauna, dominated by
algae and invertebrate species such as soft corals, sponges, and small stony corals. The soft
corals are visually dominant. The most common species are the Sea Whip (Pterogorgia
spp.), Sea Fan (Gorgonia ventalina), Sea Rod (Plexaura spp.), and Sea Plume
(Pseudopterogorgia spp.) (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1995; Jaap and Hallock, 1990b).
Stony corals found in the hardbottom community include Clubbed Finger Coral (Porites
falcata), Mustard Hill Coral (P. asteroides), Starlet Coral (Siderastrea radians), Rose Coral
(Manicina areolata), Lobed Star Coral (Solenastrea hyades), and Smooth Star Coral (S.
bournoni). Sponges are dominant in some areas of the lagoon, with the most prevalent
species including the Chicken Liver Sponge (Chondrilla nucula), Vase Sponge (Ircinia
campana), Cake Sponge (I. etherea), Stinker Sponge (I. felix), Little Blue Heavenly Sponge
(Dysidea etherea), Large Loggerhead Sponge (Spheciospongia vesparia), and Tube Sponge
Conservation and Coastal Management 88 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
(Aplysina cauliformis and Callispongia spp). Algal species are well represented by the
calcareous greens, Acetabularia, Batophora, Halimeda, and Udotea spp. (U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1995).
3.8.3.1.5 Macrofauna of Coral Communities
Coral reef systems provide protection and shelter for colorful and diverse macrofauna,
including small shrimp, crabs, fish and several species of lobsters. Many species, especially
the larger predators, are important species for local fisheries. Hardbottom communities
are valuable nursery areas for many invertebrates and fishes of both the patch reef and
seagrass communities, providing microhabitats for many juvenile fishes [See Section
3.14.1.4 (Fish Species Common to Coral Communities)].
3.8.3.2 Existing Commercial Recreational or Conservation Uses of Coral
Communities
Recreational boating, snorkeling, SCUBA diving, and fishing are the primary activities
which occur in the coral communities of the Florida Keys. As previously noted, the FKNMS
encompasses all of the submerged lands and waters of the Florida Keys extending from the
mean high water mark to the offshore FKNMS boundary. This lies at the approximate 300-
foot depth contour line (Public Law 101-965). Excluded areas include Everglades National
Park, Biscayne National Park, and Fort Jefferson National Monument. All coral
communities within these designated FKNMS boundaries are protected and subject to
management through the FKNMS Management Plan and the FKNMS Water Quality
Protection Program [see Section 3.5.4.2 (FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program)].
Marine resources presently under State management on State-owned lands are also be
subject to these future management programs through memoranda of agreement between
NOAA, USEPA, FDEP, SFWMD and the County. Management of State sovereignty
submerged lands has been retained by the State of Florida (within the boundaries of the
FKNMS):
• John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park;
• Lignumvitae Key State Aquatic Preserve;
• Biscayne Bay -Card Sound Aquatic Preserve;
• Coupon Bight State Aquatic Preserve;
• Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuge;
• Key West National Wildlife Refuge;
• Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary; and
• Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary.
3.8.3.3 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Coral Communities
Coral reefs in Florida exist at their environmental extremes due to their high latitude and
proximity to the continent. Numerous studies have documented or suggested the threats
which currently exist to coral communities in the Florida Keys from natural and man-made
Conservation and Coastal Management 89 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
causes (Precht and Robbart, 2006; Andrews et. al., 2008; Somerfield et al., 2008). While
there is a consensus that the reefs are declining, there is considerable disagreement among
researchers, regulators, and resource managers as to the causes of this decline. In addition,
there is no consensus on how coral reef protection can be accomplished (Precht and
Robbart, 2006; Somerfield et al., 2008).
The Florida Keys are susceptible to multiple natural disturbances such as hurricanes, E1
Nino southern oscillation (ENSO) events, winter cold fronts, bleaching episodes, and algal
blooms, Hurricanes contributed to declines in coral cover on many Caribbean reefs in the
1980s, but other stressors now appear to be more important in driving overall declines in
coral cover in the region. A number of environmental effects have been attributed to the
decline of coral' reefs in the Florida Keys. Increased rainfall from hurricanes and ENSO
events leads to more runoff, potentially moving nutrients, toxic substances, microbes, and
metals from terrestrial and freshwater systems into the marine system. Regional -scale
agricultural runoff from the Everglades and sewage discharges from the Florida Keys are
nitrogen sources supporting eutrophication and algal blooms in coral reef communities in
the Lower Florida Keys. Increases in nutrients can affect reefs by increasing the growth of
benthic algae, which can grow over the reefs, decrease water transparency by promoting
plankton blooms, and increase competition from other benthic plants and animals.
Environmental changes can cause physiological stresses that can lead to coral diseases
(reviewed in Somerfield et al., 2008). Whatever the underlying cause(s), coral diseases
contributed to declines of Acropora spp. throughout the Caribbean and western Atlantic,
resulting in the listing of A. cervicornis and A. palmata as threatened species on the
Endangered Species List in May 2006 [see Section 3.13.5 (Corals)]. Somerfield et al. (2008)
believe that the lack of recovery seen among offshore reefs implies that they are already
suffering from some underlying stress.
Non-native (exotic) fishes have been increasingly documented in Florida coral reef
environments. These species have the potential to disrupt natural coral reef communities
due to increased predation of natural species, increased competition for available space,
and potential introduction of diseases. More than 18 species of non-native marine fish
have been documented from Miami -Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties in Southeast
Florida (REEF database, 2006). Lionfish (Pterois volitans and P. miles) have become
established in the Florida Keys since about 2009. These venomous fish have voracious
feeding habits, unique reproduction, and few predators. Sightings and removal efforts are
being tracked through the REEF Volunteer Fish Survey Project in partnership with federal
and State agencies.
There is currently no oil or gas drilling occurring in State waters. The Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary Act prohibits oil and gas exploration in the FKNMS. Florida law
prohibits future leasing or drilling of the seabed within the State's Territorial Sea for
purposes of oil and gas exploration and development. Holders of any offshore drilling
leases that were granted by the State prior to the enactment of the current law must obtain
permits under State environmental laws and regulations prior to conducting any drilling
activities. No leases exist in Florida areas where coral reef tracts are located (Donahue et
al., 2008). However, proposals for offshore drilling in State waters, outside the FKNMS, are
Conservation and Coastal Management 90 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
often evaluated by the State and federal government and the potential for future drilling
and oil spills exists.
Through the FKNMS Water Quality Protection Plan monitoring program, it is now well
known that coral reefs are highly variable, and are subject to frequent biological and
physical disturbances. However, the temporal and spatial scales of the disturbances are
often large and difficult to study (Somerfield et al., 2008). The Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef
Assessment (AGRRA) program is another region -wide monitoring program, which
monitors a group of smaller -scale studies (including coral cover). This study showed that
significant bleaching and disease -induced mortality associated with the 1998 ENSO event
were most apparent in the western Caribbean and Bahamas subregions (Kramer, 2003).
The analysis did not include data from Florida, but it seems likely that the event impacted
the Florida Keys in a similar way.
The Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute collects annual data on the status of coral
habitats in the Florida reef tract through the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Project
(CREMP). In 1996, data collection began at 40 sites in the Florida Keys. The project was
expanded in 1999 to include three sites in the Dry Tortugas. In 2003, ten additional sites
were selected at reefs along Florida's southeast coast and have been monitored annually
under the Southeast Florida CREMP (SECREMP) project.
CREMP sites encompass four reef habitat categories: hardbottom, patch reef, and offshore
deep and shallow reefs. The number of stony coral species declined across all habitat types
between 1996 and 1999. Between 2005 and 2006, the data show a greater decline in the
number of species at deep offshore and hardbottom sites than at shallow offshore or patch
reef sties in the FKNMS. Some of the smaller or less common species have declined in
distribution. The percent cover of stony corals in the FKNMS declined between 1996 and
1999, but was relatively stable from 1999 to 2005. Additionally, between 2005 and 2006,
there was a consistent loss of stony coral cover in all regions and habitats sampled in the
FKNMS, with the deep offshore reefs showing the greatest decline. This observed decline is
likely attributable to loss of cover of the boulder star coral, Montastraea annularis. This
framework builder has been the dominant species in terms of percent cover and
occurrence throughout the sites sampled in the Florida Keys reef system, and has been in
decline throughout the duration of the CREMP monitoring project. The combination of
hurricanes and severe bleaching in 2004/2005 is likely primarily responsible for the
observed decrease in stony coral species richness and percent cover at the CREMP
monitoring sites in 2006. However, the offshore deep sites, which might be expected to be
buffered by the effects of hurricanes and bleaching, showed the greatest loss between 2004
and 2006. Since 2002, disease has generally decreased within the CREMP stations within
the FKNMS (Donahue et al., 2008).
Coral reefs have always experienced acute (and sometimes catastrophic) events such as
anomalous bleaching and hurricanes. Between these events, healthy reefs begin to recover,
albeit slowly. However, since monitoring began, the CREMP has not documented
significant increases in coral cover at any of the study sites. This lack of recovery could be
attributed to chronic environmental changes, from cumulative effects of hurricanes, severe
Conservation and Coastal Management 91 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
bleaching, and disease outbreaks, or a synergy of both chronic and acute impacts. Distance
from human habitation has been considered a buffer from the affects of man-made impacts;
however, globally there are many examples of reefs that are remote from civilization that
are similarly in decline (Donahue et al., 2008; Miller and Szmant, 2008). Sea level rise
increases water depths and threatens coral reefs.
3.8.3.4 Potential for Conservation Use or Protection of Coral Communities
Monitoring of Florida Keys reefs began in the late 1970s in Biscayne and Dry Tortugas
National Parks through the 1980s. Three large ship groundings in 1989 was the major
impetus for the creation of the FKNMS. The FKNMS Water Quality Protection Plan
monitoring program was established to evaluate the status and trends of the coral
communities throughout the FKNMS. It was finalized following technical meetings in 1994.
Through these and other monitoring programs, it has been learned that a large amount of
coral cover has been lost in the Florida Keys. Monitoring programs have shown an overall
decline in hard coral cover of 44 percent at quantitatively surveyed stations.
Proportionally, the major framework building corals seem to have been most affected (73
percent loss for Acropora palmata, and 37 percent loss for Montastraea annularis)
(Andrews et al., 2008; Donahue et al., 2008). Many of the causes of local coral decline
originate beyond the jurisdiction of the County. For example, algal blooms in the Florida
Keys are influenced by nutrients and water flows from the Everglades and southwest
Florida. Also, warming ocean temperatures associated with global climate change are a
major factor in coral bleaching. Implementing solutions that will preserve the Florida Keys
coral reef system will require action on local, regional, and global scales.
3.9 Wetlands [Rule 91-5.013(1) (a)1. and (b), F.A.C.]
The biological communities of the Florida Keys include five wetland types which provide
important storm protection, water quality protection, and wildlife habitat functions. These
wetland communities include:
• mangrove forests along the shorelines of the Keys;
• transitional wetlands (salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands) lying landward of the
mangrove fringe and oceanward of upland communities;
• salt ponds occupying shallow enclosed basins having very restricted tidal influence;
• beaches4; and
• freshwater wetlands and freshwater ponds in areas of freshwater lenses in the Lower
Keys.
4 Beaches are not considered to be traditional wetlands under State and federal definitions since they are
located in the high wave energy zone; thus, they do not have wetland soil features nor are they vegetated
(although mud flats would meet State and federal definitions of wetlands). However, beaches (as part of the
beach/berm community) are protected by the LDRs and by State and federal regulations when they are below
the mean high water line. Thus, beaches are mentioned in this section. Beaches are more fully described in
Section 3.10 (Beach/Berm Communities).
Conservation and Coastal Management 92 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
"Disturbed wetlands" occur throughout the Keys. In the Keys, disturbed wetlands are
generally wetlands which were originally characterized as one of the other five wetland
categories.
The methods used to inventory wetland habitats are described in Section 3.8 (Living
Marine Resources). Map Series 3.3 depicts the wetlands within the Upper, Middle, and
Lower Keys and selected offshore islands, which are characterized by mangrove forests,
salt marsh, buttonwood wetlands, salt ponds, and freshwater wetlands (disturbed
wetlands are not mapped).
3.9.1 Wetlands Permitting and Wetlands Protection Planning in Monroe County
Wetlands in the Florida Keys are regulated by federal and State agencies, and by the County
LDRs. A permit is required for certain activities within wetlands, as defined by these
agencies. The primary federal jurisdiction for the USACE over wetlands is derived from
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1344, 1972, as amended in 1977, 1981, and
1987, with the Water Quality Act. Other programs are Section 10 the Rivers and Harbors
Acts of 1899, which regulates construction, excavation, or fill in navigable waters; the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; and the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973.
The federal regulations are contained in 33 CFR 320-330 and have evolved over time to
reflect added authorities and developing case law. The Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1)
Guidelines (40 CFR, Part 230), USACE Regulations (33 CFR Part 332), and associated
guidance require that project effects to waters of the United States, including wetlands, be
addressed through a sequence of avoidance, minimization and then compensation for
unavoidable impacts. In 2008, the USACE Rules 33 CFR Parts 325 and 332 and USEPA
Rules 40 CFR Part 230 were finalized accounting for "Compensatory Mitigation for Losses
of Aquatic Resources." This sequence is also followed by State agencies prior to permit
issuance [Rule 40E-4.091 (1)(a) F.A.C. (Basis of Review)]. Under the Marine Protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act, a permit is required for the transportation of dredged
material that is to be deposited in the ocean. Disposal sites are selected with criteria
developed by USEPA and the USACE.
Both FDEP and SFWMD have permitting authority over impacts to wetlands under State
law. A memorandum of agreement between the two agencies divides the types of projects
applying for permits between the two agencies. Most relevant to private -sector
development, all residential projects in excess of four units and all commercial projects
receive permits from the SFWMD, and smaller residential projects receive permits from
FDEP. Transportation projects (road and air) also fall under SFWMD permitting authority,
whereas FDEP permits projects limited to beach and shoreline impacts with no associated
upland residential or commercial development.
SFWMD also regulates the management and storage of surface waters, including dredging
or filling in wetlands, by requiring Environmental Resource Permits (ERP). Any proposed
surface water management system involving a project site 100 acres or more in size or
Conservation and Coastal Management 93 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
with more than 1 acre of wetland impacts would require an Individual Permit. In most
cases, project sites less than 100 acres in size with less than 1 acre of wetland impacts
qualify for a Standard General, Noticed General, or No Notice General Permit.
FDEP also oversees activities in wetlands that are:
• located on Florida's natural sandy beaches facing the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico,
the Straits of Florida or associated inlets;
• activities that extend seaward of the mean high water (MHW) line (the SFWMD
oversees activities landward of the MHW);
• activities that extend into sovereign submerged lands; and
• activities that are likely to affect the distribution of sand along a beach.
FDEP also regulates activities including beach restoration or nourishment; construction of
erosion control structures such as groins and breakwaters; public fishing piers;
maintenance of inlets and inlet -related structures; and dredging of navigation channels that
include disposal of dredged material onto the beach or in the nearshore area.
Prior to the permitting process, a wetland Jurisdictional Determination (JD) is required.
Wetland boundaries are determined by:
• The USACE Interim Regional Supplement to the 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual:
Atlantic and Coastal Plain Region (Federal Manual); and
• Chapter 62-340 F.A.C., "Delineation of the Landward Extent of Wetlands and Surface
Waters".
The Federal Manual is the current accepted methodology developed jointly by the USACE,
the USEPA, USFWS, and the USDA NRCS. Wetland boundaries are verified by the regulatory
agencies and then the boundaries are usually instrument surveyed. The permit application
is a joint application to the State agencies (SFWMD and FDEP) and the USACE. The State
ERP authorizes all activities permitted by SFWMD and FDEP; the USACE would issue its
own permit.
In general, wetlands in the County are protected by the LDRs and by the Comprehensive
Plan policies as "environmentally sensitive lands." However, this term is not defined in the
LDR or in the Comprehensive Plan. Section 114-3 (Surface Water Management Criteria) of
the LDRs establishes procedures to assist in the protection of the water resources,
including the reservoir of freshwater on Big Pine Key and the nearshore waters. These
include existing and proposed water management systems. Stormwater management
systems are coordinated with SFWMD and FDEP. Section 118-4 (Wetland Open Space
Requirements) states that no development activities, with some exceptions, are permitted
in mangroves, freshwater wetlands and in undisturbed saltmarsh and buttonwood
wetlands. The open space requirement in these habitats is 100 percent (no clearing is
allowed). Undisturbed freshwater wetlands, salt marsh and/or buttonwood association
wetlands are considered to be habitats with the highest sensitivity and development under
Conservation and Coastal Management 94 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
the LDRs requires clustering in areas with lowest sensitivity [Section 118-7 (General
Environmental Design Criteria)]. Sec. 118-10 (Environmental Design for Specific Habitat
Types) specifies design criteria for mangroves, wetlands, and submerged lands.
In practice, all proposed developments are required to obtain State and federal permits for
activities that would alter jurisdictional wetlands. The State of Florida mandates that all
State agencies and local governments use the Uniform Mitigation and Assessment Method
(UMAM) for evaluation of all wetland impacts and mitigation measures (Section
373.414(18), F.S. and Chapter 62-345, F.A.C). Wetlands are evaluated for existing
conditions, and mitigation requirements are determined for the proposed impacts by using
UMAM. In the Florida Keys, a specific wetlands evaluation procedure was developed called
the Keys Wetland Evaluation Procedure (KEYWEP). It was developed as part of the
Advanced Identification of Wetlands [see Section 3.9.2 (Monroe County Advance
Identification of Wetlands (ADID) Program)]. The LDRs mandate the use of KEYWEP only
for lands classified as disturbed with salt marsh and buttonwood association [Section 118-
10 (Environmental Design For Specific Habitat Types)]. Because disturbed salt marsh and
buttonwood wetlands are the only land use that is developable under current LDRs, this is
the only situation where KEYWEP is mandated for use in the Florida Keys. However,
certain salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands that are determined by KEYWEP to have
moderate or low functional capacity (KEYWEP index of 7.0 or less) are "suitable for filling
with appropriate mitigation," if also authorized by FDEP and USACE permits. KEYWEP
should continue to be used to determine if a proposed wetland impact is permittable. If a
proposed impact is permittable, mitigation would be determined in accordance with
UMAM. Prior to the mandated use of UMAM in Florida, KEYWEP (under the federal ADID
program) was used by the USACE but only for those projects that proposed to use the Keys
Environmental Restoration Fund (KERF) as mitigation for mangrove, saltmarsh, and
buttonwood wetland impacts and for seagrass impacts. Currently, KERF is a USACE "in -lieu
fee" program within the County and all functional losses and mitigation requirements will
be determined by using UMAM; KEYWEP will no longer be used to determine mitigation
requirements.
KERF is a program of National Audubon Society, Inc. of Florida. The primary activity of
KERF is restoring and enhancing wetland and upland habitats on public lands throughout
the Florida Keys. It also conducts management activities that are aimed toward producing
and enabling direct habitat restoration and enhancement results. Presently, the USACE and
FDEP allow payment into the fund in lieu of creating and implementing an individual
mitigation plan. Currently, the SFWMD is reviewing the KERF program and how it will be
incorporated into its ERP program.
Wetlands are also protected under the LDRs by setbacks and buffers adjacent to existing or
proposed development. In general, setbacks are determined by State and federal permits.
Under the LDRs, the buffer between a wetland and the proposed development is generally
50 feet with some exceptions that allow a buffer of 25 feet [(Section 118-10(4)(g)]. The
point from which the setback is applied is not specified in the LDRs.
Conservation and Coastal Management 95 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
The LDRs should be revised to:
• Provide a definition of wetlands that is consistent with the State definition and/or
federal definition and provide a definition of wetland boundaries to be the same as
those established through wetland jurisdictional determinations;
• Specify setbacks from the jurisdictional wetland boundary line established during the
wetland delineation process; and
• Remove the reference to and use of KEYWEP for determining mitigation because this
evaluation method, while highly useful to evaluate wetlands in the Florida Keys, is not
used elsewhere in Florida. In addition, UMAM is mandated by State law.
The County should determine when and how KERF should be used for wetland mitigation.
The LDRs should be revised to reflect this policy. The County should provide a definition of
"environmentally sensitive land" so that wetlands can be adequately included in the
ROGO/NROGO and Tier Overlay Ordinance.
3.9.2 Monroe County Advance Identification of Wetlands (ADID) Program
The Florida Keys Advance Identification of Wetlands (ADID) Program was a joint effort of
the USEPA, USACE, and the County. The ADID program was designed to facilitate the
permitting process under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1973 by providing
comprehensive wetlands mapping and assessment information. The scope of the ADID
Program included the entire Florida Keys, prioritized as follows:
• Privately -owned lands with development potential on the islands connected by U.S. 1;
• Publicly -owned lands on the islands connected by U.S. 1; and
• Offshore islands.
The Florida Keys ADID project included mapping of marine and freshwater wetlands
throughout the Keys. Wetlands were mapped at the seasonal high water line, although this
boundary was based on the interpretation of aerial photographs. A field -based wetland
functional assessment methodology specific to the Florida Keys was developed (KEYWEP).
The KEYWEP methodology is presented in "Technical Summary Document for the Advance
Identification of Wetlands of the Florida Keys" (Kalla, 2000). The ADID project mapped
approximately 65,000 acres of marine and freshwater wetlands and conducted a functional
evaluation of these wetlands. The evaluation separated those wetlands that were
"generally unsuitable" for the placement of fill and those wetlands that were "generally
suitable with appropriate mitigation" for the placement of fill (Kalla, 2000). The ADID
maps produced are available in the County Office of Planning and Environmental
Resources.
As described in Section 3.8 (Living Marine Resources), the map series produced for the
ADID program were produced on hand -drawn maps that were then digitized. The analysis
of the data for the inventory of natual habitats for this Technical Document revealed that
the ADID data did not correspond to the other databases (i.e., the maps did not line up
Conservation and Coastal Management 96 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
exactly). The ADID data can be useful for an individual parcel to determine if it contains a
wetland with a KEYWEP score but, because of the mapping limitations, the ADID data could
not be used on a County -wide basis. The County should reconcile the ADID mapping with
parcel -based mapping so that this information can be captured for land use analyses.
3.9.3 Mangrove Communities
Mangrove wetland communities are addressed above in Section 3.8.1 (Mangroves).
Included are discussions of the following:
• Flora of mangrove communities;
• Existing commercial, recreational and conservation uses of mangrove communities;
• Known pollution problems and/or issues related to mangrove communities; and
• Potential for conservation, use, or protection of mangrove communities.
3.9.4 Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands
Saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands are tidally influenced transitional wetlands which lie
landward of the mangrove fringe and seaward of the upland community. Two basic
wetland communities occur in the transition zone in the Florida Keys. Salt marshes are the
lower transitional wetlands. They exist at the interface of land and marine waters,
wherever wave energy is sufficiently low to allow their development and where mangrove
trees are not dense enough to shade out the characteristic vegetation (Montague and
Wiegert, 2001). Buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus) associations are generally higher
transitional wetlands, occurring between the salt marshes and the high upland habitats.
The type of transitional association that develops in the Keys is a function of tide and
topography. In the Lower Keys, where the slope of the intertidal zone is very slight, the
broadest expanse of transitional zones occurs. On Sugarloaf, Cudjoe, Big Torch, Little
Torch, and on a number of other keys, transitional zones occupy areas hundreds of feet in
width. On these keys, much of the eroded oolitic caprock is exposed, creating a karst-like
substrate with disjunct, shallow depressions containing marl soils. Most of these areas are
wetted only by the highest normal tides and by storm tides. By comparison, in the Middle
and Upper Keys, there is a relatively steep slope to the high ground. In these areas the
transitional zone is quite narrow, with hammock often found within a short horizontal
distance from the high water mark.
Table 3.7 shows the inventory of salt marsh wetlands within the County with a total of
2,552.7 acres. Most are located in the Lower Keys (94 percent) and 18 percent are
privately owned. Table 3.8 shows the inventory of buttonwood wetlands with at total of
3,323.1 acres within the County and like salt marshes, most (72.5 percent) are located in
the Lower Keys. Of that total, 21.7 percent are privately owned.
Conservation and Coastal Management 97 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.9.4.1 Flora of Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands
3.9.4.1.1 Flora of Undisturbed Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands
Several environmental factors control species distribution in transitional wetlands. These
are functions of elevation and tidal influence and are linearly related to distance from mean
high water. They include duration of tidal submergence; duration of exposure; and
frequency of submergence. Because of the low tidal amplitude (3 feet) in the Keys, the
inundation of the transition zone may be affected by several other factors, including wind
direction and velocity, shoreline exposure, slope, elevation and microrelief. As a result, the
position of an individual plant population within the transitional zone reflects an adaptive
response to a complex set of environmental gradients.
The transitional habitats of the Keys contain species representative of both the adjacent
mangrove and upland communities. In the most seaward subzone of transitional areas
scrub mangrove communities typically occur. These are dominated by small Red and Black
Mangroves with an understory of Glasswort (Salicornia bigelovii), Salt Grass (Distichilis
spicata), and Key Grass (Monanthochloe littoralis). Moving upland, there is a change to a
more diverse plant community with fewer mangroves. Depending on drainage and soil
conditions, this association can be either buttonwood or salt marsh.
Salt marshes are dominated by salt -tolerant herbs, shrubs, and grasses. Some salt marshes
are mixtures of fleshy halophytes, including Glasswort (Salicornia bigelovii), Purslane
(Sesuvium portulacastrum), and Saltwort (Batis maritima). Other marshes are dominated
by grasses, including Salt Grass, Key Grass, and Dropseed, and occasional Marsh Fimbry
(Fimbristylis spadicea), Sea Daisy, Saltwort, Buttonwood and small mangroves. These
grasses and herbs occur as small, disjunct populations forming a mosaic. In some cases, a
single population will occupy an area of about a half acre, whereas in others, the same
species might be represented by only a few individuals. This distributional variability
probably reflects the area's microrelief, which determines drainage and soil salinity.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 98 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.7 - Inventory of Salt Marsh Wetlands
Site Name Total Non- Ownership I
Species
Federal State County Protit Cities Utilities Private Recorded'
Lower Keys
Bahia Honda
State Park
18.4
KD, MR
Florida Keys
Wildlife and
Environmental
280.8
0.1
1.2
KD, MR, SR
Areaz
Great White
Heron National
360.7
20.9
1.5
5.0
KD, MR, SR
Wildlife Refuge
John J.
Pescatello
Torchwood
37.2
KD, MR
Hammock
Preserve
Monroe County
Managed Areas
1.9
KD, MR, SR
National Key
Deer Refuge
759.8
32.9
KD, MR, SR
Naval Air
Station
248.4
MR, SR
Saddle Bunch
Keys
12.6
KD, MR, SR
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
14.2
62.1
102.8
11.3
436.4
KD, MR, SR
Lower Keys
Total
2,408.2
1,383.1
417.0
104.4
61.1
0
0
442.6
Middle Keys
Lignumvitae
Key Botanical
2.8
State Park
Long Key State
Park
13.7
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
1.4
21.0
Middle Keys
Total
38.9
0
17.9
0
0
0
0
21.0
Upper Keys
Crocodile Lake
National
0.6
Wildlife Refuge
Cross Key
0.1
Dagney Johnson
Key Largo
Hammock
48.6
SS, IS, WR, CM
Botanical State
Park
Lonservanon ana coastal Management 99 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.7 - Inventory
of Salt Marsh
Wetlands
continued
Ownership
Site Name
Everglades
Tout!
1,etleral
State
Countv
Non-
Profit
Cities
Utilities
Private
"�pectes
Recorded,
National Park6
4.5
Florida Keys
Wildlife and
Environmental
4'7
Areaz
John
Pennecamp
Coral Reef State
37 9
0.2
Park
Monroe County
0.2
Managed Areas
Tarpon Basin
0.9
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
4.1
0.9
2.9
Upper Keys
105.6
5.1
95.5
0.9
1.0
0
0
3.1
Total
Total County
2,552.7
1,388.2
530.4
105.3
62.1
0
F 0
466.7
Unincorporated areas onlv.
' Site names are from the FNAI GIS database.
2 Florida Keys Wildlife and Environmental Areas are managed by the FFWCC for the preservation of listed
species that inhabit mangroves, tropical hardwood hammocks, and salt marshes.
s Total in acres.
4- Ownership information is from the Monroe County Property Appraiser.
s Species recorded are those threatened and endangered species recorded by the USFWS for a particular
parcel; a blank cell does not necessarily indicate an absence of protected species on that parcel(s).
SS = Schaus Swallowtail Butterfly; TS = Tree Snail; IS = Eastern Indigo Snake; WR = Key Largo Woodrat; CM
= Key Largo Cottonmouse; SR = Silver Rice Rat; KD = Key Deer; TC = Tree Cactus
6 Portion of the Everglades National Park that extends into Florida Bay; acreage does not necessarily include
Mainland habitats.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 100 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.8 - Inventory of Buttonwood Wetlands
Site Name Total Non- Species
Federal State Countv Cities Utilities Private Recorded
Profit
Lower Keys
Bahia Honda State Park
30.9
KD, MR
Florida Keys Wildlife
and Environmental
323.2
0.8
0.1
8.4
KD, MR,
Areaz
SR
Great White Heron
KD, MR,
National Wildlife Refuge
6.4
14.3
0.1
12.3
SR
John J. Pescatello
Torchwood Hammock
16.1
KD, MR
Preserve
Monroe County
96
KD, MR,
Managed Areas
'
SR
National Key Deer
828.6
92.5
0.1
KD, MR,
Refuge
SR
Naval Air Station
272.6
0.1
0.1
MR, SR
Saddle Bunch Keys
0.5
KD, MR,
SR
Outside of
Parks Refu
7.2
F34.9T36.8
27.9
1.0
586.3
KD, MR,
esSR
Lower Keys Total
2,410.8
1,114.8
1 505.5
1 137.6
44.7
1.0
0
607.2
Middle Keys
Lignumvitae Key
Botanical State Park
17.0
Long Key State Park
54.1
0.4
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
5.4
7.2
37.2
Middle Keys Total
121.3
0 1
76.5 1
7.2
0
0
0
37.6
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 101 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe Cou
Table 3.8 - Inventory of Buttonwood Wetlands (continued)
Comprehensive Plan Update
Site Name I Ownership,
Now Species
Upper Keys
Crocodile Lake National
Wildlife Refuge
94.1
0.7
0.3
Crocodile Lake
Sanctuary
0.7
0.3
Dagney Johnson Key
SS, TS, IS,
Largo Hammock
2.1
259.8
CM, WR,
Botanical State Park
TC
Florida Keys Wildlife
and Environmental
37.7
0.6
TS, IS, TC
Areaz
John Pennecamp Coral
Reef State Park
248.7
0.2
TS, IS, TC
Monroe County
Managed Areas
4.0
0.1
0.2
TS, IS, TC
Naval Air Station
1.7
Tarpon Basin
2.8
TS, TC
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
3.0
40.0
18.6
0.1
78.3
TS, 1S, TC
Upper Keys Total
794.0
101.6
590.9
19.0
3.2
0
0
79.3
Total
County
3,326.1
1,216.4
1,172.9
163.8
47.9
1
0
724.1
rootnotes are the same as for Table 3.7.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 102 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Uodate
The buttonwood wetland is a transitional wetland that is usually more landward than the
salt marsh and may intermix with more upland communities. Buttonwood becomes
abundant and is generally associated with an understory of Sea Daisy, Dropseed, Sea Oxeye
(Borrichia arborescens), Cordgrass, Chestnut Sedge, Christmas Berry (Lycium carolinanum)
and other small shrubs, herbs and graminoids. The open aspect of the association,
resulting from the branching habit of the buttonwoods, allows sunlight to reach the ground
and generates abundant vegetation beneath the trees, where there is typically soil
accumulation. The Wild Allamanda (Urechites lutea) and Rubber Vine (Rhabdadenia
biflora) are also often found on buttonwoods
Moving upland, the transitional zone grades into tropical hardwood hammock. The
landward extent of the tides is marked by the accumulation of litter on the forest floor and
generally corresponds to the hammock boundary. Often, there are small areas of hammock
species within the transitional zone vegetated by small, salt tolerant trees and shrubs.
3.9.4.1.2 Flora of Disturbed Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands
Vegetation of disturbed salt marsh and buttonwood communities may be either a remnant
of what existed prior to the disturbance or what has colonized the site after the
disturbance. Areas of disturbance which are wetted by spring or storm tides, but do not
contain poorly drained saturated soils, are often vegetated by dense stands of small
buttonwoods with an understory of sea daisy and salt tolerant grasses. Individual trees
remain small relative to the stature of buttonwoods growing in undisturbed conditions.
Disturbed areas which are only partially vegetated by buttonwood, but still contain open
zones, are highly susceptible for colonization by invasive plants, such as Brazilian pepper
(Schinus terebinthefolius) and Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia).
3.9.4.1.3 Fauna of Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands
The wildlife found in Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands are discussed in Section
3.12.1.2 (Wildlife Typically Inhabiting Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetland Communities).
3.9.4.2 Existing Commercial Recreational or Conservation Uses of Salt Marsh and
Buttonwood Wetlands
No development activities are permitted in undisturbed saltmarsh and buttonwood
wetlands; the open space requirement is 100 percent (no clearing is allowed). These
habitats are considered one of the most sensitive habitats, and if present on a development
site, clustering is required. Development is only allowed in lands classified as disturbed
with salt marsh and buttonwood association [Section 118-10 (Environmental Design for
Specific Habitat Types)]. Only those salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands that are
determined by KEYWEP to have moderate or low functional capacity are suitable for filling
with appropriate mitigation, but must also be authorized by FDEP and USACE permits.
conservation and Coastal Management 103 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Most of the undisturbed salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands are owned by State and
federal agencies and presumably will not be disturbed. Conservation lands [see Section
3.18.3 (Conservation Lands)] in the Florida Keys which encompass large tracts of
undisturbed salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands include:
• National Key Deer Refuge;
• John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park;
• Lignumvitae Key Aquatic Preserve;
• Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve;
• Coupon Bight Aquatic Preserve;
• Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary; and
• Everglades National Park.
3.9.4.3 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Salt Marsh and
Buttonwood Wetlands
Placement of fill for residential development, accessory structures, and accessways is the
primary source of pollution in salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands in the Keys. Placement
of fill disrupts the local natural drainage pattern, thereby affecting adjacent wetland areas
outside of the immediate area of filling. Homeowners typically introduce non-native plant
material in residential landscaping and, with time, expand the area of disturbance further
into adjacent wetlands. OSTDS serving development sites in salt marsh and buttonwood
wetlands are likely to function improperly due to soil wetness and flooding.
Malfunctioning systems release nutrients and other contaminants into the substrate and
the highly permeable underlying limestone. From there the contaminants move laterally in
groundwater to adjacent wetlands and nearshore waters.
Other pollution problems and concerns related to salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands
include:
• illegal dumping;
• damage from off -road vehicles;
• disruptive activities at the fringe of salt ponds caused by the proximity to developed
land uses;
• altered hydrology due to mosquito ditches, canals, and roads; and
• sea level rise.
3.9.4.4 Potential for Conservation Use or Protection of Salt Marsh and
Buttonwood Wetlands
Current LDRs specify setbacks and the ROGO/NROGO provides restrictions on the
development of undisturbed salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands. Off -road vehicle
trespassing onto salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands could be reduced through improved
posting of private lands and by stepped -up enforcement of trespass laws and illegal use of
Conservation and Coastal Management 104 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
public lands. Protection against illegal dumping could be improved by increased
enforcement of existing dumping regulations.
3.9.5 Beaches
Beaches are addressed below in Section 3.10 (Beach/Berm Communities). Included are
discussions of the following:
• beaches of the Florida Keys;
• flora of beach communities;
• existing commercial, recreational and conservation uses of beaches;
• known pollution problems and/or issues related to beaches;
• past trends in beach erosion and accretion;
• effects of coastal or shore protection structures on beaches;
• existing and potential beach renourishment areas; and
• potential for conservation, use or protection of beaches.
3.9.6 Salt Ponds
Salt ponds are remnants of former open water areas that have been cut off from tidal
connection by storm -built berms or man-made structures. The result is a shallow
impoundment, which receives saltwater during intense storm events and rainwater on a
regular, seasonal basis. They range in size from Jess than one acre to tens of acres. The
best known salt pond system is located along the southeastern shoreline of Key West
landward of South Roosevelt Boulevard (State Route AM). This series of ponds supported
a salt production industry in Key West from 1830 through the 1860s. Other salt ponds are
located on Boca Grande Key, Cudjoe Key, Little Torch Key, Fat Deer Key (Cocoplum Beach),
Ohio Key, and Long Key. Salt ponds are tidal habitats but they are flushed only by the
highest of tides, often just once a year in the fall. For much of the year they can become
highly saline environments (Kalla, 2000). Seasonally variable water depths range from 2
feet to occasionally dry in the late spring. Salinity of pond waters can range from 5 parts
per thousand during heavy rains to as high as 50-100 parts per thousand at the end of the
dry season. Standing water can disappear from all or part of a pond during the dry season
leaving salt deposits on the sediment surface (Kalla, 2000). Because of the typically small
volume of water contained in these ponds, water temperatures approach those of the
ambient air, ranging from 69.4 to 84.9 degrees F (monthly mean, Key West). In the smaller
ponds, and in the large ponds during periods of dry -down, daily water temperature
fluctuations are probably more extreme, with peak summer values in excess of 90 degrees
F.
Salt pond sediments are generally a mixture of organic mud marl and coarser -grained,
calcareous skeletal materials derived from marine organisms. These sediments often have
a reddish color. Their composition reflects a history of both in situ deposition and storm
deposition. In some ponds, there is only a thin (1 to 2 inch) marl layer over the caprock,
whereas in others, sediment depths exceed a foot and are often anaerobic. Although salt
conservation and Coastal Management 105 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
pond systems are subject to harsh extremes in temperature and salinity, they support a
flora and fauna, which are adapted to these extremes and, as a result of the extremes, can
be continually changing.
Salt ponds are mapped together with freshwater ponds. Thus, they are included in Section
3.9.7 (Freshwater Wetlands).
3.9.6.1 Flora of Salt Ponds
Submerged vegetation is either absent or sparse or it can be seasonal. Dominant salt pond
plants include green algae (Batophora oerstedii) and Acetabularia crenulato on coarse
substrates; and Widgeon Grass (Ruppia maritima), algae (Batophora oerstedii) tolerant of
salinity fluctuations, Spike Rush (Eleocharis cellulosa), and Shoal Grass (Halodule wrightii)
rooted in the sediments. Occasional Black Mangrove (Avicennia germinans) and, less
frequently, Red Mangrove (Rhizophoro mangle) are found along the pond banks. The
smaller ponds often contain little or no macroscopic vegetation. In larger ponds the Spike
Rush and occasional mangroves are restricted to the pond margins, while the central area
usually contains no emergent vegetation.
Probably the best adapted biotic component of the salt ponds is the periphyton, an
association of microalgae (primarily blue -greens) that form mat -like structures composed
of fine algal filaments. In wetland areas which periodically dry out, these mats appear as
black crusts on the surface of the caprock or sediment.
3.9.6.2 Fauna of Salt Ponds
The wildlife found in Salt Ponds are discussed in Section 3.12.1.3 (Wildlife Typically
Inhabiting Salt Pond Communities).
3.9.6.3 Existing Commercial Recreational, or Conservation Uses of Salt Ponds
Historically, salt ponds were used for the evaporation of salt for commercial uses. This
practice ended in the 1860s but some of the diversion ditches and berms remain to remind
us of their historic uses. Flooding occurs during the highest tides through culverts, shallow
creeks, broad transitional wetlands or a temporary natural break in the land barrier (e.g.,
Cocoplum Beach) (Kalla, 2000). Currently, salt ponds on Cudjoe Key and Little Torch Key
are located within the limits of the National Key Deer Refuge. Several salt ponds are
located within the Key West National Wildlife Refuge, most notably the historic ponds on
Duck Key. Salt ponds are now well-known tourist (and local) destinations for bird
enthusiasts.
Conservation and Coastal Management 106 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.9.6.4 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Salt Ponds
Until around 1985, salt ponds in the Florida Keys were filled to provide land for
development. Current LDRs (see above) prohibit these activities and State and federal
permits would be needed to fill, drain, or alter salt ponds.
Pollution problems and other concerns related to salt ponds include illegal dumping and
disruptive activities at the edges of salt ponds caused by the proximity to developed land
uses. Illegal dumping is a problem along the perimeter of salt ponds, particularly where
there is vehicular access. Proximity of developed land uses to salt ponds tends to adversely
affect perimeter areas of the wetland. These impacts are typically direct physical effects
caused by landowner dumping of yard debris at the perimeter of residential lots and the
cumulative impacts of homeowners through the years caused by yard improvements, such
as perimeter clearing, minor spot filling, and planting of non-native plant materials.
Disturbance along the edges of salt ponds can cause the colonization of invasive plants,
especially lather leaf (Colubrina asiatica) and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius).
Sea level rise also threatens the hydrology of salt ponds.
3.9.6.5 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Salt Ponds
Section 118-4 of the LDRs prohibits development activities in mangroves, freshwater
wetlands and in undisturbed saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands. The LDRs should be
amended to include salt ponds in this prohibition. However, filling or alteration of salt
ponds would be subject to permit authorization by the SFWMD and/or FDEP and the
USACE. Open space buffers are specified for all wetlands, which would include salt ponds.
Control of exotics should be a priority for the conservation of wildlife functions of salt
ponds. Several restoration projects in salt ponds have been completed by the KERF.
3.9.7 Freshwater Wetlands
A freshwater lens is a small scale aquifer where a shallow pool of water is perched upon
underlying salt water (see Chapter 12.0 Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element).
Seasonal high mean sea level in the fall "pushes" the lens above the ground surface in many
areas (Kalla, 2000). The size of these lenses is controlled by rainfall, freshwater discharge
(seepage, pumpage, runoff, and evapotranspiration), response to tidal fluctuations,
proximity to saltwater bodies, permeability of the subsurface materials, and elevation of
the island above sea level (Klein, 1970; Hanson, 1980; Kalla, 2000). Discharge from these
freshwater lenses is to lower topographic areas. Some groundwater discharge occurs to
mosquito control ditches, where freshwater wetlands dominated by Cattail (Typha spp.)
typically develop.
Permanent freshwater lenses occur on the larger keys, specifically Key West and Big Pine
Key. The largest and best known of the surface freshwater ponds on Big Pine Key is Blue
Hole, a one acre former limestone quarry within the boundaries of the National Key Deer
Conservation and Coastal Management 107 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Wildlife Refuge. Ephemeral or brackish lenses are present on the smaller keys, including
Sugarloaf Key, Little Torch Key, Cudjoe Key, No Name Key, Little Pine Key, and Ramrod Key.
The Lower Keys are more likely to have lenses because of their geometry and geology. By
comparison to those on Big Pine Key, the freshwater lenses on the other keys are much
smaller in size and generally do not have adequate year-round groundwater discharges to
sustain large permanent freshwater pools or wetlands.
Freshwater wetlands were mapped for the Advance Identification of Wetlands (ADID).
However, the current County GIS database was used for this inventory. The inventory of
freshwater wetlands is shown in Table 3.9. A total of 961.1 acres of freshwater wetlands
are in the County. All but 0.5 acres are found in the Lower Keys; none were observed in the
Middle Keys. Of the total amount, 12.3 percent are privately owned. The inventory of
freshwater ponds and salt ponds is shown in Table 3.10. Most open water ponds are
located in the Middle and Lower Keys. Of the total pond area, 15 percent are privately
owned.
3.9.7.1 Flora of Freshwater Wetlands
3.9.7.1.1 Flora ofSawarass Marshes
The most extensive freshwater wetlands in the Keys are the sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense)
marshes of Big Pine Key and adjoining smaller keys. These sawgrass marshes occur along
the edges of the slash pinelands, at slightly lower elevations. The occurrence of the
sawgrass marshes, as well as the pinelands conforms quite closely with the outline of the
two freshwater lenses beneath Big Pine Key (Ross, 1989). The freshwater wetlands include
large, natural, and impounded sloughs in the central portion of Big Pine Key and numerous
smaller interior basins scattered throughout Big Pine Key. The sloughs are important
discharge areas that receive drainage from the freshwater lenses during periods of high
water and, because of their size and extensive ditching, typically contain most of the
surface freshwater on Big Pine Key at any one time (Jackson, 1989). In contrast, the
smaller, interior basins are recharge areas that retain water until it can be absorbed into
the ground and surrounding uplands (Kalla, 2000).
The Sawgrass Marshes are dominated by Sawgrass (Cladium jamaicensis). Other
freshwater marsh species include Saw Sedge (Cyperus ligularis), White -top Sedge
(Rhynchospora floridensis), Giant Leather Fern (Acrostichum damaeifohum), False Foxglove
(Agalinis spp.), Perennial Saltmarsh Aster (Symphyotrichum tenuifolius), Broom Sedge
(Andropogon glomeratus), and Buttonwood (Concocarpus erectus). Two vines, Mangrove
Rubber Vine (Rhabdadenia biflora) and Wild Allamanda (Pentalinom lutea), and a variety of
bromeliads, occasionally occur on the buttonwoods.
Sawgrass occurs ubiquitously in both fresh and brackish wetlands. In areas that contain
brackish water or slightly saline soils, the association often includes other salt tolerant
species including Gulf Coast Spikerush (Eleocharis cellulosa), hurricanegrass (Fimbristylis
cymosa), and seashore dropseed (Sporobolus virginicus). In these areas, buttonwood and
mangroves also frequently occur. In small, shallow solution depression on Big Pine, No
Conservation and Coastal Management 108 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Name, Cudjoe, and Sugarloaf Keys, dense stands of Saw Palmetto (Serenoa repens) are
found closely associated with sawgrass.
While less diverse than the pinelands with which they are typically associated, the
sawgrass marshes contain several State -protected plants, including Pride -of -Big -Pine
(Strumpfia maritima), Joewood Uacquinia keyensis), and bromeliads (Tillandsia spp.).
3.9.7.1.2 Flora of Cattail Marshes
Cattail (Typha spp.) marshes occur less extensively than the Sawgrass marsh on
Knockemdown, Big Pine, Little Torch, Middle Torch, Sugarloaf, and Cudjoe keys. Because
cattail marshes naturally occur well within the confines of hammocks protected from the
xeric atmospheric conditions characteristic of more open areas, they are probably
subjected to saline influences only during hurricanes or tropical storms.
Where organic soils are deeper, these marshes are characterized by almost pure stands of
Cattail. In some, Gulf Coast Spikerush (Eleocharis cellulosa) often occurs in pure stands just
a few inches below the Sawgrass. Buttonwoods and occasional mangroves are present on
the borders, supporting mixed populations of bromeliads (Tillandsia spp.) and Butterfly
Orchid (Encyclia tampensis).
In addition to natural cattail marshes, narrow linear freshwater wetlands dominated by
Cattail occur along mosquito ditches throughout the Keys. These ditches are flooded by
freshwater during the wet season and, due to the high water -holding capacity of the deep
organic layer, contain wet to moist soils throughout the year.
3.9.7.2 Fauna of Freshwater Wetlands
Wildlife found in Freshwater Wetlands is discussed in Section 3.12.1.4 (Wildlife Typically
Inhabiting Freshwater Wetland Communities)
3.9.7.3 Existing Commercial Recreational, or Conservation Uses of Freshwater
Wetlands
Section 118-4 of the LDRs prohibits development activities in freshwater wetlands and the
open space requirement is 100 percent. Open space buffers are specified for all wetlands.
Most freshwater wetlands are protected by the Tier Overlay Ordinance and ROGO/NROGO.
In addition, filling or alteration of freshwater wetlands would be subject to permit
authorization by the SFWMD and/or FDEP and the USACE.
The largest freshwater wetlands on Big Pine Key are included in the National Key Deer
Refuge. Outside of Big Pine Key, freshwater wetlands are found on Cudjoe Key, No Name
Key, Ramrod Key, and Sugarloaf Key. Approximately 117 acres remain in private
ownership.
Conservation and Coastal Management 109 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
' Site names are from the FNAI GIS database.
z Florida Keys Wildlife and Environmental Areas are managed by the FFWCC for the preservation of listed
species that inhabit mangroves, tropical hardwood hammocks, and salt marshes.
s Total in acres.
Ownership information is from the Monroe County Property Appraiser.
s Species recorded are those threatened and endangered species recorded by the USFWS for a particular
parcel; a blank cell does not necessarily indicate an absence of protected species on that parcel(s).
SS = Schaus Swallowtail Butterfly; TS = Tree Snail; IS = Eastern Indigo Snake; WR = Key Largo Woodrat; CM
= Key Largo Cottonmouse; SR = Silver Rice Rat; KD = Key Deer; TC = Tree Cactus
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
... 1-1 vauuu aim uuasrai management 110 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
Table 3.10 - Inventory of Freshwater Ponds and Salt Ponds
Site Name 'Total Federal State County Non- Cities Utilities Private Species ded
Profit
Lower Keys
Bahia Honda
9.2
KD
State Park
Florida Keys
Wildlife and
61.1
0.6
KD, MR, SR
Environmental
Areaz
Great White
Heron National
82.3
2.3
12.9
KD, MR, SR
Wildlife Refuge
John J. Pescatello
Torchwood
20 3
KD
Hammock
Preserve
Monroe County
12.9
KD, SR
Managed Areas
National Key
313.3
50.8
6.5
KD, MR, SR
Deer Refuge
Naval Air Station
241.5
0.1
KD, MR, SR
Saddle Bunch
0.5
SR
Keys
Outside of
71.0
86.8
26.5
6.6
426.5
KD, MR, SR
Parks/Refuges
Lower Keys
1,431.7
708.1
223.1
26.5
27.4
0
0
446.6
Total
Middle Keys
Lignumvitae Key
Botanical State
22.0
Park
Long Key State
15.7
0.2
Park
Outside of
0.7
1.8
14.0
Parks/Refuges
Middle Keys
1,470.6
1,416.2
38.4
2.0
0
0
0
14.0
Total
Upper Keys
Crocodile Lake
National Wildlife
359.6
0.7
0.1
0.2
0.1
Refuge
Crocodile Lake
2.0
3.7
Sanctuary
Cross Key
1.3
Conservation and Coastal Management 111 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Tnhly 11 n _ i.,-.o-,*.,,.., -C -,
•a lvl UZHIWCUCI-
Site Name Total
rungs ana
bait Ponds continued
Federal
DagneyJohnson
State
Coullt.11
Non- Cities Utilitie" Private Species
Profit ltecorde&
Key Largo
Hammock
7
28.2
Botanical State
0.1
Park
Everglades
National Park6
279.8
Florida Keys
Wildlife and
Environmental
58.3
0.1
Areaz
John Pennecamp
Coral Reef State
9.5
Park
0.1
Monroe County
Mang ed Areas
6.5
Tarpon Basin
6.8
1.1
43.7
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
1.9
1.8
3.0
0.1
1.06
117.0
Upper Keys
Total
926.7
650.1
106.1
3.1
49
0
1.0
117.4
Total Coun
3,829.0
2,774.4
367.6
31.6
76.4
0
1.0
578.0
�nntnntPc 1 _K n,. ij—
o
. r , � n
-- --- - I —� L— —11l as ILL 1 an a 3.7.
6 Florida Keys Mosquito Control District
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 112 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.9.7.4 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Freshwater
Wetlands
Freshwater wetlands, ponds, and pools are above -ground expressions of freshwater lenses.
The Big Pine Key lens system is probably the most studied and the best mapped. The
effects of urbanization were documented on both the horizontal and vertical extent of the
lenses, especially the southern lens (Kalla, 2000). Areas of saltwater intrusion were
documented due to freshwater withdrawals. Seasonal changes have also been
documented. Seasonal high tides and heavy rains during the wet season develop strong
outflows.
Until 1986, when the County adopted the Florida Keys Comprehensive Plan, freshwater
wetlands in the Florida Keys were filled routinely for purposes of providing dry land for
development. Some were used as borrow pits or for limestone mining. In 1986, the County
adopted its current LDRs, which effectively stopped such activities in the Keys.
Pollution problems and other concerns related to freshwater wetlands which remain today
include:
• illegal dumping;
• disturbance at the fringe of freshwater wetlands caused by the proximity to developed
land uses;
• colonization by invasive plant species;
• groundwater withdrawals from irrigation wells;
• injection wells for storage of stormwater volumes;
• mosquito ditches and seawater canals; and
• sea level rise.
Illegal dumping is a problem along the perimeter of freshwater wetlands, particularly
where there is vehicular access. This is of special concern due to the potential dumping of
uncontained hazardous wastes which can leach into the soil and enter groundwater.
Some freshwater wetlands are disturbed by off -road vehicles. Wetland plants are very
susceptible to compaction. Where they are killed by repeated vehicular use, soil conditions
are usually unfavorable for their recolonization. Once formed, tracks usually remain bare
or are revegetated by invasive plant species. Colonization by invasive exotic plant species
is a problem at the edges and within freshwater systems.
Proximity of developed land uses to freshwater wetlands tends to adversely affect
perimeter areas of the wetland. These impacts are typically direct physical effects caused
by landowner dumping of yard debris at the perimeter of residential lots and the
cumulative impacts of homeowners through the years caused by yard improvements, such
as perimeter clearing, minor spot filling, and planting of non-native plant materials.
Conservation and Coastal Management 113 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Horizontal flow of groundwater contaminated with nutrients is the major source of
nonpoint source nutrient transport to surface freshwater resources. On Big Pine Key,
nutrient pollution of groundwater results primarily from inadequate treatment of
wastewater by OSTDS, with secondary contamination from discharges or drainfields
(Lapointe, 1989; Lapointe et al., 1999). Other less significant contaminant sources include
cesspits and fertilizers.
Nutrient -polluted groundwater in the freshwater lenses flows down -gradient into surface
waters as a function of "wet -dry" seasonality (Lapointe et al., 1999). Nutrient
concentrations of surface waters are highest in the spring -summer -fall wet season when
there is greater release of contaminated water from the subsurface freshwater lenses.
During this period there are greater man-made loading rates to groundwater (due to
increased transient residential populations) and greater hydraulic head due to increased
rainfall (recharge).
Historically, wells were installed in freshwater lenses. Many of these were installed by
private landowners for domestic water supply for the house and/or landscaping, but there
were also some commercial uses such as irrigation for nurseries. The amount of water
withdrawn from wells is unknown, but anecdotal evidence suggests that withdrawals have
declined due to closure of several plant nurseries and due to closure of individual private
wells for domestic use. When homes connect to the public water supply, the FKAA requires
that homeowners abandon (backfill) their well so that lens water can no longer be
withdrawn. Hanson's study (1980) of the fresh water on Big Pine Key found that continued
pumping from shallow wells would probably not damage the system. However, he projected
that future increased withdrawals from new residences and new or enlarged plant nurseries
would "increase the stress on the freshwater lens which can only supply moderate amounts
without detrimental effects during most years". Indeed, subsequent investigation showed
that the effects of urbanization were being exhibited by the freshwater lens (Stewart et al,
1989). The southeast lens on the Key has decreased in lateral extent and maximum depth
and is clearly affected by saltwater intrusion due to pumping and canal dredging activities. A
modeled simulation of pre -development and current conditions on Big Pine Key showed that
the total volume of the lens has decreased by 20 percent in response to dredging of canals
(Langevin et al., 1998).
The potential effects of sea level rise on freshwater lenses include the decrease in size of
freshwater lens, either on a permanent or seasonal basis. Other factors include a potential
increase in hurricane intensity, which could mean more severe storm surges. Ross et al.
(1994) concluded that sea level rise and associated salinization of groundwater and soil
water is a major factor in the reduction of pine forests of Sugarloaf Key. Ross et al. (1994)
also concluded that as sea level continues to rise, the Florida Keys will experience a decline in
both landscape and species diversity, as species -rich upland communities are replaced by
simpler mangrove communities.
Conservation and Coastal Management 114 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.9.7.5 Potential for Conservation Use or Protection of Freshwater Wetlands
Continued government acquisition of freshwater wetlands in the Lower Keys offers the
greatest opportunity for conservation of these critical resource areas. Acquisition efforts
should continue to focus on freshwater wetlands, freshwater ponds, buffer areas, and the
critical recharge areas of the groundwater lenses which sustain freshwater flows into the
wetland habitat areas.
KERF has completed a number of freshwater restoration projects, with other projects in
various stages of planning and phased restoration. The Fund has removed fill from 35
acres and has removed 4 miles of abandoned roadbed, and the restored water flows have
assumed benefits to approximately 1000 acres of wetland or nearshore waters (Audubon
of Florida website5).
3.9.8 Disturbed Wetlands
3.9.8.1 General Characteristics of Disturbed Wetlands
Disturbed land is defined as follows in the Monroe County LDRs:
"Disturbed land means land that manifests signs of environmental disturbance
which has had an observable effect on the structure and function of the natural
community which existed on the site prior to the disturbance."
The current land use maps do not include a separate category for disturbed wetlands.
Instead, most disturbed wetlands are included in the Undeveloped Land category, although
some disturbed wetlands are mapped as mangrove, buttonwood, or other wetland habitats.
According to the land use cover class maps, undeveloped lands are defined as,
"... open, scarified, or disturbed lands which tend to have uncertain land uses and
may contain native species."
Although this category contains mostly upland disturbed habitats, it may also contain
disturbed wetlands.
Consistent with these definitions, disturbed wetland communities show obvious signs of
environmental disturbance which has had an observable effect on the original wetland
community. The current LDRs allow filling only in Disturbed Salt Marsh and Buttonwood
Wetlands with appropriate mitigation; all other wetland categories have open space
requirements of 100 percent. Further, only those disturbed Salt Marsh and Buttonwood
Wetlands that have a KEYWEP score below 7.0 (or are assigned a green flag) are suitable
for filling with appropriate mitigation, as determined by the FDEP and the USACE. All
S http://www.audubonofflorida.org/specialplaces_FloridaKeys.html, accessed June 2, 2010.
Conservation and Coastal Management 115 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
projects shall require documentation that all aspects of FDEP and USACE mitigation have
been satisfied prior to issuance of a county building permit. According to the LDRs, this is
the only wetland community that is still assessed using KEYWEP.
In the Keys, a number of human activities have created disturbed wetlands, including:
• placement of fill or dredge spoils on wetlands,
• clearing of vegetation,
• removal of topsoil,
• impoundment of wetlands,
• drainage of surface waters,
• blockage of surface drainage,
• restriction of tidal circulation,
• introduction of exotic vegetation, and
• excavation or dredging of uplands or wetlands.
These activities have re -directed or delayed primary succession and have caused
"secondary succession" to take place. Secondary succession occurs on sites where the
natural community has been removed, resulting in a bare area open to invasion by
colonizing plants and animals. The degree to which wetlands have been altered will have
an effect on the functional value of the wetland.
Disturbed wetlands were mapped and evaluated as part of the ADID program [see Section
3.9.2 (Monroe County Advance Identification of Wetlands (ADID) Program)]. The ADID
program recommended a functional definition for disturbed wetlands, which was
incorporated into the LDRs. Vegetation typical of disturbed salt marsh and buttonwood
wetlands is described in Section 3.9.4.1.2 (Flora of Disturbed Salt Marsh and Buttonwood
Wetlands).
3.9.8.2 Existing Commercial Recreational or Conservation Uses of Disturbed
Wetlands
Section 3.9.4.2 (Existing Commercial, Recreational, Or Conservation Uses of Salt Marsh and
Buttonwood Wetlands) contains further discussion of existing uses and regulatory
procedures applicable to disturbed salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands).
3.9.8.3 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Disturbed Wetlands
Based upon the present County, State and federal policies and regulations, permits would
only be issued for projects in Disturbed Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands subject to
mitigation requirements. As noted in Section 3.9.1 (Wetlands Permitting and Wetlands
Protection Planning in Monroe County), mitigation takes the form of compensation and/or
compliance with environmental design criteria as outlined in the LDRs, or, in the case of
larger residential or commercial projects, design and implementation of individual
environmental creation or restoration projects.
Conservation and Coastal Management 116 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Disturbed Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands are one of the habitat types that are
commonly colonized by invasive exotic vegetation. Disturbed habitats are often the focus
of projects undertaken by the County Land Steward and the Florida Keys Invasive Exotic
Task Force. Sea level rise also threatens disturbed wetlands.
3.9.8.4 Potential for Conservation Use or Protection of Disturbed Wetlands
In general, development is directed to disturbed sites, including disturbed wetlands
through ROGO/NROGO and the Tier Overlay maps. Projects undertaken by KERF, the
Florida Keys Invasive Exotic Task Force, and the County Land Steward routinely include
disturbed wetlands as well -as other disturbed habitat types. In addition, mitigation
projects implemented as part of larger residential or commercial projects have also
restored areas of privately -owned disturbed wetlands throughout the Florida Keys. The
restoration of Disturbed Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands may be desirable in areas
where they are adjacent to other high quality habitats. If practical and desired, restoration
of these wetlands should be undertaken to restore biological functions.
Currently in the regulations, disturbed wetlands that are suitable for filling have a KEYWEP
score below 7.0 (or are assigned a green flag). However, based on the Technical Summary
Document for the Advance Identification of Wetlands of the Florida Keys (Kalla, 2000), the
County should consider revising that criterion to those wetlands that receive a KEYWEP
total functional index of 5.5 or less (Kalla, 2000).
3.9.9 Exotic Vegetation
The exotic vegetation land use category includes only vacant lands that are dominated by
extensive stands of invasive exotic plants, primarily Australian pine (Casuarina
equisetifolia) and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius). These species can form dense
stands that can be discerned on aerial photographs. A list of Florida's exotic plant species
is maintained by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (2009) and locally by the Keys
Exotics Task Force. The inventory of exotic -dominated lands is shown in Table 3.11. Most
of the exotic vegetation cover is located on privately -owned lands (61.8 percent). Of the
lands that are publicly -owned, most of exotic dominated lands are located on Naval Air
Station lands.
Numerous efforts are underway in the Florida Keys to control the proliferation of exotic
plants and animals in the Florida Keys. Since 2005, the Monroe County Land Steward has
undertaken numerous exotic plant removal projects in County -owned parcels, using annual
grant funding from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Invasive Plant
Management Section. The Land Steward is a partner with the Florida Keys Invasive Exotics
Task Force (Task Force). Task Force partners include the County, State and federal
agencies, non -profits and public utilities. The Task Force coordinates efforts to eliminate
invasive, non-native plant and animal species. The County should continue this partnering
with the Task Force.
Conservation and Coastal Management 117 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.10 Beach/Berm Communities [Rule 9J-5.012 (2) (0, F.A.C.]
3.10.1 Beach/Berm Communities of the Florida Keys
Beach/berm communities in the Florida Keys are relatively uncommon and are not directly
comparable to the broad coastal strand communities in other areas of the State (Florida
DNR, 1989; USFWS, 2009). The discontinuous beaches of the Florida Keys and the islands
west of Key West are formed primarily of shell fragments rather than quartz sands. The
most significant dune system is located in the Cape Sable area (USFWS, 1999). Extensive
beach development outside the mainland is precluded by the offshore coral reefs and
gently sloping bottom of Hawk Channel which dispense oceanic wave energy, Where
beaches and wetlands are not present, the shoreline is characterized by exposed, pitted,
and pinnacled limestone.
The typical beach system in the Keys is comprised of a beach and an associated berm. The
most seaward component is the "beach" which is usually calcium carbonate sand, with
varying percentages of shell fragments, that extends from the upper berm to the low water
mark (Clark, 1977; Johnson and Barbour, 2001). In the Keys, beaches are typically 15 to 25
feet in width, reaching a maximum width of 60 feet in a few areas, such as on Bahia Honda
Key.
The berm is a mound or ridge of unconsolidated sand that is immediately landward of, and
usually parallel to, the shoreline and beach. The berm is higher in elevation than both the
beach and the area landward of the berm, ranging from slightly above mean high water to
more than 7 feet above mean sea level. Berms in the Keys vary in width from 20 to 200
feet. In some locations berms occur without a beach along the shoreline. Instead, there is a
narrow band of fringing mangroves along the waterward edge of the berm.
FNAI has completed an inventory of the beaches of the Florida Keys (Johnson and Gullege,
2005). Findings of the inventory of beach/berm communities indicate that they are not
common in the Keys (see Table 3.12). In general, beach frequency increases to the
southwest, with the largest percentage of land mass composed of beach found on Bahia
Honda Key, the outer islands west of Key West (Sand Keys), the Marquesas Keys, and the
Dry Tortugas.
A total of 82.7 acres of beach/berm habitat is found in the Florida Keys. Of that total, most
is found in the Lower Keys (81 percent) and 39 percent are owned by the State.
Approximately 20 percent of the beaches are privately -owned. Numerous other natural
beaches occur on the mainland and on the islands west of Key West (Sand Keys, Marquesas
Keys, and Dry Tortugas). There are no natural beaches in the Upper Keys, north of Upper
Matecumbe Key.
The methods used to inventory beach/berm habitats are described in Section 3.8 (Living
Marine Resources). Map Series 3.3 depicts the beach/berm habitats within the Upper,
Middle, and Lower Keys.
conservation and Coastal Management 118 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Com
Table 3.11- Inventory of Exotic Vegetation Habitats
ive Plan Update
Site Name Total Federal State County, Noll- Cities Utilities Private species
Profit Recorded`
Lower Keys
Florida Keys
Wildlife and
0.1
KD
Environmental
Area'
Great White
Heron
National
3.5
1.2
0.2
KD, SR
Wildlife
Refuge
Monroe
County
3.3
KD, SR
Managed
Areas
National Key
5.7
0.8
0.1
KD, MR, SR
Deer Refuge
Naval Air
43.8
0.1
0.2
MR
Station
Outside of
6.7
2.1
9.9
2.1
0.9
96.8
KD, MR, SR
Parks/Refuges
Lower Keys
177.5
59.7
7.6
10.0
2.1
0.9
0
97.2
Total
Middle Keys
Lignumvitae
Key Botanical
0.9
State Park
Outside of
0.4
14.3
Parks/Refuges
Middle Keys
15.6
0
0
0.4
0
0
0
15.2
Total
Upper Keys
Dagney
Johnson Key
Largo
3.5
Hammock
Botanical State
Park
John
Pennecamp
0.9
Coral Reef
State Park
Outside of
0.2
1.2
27.4
Parks/Refuges
Upper Keys
33.2
0
4.6
1.2
0
0
0
27.4
Total
Total County
226.3
59.7
12.2
11.6
2.1
0.9
0
139.8
Unincornorated areas only.
Footnotes 1-5 are the same as in Table 3.9.
Conservation and Coastal Management 119 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe Countv Com
Table 3.12 - Inventory of Beach/Berm Habitats
Plan Update
Site Name Noll Ownership'
Lower Keys
Bahia Honda State
Park
19.8
KD
John J. Pescatello
Torchwood
Hammock
3 1
KD, MR
Preserve
National Key Deer
Refuge
7'8
0.1
KD, MR
Naval Air Station
2.2
Outside of
MR
Parks/Refuges
1.2
1.8
7.5
11.6
12.0
KD, MR, SR
Lower Keys Total
67.1
11.2
21.6
7 1,
14.7
0
0
12.1
Middle Keys
Long Key State
Park
8.0
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
1.2
2.5
Middle Ke s Total
11.7
0
9.2
0
0
0
0
2.5
U er Keys
John Pennecamp
Coral Reef State
1.3
Park
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
0.5
0.2
1.9
Upper Keys Total
3.9
0
1.8
0.2
0
0
0
1.9
Total County
82.7
11.2
32.6
7.7
14.7
0
0
16.5
vu -V1 yV1aLUU dl CdJ Ullly.
Footnotes 1-5 are the same as in Table 3.9.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
uunservauon ana coastal Management 120 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.10.2 Flora of Beach/Berm Communities
The County categorizes the Beach/Berm Community whereas FNAI recognizes five
subtypes of coastal upland communities in the County. Moving landward from the
shoreline, these include:
• Beach Dune;
• Coastal Berm;
• Coastal Strand;
• Rock Barren; and
• Maritime Hammock.
This generalized zonation scheme (exclusive of the coastal rock barren) is typically found
only on the most highly developed beach systems, such as on the keys between Key West
and the Dry Tortugas and on Cape Sable. On the remaining keys, this distinct zonation,
with some variation, occurs on Bahia Honda, Lower Sugarloaf, Big Pine, Newfound Harbor
Keys, and Content Keys. On other keys, this zonation complex is not as well developed.
The Beach Dune association is dominated by plants that are salt tolerant, root quickly,
germinate from seed rapidly, and can withstand wave wash and shifting sand. Commonly
found species include the Sea Purslane (Sesuvium portulacastrum), Railroad Vine (Ipomoea
pes-caprae), Beach Grass (Panicum amarum), Sea Oats (Uniola paniculata), Sea Lavender
(Argusia gnapholodes), Coastal Ragweed (Ambrosia hispida), Bay Cedar (Suriana maritima),
Sand Spur (Cenchrus spp.), and Sand Dune Spurge (Chamaesyce bombensis). On most
beaches this association occurs only at the base of the berm since the beach is very narrow.
The Coastal Berm association begins with a steep and distinct increase in slope upward
from the beach. The foreslope of the berm is vegetated primarily by species found in the
Beach Dune association. Proceeding landward, these pioneer species are joined by others,
such as Chaff Flower (Alternanthera maritima), Sea Daisy (Borrichia frutescens), Cordgrass
(Spartina patens), Beach Orach (Atriplex arenaris), Spider Lily (Hymenocallis latifolia), and
Sea Rocket (Cakile lanceolata). On a number of beaches, Australian Pines (Casuarina
equisetifolia) have become established in this zone. Another exotic, Lather Leaf (Colubrina
asiatica), has also become established, forming dense thickets in the seaward portion of the
berm.
The Coastal Strand association is generally considered a transition zone between the
Coastal Berm and hammock forests. Shrubs and occasional trees occur more frequently
and become more abundant moving landward. Species often found include Seagrape
(Coccoloba uvifera), Wild Sage (Lantana involucrata), Seven-year Apple (Genipa clusiifolia),
Blolly (Guapira discolor), Yellow Nicker (Caesalpina crista), Blackbead (Pithecellobium
guadalupense), Nightshade (Solanum bahamense), and the Erect Prickly Pear (Opuntia
sticta). Occasional larger trees include Buttonwood, Seagrape, Blolly, Gumbo Limbo
(Bursera simaruba), and Jamaica Dogwood (Piscidia piscipula). Vegetation occurring as an
understory or in open areas includes many of the above mentioned graminoids and herbs,
Conservation and Coastal Management 121 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
as well as Rose Natal Grass (Rhynchelytrum repens), Spanish Needles (Bidens alba) and
Yellowtop (Flaveria linearis).
Coastal rock barren is known from four sites in the Florida Keys (USFWS, 1999; Johnson
and Gulledge, 2005). It is an ecotonal community occurring as tiny patches along rocky
shorelines in the Keys. It occurs on Key Largo limestone and is inhabited by spiny species
including Triangle Cactus (Acanthocereus tetragonus), Erect Pricklypear, and False Sisal
(Agave decipiens) and a variety of weedy herbs and shrubs. It appears to develop after
disturbance, either man-made or natural and probably would not be recognized as a
separate community except for the presence of several rare plants, notably Garber's spurge
(Chamaesyce garberi), Spanish Lady (Opuntia triacanthos), and Florida Keys Indigo
(Indigofera trita) (USFWS, 1999).
The most landward zone on the berm is occupied by Maritime Hammocks, which is only
found in the well -developed beach dune system of Cape Sable (USFWS, 1999). It has a low -
diversity canopy of live oak (Quercus virginiana), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), and sweet
bay (Persea borbonia) with a variety of small trees and shrubs, such as Black Bead
(Pithecellobium keyense) and the stoppers (e.g., Eugenia axillaris). In the Florida Keys, this
habitat is replaced by tropical hardwood hammocks, which have a limestone substrate (see
Tropical Hardwood Hammocks Section 3.11.1 [Tropical Hardwood Hammocks) below).
3.10.3 Existing Commercial, Recreational, or Conservation Uses of Beach/Berm
Communities
Developed uses on natural beaches in the Keys are generally limited to single family homes
and condominiums. In some locations, most notably at Holiday Isle and Islamorada, hotel
owners have built beaches which are used for tourist commercial uses.
Several beaches are protected through public ownership and are available for public
recreation purposes (see Table 3.12). A total of 16.5 acres of beach/berm habitat remains
in private ownership. An additional 14.7 acres is owned by non -profits organizations (Boy
Scouts, Girl Scouts, Seacamp).
3.10.4 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Beach/Berm
Communities
Pollution problems and disturbances related to beach/berm communities in the Keys
include the following:
• general loss of beach/berm habitat to developed land uses;
• clearing of berm vegetation for land development;
• establishment of exotic vegetation;
• beach erosion due to human use and off -road vehicles;
• natural beach erosion; and
• sea level rise.
Conservation and Coastal Management 122 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
Because most beaches in the Keys are narrow, the shoreline setback effectively restricts
development activities on beaches. However, development is permitted on berms, subject
to environmental design criteria which limit clearing, impervious surfaces, lighting,
excavations, fill, and landscaping. Section 118-10(3) of the LDR specifies that all structures
be elevated on pilings or other supports within a beach berm habitat. The LDRs also
regulates excavation, filling, and clearing of beach berm vegetation. State and federal
regulations also regulate these types of activities. Section 118-12 also specifies setback
requirements for the placement of structures and accessory buildings within or near the
beach berm habitat. Native vegetation must be preserved to the maximum extent.
Seawalls, bulkheads, riprap or other shoreline hardening structures are prohibited on or
waterward of any portion of any beach berm complex that is known to be or is potential
nesting area for marine turtles.
In general, widespread establishment of exotic vegetation has placed Keys beach
communities under stress. The most invasive species are Australian pine (Casuarina
equisetifolia), beach naupaka (Scaevola taccada), and latherleaf (Colubrina asiatica), all of
which are very competitive with native plants. Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthefolius)
may also be a problem in some areas, but is not nearly as widespread on beaches in the
Keys.
Beach erosion is typically due to natural causes, exacerbated by human activities (walking,
off -road vehicles, and disturbances associated with adjacent development), which have
disturbed natural beach vegetation, facilitated colonization by invasive plants, and
weakened the sandy beach substrate.
3.10.5 Past Trends in Beach Erosion and Accretion
Past trends in beach erosion and accretion in the Florida Keys have been documented by
the FDEP (2009). There are five critically eroded beach areas (4.6 miles) and one
noncritically eroded beach areas (1.0 mile) within the unincorporated portion of the
County (Table 3.13). Trends at the Sand Keys west of Key West (including Woman Key,
Boca Grande Key, the Marquesas Keys, and the Tortugas Keys) and Cape Sable are not
available because of insufficient historic data (FDEP, 2002). However, Cape Sable beaches
sustained severe erosion conditions due to Hurricane Wilma in 2005 and are currently
being monitored (FDEP, 2009).
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 123 Technical Document: May 2011
Table 3.13 -Monroe Coun
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
Eroded Beaches
Long Key (Long Key
Updated surveys and park management decisions are
State Park)
1.0
currently needed to determine environmentally
acceptable erosion control alternatives.
Little Crawl Key (Curry
0 1
No current recommendations; recent restoration
Hammock State Park)
project
Little Duck Key
0.2
No current recommendations; recent restoration
project
Bahia Honda Key (Bahia
2 0
No current recommendations; recent restoration
Honda State Park)
project
Big Pine Key (Long
Beach)
1.0
No current recommendations
Boca Chica Key
1.3
No current recommendations; recent restoration
project
Total
4.6
1.0
Source: FDEP 2008 and FDEP 2009
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
uvnservanon ana Loastai Management 124 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.10.5.1 General Beach Accretion Trends
In general, beach formation in the Keys is limited by reduced wave action in the Straits of
Florida coupled with a lack of sand available for transport. The southward net transport of
sand along the Atlantic barrier beaches of Florida, which builds and renourishes the
beaches of South Florida north of the Keys, diminishes substantially at the southern end of
Miami -Dade County. While quartz sand deposits do exist in shoals south of Key Biscayne,
there is little southward sand transport from there to Soldier Key. There are a number of
physical reasons for the lack of sand transport between the barrier islands and the Florida
Keys. Little Bahama Back and Great Bahama Bank provide substantial protection to the
shoreline from Atlantic Ocean swell. As a result, wave action needed to transport sand to
the shore is greatly diminished in the Straits of Florida. Furthermore, in offshore areas any
sand which may exist is influenced by the strong northward current of the Gulf Stream
which blocks southward sediment transport (Florida DNR, 1989).
As a result of these conditions, the narrow beaches characteristic of the Keys are created by
an interaction of low wave energy and coarse sand. The berms or sand ridges result from
storm waves which transport sand from the shallow submerged bottoms and beach zones
landward. The sands that form the beaches and berms of the Keys are of carbonate origin
derived from the erosion of limestone, from aragonite particles precipitated from seawater,
and from the fragmented remains of corals, cast-off shells, and calcareous algae. These
fragmentary particles are generally coarse and angular, in contrast to the fine particles of
silica that form the sands of Panhandle beaches. This coarse fraction of sediments is sorted
from the fine by the action of waves and currents. Coarse material is deposited in the
higher energy areas such as beaches and slope tops of channels, whereas the fine muds end
up in quiescent areas such as mud banks, shallow embayments, and mangrove fringes.
Subsequent to deposition of this material on the beach, it is either carried upward to the
berm by storm waves or transported offshore by nearshore currents. Because of its
relatively large size and angularity, this sand is not readily transported by the wind as are
the siliceous sands of mainland beaches. This explains the absence in the Keys of the
shifting or high dunes characteristic of beaches on the middle Atlantic shore. FDEP does
not report beach accretion trends and this may be due to the lack of appreciable longshore
drift in the Florida Keys (FDEP, 2002; FDEP, 2009).
3.10.5.2 Beach Erosion Trends
In 1986, pursuant to Sections 161.101 and 161.161, Florida Statutes, the Florida
Department of Natural Resources, Division of Beaches and Shores (now the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems) was
directed to identify critically eroding beaches and to develop and maintain a
comprehensive long-term management plan for their restoration. This inventory was
updated in 2009 (FDEP, 2009).
Conservation and Coastal Management 125 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Erosion in the Florida Keys is attributed to tropical storms and hurricanes and to natural
erosion caused by the pattern of littoral transport of sediments in this area. However,
natural shoreline changes are exaggerated by sediment transport with seawalls and
revetments. The most erosive storms in recent years were Hurricane Andrew (1992;
Upper Keys), Hurricane Georges (1998), which caused extensive property damage
throughout the Keys and significant beach erosion at many locations, Hurricane Irene
(1999; Middle and Lower Keys), and Hurricanes Rita and Wilma (2005; throughout the
keys including the Sand Keys) (FDEP, 2008). The critically eroded beaches, as defined by
FDEP, are listed in Table 3.13.
3.10.5.2.1 Lona Kev State Park
Long Key State Park has a 1.0 mile segment of critically eroded beach. Park officials have
estimated shoreline recession to be as much as three feet per year since the park was
opened in 1970. A rock revetment was constructed along a limited segment of shoreline in
1976; however, erosion end effects are most apparent adjacent to the structure. The park
was severely impacted by Hurricanes Georges and Irene in 1998 and 1999. Beach and
dune restoration was considered necessary after these storms, and a feasibility study was
initiated by the FDEP. In 2005, Hurricanes Rita and Wilma combined to severely impact
the park and destroyed all the waterfront campsites and infrastructure.
3.10.5.2.2 Curry Hammock State Park Little Crawl Key
Curry Hammock State Park has a 0.1 mile segment of critically eroded beach where
recreational interests are threatened. In 2005, Hurricanes Rita and Wilma combined to
severely impact the park. In 2005, a feasibility study was completed to investigate sand
sources for state parks in the Keys, including Curry Hammock State Park. The Curry
Hammock State Park Beach Restoration Project was constructed via truck with removal of
inappropriate fill and 14,450 cubic yards of sand in April 2008.
3.10.5.2.3 Little Duck Kev
Little Duck Key has a 0.2 mile segment of critically eroded beach and is the site of Veteran's
Memorial Park. Hurricane Wilma (2005) caused moderate beach and dune erosion and
destroyed all the park facilities. In April 2006, this segment was designated as critically
eroded threatening recreational interests at the county park. The FDEP assisted in the park
recovery by bringing sand from approved upland borrow sites, placed in an alongshore
berm configuration above mean high water, and stabilized with plantings of native
vegetation.
3.10.5.2.4 Bahia Honda State Park
Bahia Honda Key has three erosional areas. Within Bahia Honda State Park, Calusa Beach
(between the bridges), Loggerhead Beach (a western segment) fronting on the Straits of
Florida, and a stretch of Sandspur Beach at the east end have a total of 2.0 miles of critically
Conservation and Coastal Management 126 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
eroded beaches. The most significant carbonate beaches and dunes of the lower Keys are
on Bahia Honda Key, which is part of Bahia Honda State Park. The estimated annual
longshore transport of more than 2,000 cubic yards of sediment is to the southwest.
Several attempts have been made to armor, build groins, and fill the eroding areas since the
early 1970s. In 1989, a 100-foot long groin and restoration was constructed at Calusa
Beach, the 600 foot long recreation beach between the Flagler Bridge and the U.S. 1 bridge.
The western 3,500 feet of Loggerhead Beach fronting the Straits of Florida, also designated
critically eroded, receded about 5 feet between 1971 and 1986. Erosion control efforts
have included the placement of concrete bridge piles near the west end, riprap along the
400 to 500 feet of threatened roadway in the early 1970s, the 1988/89 construction of a
1,200 foot long limerock revetment, and substantial sea oats planting during the 1980s and
1990s. Hurricane Georges (1998) caused major beach and dune erosion and severely
damaged the park facilities, roadway, and bridge. Hurricane Rita (2005) inflicted minor
beach and dune erosion at Calusa Beach and Sandspur Beach, and minor to moderate beach
and dune erosion at Loggerhead Beach. Hurricane Wilma (2005) caused moderate to
major beach and dune erosion at Calusa Beach and Loggerhead Beach, and minor dune
erosion with beach accretion within the critically eroded portion of Sandspur Beach.
Wilma also caused severe damage to the park's recreation facilities at the public beaches.
During post -storm recovery operations, overwash sediments were returned to the beaches.
In 2005, a feasibility study was completed to investigate sand sources for State Parks in the
Keys, including Bahia Honda State Park. FDEP assisted in the recovery of storm erosion
impacts to public beaches above mean high water by trucking sand from approved upland
borrow sites and placed it in a berm configuration, and stabilized with plantings of native
vegetation.
3.10.5.2.5 Big Pine Key
Big Pine Key has a 1.0-mile segment of critically eroded beach. FDEP did not evaluate this
beach in their 2009 report. No current recommendations have been provided (FDEP
2009).
3.10.5.2.6 Boca Chica Key
Boca Chica Key has 1.3 mile segment of critically eroded beach and a County park.
Hurricanes Georges (1998) and Irene (1999) caused moderate to major beach and dune
erosion and road damage in this area. In 2005, Hurricane Rita caused minor beach and
dune erosion and Hurricane Wilma caused moderate to major beach and dune erosion.
Rita caused overwash deposits onto Boca Chica Beach Road and Wilma destroyed much of
the road. FDEP assisted in the recovery of storm erosion impacts to public beaches above
mean high water by trucking sand from approved upland borrow sites and placed it in a
berm configuration, and stabilized with plantings of native vegetation.
Conservation and Coastal Management 127 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.10.6 Effects of Coastal or Shore Protection Structures on Beach/Berm
Communities
Coastal protection structures have been used throughout the Keys for purposes of reducing
shoreline erosion, including erosion on beaches. Groins and other erosion measures have
been used at Bahia Honda State Park (FDEP, 2009). The FDEP has not specifically
identified any instances of adverse impacts on beaches associated with shoreline
protection structures, such as groins, breakwaters, riprap and bulkheads (FDEP, 2008).
3.10.7 Existing and Potential Beach Renourish men t Areas
Beach renourishment projects (discussed above) have occurred at several beaches in
unincorporated Monroe County, including beaches at Little Duck Key, Bahia Honda State
Park, and Boca Chica Key. In addition, FDEP has evaluated beach and dune restoration
options at Long Key State Park. These beach restoration projects have primarily been for
post -storm recovery.
The County and the USACE are eligible governmental entities under the beach erosion
control assistance program. The County and the City of Key West have participated with
the FDEP as the local sponsors of beach management projects. In addition, the Florida
Division of Recreation and Parks manages state parks on Long Key, Little Crawl Key, Indian
Key, Lignumvitae Key, Bahia Honda, and Key West, and is responsible for environmental
resource management of all the wet sandy beaches of the keys under the FKNMS program.
Project cost estimates and schedules may be found in the Florida Beach Management
Funding Assistance Program - Long Range Budget Plan.
3.10.8 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Beach/Berm Communities
The FDEP has completed several beach restoration projects in response to recent
hurricanes (Table 3.13). With the exception of unspecified needs to address beach erosion
on Long Key, FDEP has no current recommendations.
Acquisition is the most direct means of preserving remaining undisturbed beach/berm
habitat areas in the Keys. This can be accomplished for some high priority beaches,
particularly those which are suitable for recreation use. The County permits a limited
number of uses in beach/berm areas. The Tier Overlay Ordinance establishes open space
requirements based on the tier [see Section 3.19 (Effects of Future Land Use on Natural
Resources)].
3.11 Upland Vegetation [Rule 9J-5.013(1)(a) and (b), F.A.C.]
There are two native upland biological communities in the Florida Keys. These are:
• tropical hardwood hammocks, the climax terrestrial community, and
• pinelands, a fire -climax system.
conservation and Coastal Management 128 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Many upland areas in the Keys have experienced disturbance of some kind which has
interfered with natural succession in upland communities. These uplands are referred to
collectively as "disturbed lands."
The methods used to inventory upland habitats are described in Section 3.8 (Living Marine
Resources). Map Series 3.3 depicts the Tropical Hardwood Hammock and Pinelands
habitats within the Upper, Middle, and Lower Keys.
3.11.1 Tropical Hardwood Hammocks
Tropical hardwood hammocks constitute the climax terrestrial community of South Florida
and the Keys. This community is probably the richest in diversity, with approximately 100
species of wide tropical occurrence, present in the Keys and nowhere else in the
continental United States. They are also called Rockland Hardwood Hammock or Rockland
Hammock in recent texts because of their location in outcroppings of limestone. The soil of
these hammocks consists mostly of a thin layer of partially decomposed organic matter
resting directly on a porous limestone substrate. This humus layer allows increased soil
moisture relative to other communities in the Keys. Many of the hammock trees generate
the leaf litter layer themselves, thus preparing the substrate for other species. The closed
canopy of hammocks is insulative, moderating thermal extremes (Olmstead and Loope,
1984; Taylor, 1998; USFWS, 1999) and reducing the loss of soil moisture. The inventory of
tropical hardwood hammocks within the Florida Keys is shown in Table 3.14. There is a
total of 7,283.8 acres of hammock in the Florida Keys (incorporated areas and mainland
hammocks are not included) and they are found in approximate equal proportions in the
Upper, Middle, and Lower Keys. Of the total acreage, 75 percent are protected by federal
and State ownership and 20 percent are privately -owned.
The structure and composition of tropical hardwood hammocks in the Florida Keys are
variable and are influenced by several factors, including fire and hurricane disturbances,
local gradients of saltwater influence, surrounding vegetation types, and the elevation and
character of the limestone substrate (Snyder et al., 1990). Species composition differs
between the Upper, Middle, and Lower Keys (USFWS, 1999; Ross et al., 1992). Because
trees are shallow -rooted, hurricanes can seriously damage a hammock by uprooting or
breaking the limbs of large trees.
3.11.1.1 Flora of Tropical Hardwood Hammocks
Hammock communities occur as isolated stands of hardwoods or "tree islands". These
distinct tree islands consist of broadleaved evergreen hardwood species mainly of a West
Indian distribution and are typically surrounded by pinelands or wetland vegetative
communities which occur in wetter soils (Tomlinson, 1980; Snyder et al., 1990; Taylor,
1998; USFWS, 1999). They are closely associated with tropical pinelands on the larger
keys, most notably on Big Pine Key. The island -like character is most evident on mainland
Monroe County, where raised areas among the pinelands and freshwater wetlands harbor
hammock forests. In the Keys, the natural topographic configuration of the islands,
especially in the Upper Keys, has favored development of large stands of hardwoods
(Snyder et al., 1990; Ross et al., 1992).
Conservation and Coastal Management 129 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Bahia Honda
TS, KD, MR,
State Park
21.5
Florida Keys
TC
Wildlife and
Environmental
0.4
504.4
0.8
12 1
TS, IS, KD,
Areal
MR, SR, TC
Great White
Heron National
216.3
3.5
1.4
3.7
TS, IS, KD,
Wildlife Refu e
MR, SR, TC
John J. Pescatello
Torchwood
Hammock
32.6
TS, IS, KD,
Preserve
MR, TC
Monroe County
Mana ed Areas
0.2
20.0
0.1
0.2
TS, IS, KD,
National Key
MR, SR, TC
Deer Refu e
1,523.2
:E.
0.5
0.6
TS, IS, KD,
--
MR, SR, TC
Naval Air Station
79.2
TS, IS, MR,
Saddle
Saddle Bunch
SR, TC
s
2.9
TS, IS, KD,
Outside of
MR, SR, TC
Parks/Refuges
50.8
126.3
161.3
24.5
1.7
801.0
TS, IS, KD,
Lower Keys
MR, SR, TC
Total
3,744.5
1,870.1
831.6
164.1
60.00
1.7
0
817.6
Middle Keys
Key
Botanical State
157.3
[Lignumvitae
Park
TS, IS, TC
Long Key State
Park
77•8
0.7
TS, IS, TC
Outside of
Parks/Refuges
1.3
2.0
9.6
TS, IS, TC
Middle Keys
Total
248.7
0
236.4
2
0
0
0
10.3
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
��__��• �"LAVI. "IJU ..uantaj management 130 Technical Document: May 0011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.14 - Inventory of Tropical Hardwood Hammock Habitats (continued
FederalSite Name Total
Recorded'Profit
Upper Keys
Crocodile Lake
SS, TS, IS,
National
527.6
74.0
1.1
0.9
CM, WR,
Wildlife Refuge_
TC
SS, TS, IS,
Crocodile Lake
0.2
CM, WR,
Sanctuary
TC
Dagney
Johnson Key
SS, TS, IS,
Largo
23.5
1,273.7
0.1
1.5
CM, WR,
Hammock
TC
Botanical State
Park
Florida Keys
Wildlife and
130.9
0.1
2.6
TS, IS, TC
Environmental
Areaz
John
Pennecamp
255.2
6.8
0.36
2.2
Coral Reef
State Park
Curry
Hammock
2.1
2.7
TS, TC
State Park
Monroe County
12.9
0.2
0.5
TS, IS, TC
Managed Areas
SS, TS, IS,
Naval Air
18.5
3.4
CM, WR,
Station
TC
Tarpon Basin
9.7
0.1
TS, IS, TC
Outside of
45.4
161.0
110.7
2.1
1.2
619.4
TS, IS, TC
Parks/Refuges
Upper Keys
3,290.6
615.0
1,911.1
118.9
14.1
1.3
0.3
629.9
Total
Total
7,283.8
2,485.1
2.979.1
285.0
74.1
3.0
0.3
1,457.8
County
Unincorporated areas only; does not include mainland hammocks.
Footnotes 1-5 are the same as in Table 3.9.
6 Key Largo Wastewater Treatment
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 131 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The drier climate and well -drained soils of the Keys relative to the mainland also allow
establishment of well -developed stands of tropical hardwoods, to the virtual exclusion of
temperate species. Hammock vegetation on the Keys may include a higher proportion of
species which are rare on the mainland, such as Milkbark (Drypetes diversifolia);
Lignumvitae (Guaiacum sanctum); and Princewood (Exostema caribaeum). Hammock
vegetation may also include many tropical species that are restricted to the Keys, such as
Pisonia (Pisonia rotundata), Maidenbush, (Savia bahamensis); and Cinnecord (Acacia
choriophylla) (Tomlinson, 1980; Scurlock, 1996).
Early researchers categorized hammocks as "high" and "low" hammocks due to slight
differences in their elevations. Recent researchers no longer separate these hammock
types due to the high degree of variability among them and their location at the transition
between other habitat types (e.g., Pinelands). Many of the species normally occurring in
Tropical Hardwood Hammocks are:
Common Name
Scientific Name
Torchwood
Amyris elemifera
Marlberry
Ardisia escollanioides
Crabwood
Ateramnus lucidus
Saffon Plum
Bumelia celastrina
Willow Bustic
Bumelia salicifolia
Gumbo Limbo
Bursera simaruba
Locustberry
Brysonima cuneata
Spicewood
Calyptranthes pallens
Wild Cinnamon
Canella winterana
Limber Caper
Capp aris flexuosa
Snowberry
Chiococca alba
Pigeon Plum
Coccoloba diversifolia
Buttonwood
Conocarpus erectus
Milkbark
Drypetes diversifolia
Black Torch
Eritholis fruticosa
White Stopper
Eugenia axillaris
Spanish Stopper
Eugenia foetida
Everglades Velvetseed
Guettarda elliptica
Black Ironwood
Krugiodendron ferreum
Wild Lantana
Lantana involucrata
Wild Tamarind
Lysiloma latisiliquum
Wild Dilly
Manilkara bahamensis
Poisonwood
Metopium toxiferum
Myrsine
Myrsine floridana
Lancewood
Nectandrea coriacea
Jamaican Dogwood
Piscidia piscipula
Cockspur
Pisonia rotundata
Black Bead
Pithecellobium guadalupense
Conservation and Coastal Management 132 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Common Name
Scientific Name
Long Stalked Stopper
Psidium longipes
Wild Coffee
Psychotria nervosa
Indigo Berry
Randia aculeato
Darling Plum
Reynosia septentrionalis
Maidenbush
Savia bahamensis
Bahama Nightshade
Solanum bahamense
Mahogany
Swietenia mahogoni
Tallowwood
Ximenia americana
Wild Lime
Zanthoxylum fagara
Sources: Snyder et al., 1990 and USFWS, 1999
Many plant species of Tropical Hardwood Hammocks in the County are dominated by
species of tropical origin. Many are bird dispersed and only a few (e.g., mahogany) are
wind dispersed, which explains their West Indian and Caribbean origins. Many of these
species are extremely rare and are listed as threatened or endangered by the State of
Florida; few are federally listed, although over 170 species are federally listed as species of
concern (USFWS, 1999).
Tropical Hardwood Hammocks on the Florida Keys tend to be drier than those on the
mainland because of increased ocean breezes and lowered rainfall. They also have a higher
percentage of tropical species in part because many temperate species, such as live oak
(Quercus virginiania), swamp bay (Persea palustris), and sugarberry (Celtis laevigata) reach
their southern limits on the mainland or in the northern Keys. Many tropical tree species
within Florida, such as rough strongbark (Bourreria radula) and lignum-vitae (Guaicum
sanctum) only occur in rockland hammocks of the Keys (FNAI, 2009).
In the Keys, there is a structural difference between the rockland hammocks north and
south of Big Pine Key. This is at least partially due to differences in geology, groundwater
salinity and rainfall. The surface rock in the northern keys from Soldier Key to Big Pine Key
is Key Largo Limestone; the south portion from Big Pine Key to Key West is Miami Oolite.
The Key Largo limestone is more permeable than the Miami Oolite and therefore
hammocks in the Upper Keys tend to have higher groundwater salinities. Rainfall also
decreases from the northern to southern Keys (FNAI, 2009). Much taller, more developed
tree canopies (near 35 feet tall) occur in the northern section, while the hammocks in the
southern section are a more scrubby, xeric form of rockland hammock which average less
than 20 feet tall (Snyder et al., 1990). These often impenetrable hammocks in the southern
keys have previously been referred to as "low hammock" or "Keys hammock thicket"
(Snyder et al., 1990).
Thorn scrub is one variant of Tropical Hardwood Hammocks that occurs along the ecotone
of hammocks with Keys tidal rock barren or Keys cactus barren or within openings in
rockland hammock. Thorn scrub is a low-statured scrubby hammock dominated by spiny
species such as saffron plum (Sideroxylon celastrinum), blackbead (Pithecellobium
Conservation and Coastal Management 133 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
guadalupense), hog plum (Ximenia americana), and other rockland hammock species (Ross
et al., 1992; FNAI, 2009).
3.11.1.2 Existing Commercial Recreational or Conservation Uses of Tropical
Hardwood Hammocks
Since the 1950s, development in coastal uplands of the Keys has resulted in the loss of
considerable acreage of tropical hardwood hammocks. This development has occurred
throughout the Upper, Middle and Lower Keys and has involved all types of residential,
commercial, institutional and government uses.
Most (75 percent) of the remaining tracts of tropical hardwood hammocks in the County
(excluding incorporated areas and the mainland) are protected through public or non-
profit ownership for conservation purposes (Table 3.14). Land acquisition efforts have
focused in recent years on the higher quality hammocks. Conservation lands [see Section
3.18 (Areas of Special Concern to Local Government)] with significant tropical hardwood
hammock communities are located in:
• Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge;
• Dagney Johnson Key Largo Hammock Botanical State Park;
• Lignumvitae Key State Botanical Site;
• National Key Deer Refuge;
• John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park;
• Bahia Honda State Park;
• Long Key State Recreation Area;
• Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuge;
• The Nature Conservancy;
• Everglades National Park;
• Florida Keys Land and Sea Trust's Crane Point Hammock; and
• Curry Hammock State Park.
3.11.1.3 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Tropical Hardwood
Hammocks
Historically, settlers to the Keys in the 1800s and early 1900s lived in and around
hardwood hammocks, clearing areas for houses and farming. The majority of hammocks in
the Upper Keys were cleared during this time for agriculture, including a large pineapple
industry. A hiatus of settlement in the Keys occurred following the 1926 hurricane, which
caused great destruction and loss of life, and much of the forest grew back prior to
development pressures increased again after World War II.
Man's impact to coastal uplands in the Keys has taken many forms, with both long-term
and short-term impacts (Kruer, 1991). Tropical hardwood hammock occurs on prime
development property and has become globally imperiled (FNAI, 2009). Disruptive land
uses have historically included hardwood and buttonwood logging (for charcoal), and
conservation and Coastal Management 134 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe Countv Comprehensive Plan Update
clearing for railroad beds, roads, agriculture, commercial and residential development and
public facilities (Kruer, 1991). Other impacts have resulted from rock pit excavation,
dredging of canals, mosquito ditches, plant theft, dumping (especially piles of vegetative
and organic debris), mosquito spraying, and regular thinning or mowing of native
groundcovers, shrubs and trees (Kruer, 1991).
Large-scale loss and alteration of hammocks has generally occurred on a larger scale in the
Upper Keys (Kruer, 1991). Several hundred acres are estimated to have been lost since
1980 in the Upper Keys, including some of the most mature high hammock in North Key
Largo (Kruer, 1991). Many parcels that have been protected through land acquisition
programs occur as islands within developed and developing lands. This poses
management problems in terms of edge effects (e.g., trash dumping, exotic plant
infestation, exotic and feral animal control) and loss of the natural ecotone that forms
between the tropical hardwood hammocks and the adjacent community. Some plants and
animals of hammocks (e.g., tree snails, orchids, and bromeliads) are susceptible to
collection pressures and must be protected from collectors. Some of these species have
been extirpated from the Florida Keys due to over -collection. Exotic plant species
infestations are an ongoing problem in hammocks. Species such as Brazilian pepper
(Schinus terebinthifolius), lead tree (Leucaena leucocephala), seaside mahoe (Thespesia
populnea), latherleaf (Colubrina asiatica), and sapodilla (Manilkara zapota) invade and
displace native species. Dumping of yard waste can lead to the invasion of species such as
bowstring hemp (Sansevieria hyacinthoides) and golden pothos (Epipremnum pinnatum)
(FNAI, 2009).
Tropical hardwood hammocks can be the advanced successional stage of pine rockland,
especially in cases where the hammock is adjacent to pine rocklands where hardwood seed
rain is high. In such cases, when fire is excluded from pine rocklands for 15 to 25 years, it
can succeed to tropical hardwood hammock vegetation that can retain a relict overstory of
pine (Snyder et al., 1990). Historically, tropical hardwood hammocks in South Florida
evolved with fire in the landscape, which does not proceed into the hammock because of its
moist microclimate and litter layer, or a natural moat that can form around hammocks in
the Everglades caused by the dissolution of limestone. However, tropical hardwood
hammocks are susceptible to damage from fire during extreme drought or when the water
table is lowered. In these cases, fire can cause tree mortality and can consume the organic
soil layer. Although tropical hardwood hammocks can reestablish within 25 years after
fire, maximum development of structure and diversity probably requires more than 100
fire -free years. The ecotone between tropical hardwood hammocks and pine rockland is
abrupt when regular fire is present in the adjacent pine rockland. However, when fire is
removed, the ecotone becomes more gradual as hardwoods from the hammock push out
into the pinelands (FNAI, 2009).
Tropical hardwood hammocks are also sensitive to the strong winds and storm surge
associated with hurricanes. Canopy damage often occurs, which causes a change in the
microclimate of the hammock. Decreased relative humidity and drier soils can leave
tropical hardwood hammocks more susceptible to fire. Fragmentation of hammocks can
cause wind turbulence resulting in downed trees. Storm surge associated with Hurricane
Conservation and Coastal Management 135 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Georges overwashed the Cactus Hammock on Big Pine Key, resulting in the loss of the
hammock's understory (USFWS, 1999). Sea level rise also threatens hammocks.
3.11.1.4 Potential for Conservation Use or Protection of Tropical Hardwood
Hammocks
In the Florida Keys, significant areas of tropical hardwood hammocks have been acquired.
However, large areas of hammock remain privately owned. Tropical hardwood hammocks
two acres or larger are protected by ROGO/NROGO and the Tier Overlay Districts.
Hammocks 1 to 1.09 acres in size are designated as Tier III -A; hammocks less than one acre
in size can be designated Special Protection Areas if the County Biologist determines that
development in such areas would increase additional secondary impact on threatened or
endangered species due to their proximity to a designated Tier I area. In addition to these
regulations, the LDR includes a requirement to prepare and Existing Conditions Report and
requires a Conservation Easement on uncleared portions of the property.
Significant work on exotic plant control in tropical hardwood hammocks (as well as other
habitats in the Florida Keys) has been completed by the County Land Steward and the
Florida Keys Invasive Exotics Task Force. The Task Force is composed of federal, State, and
local agencies; non -profits; and public utilities.
Tropical hardwood hammocks can be restored. A large majority of the existing hammocks
in the Florida Keys are secondary growth following the abandonment of agriculture and
early settlements (Elliott and Rhodes Keys) (USFWS, 1999). However, with the
establishment of exotic species, regeneration of hammocks on disturbed lands would need
to be accompanied by an aggressive exotic control program.
3.11.2 Pinelands
Pinelands are fire -climax systems dominated by pine trees. Although pinelands formerly
existed in the Upper Keys (Alexander, 1953), their occurrence in the County is presently
limited to the Lower Keys, primarily on Little Pine Key, Big Pine Key, No Name Key, Cudjoe
Key, Sugarloaf Key and on neighboring keys. Because slash pines (Pinus elliottii var. densa)
do not tolerate high salinities, Ross et al. (1994) found that sea level rise over the last 70
years has caused a reduction in the areal extent of pinelands. More than 50 percent of the
ground surface in pinelands is exposed rock. The low rainfall of this area compared to the
mainland imposes more xeric conditions but they bay be flooded by saltwater for brief
periods (one to three days) when hurricanes pass over the islands (Snyder et al., 1990).
This community is often found in association with tropical hardwood hammocks and short
hydroperiod freshwater wetland communities. The inventory of pinelands in the Florida
Keys is shown in Table 3.15. All pinelands are found in the Lower Keys and comprise an
area of 1,668.1 acres. Most of the pine lands (72.2 percent) are owned by the federal
government in the National Key Deer Refuge. Of the total pinelands, 9.2 percent are
privately owned.
Lonservanon and Coastal Management 136 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.15 - Inventory of Pineland Habitats
Site Name Total Federal State County Non- Cities Utilities Private Spec'
Profities
Lower Keys
Great White
IS, KD, MR,
Heron National
62.6
0.2
SR
Wildlife Refuge
Monroe County
1.3
IS, KD, SR
Managed Areas
National Key
1,128.9
230.5
1.5
IS, KD, MR,
Deer Refuge
SR
Terrestris
8.5
1
IS, KD
Outside of
12.6
2.8
60.8
3.0
1.26
154.2
IS, KD, MR,
Parks/Refuges
SR
Lower Keys
1,668.1
1,204.1
234.6
62.5
11.5
1.2
0
154.2
Total
Total Countv
1,668.1
1,204.1
1 234.6
62.5
11.5
1.2
0
154.2
Unincorporated areas only.
1 Site names are from the FNAI GIS database.
2 Florida Keys Wildlife and Environmental Areas are managed by the FFWCC for the preservation of listed
species that inhabit mangroves, tropical hardwood hammocks, and salt marshes.
3 Total in acres.
4 Ownership information is from the Monroe County Property Appraiser.
S Species recorded are those threatened and endangered species recorded by the USFWS for a particular
parcel; a blank cell does not necessarily indicate an absence of protected species on that parcel(s).
SS = Schaus Swallowtail Butterfly; TS = Tree Snail; IS = Eastern Indigo Snake; WR = Key Largo Woodrat; CM
= Key Largo Cottonmouse; SR = Silver Rice Rat; KD = Key Deer; TC = Tree Cactus
6 Cities of Marathon and Islamorada
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 137 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.11.2.1 Flora of Pinelands
The most extensive and best developed areas of pinelands remaining in the Keys occur on
Big Pine Key. On Big Pine Key, pinelands occupy most of the relatively high elevations on
the interior of the island. They are comprised of a north and south section, the occurrence
of which conforms quite closely to the outline of two underground freshwater lenses
(Stewart, 1989; Ross et al., 1992; Ross et al., 1994). Although mature slash pine (Pinus
elliottii var. densa) stems are able to survive at a mean groundwater salinity of 11 percent,
salinities in the most extensive pinelands are 2 to 3 percent (Ross et al., 1992).
Pinelands are several systems that are less easily characterized biotically than climax
hardwood hammock. Slash Pine is the canopy dominant and Silverpalm (Coccothrinax
argentota), Black -bead (Pithecellobium keyense) and the Keys Thatch Palm (Thrinax
morrisii) are the primary midstory forms. Species composition of the understory is less
easily characterized since it changes depending on its fire history (Ross et al., 1992).
Understory plants of rather general occurrence in pinelands are Saw Palmetto (Serenoa
repens), Long -stalked Stopper (Psidium longipes), Pisonia (Pisonia rotundata), and
Locustberry (Byrsonima lucida). The ground cover consists of a large number of species
including Golden Creeper (Ernodea littonalis), Sand Flax (Linum arenicola), Pine Pink
(Bletia purpurea), Pine Fern (Anemia adiantifolia), Star Rush (Dichromena floridensis), and
Broomsedge Bluestein (Andropogon virginicus). Several endemic plant species of South
Florida are found in the pinelands of the Keys:
Species
Habitat
Range
Argythamnia blodgettii
Pinelands
Keys and mainland
Cassia keyensis
Pinelands
Endemic to Keys
Chamaesyce deltoidea var. serpyllum
Pinelands
Endemic to Keys
Chamaesycegarberi
Pinelands, hammocks,
Keys and mainland
sand dunes
Chamaesyce porteriana var. keyensis
Pinelands, sand dunes
Endemic to Keys
Chamaesyce porteriana var. scoparia
Pinelands
Keys, possibly Big Cypress
Croton arenicola
Pinelands, sand dunes
Keys and mainland
Evolvulus sericeus var. averyi
Pinelands
Keys and mainland
Gerardia keyensis (Agalinis)
Pinelands
Endemic to Keys
Linum arenicola
Pinelands
Keys and mainland
Melanthera parvifolia
Pinelands
Keys and mainland
Phyllanthus pentaphyllys var., loridanus
Pinelands
Keys and mainland
Schizachyrium sericatum
Pinelands
Endemic to Keys
Tragia saxicola
Pinelands
Keys and mainland
Source: Avery and Loope, 1980
In the absence of fire, pineland understories tend to develop a subcanopy of hardwood
species that eventually expands to replace the pine canopy. Ultimately pinelands succeed
into hardwood hammocks - a process that may require about 30 to 50 years (Alexander
and Dickson, 1972; Ross et al., 1992). This requires a build up of a wet humus layer that
will not burn (Tomlinson, 1980). Hardwood hammock species which are early pioneers in
conservation and Coastal Management 138 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
the pinelands include species such as Jamaica dogwood (Piscidia piscipula) and
poisonwood (Metopium toxiferum).
3.11.2.2 Existing Commercial Recreational or Conservation Uses of Pinelands
Since the 1950s, development in coastal uplands of the Keys has resulted in the loss of
considerable acreage of pinelands. On Big Pine Key alone losses are estimated at 50
percent in the last 50 years (Ross, 1989). Development in pinelands has involved all types
of residential, commercial, institutional, and government uses. Today, there are
approximately 1,668 acres of undisturbed pineland remaining in the Keys. Of these,
approximately 72 percent are protected through public ownership for conservation
purposes. Most protected pinelands are located within the National Key Deer Refuge.
3.11.2.3 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Pinelands
Impacts that affect pinelands are varied and include natural events such as hurricanes and
altered fire regime. Man -induced impacts include activities such as land clearing, dredging,
ditching, filling, and the introduction of exotic plants. The nature of these impacts depends
on the integrity and size of the pineland. Recovery from the impacts depends on the
condition, size, and amount of surrounding pinelands, and the type of development on
adjacent land.
Pinelands have adapted to hurricanes and fire, the principal natural disturbances in the
Keys. If undisturbed, pinelands typically fully recover from such events. Fires are essential
to the maintenance of pinelands (USFWS, 2009). Consequently, fire exclusion in pinelands
eventually generates a proliferation of hardwood species that culminates in a tropical
hardwood hammock climax. Since humans discourage fire in the vicinity of habitations,
development tends to reduce the extent of pinelands that receive periodic burning. In the
absence of fire, a pineland in the Lower Keys may be replaced by hammock after about 50
years (Alexander and Dickson, 1972; Ross et al., 1992).
The most damaging human impacts on pinelands occur when they are destroyed by
clearing. Once cleared, pinelands are unlikely to become reestablished on a development
site. It is estimated that approximately one-half of the pinelands present on Big Pine Key in
1935 have been lost to development (Ross, 1989).
Indirect effects associated with drainage alterations and groundwater withdrawals may
similarly damage pinelands. Impoundments within pinelands can drastically change the
local soil moisture regime and cause the suffocation of roots and the corresponding dieback
of plants. The occurrence of pinelands on Big Pine Key, and probably on other Keys,
conforms quite closely with the outline of underlying freshwater lenses (Ross, 1989; Ross
et al., 1992). Research in the Keys supports the hypothesis that the survival of the
pinelands and associated freshwater marshes on Big Pine Key is dependent on maintaining
the integrity of the freshwater resource (Ross et al., 1992). Wells penetrate the freshwater
lenses on some keys, withdrawing water for domestic and irrigation purposes. These
Conservation and Coastal Management 139 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
withdrawals, combined with reductions in recharge brought about by accelerated surface
drainage via canals and mosquito control ditches, serve to diminish the freshwater lenses
and accelerate saltwater intrusion into them. Sea level rise has been an historic and future
concern for the long-term persistence of pinelands in the Keys (USFWS, 1999; USFWS,
2009).
The introduction of invasive exotic plants is a serious problem in pineland communities, as
it is in tropical hardwood hammocks [see Section 3.11.1.3 (Known Pollution Problems
and/or Issues Related to Tropical Hardwood Hammocks)]. Exotic animals, including feral
cats, are another concern for pinelands and their wildlife. Exotic plant control in pinelands
has been undertaken by the County Land Steward and the Florida Keys Invasive Exotics
Task Force.
3.11.2.4 Potential for Conservation Use or Protection of Pinelands
Government acquisition of pinelands has preserved significant areas of the remaining
pinelands in the Lower Keys, although some areas of pinelands remain privately owned,
especially in Big Pine Key. As discussed for tropical hardwood hammocks and other
habitats, undeveloped pinelands are protected by ROGO/NROGO and the Tier Overlay
Districts tier lands [see Section 3.19.2.2 (Tier Overlay Ordinance in Big Pine Key and No
Name Key)]. The Tier Overlay Ordinance is also used as part of the County's 20-year land
acquisition program. In addition to these regulations, the LDR includes a requirement to
prepare and Existing Conditions Report and requires a Conservation Easement on
uncleared portions of the property.
3.12 Wildlife [Rule 9J-5.013(1)(a)5. and (b), F.A.C.]
The Florida Keys encompass a variety of ecologically unique biological communities
providing habitat to diverse wildlife populations, including many species endemic to the
Keys; several are globally rare and endangered. This section describes the wildlife
generally above the mean water line; fauna found in seagrass beds and coral communities
are discussed in Sections 3.8.2 (Seagrass Beds) and 3.8.3 (Coral Communities). The
biological communities of the Keys include:
Living Marine Resources
• Mangrove forests along the shorelines of the Keys
• Seagrass beds on both sides of the Keys and extending offshore to the Florida Reef
Tract (fauna of Seagrass beds are discussed in Section 3.8.2.2 (Fauna of Seagrass
Beds)
• Coral and hard bottom communities of nearshore and offshore waters, including the
Florida Reef Tract (fauna of coral and hardbottom communities are discussed in
Section 3.8.3.1.5 (Macrofauna of Coral Communities)
Wetlands
• Transitional wetlands landward of the mangrove fringe and seaward of upland
communities
conservation anti Coastal Management 140 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan
• Beaches (as part of the Beach/Berm Community)
• Salt ponds occupying shallow enclosed basins having restricted tidal influence
• Small freshwater wetlands in freshwater lenses in the Lower Keys
Uplands
• Tropical hardwood hammocks, the climax terrestrial community
• Pinelands, a fire -climax system
3.12.1 Wildlife of the Biological Communities of the Florida Keys
3.12.1.1 Wildlife Typically Inhabiting Mangrove Communities
ate
The mangrove communities of the Keys provide food, cover, spawning, nesting, and resting
habitat for many species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates.
Many of these species are dependent upon these communities during all or part of their life
cycle.
A number of food webs are based on primary production of the mangroves and their
associated epiflora and epifauna. Energy flows stemming from mangrove -derived carbon
begin their movement through these food webs as detritus, dissolved organic compounds,
or as the products of direct grazing. Other pathways involve bacteria, fungi, macroalgae,
and phytoplankton associated with mangroves.
A variety of insects and gastropods graze directly upon arboreal leaf material. Simberloff
and Wilson (1969) list 200 species of insects that are associated with mangrove
communities. Snails (Littorina sp., Cerithidea sp. and Melampus sp.), isopods (Ligea spp.),
and fiddler crabs (Uca spp.) are especially plentiful on the forest floor (Odum and McIvor,
1990).
Mangrove communities also provide feeding, nesting and roosting habitat for numerous
wading and fish eating birds. Odum et al. (1982) provides a list of 181 species of birds that
use mangroves in South Florida. Among these, the following species are a major
component of the avifauna of the Keys:
Common Name
Great Egret
Snowy Egret
Great White Heron
Great Blue Heron
Reddish Egret
Tricolored Heron
Green Heron
Black -crowned Night Heron
Yellow -crowned Night Heron
White Ibis
Roseate Spoonbill
Double -crested Cormorant
Scientific name
Casmerodius albus
Egreta thula
Ardea herodias occidentalis
Ardea herodias
Dichromanassa rufescens
Hydranassa tricolor
Butorides striatus
Nycticorax nycticorax
Nycticorax violcea
Eudocimus alba
Ajaia ajaja
Pyalacrocorax auritus
Conservation and Coastal Management 141 Technical Document: May 2011
Common Name
Magnificent Frigatebird
Osprey
Mangrove Cuckoo
Kingbirds
Black -whiskered Vireo
Warblers
White -crowned Pigeon
Monroe County
Scientific name
Fregata magnificens
Paudion haliaetus
Coccyzus minor
Tyranus spp.
Vireo altiloquus
Dendroica spp.
Patagioenas leucocephalo
All of these species nest in mangroves, usually on overwash islands.
rehensive Plan Update
A number of terrestrial and aquatic reptiles, amphibians and mammals utilize mangrove
habitat. Of the several species of marine turtles that inhabit mangroves, the Atlantic
Loggerhead (Caretta) is relatively common and may use mangroves as nursery areas
(Odum et al., 1982). The Atlantic Hawksbill (Eretmochelvs imbricata) and the Atlantic
Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas) are known to feed upon mangrove roots and leaves (Ernst
and Barbour, 1972; Carr and Goin, 1955). Other reptiles include several species of snakes
and anoles, and the Mangrove Terrapin. Of the snakes, only one, the Mangrove Water
Snake (Nerodia fasciata compressicauda), is entirely dependent upon mangrove areas
(Florida DNR, 1991a). Amphibians which inhabit mangroves include those which are
suitably adapted to reproduce during brief rainy periods and/or which can use brackish
pools for reproduction. Two introduced species, the Giant Toad (Bufo marinus) and the
Cuban Treefrog (Hyla septentrionalis), have expanded their range considerably in
mangrove areas in the last several decades (King and Krakauer, 1966; King and Krakauer
1968; and Krakauer, 1970).
Mammals which most commonly inhabit mangrove association include the Virginia
Opossum (Didelphis virginiana) and the Raccoon (Procyon lotor). Generally the opossum is
confined to small populations in proximity to human habitations. Both species are
extremely versatile omnivores and are known to forage mangrove habitats (Layne, 1974).
Other naturally occurring and introduced mammals which may frequent mangroves
include the marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustis paludicola) and several species of rodents.
The most diverse group of organisms inhabiting the mangrove association are the marine
organisms. Detritus and plankton are primary food sources for a large number of
invertebrate fauna that attach themselves to prop roots, live in adjacent muds, or swim in
the water (Odum and McIvor, 1990).
3.12.1.2 Wildlife Typically Inhabiting Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetland
Communities
Transitional wetlands support a fauna somewhat different from that of mangrove systems,
although a number of animals feed in both tidal areas. The most frequently observed
invertebrates are various species of insects, mollusks, and crustaceans. Fiddler Crabs (Uca
spp.) are often found where there is adequate soil for burrowing. The Grey Peanut -snail
Conservation and Coastal Management 142 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
(Cerion incanum) is often found in large numbers on the marsh floor or climbing through
the low-lying vegetation. Hornsnails (Cerithidea spp.) are also very common in the marsh.
A number of reptiles and mammals rely on transitional wetlands habitat. Of these, several
are designated as rare, endangered or of special State concern, including:
Common Name
Key Deer
Silver Rice Rat
Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit
Red Rat Snake
Scientific Name
Odocoilius virginianus clavium
Oryzomys argentatus
Sylvilagus palustris hefneri
Elapha guttata guttato
The importance of the Keys' transitional wetlands to wading bird populations has long
been recognized by wildlife biologists. Virtually every wading bird species resident in the
Keys forages in tidal wetlands. These birds rely on the shallow water areas of the
transitional wetlands for feeding during periods of the year when they are unable to feed in
their usual feeding areas because the water is too deep for wading. During these periods,
the undisturbed transitional wetlands are critical to the survival of many bird species.
Among the most common wading birds that feed in transitional wetlands are:
Common Name
Roseate Spoonbill
Great White Heron6
Great Egret
Little Blue Heron
Snowy Egret
Reddish Egret
Tricolored Heron
Green Heron
White Ibis
Black -crowned Night Heron
Yellow -crowned Night Heron
Glossy Ibis
Scientific name
Ajaia ajaja
Ardea heriodias occidentalis
Casmerodius albus
Egretta caerulea
Egretta thula
Egretta rufescens
Egretta tricolor
Butorides virescens
Eudocimus albus
Nycticorax nycticorax
Nycticorax violacea
Plegadis falcinellus
3.12.1.3 Wildlife Typically Inhabiting Salt Pond Communities
Birdlife is a striking component of salt ponds. Because the water levels in salt ponds can
vary throughout the year, euryhaline fish, crustaceans, and benthic fauna tend to
concentrate during low water periods. This submerged community provides important
6 The great white heron was originally described as a distinct species, Ardea occidentalis, but is currently known as
A. herodias occidentalis. It is considered to be the white morph (variation) of the polymorphic great blue heron
subspecies, The great white heron contains individuals with all white plumage. Unlike the great blue heron, which
is widely distributed throughout North America, the great white heron is restricted to south Florida and parts of the
Caribbean. The largest known breeding population (approximately 850 breeding pairs) occurs in the Florida Keys
(McGuire, 2002).
Conservation and Coastal Management 143 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
foraging for wading birds, shorebirds, and waterfowl, such as Wood Stork (Mycteria
americana), Great White Heron (Ardea herodias), Reddish Egret (Egretta rufescens), Plovers
(Charadrius spp.), and Roseate Spoonbill (Ajaia ajaja). The ponds are an important stop for
migrating waterfowl such as mergansers (Mergus serrator) and Blue -winged Teal (Arras
discors), which feed on the seasonal abundance of Widgeon Grass. Several species are at
least partly dependent on salt ponds in the Florida Keys, including the reddish egret and
black -necked stilt (Himantopus mexicanus) (Kalla, 2000). See Section 3.14 (Fisheries) for a
list of fish species common to salt pond communities.
Birds known to use salt ponds as feeding habitat include:
Common Name
Roseate Spoonbill
Blue -winged Teal
Great White Heron
Great Blue Heron
Green Heron
Dunlin
Western Sandpiper
Great Egret
Willet
Semipalmated Plover
Little Blue Heron
Tricolored Heron
Reddish Egret
Snowy Egret
White Ibis
Herring Gull (winter only)
Laughing Gull
Ring -billed Gull (winter only)
Short -billed Dowitcher
Wood Stork
Yellow -crowned Night Heron
Brown Pelican
Black -bellied Plover
Forster's Tern (winter only)
Common Tern
Royal Tern
Greater Yellowlegs
Lesser Yellowlegs
Scientific Name
Ajaia ajaja
Anas discors
Ardea herodias
Ardea herodias occidentalis
Butorides virescens
Calidris alpina
Calidris mauri
Casmerodius albus
Catoptrophorus semipalmatus
Charadrius semipalmatus
Egretta tricolor
Egretta tricolor
Egretta rufescens
Egretta thula
Eudocimus albus
Larus argentatus
Larus atricilla
Larus delawarensis
Limnodromus griseus
Butorides virescens
Nycticorax violacea
Pelecanus occidentalis
Pluvialis squatarola
Ste rnatern a tern a forsteri
Sterna hirundo
Sterna maxima
Triga melanoleucus
Triga flavipes
Several species of migratory waterfowl are also known to utilize salt ponds seasonally.
Species of Fundulus, Cyprinodon, and Poecilia are the primary food fishes of the rare
Roseate Spoonbill and the White Ibis (Kushlan, 1979). Similarly, the rare Reddish Egret is
reported to feed primarily on Killifish.
Conservation and Coastal Management 144 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.12.1.4 Wildlife Typically Inhabiting Freshwater Wetland Communities
Freshwater marshes normally support a highly diverse and abundant fauna that includes
fish, invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds. Many of these species
(common elsewhere in Florida) are relatively rare in the Keys, largely because of the
limited number and locations of freshwater resources. During the dry season these
marshes are the only natural sources of water for wildlife in the area. They are particularly
critical to the reproductive success of animal populations that bear young during the dry
season.
Many of the vertebrate and invertebrate fauna listed are locally adapted forms that are
biologically distinct and geographically restricted. A partial list of vertebrates (excluding
birds) associated with freshwater and non -tidal wetlands on Big Pine Key include:
Common Name
Mammals
Lower Keys cotton rat 1
Lower Keys rabbit 1
Lower Keys racoon
Key deer
Reptiles
American alligator
Striped mud turtle 1 2
Florida box turtle
Peninsular cooter 3
Chicken turtle 3
Florida softshell turtle 3
Common snapping turtle
Black racer
Eastern indigo snake 1
Florida brown snake 1 z
Rough green snake
Key ringneck snake 1
Mangrove salt marsh snake
Red rat snake 1 2
Penninsula ribbon snake 1 z
Eastern diamondback rattlesnake
Amphibians
Oak toad
Southern toad
Green treefrog
Squirrel treefrog
Little grass frog
Cuban treefrog 3
Narrow -mouthed toad
Southern leopard frog
Greenhouse frog 3
Species name
Sigmodon hispidus exsputus
Sylvilagus palustris hefneri
Procyon lotor incautus
Odocoileus virginianus clavium
Alligator mississippiensis
Kinosternon baurii
Terrapene carolina bauri
Pseudemys floridana peninsularis
Deirochelys reticularia
Trionyx ferox
Chelydra serpentina
Col uber constrictor
Drymarchon corals couperi
Storeria dekayi victa
Opheodrys aestivus carinatus
Diadophis punctatus acricus
Nerodia clarkii compressicauda
Etaphe guttata guttata
Thamnophis sauritus sackenii
Crotalus adamanteus
Bufo quercicus
Bufo terrestris
Hyla cinerea
Hyla squirella
Limnaoedus ocularis
Osteopilus septentrionalis
Gastrophryne carolinensis
Rana utricularia
Eleutherodactylus planirostris
Conservation and Coastal Management 145 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Common Name
Species name
Fishes
Southern Gulf killifish
Fundulusgrandis saguanus
Bluegill
Lepomis macrochirus
Cichlid 3
Cichlasoma cyanoguttatum
Diamond killifish
Adinia xenico
Mosquitofish
Gambusis holbrokii
Rainwater killifish
Lucanio parva
Sailfin molly
Poecilia latipinna
Sheepshead minnow
Cyprinodon variegatus
1 Species designated rare, endangered, or of special State concern
z Listings and statuses refer to distinctive Lower Keys populations
3 Species not native to Big
Pine Key (i.e., introduced)
An abundant and varied bird population utilizes the freshwater wetlands. In addition to
wetland species that are resident in the Keys, a diverse population of migratory bird
species utilizes the wetlands and adjacent uplands on a seasonal basis. Sixty-seven species
of birds are known to utilize habitat in the freshwater marshes of Big Pine Key (Jackson,
1989). Of these, 43 species are typically resident populations, and 24 species are migratory
populations usually present only during winter months. Nine bird species ranked as
endangered, threatened or species of special concern occur, including six species found
commonly in the marshes and three which are typically rarely present, as follows:
Common Name
Glossy Ibis
Roseate Spoonbill
Reddish Egret
Snowy Egret
Tricolored Heron
Least Tern
Caspian Tern
Bald Eagle
White crowned Pigeon
Scientific Name
Plegadis falcinellus
Ajaia ajaja
Egretta rufescens
Egretta thula
Egretta tricolor
Sterna albifrons
Hydroprogne caspia
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Columba leucocephala
3.12.1.5 Wildlife Typically Inhabiting Beach./Berm Communities
A variety of terrestrial wildlife is associated with the beach and berm community. Beaches
provide nesting areas for a variety of shorebirds, primarily terns, as well as important
feeding areas for a variety of shorebirds. Invertebrates, such as insects, amphipods,
isopods, crabs, mollusks and worms, which are food for shorebirds, utilize accumulated
seaweed and other organic beach debris as habitat. Sea turtles have always been
associated with the Florida Keys, particularly with the beaches of the Dry Tortugas.
Conservation and Coastal Management 146 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.12.1.6 Wildlife Typically Inhabiting Tropical Hardwood Hammock Communities
The environment provided by the flora of tropical hardwood hammocks is a major
determinant of the assemblage of animal species that inhabit these communities. Because
of their uniqueness and restricted occurrence, tropical hardwood hammocks provide
habitat for many endemic or very restricted species, including several species listed as rare,
endangered or of special concern.
While amphibians are not abundant in Keys hammocks, many reptiles may be found. These
include the Florida Box Turtle (Terrapene corolina bauri), Striped Mud Turtle (Kinosternon
bauri), the endemic Keys Mole Skink (Eumeces egregius), Coral Snake (Micrurus fluvius),
Eastern Diamondback Rattlesnake (Crotalus adamanteus), Key Ringneck Snake (Diadophis
punctatus acricus), Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), Florida Brown Snake
(Storeria dekayi victa), Rim -rock Crowned Snake (Tantilla oolitica), the Florida Ribbon
Snake (Thamnophis sauritus sackeni) and the Red Rat Snake (Elaphe guttata). While some
of these reptiles apparently occur throughout the Keys, others are restricted to only a few
Keys, such as the coral snake which is limited to the Upper and Middle Keys.
Many species of birds use tropical hardwood hammocks. They are important stopover
areas for neotropical migratory birds, especially during inclement weather. Many fuit-
eating birds, particularly the white -crowned pigeon depend on tropical hardwood
hammocks (USFWS, 2009). Those known to nest in Keys hammocks are:
Common Name
Scientific Name
Red -shouldered Hawk
Buteo lineatus
Osprey
Pandion haliaetus
Mourning Dove
Zenaidura macroura
Ground Dove
Columbigallina passerina
Mangrove Cuckoo
Coccyzus minor
Yellow -billed Cuckoo
Coccyzus americanus
Eastern Screech Owl
Megascops asio
Chuck Will's Widow
Caprimulgus carolinensis
Pileated Woodpecker
Dryocopus pileatus
Northern Flicker
Colaptes auratus
Red -bellied Woodpecker
Centurus carolinus
Gray Kingbird
Tyrannus dominicensis
Great -crested Flycatcher
Myiarchus crinitus
Carolina Wren
Thryothorus ludavicianus
Northern Mockingbird
Mimus polyglottus
Brown Thrasher
Toxostoma rufum
White -eyed Vireo
Vireo griseus
Black -whiskered Vireo
Vireo altiloguus
Red -winged Blackbird
Agelaius phoenicius
Common Grackle
Quiscalus quiscula
Cardinal
Richmondena cardinalis
Conservation and Coastal Management 147 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Within the Keys, the range of some of these bird species is quite limited. The pileated
woodpecker and Carolina wren, for instance, are known only from Key Largo.
Mammals that use Keys' tropical hardwood hammocks include the following:
Common Name
Opossum
Gray Squirrel
Racoon
Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit
Hispid Cotton Rat
Least Shrew
Bobcat
Key Largo Wood Rat
Key Largo Cotton Mouse
Key Vaca Raccoon
Key Deer
Scientific Name
Dideophis marsupialis
Sciurus carolinensis matecumbei
Procyon lotor
Sylvilagus palustris hefneri
Sigmodon hispidus
Cryptotis parva
Felis rufus
Neotoma floridana smalli
Peromyscusgossypinus allapaticola
Procyon lotor auspicatus
Odocoileus virginianus clavium
3.12.1.7 Wildlife Typically Inhabiting Pineland Communities
Pinelands are utilized as habitat of many animal species, including several forms endemic
to the Keys. Endemic reptiles that use the pinelands include:
Common Name
Scientific Name
Key Mole Skink
Eumeces egregius
Key Ringneck Snake
Diadophis punctatus acricus
Florida Brown Snake
Storeria dekayi victa
Florida Ribbon Snake
Thamnophis sauritus sackeni
The American Alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) uses pinelands as corridors between
freshwater holes. Most of the Key Deer habitat includes pinelands.
3.12.1.8 Offshore Island Bird Rookeries
The backcountry area of Florida Bay contains a large number of bird rookeries, mostly on
isolated mangrove islands. These islands are used by a variety of wading birds, shorebirds
and marine turtles, including several species designated by the State and/or USFWS as
threatened, endangered or of special concern.
The Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuge and the Key West National Wildlife Refuge
were established to protect many of these islands, recognizing their wildlife habitat.
Approximately 60 islands, not connected by U.S. 1, in the Keys remain in private ownership.
These range in size from one acre to several hundred acres. An additional unknown
number of offshore islands in Keys' waters are sovereignty lands owned by the State of
Florida. A partial inventory of offshore island bird rookeries contained in these refuges is
�,uiiservauun ana Loastai management 148 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
mapped on the Protected Animal Species Map. Offshore islands which are designated as
known habitat for any of the endangered or threatened nesting birds are also identified as
rookeries. Many of the islands in the Florida Keys are zoned for protection of the nesting
birds by both the National Park Service and the National Wildlife Refuges.
3.12.2 Existing Commercial, Recreational, and Conservation Uses of Florida Keys
Biological Communities
Existing uses in each of the biological communities in the Keys are generally discussed in
preceding sections of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, as follows:
Section 3.8.1.3
Mangroves
Section 3.8.2.3
Seagrass Beds
Section 3.8.3.2
Coral Communities
Section 3.9.4.2
Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands
Section 3.9.6.3
Salt Ponds
Section 3.9.7.3
Freshwater Wetlands
Section 3.10.3
Beach/Berms
Section 3.11.1.2
Tropical Hardwood Hammocks
Section 3.11.2.2
Pinelands
Section 3.12.1.8
Offshore Islands Bird Rookeries
In addition, biological communities support important economic and cultural aspects of the
Keys including fishing and ecotourism (including but not limited to birdwatching, diving,
and wildlife observation).
3.12.3 Known Pollution Problems and/or Issues Related to Wildlife Communities
Problems and issues related to wildlife in the Keys can be categorized as follows:
• destruction or modification of habitat;
• predation and/or destruction of native wildlife populations;
• direct and indirect disturbances caused by human activities which alter the distribution
and behavior of native wildlife populations;
• habitat fragmentation that can result in the physical and reproductive isolation of
populations and reduced population viability; and
• introduction of invasive exotic animals
Destruction and modification of habitat has occurred in every biological community in the
Keys. The known pollution problems and/or issues related to each community are
discussed in preceding sections of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, as
follows:
Section 3.8.1.4 Mangroves
Section 3.8.2.4 Seagrass Beds
Conservation and Coastal Management 149 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Section 3.8.3.3
Coral Communities
Section 3.9.4.3
Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands
Section 3.9.6.4
Salt Ponds
Section 3.9.7.4
Freshwater Wetlands
Section 3.10.4
Beach/Berms
Section 3.11.1.3
Tropical Hardwood Hammocks
Section 3.11.2.3
Pinelands
Section 3.12.1.8
Offshore Islands Bird Rookeries
In general, habitat losses and degradation include the following:
• loss of wetland and upland habitats to development;
• degradation of nearshore water environments due to dredge and fill, water pollution,
and recreational boating activities;
• habitat contamination due to widespread aerial application of mosquito control
chemicals;
• fire suppression or infrequent fires;
• habitat fragmentation; and
• sea level rise.
Predation and/or destruction of native wildlife occur as a result of a variety of factors,
many of which are common to all habitat types. These include:
• Natural Destruction
o Hurricanes
o Wildfires
• Predation by Native Populations
o Nesting site predation, particularly by raccoons
o Hatchling predation, particularly by raccoons
o Adult predation
• Predation by Non -Native Wildlife Populations
o Nest destruction by free -roaming pets and non-native animals
o Destruction of young and adults by free -roaming pets and non-native animals
• Predation by Humans
o Egg collection
o Deliberate nest destruction
o Deliberate human persecution (shooting/trapping/vandalism)
o Commercial exploitation for the pet trade
o Overcollection
c Poaching
• Accidental Death
c Boat collisions
o Incidental catch
o Entanglement in fishing gear
Conservation and Coastal Management 150 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
o Highway mortality, particularly along the "eighteen mile stretch" segment of U.S. 1,
Card Sound Road and in Big Pine Key
o Accidental drowning in artificial waterbodies (canals and mosquito control ditches)
• Activities Altering Distribution and Behavior
o Hand feeding resulting in loss of fear for man and vehicles
o Human disturbances during courtship and nesting periods
o Installation of fencing
o General human harassment on land (by residents and visitors) and on the water (by
divers, boaters, swimmers, fishermen and snorkelers)
3.12.4 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Wildlife Communities
The potential for conservation, use, or protection of habitat in each of the biological
communities in the Keys are discussed in preceding sections of the Conservation and
Coastal Management Element, as follows:
Section 3.8.1.5
Mangroves
Section 3.8.2.5
Seagrass Beds
Section 3.8.3.4
Coral Communities
Section 3.9.4.4
Salt Marsh and Buttonwood Wetlands
Section 3.9.6.5
Salt Ponds
Section 3.9.7.5
Freshwater Wetlands
Section 3.10.8
Beach/Berms
Section 3.11.1.4
Tropical Hardwood Hammocks
Section 3.11.2.4
Pinelands
Section 3.12.1.8
Offshore Islands Bird Rookeries
Other actions which could be taken by the County to generally protect its wildlife
populations include the following:
• Adoption of a requirement for an environmental impact assessment for all major
development proposals [see Section 3.13.2.3 (Revisions to the Land Development
Regulations to Protect Designated Species)];
• Stepped -up enforcement of animal control laws [see Section 3.13.2.6 (Protection from
Free -Roaming Domestic Pets)];
• Stepped -up enforcement of animal feeding laws [see Section 3.13.2.7 (Protection from
Deliberate and Inadvertent Feeding)];
• Adoption of an exotic wildlife species ordinance [see Section 3.13.2.8 (Protection from
Exotic Plant and Animal Species)];
• Increased acquisition of undisturbed habitats, especially those properties that could
create wildlife corridors, reverse fragmentation, and/or create larger preserves;
• Creation of new or additional wildlife corridors; and
• Development and implementation of a sea level rise adaptation plan for at -risk species.
Conservation and Coastal Management 151 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update:
3.13 Threatened and Endangered Species [Rule 9J-5.013(1)(a)5. and (b),
F.A.C.]
3.13.1 Occurrences of Threatened and Endangered Species
Biological communities in the Florida Keys have evolved in response to unique island
environmental conditions characterized by salt water, hot sun, dry seasons and hurricanes.
Extreme environmental conditions combined with the isolation of the island archipelago
have supported colonization and evolution of highly specialized plants and animals. Today,
many are endemic to the Keys; others are limited to a relatively small geographic area on
this continent. Populations of species in the Keys have evolved to the point of representing
unique races or subspecies, existing nowhere else in the world (Ross, 1989; Lazell, 1989;
Myers and Ewel, 1990).
Vertebrates of the Florida Keys largely represent a subset of those species that occur in
temperate mainland North America, particularly the Florida Peninsula (Ross, 1989). In
contrast, the plants of the Florida Keys exhibit a substantial floral component derived from
the tropics (Lazell, 1984; Myers and Ewel, 1990; Lodge 2005).
Two major focal points exist for the unique forms of vertebrates and plants in the Florida
Keys: Key Largo and Big Pine Key. These are the two largest keys, possessing the greatest
diversity and habitat area. Big Pine Key also is characterized by the only extensive
perennial freshwater resources for wildlife (Ross, 1989; USFWS, 2006).
The occurrence of threatened and endangered species was provided by the USFWS and is
recorded in a GIS database. The methods used to inventory threatened and endangered
species within the Florida Keys are described in Section 3.8 (Living Marine Resources).
Table 3.16 presents a list of species designated as endangered, threatened or of special
concern by the following organizations: FFWCC, FDACS, and USFWS.
Table 3.16 identifies the types of habitat typically used by each animal species for feeding,
resting, and nesting, as well as the approximate range for each species within the Keys.
Habitats for plant species are from Chapin (2000). A summary of the endangered and
threatened species recorded in the County is shown in Table 3.17.
Map Series 3.5 depicts documented sightings, total known range, and/or concentrated
range within the Upper, Middle and Lower Keys, for the primary State or federally -
designated listed species. Information was obtained from the USFWS, updated in April
2010. For the remaining threatened or endangered vertebrates and invertebrates, habitat
data from the land use cover maps can adequately predict potential habitat for listed
species. Plant occurrences are not mapped to protect the species from disturbance.
However, the land use maps adequately identify suitable habitat for these species. Most
protected plant species are known from pinelands and tropical hardwood hammock.
Conservation and Coastal Management 152
Technical Document: May 2011
LT,
W
�cw0*>��
o
*ti
��
*fin
-
mrw
o
w-
vya�
cn1yy�m
P
t
a
>>>>x-xn:
L
3L
O.
O
'tj
O
O
rD
V) C
Y
n"
O
a.
O
'-S
y
"y
'
O
O
w
R
y
<
w
p
<
m
^*
y
O
O
�' y
a
rD
Q
�.
a
1
rD
r*
m
o
O
rD
fr
m
t
O
rD
fD
w
i3
H
O
n
O
-z
, *
rD
y
?
y
`�
n
o
n
y
w
-- CD
w
a
o
S
in
7
a-
t�
rT
w
-
rD
y
o
m
v`
R
m
r.
w
n
O
m
�zCy~-
�.
�.
�'
,*
H
y-
x
O
O
w
°'
In
'�
cD
rD
[n
'%
O
O
p
O
O
d'
v'
pi
x
cr
^Y
�
!�
R
O'
In
�'
C
d
w
O
O
w
y
iD
rD
x
0
C
rD
ra.
.y
O
N
ro
<
�.�
<
rD
O
io
p
...s
p
R.
rD
C
Q.
O
rD
w
O
w
7C
rD
w
n
x
r)
`"%
`y
rD
�
0
y
O
,-,.
C
y
^y
�
rD
O
C
Q.
y
w•
w
y
O
fD
rD
r7
�'
O
a.
C
rt
x
rD
o
rD
w
0.
O
a
o
o
w
oC;r
N
�Gi
x
o
r
o
O
°'
rD
r
o
O
O
p
C
rD
O
Ci
O
O
w
Q
C
rD
w
�
tl.
rD
C
r
w
fD
•-
rD
cn
o
C.].
w
x
��'*,,,
rD
fD
x
�--
w
x
Tv'
rD
rD
w
y
w
d
r0D
n"
w
00
y
w
y
D
rD
C
^s
rD
tD
�p
su
6,
x
o
o
n
rD
m
(D
rD
O
rp
rD
aaaa
�m000
o
C)n
a
a
o
C0
_
a
a
a
a
3
a
o
co
n
o
sy
3
O
o
co
rr
a
-s
z
a
co
cn
o
a
c-'
n
a
'B
a
n
a
a
a
Q•
A.
a.
y
O
xi
a
—
0
9
N
O
cD
O
0
'B
a.
�_
O
r_n
'CS
Es.
w
2
C
a
O
a
n
n
l
n
a
r�
Z
a
O
a
r„
y
n
3.
S
S
a
3
a
n
o-
0
a
s
a
s
c
a
c
p
M,)
e'
c"
.n
a
a
a
a'
a
o
o
n
M
o
co
o
co
c
o
ro
y
a
n
ro
n
n
-z
C
y
rD
ro
o
a
^a
co
a
a
a
cp
fi
3❑
c�
aEl
C
cn
n
a
n
a
<
v
o
k
a
n
a
l
a
O
n
k
p
C
n
a
a
Q
C
cp
`,
a
e
a
n
O
cn
O
ti
�.
a
O
y
:°
rD
to
c-r
ti
ff+.
a
y
cn
cn
n
O
a
l
C
<
•�.
n
rh
n
ti
A
�"
cn
O
�•
�.
a
s
�.
y
Q
n
°.
a'
n
�
a
e
cn
a
O
rr
_
rD
a
S�
n
S
rD
cn
ti
sj
Ei"
lj'
A
a
o
p
Q
,��.'
a
ct
c"
rD
y
c
a
ro
n
S
n
a
y'
tn
^3
n
tr1
cn
cn
v)
uo
cn
cn
cn
cn
M
cn
cn
[zy
Ln
V)
- 3
-3
tr]
tc7
In
cn
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
V
ti7
—3
n
C/)
n
.�
cn
n
a
z
�Irlzzz
�tz
tz
mo
1:0
ITI�
zz�z�z
�'TI
to
m
to
to
171
ITI
,�'vITI
1
z
m
'71
M
td
tz
m
�cCxc�
w
O
rD
o
C--
CCCCCCx
o
�w
o[rntz
zxracn
xar0
cn
r�oo�
cn
w
R.
C
C<
a
C
o
rD
n
C
0
"t
0
p
rD
..._
C
rD
,�
O
rD
p
C rD
rD
O
O
•...
O
O
y
rDj
y
rDy
rDj
rDS
�f
M,
C
C
C
n
CD
q
ID
M]
r
�
r
CCD
C
rD
rD
x
w
[n
cn
^S
cn
cn
cn
cn
W
W
w
w
w
w
z
r
^w�Y r
(`D
CZ
n
a
w
w
w
a
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
x
A-
cn
w
n
_y
CD
m
`_<
�.
�.
x
�.
�.
^U
'Jy
°'
rD
w
y
x
=-
rt
O
(D
y'
rt
•
rD
"�
p
M
rD
rD
rD
z
rD�
„y
=
`<
m
lb
w
rD
rt
rt
r�i
�
Q•
rt
O"
Z
O
(xD
O
CC�
G
Cx7
O
C�
`
y
`C
N
o
x
p
<
rD
r
O
C
¢
C
_
rDO
rt
rO•�
O
wCU
w
'o
cnC
n
CD
n
w
COn
OQq
p
¢,
O
OC
]
OOOO
O
rr
Cn
�:nn
rD
O
O
fD
C
C
w
o
(Di
C
w
C
O
..
rD
^s
rt
rt
-
rt
rt
r-r
rr
rt
rt
rt
rr
x
rn
r•r
w
-c
o
rD
rD
x
,,�, •
p
rD
rD
-o
rD
rn
°
�w-h
c<
<
(D
O
a+,
(D
oCC
n
b
m
xx�?n
rD
x
rD
nxxxxn
rD
rD
rD
rD
rD
- •
(�D
no
Ax7
x�
cn
zx
:<
G
'�:
n
�.
x�
'rD•!
m
[D
rD
O
rD
O
rD
rD
rD
rD
o
O
n
o
*-
<�<
lD
C
y
p
rD
w
x
rD
�.
fn
cn
rD
Ln
tin
�
y
C
'"Y
Ci
cn
C
O
tU
G
y"
(4
w
z
,--,
O
rD
`C
�C
x
lD
rO�
`C
w
O
n
m
�
o
w
y
G
rD
cn
�
n
c
O
w
w
i
<
r<D
o
"
x
�
r(o
x
c
r'
o
vrD
Q
y
w
'O
CD
<
rD
o
O
CD
,w0
(D
rt
C
w
x
O
(.
fD
rD
Od
o
C
O
W
C
n
o
n
w
CD
Q
fD
y
o
x
�
CD
o
�
y
C
w
EA
C
O'
rD
rD
v
V
O
O
to
Ort
x
�G
5
0
0
0
n
0
�1D
e—i
M
B
c�
E"(
C
ro
�
L
N
�
L
U
�
ro
U
ro
�
a)
L
(n
�
a)
L
L
z
o
N
u
u
O
x
O
{
�
L
-u
L,
y
U
j
�
2
Z
U
U
.�
•
p
o
p
v�i
v�i
W
ro
O
c"
cu
co
O
ro
'�
ro0
vi
C
ro
C
GL
CL
ro
ro
u
u
u
+%'
O
u
O
cu
�'
x
'CS
O
'�
p
bD
ro
O
O
L
u
c06
O
O
u
.t3
L
v
a)
U
N
bA
bA
GU
a)
O
fl
QU
u
u
w
u
ro
u
(n
(n
(n
x
ro
x
L7C1
u
W
ro
��
ro
ro
cn
E
E
o
G
vi
O
ro
O
O
O
"^
O
G'
a)
L
O
U
ro
'Lf
%.
'LS
a)
a)
cA
E
..O
, y
to
L
cu
v
x
S...
.�
-'�'
�
ct
a)
a)
a)
o
ro
ro
C
C
w
v
O
'd
'O
ro
Q
cyn
'C
ro
y
o
u
o
v
cs
u
Q
u
y
y
y
>
r
o
Y
>
r
u
ro
xG.
ro
c
ro
a)
"o
Ln
C
ro
o
ro
u
a)
ro
"i.
En
ro
CC
G
G
ro
o
ro
ca
E-
Oc
x
u
ro
,i
'U"
�'
cn
x
x
.L
u
'�
o
-u
E
.o
G
o
.o
tDto
aA
°
a
is
C
o
o
ro
o
v
°
o
o
o
Or
tX0
0
. a'�
c �
a
ro
u
o
o
v
`'
`
u"
o
L
L
u
x
o�
Ln
x
0
0
0
0
°
o
O
oa
L
o
i
¢
a
c
a
a
°o
c
c
Q
o
o=
`3
o
L
L
L
y
0
tw
i
°
i
Z
s
G
ro
ro
cO�!
G
ro
'O
="'
ro
coC
G
ro
ro
L
N
L
u
L
ro
�,
ro
z
z
ro
ro
o
a
o
a
Ti
d
a
cs
o
a
o
a
a
o°
o
v
x
a
3
(n
(n
U
O
C
O
O
ro
G
O
C
C
C
,x
ro
L
o
C
C
ro
C
C
C
C
L
o
O
x
x
a,
>,
a
x
a)
v
a>i
a
G
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
o
ro
ro
ro=
ro
ro
ro
ro
v
ro
ro
fd
ct1
iC
N
N
C
N
b
C
-O
x
x
O
G
x
L
x
x
O
L
L
O
x
L
1
x
x
y
Ln
N
�-a
iZ
x
ro
v
o
's'.
ro
ro
ro
N
��.,
U
o
U
o
U
O
O
ro
U
O
U
O
U
o
U
O
O
c�
ro
o
0
o
o
o
o
O
O
O
y
>>>
9_
Y
C
Y
pp
L
'
G4
ro
pp
L
'L
as
•L.
C
L,
L
Q!
L
a)
L
44
L
L
L
L
L
Ln
x
u
N
Q
ro
'x
N
N
N
N
u
.^
cn
Q
v)
Qi
ro
o
ro
o
u
ao
u
o
o
ro
c
a)
u
a)
o
a)
a
a)
G
a)
a)
c
ro
u
o
aL1
u
c
c
c
o
ro
o
ro
z
CL
v)
z
w
r�
¢
w
u
w
o.
o:
a
rx
a
a
a
o
a
x
F
o.
a
s
c�
a
o
a
a
E
u
CL
U
c
n.
w
w
w
aaww
Xx
X
xx
x
x
Xx
x
a
�
a
w
w
a
wwr�.
w
m
rx
rx
rx
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
x
0o
m
oa
u"
w
w
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
oa
m
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
F
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
F-
w
www
w
w
w
w
E•-
F
w
c�
v
w
U
En
En
cD
Z5
m
cD
>cz
QJ
CS
O
.Q
II,
i+
'L
l
Q
TS
O
-Q
O
Q)
Ql
�''
G'
C
Q
U
p
N
Q
cn
U
u
O
O
p
.°
U
N
Z
QQi
�
p
+-+
U
@
O
O
O
O
U
CS
-a
i�
Q
N
N
CS
O
O
>
co
Q)
Qpi�
'.a
;-p
V
O
CS
'�
U
Qo
�
°
�
nd
o~.
aQ
,Y
U
zz�°�
In
>O
E
.Q
i
�
O
'ILI
m
O�
°
S�L°
o
c
r
p
p
�QJ
o
p
�
u
o
a
cz
oZ
L.
L
L
O
U
+�
CS
CS
Ct
�
En
aUi
v�
Q7
Z
'B
O
O
U Q
a a
�Y
(�
L
U
U
�C
Q)
4
Q)
IT�
s_
O
N
CS
U
°
v
CS
U
-�
v
-�
v
-Z
U
0.
v
U
C�
O
C)
�
U
Q
g
O
q
s�
W
zz
W
�
W
>
Lv
k
w
(n
cu
M.
.�
U
U
O
Q)
O
ro
u
Y
ro
.fl
ro
�
a)
>
.-�
a)
ELE
(n
O
y
�
o
u
O
U
O
L
U
o
L
o�
o
.O
C
.?
y
ti
Q
L
L
ro
a)
N
U
Q)
o
C3
N
y
ro
ro
ro
u
L
O
O
L
OQ
M
L
[C
•?
o
°
a)
L
y
L
(a
Ci
i�
�.
'i
Q
a
a
o
o
Y
L
(n
i.:
U
Q
L
>
JL-.
•
a)
Lj
�.
ro
Q)
L
y
Ln
' C3
ro
Q
3
E
c
o
a
o
c
G
u
°)
w0
3
O
C
a
a
n
n
U
G
aCL
-O
4
O
u
o
O
J
X
c
C)
a
x
u
(�n
JQ).+
t0
Cd
C
q
fd
Q)
L
(C
CO
'q
L
ro
•L3
ro
'O
^
(J
L
U
I
O
J--+
o
v
�-i.
.--..
C
•i7
L
Q)
E-.
L
(O
y
V1
%
cz
cz
L
Q
(Q
(n
(B
-0
N
Q
•�
,f
6J
y
y
V
.-a
.�
..-7
'S-.
a)
bD
O
L
N
Ci
r
-"
'�
.�
a)
z—
±-+
ro
a
Q
'Q
v1
a)
y
,�
b
'_'.'
to
N
U
o
U
U
ca
ro
O
tC
ca
a
a)
?
>,
Q)
o
L.
o
i.
o
,
O
ro
.S"
x
�_
^v
ro
u
o
c
a)
L
c-!
.-y-�
L>
ro
a)
L
O
u
O
n
O
o
o
x
O
�s
a)
o..�
L
G
L
C
yUi
ca
Q
>.
a)
O
[z
U
y
cn
W
a
0.
W
f%
J.
G
/7
0]
G1
C 7
a
U
uZ
u
cn
V
o
ro
0
c 7
a
ro
Lz,
[z
n
r�
ui
Ln
10 co --1
C, U7 .P W N I
x
O
cr-00�
ICI
11
11 11
� O Cn II i
II
n ci s
O
CD
C'
-3 ?
3?
w W w CL ;
(D (D
0..
-c=
(D w
°
^
CL
i
C
o0
o n-rl
V
{
EL
CD
C (D
o
i
N `C o
ti a
p
V c
o <
r
a
>
� s
O
p p
1
El
Q
p Ei
n
�. w
II
�
V (D
b7 II
o 0
EL =
(D
zi
�
o
w
�s
o
CD
n.
w
n
CD
n
II
II
O
CO n
cn
'
w °q
n
V
(DLn
? p.
,
0
A
0
�q
n
w
n
0
0
n
m
n
n
n
w
0
n.
w
a
°
n
C
U)
oC7
n
Z
n
O
n
3
n
a
(D
cn
x
ys
r
cn
cn
w
p
o
w
w
's
o
W
W
.i
(D
w
(D
(D
w
�-
in
W
w•
�-
0
(D
°
o
W
w
(D
w
cn_
`°
w
0
-
!:
'o
j C•
`-D
6'
;*
n
O
O°
�-
(D
C
<
w
_
w
�,
w
fD
O
�
(D
w
m
y
(ID
=
�
NCD
O
((DD
`�
"J
to
O
O
k • G
w
o
a=
p
(D
A
nr
Ci.Y
n
Q`
0
w
=
rDD
per',
p
con
voi
CD
(D
((DD
w
�
5
cn
ii
r
p
o
rr
O
L
�
CCD
tr,
n
c>
00
O
(n
:
�n
C-1
:�o
b
b
_n
:o
b
b
b
b
0
r mt,
a SJTZ
D
Z5
n
z
N
'ZS
:3
n
Z
n
n
O
o
O
SJ..
o
O
y
b
Q
b
n'
is::
�
'�
`�
o
�.
i
`'a
�•
.7
� cD
s p
o
�
�,
�-
o
�
o
a••
�_
o
�
a
z
o
o
o
o
ij
a t1
o
o
o
o
sJ
o
n
a'
a
C)a
p
,..
z
o
o
a
�•
O
O
o
p
�
a
LA
n
O
O
fD
n
O
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
-3
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ra O
O
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
x
X
X
x
X ~
n
O
O
X
X
X
x
X
X
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
x
x
X
x
X
X
�.
O
O
X
X
X
X
Idx
x
x
t
X
X
X
X
X
'_v
'C
j
- 3
j
70
�
M
- 3
-t
-v
-3
-A
=
j
~u
'v
W
~o
:9
b
O
7o
�
7o
- 3
Co
'b
0
o
o
o
o
On
On
o
0
o
o
On
w
D)
On
ID
On
C-�
0
(D
'B
%v'
rpr
e-t
(D
(D
.�.
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
�.
e-t
(D
0
oo
nnnw
w
ojQ
�
c-0-oxxxc_n
o.
n
o
n
o
w
v
w
w
-s
w
-s
w=
-•s
�
w
w
o
w
-s
w
w
w
w
o'
o
m
w
o
'-^
w
w
w
o
o
w
o
0
C1.
0
O.
f1.
L]..
SS.
"'
ss.
n.
O
i].
O
i1.
-s
ii
-s
LS.
w
(D
o
❑.
o
Q.
�-*
o
o.
a
Q.
o°
iS.
�-*
w
s�.
!n
w
"'
-s
i1.
a
N
o
!?.
y
y
0
0
0
°
w
0
0
0
(D
w
w
w
i
w
o
o
C
C-)
0
0
0
�^..
s,'1,
O�
O�
0
(D
fD
¢.
o
Q.
�,
w
,.
o
S3.
0
R.
n'
O
C1
0
p
0
(D
w
w
x
x
o
s
n
x
o
-s
=
s
w
n
x
n
x
Q
o'
=
o
w
w
o
w
w
w
w
CL
n
w
O
n
w
w
o
n
o
o
O
n
O
n
a
n
w
(D
d
n
n
Eg
E
n
o
sD
n
x
t�
o
x
n
x
x
C')
w
w
0
0
cn
x'
Ul
r*
CL
O
rD
0
'T.'
O
0
0
-
w
o
w
w
w
w
w
0
o
w
o
w
EI�
w
a
n•
W
rt-1
x
x
o
o
o
n
p
Q
o
n
0
n
w
0°
n
cn
9
w
3
ig
w
-ni
w
w
w
o
o
o
w
n
o
n
n,
w
o
O
o
w
0
a
o
a
o
cs.
a.
a
ss
o
0
0
o
n
o
m
(moo
x
o
o
w
CAEl
El
°
C
c
o
0
Q
a w
w
w
w
o
o
vw
CA
a
n
a
n
g
o
v)
o-
v
r+
w
n
w
w
I
((DD
(0D
or)
n
n
v,
x
C
w
¢
w
rn
n
�
0
n
w
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.17 Summary of Threatened and Endangered Fauna and Flora in Monroe
County
Inverte- Amphibians
Status Designation orates Fish and Reptiles Birds Mammals Plants Total
• . :. . ,WRI
. - - • �
00
0000
- . • ..
ve
vaoo
Designations same as in Table 3.9
3.13.2 General Recommended Conservation Actions for Protection of Threatened
and Endangered Species
3.13.2.1 Mapping and Data Collection for Designated Species
For species that have received local attention, such as Key deer, the County's database and
reference materials are fairly extensive. Data for designated species have been entered
into the GIS database. Occurrence data is plotted on specific parcels for which occurrences
have been recorded, particularly for plants. This assists in evaluation of wildlife impacts
associated with development proposals on specific properties.
3.13.2.2 Coordination with Federal and State Agencies
State agencies responsible for protection of State -designated species include FFWCC and
FDACS. The USFWS is the primary federal agency responsible for protection of federally -
designated terrestrial species, including preparation of recovery plans. The NMFS is
responsible for the protection of marine species that are not regulated by FFWCC. The
FKNMS Management Plan and the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) at Big Pine Key and No
Name Key are examples of cooperation among federal, State, and county agencies to
protect endangered and threatened species.
The County should continue to work cooperatively with USFWS, FFWCC, and FDACS to
promote the recovery of designated wildlife species. The County should cooperate with
these agencies to locate potential introduction sites for designated species, particularly for
those which are federally- or State -listed. The County should assist, to the extent that it is
able, with acquisition of reintroduction sites and sites having known populations of
designated species. The County Biologist should participate in development of new
Conservation and Coastal Management 156 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
recovery plans and revisions to old recovery plans for federally -designated species. When
State or federal agencies undertake specific recovery actions in the County, the County
should support these activities as appropriate through public education, law enforcement,
and data collection.
3.13.2.3 Revisions to the Land Development Regulations to Protect Designated
Species
The County adopted comprehensive plan amendments in early 2005, which established the
development regulation strategy for the Tier Overlay Ordinance. The Tier Overlay
Ordinance is a method of providing property evaluation and development potential for the
use of determining development impact on surrounding habitat and infrastructure. This
approach eliminates the previous Habitat Evaluation Index? system, which was used to
determine upland habitat quality. Instead, ROGO and NROGO are used to make land
development decisions.
3.13.2.4 Monitoring Prohibition of FKAA Water Connections to Selected Federally_
Designated Habitat Areas
ROGO and NROGO strongly discourages land development proposals that would provide
FKAA water connections to areas within Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge and
National Key Deer Refuge (areas on Big Pine Key, No Name Key and Big Torch Key).
3.13.2.5 Management Guidelines for Landowners
Many recovery plans for federally -designated species identify the need for public education
regarding activities detrimental to habitat and populations of these species. Education is
typically needed to inform local residents in critical habitat areas regarding applicable
federal and/or State law as well as design and management guidelines for land
development and property management.
The County should develop brief information brochures for use by developers and
landowners within critical habitat areas to inform them regarding activities disruptive or
harmful to specific wildlife species. As appropriate for each species, the guidelines should
address items such as feeding, free -roaming domestic pets, noise, traffic, fencing, pesticide
applications, invasive exotic species, and other threats. Existing laws and penalties for
their violation should be identified. Guidelines should be made available to the general
public.
3.13.2.6 Protection from Free -Roaming Domestic Pets
' The Habitat Evaluation Index (HEI) added points for habitat presumed to provide refuge for listed
animal species. However, the HEI was found to be flawed since it did not always completely reflect the
role of a parcel within an overall system. Subsequently, the Tier Overlay Ordinance was developed to
examine lands as an ecosystem, and the HEI is no longer used to assess habitat value under
ROGO/NROGO.
Conservation and Coastal Management 157 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Dog- and cat -related deaths of protected populations are serious threats to the recovery of
many designated species. This is typically the most frequent cause of man -induced
mortality for some species, particularly small mammals. The problem is exacerbated as
residential development increases in proximity to habitats of designated species. Presently
in the County there is inadequate funding to support animal protection efforts at the level
required to adequately safeguard these populations throughout the Keys.
To address this problem, the County Biologist should work cooperatively with the Animal
Control Department to develop and implement an animal control plan. This plan should
identify areas within the County where priority should be placed in enforcing animal
control laws so as to protect native wildlife populations, particularly listed species. These
priorities should be reviewed periodically. The Animal Control Department should be
responsible for addressing the long-term staffing, facility and financial requirements to
support implementation of the plan.
3.13.2.7 Protection from Deliberate and Inadvertent Feeding
In addition to natural foods, some species forage on materials provided by humans. This
can be deliberate feeding such as when humans provide hand-outs to wildlife, or
inadvertent feeding such as when wildlife rummage through garbage cans and litter.
Deliberate or inadvertent feeding of wildlife is harmful for many reasons, but primarily
because it lessens their fear of humans. Key Deer can be found foraging in yards and on the
sides of most roads where they eagerly approach people and slow moving vehicles for
hand-outs. Illegal roadside feeding contributes to road kills which account for 70 percent
of the annual mortality of Key Deer. Illegal feeding also causes a concentration of wildlife,
facilitating the spread of parasites and disease (http://myfwc.com/ WILDLIFEHABITATS/
SpeciesInfo_KeyDeer.htm). Public feeding is usually centered in areas of high human
concentrations such as subdivisions. These developments expose the wildlife to human -
related accidents such as entanglement in wire or other debris, accidental drowning in
canals, and harassment and attacks by dogs. Also, supplementing the natural diet with
unnatural foods may have adverse effects on the health of the animals
(http://www.fws.gov/ southeast/pubs/nkdgenl.pdf).
A major source of inadvertent feeding is when wildlife rummage through garbage cans.
Not only does this directly impact protected species that feed on the trash, but it increases
the population of free -roaming domestic and feral pets (cats and dogs) and raccoons that
prey on protected species such as the Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit and the Silver Rice Rat.
State regulations implemented by the FFWCC make feeding Key Deer a misdemeanor
offense. Federal law prohibits the feeding of wildlife on the Florida Keys National Wildlife
Refuges (http://www.fws.gov/southeast/pubs/nkdgenl.pdo.
Conservation and Coastal Management 158 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.13.2.8 Protection from Exotic Plant and Animal Species
Escape of non-native plant and animal species into the general environment can have
devastating impacts on naturally native plant and animal species. In the extreme, the
proliferation of invasive plants such as Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia) and
Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) shows of the extent to which non-native plant
material can invade and degrade natural biological communities.
The County prohibits the planting of some highly invasive exotic plants throughout the
County and should continue in its efforts to educate the public of the need to remove
invasive plant materials from existing developed areas. The LDRs requires that all areas of
disturbance be managed to avoid the introduction and/or establishment of invasive exotic
plant species. In addition, certain invasive exotic plant species are required to be removed
from development parcels (Section 118-7(4)(5). The definition should be expanded to
include additional species of invasive plants that have become a problem in the Keys.
The spread of the Burmese python and the red lionfish (among others) into the Florida
Keys demonstrates the need to address the introduction of exotic wildlife. The County
Biologist is a partner with the Florida Keys Invasive Exotics Task Force. The County should
consider adoption of an invasive exotic wildlife ordinance which shall prohibit and/or
restrict the sale and handling of listed undesirable exotic species.
3.13.2.9 Recovery Activities which could be Implemented by Monroe County for
Protection of Federally -Designated Threatened and Endangered Species
Many recovery activities could be implemented by the County to prohibit the destruction of
federally -designated threatened and endangered species and to protect their habitat.
Sections 3.13.3 through 3.13.25 below generally describe the status, distribution and
habitat of the federally -designated plants and animal. Also included are a summary of the
reasons for decline of these species in the County and a list of recovery activities that could
be implemented for each species by the County. Many of these are adapted from USFWS
(1999).
3.13.2.10 Recovery Activities which could be Implemented by Monroe County for
Protection of State -Designated and Locally Rare Species
In addition to the federally -designated species, the Florida Keys provide habitat to plant
and animal species designated by the State as threatened or endangered, commercially
exploited plants, and species of special concern. There are many plant and animal species
in the Florida Keys which while not designated as threatened or endangered at the State or
federal level are considered locally rare. The County, in conjunction with federal and State
agencies, FNAI, and the Institute for Regional Conservation, has developed lists of locally
rare plant and animal species.
Lonservation and Coastal Management 159 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
3.13.2.11 Actions to Protect Designated Plants, Locally Rare Plants, Champion Trees
Specimen Trees and Mature Native Trees
Section 118-8 of the LDRs does not allow disturbances to champion trees, specimen trees
or plants listed by the FDACS as threatened or endangered. Specimen trees are defined as
those having a diameter at breast height (dbh) that is greater than seventy-five percent of
the record tree of the same species for the State of Florida.
Current county policy requires that development be sited to minimize impacts on species
designated by FDACS (Table 3.16), and native trees with dbh of four inches or greater.
Similar protection is needed for species which are designated as locally rare [see Section
3.13.2.10 (Recovery Activities which could be Implemented by Monroe County for
Protection of State -Designated and Locally Rare Species)]. In those instances where an
applicant can demonstrate that avoidance of such species or trees is not possible by
clustering or by an alternate design approach, then such species and trees must be
relocated or replaced with nursery stock of the same species or equally rare species
suitable to the site pursuant to a transplantation plan approved in accordance with Section
118-8 (transplantation plan). The removal of any listed threatened, endangered,
commercially exploited, and regionally important native plant species and all native trees
with a dbh greater than four inches requires payment to the Monroe County Environmental
Land Management and Restoration Fund in an amount sufficient to replace each removed
plant or tree on a 2:1 basis. The number, species, and sizes of trees and plants to be
mitigated is identified in an existing conditions report approved by the County biologist in
accordance with the minimum size requirements set forth in Section 114-101.
3.13.3 Schaus'Swallowtail Butterfly (Heraclides aristodemus ponceanus)
3.13.3.1 Status. Distribution, and Habitat Description
The Schaus' swallowtail butterfly is endemic to southeastern Florida and the Florida Keys.
Historically, the Schaus' swallowtail was collected from mainland areas around what is
now Miami to Lower Matecumbe Key. Its present range is believed to be restricted to
undisturbed tropical hardwood hammocks in Miami -Dade County and northern Key Largo
to Elliott Key (USFWS, 2006).
Tropical hardwood hammocks are the exclusive habitat of the Schaus' swallowtail
butterfly. The eggs are laid almost exclusively on the host plant torchwood (Amyris
elemifera), although oviposition has been observed on wild lime (Zanthoxylum fagara)
(Baggett, 1982; Loftus and Kushlan, 1982). Tropical hardwood hammocks and torchwood
are found in the Lower Keys and other areas and have been occasionally observed (USFWS,
1999).
The adult butterflies usually emerge between late April and early June for the flight period
that lasts about three weeks (Baggett, 1982). The rarity and short flight period of the
Schaus' swallowtail mean that comprehensive surveys or potential habitat are logistically
Conservation and Coastal Management 160 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
impractical. As a result, population estimates remain uncertain. However, it is clear that
the range of the species has shrunk, within historic periods, from its previous coverage to
Upper Key Largo and various keys within Biscayne National Park. The actual numbers
have always been very low, with year to year fluctuations (USFWS, 1999). From 1973 to
1984, the Schaus' swallowtail was in dramatic decline, with individuals located on three
keys in Biscayne National Park and one individual on north Key Largo (Emmel, 1986). In
1985 the population began to reestablish itself. In 1986, the Elliott Key population was
between 750 and 1,000 adults, with small populations of 50 to 80 adults and immatures on
each of Old Rhodes, Totten, and Adams Keys (Emmel, 1986).
3.13.3.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Schaus' Swallowtail
Butterfl
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of the Schaus' swallowtail
butterfly (USFWS, 1999). Reasons for decline in the Florida Keys are summarized as
follows:
• Destruction or modification of habitat
o Disruption and destruction of tropical hardwood hammock habitat
• Predation and/or destruction
o Widespread aerial application of insecticides by the Florida Keys Mosquito Control
District
o Overcollecting
o Natural factors (weather, predation, parasitism, etc.)
The most important Schaus' swallowtail butterfly habitat is protected within the Key Largo
Hammock Botanical Site. The County's LDR and ROGO/NROGO protects the habitat, which
is generally located in lands protected by the Tier Overlay System. Because of these efforts,
the threat of occupied habitat loss from development and mosquito spraying on North Key
Largo is low. The population is distributed throughout North Key Largo and is apparently
viable (USFWS, 2006).
3.13.4 Stock Island Tree Snail (Orthalicus yeses)
3.13.4.1 Status, Distribution and Habitat Description
Historically, Stock Island Tree Snails occurred only on Stock Island and Key West. Today,
populations of snails occur throughout the Keys in hardwood hammocks. The majority of
suitable habitat is now unoccupied. The USFWS has current records of 28 populations in
the Florida Keys, many believed to be populations distributed by collectors. The Stock
Island Tree Snail was listed as threatened by the Service in July 1978 because of population
declines, habitat destruction and modification, pesticide use, and over -collecting. Since its
original listing, this threatened snail was thought to have been eliminated from its historic
range on Stock Island by habitat destruction; however, snails were observed there in the
botanical garden (USFWS, 2006). The Stock Island Tree Snail is found only in tropical
conservation and Coastal Management 161 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
hardwood hammocks. It feeds on algae and lichens on the trunks and limbs of native and
non-native trees in hammocks. Foraging occurs at night during the rainy season from June
through December (USFWS, 1999; USFWS, 2006). During other times of year it is in
aestivation, attached to trees by a hard mucous seal. The snails are hermaphroditic but
crossbreeding between individuals is required for successful reproduction. The snails do
not reproduce until 2 to 3 years of age. Eggs are laid in cavities burrowed at the base of
trees.
3.13.4.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Stock Island Tree Snail
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of the Stock Island Tree Snail
(USFWS, 1999). These are summarized as follows:
• Destruction or modification of habitat
o Disruption and destruction of hammock habitat
• Predation and/or Destruction
o Widespread aerial application of insecticides
o Overcollecting
o Natural factors (weather, predation/parasitism, etc.)
The greatest threat to the Stock Island Tree Snail is the loss and modification of its habitat,
although natural disasters such as hurricanes and drought can have a significant effect.
Loss of habitat from development has been a factor thought to have potentially affected the
Stock Island Tree Snail, although much suitable habitat is currently unoccupied. The
current range of the Stock Island Tree Snail includes tropical hardwood hammocks
throughout the Keys where collectors and conservationists have relocated the species.
Sites at John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, Key Largo Hammock State Botanical Site,
and the Everglades National Park are publically owned. Other areas are privately owned
and are subject to human disturbance.
The County's LDR and ROGO/NROGO protects the tropical hardwood habitat for the Stock
Island Tree Snail. Its habitat located on privately -owned hammock parcels is protected by
the Tier Overlay System.
3.13.5 Corals
3.13.5.1 Status. Distribution. and Habitat Description
Three species of the branching corals Acropora spp. exist in the Florida Keys: Staghorn
Coral (Acropora cervicornis), Elkhorn Coral (A. palmata), and Fused Staghorn Coral (A.
prolifera), a hybrid of the two. They are branching corals and are important reef building
species. They are found typically in shallow water in high-energy zones with a lot of wave
action. Too much wave action (major storms) can cause branching corals to break.
However, fragmentation via branch breakage is one method of reproduction. They have a
relatively high growth rates for corals and exhibit branching morphologies that provide
conservation and Coastal Management 162 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
important habitat for other reef organisms. They can tolerate salinity extremes but thrive
in normal salinities (33 to 37 parts per thousand). They are typically found in water
temperatures from 66°F to 86°F. Some degree of stress is experienced at water
temperatures greater than 2 to 3°F cooler or warmer than normal for an extended period.
Pillar Coral (Dendrogyra cylindrus) form colonies of cylindrical pillars without secondary
branching to approximately 3 feet tall. They are one of the few types of hard coral whose
polyps can commonly be seen feeding during the day. They are found in shallow depths (6
to 60 feet deep) on flat to gently sloping areas in warm, clear, nutrient -poor marine waters
along the Continental Shelf. They are found from Miami to the Marquesas Keys although
their occurrence is rare (Hipes et al., 2001).
3.13.5.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for Corals
Many stresses can affect corals, both natural and human induced:
• land based sources of pollution, such as runoff,
• sewage discharge;
• dredging and coastal development can increase nutrient levels;
• sediment loading;
• turbidity;
• high and low temperatures; and
• damage from boats, anchors, divers, and fishing gear.
Runoff can also reduce oxygen levels and possibly introduce pathogens. Excess nutrients
allow large fleshy algae (macroalgae) to proliferate and overgrow corals. Pathogens may
cause diseases in corals such as white -band disease and white pox/patchy necrosis, which
are thought to be two of the most significant causes of mortality to Atlantic acroporids.
Climate change, associated with increased water temperature, may cause coral bleaching.
Ocean acidification is reducing coral growth rates. Overfishing has caused a reduction in
number of important predatory fishes such as groupers; reduction in number of predatory
fishes can possibly lead to an increase in organisms that prey on acroporids, such as the
short coral snail, fireworm, and damselfish. Furthermore, without a healthy herbivorous
fish population, macroalgae growth limits the recovery of stressed corals and the
settlement of new baby corals to replace those that have been lost from disease, bleaching,
predation, and overgrowth.
In May 2006, the United States listed Elkhorn Coral and Staghorn Coral as threatened under
the Endangered Species Act due to their widespread decline throughout their Caribbean
range. Although numerous factors such as habitat degradation, storm and anchor damage,
coral bleaching and competition have contributed to the Acropora decline, coral disease
was identified as the major cause of coral loss throughout the region. The widespread
decline changed many reefs from three-dimensional dense thickets to flat rubble areas.
Pillar coral is State listed as endangered because of its extreme rarity.
Conservation and Coastal Management 163 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan
The FKNMS, the largest coral reef management entity in the region, has developed a
management plan for the Sanctuary's corals that includes protective activities, such as
water quality monitoring, zoning, channel markings, and restoration efforts [see Section
3.8.3.4 (Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Coral Communities)]. Restoration
activities have included efforts to re -attach Acropora fragments generated by ship
groundings and hurricane events; these efforts have had mixed success. Other restoration
efforts have included attempts to culture and settle coral larvae with very limited success.
New techniques for restoring Acropora are currently being pursued. Such new techniques
involve enhancing sexual recruitment, reestablishing ecological roles within reef systems
(e.g., herbivorous urchins), and other methods for controlling predators and disease.
Protection of pillar coral is the continued enforcement of the ban on collection of coral.
3.13.6 Smalltooth Sawfish (Pristis pectinata)
3.13.6.1 Status. Distribution. and Habitat Description
The smalltooth sawfish is found between the Caloosahatchee River and the Florida Keys.
juvenile smalltooth sawfish generally inhabit the shallow coastal waters of bays, banks,
estuaries, and river mouths, particularly shallow mud banks and mangrove habitats.
Larger animals can be found in the same habitat, but are also found offshore. Florida Bay
has been designated as part of its critical habitat. Little is known about the life history of
these animals, but they may live up to 25 to 30 years, maturing after about 10 years.
However, large individuals (greater than 79 inches) have been collected near the
Marquesas Keys (NMFS, 2006).
3.13.6.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for Smalltooth Sawfish
The primary reason for the decline of the smalltooth sawfish population has been
commercial and recreational fisheries bycatch. The secondary reason is habitat loss and
degradation. Other threats to the species include entanglement in marine debris, injury
from saw removal, pollution, and disturbance of natural behavior by divers and other
marine activities (NMFS, 2006).
Research on smalltooth sawfish is contributing to the development of conservation
measures and the increased knowledge is being used to formulate management actions.
Research efforts are focused within the National Marine Fisheries Service, Everglades
National Park, Mote Marine Laboratory, FFWCC's Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, and
the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Habitat within the Florida Keys for
the Smalltooth Sawfish is protected within the FKNMS and the State aquatic preserves.
Conservation and Coastal Management 164 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Undate
3.13.7 Marine Turtles
3.13.7.1 Status. Distribution and Habitat Description
Marine turtle nesting season in the Florida Keys generally lasts from April through October.
Turtles will use most sandy beach areas. While five species of turtles are found in marine
waters off the Keys, the Atlantic Loggerhead is the most common turtle which uses the
beaches of the Keys for nesting.
3,13.7.1.1 Atlantic Loggerhead (Caretta caretta caretta
The loggerhead turtle is a marine species found world-wide in temperate and subtropical
waters. It nests in the United States on sandy beaches from Florida to North Carolina. The
loggerhead is highly migratory. Adult females return to the same beach to re -nest in
several years and tagged animals have been recaptured up to 1,500 miles from the site of
trapping (USFWS, 1999; Hipes et al., 2001). The loggerhead is an omnivorous species
consuming both plant and animal material. Its primary foods include mollusks,
crustaceans, and other marine animals. In the Keys, loggerheads can be expected in all
waters and marine habitats. The loggerhead is the only species of marine turtle which
regularly utilizes Florida Keys beaches for nesting and egg laying. In recent years nesting
has been documented on Lower Matecumbe Key, Long Key, Coco Plum Beach, Bahia Honda
Beach, Big Munson Key, Sawyer Key, and Lower Sugarloaf Key.
3.13.7.1.2 Atlantic Green Turtle (Chelonia mvdas)
The green turtle is a marine species that occurs throughout the Caribbean Sea, the Gulf of
Mexico and the South Atlantic waters of the Bahamas and the islands of the West Indies.
The green turtle is highly migratory. Adults of both sexes travel to waters off nesting
beaches where mating occurs, and the females then come ashore to lay eggs. The
hatchlings then return to the sea and eventually travel to the feeding grounds which may
be quite distant from the nesting beaches (USFWS, 1999). The green turtle is primarily
herbivorous, its main food being turtle grass (Thalassia testudium). The extensive seagrass
beds in County waters represent important feeding habitat for this species (Zieman, 1982).
Green turtles nest regularly on beaches in the Keys (Lazell, 1989).
3.13.7.1.3 Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelvs coriacea)
The Leatherback turtle is the most pelagic of the marine turtle species. It is a worldwide
species with nesting beaches in the tropics and sub -tropics, but it is often observed in more
northern waters. The Leatherback is a carnivorous species whose primary food is jellyfish.
It nests on sandy beaches from April to August when the females lay eggs. After 55 to 74
days the eggs hatch and the young return to the sea (USFWS, 1999). In recent years nests
have been observed on beaches from Miami to Flagler County on the Atlantic coast of
Florida (Lund, 1978). Today, leatherbacks are scarce in Keys' waters (Lazell, 1989). There
are no recent records of nestings on beaches of the Florida Keys.
Conservation and Coastal Management 165 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.13.7.1.4 Atlantic Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricatal
The hawksbill turtle is a marine species that occurs in tropical oceans worldwide. It nests
on beaches scattered throughout its range, and spends most of its life in coastal waters. The
hawksbill is considered omnivorous, feeding on mollusks, crustaceans and marine algae
(Lund, 1978). In Florida, the hawksbill is most often observed near coral reefs (Lund,
1978). Nesting is infrequent (1 to 4 per year) but recorded from Volusia County to the
Marquesas. Some small island nesting beaches are on federal lands, especially the Key
West National Wildlife Refuge (Hipes et al., 2001).
3.13.7.1.5 Kemp's Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys kempi)
The Kemp's ridley turtle is a marine species that primarily inhabits the Gulf of Mexico but is
also found in the Caribbean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean. Nesting is restricted to the beaches
of northern Mexico and southernmost Texas; there are no records of nesting in Florida.
The ridley turtle is omnivorous, feeding on invertebrates, fish, and marine plants. In the
Florida Keys, it would be found in nearshore waters, mangrove creeks, and bays.
3.13.7.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for Marine Turtles
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of marine turtles (Lazell,
1989; Myers and Ewel, 1990; Hipes et al., 2001; U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007).
Reasons for decline in the Florida Keys are summarized as follows:
Destruction or Modification of Habitat
• Beach nesting site disturbances
o Invasive plants (impenetrable root structures)
o Artificial lighting (from adjacent development)
o Mechanical beach cleaning
• Water quality degradation
o Nearshore water pollution
o Marine litter
o Dredge and fill
• Seagrass bed destruction
• Damage from recreational boating
Predation and/or Destruction
• Nesting site predation
o Native wildlife populations
o Free -roaming domestic pets
• Human disturbance (egg collecting/nest destruction)
• Recreational boating
• Incidental catch
conservation and Coastal Management 166 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Section 118-12(k)(6) of the LDRs prohibits seawalls, bulkheads, riprap or other shoreline
hardening structures waterward of any portion of any beach berm complex which is known
to be or is potential nesting area for marine turtles, as determined by the county biologist,
the State, and/or other appropriate agencies.
Recovery activities which could be implemented by the County to prohibit the destruction
of marine turtles and to protect their habitat include:
• Acquisition of undisturbed beach/berm areas regularly used as marine turtle nesting
sites;
• Restoration of publicly -owned beaches. The county LDRs state that restoration of
lawfully altered beach berms may be undertaken in cooperation of the FDEP to restore
turtle nesting habitat. Restoration is required for beaches altered without
authorization ;
• Continuation of LDRs applicable to existing and new development;
o Prohibit activities disruptive to marine turtles and to their nesting habitat
o Restrict artificial lighting
o Restrict mechanical beach cleaning
o Protect marine turtles from predation by human activities and free -roaming pets
• Continuation of LDRs, applicable to new development;
o Restrict new beachfront lighting
o Require setbacks from turtle nesting sites
o Require restoration of beaches
o Restrict shoreline hardening activities
• Adoption of speed controls in nearshore waters and/or creation of a boating restricted
or boating protection zone;
• Support for establishment of an oil response team for the Florida Keys;
• Coordination with USFWS and FDEP to determine additional protection measures
which could be implemented by the County;
• Enforcement of existing State regulations prohibiting the molesting or harming of
endangered species (Chapter 39, F.A.C.); and
• Implementation of management strategies for water quality protection consistent with
the FKNMS Water Quality Protection Plan.
3.13.8 American Crocodile (Crocodylus acutus)
3.13.8.1 Status. Distribution. and Habitat Description
The American crocodile is found in several areas of tropical coastal swamps throughout the
Caribbean basin and the Pacific coast of Central and South America. In the U.S., it occurs
from Biscayne Bay on the east coast of Florida to the Ten Thousand Islands on the west
coast, although the breeding habitat is much more restricted. Crocodiles are primarily
found within Everglades National Park, on mangrove islands in Florida Bay, and at Turkey
Point in Biscayne Bay (Hipes et al., 2001). The Florida Keys are located within the critical
Conservation and Coastal Management 167 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
habitat for the American crocodile. Critical habitat for the species includes all of Florida
Bay, extending from Turkey Point on the north to Long Key on the south.
The American crocodile inhabits coastal waters, with a preference for protected bays and
sounds, and adjacent mangrove swamps. It utilizes man-made bodies of water such as
canals and borrow pits, if conditions are suitable. It requires loose soils above the
elevations of tides for its nest sites where the females lay eggs. Natural nesting sites are
usually located on beaches or the waterward areas of tropical hardwood hammocks. Deep
water access for the adult female close to a potential nest site appears to be a requirement
for nesting (Ogden, 1978a). It may utilize dredge spoil for nesting sites, if conditions are
favorable. Nesting activity begins in April when the females re -work nest sites or establish
new ones. The females lay 20 to 80 eggs in late April or early May; the young hatch in late
July or early August and are dug out by an adult, presumably the female (Ogden, 1978b).
The bay side of Upper Key Largo is crocodile habitat because there are suitable nesting
sites close to extensive areas of undisturbed habitat. In contrast, the mainland side of
Barnes Sound and other areas have sufficient feeding habitat but no suitable nesting sites
(Ogden, 1978a). The distribution during the non -nesting period can vary among years
because adults can disperse great distances. However, the majority are observed in the
vicinity of core nesting areas near Biscayne and Florida Bays (USFWS, 1999).
3.13.8.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the American Crocodile
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of the American crocodile
(USFWS, 1999). Reasons for decline in the Florida Keys are summarized as follows:
Destruction or Modification of Habitat:
• Habitat loss of mangrove and nearshore habitat
• Water quality degradation
• Nearshore water pollution
• Marine litter
• Dredge and fill
Predation and/or Destruction:
• Habitat alteration and/or destruction
• Nesting site predation
o Native wildlife populations
o Human disturbance (egg collecting/nest destruction)
o Hatchling predation by native wildlife populations, particularly raccoons
• Highway mortality along the "Eighteen Mile Stretch" segment of U.S. 1 and along Card
Sound Road
• Commercial and net fishing in Florida Bay
• Historic commercial harvesting
Conservation and Coastal Management 168 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Indirect Disturbances:
• Human disturbances during courtship and nesting periods
• Stochastic events such as cold temperatures, tropical storms, and hurricanes
• Salinity changes
Recovery activities which could be implemented by the County to prohibit the destruction
of the American crocodile and to protect its habitat include:
• Coordination with USFWS and FFWCC to determine additional protection measures
which could be implemented by the County
• Public education concerning human disturbances during courtship and nesting periods
• Adoption of speed controls in nearshore waters and/or creation of a boating restricted
or boating protection zone
• Support for establishment of an oil response team for the Florida Keys
• Implementation of management strategies for water quality protection consistent with
the FKNMS Water Quality Protection Plan.
Most lands that are inhabited by the American crocodile are located in Tier I lands. This
habitat is generally protected by the County's LDR and ROGO/NROGO Tier Overlay System
[see Section 3.19.8 (Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, including the
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key)].
3.13.9 American Alligator (Alligator mississippiensis)
3.13.9.1 Status. Distribution and Habitat Description
The American alligator occurs throughout Florida and the southeastern United States from
Texas to North Carolina, and up the Mississippi basin as far as Arkansas and Oklahoma.
Alligators are reproductively active in the Florida Keys (Jacobsen, 1983). Current
population counts for the Keys are not known but population numbers have increased
since protections began in the 1960s.
Alligators have been sighted in recent years on Cudjoe Key, Middle Torch Key, Big Pine Key,
and Little Pine Key. The primary habitats of alligators are freshwater wetlands and fresh
waterbodies. In the Keys, the most extensive freshwater wetlands occur on Big Pine Key,
where habitat has actually been enhanced for alligators by the excavation of approximately
100 miles of mosquito -control ditches. These ditches provide connections for alligators to
move between freshwater areas, as well as increased food supplies (Jacobsen, 1983). The
greatest population occurs on Big Pine Key in the vicinity of the Blue Hole in the National
Key Deer Refuge (Weiner, 1979; Jacobsen, 1983; Lazell, 1989; U.S. Department of
Commerce, 2007). Nests are typically constructed of vegetation piled above the reach of
water. Alligators in the Lower Keys have also been observed in marine habitats (Jacobsen,
1983).
Conservation and Coastal Management 169 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.13.9.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the American Alligator
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of the American alligator.
Reasons for decline in the Florida Keys are summarized as follows:
Destruction or Modification of Habitat:
• historic loss of freshwater wetland habitat
Predation and/or Destruction:
• nesting site predation
o native wildlife populations
o human disturbance (egg collecting/nest destruction)
o hatchling predation by native wildlife populations, particularly raccoons
• historic commercial harvesting.
A number of activities have contributed to the recovery of the American alligator. Because
the greatest concentrations are on Big Pine Key, alligator holes and ponds may be
important refuges for other animals during periods of drought and the maintenance of
these ponds plays an important role in preserving the health of the area's wetlands.
However, the species remains threatened by the loss of freshwater and wetland habitats
and human interactions (poaching, road kills, and removals) (U.S. Department of
Commerce, 2007).
3.13.10 Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymachron corais couperi)
3.13.10.1 Status. Distribution. and Habitat Description
The eastern indigo snake is found throughout Florida and southeast Georgia. Disjunct
populations may be present in South Carolina, Alabama and Mississippi (USFWS 1999;
USFWS, 2006). In the Keys, eastern indigo snakes have been collected from Big Pine and
Middle Torch Keys and are reliably reported from Big Torch, Little Torch, Summerland,
Cudjoe, Sugarloaf, and Boca Chica Keys (Lazell, 1989). Since surveys have not been
conducted in the Keys, the eastern indigo snake may occur on other keys as well (USFWS,
2006). No critical habitat has been designated for the eastern indigo snake.
The indigo snake is a generalized predator and will eat any vertebrate small enough to be
overpowered, such as small mammals, birds, lizards, frogs and other snakes, including
venomous species (Kochman, 1978; Lazell, 1989; USFWS, 2006).
In the Keys and south Florida the indigo snake utilizes a number of habitats including
tropical hardwood hammocks, slash pinelands, beach/berm systems, freshwater wetlands,
tidal mangroves, transitional habitats and disturbed lands recolonized by non-native
vegetation (Kochman, 1978; Steiner et al., 1983; Hipes et al., 2001). It appears to prefer the
more upland habitats, but it also has been observed swimming in both fresh and saltwater.
It is not found in developed lands, mangroves, salt marsh, and deep -water areas (Steiner et
al., 1983).
Conservation and Coastal Management 170 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
No population estimates exist for south Florida, but anecdotal accounts from field
researchers indicate that observations of the eastern indigo snake are rare. The average
range of the eastern indigo snake is 11.9 acres during the winter (December -April), 106.0
acres during late spring early summer (May -July), and 240.7 acres during late summer and
fall (August- November). Adult male eastern indigo snakes have larger home ranges than
adult females and juveniles; their ranges may encompass as much as 553 acres and 390
acres in the summer (USFWS, 2006).
3.13.10.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Eastern Indigo Snake
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of the eastern indigo snake
(USFWS, 1999). Reasons for decline in the Florida Keys are summarized as follows (Lazell,
1989):
• Destruction or modification of habitat
o loss of habitat to development
o degradation of habitat due to human disturbance and interference with natural burn
cycles and natural succession
o decline of gopher tortoise populations
• Predation and/or destruction
o commercial exploitation for the pet trade
o highway mortality
o deliberate human persecution
It appears that the eastern indigo snake has always been rare in the Keys and that their
preferred habitat lies further north on the mainland. At the time of its listing as a
threatened species, the main factor in the decline of the eastern indigo snake was
attributed to exploitation for the pet trade. Because of effective law enforcement, the
pressure from the collectors has declined, but remains a concern. In the Keys, the primary
threat to the eastern indigo snake is habitat loss and fragmentation due to development.
Residential housing is also a threat because it increases the likelihood of snakes being
killed by property owners and free -roaming pets (USFWS, 2006)
The eastern indigo snake is one of the protected species included under HCP for Big Pine
Key and No Name Key. Activities to prohibit the destruction of the eastern indigo snake
and to protect its habitat have been addressed in this plan. However, indigo snakes have
not been documented on Big Pine Key in recent years despite the presence of suitable
habitat (USFWS, 2006). Elsewhere in the Keys, undeveloped eastern indigo snake habitat is
generally protected by the County's LDR and ROGO/NROGO Tier Overlay System [see
Section 3.19.8 (Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, including the Habitat
Conservation Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key)].
Conservation and Coastal Management 171 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.13.11 Southern Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
3.13.11.1 Status, Distribution, and Habitat Description
The bald eagle has been federally and State delisted. However, the species continues to be
protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection
Act. In Florida, it continues to be protected under the State's newly enacted bald eagle rule,
F.A.C. 68A-16.002 Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). The Florida bald eagle rule is very
similar to the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
It is a water -dependent species and is found near coastal areas, bays, rivers, lakes, or other
bodies of water that provide concentrations of food sources. Nesting and breeding
activities occur year round. Eagles often nest in tall trees such as pines. In the Keys they
will also nest in mangroves, particularly on overwash mangrove islands. Eggs are normally
laid in winter. Eleven nests are known from the County; two are located near Big Cypress
Swamp on the mainland. The other nine are located in the Lower Keys
(http://www.myfwc.com/eagle/eaglenests/nestiocator.aspx). Exact nest locations are
known but have not been mapped to discourage disturbance.
3.13.11.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Southern Bald Eagle
The federal and State protection measures will help ensure that Florida's eagle population
either remains stable or increases throughout the State. The County's LDR and
ROGO/NROGO adequately protects eagle habitat, which is generally located in lands
protected by the Tier Overlay System.
3.13.12 Wood Stork (Mycteria americana)
3.13.12.1 Status, Distribution and Habitat Description
The wood stork is a tropical and sub -tropical wading bird that occurs in Mexico, Central
America, South America, and the southern United States. Historically there were breeding
colonies from Texas to South Carolina, but the range has shrunk to Florida and
southeastern Georgia (Ogden, 1978c; Hipes et al., 2001; USFWS, 1999).
The wood stork inhabits freshwater and brackish coastal wetlands. It nests in cypress or
mangrove trees. Nesting colonies form in November through January, and the offspring
fledge before seasonal rains begin in June (Ogden, 1978c). There are several large
rookeries in Everglades National Park, including Madeira Rookery (Ogden et al., 1978),
which is approximately 15 miles from the nearest point on Key Largo.
The wood stork feeds on small fish captured in shallow water (6 to 10 inches deep) by a
specialized behavior known as tacto-location (Ogden, 1978c). The wood stork is
dependent, to a much greater degree than other wading birds, on a highly concentrated
supply of fish for food, especially during the November -May nesting period (Kushlan et al.,
1975). The main food species include sailfish mollies (Poecillia latipinna) and marsh
Uonservation and Coastal Management 172 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
killifish (Cypridon veriegatus) which are common species in the mangrove swamps of the
mainland and the Keys (Ogden et al., 1978).
The wood stork is only an occasional visitor to the Florida Keys. Its primary habitat is on
the Florida mainland. There are no nesting colonies in the Keys. The mangrove areas of
Key Largo are utilized as feeding habitat only rarely by wood storks, which appear to favor
mainland areas. However, wood storks have been observed to fly 80 miles from their nests
to feeding grounds (Ogden et al., 1978), making it possible for them to utilize mangrove
areas on Key Largo. Therefore, loss of Key Largo mangrove areas could cause a loss of
wood stork feeding habitat within range of a known nesting site.
The wood stork populations have declined drastically in Florida (and throughout its range).
This is due to water management practices that limit foraging habitat, especially during the
breeding season. Prognosis of the wood stork population is partially dependent on the
success of the overall South Florida ecosystem restoration effort to restore the quantity,
quality, timing, and distribution of freshwater flows in Everglades wetlands so that the
prey base will be recovered in the estuarine and freshwater systems (USFWS, 1999).
3.13.12.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Wood Stork
The generally accepted explanation for the decline of the wood stork is the reduction in the
food base attributed to the loss of wetland habitat and changes in hydroperiod in the
interior wetlands of south Florida (USFWS, 1999). Although Wood Stork does range into
the Florida Keys for foraging and roosting, rookeries are not present. No management
actions have been identified as County recovery action for the Wood Stork in the Florida
Keys.
3.13.13 Bachman's Warbler (Vermivora bachmanii)
3.13.13.1 Status. Distribution, and Habitat Description
The Bachman's warbler is the rarest of all American warblers. The last sighting in Florida
was reported in 1977 and it is not reported to breed in Florida (USFWS, 1999). Historically
these warblers nested in the interior United States from Missouri to Virginia and migrated,
passing through the Florida Keys, to their wintering habitat in Cuba. If any Bachman's
warblers remain, they would be found in the mangroves and hardwood hammocks,
primarily in the Lower Keys, during from July through September (Lazell, 1989).
3.13.13.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Bachman's Warbler
Shooting for its plumage has been the suggested cause of the decline of the Bachman's
warbler (Lazell, 1989; USFWS, 1999). The USFWS has prepared a recovery plan for the
Bachman's warbler. The County has not identified any recovery actions. In the unlikely
event that any Bachman's warblers survive, existing County ROGO/NROGO regulations
prohibiting development in mangroves and current acquisition programs for hardwood
Conservation and Coastal Management 173 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
hammocks would serve to protect habitat in the Keys used by this species during its early
spring and late summer migration.
3.13.14 Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus)
3.13.14.1 Status. Distribution, and Habitat Description
The piping plover is a small shorebird. There are three populations in the United States,
including those on sandy beaches of the east coast of North America, in the Great Lakes
region, and riverine systems in the Northern Great Plains. The east coast population
breeds on sandy beaches from Newfoundland to South Carolina.
Piping plovers do not nest in the Florida Keys but individuals from the three breeding
populations winter from North Carolina to Key West. In the Florida Keys, the stretch from
the Seven Mile Bridge to Bahia Honda is utilized as wintering grounds (USFWS, 1999). A
major wintering ground is the wetlands system on Ohio Key, which has been acquired by
the USFWS. Available data suggest that the entire Atlantic Coast population has been
decreasing since 1955 or earlier (USFWS, 1999).
3.13.14.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Piping Plover
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of the piping plover (USFWS,
1999). Specific studies of wintering grounds in the Keys have not been undertaken.
Nevertheless, it has been suggested that the factors affecting the population in its wintering
grounds are as follows (USFWS, 1999):
Destruction or Modification of Habitat:
• loss of habitat to development, shoreline stabilization structures, and dredging
Predation and/or Destruction:
• human disturbance in wintering habitats
Piping plovers in the Florida Keys congregate on wintering grounds on Ohio Key. The
County has designated this wintering ground as an Area of Critical County Concern (ACCC),
explicitly for purposes of protecting the piping plover habitat. Section 106-9 of the LDRs
explicitly limits future uses on Ohio Key to 20 recreational vehicle parking spaces or
campsites. This land is now under public ownership although the County should retain
existing LDR restrictions, which limit land uses and establish wildlife habitat protection
measures for the piping plover on the Atlantic -side portion of Ohio Key.
3.13.15 Roseate Tern (Sterna dougallii)
3.13.15.1 Status, Distribution. and Habitat Description
The roseate tern is a nearshore bird that occurs on both sides of the Atlantic. Other
subspecies occur in the tropical Indian Ocean and western Pacific. Along the Atlantic coast
Conservation and Coastal Management 174 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
of North America nesting occurs from Nova Scotia to Virginia, in the Florida Keys and in the
West Indies (Robertson, 1978).
The roseate tern is piscivorous, plunge -diving for small fish up to four inches in length in
nearshore waters (Robertson, 1978). Nesting occurs on the bare shell/sand of beaches,
broken coral heaps, and eroded open limestone in open unvegetated areas (U.S.
Department of Commerce, 2007). Nesting usually begins in late May or early June. Keys'
nests usually contain two eggs. The incubation period is 21 days. Fledging occurs about
one month after hatching and the young may be fed by adults for several more months
(Robertson, 1978). The birds at the largest nesting colony in the Keys and the Dry Tortugas
leave by early September (Robertson, 1978).
Over the past two decades, roseate terns have been reported to nest at various locations in
the Keys, including the Dry Tortugas, Coco Plum Beach, islands off the Seven Mile Bridge,
spoil islands in Key West Harbor, and the Molasses Reef Dry Rocks (Robertton, 1978; U.S.
Department of Commerce, 2007).
3_.13.15.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Roseate Tern
The USFWS has not completed nor scheduled completion of a recovery plan for the
southeastern population of the Roseate Tern (northeastern population has been
completed; USFWS, 1999).
Recovery activities which could be implemented by the County to prohibit the destruction
of the roseate tern and to protect its habitat include:
• Identification of historic nesting sites in the Upper, Middle, and Lower Keys;
• Acquisition of parcels having historic nesting sites;
• Prohibition of development on offshore islands used as nesting sites;
• Direction of growth away from active nesting sites;
• Preparation of management guidelines for landowners whose properties contain or are
in proximity to nesting sites [see Section 3.13.2.5 (Management Guidelines for
Landowners)];
• Enforcement of existing State regulations prohibiting the molesting or harming of
endangered species (Chapter 39, F.A.C.); and
• Coordination with USFWS and FFWCC to determine additional protection measures
which could be implemented by the County.
The County's LDR and ROGO/NROGO protects roseate tern habitat, which is generally
located in lands protected by the Tier Overlay System [see Section 3.19.8 (Protection of
Threatened and Endangered Species, including the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big
Pine Key and No Name Key)].
Conservation and Coastal Management 175 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.13.16 Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow (Ammodramus maritimus mirabilis)
3.13.16.1 Status. Distribution, and Habitat Description
Cape Sable seaside sparrows are medium-sized sparrows restricted to the Florida
peninsula. They occur only in the Everglades region of Miami -Dade and Monroe counties in
South Florida. They are non -migratory and isolated from other breeding populations of
seaside sparrows. Presently, the known distribution of the sparrow is restricted to two
areas of marl prairies east and west of Shark River Slough, and flanking Taylor Slough
(USFWS, 1999).
3.13.16.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Cape Sable Seaside
Sparrow
The Cape Sable seaside sparrow was listed as an endangered species in 1967 because of its
limited distribution and threats to its habitat posed by large-scale conversion of land in
South Florida to agricultural uses. Its habitat periodically experiences extensive flooding,
fires, and hurricanes, which may alter habitat suitability by changing vegetative
composition and structure. Biologists studying the sparrow have documented that high
water levels, due in large part to managed water releases, in western Shark River Slough
have caused the decline of the western subpopulation and continue to contribute to the
absence of a population rebound. Competition and predation also threaten the Cape Sable
seaside sparrow. Raccoons, snakes, rice rats, and hawks may be the chief predators.
Increasing water levels are associated with significant increases in predation rates (USFWS,
1999).
Recovery efforts include the monitoring of hydrology, vegetation and sparrow populations
as new hydrological schedules are implemented (e.g., Comprehensive Everglades
Restoration Plan) to ensure that unexpected adverse effects to the Cape Sable seaside
sparrow do not occur. With careful monitoring and continued close coordination with the
USFWS and other natural resource professionals, the habitat restoration in the Everglades
has the potential to provide significant progress towards recovery for this species.
3.13.17 Key Largo Wood Rat (Neotoma floridana smallii)
3.13.17.1 Status. Distribution and Habitat Description
The Key Largo wood rat is an endemic subspecies that exclusively inhabits tropical
hardwood hammocks on Key Largo and does not utilize any other vegetation community.
The range of the wood rat formerly extended to southern Key Largo. At present, the
natural range of the wood rat is limited to hammocks in Upper Key Largo (Barbour and
Humphrey, 1982; Hipes et al., 2001). The experimental population established on
Lignumvitae Key, where it was introduced in 1970, has not survived (due to unknown
causes) (Hipes et al., 2001; USFWS, 1999). Wood rats usually utilize only hammocks that
are sufficiently mature to have a well-defined canopy but also inhabit a variety of
Conservation and Coastal Management 176 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
microhabitats within tropical hardwood hammocks (USFWS, 1999). The density of nests
and animals is positively correlated with the maturity of the hammock (Barbour and
Humphrey, 1982).
3.13.17.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Kev Largo Wood Rat
Habitat for the Key Largo Wood Rat is protected on Key Largo Hammock State Botanical
Site. Areas are also protected on other parts of Key Largo and adjacent islands. However,
its original range has been reduced to about half of its original range that it may be
insufficient to support viable populations (USFWS, 1999).
The USFWS prepared a recovery plan for the Key Largo wood rat (USFWS, 1999). Despite
the protected status of this habitat, the status of the Key Largo woodrat remains precarious
due to habitat fragementation and the effects of hurricanes. According to the recovery plan
for the species (USFWS, 1999), surveys of woodrats on Northern Key Largo in 1997 and
1998 trapped only 6 and 7 animals in 1997 and 1998, respectively, after 1,500 trap nights
of effort. McCleery (2003) estimated the current population to be between 26 and 106
individuals. He modeled the populations using demographic parameters and projected a
high risk of extinction. Current threats to the Key Largo woodrat include predation by feral
and domestic cats, predation by exotic fire ants, and random environmental events such as
fires and hurricanes. The County LDRs and ROGO/NROGO protects tropical hardwood
habitat, which is generally located in lands protected by the Tier Overlay System [see
Section 3.19.8 (Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, including the Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key)]. These lands are generally
the same as those inhabited by the Key Largo wood rat. Because of these protections, the
threat of future habitat loss from development on North Key Largo is low.
3.13.18 Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium)
3.13.18.1 Status. Distribution and Habitat Description
The Key deer is a distinct geographical race of Virginia white-tailed deer that is endemic to
the Lower Keys. Historically, the Key deer ranged from Key West to Duck Key (Barbour
and Allen, 1982, as cited in USFWS, 1999). At present, the permanent population is
centered on Big Pine Key and No Name Key with the range extending to Big Torch, Middle
Torch, Cudjoe, Howe, Summerland, Little Pine Island, and Sugarloaf Keys.
The Key deer utilizes almost all habitats and vegetation communities within its range. It
feeds primarily in slash pinelands, mangroves, and transitional habitats. It obtains water
from freshwater wetlands and solution holes. It gives birth to fawns in tropical hardwood
hammocks. Silvy (1975) found that the deer preferentially utilize slash pinelands and
tropical hardwood hammocks compared to other available habitat types, but they use
virtually all available habitats in their range (Lopez, 2001). The deer will also feed and
travel through open disturbed and moderately developed areas (USFWS, 1999; Monroe
County et al., 2006).
Conservation and Coastal Management 177 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The geographic distribution of the Key deer is closely tied to the availability and suitability
of habitat. At present, approximately two-thirds of the population is concentrated in the
Big Pine Key/No Name Key area. The remaining one-third of the population, which is also
reproductively active, lives outside the area of concentration (Monroe County et al., 2006).
Two habitat requirements account for this distribution. First, Key deer require a year-
round supply of fresh drinking water, which is a critical factor in their distribution (Monroe
County et al., 2006). Big Pine Key and No Name Key have relatively abundant freshwater
wetlands and solution holes that are fresh year-round. Second, Key deer show a marked
preference to feed in freshly burned slash pinelands, where there are abundant foodstuffs
at a level they can reach (USFWS, 1999). Big Pine Key and No Name Key again provide the
greatest acreage of slash pineland habitat. Key Deer swim between islands, and there is
evidence that the Big Pine/No Name Key population migrates to various smaller, outlying
islands to feed during the wet season when rainwater has collected, returning to the large
islands during the dry season.
The population trends of the Key deer reflect their vulnerability to human impacts. The
natural reproductive rate of Key deer is low (USFWS, 1999; Monroe County et al., 2006;
USFWS, 2006), meaning that any population recovery following a decline would be slow.
Lopez (2001) studied the ecology and population dynamics of the Key deer for three years.
He followed the movement, habitat utilization, and fate of over 200 deer using radio -
telemetry and census procedures. The study produced a Population Viability Analysis
model to evaluate the impacts of development scenarios on the Key deer population. The
model is a tool to evaluate the likelihood that the species will persist for a given time into
the future under different scenarios. The unit of impact in the model was termed "H" and
can be applied to any type of development activity.
3.13.18.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Key Deer
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of the Key deer (USFWS,
1999). These include the following:
• Destruction or modification of habitat
o loss and restriction of habitat caused by development, primarily on Big Pine Key
o installation of fencing on private property
• Predation and/destruction
o highway mortality (particularly along U.S. 1 and Key Deer Boulevard)
o free -roaming domestic pets, especially domestic cats on young deer
o poaching
o accidental drowning of fawns in mosquito control ditches
o entanglement in fencing
• Activities altering distribution and behavior
o hand feeding resulting in loss of fear for man and vehicles
• Potential modification of habitat
o reduction in availability and/or contamination of freshwater resources
Conservation and Coastal Management 178 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
The USFWS (1999) has identified three primary objectives for recovery of the Key deer:
• to prevent extinction or irreversible decline of the species in the foreseeable future;
• to prevent significant negative impacts short of extinction; and
• to provide for full recovery of the species.
Both the "Key Deer Recovery Plan" (USFWS, 1999) and the "Habitat Conservation Plan for
Florida Key Deer" (Monroe County et al., 2006) identify land acquisition as the single most
important management strategy that would significantly contribute to the successful
maintenance of the Key deer in its natural environment. Approximately 69 percent of the
land on Big Pine Key and No Name Key is in public ownership of which 66 percent is
managed for conservation. The main landowner is the Federal government with 55
percent, all of which is within the National Key Deer Refuge. The National Key Deer Refuge
was established on August 22, 1957 to protect and conserve Key deer and other wildlife
resources. It comprises nearly 8,983 acres of land on several islands within the refuge, as
well as additional parcels located outside the boundary administered by the refuge. The
USFWS owns 52 percent of Big Pine Key and 71 percent of No Name Key. The State of
Florida purchases land under the Florida Forever program, which is administered by FDEP.
State-owned lands within the project area include the Coupon Bight Aquatic Preserve and
Preserve Buffer Lands and lands within the Coupon Bight/Key Deer CARL project area. The
Monroe County Land Authority (MCLA) purchases a wide variety of vacant lands as
directed in the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan (Monroe County et al., 2006).
The USFWS prepared a management plan for the Lower Florida Keys National Wildlife
Refuges: National Key Deer Refuge; Key West National Wildlife Refuge; and Great White
Heron National Wildlife Refuge (USFWS, 2008). The refuge complex is managed as a whole
with administrative headquarters at National Key Deer Refuge on Big Pine Key. The FDEP
Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas manages State-owned lands within the
Coupon Bight Aquatic Preserve and Preserve Buffer, whereas the USFWS manages State-
owned lands within the Coupon Bight/Key Deer CARL project area under an existing lease
agreement. State-owned lands (purchased by the State with Florida Forever funds) outside
of the USFWS and FDEP management boundaries are managed by the County Land
Steward. The Land Steward also manages County -owned conservation lands which were
acquired through ROGO dedications or purchased by the MCLA. Habitat management of
County lands started Keys -wide during FY 2002-2003.
The HCP for Big Pine Key and No Name Key was implemented to address the "incidental
take" of Key deer based on a population viability model. An Incidental Take Permit (No.
TE083411-0) was issued by USFWS in conjunction with the completion of the HCP. The
HCP was developed with a measurable goal to ensure development does not take place in
prime Key deer habitat. The conservation program focuses on avoidance and minimization
strategies and habitat mitigation based on replacing lost habitat value and protection and
management of acquired habitat.
Conservation and Coastal Management 179 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The Key deer herd has increased substantially over the past 40 years, due principally to a
ban on hunting and from protection and management of habitat within the National Key
Deer Refuge. The population is at or near historical highs and has remained stable since
2003. Road mortality represents the largest known source of documented Key deer
mortality (Lopez, 2001), and a crossing constructed by FDOT along U.S. 1 has reduced road
mortalities. Braden et al. (2008) found that key deer -vehicle collisions were reduced by 94
percent inside the fenced segment.
3.13.19 Silver Rice Rat (Oryzomys argentatus)
3.13.19.1 Status. Distribution. and Habitat Description
The silver rice rat is an endemic species of the Lower Keys discovered in the 1970s (Spitzer
et al., 1978). The silver rice rat occurs on twelve islands in the Lower Keys: Big Pine, Little
Pine, Howe, Water, Middle Torch, Big Torch, Summerland, Raccoon, Johnston, Cudjoe,
Upper Sugarloaf, and Saddlebunch Keys. Based on the availability of suitable habitat and
proximity to existing populations, the silver rice rat may also occur on several other islands
in the Lower Keys, including but not limited to, Little Torch and Ramrod. Critical habitat
for the silver rice rat includes Little Pine Key; Water Keys; Big Torch Key; Middle Torch
Key; Summerland Key north of U.S. 1; Johnston Key; Raccoon Key; and Lower Saddlebunch
Keys south of U.S. 1, but not including lands in Township 67S, Range 27E, section 8 and the
northern 1/5 of section 17. All lands and waters above mean low tide are included in this
designation (50 CFR 17.95; USFWS, 2006). The major constituents of this critical habitat
that require special management considerations or protection are:
• Mangrove swamps containing Red Mangrove (Rhizophora mangle), Black Mangrove
(Avicennia germinans), White Mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa), and Buttonwood
(Conocarpus erectus);
• Salt marshes, swales, and adjacent transitional wetlands containing Saltwort (Batis
maritima), Glasswort (Salicornia virginica), Saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), Sea Ox-eye
Daisy (Borrichia frutescens), Key Grass (Monanthochloe littoralis), and Smutgrass
(Sporobolus virginicus); and
• Freshwater marshes containing Cattails (Typha domingensis), Sawgrass (Cladium
jamaicense), and Cordgrass (Spartina spp.; USFWS, 2006).
The silver rice rat is a wetland -dependent species. It was first discovered in a freshwater
marsh on Cudjoe Key in 1973 (USFWS, 2006). The other known populations are all in
saltwater wetlands that include mangroves and saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands. It
has never been found in areas of exclusive mangroves (Spitzer, 1983). The rice rat feeds in
all these zones and nests in the saltmarsh and buttonwood zones in tussocks of
Sporobolus/Distichilis (Spitzer, 1983). It may obtain freshwater by entering crab holes in
the highest buttonwood zone which penetrate the underlying fresh/brackish water lens
(Spitzer, 1983). Thus, most of the known populations are dependent upon wetland habitat
containing the typical gradient from intertidal red mangrove to the saltmarsh and
buttonwood wetlands.
Conservation and Coastal Management 180 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The silver rice rat utilizes a large home range compared to that of other rodents (Spitzer,
1983). It is unlikely that the species or its habitat was ever abundant in the Lower Keys
due to its habitat specificity and low population densities (USFWS, 1999). The silver rice
rat population has apparently remained stable throughout its range in recent years. The
best available species population size is 5,000-20,000 individuals (USFWS, 2006). Of the
8,645 acres of critical habitat, 6,712 acres are in public ownership (77.6 percent). Ninety-
seven percent of critical habitat and its constituent components remain intact (USFWS,
2006).
3.13.19.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Silver Rice Rat
The USFWS has completed a recovery plan for the silver rice rat (USFWS, 1999). The main
threat to the species is residential and commercial activities, habitat loss and the
introduction or increase in non-native predators. Other threats include habitat
fragmentation and an increase in the densities of black rats and domestic cats.
A large amount of habitat for the Silver Rice Rat is contained in the National Key Deer
Refuge. Although the refuge is managed primarily for Key deer, the habitat requirements
and biological needs of the species do not conflict. The HCP for Big Pine Key and No Name
Key was implemented to protect the Florida Key deer as well as other rare species. The
County's LDR and ROGO/NROGO protects the habitat for the Silver Rice Rat, which is
generally located in lands protected by the Tier Overlay System [see Section 3.19.8
(Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, including the Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key)]. Permits issued by the USACE that may
affect the silver rice rat or areas within silver rice rat critical habitat require Endangered
Species Action Section 7 consultation with the USFWS. Avoidance and minimization
measures would be required prior to permit issuance by the SFWMD and/or the FDEP.
3.13.20 Key Largo Cotton Mouse (Peromyscusgossypinus allapaticola)
3.13.20.1 Status, Distribution, and Habitat Description
The Key Largo cotton mouse is an endemic subspecies of cotton mouse that inhabits Key
Largo. Historically, it occurred within hardwood hammock forests throughout Key Largo.
Today it is restricted to the northern portion of the island (Brown, 1978; Barbour and
Humphrey, 1982; USFWS, 1999). A few cotton mice were introduced onto Lignumvitae Key
in 1970, but there have been no studies to determine if the animal is still present (Brown,
1978). Information on its current status is unavailable (USFWS, 2006). The Key Largo
cotton mouse inhabits only tropical hardwood hammocks, to the exclusion of all other
vegetation communities and is dependent upon mature tropical hardwood hammocks
(Brown 1978; Barbour and Humphrey, 1982). The range of the cotton mouse on Key Largo
is not completely known due to its nocturnal habits, small size, and lack of conspicuous
nests.
Conservation and Coastal Management 181 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.13.20.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Key Largo Cotton
Mouse
The status of the cotton mouse is not known with certainty because no recent detailed
survey information is available. Threats by domestic and feral cats are a concern for long-
term viability. Other threats include predation by exotic fire ants, and random
environmental events such as fires and hurricanes. The USFWS has prepared a recovery
plan for the Key Largo cotton mouse (USFWS, 1999). The Key Largo cotton mouse shares
habitat with the endangered Key Largo woodrat and the same threats are causes of concern
for both species. Much more is known about the Key Largo woodrat and, given its
precarious condition; it is possible the overall condition of Key Largo cotton mouse may
have deteriorated as well (USFWS, 2006).
The remaining population for the Key Largo Cotton Mouse is protected in the Key Largo
Hammock State Botanical Site, which is managed for conservation. The County's LDR and
ROGO/NROGO protects the habitat for the Key Largo Cotton Mouse, which is generally
located in lands protected by the Tier Overlay System [see Section 3.19.8 (Protection of
Threatened and Endangered Species, including the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big
Pine Key and No Name Key)]. For the long term, the threat of occupied habitat loss from
development on North Key Largo is low.
3.13.21 Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris hefneri)
3.13.21.1 Status. Distribution. and Habitat Description
The Lower Keys rabbit is a subspecies of the marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris hefneri) and
differs from the Upper Keys subspecies (Sylvilagus palustris paludicola). Lower Keys marsh
rabbits inhabit tidal, brackish, upland, and freshwater environments. Herbaceous cover is
a dominant feature within Lower Keys marsh rabbit home ranges. This herbaceous cover
is a mixture of grasses, sedges, and forbs. Such ground cover provides shelter as well as
critical foods and nesting sites.
The majority of suitable habitat area lies in a transitional zone between marine
environments and uplands. Cover types that provide habitat include salt marsh, coastal
prairie, coastal beach berms, buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus) woodlands, and salt marsh -
buttonwood transition areas. They also use freshwater wetlands. Lower Keys marsh
rabbits often include areas of mangrove [red mangrove, black mangrove, and white
mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa)] woodlands within their home ranges, and regularly
pass through mangrove when traveling between the other habitats. Similarly, data from
recent studies suggests that the species may range into the edges of pinelands and other
upland habitats (USFWS, 2006). Freshwater marshes are limited in the Lower Keys, since
mangroves occupy many coastal areas, and interior freshwater habitat is scarce.
uunsei-vauon ana coastal Management 182 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.13.21.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Lower Keys Marsh
Rabbit
The USFWS has prepared a recovery plan for the Lower Keys marsh rabbit (USFWS, 1999).
The Lower Keys marsh rabbit occurs in many of the larger Lower Keys, including Sugarloaf,
Saddlebunch, Boca Chica, and Big Pine Keys, as well as in the small islands near these keys.
It probably occurred on all of the Lower Keys that supported suitable habitat but did not
occur east of the Seven -Mile Bridge, where it is replaced by Sylvilagus palustris paludicola.
Known localities for the rabbit are on privately owned land, State-owned land, and federal
land within the National Key Deer Refuge and Key West Naval Air Station. Suitable habitat
for this species is highly fragmented across all of the Lower Keys (USFWS, 2006). No
critical habitat has been designated for this species.
The greatest threats to the continued existence of the Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit are
predation by cats, habitat loss and degradation, and hurricanes. Other threats include
contaminants, dumping and trash accumulation, poaching, fire ants, and exotic vegetation.
These threats not only directly affect the viability of local subpopulations, but also reduce
the probability of successful dispersal among the increasingly fragmented habitats.
Connectivity among suitable habitat patches is necessary for Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit
dispersal among patches (USFWS, 2006).
To address habitat loss and indirect effects (e.g., cat predation) associated with
development on Big Pine and No Name Keys, the USFWS issued an Incidental Take Permit
to the County, FDOT, and DCA. The take of these species will be incidental to land clearing
for development and recreational improvements. The HCP for Big Pine Key and No Name
Key was implemented to protect the Florida Key deer as well as other protected species
under the plan, including the Lower Keys marsh rabbit. The County's LDR and
ROGO/NROGO protects privately -owned lands that contain the rabbit's habitat, which is
generally located in lands protected by the Tier Overlay System [see Section 3.19.8
(Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, including the Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key)].
3.13.22 Florida Manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris)
3.13.22.1 Status, Distribution, and Habitat Description
The manatee inhabits coastal and riverine waters. It is found in Florida and occasionally in
Georgia and along the Caribbean coasts of Central and South America. The manatee is
herbivorous. In the Keys its primary food sources are seagrasses (Thalassia testudinum,
Syringodium filiforme, and Halodule wrightii). Manatees live along both coasts of Florida,
along the St. johns and other rivers, and occasionally in Lake Okeechobee and the
waterways leading to it from the Gulf and Atlantic (Hartman, 1978). Populations are
concentrated in the warmer waters of south Florida during the winter months of October
to April (Hartman, 1978). Warm water refuges have been identified throughout Florida
where manatee populations concentrate and these are located at outfalls from power
Conservation and Coastal Management 183 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
plants and natural warm -water springs; none are in the Florida Keys. Manatees are
occasionally found as far south as Key West.
3.13.22.2 Reasons for Decline and Recover Activities for the Florida Manatee
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of the Florida manatee
(USFWS, 1999). Reasons for decline in the Florida Keys are summarized as follows:
• Destruction or modification of habitat
o Water quality degradation
o Dredge and fill
o Nearshore water pollution
o Seagrass bed destruction
o Damage from recreation and boating
• Predation and/or destruction
o Boat collisions
o Entanglement in fishing gear
o Poaching and vandalism
o Death of dependent calves to unknown causes
• Activities altering distribution and behavior
o Human harassment by divers, boaters, swimmers, fishermen, and snorkelers
Recovery activities identified by USFWS (1999) include:
• Continue speed controls in nearshore waters
• Continue boating restricted or boating protection zone
• Coordination with USFWS and FDEP to determine additional protection measures that
could be implemented by the county
• Enforcement of existing State regulations prohibiting the molesting or harming of
endangered species (Chapter 39, F.A.C.)
• Implement management strategies for water quality protection consistent with the
FKNMS Water Quality Protection Plan, including habitat protection strategies
3.13.23Key Tree -Cactus (Cereus robinii)
3.13.23.1 Status Distribution and Habitat Description
The Key tree -cactus (Cereus robinii) is a large, tree -like cactus with erect columnar stems,
reaching 33 feet in height. At maturity, the plants are either much -branched (in variation
robinii), or few -branched (in variation deeringii) and occur on Lower Matecumbe Key
(USFWS, 1999).
Conservation and Coastal Management 184 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.13.23.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for the Key Tree -Cactus
Several factors have contributed to the decline in populations of the Key tree -cactus
(USFWS, 1999). These are summarized as follows:
• disturbance and destruction of hardwood hammocks
• hurricanes
• fires
• overcollection
Two self-sustaining sites are located in Big Pine Key within the National Key Deer Refuge.
The main threat to the continued existence of the two unprotected populations is habitat
loss from development at the two remaining sites in private ownership. In addition, the
remaining populations generally are in decline, which may stem, in part, from the effects of
recent hurricanes. Survival and recovery of the Key tree -cactus depends on protecting the
remaining tropical hammock areas throughout the Keys. The County LDRs and
ROGO/NROGO protects the habitat, which is generally located in lands protected by the
Tier Overlay System [see Section 3.19.8 (Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species,
including the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key)].
3.13.24 Small's Milkpea (Galactia smallii)
3.13.24.1 Status. Distribution, and Habitat Description
Small's milkpea. is an endemic plant restricted to pine rockland of the south Florida
peninsula. The reduction of this habitat type in south Florida and the Keys, combined with
the exclusion of fire, has caused many species characteristic of pine rocklands, such as
Small's milkpea, to be threatened with extinction (USFWS, 1999).
3.13.24.2 Reasons for Decline and Recovery Activities for Small's Milkpea
Small's milkpea has declined due to disruption and destruction of rockland habitat
combined with the exclusion of fire from these habitats (USFWS, 1999). It is not known to
occur in the Florida Keys although pine rockland habitat is present in the Lower Keys. The
County's LDR and ROGO/NROGO adequately protects pine rockland habitat, which is
generally located in lands protected by the Tier Overlay System [see Section 3.19.8
(Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, including the Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key)].
3.13.25 Garber's Spurge (Chamaesyce garberi)
3.13.25.1 Status, Distribution, and Habitat Description
Garber's spurge is an endemic plant restricted to areas of the south Florida peninsula. In
the Keys, it grows on semi -exposed limestone shores, open calcareous sale flats, pine
Conservation and Coastal Management 185 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
rocklands, calcareous sands of beach ridges, and along disturbed roadsides (USFWS, 1999),
It is known to exist only on government protected lands on Big Pine Key and No Name Key
(Monroe County et al., 2006). In pine rocklands, it is found growing in crevices in oolitic
limestone.
3.13.2 5.2 Reasons for Decline and RecoverY Activities for Garber's Spurge
Garber's spurge has declined due to disruption and destruction of habitat (USFWS, 1999).
Pine rocklands are protected as Tier I lands and nearly all remaining pinelands are targeted
for acquisition. The County's LDR and ROGO/NROGO adequately protects pine rockland
habitat, which is generally located in lands protected by the Tier Overlay System [see
Section 3.19.8 (Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, including the Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key)]. Thus, the remaining habitat
for this species is likely to remain protected.
3.14 Fisheries [Rule 9]-5.013(1)(a)5. and (b), F.A.C.]
3.14.1 Fisheries of the Florida Keys
3.14.1.1 Fish Species Common to Mangrove Communities
Many species of fish complete their life cycle within the mangrove community. Others are
dependent upon mangroves during juvenile states and migrate to grassbeds and/or coral
reefs when mature. Others are seasonally or locally abundant. Many of the invertebrates
and fishes are important to the region's recreational and commercial fisheries, including:
Pink Shrimp (Penaeus duorarum), Stone Crab (Menippe mercenaria), Spiny Lobster
(Panulirus argus), jacks (family Caranigadae), goliath grouper (Epinepelus itajara), grunts
(family Pomadasyidae), groupers (Epinephelus spp. and Mycteroperca spp.), seabass (family
Serranidae), Snapper (Lutjanus spp.), Mmullet (family Mugilidae), Red Drum (Sciaenops
ocellata), Ladyfish (Flops saurus), Spotted Sea Trout (Cynoscion nebulsus), Tarpon
(Magalops atlanticus), Snook (Centropomus undecimalis), and Menhaden (Brevoortia
patronus; Florida DNR, 1991a; Heald and Odum, 1970; Lewis et al., 1985).
3.14.1.2 Fish Species Common to Salt Pond Communities
Fish species frequently reported to occur include the Sheepshead Minnow (Cyprinodon
variegatus), Killifish (Fundulus spp.), Rainwater Killifish (Lucania parva), Diamond Killifish
(Adenia xenica), Mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis), and Sailfin Molly (Poecilia latipinna).
3.14.1.3 Fish Species Common to Seagrass Bed Communities
The seagrass beds are transitional habitats between the coral reef and mangrove habitats.
As such, they are important to many species of both ecosystems. They provide abundant
food and shelter for a myriad species of fish, sea turtles, and invertebrates. They represent
one of the most productive and important habitats in the nearshore marine systems of
,1 vauuii cmu Luasrai management 186 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Florida (Livingston, 1990). They also represent the richest nursery and feeding grounds in
South Florida's coastal waterways. In addition to representing a primary resource for
grazers, seagrasses provide vast amounts of energy via detritus that may cycle internally or
be exported to mangrove or coral reef communities.
Faunal constituents of the marine grassbed community include a diversity of microscopic
zooplankton, epiphytic biota, pelagic invertebrates, fishes, and mammals. A large number
of birds feed extensively in shallow seagrass meadows.
Conspicuous among the epibenthic invertebrates found is seagrass beds are the Queen
Conch (Strombus gigas), the Spiny Lobster (Panulirus argus), the Bahamian Starfish
(Oreaster reticulata), and numerous sea urchins, most notably Lytechinus variegatus
carolinus and Tripneustes ventricocsus. Numerous epiphytic invertebrates glean food from
seagrass areas by preying on the algae that grow on the leaves of seagrasses. Principal
among these are a variety of gastropods. Many invertebrates, including the Pink Shrimp
(Penaeus duorarum) and the Spiny Lobster, utilize seagrass meadows for nurseries.
Diverse and abundant fish faunas also inhabit seagrass communities (Florida DNR, 1991b;
Nagelkerken and van der Velde, 2004). While few, if any, of the many permanent residents
are of direct commercial value, these seagrass ecosystems are important nurseries and
feeding areas for such species. These include Sea Bream (Archosargus rhomboides),
Sheepshead (A. probatocephalus), Gag Grouper (Mycteroperca microlepis), Redfish
(Scriaerops oscellata), Gray Snapper (Lutjanus griseus), Lane Snapper (L. synagris), Dog
Snapper (L. jocu), Mutton Snapper (L. annalis), Yellowtail Snapper (Ocyurus chrysurus), and
Spotted Seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus). Other fish that extensively use seagrasses as
nursery areas are:
Common Name
Scientific Name
Pinfish
Lagodon rhomboides
Spot
Leiostomus xanthurus
Silver Perch
Bairdiella chrysura
Pigfish
Orthopristi chrysoptera
White Grunt
Haemulon plumeri
Ocean Sturgeon
Acanthurus bahianus
Doctorfish
Acanthurus chirurgus
Spotted Goatfish
Pseudupeneus maculatus
Yellow Goatfish
Mulloidicthys martinicus
Bucktooth Parrotfish
Sparisoma radians
Redtail Parrotfish
Sparisoma chrysopterum
Stoplight Parrotfish
Sparisoma viride
Redfin Parrotfish
Sparisoma rubripine
Striped Parrotfish
Scarus croicensis
Rainbow Parrotfish
Scarusguacamaia
Midnight Parrotfish
Scarus coeruleus
Emerald Parrotfish
Nicholsina usta
Conservation and Coastal Management 187 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Several sportfishing species, most notably Tarpon (Megalops atlanticus), Bonefish (Albula
vulpes) and Permit (Trachinotus falcatus), depend upon seagrass systems. In areas where
seagrass meadows abut coral reefs, many prominent species of reef fish move into seagrass
areas to feed at night. Principal among them are members of the families Pomadasyidae,
Lutjanidae, and Holocentridae.
3.14.1.4 Fish Species Common to Coral Communities
Coral reef systems provide protection and shelter for colorful and diverse macrofauna,
including small shrimp, crabs, fish and several species of lobsters. Many species, especially
the larger predators, are important species for local fisheries. Hardbottom communities
are valuable nursery areas for many invertebrates and fishes of both the patch reef and
seagrass communities, providing microhabitats for many juvenile fishes.
Larger predators of reef communities include fishes that prey upon invertebrates and
smaller individuals of their own kind. The most frequently observed larger predators on
the reef include the Barracuda (Sphyraena barracuda) and Moray Eel (Gymnothorax spp.)
(Florida DNR, 1991a; Florida DNR, 1991b).
3.14.2 Existing Commercial, Recreational, or Conservation Uses of Fisheries
Sportfishing and commercial fishing are major components of the Florida Keys' economy.
Commercial fishing is the second-largest industry in the Keys; the commercial fleet
supports about 1,200 families, which is nearly five percent of the County's population
(http://www.dep.state.fl.us/coastal/sites/keys/info.htm, updated February 25, 2009).
Common saltwater sportfishing species (Florida DNR, 1991b) include:
Sailfish
Drum
Spanish Mackerel
Bluefish
Redfish
Tarpon
Sheepshead
Amberjack
Flounder
Sea Trout
Dolphin
Pompano
Grouper
King Mackerel
Snapper
Major commercial fisheries include the spiny lobster, pink shrimp and finfish fisheries.
Commercial fishing landings, including shellfish, for the County from 2000 to 2009 are
summarized as follows (FFWCC, Marine Fisheries Information System, Annual Landings
Summary, available at http://research.myfwc.com/features/view_article.asp?id=19224 ):
Total
Total
Pink
Year
Finfish (lbs)
Invertebrates (lbs)
Shrimp (lbs)
2009 *
4,305,970
2,121,072
721,426
2008
4,193,452
3,935,569
1,490,511
2007
4,156,794
4,682,411
719,409
2006
5,685,984
5,455,473
1,302,547
2005
6,638,464
4,303,340
2,038,383
2004
5,877,188
6,029,516
2,112,473
2003
6,007,654
5,237,859
2,309,794
„ aaiu uuaswi management 188 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
2002 5,575,831 5,733,334 1,993,496
2001 5,825,678 4,904,792 2,833,018
2000 5,866,496 7,376,572 1,716,787
* Preliminary data
Invertebrates are primarily spiny lobster and stone crab
3.14.3 Known Problems Related to Fisheries and the Potential for Conservation, Use,
and Protection of Fisheries
3.14.3.1 Problems, Trends, and Research Needs
Several federal, State, and local governmental agencies and organizations are responsible
for managing individual resources and regulating their uses within the marine
environment of the County. These resource management agencies provide a system of
comprehensive ecosystem management for the long-term protection of the Keys' diverse
natural resources. Faced with increasing environmental threats from human activities,
their capacity to perform effectively may deteriorate due to limitations in staffing,
equipment, and funding. Because of the differing missions if each agency, coordinated
policy development can be difficult. The FKNMS was established in 1993 to address these
coordination issues. In the past decade, a number of problems, trends and research needs
have been identified.
The Fish and Wildlife Research Institute Stock Assessment Group (The Marine Fisheries
Management Division of the FFWCC) produced the 2008 Status and Trends Report (Fish
and Wildlife Research Institute, 2009). This report summarized the available 1992-2007
commercial and recreational landings, fishing effort, fishery catch rates, the 1997-2007
fisheries -independent sampling effort, and young -of -the -year and post -young -of -the -year
abundance indices for 136 species or groups. The condition of these species or groups was
determined using information from recent stock assessments, when available. Otherwise,
the condition was assessed using available commercial landings rates, recreational total -
catch rates, and fishery independent abundance indices. The status determination and
supporting trend -analyses were designed to highlight potential areas of concern about
recent substantial changes in Florida's diverse marine fisheries. These analyses were for
Florida as a whole but because a large portion of the fisheries catch comes from the
nearshore waters of the Florida Keys, these results are pertinent to the viability of the Keys'
commercial and recreational fisheries industry.
Most species or groups on the Atlantic coast in 2007 were judged stable (75 species or
groups). Seven were increasing, four were decreasing, and 48 were too rarely caught to
determine their status. Similarly on the gulfside / bayside, most of the species or groups
were stable (100), nine were increasing, one was decreasing, and twenty-two were too
rarely caught to determine their status. Valid data for two species were assumed to be
available only from the waters along Florida's Atlantic coast: weakfish and American shad.
Compared to report prepared in 2007, the numbers of stable or increasing groups this year
were higher on the Atlantic coast (five more) and one less on the gulfside / bayside.
Although the species or groups changed, the numbers in the three stock trend categories
Conservation and Coastal Management 189 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
(decreasing, stable, or increasing) remained similar to the numbers from last year. Some
species or groups that were judged either increasing or decreasing last year moved into the
stable category this year (one on the Atlantic coast and eleven on the gulfside / bayside).
Only weakfish and swordfish on the Atlantic coast and gag grouper on the gulfside /
bayside have shown consecutive 'decreasing' status the last two years. Assessments for
weakfish and gag species find that they are at historically low levels of abundance. Several
Marine Life groups (shrimp, crabs) have persisted recently in the "'increasing" category
(Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, 2009).
Partly in response to concerns about fishing pressure, the FKNMS established a series of
Sanctuary Preservation Areas in 1997. The FKNMS also created the Tortugas Ecological
Reserve in 2001 to protect coral reef ecosystem services in that area and support
sustainable reef fisheries. The Tortugas Ecological Reserve protects 150 square nautical
miles and prohibits all anchoring, fishing and other extractive activities; it was the largest
marine reserve in North America when first implemented. Scientists at the University of
Miami and NMFS have studied and reported on responses of coral reef fish populations to
this reserve. Based on data collected during more than 4,000 research dives, they
compared changes in the Dry Tortugas region between 1999 and 2000 before the reserve
was established, and in 2004, three years after the reserve was established. As predicted
by marine reserve theory, significant regional increases in abundance for several exploited
and non -exploited species were detected. Significantly greater abundance of large fish was
found in the Tortugas Ecological Reserve for black grouper, red grouper, and mutton
snapper compared to the baseline period. No significant declines were detected for any
exploited species in the reserve, while non -exploited species showed both increases and
declines. Abundance of exploited species in fished- areas on the Tortugas Bank either
declined or did not change (Donahue et al., 2008).
On January 19, 2007, the National Park Service established a 46 square mile Research
Natural Area within the Dry Tortugas National Preserve. This area is contiguous to the
northern portion of the FKNMS Tortugas Ecological Reserve and effectively expanded the
marine reserve network since it also prohibited all anchoring and extraction. Research and
monitoring are planned to ascertain whether patterns observed in protected areas in the
Tortugas are due to influences of marine reserves, confounding effects of recent changes in
fishing regulations, hurricane disturbances, or random oceanographic and chance
recruitment events.
FFWCC conducts visual censuses between April and October to monitor finfish populations
along the Atlantic margin of the Florida Keys in waters of the FKNMS. Overall mean
densities (number of fish/100 square meters) have been increasing since 2001, dominated
by fish in the grunt family.
A number of human activities have an effect on marine. habitats and thus, the fate of
commercial and recreational fisheries (Florida DNR, 1991b; U.S. Department of Commerce,
2007). Common fish species of the Keys' coral reefs are:
L,ui,bervauon ana Loastal Management 190 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Corn
ive Plan Update
Common Name
Species Name
Outer Reef
Creole Wrasse
Clepticus parrai
Blue Chromis
Chromis cyaneo
Brown Chromis
Chromis multilineato
Rock Beauty
Holacanthus tricolor
Parrotfish
Scarus spp.
Hogfish
Lachnolaimus maximus
Sergeant Major
Abedefdufsaxtilis
Bluehead
Thalassoma bifasciatum
Striped Grunt
Haemulon striatum
Smallmouth Grunt
Haemulon chrysargyreum
Bluestriped Grunt
Haemulon scrius
French Grunt
Haemulon flavolineatum
Spanish Grunt
Haemulon macrostomum
Grey Angelfish
Pomachanthus orcuatus
Grey Snapper
Lutjanusgriseus
Glassy Sweeper
Pempheris schombergki
Porkfish
Anisotremus virginicus
Bicolor Camselfish
Pomocentrus partitus
Flamefish
Apogon maculatus
Squirrelfish
Holocentrus ascensionis
Pearly Razorfish
Hemipteronotus novaculo
Seminole Goby
Microgobius carri
Slendor Mojarra
Eucinostromus pseudogula
Eyed Flounder
Both us ocellatus
Ballyhoo
Hemiramphus brasiliensis
Scaled Sardine
Harengula pensacolae
Lane Snapper
Lutjanus synagris
Yellow Stingray
Urolophus jamaicensus
Gag Grouper
Mycteroperca microlepis
Nassau Grouper
Epinephelus striatus
Snowy Grouper
Epinephelus nireatus
Goliath Grouper
Epinephelus itajara
Yellowtail Snapper
Ocyurus chrysurus
Barracuda
Sphyraena barracuda
Spanish Hogfish
Bodianus rufus
Patch Reef
Sergeant Major
Abedefdufsaxtilis
Bluehead
Thalassoma bifasciatum
Parrotfish
Scarus spp.
French Angelfish
Pomocanthus paru
Blue Tang
Acanthus coeruleus
Bluestriped Grunt
Haemulon sciurus
Black Grouper
Mycteroperca bonaci
Gag Grouper
Mycteroperca microlepis
Nassau Grouper
Epinephelus striatus
Snowy Grouper
Epinephelus nireatus
Goliath Grouper
Epinephelus itajara
Conservation and Coastal Management 191 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Common Name
Yellowtail Snapper
Baracuda
Spanish Hogfish
Species Name
Ocyurus chrysurus
Sphyraena barracuda
Bodianus rufus
3.14.3.2 Human Activities that Affect Fisheries
3.14.3.2.1 Over -Collection and OvLc-Lishing of Reef Fish and Invertebrates
Over -collecting of colorful juvenile grazers for the aquarium trade and by private
individuals for aquaria is expected to shift the ecological balance of the reef, either abruptly
or gradually, from a community dominated by slow -growing hard corals to a community
dominated by fast-growing species such as macroalgae and octocorals. Removal of these
organisms also reduces the populations of colorful fish from the reef.
From 1979 through 1998, a total of 263 fish species representing 54 families have been
observed within the boundaries of the FKNMS. Over half of all fish observed were from just
ten species. Relatively few fish of legal size have been seen, which is consistent with
several studies that indicate reef fish in the Florida Keys are highly overexploited. Despite
population declines throughout much of the FKNMS, fish numbers in fully protected zones
(Sanctuary Preservation Areas, Ecological Reserves, and Special -use and Research -only
areas) have increased for several commercially important species since implementation of
the zones in 1997. Years of data from one monitoring program show that the numbers of
individuals of three exploited species are higher in protected zones than in fished sites.
Researchers have also seen an increase in the abundance of snapper species at several sites
after the sites were protected. Similar increases in grouper and snapper abundance and
size have also been documented in the Tortugas North Ecological Reserve since its
implementation in 2001 (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007).
3.14.3.2.2 Fish Trapping
Fish traps capture indiscriminately and cause mortality of trapped fish. Fish trapping has
been made illegal in the Keys. The Florida Legislature banned traps in State waters in
1980, with the exception of traps for small bait and shellfish. The Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council banned new traps in 1987 and phased out existing ones over a ten
year period. The South Atlantic Fishery Council followed suit in 1988, banning traps in the
ocean's federal waters three miles off the coast between North Carolina and Florida. Illegal
fish traps are occasionally reported in the Keys.
3.14.3.2.3 Hook and Line Fishing
This type of. fishing can impact coral and hardbottom habitats as gear becomes entangled
and damages corals and other sessile organisms. Hook and Line fishing have the greatest
impact in coral and hardbottom areas, particularly near bridges where fishing activity is
concentrated. Sustained netting, trapping and hook and line fishing in combination with
Conservation and Coastal Management 192 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
declining water quality have resulted in a continuous and cumulative decline in species
abundance (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007).
3.14.3.2.4 Overfishincof Commercial Sponges
Approximately 117 species of sponges inhabit marine waters surrounding the Keys.
Sponges and soft corals cover about 10 percent to 20 percent of total marine area. They
are highly variable in their extent, depending on the region being surveyed and the time of
year (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007). Overfishing of sponges in the Keys is
suspected by biologists. Data are not available to document the reduction of stocks.
Sponge fishing by sponge hook allows for a much lower percentage of sponge regeneration
than sponge fishing by cutting. Research is underway by Old Dominion University to
investigate dynamics of hard -bottom communities, including commercially fished sponge
species.
3.14.3.2.5 Decline of Mobile Invertebrates
Queen conch populations have remained low despite a prohibition on their collection since
1985. Individuals in nearshore waters do not reproduce as well as conch aggregations at
offshore sites, apparently because of an undetermined environmental effect. Nearshore
conch are being transplanted offshore, where they become reproductive and may help
rebuild local populations (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007).
The FFWCC monitors the recovery of the queen conch (Strombas gigas) population in the
Florida Keys by conducting belt-transects in locations with known conch aggregations,
including marine reserves and adjacent reference areas. Since Florida's queen conch
fishery was closed in 1986, there have been signs that adult queen conch have begun to
recover. By 2003, adult conch density had increased. However, this trend was reversed in
2004 and 2005 as density and overall abundance declined in both years. Because most of
the breeding aggregations are in relatively shallow water (less than 16 feet), the active
hurricane seasons during these two years may have negatively impacted the aggregations.
By 2006, there was a slight rebound in density and overall abundance in 2006 to about
25,500 adults (Donahue et al., 2008).
3.14.3.2.6 Lobster and Stone Crab Trapping
Approximately half a million lobster traps and a million stone crab traps are deployed in
FKNMS waters during the fishing seasons for these species, which last eight months and
seven months, respectively. The habitat impacts of lowering and raising such a
considerable number of traps, as well as additional impacts from derelict fishing gear such
as lost or abandoned crab and lobster traps ("ghost traps") and entangled lines, require
investigations. Ghost traps capture indiscriminately and cause mortality of trapped
species. Lost and discarded lobster, stone crab, and blue crab traps are a common
component of marine debris in Florida. Traps and the associated buoys and ropes are
commonly lost during both routine fishing operations and when conflicts occur with other
fishing gear and boats. Surveys suggest that, of the 500,000 lobster traps currently in the
Conservation and Coastal Management 193 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Uodate
fishery, 20 percent of them are lost annually. No surveys have been conducted that
estimate the number of lost stone crab and blue crap traps, but fishers report that they
replace 20 percent of the 818,000 stone crab traps used annually, and anecdotal reports
suggest that during 1998, 30-50 percent of the 360,000 blue crab traps were lost.
Additional trap losses occur during tropical and severe winter storms. During the Ground
Hog Day storm in 1998, approximately 80,000 lobster traps and 22,000 stone crab traps
were lost in the Florida Keys. The combined effects of Hurricane Georges and Tropical
Storm Mitch later that same year destroyed an estimated 111,000 lobster traps and a few
thousand stone crab traps. Research is needed to investigate impacts on habitats of
commercial and recreational fishing gear and methods. The NOAA/NOS/NCCOS/Center for
Coastal Fisheries and Habitat Research investigated impacts of lobster traps on seagrass
habitat and NMFS is investigating coral reef impacts. The study found that traps damage
sensitive habitats and are a hazard to navigation. The loss of a trap spells lost income and
economic hardship for working lobstermen, wholesalers, and the restaurant industry as
well. Researchers also measured the effect of lobster traps on seagrass, finding that the
typical length of time that traps are deployed (between 7 to 25 days) does not result in
significant damage. However, long-term injuries do occur when traps are lost and remain
on top of seagrass for more than six weeks (online report at
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/news/ weeklynews/dec08/ lobstertraps.html).
After the 2008 storm season, the County obtained FEMA funding for a post -disaster marine
debris response. The County removed over 60,000 pieces of trap debris (ropes, floats,
partial traps, and whole traps) that had washed up into shallow marine areas, including the
mangroves.
"Casita" is a term used to describe a particular type of fishing gear used to attract spiny
lobsters. Within the FKNMS, casitas are not considered traditional fishing gear, and thus
are subject to regulation. It is against FKNMS regulations to place casitas inside FKNMS
boundaries and it is illegal to harvest spiny lobster from any artificial structure throughout
the State of Florida. Casita placement (and presumably the associated lobster harvest) is
common in the backcountry area north of the Lower Keys, and there is concern among
wildlife management agencies that there could be detrimental effects to natural habitat and
lobster population dynamics as a result. Additionally, there are concerns in the commercial
trap fishing industry that this practice is unfairly shifting fishery allocation away from the
legal lobster trap fishers. In July 2007, a cooperative effort between State and federal
partners was implemented to target and remove casitas in the Lower Keys.
Simultaneously, fisheries biologists from the State of Florida began evaluating the effect of
casitas on the ecology of the backcountry area and the lobster fishery in response to a
request from FFWCC Commissioners (Donahue et al., 2008).
The FFWCC undertook a lobster monitoring program in 1997 to test the hypothesis that
no -take zones would sufficiently protect spiny lobster so that their average abundance and
size would increase in protected zones compared to similar fished areas. Spiny lobster
monitoring in the FKNMS began at the time of reserve establishment. In 1997, mean
lobster size was below the legal limit in both reserves and exploited areas. Since
protection, mean lobster size in reserves has been larger than legal size, while in exploited
Conservation and Coastal Management 194 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
areas it remained below the legal limit in most years. In all years, legal -sized lobsters found
in Sanctuary Preservation Areas of the FKNMS were as large as or larger than those in
fished areas. In most years, abundance declined in both reserves and exploited areas
during the open season, but the decline was less precipitous in reserves. The decline in
lobster abundance inside reserves during the fishing season indicates that the reserves are
too small to adequately protect lobsters from harvest (Donahue et al., 2008).
3.14.3.2.7 Degradation ofNearshore Habitats
Changes in nearshore habitats, particularly nutrification and siltation, could have adverse
consequences for numerous fish and shellfish now common in the Florida Keys. The
FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program established. comprehensive, long-term
monitoring of three components of the ecosystem: water quality, coral reefs and hard -
bottom communities, and seagrasses. The Marine Zone Monitoring Program documents
effects of 24 fully protected marine zones, including the Tortugas Ecological Reserve, that
were implemented in 1997 and 2001. Monitoring projects in this program document
trends in ecological processes, reef fishes, spiny lobster, queen conch, other invertebrates,
and document trends in benthic community structure within fully protected marine zones
and nearby reference areas. Social and economic parameters are also being surveyed.
Together, these monitoring programs provide FKNMS managers with basic information
about the state of the Florida Keys coral reef ecosystem (U.S. Department of Commerce,
2007).
3.14.3.2.8 Water Quality
Many water -quality parameters have been monitored in the marine waters of the Keys by
Florida International University's Southeast Environmental Research Center since 1995 as
part of the WQPP. Thus far, results indicate that some parameters (dissolved oxygen, total
organic nitrogen, and total organic carbon) are present in higher concentrations in surface
waters, while other indicators (salinity, turbidity, nitrite, nitrate, ammonium, and total
phosphorus) are higher in bottom waters. Geographic differences in water quality include
higher nutrient concentrations in the Middle and Lower Keys and lower nutrient
concentrations in the Upper Keys and Dry Tortugas. Also, declining inshore -to -offshore
trends across Hawk Channel have been noted for some parameters (nitrate, ammonium,
silicate, total organic carbon and nitrogen, and turbidity). Probably the most interesting
findings thus far show increases over time in total phosphorus for the Dry Tortugas,
Marquesas Keys, Lower Keys, and portions of the Middle and Upper Keys, and increases in
nitrate in the Southwest Florida Shelf, Dry Tortugas, Marquesas Keys, and the Lower and
Upper Keys. In contrast, total organic nitrogen decreased somewhat, mostly in the
Southwest Florida Shelf, the Sluiceway, and the Lower and Upper Keys. These trends may
be driven by regional circulation patterns arising from the Loop Current and Florida
Current, and have changed as the period of record has increased. Stationary instruments
along the reef tract continuously monitor seawater parameters and ocean states as part of
a local ocean observing system. The data are analyzed by Florida Institute of
Oceanography's SEAKEYS program and periodically transmitted to satellites and made
available on the Internet. Additionally, water temperature data are recorded every two
Conservation and Coastal Management 195 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
hours from a series of thermographs that the FKNMS has maintained for over fifteen years
(U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007).
3.14.3.2.9 Catastrophic Declines in Populations ofReefAnimals
Research is needed to document the correlation between declines in sea urchin, which are
in very low abundances, especially the long-spined urchin. This decline suggests poor
recovery of this species in the Keys since its severe Caribbean -wide die -off in 1983.
Research efforts by NOAA are exploring means by which populations of this key species
may be restored. Research is also needed on the decline of staghorn coral and other corals.
Threats may be due to indirect human impacts, which are difficult to identify but are
reflected in coral declines and increases in macroalgae and turbidity.
Seasonal and yearly seawater temperature fluctuations, increasing solar radiation and
atmospheric changes have affected marine ecosystem. The impacts are seen in coral
disease and bleaching, which have increased in frequency, duration and range, coinciding
with the ten warmest years on record (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007). Under
normal conditions, corals and reef organisms would be expected to tolerate and recover
from sporadic events such as temperature variation. However, additional human -induced
stresses are likely affecting the ability of these organisms to adequately recover from
climate fluctuations.
3.14.3.2.10 Phvsical Damage to Benthic Communities
Over three million tourists visit the Keys annually, participating primarily in water -related
activities, such as fishing diving, boating, and other ecotourism activities (U.S. Department
of Commerce, 2007). Management techniques are needed to mitigate or reduce physical
damage to corals and other benthic communities caused by these visitors. The FKNMS
Management Plan addressed the number of visitors that a reef can support annually and
still be ecologically viable.
3.14.3.2.11 Propeller Damage to Sea rases
Impacts to seagrasses are due to vessel groundings, anchor damage, and trap fishing. Boat
propellers and large ships have damaged over 30,000 acres of seagrasses and more than 20
acres of coral reef habitat in the FKNMS (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007).
3.14.3.2.12 Artificial Reefs
Artificial reefs generally increase the area of hardbottom, and contribute to the dive
industry, but their placement can directly reduce benthic habitats through improper
placement. The man-made structures may also be a physical threat to coral reefs under
extreme storm conditions (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007) and may contain
pollutants if not properly decontaminated prior to placement.
U, vaLiuii ai,u uuasmi management 196 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
One example of a major artificial reef is the Geri. Hoyt-S. Vandenberg, a former military ship
approximately 525 feet Ion-. It was deliberately sunk in 2009 in the FKNMS seven miles
south of Key West in approximately 150 feet of water. The ship had undergone months of
inspections and about 75,000 man-hours worth of cleanup in shipyards in Norfolk Virginia
to remove contaminants that were deemed potential hazards to the marine environment.
The cleanup was required by local, State and federal agencies to receive the necessary
federal and State permits to sink the ship in the FKNMS. (http://�n7,n�w.f7i-
keys.com/diving/vandenberg.cfni).
Other examples include the Thunderboltwhich is a former electrical research vessel sunk in
1986 in 120 feet of water four miles south of Marathon, the Duane which is a 327-foot
former U.S. Coast Guard cutter sunk in 1987 in 120 feet of water off Key Largo, the 210-foot
Adolphus Busch Sr. which is former freighter sunk in 1998 about five miles southwest of Big
Pine Key, and the Spiegel Grove which is a 510-foot former Navy landing ship sunk in 2002
in 130 feet of water about six miles off Key Largo. Originally sunk on its side in 2002, the
Spiegel Grove was righted by Hurricane Dennis in 2005, demonstrating the potential for
storms to shift artificial reefs (http://www.fla-keys.com/news/news.cfm?sid=1958).
3.14.3.2.13 Invasive Species
At least 123 non-native fish species have been caught in Florida. Of these, 56 are
established in freshwater habitats and at least four are established in estuaries (Andrews et
al., 2003). Fifteen species of non-native tropical reef fishes, mainly angelfishes
(Pomacanthus spp.), surgeonfishes (Zebrasoma spp.), and a serranid (Chromileptes
altivelis), have been observed in southeastern Florida reefs but are not known to be
established.
The red lionfish (Pterois volitans) is the only marine invasive species that appears to have
become established in Florida. Six lionfish were freed into Biscayne Bay, Miami -Dade
County on August 24, 1992, when Hurricane Andrew destroyed a large marine aquarium.
Red lionfish are now found along the seaward edge of reefs and in lagoons, turbid inshore
areas, and harbors. They are often found during the day under ledges and crevices but may
also hunt small fish, shrimps, and crabs in open water at night. The red lionfish could pose
a threat to Florida's fishers, divers, and wildlife inspectors because it is venomous.
Furthermore, potential ecological effects include habitat alteration; water quality
degradation; and introduction of diseases and parasites, competition, predation,
hybridization, and replacement of native species. As introduction of non-native marine
fishes is relatively rare, the effects of such introductions are not well documented
(Andrews et al., 2003).
Orange cup coral (Tubastrea coccinea) is found on vertical steel structures (sunken ships
and engineering platforms). Tubes are usually facing in the direction of the current. An
example is the sunken vessel U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Duane (off Key Largo), which contains
southern facing deck structures that are veneered with multiple colonies. The species has
also been reported on other wrecks in the Gulf of Mexico (Fenner and Banks, 2004). To
date, there are no reports of T. coccinea replacing native species and it is only known to
Conservation and Coastal Management 197 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
settle and grow on steel structures. Monitoring is recommended at selected locations to
follow the status and trends in abundance and distribution for T. coccinea (Andrews et al.,
2003).
While non-native fishes and corals may threaten Florida's coral reef, non-native plants pose
the greatest risks. The world-wide spread of the algae Caulerpa taxifolia has been well
documented. More recently, Caulerpa brachypus, native to the Pacific region, has been
detected in Florida on nearshore reefs and in the Indian River Lagoon. The species was
probably released from saltwater aquaria or from ships' ballast water. In the absence of
predators, both species can grow unchecked and can smother corals and seagrass beds
rapidly if sufficient nutrients are available. It is believed the rapid spread is enhanced by
man-made enrichment (Andrews et al., 2003).
3.14.3.3 Problems and Solutions Specifically Related to the Two-Dav Lobster Sport
Fishing Season
The Monroe County BOCC and the FFWCC have established regulations for the two-day
Sport Lobster Season (the last consecutive Wednesday and Thursday of July). Regulations
specify a daily six lobster bag limit, daytime diving only (nighttime diving is allowed during
the regular season), and specific prohibited areas have been established. Problems related
to the two-day Sport Lobster Season season include the use of illegal gear, diving in
prohibited areas or at night, exceeding the bag limit (on a single trip, or by multiple trips),
and collection of lobster smaller than the legal limit.
A problem in recent years during the two-day Sport Lobster Season has been conflicts
between snorkelers in canals, diving under residential docks and invading the privacy of
residents. In unincorporated areas and incorporated areas (e.g., Islamorada, Key Colony
Beach, and Marathon), snorkeling/diving ordinances have been adopted to prohibit diving
or snorkeling within (1) 300 feet of improved residential or commercial shoreline, (2) any
manmade or private canal, and (3) any public or private marina.
3.14.3.4 COMDrehensive Fisheries Management and Habitat Preservation through
the Florida Kevs National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan
To protect the spectacular marine ecosystem of the Florida Keys, the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary and Protection Act was enacted by Congress and signed into law on
November 16, 1990. The Act created the FKNMS boundaries, encompassing approximately
2900 square nautical miles (2.5 million acres), with jurisdiction up to the mean high tide
line. In addition, the Act called for NOAA of the U.S. Department of Commerce to prepare a
comprehensive management plan for the FKNMS after consulting with the public and with
federal, State, and local government authorities. An Advisory Council was established to
act as conduit of public opinion and to -assist in the development of the plan. The FKNMS
Comprehensive Management Plan was developed and FKNMS regulations went into effect
on July 1, 1997. The revised Management Plan went into effect in December 2007.
Conservation and Coastal Management 198 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.14.4 Essential Fish Habitat
The Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) provisions of the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act (MSA) were made final January 17, 2002 (67 FR 2343). As defined in
that final rule, EFH means those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning,
breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity. For the purpose of interpreting the definition of
EFH, "waters" include aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and biological
properties that are used by fish, and may include aquatic areas historically used by fish,
where appropriate; "substrate" includes sediment, hard bottom, structures underlying the
waters, and associated biological communities; "necessary" means the habitat required to
support a sustainable fishery and the managed species' contribution to a healthy
ecosystem; and "spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity" covers a species' full
life cycle.
The NMFS and their eight regional fisheries management councils are responsible for the
management and protection of fisheries and habitat essential for the survival of managed
species. The U.S. Secretary of Commerce, acting through NMFS and the South Atlantic
Fisheries Management Council (SAFMC), has been delegated this authority under the
provisions of the MSA; Public Law 104-208. The SAFMC is responsible for the management
of fish stocks and EFH within the federal 200-mile limit of the Atlantic from North Carolina
through the Florida Keys. The MSA, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996,
sets forth a number of mandates for NMFS and the SAFMC to identify and protect
important marine and fish.
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) are subsets of EFH that include areas that hold
an especially important ecological function, are sensitive to human induced environmental
degradation, are particularly vulnerable to development activities, or are particularly rare.
The SAFMC designated HAPCs broadly to include both general habitat types (e.g., seagrass
beds) and geographic areas of ecological importance (e.g., the Charleston Bump). In
general, HAPCs typically include high value intertidal and estuarine habitats, offshore areas
of high habitat value or vertical relief, and habitats used for migration, spawning, and
rearing of fish and shellfish.
In the Florida Keys, habitats that are considered to be essential for fish species managed in
the South Atlantic region are: Estuarine Intertidal Scrub -Shrub Wetland (mangroves);
Estuarine Subtidal Open Water; Seagrasses; Vegetated, Non -vegetated, and Live Bottoms;
Coral and Artificial Reefs; Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks; Intertidal Flats; Palustrine
Emergent Wetland (freshwater marshes); and Palustrine Forested Wetland (freshwater
wetlands). Coral Reefs, Mangroves and Seagrasses would be considered HAPCs.
Geographically defined HAPCs are:
• The Dry Tortugas National Park;
• Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary;
• Card Sound;
• Florida Bay;
Conservation and Coastal Management 199 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Biscayne National Park;
• Marathon Hump; and
• The Wall (Florida Keys)
3.15 Air Quality [Rule 9J-5.013(1)(a)1. and (b), F.A.C.]
3.15.1 AmbientAir Quality Standards and Statewide Air Quality Monitoring Programs
Air pollution is defined as the presence in the atmosphere of a substance or substances
added directly or indirectly by a human act, in such amounts to adversely affect humans,
animals, vegetation, or materials. The federal Clean Air Act, a legal mandate which was last
amended in 1990, requires the USEPA to establish standards, for six common air pollutants
to protect human health and welfare from air pollution. These "criteria pollutants" for
which limits on air quality standards have been set are: particulate matter (PM10 and
PM2.5); sulfur dioxide (S02); nitrogen dioxide (NO2); ozone (03); carbon monoxide (CO);
and lead (Pb). Two types of national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) have been
established by the USEPA for each criteria pollutant. Primary ambient air quality standards
are designed to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety
(http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html). Secondary standards are designed to protect
public welfare -related values including property, materials and plant and animal life
(http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html). Ambient air is defined as that portion of the
atmosphere near ground level and external to buildings or other structures, or more
simply, the air we breathe when outside.
USEPA and FDEP have implemented an air quality monitoring program throughout the
State, which measures concentrations of major pollutants in the ambient air. This program
is designed to provide data regarding compliance with the legal limitations on
concentrations of major pollutants in the ambient air established by both USEPA and FDEP.
Although FDEP and the County can set more stringent standards than those established by
USEPA, they have chosen to utilize the federal NAAQS as their standard as shown in the
State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards table below (FDEP, 2006).
Pollutant
Averaging
g g
Time
Florida Standard
Primary
Secondary
y
Carbon
8-hour
9 ppm
NAAQS
9 ppm
NAAQS
--
Monoxide
1-hour
35 ppm
35 ppm
Lead
Quarterlyb
1.5µg/m3
1.5µg/m3
1.5µg/m3
Nitrogen
Annualb
100µg/m3
0.053 ppm
0.053 ppm
Dioxide
(0.05 ppm)
(100µg/m3)
(100µg/m3 )
Ozone
1-hours
0.12 ppm
Particulate
8-hourd
Annualb
50µg/m3
0.08 ppm
50µg/m3
0.08 ppm
50µg/m3
Matter (PMio)
24-hours
150µg/m3
150µg/m3
150µg/m3
Particulate
Annualb
--
15µg/m3
15µg/m3
Matter (PM2.5)
24-hours
--
35µg/m3
35µg/m3
Conservation and Coastal Management
200
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Annualb 60µg/m3 (0.02 ppm) 0.03 ppm --
Sulfur Dioxide 24-houra 260µg/m3 (0.10 ppm) 0.14 ppm 3-hour, 1300µg/m3 (0.5 ppm) - 0.5 ppm
a - Not to be exceeded more than once per year.
b - Arithmetic mean.
- Not to be exceeded on more than an average of one day per year over a 3-year period.
d - Not to be exceeded by the 3-year average of the 41h highest daily max.
The FDEP maintains two types of ambient air quality monitoring stations throughout the
State, each of which is designed to meet different objectives. According to FDEP's 2006
Monitoring Report, ambient air data are collected by 216 monitors located in 34 counties.
No monitoring stations were listed for Monroe County. The State/Local Air Monitoring
Station (SLAMS) and National Air Monitoring (NAMS) network is typically established in
high population areas and/or where there are significant pollutant emission sources or
source categories. Data from this network provide an overall view of the State's air quality
and are used in the development of statewide control strategies (FDEP, 2006). The Special
Purpose Monitoring (SPM) Network is designed to supplement the SLAMS/NAMS network
in data sparse areas. Data from these stations are used to develop and refine local control
strategies and to verify maintenance of ambient standards in areas outside of the
SLAMS/NAMS network (FDEP, 2006).
Based on analyzed monitoring data, all areas within the State are designated with respect
to each of the six pollutants as "attainment", "nonattainment", or "unclassifiable".
Attainment areas are those within which air quality standards are being met. An area that
is found to be in violation of these NAAQS is called a non -attainment area. The purpose of
the nonattainment designation is to identify air quality problem areas for which the State
and USEPA must seek solutions. Pollution sources contributing to non -attainment areas are
subject to tighter restrictions to meet and maintain the standards. Where insufficient data
are available to reasonably be classified as either attainment or nonattainment the area is
designated as "unclassifiable" (FDEP, 2006).
3.15.2 Monroe County Ambient Air Quality
Air quality in the Florida Keys is generally excellent. Sea breezes, coupled with the lower
intensity of development and small number of point sources, result in relatively low
pollutant loads which are dispersed by winds. Based upon ambient air quality monitoring,
the FDEP has designated Monroe County as an attainment area for all major air
contaminants with the exception of Particulate Matter (PMlo), which is designated as
"unclassifiable" statewide (Chapter 62-204.340, F.A.C.). This indicates that the
concentrations of major pollutants in the ambient air within the County fall within the
acceptable limits set by both FDEP and USEPA.
Conservation and Coastal Management 201 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Undate
3.15.3 Known Sources of Air Pollution in Monroe County
Potential sources of air pollution in the County generally include vehicle emissions,
naturally occurring seasalt, airborne dust from disturbed areas, controlled open burning,
and point sources (permitted under Chapters 62-4, 62-204, and 62-213, F.A.C.).
Sources of air pollutants with active FDEP Air Operation Permits are listed below. These
facilities include six concrete plants, two crematories, two electric plants, one dry cleaner
and one facility under construction. All discharges are currently in compliance with
discharge limits [http://www.dep.state.fl.us/air/emission/aces/ACES_r.asp (as of July 2,
2010)].
• Cemex Construction Materials - Marathon
• Cemex Construction Materials - Rockland Key
• Cemex Construction Materials - Tavernier
• Dean -Lopez Crematory, Inc. - Big Pine Key
• Florida Keys Electric Coop Assoc. - Marathon
• Floida Keys Funeral Services LLC - Big Coppitt Key
• J A Larocco Enterprise Inc. - Islamorada
• Keys Energy Services - Stock Island
• LaCross Marina, LLC - Key Largo (under construction)
• Monroe Concrete Products, Inc. - Rockland Key
• Nielsen & Co., Inc. (Keys Cleaners) - Marathon
• Stay Hard, Inc. - Marathon
3.15.4 Potential for Conservation, Use, or Protection of Air Quality in Monroe County
Ambient air quality in the Keys is likely to remain excellent, due to the low intensity of
development, sea breezes, and limited number of point sources of pollutants. However,
actions can be taken by the local government to reduce the potential for localized
concentrations of pollutants, particularly particulates; to support FDEP in regulation of
point sources; to support initiatives for statewide programs to reduce vehicle emissions; to
inspect permitted sites for compliance; and to take action against unregulated and
unpermitted activities.
• Particulates escaping from disturbed areas in the form of fugitive dust can be controlled
by on -site dust control measures. Areas exposed during construction can be treated
with mulch, spray, grass, water, or other appropriate methods to control dust. Use of
these measures can be required as a condition of Development Orders. For construction
projects greater than one acre, the FDEP Generic Permit for Stormwater Discharge from
Large and Small Construction Activities requires contractors to develop a stormwater
pollution prevention plan that would provide control measures for fugitive dust (FDEP
Document No. 62-621.300(4)(a) effective February 17, 2009).
Conservation and Coastal Management 202
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan
• Annual permit renewals for mining activities require the submittal of fugitive dust
control plans. The County could require demonstration of compliance with these
measures as part of the permit renewal process.
• Open burning will continue to be regulated under Chapter 62-256, F.A.C. Accordingly,
open burning is prohibited except for yard, tree, and initial land clearing debris.
Authorizations for open burning may be required by the Florida Division of Forestry
pursuant to Section 590.125, Florida Statutes.
• Point sources of pollution from generators, incinerators, concrete plants, and other
pollutant sources will continue to be regulated under Chapters 62-4, 62-204 and 62-
213, F.A.C. These programs are designed to ensure that point source emissions are in
compliance with FDEP and USEPA air quality standards.
• In December 2008, Rule 62.285.420, F.A.C., became effective. This rule prohibits heavy-
duty diesel engine powered motor vehicles from idling for more than five consecutive
minutes.
• In response to Executive Orders 07-126, 07-127, and 07-128, the Florida Legislature
passed the Florida Climate Protection Act, Section 403.44, F.S., which authorized FDEP
to adopt rules for a regulatory cap -and -trade program to reduce greenhouse gas from
the electric utility sector. As of June 2010, the rule -making process is on -going and is
tied to the potential passage of Federal legislation on the issue. The specific goals in the
Exeuctive Orders are to reduce greenhouse gases to year 2000 levels by 2017, to year
1990 levels by 2025, and to 20 percent of 1990 levels by 2050 (Comparative Study of
Selected Offset Protocols for Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Reporting Programs, FDEP,
May 21, 2010).
• The Florida Clean Car Emission, Chapter 62-285, F.A.C., became effective on February
15, 2009. The new rule will only apply to future make and model passenger cars, light -
duty trucks, and sport utility vehicles. The implementation date will be two model
years after both of the following conditions are met: (1) the USEPA grants the State of
California a waiver for their automotive greenhouse gas standards, and (2) the Florida
Legislature ratifies the rule. USEPA granted the California waiver in June 2009;
however, the Florida Legislature had not ratified the rule as of June 2010
(http://www.dep.state.fl.us/air/rules/ghg/california.htm).
• USEPA and the Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration have finalized a joint rule to establish a national program consisting of
new standards for model year 2012 through 2016 for light -duty vehicles to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and improve fuel economy. The new standards apply to new
passenger cars, light -duty trucks, and medium -duty passenger vehicles covering model
years 2012 through 2016. The USEPA standards require these vehicles to meet an
estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile in
model year 2016, equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon if the automotive industry were to
meet this carbon dioxide level all through fuel economy improvements (Light -Duty
Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy
Standards; Final Rule, 40 CFR Parts 85, 86, and 600; 49 CFR Parts 531, 533, 536, et al.).
Conservation and Coastal Management 203 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.16 Water Needs and Use [Rule 9J-5.013(1)(c), F.A.C.]
3.16.1 Current (Year 2010) Water Needs and Sources
The current (year 2010) demand for potable water by existing and committed residential
and non-residential uses in the Florida Keys is estimated at approximately 20.07 million
gallons per day (see Chapter 8.0 Potable Water Element).
The primary source of potable water consumed in the Keys is the Biscayne Aquifer in
southeastern Miami -Dade County. Water is pumped from the Florida City Wellfield and
distributed by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FKAA). With treatment, water drawn
from the Biscayne Aquifer meets all federal and state drinking water standards.
Alternative potable and non -potable water supplies in use include private cisterns, private
wells, home desalinization systems, and bottled water. Most users of these alternative
sources rely on them only as supplements to the FKAA water. Cistern and well water is
typically reserved for irrigation and other non -potable uses. The deeper Floridan Aquifer,
which requires desalination treatment before it is suitable for either potable or irrigation
use, is locally used for landscape irrigation. Based on the SFWMD ePermitting database
(accessed June 4, 2010), there are only three consumers in the County that are using enough
Floridan Aquifer water to require an individual SFWMD permit: Ocean Reef Community (golf
course and landscaping), Silver Shores Mobile Home Park (landscaping), and Card Sound Golf
Course (golf course irrigation) (see Chapter 8.0 Potable Water Element).
Potable water is supplied to the Keys by the FKAA according to the terms of the current
consumptive use permit (SFWMD Water Use Permit No. 13-00005-W). A complex set of
interagency and intergovernmental agreements control the water allocation and
distribution. Agencies and governments which are parties to these agreements include
FKAA, the SFWMD, the FDEP, the County, and the City of Key West (see Chapter 8.0 Potable
Water Element).
3.16.2 Projected (Year 2035) Water Needs and Sources
The projected demand (year 2035) for potable water from residential and non-residential
uses in the FKAA service area is estimated at 23.8 million gallons per day. This water will
continue to be provided by the FKAA. The SFWMD Consumptive Use Permit will continue
to be revised to provide for this projected demand. Water will continue to be obtained
from the Florida City Wellfield (see Chapter 8.0 Potable Water Element).
3.16.3 Water Conservation Strategies
Water conservation strategies in use or under consideration in the Keys focus upon leak
detection and repair; metering to detect unaccounted-for water; reuse of wastewater; and
reduction of consumption through a conservation -oriented rate structure, water use
restrictions, distribution of water conservation kits, adoption of a Florida -Friendly
Landscape Ordinance, adoption of plumbing fixture efficiency standards, and reuse of
1 aiiu uuamai management 204 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
wastewater. The ten-year (2010) water need projection accounts for the FKAA Leak
Detection Program, which has a goal of 13 percent unaccounted for water (see Chapter 8.0
Potable Water Element).
3.17 Hazardous Wastes and Hazardous Materials [Rule 9J-5.013(1)(b), F.A.C.]
3.17.1 Solid Waste Disposal Sites
Inactive County landfills and abandoned landfill sites are addressed in Section 3.5.3
(Known Existing Point and Non -Point Source Pollution Problems). The discussion includes:
• Identification of inactive County landfills and abandoned dumps in unincorporated
Monroe County; and
• General discussion of the potential water quality impacts related to landfill leachate
contamination of nearshore waters.
Solid waste disposal sites have environmental issues other than those related to potential
pollution. Some solid waste disposal or storage areas, including private storage areas
where yard waste or other non -hazardous materials are stored or staged, encroach on
natural habitats. Examples include permitted facilities that exceed the permitted acreage,
or non -permitted illegal stockpiling.
3.17.2 Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites
The USEPA's Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS) (as of search date of February 11, 2010) include two active,
known, alleged, or potential hazardous waste sites in the County, including the
incorporated cities. Active CERCLIS sites are sites at which site assessment, removal,
remedial, enforcement, cost recovery, or oversight activities are being planned or
conducted under the Superfund program. These are:
• NAS Trumbo Point, Palm Avenue Causeway, Key West (USEPA ID FL2170024473), and
• Robbies Drum & Tank, Key West (EPA ID FLN000407546).
The CERCLIS database also indicates several archived sites in the County. The archive
designation indicates the site has no further interest under the federal Superfund program
based on available information. USEPA may perform a minimal level of assessment work at
a site while it is archived if site conditions change and/or new information becomes
available. The Archive designation is removed and the site is returned to the CERCLIS
inventory if more substantive assessment and/or any cleanup work is necessary under the
federal Superfund program. These are as follows:
• Key West Gasification, 726 Catherine Street, Key West (USEPA ID FLD984172189),
• Marathon Key Abandoned Drum, Marathon Key (USEPA ID FLD984170282),
• NAS Key West (Boca Chica), Naval Air Station, Key West (USEPA ID FL6170022952),
Conservation and Coastal Management 205 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Snapper Lane, Key Largo (USEPA ID FLD984170266), and
• USCG Station Key West, Palm Ave Causeway, Key West (USEPA ID FL1690331300).
3.17.3 Hazardous Waste Generators
Based on the FDEP Hazardous Waste Facilities Handler database (accessed online at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/categories/hwRegulation/defauIt.htm on March 17,
2010) there is one Large Quantity Generator of hazardous waste in the County (the Naval
Air Station in unincorporated Boca Chica Key is a Large Quantity Generator, USEPA
identification number FL6170022952). Large Quantity Generators generate 1000
kilograms or more of hazardous waste per month or 1 kilogram or more of acute
hazardous waste (such as some pesticides, toxins, or arsenic and cyanide compounds) per
month.
There are 76 Small Quantity Generators in the County (including incorporated areas).
Small Quantity Generators generate 100 to 1000 kilograms of hazardous waste per month.
Small Quantity Generators handle small amounts of hazardous wastes and include
pharmacies, markets, automotive parts stores, marine supply stores, photography facilities,
printing facilities, and many other types of businesses. Of the 76 Small Quantity
Generators, 35 have addresses that are not in Islamorada, Plantation Key, Key Colony
Beach, Marathon, Layton, or Key West and therefore this number is an approximate
number of Small Quantity Generators in unincorporated Monroe County.
3.17.4 Household Hazardous Wastes
Improper handling and disposal of many common household products in trash and septic
systems pose threats of ground and surface water contamination, exposure of homeowners
to health risks, potential injuries to sanitation workers, and possible damage to packaged
treatment plants. The list of household products that are considered hazardous includes a
range of household cleaners, automotive products, home maintenance and improvement
products, and lawn and garden products used everyday in the home. Many users remain
unaware of the hazards associated with the use of these substances despite public
education efforts.
County residents may drop off household hazardous wastes, free of charge, on two days
each month at the three transfer stations (Cudjoe Key Transfer Station, MM 21.5, Blimp
Road; Long Key Transfer Station, MM 68; and Key Largo Recycling Yard, MM 100.3, 300
Magnolia Street). The transfer stations accept household hazardous wastes such as motor
oil, car and boat batteries, paints, household and garden chemicals, florescent bulbs, and
mercury containing devices. The waste collected at these facilities is transported out of the
County for disposal [See Chapter 9.0 Solid Waste Element].
Conservation and Coastal Management 206 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.17.5 Underground and Aboveground Storage Tanks
Most underground storage tank installations in the Florida Keys are costly, difficult, and
require floating and ballasting of tanks to anchor them into position (FIMC, 1991). This is
due to the high water table, shallow soils, and presence of coral rock typically lying within
one to ten feet of the ground surface. Because of these conditions, many storage tank
owners prefer aboveground storage tanks to underground storage tanks (FIMC, 1991).
FDEP regulates underground and aboveground storage tanks according to the following
rules:
• Chapter 62-761, F.A.C. regulates all underground storage tanks over 110 gallons
containing pollutants and CERCLA hazardous substances; and
• Chapter 62-762, F.A.C. regulates all aboveground tanks over 550 gallons containing
pollutants.
Both rules require secondary containment for new and existing tanks.
Based on the FDEP Regulated Tanks UST database (available online at
http://www,dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/database_reports/pages/stcm/storagetan
k_reports.htm, updated March 4, 2010) there are 231 registered petroleum USTs in the
County (including incorporated areas). Of the 231 USTs, 117 have addresses that are not in
Islamorada, Plantation Key, Key Colony Beach, Marathon, Layton, or Key West and
therefore this number is an approximate number of USTs in unincorporated Monroe
County. Of the 231 USTs, at least 228 contain gasoline or diesel.
Based on the FDEP Regulated Tanks AST database (available online at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/database_reports/pages/stcm/storagetan
k_reports.htm, updated March 4, 2010) there are 274 registered ASTs in the County
(including incorporated areas). Of the 274 ASTs, 80 have addresses that are not in
Islamorada, Plantation Key, Key Colony Beach, Marathon, Layton, or Key West and
therefore this number is an approximate number of ASTs in unincorporated Monroe
County. Of the 274 USTs, 232 contain gasoline or diesel, 24 contain aviation gas or jet fuel,
10 contain new/lube oil, and 8 contain waste oil.
A discharge is reported when a suspected underground storage tank leak has contaminated
the surrounding soils, surface waters immediately adjacent to the tank, or groundwater
directly beneath a tank.
Based on the FDEP Contaminated Facilities database (available online at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/database_reports/pages/stcm/stcm_repor
ts.htm, updated March 4, 2010) there are 142 petroleum -contaminated facilities in the
County (including incorporated areas). The database includes petroleum -contaminated
facilities but does not include discharges that are not required to be remediated under
Chapter 62-770 F.A.C. or discharges that have already been cleaned up. Of the 142
Conservation and Coastal Management 207 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
facilities, 49 have addresses that are not in Islamorada, Plantation Key, Key Colony Beach,
Marathon, Layton, or Key West and therefore this number is an approximate number of
petroleum -contaminated facilities in unincorporated Monroe County. Of the 142 facilities,
56 are retail stations, 34 are government -owned facilities, 28 are non -retail facilities, 22
are marine/coastal fuel storage facilities, and 2 are under other categories.
Many of the fuel tanks in the Florida Keys that have had leaking events are included in the
State cleanup program and are numerically ranked in regard to likelihood to affect public
health and safety. Most if not all of the sites are ranked quite low, and, therefore, would not
be subject to State cleanup funding for quite some time, if ever, as the cleanup fund, which
has not received legislative budget allocations for the last several years, is only directed to
much higher -ranked sites. Therefore, these sites in Monroe County remain unremediated,
for the most part.
The State ranking system is weighted toward potential effects on public potable water
supply, and, as groundwater in Monroe County does not serve as a public water supply
source, this results in a low ranking. The evaluation process does not consider possible
migration of contaminated groundwater into wetlands or nearshore surface waters and the
potential effects on the associated biota, so the Statewide ranking system is not effective in
protecting Florida Keys marine water quality.
3.17.6 Drycleaning Facilities
Based on the FDEP Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program Priority Ranking List for January
2010 (accessed online at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/categories/drycleaning/
default.htm), there are no recorded drycleaning facilities in the County that have been
remediated or are awaiting funding in the Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program. Based on
the FDEP 2010 Drycleaning Certificates of Registration Issued database (accessed online at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/categories/drycleaning/default.htm and updated March
16, 2010), there are two facilities in the County that have been issued a FDEP drycleaning
Certificate of Registration, but neither is in unincorporated Monroe County.
3.17.7 Brownfields
There is one designated Brownsfield area in the County, based on FDEP's Brownfields
Redevelopment Program database (accessed online at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/
waste/quick-topics/ database_ reports/default.htm, updated March 10, 2010). The Old
Baltuff Dump Site Brownfield Area (Area ID BF440701000) is located on Middle Torch Key
and comprises 12.81 acres. It was designated as a Brownsfield site in 2007 and is the first
Designated Brownfield Area in the County.
3.17.8 Hazardous Material Spills
The FDEP Division of Law Enforcement, Bureau of Emergency Response responds to
hazardous materials incidents and oil spills. Under the statewide program, the County is
Conservation and Coastal Management 208 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
served by an office in Marathon. FDEP provides technical assistance or response, or both,
depending upon the severity, location of the incident, and capability of other responders.
Most actual handling of materials is done by the fire department or a cleanup contractor.
The most common types of hazardous materials are used fuels, oils, paint -related materials,
solvents, corrosives and pesticides. Any radioactive incidents would be handled by the
Florida Department of Health, Office of Radiation Control. FDEP has adopted the USEPA's
Reportable Quantities for hazardous substances, and has a Reportable Quantity of 25
gallons for petroleum products spilled on land, or any amount which causes a sheen on
navigable waters.
Incidents that meet certain threshold criteria are entered in the Oil and Hazardous
Materials Incident Tracking (OHMIT) database. The database is administered out of FDEP
headquarters in Tallahassee. The OHMIT database includes a listing of the 2008 and 2009
coastal incidents for the County. The database includes pollutant names and spill volumes
reported. In 2008, there were 57 incidents totaling 975.79 gallons. In 2009, there were 79
incidents totaling 6598.3 gallons. The largest incidents were as follows:
Volume
Incident Date
Incident #
Pollutant Name
Source
(gal)
01/30/2009
41959
Scrap metal
Vessel
5000
01/15/2008
38845
Jet fuel
Aircraft
800
04/11/2009
41326
Diesel fuel
Vessel
300
05/20/2009
41480
Diesel fuel
Vessel
300
04/24/2009
41360
Diesel fuel
Vessel
200
05/25/2009
41515
Batteries
Vessel
100
11/04/2009
42556
Food oils
Unknown
100
05/24/2009
41510
Raw sewage
Vessel
100
05/25/2009
41515
Scrap metal
Vessel
100
Information that is reported to the National Response Center is available from the
Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) database: http://www.epa.gov/
region4/r4data/erns/index.htm.
3.17.8.1 Hazardous Material Spills in Terrestrial Environments
Data available from FDEP (January 1987 to June 1991) and from the U.S. Coast Guard's
National Response Center (October 1984 to March 1990) indicate a total of 93 reported
spills in the Florida Keys (CSA, 1991). At least 26 of these spills occurred in the City of Key
West (CSA, 1991).
The most frequently spilled hazardous materials have been petroleum products (CSA,
1991). Other spilled substances included chemicals, raw sewage, miscellaneous toxic
substances, and unclassified substances (such as soot and ash, foam, garbage, etc.; CSA,
1991). Structural failure and seepage from storage facilities were responsible for the
Conservation and Coastal Management 209 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
largest percentage of the hazardous material spills (CSA, 1991). Equipment failure and
human error accounted for the remaining classified spills reported (CSA, 1991).
FDEP regulatory and inspection programs for storage tank facilities (Chapters 62-761 and
62-762, F.A.C.) are designed to prevent spills from storage facilities due to leakage,
overfilling, and structural failures. These programs reduce the number of spills from
storage facilities in the future as older facilities are inspected and replaced.
3.17.8.2 Hazardous Material Spills in Marine Environments
There were 355 reported spills of hazardous materials in the waters of the FKNMS in the
period between October 1985 and August 1991 (CSA, 1991). Approximately 44 percent of
the spills occurred on the Atlantic Coast within 3 nmi from shore; approximately 37
percent occurred on the gulfside/bayside within the same distance of the shore; and the
remaining spills were dispersed among nearshore waters (canals and harbors) and Atlantic
and Gulf contiguous and offshore waters (more than 3 nmi offshore) (CSA, 1991).
Petroleum products, primarily gas and diesel fuel, were the most commonly spilled
substances, with an average discharge per incident of 30.05 gallons (CSA, 1991). Based
upon historic spill rates, it is estimated that approximately 1,598 gallons of oil -related
products have been released annually between 1985 and 1991 (CSA, 1991).
Given historical spill volumes, marine spills do not represent a significant threat to marine
waters in the Keys. The marine communities and habitats of the Keys are relatively
resistant to minor amounts of oil floating on the water surface (CSA, 1991). However, a
catastrophic spill resulting from a major tanker grounding or any other major accident
could have serious environmental consequences. This risk has been reduced, although not
eliminated, by federal regulations which have moved tanker traffic further offshore (CSA,
1991). One component of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and Protection Act
(Public Law 101-605) restricts vessel traffic within the FKNMS boundaries. "Areas To Be
Avoided" (ATBAs) have been established to reduce the likelihood of groundings. The ATBA
boundaries are not based on a single certain distance from shore or a certain depth, but are
irregular boundaries defined in 15 CFR 920. Tanker vessels and vessels greater than 50
meters long are prohibited in the ATBAs. As evidenced by the Deepwater Horizon oil
drilling platform disaster off the coast of Louisiana in 2010, hazardous material spills from
distant marine sources have the potential to impact the County.
3.18 Areas of Special Concern to Local Government [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(b), F.A.C.]
3.18.1 Areas of Critical State Concern
The Florida Legislature in 1972 enacted Section 380.05, F.S., which created the Area of
Critical State Concern (ACSC) program. At the time of the program's creation, local
governments in many parts of Florida did not have adequate local plans to address future
iiu wa,wi inanagement 210 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
growth. The ACSC program protects resources and public facilities of major statewide
significance. Five ACSCs were created during the 1970s:
• City of Key West
• Florida Keys
• City of Apalachicola (Franklin County)
• The Green Swamp (portions of Polk and Lake counties)
• The Big Cypress Swamp (Collier County)
The Florida Keys are designated as an ACSC under Section 380.0552, F.S. The Florida Keys
ACSC does not include the City of Key West, which is separately designated as the Key West
ACSC. The particulars of each designation differ, reflecting the unique character,
circumstances, and legislative urgency for protection of the areas. In every case, however,
the common objective was protection of natural resources of statewide significance
through cooperative planning and management. In 1985, the Florida Legislature enacted
the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act
("Growth Management Act"). The Act established minimum requirements for adoption of
comprehensive plans to guide a community's future growth while protecting natural
resources and planning for the provision of public facilities and services required
supporting population growth and the corresponding development. Local governments
within ACSCs are required to comply with requirements of the Growth Management Act, in
addition to any additional requirements imposed by their ACSC designation.
The Florida DCA reviews all local development projects within the designated areas and
may appeal to the Administration Commission any local development orders that are
inconsistent with state guidelines. DCA also is responsible for reviewing and approving
amendments to comprehensive plans and land development regulations proposed by local
governments within the designated areas.
3.18.1.1 Federal Consistency and Coastal Zone Management
The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) seeks preserve, protect, develop and, where
possible, to restore and enhance the resources of the nation's coastal zone. It encouraged
coastal states to develop and implement comprehensive management programs that would
balance the need for coastal resource protection with the need for economic growth and
development in the coastal zone. If a management program developed by a coastal state is
approved by the U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), the state is authorized to review certain federal activities affecting
the land or water uses or natural resources of its coastal zone for consistency with its
program. This authority is referred to as `federal consistency" and allows states to review:
• Activities conducted by or on behalf of a federal government agency;
• Activities requiring federal licenses or permits;
• Permits issued under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act for offshore minerals
exploration or development; and
Conservation and Coastal Management 211 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Federally funded activities (Federal assistance to state and local governments)
The Florida Coastal Management Program (FCMP) is a series of state regulations designed
to preserve, protect, develop and, where possible, to restore and enhance the resources of
the coastal zone and was approved by NOAA in 1981 and is codified in Chapter 380, Part II,
F.S. The FCMP consists of a network of 24 Florida Statutes (i.e. enforceable policies)
administered by nine state agencies and five water management districts. In order to
accomplish these tasks, the FCMP regulations authorize the Florida DCA to review permits
issued by state licensing agencies for federal actions. DCA permit review consists of
ensuring that permits for federal activities are consistent with state statutes and rules.
During the DCA review, it coordinates with the state licensing agencies by providing its
comments and a determination regarding its findings.
Federal consistency reviews are integrated into other review processes (for example:
Florida State Clearinghouse, environmental resource permits and joint coastal permits)
conducted by the state depending on the type of federal action being proposed. Regardless
of the process used, the review of federal activities is coordinated with the applicable FCMP
member agencies, which includes the Department of Community Affairs. Agencies
authorized to review and comment on the consistency of federal activities subject to state
review under the FCMP are those agencies charged with the implementation of the statutes
and rules included in the federally approved program. Each agency is given an opportunity
to provide comments on the merits of the proposed action, address concerns, make
recommendations, and state whether the project is consistent with its statutory authorities
in the FCMP. The Department of Environmental Protection, as the designated lead coastal
agency for the state, communicates the agencies' comments and the state's final
consistency decision to federal agencies and applicants through the approval or denial of a
permit.
This framework allows the state to make integrated, balanced decisions that ensure the
wise use and protection of the state's water, property, cultural, historic, and biological
resources; protect public health; minimize the state's vulnerability to coastal hazards;
ensure orderly, managed growth; protect the state's transportation system; and sustain a
vital economy.
3.18.2 Areas of Critical County Concern
The County has identified a number of Areas of Critical County Concern (ACCC); these
places, which include Big Pine Key, North Key Largo, Windley Key/Holiday Isles, and Ohio
Key, were determined to have special planning and regulatory needs. However, the 2004
Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key (under the Livable
CommuniKeys Program) recommended removing the ACCC land use designation from this
planning area and replacing it with applicable land use designations on a parcel basis (per
Policy 103.1.2 of the Comprehensive Plan).
Conservation and Coastal Management 212
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.18.3 Conservation Lands
Many of the most significant marine and terrestrial biological communities found in the
Florida Keys have been protected through acquisition by federal and State governments,
ROGO dedications, and MCLA purchases. The Office of the County Land Steward manages
approximately 3,100 parcels (1,450 acres) of County -owned land. In addition, the Land
Steward manages 495 parcels (169 acres) of State-owned lands purchased under the
Florida Forever acquisistion program.
Within the uplands and marine waters of the Florida Keys there are two national parks, one
national preserve, four national wildlife refuges, and three national marine sanctuaries.
There are also four aquatic preserves, two state botanical sites, one state geological site,
one state historic site, and four state park/recreation areas. A few County -owned
properties have public facilities (Table 3.18).
3.18.3.1 Federally -Owned Conservation Lands
There are approximately 1.7 million acres of lands or waters under federal jurisdiction in
the County (Table 3.18). These are mainly large, resource -based conservation areas that
include environmentally significant marine, wetland and/or upland habitats. These areas
function to protect and preserve resources and habitats and provide passive and active
recreation and environmental education opportunities for residents of and visitors to the
region. Federally -owned conservation lands in the County are described below.
3.18.3.1.1 Everglades National Park
Everglades National Park encompasses approximately 1.5 million acres in southern
Florida, including the entire mainland portion of the County. The Park's borders extend
into Florida Bay to include all of the submerged land and offshore island lying north of the
Intracoastal Waterway between Cross Key to the east and approximately Long Key to the
west.
3.18.3.1.2 Big Cypress National Preserve
Big Cypress National Preserve, located on the mainland, includes portions of Monroe,
Collier, and Miami -Dade Counties, and borders Everglades National Park to the north. The
Preserve was established in 1974 for the purpose of ensuring the "preservation,
conservation and protection of the natural, scenic, hydrologic, floral and faunal, and
recreation values of the Big Cypress Watershed" and to "provide for the enhancement and
public enjoyment thereof' (U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1989).
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 213 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table
ivuuvnut rurK JerVICe
Everglades National Park
Mainland
1.5 million
Dry Tortugas National Park
Dry Tortugas
64,761
104
64,657
Big Cypress National Preserve
Mainland
126,362
126,362
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Crocodile Lake National Wildlife
North Key
Refu e
Largo
6,800
Heron National
Great WERefu--
Big Pine to Key
Wildlife
West7,408
NationaDeer Refuge
Big Pine to
Sugarloaf
9,200
Key West National Wildlife Refuge
Ke West
2,019
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Florida Keys National Marine
Offshore
Sanctuary1
Florida Ke s
2.34 million
2,347,500
State Parks and Recreation Areas
John Pennecamp Coral Reef State
Park
Key Largo
56,829
3,169
53,660
Long Key State Recreation Area
Long Key
966
849
117
Bahia Honda State Park
Bahia Honda
325
325
Fort Zachary Taylor Historic State
Park
Key West
54
54
Curry Hammock State
Park
Marathon
970
State Botanical, Geological, and Historic Sites
Key Largo Hammock State
North Key
Botanical Site
Lar o
2,344
Lignumvitae Key State Botanical
Lignumvitae
Site
Ke
587
486
101
Windley Key State Geological Site
Windley Key
29
28.5
0.5
Indian Key State Historic
Site
Indian Key
115
�17
98
State Aquatic Preserves
Lignumvitae Key State Aquatic
Offshore
Preserve
Lignumvitae
7,000
7,000
Key
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 214 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
1 dole .5.1ts - IHVeHLOry ui reuerai,
Nanic
irate, anu
1'�cation
yiner Lonservatlon
Area
Lanas I continues
(acres)
Biscayne Bay State Aquatic
Offshore south
Preserve
to Card Sound
67,000
67,000
San Pedro Archaeologic Aquatic
Offshore
Preserve
Indian Key
650
650
Coupon Bight State Aquatic
Offshore Big
Preserve
Pine Key
6,000
6,000
Coupon Bight/Key Deer
Big Pine Key
1,755 ac acquired of
2,830 ac project
Florida Keys Ecosystem
Key Largo to
5,445 ac acquired of
Boca Chica Key
11,863 ac project
North Key Largo Hammocks
North Key
3,974 ac acquired of
Largo
4,621 acproject
Florida Keys Land and Sea Trust, The Nature Conservancy, and County -owned Parcels 3
Crane Point Hammock Museum
Marathon
63
63
and Nature Center
Spoonbill Sound Hammocks
Cudjoe Key
26
26
Hammock Golf Course
North Key
Largo
4
4
Lower
Lower Matecumbe Key
Matecumbe
26
26
Key
Terrrestris Preserve
Big Pine Key
123
123
John J. Pescatello Torchwood
Little Torch
Hammock Preserve
Key
132
132
Total
4,204,967
' FKNMS incorporated Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary and Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary.
2 Separate upland and submerged acres provided only when separated by the source information.
3 The Florida Keys Land and Sea Trust, The Nature Conservancy, and the County own numerous parcels of
various habitat types (e.g., pinelands, tropical hardwood hammock). They are inventoried as the various
habitat types under County ownership within this element. The parcels listed here refer to those that are
available to the public.
3,18.3.1.3 Dry Tortugas Nationol Park
The Dry Tortugas lie approximately 70 miles to the west of Key West, and represent the
last outer islands of the Florida Keys. The Dry Tortugas were discovered by Ponce de Leon
in 1513 and were used by pirates as refuge until 1821, when Florida became part of the
Union. After the islands gained strategic significance, the U.S. Army started construction of
Fort Jefferson. The fort was later used as a prison during the Civil War. A lighthouse was
constructed at Garden Key in 1825 to warn incoming vessels of the dangerous reefs and
later, a bricktower lighthouse was constructed on Loggerhead Key in 1858 for the same
purpose. The Dry Tortugas Research Natural Area is a 46-square-mile no -take and no -
anchor ecological preserve established in 2007. It is located in the northwestern part of
the park. The Research Natural Area complements the adjacent Tortugas Ecological
Reserve in the FKNMS, creating the largest no -take marine reserve in the continental
United States.
Conservation and Coastal Management 215 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.18.3.1.4 Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuae
The Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1978 and includes 6,800
acres of shoreland mangroves and tropical hardwood hammocks on North Key Largo. The
Refuge includes a number of endangered and threatened species, including the American
crocodile (Crocodylus acutus), the Florida manatee (Tricheus manatus latirostris), the
Schaus' swallowtail butterfly (Papilio aristodemus ponceanus), the Key Largo wood rat
(Neotona floridana smalli), the Key Largo cotton mouse (Peromyscus gossypinus
allapaticola), and the Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corals couperi). The Refuge was
established to prevent both habitat destruction and human intrusion into an area that is
essential to maintaining a self-sustaining crocodile population in the United States.
3.18.3.1.5 Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuae
The Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1938 to protect the
nursery and nesting grounds of the Great white heron (Ardea herodias oxydentalis). The
Refuge encompasses approximately 320 square miles in the Lower Keys, with
approximately 7,400 acres currently in public ownership, including most of the offshore
islands in the Lower Keys. Management problems associated with these relatively remote
islands include propeller scouring of seagrass beds; disturbance of migratory and wading
waterfowl habitat and nesting sites and of turtle nests; and destruction of habitat and
disposal of garbage by visitors to these islands.
3.18.3.1.6 National Key Deer Refuae
The National Key Deer Refuge was established in 1954 to protect the Key deer (Odocoileus
virginianus clavium) and its habitat. The Refuge includes Big Pine Key and several other
Keys and offshore islands, including portions of No Name, Sugarloaf, Cudjoe, Ramrod, and
the Torch Keys. The Refuge has an active acquisition program to acquire core habitat areas
primarily on No Name Key and northern and central Big Pine Key in addition to Key deer
movement corridors on Big Pine Key.
3.18.3.1.7 Key West National Wildlife Re uae
The Key West National Wildlife Refuge was the first refuge designated in the County in
1908. It includes approximately 2,019 acres of submerged lands and small islands lying
west of Key West and extending to the Marquesas, a grouping of offshore islands southwest
of Key West.
3.18.3.1.8 Looe Kev National Marine Sanctuary
The Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary was established in 1981 to protect the fragile
coral reef which surrounds Looe Key, which is located approximately 6 miles to the south
of Big Pine Key. The Sanctuary encourages both commercial and recreational uses as long
��a�w. management 216 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
as those activities are not in conflict with the health or overall enhancement of the
resources of the area. It was incorporated into the FKNMS.
3.18.3.1.9 Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary
The Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary was established in 1975 to protect the Key Largo
coral reef system. The sanctuary includes approximately 100 square miles off the
southeastern coast of Key Largo. The sanctuary includes a mooring buoy system to provide
a convenient means of securing a boat without dropping anchor on the fragile coral
formations. It was incorporated into the FKNMS.
3.18.3.2 State -Owned Conservation Lands and Facilities
The State of Florida owns large areas of lands and submerged lands (sovereignty
submerged lands) in the County and the surrounding waters of the Atlantic Ocean, Florida
Bay, and the Gulf of Mexico (Table 3.18). Sovereignty submerged lands include, but are
not limited to, tidal lands, islands, sand bars, shallow banks, and lands that are waterward
of the ordinary or high water line, beneath navigable fresh or tidally -influenced waters
conveyed to the State by virtue of statehood in 1845 (Chapter 18-21, F.A.C.). State -
administered facilities include large areas of significant marine or terrestrial habitats.
These facilities often contain resource -based recreational opportunities such as camping,
fishing, or boating. The State also maintains smaller recreational sites throughout the Keys.
Most of these sites promote water -related recreation and contain facilities such as beaches,
boat ramps, docks, and picnic facilities. State-owned conservation and recreation lands in
the County are described below.
318321 John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park
The John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park includes approximately 3,169 acres of upland
and 53,860 acres of submerged lands on North Key Largo. The Park is managed primarily
to preserve and maintain a natural setting of exceptional quality, while at the same time
permitting a full program of compatible passive and active recreational activities. The Park
includes several RV/trailer sites, swimming beaches, picnic areas, dive boat operations and
other concessions.
3.18.3.2.2 Long Key State Recreation Area
Long Key State Recreation Area includes approximately 850 acres of uplands and 117 acres
of submerged lands on Long Key in the Middle Keys. The Area is managed to meet the
more active recreation needs of the public, although certain areas of exceptional natural
value have been set aside for special protective management. The Area includes RV/trailer
sites, camp sites, and canoe trails and rentals.
Conservation and Coastal Management 217 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.18.3.2.3 Bahia Honda State Recreation Area
Bahia Honda State Recreation Area consists of approximately 325 acres on Bahia Honda
Key. The Recreation Area provides camping, picnicking, sunbathing, snorkeling, swimming,
and fishing. The Area also contains significant natural resources which require special
protective management, including tropical hardwood hammocks, mangroves, and
beach/berms.
3.18.3.2.4 Key Largo Hammock State Botanical Site
The Key Largo Hammock State Botanical Site includes approximately 2,344 acres on the
southeast side of State Road 905 on North Key Largo. North Key Largo hammocks are the
best example of tropical hardwood hammock that remains in the United States. This
rapidly disappearing natural community type supports numerous plant and animal species
that have very limited distributions and are considered rare and endangered. The site
provides habitat for several endangered species, including the Key Largo wood rat, Key
Largo cotton mouse, Schaus' swallowtail butterfly, and the American crocodile. Special
environmental concerns include poaching, dumping of garbage, maintaining, and restoring
native vegetation, and exotic species control. The FDEP continues to acquire properties to
expand this site.
3,18.3.2.5 Lignumvitae Key State Botanical Site
The Lignumvitae Key State Botanical Site includes 485 acres of uplands and 100 acres of
submerged lands. The primary purpose of the site is to protect a virtually undisturbed
subtropical hardwood hammock. Facilities include a public dock, restrooms, visitors
center/historic site, and nature trails. Access to the site is restricted to private boats or
tour boats. Special concerns include the effects of increased population and recreational
demands and the associated pollution and physical damage to the resources of Lignumvitae
Key.
3.18.3.2.6 Windley Kev State Geological Site
Windley Key State Geological Site includes approximately 30 acres of significant botanical,
geological, and historic resources on Windley Key.
3.18.3.2.7 Indian Key State Historic Site
Indian Key was the site of an active colony for ship salvaging operations in the mid-1820s
and was the first county seat for Dade County in the 1830s. It is located one mile east of
lower Matecumbe Key and is accessible only by private boat. In 1840, Seminole Indians
attacked and killed seven people. The site is listed on the National Register of Historic
Places and includes remnants of the original salvaging colony as well as an
interpretive/nature trail and docking facilities.
Conservation and Coastal Management 218 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.18.3.2.8 Curry Hammock State Park
Curry Hammock is located in the Middle Keys, within the City of Marathon, with public
access to swimming, a playground, picnic tables, grills, and showers on the ocean side of
Little Crawl Key. The hardwood hammocks found on these tropical islands support one of
the largest populations of thatch palms in the United States. Mangrove swamps, seagrass
beds and wetlands provide vital habitats for tropical wildlife.
3,18.3.2.8 Lignumvitae Key State Aquatic Preserve
Lignumvitae Key Aquatic Preserve is one of the southernmost aquatic preserves. It is
located within the boundaries of the FKNMS. The Florida Division of Recreation and Parks
handles much of the site management of the preserve as part of the Lignumvitae Key
Botanical State Park which is essential part of the preserve. Primary concerns to the
Preserve's resources include boating and fishing activities and poorly planned
development. Boating related impacts involve prop dredging, siltation and groundings.
3.18.3.2.9 Biscayne Bay State Aquatic Preserve
Biscayne Bay State Aquatic Preserve extends from the Oleta River in Miami -Dade County to
the Card Sound Road bridge between the mainland and northern Key Largo (excepting
Biscayne National Park). The rich fauna found in Biscayne Bay results from the diverse
habitats found in the bay. At least some of this diversity is due to the overlap of the Atlantic
and the Caribbean marine provinces. The mangrove and estuarine areas support diverse
populations of fish. Seagrass beds serve as a food source for the Florida manatee and as
nursery grounds for several important species of fish and invertebrates. Major bird
rookeries are located within the preserve.
3.18.3.2.10 San Pedro Archaeologic Aquatic Preserve
The San Pedro Archaeologic Aquatic Preserve is located approximately south of Indian Key.
The Preserve includes 72 acres of submerged lands, including the San Pedro shipwreck,
and mooring buoys. The San Pedro Underwater Archaeological Preserve consists of the
1733 wreck "San Pedro" surrounded by a ring of sandy substrate and seagrass beds.
3,18.3.2.11 Cou,2on Bight State Aquatic Preserve
The Coupon Bight State Aquatic Preserve is located to the south of Big Pine Key and
includes approximately 6,000 acres of submerged lands in Coupon Bight and the Atlantic
Ocean. Coupon Bight is unique within the State system of Aquatic Preserves because it
encompasses living coral reef formations. The submerged portions of the preserve
encompass seagrass meadows, hard bottom communities, mangrove wetlands, and coral
patch reefs that provide nursery and settlement habitat for a wide variety of marine
species. Activities within the preserve include boating, snorkeling, diving, commercial
Conservation and Coastal Management 219 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
fishing, marine life collecting, charter sport fishing and recreational fishing for finfish and
lobster.
3.18.3.2.12 Florida Forever Acquisition Proiects
The Florida Forever Program is the State of Florida's current environmental land
acquisition program. Three Florida Forever projects are located in the County: Coupon
Bight/Key Deer, Florida Keys Ecosystem, and North Key Largo Hammocks. Coupon
Bight/Key Deer is located on Big Pine Key, and its main goal is protection of the Florida Key
Deer. The Florida Keys Ecosystem is located from Key Largo to Boca Chica Key, and its
primary goal is to provide natural habitat for migratory birds. This project is comprised of
41 sites located throughout the Florida Keys, managed by the Florida Division of
Recreation and Parks and by the FFWCC. North Key Largo Hammocks is located on the
northern end of Key Largo, including the islands up to Broad Creek at the southern tip of
Biscayne National Park, and its primary goal is to protect environmentally unique and
irreplaceable lands that contain native flora and fauna such as the largest West Indian
tropical forest stand in the United States.
Coupon Bight/Key Deer is 2,830 acres in size and as of 2008, 62 percent had been acquired.
The Florida Keys Ecosystem is 11,863 acres in size and is 46 percent acquired. The North
Key Largo Hammocks is 4,621 acres in size and is 86 percent acquired.
3.18.3.3 County -Owned Conservation Lands
County -owned conservation lands have been acquired over the years through land
purchases by the Monroe County Land Authority (MCLA), land purchases by the Board of
County Commissioners (BOCC), and the dedication of ROGO lots to the BOCC. These
properties are located throughout the Keys, are undeveloped, and generally have parcel
sizes of one acre or less. In many cases they are near or adjacent to larger conservation
properties owned by the state or federal government. Many of the properties originally
acquired by MCLA and the BOCC have been conveyed to the state or federal government.
As of September 30, 2010, the inventory of conservation lands titled in either MCLA or the
BOCC totaled approximately 1,400 acres.
3.18.3.4 Organization -Owned Conservation Lands
A number of organizations, such as The Nature Conservancy, purchase lands in the County
for conservation purposes (Table 3.18).
Other lands are owned by the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and other organizations. These are
listed in the land use inventories as non-profit organizations. These lands may not be
protected as conservation lands, but their zoning designation or the mission statement of
the organization may provide greater conservation potential than lands not owned by such
an organization.
Conservation and Coastal Management 220 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.18.3.5 Measures to Protect Publicly -Owned Conservation Lands
Fee title acquisition by public agencies generally guarantees the permanent protection of
conservation lands from development. However, it does not ensure the long-term health
and stability of the natural systems present on a property. A primary threat to upland
habitats is loss and fragmentation of habitats and the resultant loss of ecosystem function
due to residential and commercial development. Canals, mosquito ditches, fill, and roads
have altered natural hydrologic processes. Residential development has impacted
management capabilities for fire -adapted Pinelands by expanding the wildland-residential
edge. This has resulted in the alteration of natural fire processes and a demand for fire
suppression. Although many wetland and upland habitats have been restored, continued
restoration is needed to help mitigate habitat loss elsewhere.
The County should continue to support the conservation efforts of State and federal
agencies by working cooperatively with resource managers at publicly -owned refuges,
parks, and special -interests sites to address adjoining lands issues. Prescribed fire is an
important tool for effectively managing and restoring Pinelands. Fire can also manage the
encroachment of understory vegetation and restore open habitat features of coastal salt
marsh and freshwater marsh habitats. The County can continue to support the habitat
management strategies of resource agencies to include measures of the effectiveness of
prescribed fire treatments. Such monitoring is essential for an adaptive management
process to maintain and restore habitat. The County should continue its outreach efforts to
increase the public's awareness and understanding of this management technique.
Exotic, invasive, and nuisance species cause habitat loss by disrupting natural communities.
They can displace native species and alter ecosystem functions. The most widespread and
problematic plant species include Brazilian pepper, Australian pine, latherleaf, seaside
mahoe, lead tree, and non-native grasses. Federal and State agencies, as well as the Florida
Keys Invasive Exotics Task Force and the County Land Steward, have invested substantial
time and money in removing invasive exotic plant and animal species. Continual
monitoring and maintenance treatment is required to keep exotics under control, prevent
new infestations, and detect new species invasions. Adjacent private lands and roadways
can serve as seed sources that may re -infest conservation lands. The use of non-native,
invasive plants in landscaping causes the introduction of exotics to conservation lands.
Feral and free -roaming domestic cats are a predator of the endangered Lower Keys marsh
rabbit, silver rice rat, and native birds and reptiles. Free -roaming dogs can attack and
injure or kill Key deer. The County should continue to support programs to control exotic,
invasive, and nuisance plant and animal species.
Hurricanes and tropical storms and sea level rise have consequences for the management
of conservation lands. It is predicted that the Florida Keys will experience changes from
global climate change, particularly from changing temperatures in the air and water, rising
sea level, and coastal storms. Saltwater intrusion into the freshwater lens from sea level
rise and saltwater inundation of surface freshwaters from storm surges can alter Pinelands
and Freshwater Marshes resulting in more salt -tolerant plant communities. Species that
Conservation and Coastal Management 221 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
are found only in Pinelands may disappear as the pine forests die out. Storm events can
cause considerable physical damage to Beach/Berm and coastal habitats. The County
should continue to support the resource agencies as they gather scientific data to
understand the natural processes and subsequent changes from sea level rise and to assist
in the development of adaptive management strategies for future conservation needs.
To protect and manage conservation lands, the County should maintain its land
stewardship program and continue its existing partnerships, and develop new ones as
needed, with resource agencies, organizations, and individuals. Partnerships can achieve
the goals of complex programs and can considerably reduce costs.
3.18.4 Units of the Coastal Barriers Resources System
The Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982 established the Coastal Barrier
Resources System (CBRS). The CBRA legislation is specifically designed to restrict federally
subsidized development of undeveloped coastal barriers to minimize the loss of human life,
reduce the wasteful expenditure of Federal revenue, and reduce damage to fish and wildlife
habitat and other valuable natural resources of coastal barriers (U.S. Department of the
Interior, 1988). Specifically, the CBRA prohibits within the undeveloped, unprotected
coastal barriers of the CBRS, most expenditures of Federal funds which encourage
development. The intent of the CBRA is to remove from undeveloped coastal barriers
Federal incentives for new development, such as National Flood Insurance, structural
stabilization projects, and Federal assistance for construction of sewer systems, water
supply systems, airports, highways, and bridges (U.S. Department of the Interior, 1988).
CBRA defines a coastal barrier as a depositional feature that is subject to wave, tidal, and
wind energies and that protects landward aquatic habitats from direct wave attack. As
such, CBRA extends the definition of an undeveloped coastal barrier to encompass all
associated aquatic habitats, including adjacent wetlands, marshes, estuaries, inlets and
nearshore waters. This definition reflects the specific conservation purposes of the CBRA
to protect the fish, wildlife, and other natural resources of coastal barriers (U.S.
Department of the Interior, 1988).
Today, the CBRS is comprised of undeveloped coastal barriers along the Atlantic and Gulf of
Mexico coasts, including the coasts of the Florida Keys, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
The CBRS includes 25 units listed in the County:
ID No.
Unit Name
FL-34P
Biscayne Bay
FL-35
North Key Largo
FL-35
North Key Largo
FL-36P
El Radabob Key
FL-37
Rodriguez Key
FL-39
Tavernier Key
FL-40
Snake Creek
Conservation and Coastal Management 222 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
ID No.
Unit Name
FL-41P
Lignumvitae/Shell Keys
FL-42P
Long Key
FL-43
Channel Key
FL-44
Toms Harbor Keys
FL-45
Deer/Long Point Keys
FL-46
Boot Key
FL-47P
Key Deer/White Heron
FL-48P
Bahia Honda Key
FL-50
No Name Key
FL-51
Newfound Harbor Keys
FL-52
Little Knockemdown/Torch Keys Complex
FL-53
Budd Keys
FL-54
Sugarloaf Sound
FL-55
Saddiebunch Keys
FL-57
Cow Key
FL-59P
Fort Taylor
FL-60P
Key West NWR
FL-61P
Tortugas
*Biscayne Bay
unit is primarily within Miami -Dade County
The USFWS maintains the official CBRS maps that are periodically amended by Congress in
the CBRA and are available at http://www.fws.gov/ habitatconservation/
coastal_barrier.html. The USFWS also advises federal agencies, landowners, and Congress
whether properties are in or out of the CBRS, and what kind of federal expenditures are
allowed in the CBRS. Most of the CBRS units in the County are largely undeveloped.
In general, future development in the County should be directed to the maximum extent
possible away from the CBRS units. This should be accomplished through land use policies
of the Comprehensive Plan and its implementing LDRs.
Other actions which the County should take to discourage further private investment in
CBRS units include:
• No new bridges, causeways, paved roads or commercial marinas should be permitted to
or on CBRS units;
• Shoreline hardening structures should not be permitted along shorelines of CBRS units;
• Public expenditures on CBRS units should be limited to property acquisition,
restoration and passive recreation facilities;
• Privately -owned undeveloped land located within the CBRS units should be considered
for acquisition by the County; and
• The County should coordinate with FKAA and private providers of electricity and
telephone service to assess measures which could be taken to discourage extension of
facilities and services to CBRS units.
Conservation and Coastal Management 223 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The Federal policy against subsidizing development of designated coastal barriers has
impacted the amount and rate of development of those units. Since the intent and effect of
the CBRS has been to discourage development (prohibiting flood insurance and other
federal program funds) in the County's designated coastal barriers, the County should
consider whether to maintain the existing comprehensive plan policies related to the CBRS,
or to focus on the development impacts on endangered species and habitat should
unsubsidized development still occur.
3.18.5 Historic Resources [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(c), F.A.C.]
The entire County is located within the coastal area. Therefore, the inventory and future
trends of historic resources within the coastal area are identical to those identified in
Chapter 2.0 Future Land Use Element (Historic Resources).
3.19 Effects of Future Land Use on Natural Resources [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(b),
F.A.C.]
This section discusses the existing planning and legal framework for managing growth in
the County. The future land use analysis is contained in Chapter 2.0 Future Land Use
Element.
3.19.1 Natural Resource Protection by Reducing Growth Rates: the Rate of Growth
Ordinance
The 1990 Monroe County Comprehensive Plan identified concerns associated with the high
rates of growth in the Florida Keys. To address concerns regarding public safety
(particularly during a mandatory hurricane evacuation) and quality of life issues, the
Monroe County Board of Commissioners recommended the development of a dwelling unit
allocation system. In 1992, the County adopted and implemented the Rate of Growth
Ordinance (ROGO).
The primary purpose of ROGO was to control growth throughout the County so that the
population can be evacuated in a timely manner in the event of a hurricane. In 1992, it was
determined that 2,550 residential permits could be added and still maintain a 24-hour
standard for evacuation clearance time.
Under ROGO, building permits are issued for a new dwelling only if it has received a
residential dwelling unit allocation award, or if it is determined to be exempt. The
Nonresidential Rate of Growth Ordinance (NROGO) applies to the development of all new
and expanded nonresidential floor area developments, except as exempted, for which a
building permit or development approval is required.
The process of receiving an allocation is competitive and ROGO and NROGO establish the
rules and procedures for that competition. Competition is a point based system that allows
Conservation and Coastal Management 224
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
applicants for new residential or commercial building permits to compete against each
other for the limited number of allocations issued each year. The number of allocations
available is determined through the adoption of an administrative rule on the State level.
The number of allocations is based on the progress the County has made toward achieving
stipulated State goals.
The ROGO allocation system applies only to the unincorporated area of the County and
excludes the mainland and Ocean Reef (northern Key Largo). It is divided into three
subareas:
• The unincorporated area of the county north of Tavernier Creek and corporate limits of
the Village of Islamorada (approximately mile marker 90).
• The unincorporated area of the county from the corporate limits of the Village of
Islamorada (approximately mile marker 72) south to the corporate limits of the City of
Key West at Cow Key Bridge on U.S. 1 (approximately mile marker 4), excluding Big
Pine Key and No Name Key.
• Big Pine Key and No Name Key, which are covered under an approved HCP: the Big
Pine Key -No Name Key HCP is separate conservation planning document that operates
in conjunction with ROGO and NROGO [see Section 3.19.2.2 (Tier Overlay Ordinance in
Big Pine Key and No Name Key)].
Each applicant competes against the other applicants located within the same sub -area.
There is one exception to this process: applicants for affordable housing. Affordable
housing applicants compete against all applicants for affordable housing permits
throughout the keys. Allocations are awarded each quarter in each sub -area. The ROGO
system is reviewed quarterly and monitored by the County Department of Planning and
Environmental Resources.
3.19.1.1 Point System within ROGO
Points are intended to discourage development in environmentally sensitive areas and to
direct and encourage development to appropriate infill areas. Points also recognize that
any development can affect the functioning of natural and man-made infrastructure. Points
vary depending on whether a proposed development project is located on Big Pine Key or
No Name Key or if it is located elsewhere in unincorporated Monroe County. The primary
point assignments are8:
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
8 Source: Section 138-28. Land Development Regulations for Monroe County.
Conservation and Coastal Management 225 Technical Document: May ZU11
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Prima ry point assi girnments under ROGO
Point
Assignment Criteria (see Section 3.19.2 for an explanation of Tiers)
+0 An application which proposes a dwelling unit within an area designated
Tier I on Big Pine Key or No Name Key.
+10 An application which proposes a dwelling unit within an area designated
Tier I (natural area).
An application which proposes development within an area designated
+10 Tier II (transition and sprawl reduction area) on Big Pine Key or No Name
Key.
+20 An application which proposes development within an area designated
Tier III (infill area) on Big Pine Key or No Name Key.
An application which proposes the clearing of any upland native habitat
+20 vegetation that is part of a one acre or larger upland native habitat within
an area designated Tier III -A (special protection area).
+30 An application which proposes development within an area designated
Tier III (infill area) outside of Big Pine Key or No Name Key.
Points to implement the HCP and the Livable CommuniKeys Community Master Plan
for Bi Pine Ke and No Name Ke
Point
Assignment Criteria
- 10 An application which proposes a dwelling unit on No Name Key.
An application which proposes development in designated Lower Keys
- 10 Marsh Rabbit habitat or buffer areas as designated in the community
master plan.
- 10 An application which proposes development in Key Deer Corridor as
designated in the community master plan.
Conservation and Coastal Management 226
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Points to encourage density reductions
Point
Criteria
Assignment
An application which aggregates a contiguous vacant, legally platted,
vacant, buildable lot, zoned IS, IS-D, URM, URM-L, or CFV, located within a
Tier III designated area together with the parcel proposed for
+4
development. Each additional vacant, legally platted, buildable lot which
is aggregated that meets the above requirements will earn the
application the additional points.
On Big Pine Key and No Name Key. An application which aggregates a
contiguous vacant, legally platted, vacant, buildable lot, zoned IS, IS-D,
URM, URM-L, or CFV, located within a Tier II or Tier III designated area -
+3
together with the parcel proposed for development. Each additional
vacant, legally platted, buildable lot which is aggregated that meets the
above requirements will earn the application the additional points.
Additional Requirements:
• The proposed development cannot clear upland native vegetation of more than 5,000 square feet or the
open space requirements of LDR Section 118-99.
• The application shall include, but not be limited to
o A legally binding, restrictive covenant limiting the number of dwelling units on the aggregated lot,
running in favor of the county and enforceable by the county, subject to the approval of the growth
management director and county attorney and recorded in the office of the clerk of the county prior
to the issuance of any building permit pursuant to an allocation award.
• Exception: No points for aggregation are awarded for any application that proposes the clearing of any
native upland habitat in a Tier II1-A (Special Protection Area) area. No aggregation of lots will be
permitted in Tier I.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
The Department of Community Affairs and the Keys communities evaluated the adopted clearing limits for
high and moderate quality tropical hardwood hammocks. The allowable amount of clearing is currently
determined by the quality of the hammock and varies by tier designation and community.
Recommendations were made to bring parity between incorporated and unicorporated Monroe County,
and to strengthen the protection of tropical hardwood hammocks. Proposed recommendations included
land clearing limits, which vary according to the tier designation, but cannot exceed 7,500 square feet. It
was further recommended that the Comprehensive Plan revise its lot aggregation policies, land
development regulations, and Rule 28-20.120(4)(e), F.A.C., to limit clearing of aggregated lots that receive
points in the building permit allocation system from 5,000 square feet to a maximum of 7,500 square feet
(DCA, 2010).
Conservation and Coastal Management 227 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan
Points to encourage dedication of lands in Tier I and Tier II (Big Pine Key and No
Name Key) areas and to encourage affordable housing in Tier III lands
Point
Assignment Criteria
An application, which includes the dedication to the county of one vacant,
legally platted buildable lot, zoned SC, IS, IS-D, URM, URM-L, or CFV, or a
+4 legally platted, buildable lot within any CFSD that authorizes dwelling
units. Each additional vacant, legally platted, buildable lot which is
dedicated that meets the above requirements will earn the application the
additional points.
On Big Pine Key and No Name Key, an application, which includes the
dedication to the county of one vacant, legally platted buildable lot, zoned
+2 SC, IS, IS-D, URM, URM-L, or CFV, or a legally platted, buildable lot within
any CFSD that authorizes dwelling units. Each additional vacant, legally
platted, buildable lot which is dedicated that meets the above
requirements will earn the applicant the additional points.
An application, which includes the dedication to the county of a vacant,
+1 for each legally platted, buildable lot of 5,000 square feet or more within a
5,000 square suburban residential district (SR) or suburban residential -limited district
feet of lot (SR-L) within a designated Tier I area. Each additional vacant, legally
area platted, buildable lot of 5,000 square feet or more that meets the above
requirements will earn points.
An application, which includes the dedication to the county of one vacant,
legally platted, buildable lot of 5,000 square feet or more within a native
+0.5 area district (NA) or sparsely settled district (SS) in a designated Tier I
area. Each additional vacant, legally platted, buildable lot that meets the
above requirements will earn the half -point.
An application, which includes the dedication to the county of at least one
+4 acre of vacant, unplatted, buildable land located within a designated Tier I
area. Each additional one acre of vacant, unplatted, buildable land that
meets the above requirements will earn the points.
On Big Pine Key and No Name Key, an application, which includes the
dedication to the county of at least one acre of vacant, unplatted, buildable
;application
land located within a designated Tier I area. Each additional one acre of
vacant, unplatted, buildable land that meets the above requirements will
earn the points.
Addirements
• Tshall include, but not be limited to
csautory warranty deed that conveys the dedicated property to the county shall be approved by
the growth management director and county attorney and recorded in the office of the clerk of the
county prior to the issuance of any building permit pursuant to an allocation award.
• Lots or parcels dedicated for positive points under this paragraph shall not be eligible for meeting the
mitigation requirements of the Big Pine Key and No Name Key Overlay Zone.
• Lots or parcels donated for points in Big Pine Key or No Name Key must be located within Tier I or Tier
II lands in Big Pine Key or No Name Key.
Conservation and Coastal Management 228 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Additional points
Point
Criteria
Assignment
An application for market rate housing unit which is part of employee or
affordable housing project. The market rate dwelling unit must be part of
+6
an approved employee or affordable housing project and meet all the
requirements and conditions pursuant to LDR Section 130-161(a) and (f).
- 4
An application which proposes development within a "Y' zone on the
FEMA flood insurance rate map.
An application for which development is required to be connected to a
+4
central wastewater treatment system that meets BAT/AWT standards
established by the State legislature.
A point shall be awarded on the anniversary controlling date for each year
+1
that the application remains in the ROGO system up to a maximum of four
years.
Proposes payment to the county's land acquisition fund in an amount
equal to the monetary value of a ROGO dedication point times the number
of points to be purchased, up to a maximum of two points.
The monetary value of each point shall be established annually by
resolution of the board of county commissioners.
+ 1 to + 2
The monetary value of each point shall be based upon the average fair
market value of privately -owned, buildable, vacant, IS/URM, platted lots in
Tier I divided by four.
Payment to the county's land acquisition fund shall be prior to the
issuance of any building permit pursuant to the allocation award.
3.19.2 Natural Resource Protection by Directing Growth Away from Sensitive Areas:
the Tier Overlay Ordinance
On March 21, 2006, the Tier Overlay Ordinance was adopted as a zoning overlay. The Tier
Overlay Ordinance is a ranking of land based on environmental characteristics.
3.19.2.1 Tier Overlay Ordinance in Unincorporated Monroe County
Section 130-130 of the LDRs stipulates the Tier Overlay Ordinance as a planning tool and as
an overlay district to manage development and conservation of land. The purpose is to
designate geographical areas outside of the mainland of the County (excluding the Ocean
Reef planned development) into tiers. Each tier:
• assigns points used in the ROGO and NROGO systems;
• determines the permittable amount of clearing of upland native vegetation; and
• prioritizes lands for public acquisition.
Conservation and Coastal Management 229 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The tier boundaries are shown on the Tier Overlay District Maps, which are available from
the County Department of Planning and Environmental Resources.
Lands in unincorporated Monroe County (excluding the Ocean Reef planned development)
are mapped as Tier I, III, and III -A (Special Protection Area). Lands on Big Pine Key and No
Name Key are mapped as Tier I, II, or III. The Tier boundaries were determined using
aerial photographs, data from the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study, endangered
species maps, property and permitting information, and limited field evaluations.
Approximately half of the land subject to the Tier Overlay Ordinance is classified as Tier I.
Tier Classifiratinn cvctPm rritnrin f.%r
Lower
Middle
Upper
Total
Tier
Description
Keys -
Keys -
Keys -
acres
acres
acres
acres
Tier I boundaries were delineated to include
one or more of the following criteria:
• Vacant lands which can be restored to
connect upland native habitat patches and
reduce further fragmentation of upland
native habitat.
• Lands required to provide an undeveloped
buffer, up to 500 feet in depth, if indicated
as appropriate by special species studies,
between natural areas and development to
reduce secondary impacts. Canals or
roadways, depending on width, may form a
I
boundary that removes the need for the
buffer or reduces its depth.
31,490.0
944.1
16,979.4
49,413.4
• Lands designated for acquisition by public
agencies for conservation and natural
resource protection.
• Known locations of threatened and
endangered species, as defined in LDR
Section 101-1, identified on the threatened
and endangered plant and animal maps or
the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study
maps, or identified in on -site surveys.
• Conservation, Native Area, Sparsely Settled,
and Offshore Island land use districts.
• Areas with minimal existing development
and infrastructure.
Pertains only to Big Pine Key / No NameTof
Scattered lots and fragments
environmentally sensitive lands that ma
II
found in platted subdivisions. A large nu
of these lots are located on canals and a
0.0
0.0
Z78.2
minimal value to the key deer and other
protected species because the canal presents a
barrier to , ersal.
ull'Cl Va11V11 anu Loasrai management 230 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Lower
Middle
Upper
Total
Tier
Description
Keys -
Keys -
Keys -
acres
acres
acres
acres
Tier III are lands located outside of Big Pine
Key and No Name Key that are not designated
III
Tier I or Tier III -A. Tier III represents the
7,190.5
1,606.4
26,134.0
34,930.9
majority of developable acreage in the County.
Tier III -A is designated as a Special Protection
III -A
Area. It is defined as lands that have one acre
130.8
0.0
1,204.9
1,335.7
or more of native upland habitat.
Some properties do not have a tier designation.
These undesignated properties are found
throughout the Keys but most occur in Ocean
Reef, which is exempt from the Tier Overlay
Undesignated
Ordinance. Others are rights -of -way, military
5,319.1
292.2
8,745.9
14,357.2
installations, or properties that were not
designated due to mapping discrepancies and,
at the time of the preparation of this document,
are being evaluated for tier designation.
Source: Acreages from Monroe County GIS database 10/8/2010.
After adoption of the Tier Maps and ordinances, a legal challenge was filed to the ordinance
which resulted in an order from an administrative law judge that recommended striking
certain portions of the tier criteria ordinance which was used to classify parcels in the Tier
Overlay Ordinance. DCA Secretary Pelham adopted the administrative law judge's
recommended order in his Amended Final Order. This Final Order invalidated the tier
designations for approximately 3,100 parcels. With the complex permitting system in the
County, the de -designation of these parcels, along with several other groupings of parcels
where property owners petitioned the County for amendments to their Tier Designation,
has caused some parcels/land to be "Tier -less", or "Tier Undesignated", with no ability to
score them in ROGO or NROGO. The County is re-evaluating and processing these lands
into Tier categories, based upon recommendations made by a Tier Designation Review
Committee (TDRC).
3.19.2.2 Tier Overlay Ordinance in Big Pine Key and No Name Key
The Tier Overlay Ordinance in unincorporated Monroe County differs somewhat from the
islands of Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The tier boundaries on Big Pine Key and No
Name Key were designated using the Big Pine Key and No Name Key HCP (Monroe County
et al., 2006) and the adopted community master plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
The HCP provides a strategy to protect the habitat of the endangered Key Deer (Odocoileus
virginianus clavium), endangered Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris hefneri),
and threatened Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon corais couperi). The HCP protects the
highest quality habitat and directs development to areas that have already been impacted.
The HCP was developed in conjunction with an Incidental Take Permit issued by the
USFWS on June 9, 2006, Under this permit, landowners obtaining a building permit from
Conservation and Coastal Management 231 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
the County may "take10" threatened and endangered wildlife and can proceed with
construction without any other permits or reviews from the USFWS.
Maps depicting Tier designations are used to overlay onto current zoning maps to
determine appropriate use and intensity of future development or redevelopment. Based
on the Key Deer studies completed under the HCP and the spatial model that resulted, the
County developed a conservation priority classification for private undeveloped lands in
the study area.
Tier classificatinn rritprin fnr Riv Pinn lzo., --A wr.. AT--- 1r7___
Area a
Big Pine
Tier
Description
Key
Lands where all or a significant portion of the land area is
characterized as environmentally sensitive and is important
I
for the continued viability of HCP covered species. These
lands are high quality Key deer habitat, generally
973.4
representing large contiguous patches of native vegetation
that provide habitat for other protected species
Scattered lots and fragments of environmentally sensitive
lands that may be found in platted subdivisions. A large
II
number of these lots are located on canals and are of minimal
101.6
value to the key deer and other protected species because the
canal presents a barrier to dis ersal.
Scattered lots within already heavily developed areas that
provide little habitat value to the Key deer and other
III
protected species. Some of the undeveloped lots in this Tier
58.5
are located between existing developed commercial lots
within the U.S. 1 corridor or are located on canals.
Total
�1,_133.5
cresNo
Name
217.0
R]
0
217.0
Source: HCP for Florida key deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) and other protected species on Big Pine
Key and No Name Key, Monroe County, Florida. April 2003, revised, April 2006.
Tier I lands are higher -quality Key deer habitat (and other protected species considered in
the plan) while Tier III lands are the lowest quality. Most of the parcels in Tiers II and III
are interspersed among developed parcels and along canals. The tier classification helps to
determine the location of potential new development and to prioritize mitigation areas.
10 "Take" is defined in the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (87 Stat. 884; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) as
harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect any threatened or endangered species. Harm
may include significant habitat modification where it actually kills or injures a listed species through impairment of
essential behavior (e.g., nesting or reproduction).
.. aa,u u,asiai management 232 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Tiers are also used as part of the County's 20-year land acquisition program. Tier I land
will receive first priority for acquisition, Tier II land and patches of tropical hardwood
hammock or pinelands of one acre or greater in areas within Tier II land will receive
second priority for acquisition, and Tier III lands will be third priority for acquisition,
except for acquisition of land for affordable housing, which also shall be a first priority.
These areas will be set aside for conservation or retirement of development rights of
vacant privately -owned, buildable, platted lots within Tier I and Tier II and the acquisition
of scarified and disturbed lands for affordable housing within Tier III (Monroe County et al.,
2006).
3.19.2.3 Tier Overlay District Map Amendments
According to Section 130-130 of the LDRs, the Tier Overlay District Map may be amended
to reflect existing conditions in an area because of drafting errors, data errors, or regrowth
of hammock. The Tier Overlay District Map amendments are made according to
procedures set in the LDRs for map amendments.
3.19.3 Natural Resource Protection by Prohibiting Development in Wetlands
The Comprehensive Plan prohibits new residential and non-residential development in
most wetlands in the Keys. This prohibition applies to the following wetland communities:
• mangroves;
• submerged lands;
• undisturbed salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands;
• beaches (50 feet from all natural shorelines); and
• freshwater wetlands (disturbed and undisturbed).
According to the LDRs, development in disturbed wetlands is allowed, subject to permits
from the USACE, FDEP, and the County. The County has a permitting program for activities
in disturbed wetlands subject to a policy requiring "no net loss" of functional value. While
this will allow some filling of disturbed salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands, it is intended
to eliminate any further net loss of wetland function in the Florida Keys.
3.19.4 Natural Resource Protection through Stronger Environmental Design
Criteria
When development is permitted under the Comprehensive Plan and ROGO/NROGO, it is
subject to revised and strengthened environmental design criteria of the updated LDRs
[Section 118-7 (General Environmental Design Criteria)].
3.19.5 Natural Resource Protection through Land Acquisition
Fee title acquisition of real estate is the most effective means of protecting environmentally
sensitive lands from direct disturbances by human activities. Components of the
Conservation and Coastal Management 233 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Comprehensive Plan which reduce the rate of growth and direct the allocation of growth
discourage development in many undisturbed upland communities and habitat areas of
federally -designated species. However, these techniques do not permanently guarantee
protection of these sensitive ecological resources. Long-term protection is best
accomplished through acquisition for permanent conservation purposes by the federal,
State, or local government, or by non-profit conservation organizations. While acquisition
is not a realistic solution for most lands in the Keys, it should be pursued for those which
are determined by County staff, local scientists, and regulators to be the most ecologically
sensitive and the most susceptible to development or environmental threat, despite the
protections afforded by the Comprehensive Plan. However, effective management of that
land is necessary to ensure it remains in a condition to support the viability of natural
systems being protected. Unmanaged public lands tend to become used for unregulated
vehicle access, informal camping sites, dumping, and removal of protected species
(particularly native orchids and tree snails). Also, areas purchased for conservation often
contain exotic vegetation and other disturbances that require restoration activities. The
County has a land management program for County -owned conservation lands for
mainteneance and restoration activities. In addition the County has established the
Monroe County Environmental Land Management and Restoration Fund as a recurring
funding source to ensure these public resources retain their habitat functions.
3.19.6 Implementation of Measures to Reduce Pollutant Discharges into Ground
and Surface Waters of the Keys
The Comprehensive Plan includes goals, objectives, and policies to reduce pollutant
discharges into ground and surface waters from point and non -point sources [see Section
3.5.2 (Ambient Water Quality Conditions)]. This is based upon the most recent State and
federal regulations concerning such discharges as discussed herein.
3.19.7 Implementation of the Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan and Stormwater
Management Plan for Monroe County
Two important plans to protect the waters of the Florida Keys are the Sanitary Wastewater
Master Plan and the Stormwater Management Plan. The Sanitary Wastewater Management
Plan makes several recommendations, which have significant effects on man-made nutrient
loadings to nearshore waters. The Sanitary Wastewater Management Plan recommends:
• the ultimate type of treatment and effluent disposal system to be utilized by geographic
service areas within the County;
• the mandatory levels of treatment for new and replacement systems, including the
criteria for attaining the adopted level of treatment;
• recommendations for retrofitting specific existing facility deficiencies found to be
causing significant water quality degradation; and
• recommendations for ongoing monitoring programs to assess the effectiveness of
sanitary wastewater improvements and amended adopted levels of service on water
quality.
Conservation and Coastal Management 234
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The Stormwater Management Plan makes several recommendations designed to reduce
pollutant loadings:
• recommendations for retrofitting specific existing facility deficiencies found to not be
meeting the adopted levels of service standards, and
• recommendations for ongoing monitoring programs to assess the effectiveness of
stormwater management improvements and amended adopted levels of service on
water quality.
3.19.8 Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, including the Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
The Comprehensive Plan calls for an active protection program for federally and State -
listed threatened and endangered plant and animal species. Recovery activities are
proposed for each species, aimed at prohibiting its destruction and protecting its habitat.
These are dependent upon the type of habitat utilized, the threats to that habitat, and the
specific sensitivities of each species. The general types of recovery activities include:
• assignment of negative points in the ROGO System;
• recommended habitat acquisition;
• stepped up enforcement of existing laws pertaining to free -roaming pets, road speeds in
critical habitat areas, and molesting or harming of endangered species; and
• increased coordination of preservation efforts among the County, USFWS, FFWCC and
FDEP.
Big Pine Key and No Name Key contain particularly sensitive habitat for threatened and
endangered species. Since the mid-1990s, the County, the Florida DCA, the FDOT, and the
USFWS have recognized that continued growth and development on Big Pine and No Name
Keys without proper protective measures would be harmful to Key deer (Odocoileus
virginianus clavium), Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit (Sylvilagus polustris hefneri), and eastern
indigo snake (Drymarchon corals couperi). Big Pine Key and No Name Key were under a
development moratorium for over 10 years due to the level of service of U.S. 1 through the
Big Pine area. The moratorium placed an undue burden on the community, so the County
met with various stakeholders to seek a solution to the problem. A solution to the level of
service was realized through the additional lane on the north bound side of U.S. 1 and
through the deer crossing tunnels on Big Pine Key. However, additional constraints on
growth in Big Pine remained due to the many endangered species located on Big Pine Key
and No Name Key, The County, along with its partners, began a process to continue the
growth on Big Pine in an environmentally compatible nature through a permitting process
with USFWS. This process included the development of the HCP in 2006 which outlined the
planned growth patterns and rate as well as the anticipated impact that growth will have
on the species. In conjunction with this process, the County prepared a Livable
CommuniKeys Plan for Big Pine and No Name Key to serve as a master plan for the area.
Conservation and Coastal Management 235 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Covering an area of approximately 7,000 acres, the Big Pine Key/No Name Key HCP is a
conservation strategy that protects the habitat of the Key deer, Lower Keys marsh rabbit,
and eastern indigo snake while allowing limited residential, commercial, recreational, and
municipal development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key. In addition to protecting high
quality habitat for these species, the HCP directs development toward areas that have
already been already impacted and away from endangered species habitat.
The goal of the HCP is to hold impact on the species to a minimum based on Key Deer
"quasi -extinction", which was defined as the probability that the number of female deer
would fall below 50 at least once over 50 years. The drafters used an assignment of "H" for
each parcel as a tool to regulate development. H represents impact, both primary and
secondary. Factors such as distance from U.S. 1, existing housing density, existing habitat
quality, proximity to deer movement corridors, existing deer density, and water barriers
were considered in the "H" model for each parcel. The assigned H values range from 0 (no
impact), to 2. A Population Viability Analysis was conducted for the Key Deer in association
with the HCP and details the likelihood of persistence of a species. The Population Viability
Analysis study indicated that, under current conditions, the Key Deer have a 2.2 percent
chance of reaching quasi -extinction. Based on this Population Viability Analysis, the
drafters decided to strive for increasing this likelihood to no more than 4.2 percent. This
equates to the loss of 4.2 deer a year to human -related mortality. With the above goal, an
acceptable "H" limit or impact limit for development in Big Pine Key and No Name key is H
= 1.1 over 20 years. The drafters then agreed to mitigate all H (impact) at a ratio of 3:1.
This means that each parcel developed under this plan will add to the total H allowed over
the next 20 years and the County must mitigate that H by three times this amount. If this
ratio is not maintained, development activity will be stopped until the ratio is achieved or
exceeded.
In an effort to not exceed this H = 1.1 limit, basic development limitations were set. These
limitations are outlined in general in the HCP and more defined in the Livable
CommuniKeys Plan for Big Pine and No Name Keys. These limitations cover everything
from residential to light industrial to road widening. The following 20-year limitations are
defined in the master plan:
0 residential units limited to 200;
0 commercial limited to 47,800 square feet;
• non-public institutional limited to 2,500 square feet per year, with restrictions;
• 7 new pocket parks within certain subdivisions; and
• 3 new public parks, with restrictions.
If at any time during the 20 year period H = 1.1 is met or exceeded, development activity
will halt.
While these restrictions on new development help meet the goal, additional restrictions
were also required. Most of these restrictions were based on tier, which reflects the
Uaawi ,naaagement 236 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
increased impact based on location and development pattern for the area. These 20-year
restrictions are:
• 10 new residential permits in Tier 1 areas;
• no new fences in Tier 1 areas; and
• only residential development is allowed in Tier 1.
A complete listing of restrictions is available in the HCP and the Master Plan. All
applications for new residential and commercial development will be required to apply for
a ROGO/NROGO allocation.
ROGO/NROGO applications for Big Pine and No Name Key compete against each other
based on the overall score and date the applicant applied. Applicants are competing for
eight market rate and two affordable allocations annually. Prior to allocation issuance, the
applicant must mitigate the H value associated with the development of the parcel. This is
accomplished through land donation or fund donation to allow the County to purchase
property to maintain a 3:1 ratio for impact.
Based on the HCP finalized in 2006, USFWS issued an Incidental Take Permit (No.
TE083411-0, issued June 9, 2006 and expires June 30, 2023) that allows the County to
continue to adversely impact endangered species on Big Pine and No Name Key through
the issuance of building permits. The development of 200 homes or no more than 168
acres of development over a 20-year period is anticipated on Big Pine Key and No Name
Key. The HCP does not specify which properties will be permitted or when. Because the
County now has the approved HCP and Incidental Take Permit necessary to protect listed
species and their habitats, landowners obtaining a building permit generally do not need
any other permits or reviews from the USFWS. Improvements to properties are generally
allowed as long as they are consistent with County regulations. However, projects that
remove native vegetation or reduce Key deer access to habitat such as fences may undergo
additional review by the County and the USFWS.
The HCP aides in the recovery of listed species on Big Pine and No Name Keys because it
directs development toward areas that have already been impacted and away from listed
species habitat. Development is limited to 168 acres (with no more than 7 acres being
native habitat) of impact over a 20-year period and mitigation is conducted at a 3:1 ratio.
In total, 504 acres will be acquired, restored, and managed for Key deer, Lower Keys marsh
rabbit, and eastern indigo snake conservation. In addition, no development will occur in
Lower Keys marsh rabbit habitat and a 1,640-foot buffer from future development will be
implemented to reduce the indirect effects of development (except for about 40 acres that
have already been fragmented). All unprotected suitable marsh rabbit habitat on Big Pine
and No Name Key will be targeted for acquisition and conservation. The County also
implements a free -roaming pet education program to reduce mortality (predation) on
marsh rabbits.
Conservation and Coastal Management 237 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Under the LDRs [Section 9.5-345 (General Environmental Design Criteria)], clustering of
development is required to reduce habitat fragmentation and to preserve the largest
possible area of contiguous undisturbed habitat (for all natural habitat types). The LDRs
also contain restrictions on the amount of land clearing, depending on the tier designation.
The County currently requires a coordination letter from the USFWS when development is
proposed in known or potential habitat for endangered and threatened species. Under the
Tier Overlay Ordinance, lands that serve as habitat for protected species have top priority
for land acquisition. Under the current ROGO/NROGO system, development within known
habitat of threatened or endangered species receive minus 10 points.
3.19.9 Restoration of Disturbed Habitats
The Comprehensive Plan currently includes three major provisions for the restoration of
disrupted marine, beach/berm, and native upland vegetation. The Plan calls for an ongoing
restoration program for public lands. The County undertakes projects based on
management or maintenance needs or by public request. The County uses a combination
of local, State, and federal funds to implement specific projects. Local funding comes from
the Monroe County Environmental Land Management and Restoration Fund, which
receives monies paid to the County as fines or penalties for environmental crimes, or as
payments in lieu of replacement of native vegetation destroyed during the land
development process.
The restoration program for private lands is comprised of two components. Mandatory
removal of invasive plants from all development sites will be required prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy. The County will also pursue development of incentives and use of
volunteer organizations for purposes of promoting voluntary removal of invasive plants
from private property.
3.19.10 Cooperative Planning Efforts to Protect State and Federal Conservation
Lands
The Comprehensive Plan commits the County to a cooperative planning program with
resource managers at publicly -owned refuges, parks, and sites of particular interest in the
Keys [see Section 3.18.3.5 (Measures to Protect Publicly -Owned Conservaton Lands)]. This
planning program addresses management issues related to activities on adjoining private
lands which may be adversely affecting, or have the potential to adversely affect, the
natural resources for which the refuge or park was established to protect. Implementation
of this program further ensures the long-term health and stability of the natural systems of
conservation lands in the Keys by reducing encroachments and environmental degradation
due to activities on adjoining lands which remain in private ownership.
3.20 Existing Land Use in the Coastal Area [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(a), F.A:C.]
The entire County is located within the coastal area. Therefore, the inventory of existing
land uses included in Chapter 2.0 Future Land Use Element represents the inventory of
u %.uasmi management 238 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
existing land uses within the coastal area. This section addresses land use along the
County's shoreline including:
• Water -dependent and water -related uses;
• Conflicts among shoreline uses; and
• Recommended studies to address the need for water -dependent and water -related uses
and other issues related to shoreline development.
3.20.1 Existing Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses
3.20.1.1 Water -Dependent Uses
According to Rule 9J-5.003 (Definitions), water -dependent uses are "activities which can be
carried out only on, in or adjacent to water areas because the use requires access to the
water for: waterborne transportation including ports or marinas; recreation; electrical
generating facilities; or water supply".
Water -dependent businesses were identified by obtaining a database of business licenses
from the Monroe County Tax Collector in November 2010. Businesses with licences in
categories related to marine businesses were compiled; these categories included receipt
numbers starting with 47140 (Fishing Diving Charter), 47142 (Marinas & Storage), 47143
(Marine Repair), 48210 (Marine Retail Sales), 53110 (Marine Wholesale Sales), and 29240
(Mobile Marine Services). The database provided by the Monroe County Tax Collector
included a designation for whether the physical location of the business was in an
incorporated city (Key West, Key Colony Beach, Layton, Islamorada, or Marathon) or was in
unincorporated Monroe County. Because this Technical Document is for the
unincorporated parts of the County (not the incorporated areas), businesses within the
incorporated cities were deleted from the database, leaving businesses in unincorporated
Monroe County only. Based on the description of the business and the name of the
business provided in the database, each site was assigned a designation of water -
dependent, water -related, or neither. Approximately 130 businesses in unincorporated
Monroe County were identified as water -dependent. In the County, the majority of water -
dependent uses are related to commercial fishing or recreation activities. These include,
but are not limited to, businesses that involve boat rentals, marinas, and boat yards. Table
3.19 lists public and privately owned water -dependent uses in the County. Map Series 3.6
depicts the locations of the Water -Related and Water -Dependent Uses in the County.
3.20.1.2 Water -Related Uses
According to Rule 9J-5.003 (Definitions), water -related uses are "activities which are not
directly dependent upon access to a water body, but which provide goods and services that
are directly associated with water -dependent or waterway uses".
Water -related businesses were identified by obtaining the same database of business
licenses as described above for water -dependent uses. Based on the description of the
Conservation and Coastal Management 239 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
business and the name of the business provided in the database, each site was assigned a
designation of water -dependent, water -related, or neither. Approximately 540 businesses
in unincorporated Monroe County were identified as water -related. Table 3.19 lists
water -related uses in the County. These include, but are not limited to, businesses that
involve charters, captains for hire, trailer storage, marine supplies, marine parts, boat
dealers, and marine maintenance and repair. Map Series 3.6 depicts the locations of the
Water -Related and Water -Dependent Uses in the County.
3.20.1.3 Water -Enhanced Uses
Some facilities do not require access to the water and may not be water -dependent or
water -related, but are enhanced by proximity to water. These are informally referred to as
"water -enhanced" uses. This term is not identified in Rule 9J-5. A good example of a
"water -enhanced" use in the Keys is a seafood restaurant. The seafood restaurant does not
require access to the water, but the dining experience and economy is enhanced if the
restaurant is on a waterfront.
3.20.2 Conflicts among Shoreline Uses [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(a), F.A.C.]
3.20.2.1 Competition for Shoreline Development Sites
The diminishing supply of shoreline development sites is a major source of conflict among
competing land uses. The demand for waterfront land comes not only from water -
dependent and water -related uses described above, but from commercial, residential, and
tourism -related uses attracted to waterfront locations by economic or aesthetic reasons
rather that by functional necessity. The physical beauty of the waters surrounding the Keys
induces an overwhelming preference for shoreline rather than inland locations. The
growth and importance of the tourism industry and the rising seasonal and permanent
residential population (see Chapter 2.0 Future Land Use Element) has increased the demand
for waterfront sites for residential, recreational, and tourist -related commercial
development which are not water -dependent. In addition, public agencies have increased
efforts to acquire and preserve shoreline areas for recreation and conservation uses.
Physical characteristics and more stringent environmental regulations further limit areas
suitable for marina and docking facilities.
Despite the extensive shoreline of the Keys, the supply of shoreline development sites
cannot satisfy the demand. In this competitive market, water-dependent/water-related
uses are often supplanted by more profitable non -water -dependent or water -related uses.
Tourism, which continues to dominate the local economy in terms of employment, depends
heavily on access to the shoreline for recreational uses. The increasing number of
recreational boats has heightened the competition for suitable marina sites between
commercial fishing and recreational marina operators.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
L."ISWI Mauagemenr 240 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 -
1
Fishing
Diving
Charter
.. .. ............
........ ......
2
.......... -
.............
Fishing
- ....... ..........
..... . ...... .....
Diving
I .............
.......
Charter
-
3
Fishing
Diving
Charter
4
............
Fishing
............
Diving
. ...
Charter
.... . ....... - .
5
...........
Fishing
...........
Diving
Charter
.. ..... ... -
6
Fishing
Diving
Charter
7
Fishing
Diving
Charier
8
Fishing
............
Diving
Charter
___
........... ............
9
. 11 ........................
Fishing
Diving
- ...........
Charter
10
Fishing
Diving
Charter
"...
_ I...
11
.---.........I
Fishing
-_...............I
Diving
Charter
12
Fishing
Diving
Charter
13
6s,hing*bivin
......... ... I ............
g*
-
Charter
... .. .............
14
Fishing
Diving
Charter
15
...........
Fishing
...
Diving
...........
Charter
16
Fishing "Diving
Charter*'
17
1.1.11 ........... .
Fishing
........
Diving
........................................
h a r t e r
Charter
- .
18
, Fishing
Diving
Charter
19
i Fishing
Diving
Charter
20
Fishing
Diving
Charter
21
1 Fishing
Diving
Charter
..............
22
.........................
1 Fishing
.. ..............
Diving
Charter
1 ...............
..............
23
............
Fishing
-.1 ..........
Diving
Charier
.............
24
..............
Fishing
Diving
.............
Charter
- -
25
.......................
Fishing
Diving
Charter
26
Fishing
Diving
Charter
............. __.
27
_.. .......................
Fishing
Diving
Charter
I.., .. ........
.... ... ..........
28
.................. ...........
Fishing
. ........................
Diving
Charier
........... .............
29
I.- ...............
Fishing
.....................
Diving
Charter
.......... -.1
30
......... . .. .......................
Fishing
Diving
Charter
31
Fishing
Diving
Charter
.... ..............
.. . ................
32
.. ...........
Fishing
- ..................
.............
Diving
Charier
.. .. .. ............. ......
33
Fishing
Diving
Charter
I ....... ...
34
. ...........
Fishing
..... .......
Diving
__ -
Charter
1
35
........
Fishing
.- .......................................
Diving
Charter
...............
-.11- ....
36
. .................. .............................
Fishing
Diving
Charter
........... .......... -
_- 11,
37
... ............... _ .........................
: Fishing
Diving
Charter
- ..........
38
..............................
� Fishing
.......................
Diving
...............
Charter
...... ............
39
1.11.1-1111.1--
.... . ...............................
Fishing
........ ... _ ..... .........
11.1
Diving
.......... ....
Charter
..........
40
Fishing
Diving
Charter
-
41
.... ........
Fishing
......................
.. ............
Diving
......
..................... -
Charter
.................
42
Fishing
Diving
Charter
43
.................... ..........
Fishing
.................
Diving
..................................
- I ...........
Charter
44
Fishing
Diving
Charter
.... ........
45
Fishing
Diving
Charter
-.1- 1
46
Fishing
..........
Diving
...........
Charter
-
47
- .. ........... I I
Fishing
- I
Diving
I I ...,
Charter
.......... ........... -
48
..............
Fishing
Diving
I ..........................
Charter
I
49
................... I ..........
Fishing
Diving
. __
Charter
...................
50
�
............ .
Fishing
........ _.-
................
Diving
.
Charter
.............. .-.1.1
51 Fishing Diving Charter
52 Fishing Diving Charter
- .......................... ..................
53 Fishing Diving Charter
- .................. ..- ................ ........
54 Fishing Diving Charter
.......... - -.1 ................. .. .................
55 Fishing Diving Charter
.- ......................... ... - ...........
56 Fishing Diving Charter
.......... ............... _. ............. -.1-
57 Fishing Diving Charier
1 _ ........................ . ............. ............ _
58 Fishing Diving Charter
- .1 .... ... ....... .. .. ..................
59 Fishing Diving Charter
of Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses
BPK CHARTERS
.................................................. I
DURMER CAPT PETER-
.............. I .............. _ -
FREEDOM CHARTERS
NE CRNR GERALDINE ST WR
. .... ............ ...................................... .................. - . ..... .
17015 OVERSEAS HWY WR
%GILBERTS RESORT 107900 WR
....OVERSEAS HWY
5950 PENINSULAH AVE
... ........................... ..... -1.111111 - . . 1 1
WH
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
... ..... ... I..
SUGARLOAF MARINA MM17
WR
....
.- -.................. I .......... . . . ........... - ............ ...... .. ..
ALLIED MARINE GROUP
- I-- . -
WR
OCEAN REEF CLUB
WR
.................. ........... _-1-1.1-1-1 ...... ..... . .. .
103950 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
245oo OVERSEAS HWY
WR
............. _._ ......... ..... .............................. .... ............. ............
4 MO CTY
I.., . - -
WR
99701 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
. .. .. ... .. ........... .. ..
98250 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
................. ... ...... 1-1 ..... .................
28530 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
..................... .......... I . .......... ............ . ...................... - ............
OCEAN REEF CLUB
WD
- ...............
38801 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY
WD
...................... -,
1313 OCEAN BAY DR
WD
...... .. ..
.... ............................... .
CARD SOUND RD 11
WD
.............................. .. .
3 N CONCH AVE
WD
.. ......... ......
24326 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
. ..... ,..
... . . ............. I .......................... ...... . ......... .. ........
33000 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
FISHING VILLAGE DR
WD
............ ..........
139 SEASIDE AVE
...... .... ..
WD
........... .1- ..................
24931 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
I ......... ............ ...... - ..........................................
24931 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
- ... ................. .- .............. ....... .............
7001 OLD SHRIMP RD
............................ .. ..........
...",.. 1
WD
111.11 �
80 E 2ND ST
WD
...................... . - .............. .... . ....
107690 OVERSEAS HWY
.
WD
5950 PENINSULAR AVE
WD
. ......... ....................... ..........
107690 OVERSEAS HWY
... ..
WD
.. ..... . ... ..,
....
5710 US HWY 1
WD
........... ............... ......
24838 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
.................... ......... ... .............. ..
30641 OVERSEAS HWY
................................... . ........ .... ..
WD
99701 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
102601 OVERSEAS HWY
.............. .......... ............ . ... .. ..
..... .... WD
16921 DRIFTWOOD LANE
WD
..... .. .. . ....
MO CTY
WR
.. .. ..... .
I _1 . ......... -
MO CTY
WR
.. ............ ...
MO CTY
WR
.. ................................
21 GARDEN COVE DR
- ...... .....
WR
MO CTY WH
1127 GRAND ST WH
MO CT(
5130 OVERSEAS HWY
Conservation and Coastal Management 241 Technical Document: May 2011
WH
WR
R
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - Inventor of Water -De endent and Water -Related Uses Continued
60 i .Fishing.D... Charter
CAPTAIN FOR HIRE
STRA_HOSKY MELVIN
-- 61 Fishing Diving Charter
-................ ..
CAPTAIN FOR HIRE
. . .......... _..... .
T & T CHARTERS "" """"" "' - -
WR
62 Fishing Diving Charter
- --......
...............
CHARTER
---
BOURBON JAMES A
MO CTY
WR
63 Fishing Diving Charter
......... ........ ..
CHARTER
"'
CONCHY JOE CHARTERS
36850 OVER SEAS HWY
64 Fishing
9. Diving Charter.........._.
..
CHARTER
.........__ ..._.........._........ ...... .. .. ............
EGGETT CHAR
CHARTERS
MOC
..........
WR
65 Fishing Diving Charter
_......
CHARTER
......................... - - -
FISHIN TECHNICIAN
24 838 OVERSEAS HWY
""'
R..
66 Fishing Diving Charter
_. ... ............
CHARTER
HIGH STAKES CHARTERS
5710 US 1
PENINSULAR AVE SLIP
W
..... .....
67 Fishing Dram Charter
— 9, .... .....
CHARTER
......._. ,_„ ..,. ...
..... .. ... ........... ..............
KEY WEST TIKI CHARTERS INC
6570WR
'
68 Fishing Diving Charter
...._... 9._.._.......g._........
CHARTER
""'"' ""'-"' ""' -
MORNING STAR
5130-OVE
OVERSEAS HWY
WR
69 : Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER
-
PAULSON ANDREA
477
70 Fishing Diving Charter
.. ......
CHARTER
_
PETTIT JOE
17016 OVERSEAS HWYWR
71 Fishing Diving Charter
......................
' CHARTER................"'WR
RESEARCH VESSEL_ TIBURON INC
5001 5TH A
72 Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER
"" "" ""
SEARCYJEFF ..
6 810 FRONT ST
WR
- 73 Fishing Diving Charter
............--
CHARTER5710
...................................... .
WHITE CAPS CHARTER
US I
WR
74 Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER
......__......
-
WILLIAMS KEITH
GARLOAF MARINA„
2U ..
WR
75 Fishing Diving Charter
. _.
CHARTER & SAILING
"""' '
5348 2ND ST
WR
EXCURSIONS
MO RTAIL CHARTERS LLC
80 E 2ND ST
WR
76 Fishing Drying Charter
CHARTER BACKCOUNTRY
& OFFSHORE
............
MYERS RICHARD L II CAPT
................
....._.... _ _......__ ......
77 . Fishing Diving Charter
......-
_................. ....
CHARTER BOATEEF
._ ..._ ..._....... . ................................ - -
BELLMIKE CAPT
DR
-
WR
78 Fishing Diving Charter
- --
CHARTER BOAT
- . -
BIG PINE KAYAK ADV INC
1149 GREENBRIAR RD
WR
79 Fishing Diving Charter
.......................9...-- -.._ 9_........._...._.................:
CHARTER BOAT
.... ..... ... .... .....
""" ""
BONECHANCE CHARTERS
OLD WOODEN BWR
RIDGE
80 FishingDiving Charter
...-.._.._....._9_................................._,........._..................._...........__.._._...........................................................-OSU
...
CHARTER BOAT
B............._._....._........_........__................_......._.........................._..............._......_........._...........;........._..__
N..................................................................................................._.................
500 OVERSEAS HWY
.................... _.................._....._..._..._............_.._...._.............._._::........_.
WR
81 Fishing Diving Charter
_.......
CHARTER BOAT
CAPT JIMS CHARTERSWR
6
..... ...
82 Fishing Diving Charter
..
CHARTER BOAT
._
CARIBBEAN JET SKI INC DBA CARIBBEAN
5710 US 1
WR
-
83 Fishing Davin
-:........................9.„._.._...._9.-Charter
....................... .... ..
CHARTER BOAT
WATERSPORTS
CONCH KEY CAT CHARTERS...........__........_..............................:......_..._..................................._..............._.............._..............._._...._..................................
970 00 OVERSEASHWY
WR
84 Fishing Diving Charter
................._..._.
CHARTER BOAT
.....................
"' '
CRISTAL CLEAR ..............._....._._...................................._.._............_...._..._..................................................._........................_......_..........._..._....;......................-
CHARTERS
. 1149 GREENBRIAR RD.
WR
85 Fishing Divin
....._ .g g Charter
- - -
...................
CHARTER BOAT
CRITERION INTERNATIONAL INC
39 FISHING VILLAGE DR
W R
86 Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
CU "' - .... _....... _.... ..
RTIS FRED W JR
0 US 1
WR....
87 ' Fishing Diving Charter
.........
CHARTER BOAT
........
CAPT
DRAKE GILBERT -
N
EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK
WR
88 Fishing Diving Charter
. _... _.... ....... -
CHARTER BOAT
FANCY FREE CHARTERS FANCY FREE
5710USHWY I
"' "'
WR
- _.
89 Fishin Divin00
g Charter
9.-- ..... _.... ..... _
....... ..... .........................
CHARTER BOAT
.....
CHARTERS LLC
FAR OUT CHARTERSWR
"" """ "" "
OVER SEAS HWY
-
90 Fishing Diving Charter
'_. ..........
...... . ...
CHARTER BOAT
FINATIC CHART
CHARTERS
57100USHWYI
WR.......
D'ivi'n.
9_1.......;_...Fishing Diwng..Charter
......._. _............
CHARTER BOAT... ...
.................
......... .............................. . ......
HARRELSON JOHN G
-ST DR ......
92 Fishing Diving C............... ..._ ....
ISLAND TIME CHARTERS
93 Fishing Diving Charter
--- -- ...... . -
CHARTER BOAT................................................WR
KAHL CHARLES D III
5130 OVERSEAS HWY
-
94.........._Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
..
..........................!.
KATAMY INC
477 DROST DR
95 Fishing Diving Charter
_.._.._..._ _.
CHARTER BOAT
_...... ... .
""" -'
KEY LARGO FISHING ADVENTURES LLC
ISLAND STYLE WATERSP
WR
96 FishingDiving Charter
..............................
CHARTER BOAT
KEY WEST AND BEYOND CHARTERS LLC
10 900 OVERSEAS HWY
6000
97 Fishing Diving Charter
g..—-g.......
CHARTER BOAT
_ ... ........... .
KEY WEST KAYAK FISHINGMN
PENINSULAR AVE
........
98 Fishing Diving Charter
..................................... .....
99 Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
CHARTER
" """ "
KEY WEST LUXURY YACHT CHARTERS INC
............ ... -
5 GE GER
6810 IFRONT ST
WR
_ ...._
100 Fishing Dmng Charter
...
BOAT
CHARTER BOAT
MOORECLINT
OUTPOST MARINE INC
5001 5TH AVE ..
WR
101 Fishing Diving Charter :
... .............. ......... ......... .
CHARTER BOAT
.................
PIRATE ISLAND DIVERS INC
6810 FRONT ST
...........................
WR..
102 Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
RAINBOW RE
RA EF DIVE CENTER /EAGLE RAY.
1038000VERSEAS HWY
. ..... .... _._.
.......... ....................................... _...._...._.............. _.........;.
103 Fishin Divin Charter
......................................9...._...._...._9.....................................;.
...................................._............................................... ...............................
CHARTER BOAT
_.._........._...T .........................................................................;....................
DIVERS LLC
.
R..............................._.._...._....................__..........._................................................................._;................._......_......_.._......._............................._......._....._.......................'
AMOS JORGE
9 9725 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
.............................
104 Fishing Diving Charter
_.............................
CHARTER BOAT
_......__............_............_................................................-.................................................._;................................................................................
RAVELO MAN EL
24838 O/S HWY
.. ....
W R
105 Fishing Diving Charter
..
_.
CHARTER BOAT
.. ................
REEL ADVENTURE
WR
106 Fishing Diving Charter
--
CHARTER BOAT
..... ...................... ..... ... . .
_.
"' - -
SAFE HARBOUR CHARTERS
5710 US HWyASH
................
-
WR
107 Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
SECOND GENERATION /FISHING
6810 FRONT ST
"' "............
WR
- --- - 9
108 Fishing Divin Charter
....
CHARTER BOAT
GENERATION INC
SHADOW INC
5710 US HIGHWAY 1
WR
109 Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
SNOW LEOPARD
5950 A E 6 32
W R
110 Fishing Diving Charter
_ .....
CHARTER BOAT
''
STEM TO STERN YACHT SERVICES INC
400 OCEAN DRLAR
WR
111 Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
STRIPSET -
CHARTERS LLC
21 GARDEN COVE DR
...__
W R.....
112 Fishing Diving Charter
................;........
CHARTER.. AT
-'
SUN N FUN.R...........................................................................................................
REEF TRIPS
S001 5TH AVE
.
WR
113 FishingDiving Charter
- _ 9
CHARTER BOAT
.......... ..........................._..._..._...._._4500
SWEET RELIEF
US.1._MM 24 1/2 SUMME....
114 Fishing Diving Charter
.._
- - - -
CHARTER BOAT
........
TA SUE -
14 CARD SOUND RD
WR
115 Fishing Diving Charter
..... _...................................
CHARTER BOAT
TED LUND'S LADY NORINNE SPORT
5710 OVERSEAS HWY
"" -
WR
..
116 Fishing Diving Charter CHARTER BOAT
FISHING...._....._................................._..._.............._.........................__.........5130
YANKEE CAPTS OFFSHORE FISHING INC
US HWY._........__............_._........_.
WR
117 Fishing Diving Charter CHARTER BOAT
YOUNG GUNZ SPORTFISHING
5950 PENINSULAR AVE
............. . .
WR
..
31 OCEAN REEF
.................I _
WR'....'
Conservation and Coastal Management 242
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - Inventor v of Water-DeDendent
and Water -Related Uses (Continuedl__
Nime Busin(,ss Addiess
WR or
Row
1 1 8
Category Name
Fishing Diy!nq�"ir
occupation Dcqc
I CHARTER BOAT LEASING
BUSiness
HUMPHREYS CHARMS j j4
5950 PENINSULAR AVE
WR
WR
--im 9
1
i g Diving Charter
Fishing
CHARTER BOAT
f EVE HARRIS BAYBREEZE CRUISES
10 3900 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
120
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
(DO1 1 1 893 4......
........................................... . . . . . . . . . .
GAME CHANGER LLC
. ... . . . . . . . . . . . .
31 OCEAN REEF DR
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
WR
121
...... .......
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
PRIZEFIGHTHER CHARTERS LLC
1 FISHING VILLAGE LN
WR
. .
. . . . . . . . . (P991 0 2 9).....
. . . . . . .
1 22
Fishing Diving Charter
i CHARTER BOAT
LYONS MICHAEL C
29675 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
(D0918349) .......... . .. . . . .. . . . . ..
.. . ..... . ... ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12 - 3
................
1. Fishing _ Diving Charter
. . . . . .
3JP)
CHARTER BOAT (FL220. . .
......................................... M-M � - .......
LAPOINTE LOUIS G 111
..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1149 GRE....... ENBRIAR RD
..................
WR
124
.................. ........................
Fishing Diving Charter
-
I CHARTER BOAT
1
WET DOG CHARTERS
104500 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
(FL2670GY)
.....................................
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
125
.................................
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
SEA DUCER BACK COUNTRY CHARTER
104500 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
.........
(FL5095GE) ...........
. . ........................
...............
. ........
126
.......... -
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT(FL5565MM)
DIRTY W ATERS CHARTERS INC
H WY
104450OVERSEAS
WR
.......... ....
+
............. ........... - 9, .. . ...
"
..
127
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
SCHWICKER BILL CAPT
LITTLE PALM ISLAND
WR
.......... ........
(FL5706BH)
.. I � - .............
128
........... .............
Fishing Diving Charter
i ; CHARTER BOAT
(FL7431SG)
.. ......... 44-1.1 ... ..
DYKES MICHAEL
...........
201 OCEAN REEF DR
.............
WR
...........
129
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT
RANDY STALLINGS CHARTERS
21 GARDEN COVE DR
WR
N ..... ... .... . - - ..........
. . - . ......... ..... .. .................. ..... ............... ..... . .. ...
........... .. - ...................... ............
..........
130
............
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT (MISS
HACKNEY BOBBY
43 OCEAN REEF DRIVE
WR
CHIEF)
................. .......... .............. .... ..... .. .. ..... ...............
............. ............. .................
-.1-1 1 1 31+
.. .......
Divin'g Charter
CHARTER BOAT 621OSG
............ 4 ................
OUTCAST CHARTERS
.............. ....................................................... - - ..............
SEACENTER DIVE SHOP
............ . . . .... . M ..................... M .......... 44- .. .........
WR
132
........................
4. F i . s .. In i n .. q Drying . . .' . Charter
M4 ................... ...................... -4-
i CHARTER BOAT CAPTAIN
............. ...................
THOMAS SEEVER CHARTERS
..... ..... M ........... ............ ..........
80 EAST 2ND STREET
91 -1-1-MM4 4 1 ............ . ... 444 .. ............ I .................
WR
- . - 9 � - �
133
.......... ..........
Fishing Diving Charter
.... . ......
CHARTER BOAT DO 939680
I . . . . . . ....4... . . . . . . . . . M_ I I . . 9 - . . ... ............
RI NE CHARTERS INC ...........
. ..... .. ... M-4 .................. 4 ........................ 4 4- ................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29675 OVERSEAS HWY
................ 9 .............. -4.1 ............................
WR
.................
134
............... .. ........ ... - ................. M . . .
Fishing Diving Charter
. . . . . .............. M
: CHARTER BOAT
I
KEY LARGO FISHING ADVENTURES LLC
103900 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
135
........ . . . . . . . . . . .
Fishing Diving Charter
D01 1229B6
. . . 4 ............................. ................
CHARTER BOAT D0590150
.
.. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ............... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
GARDEN COVE DIVERS ..........
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.211- GARDEN C.O..V.,E,.D,R+,,.,,,,...........,...
I WR
136
... ... . . . ........ . . . .
1 Fishing Diving Charter
................ 44 . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .... ... ..
CHARTER BOAT D0609690
FISH QUEST CHARTERS LP
... .. . .. . ... .. . ... .. ...... . . .. .. ... ... ..... . . . . . . . . .. . . 4 .... ... ........ . . . . . . 4 .. .. ..... . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . ..
7007 SHRIMP RD
- . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. ..... .. . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
WR
137
..........................
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER BOAT D0920113
ANDY GRIFFITHS CHARTERS /CAPT ANDY6810
GRIFFITHS INC
. ....................
FRONT ST STOCK ISLAND
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - M I .+ . I . . I .............
WR
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
138
.. ............
Fishing Diving Charter
..... . . . . . . .......... .. . . ... .. . ... ..... . .. . .
CHARTER BOAT FL 3306
FUN YET CHARTERS
RICKS MARINE SERVICE
WR
139
........... ................
Fishing Diving Charter
EE ..... .......... ............ ............. .....
CHARTER BOAT FL 4221 ILD
........ . ........ - .......... ....................... .................... ...........
SPANISH FLY
..... ...... ............
5710 US HWY 1
WR
1. 1 1 40+
Fishing bivi'ng Charter4 ++'
CHARTER BOAT FL 4+2'9+3JM
................
W CKE-R'S' W ILLIAM
-.9-4 ............ ...........
5710 OVERSEAS HWY
............................................
WR
..........
141
............... .... ...... - ............. 4 ..........
Fishing Diving Charter
............................ .............. 4
CHARTER BOAT FL 5000JR
4+94- ................ 9 .................
BOEHM ALEX M.I. 1 -1-
...... ............... ...... .................. ........... . .. ...
-4.7.7 D R,O+S,.T....D..R
I-- W M. R
. .........
142
............ - .......... 11 .............. 4 .... ... ...... . .................
i Fishing Diving Charter
............... ............. -M .....................
CHARTER BOAT FL 6053FR
.................... . .
BEGAN HERBERT ALEXANDER JR
........... ........... '..' ...... ... ............. M ............ . ..... .... ...... ...........
M9 3 9. 6.8.50 OVERSEAS H..W.Y
. .. ... 4. .... ... ... ... ... ... .... .. .. ...... ...
WR
....... ........
143
................. .. . ..................
i Fishing Diving Charter
............... ... ...... ...... ........
1 CHARTER BOAT FL0707JY
............
JEANNIE 11
.......... ............... ............... ... .. ........... ..
5 GEIGER RD
............ . .. .........
WR
144
............. - - . .. ....... ..........
1 Fishing Diving Charter
.. ........................................... ...... .. ........
CHARTER BOAT FL0763DL
+ ............ M ...........
WARD CAPT RON
. ......... . ..... .. .......... ...........
17000 US HWY 1
............. ............ ....................
WR
............ 1, . , , ,
145
............................. 4 ......... . ............................
1 Fishing Diving Charter
.1 .... .4 4+4 .+++.
CHARTER BOAT FL2164KK
RICHAR D HOOG GOODLIFE CHARTERS
........ ......... 44-M .......... ..................... ............ ............ ....
35 OCEAN REEF DR
.......... -.9-mm .......... . I ................................
WR
9.. 1 .. 46
...... .....
1 Fishing Diving Charter
.............
CHARTER BOAT FL2846BH
....................
WARD RON CAPT
............ - ................................ ............ . .....
SUGARLOAF MARINA
........... .............. ........ .......... ......... . .. .......
WR
......
147
. .......... ............. ......
Fishing Diving Charter
..........................................
CHARTER BOAT FL3205LK
............................
VARNBERG ROBERT N
.. ........ . .. ............... ..........
21 GARDEN COVE DR
............. ........... M ...................... I... . ....... MM ..............
WR
148
............. ...... ..... M .. ........ M.4 .- ............
Fishing Diving Charter
............. 4 ......... .......... ................ - ...........
CHARTER BOAT FL3516GL
.. . ...........
STRIKE ZONE CHARTERS INC ..........
. . .......... ........... .... .....
29675 OVERSEAS HWY
.... ...... _ ............... . ............
WR
149 .1 ..
+ _ Fishing . . . .. Diving . . .. . - Charter .. M. .. , _ ..
............ ............. .. ............
CHARTER BOAT FL4000MT
MAGIC CAT CHARTERS
................ .. .................. M-M-4 .............. . . ..........
38801 OVERSEAS HWY
.... . ........ ..........
WR
..
150
. ....... ......................................
Fishing Diving Charter
. ................ ................... M ..................................
CHARTER BOAT FL4073LH
- .................. ............
FLORIDA KEYS ANGLERS LLC
9 .1 -.1 1 4 4 1 ......... . M 4 9 .............. M. .-M. 9 - - I I � + .11 ..........
104450 OVERSEAS HWY
-m- ............ 4 ...... ...... M ....................
WR
151
..........
i Fishing Diving Charter
- .................... ..........................
CHARTER BOAT FL4092LE
FORECAST ALMOST THERE CHARTERS
5110 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
152
..........
Fishing Diving Charter
. . .. . .....
CHARTER BOAT FL4387MX
...... . ......... ____
SPEAR IT CHARTER
.... ......... ..... ........... 4 .......... ........................... - .................. ...... ..... ..
5710 US..HWY - 1 .......... .............. ....
W . R
1+53
M ....................... 4 ........... 9 +44 .............................
Fishing Diving Charier
M ............................ -M ...................
CHARTER BOAT FL"5.6NR
...........
9 T & T CHARTERS INC
. ........ ..........
MO CTY
....... ..... ........... ............ -
WR
9 154
i Fishing .. .. .. . . +9 - D .. i . vi n .. ci Charter . . 4 +
4 1 CHARTER . . . BOAT FL4631JR
I . I M
NOVIK BRETT L
...... .... M-.4 .................. M 4 .............. - . ..... ............ ....
5710 US HWY I
......... ......... - M M M ..........
WR
1. - .............
155
........................................... ........... M ...........
i Fishing Diving Charter
... ............. M ............ ..... ... .......... 4 M 4 ....................
CHARTER BOAT FL5061 LY
..........................
GRAZIANO MIKE
................ 44 ... .......................... 4- .................. .......... .............
5710 US HWY 1
..........
WR
156
.............
Fishing Diving Charter
.. ......... ........... ................ 4 ........... M
: CHARTER BOAT FL5121MC
...............
LOGAN RYON S
. ........................... ................
51300VERSEAS.-HWY
WR
...........
157
.............. 4 .......... 1 -
Fishing Diving Charter
.........................................................
CHARTER BOAT FL5276HK
SCHMIDT MARK T
5710 US HWY 1
WR
1- 1 .. 58
Fishing . . . .. Diving , , .. Charter
........... 1.4 .............
CHARTER BOAT FL5524GE
. - ..................
SUNDANCE EXPEDITIONS INC
. . ......... ..... -.1 ..........
DOLPHIN MARINA
- ............ " ...... . .... I ................. . - .......... ...........
WR
- .... .........
159
........... ........ .. ........ .. I - ..............
Fishing Diving Charter
... 1 M4 - 4_ I ........... .. 9 ......................
CHARTER BOAT FL5697EY
..........
FLYING THIEF CHARTERS . ... ....
" ............... 1 4- .... ................ 1- M 4_1 ...............
28530 OVERSEAS HWY
............ ...........
W R
160
............ ...........
Fishing Diving Charier
.. . ........ .................. 4 .....
CHAR TER BOAT FL6051 MN
GARDEN COVE CHARTERS GARDEN COVE
DIVERS LLC
21 GARDEN COVE DR
...................... m- ........... ......
WR
M. 1 .1 .. I - ............
6
F...
.. i " s .. In . i . in .+ g. . .. 11 Charter .. .. .. . _ _
Divan
9
...........................
-1. CHARTER BOAT FL6136LF
9
......... . ........ . ....... .... ...........
ELUSIVE ENDEAVORS /KOLPIN INC
1 1 1 . . ........ 991 .................
1521 CORAL CT
............ 99 ..... ...... M .... ........
WR
162
, - - .......... M I .. 94-1.1 ..........
Fishing DryingCharter
. .. 1 ........... I ... . ............ ............... - -1- ..... ...... M-M 11
CHARTER BOAT FL6327MC
................
NOAHS FISHING CHARTERS
_-4. __ M ................... ........................ .............. ................. ............... ........... .
28530 OVERSEAS HWY
.......................... .. .... ....... ........ ..
WR
163
....... ...
Fishing Diving Charter
.................................................
CHARTER BOAT FL6447JX
SHALLOW MINDED ALMOST THERE
CHARTERS
5110 OVERSEAS HWY
. ............. ..........
WR
164
.......... . ...................... . .... ..
Fishing Diving 6harter
.......... .... -
CHARTER BOAT FL6668NF
.................... ..... ...........
SCHMIDT MARK T
.............. . ........... I ..........
5710 US 1
WR
165 1.
.. .. .... .. .. . . ..
Fishing I. .. . .9 Diving . .. '9 Charter .. .. .. , .. ...........
........... I .......... ...............
CHARTER .. .. BOAT FL6713MH
................ .. .. ....
WILLIAM STORY BENSON INC
... .......... ............ - ...........
172..1.6.-BONITA LN E
WR
... 166
- Fishing .. .. + Diving . . .. M -Charter .. M . ..
............
CHARTER BOAT FL6733LU
+ - ............
. MANNETTI CHARTERS
. . ........ -4-.1 ................
5130 OVERSEAS.HWY. S..T.E.+12.1+
. ................... I ........................
-W.F
167
.................
Fishing Diving Charter
............ I ......................................
CHARTER BOAT FL6790LD
CAPTBRAD-N0-W_ IC-KIIN OFF THE ROCK
CHARTERS
17000 US . ...... - .......... - HWY 1
+
WR
............
168
. ........... -.1 ............. .
Fishing Diving Charter
............. 1-1. ...... . ...... ............. .......... ....................
CHARTER BOAT FL7108AV
...................
.................... - - .............
DAYDREAMS CHARTERS
............. .................... ............. .... .. ....... . ...........
WY
24500 OVERSEAS H_
...................... ........................... +
WR
1 F; . P
..........
M., Fishing . . - . . - Diving , .. . Charter
...........................................................
CHARTER BOAT FL8172JH
RTPD 11 INC
OCEAN REEF
............. 4 . � ........... .. .. . ..... ... ... -
WR
Conservation and Coastal Management 243 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan
ate
Table 3.19 - Inventory of Water-E
11'rw
uaiegory "-RmL--#ccupation
Dese.
170
Fishing Diving Charter
I ............. ......... ......................... . .. ....... ...............
I CHARTER BOAT FL81 81 LD
..
-1.7.1 . ....
. Fishing Diving Charter
.............. ........... . .................. ................... .
I ......... . .. ........ . ................. ......................................................
. CHARTER BOAT FL8360LV
172
.. ........
..... I ......
Fishing Diving Charter
.............. ......... ..... ................. ..................
. . . ..... .... ......... . . ..... ....... . ............... .................................
. CHARTER BOAT FL8870JP
173
Fishing Diving Charter
.......... . ......... .. - ........ . ........ ......... . . ..............
... ........ - ....... ............... . . .... ................ . ................. . ......... .....
CHARTER BOAT FL9025MJ
174
Fishing Diving Charter
........... .......... .............................
. .... ...................................... . . ................. ...............
CHARTER BOAT FL9472MB
.......... ................
175
Fishing Diving Charter
...... . ... . ........ . .............
CHARTER BOAT FLATS
.............
. ............. . ... ..............
FISHING
.......
176
Fishing Diving Charter
........ . . . . . ......... . ... ...... ___ ...............................
CHARTER BOAT FLEET
FL8062JX
177 , Fishing Diving Charter
178
- ...... ...................................................
Fishing Diving Charter
_...... . ....
179
..........................
.
Fishing Diving Charter
180
-
I ................ .................................................
Fishing Diving Charter
..... .....
1.81
............... .. ........ ..... .. ... .........
Fishing Diving Charter
- ................................... I ............
182
...........
...................
Fishing Diving Charter
.............. .............................. ...
183
Fishing Diving Charter
184
.................... . ........ . .......... .... . . . ...... . ... ...........
Fishing Divinq Charter
186
1 Fishing Diving Charter
............
187 -
. .... . .............................................. .......... .............
i Fishing Diving Charter
..................... . __ .
188
I ...........
................
Fishing Diving Charter
..................... .... ...............................
189
. ........
Fishing Diving Charter
190
...... ....... ..
Fishing Diving Charter
. .............. ........... . .................................. .
191
I .. ......
...
1 Fishing Diving Charter
.... - ............... ......... .... . ......................
1.92
. ........... . ...
Fishing Diving Charter
.... ............... ........ .................
193
Fishing Diving Charter
.................. .. .......... ................
194
Fishing Diving Charter
...................
195
- .......... .......... I ........... . ................. . -
Fishing Diving Charter
.................................... ...................
196 1
Fishing Diving Charter
197
Fishing Diving Charter
198
Fishing Diving Charter
..................................................
199
...... ..... . ................ ........... -
Fishing Diving Charter
I .......... ........... - ... ........... . . .......... I . ............. . ......
200
Fishing Diving Charter
...........
201
......
................... . ................. ............................
. Fishing Diving Charter
.................. ............. .............................
202
..............
Fishing Diving Charter
...................................... .............................
203
....... ............
i Fishing Diving Charter
...... . .......................... — ......... . I ...................
204.
Fishing Diving Charter
............................
- . ............... ............... . ..
205
Fishing Diving Charter
.......
206
... .......
............ ........... . ..... ............ _ ..........
Fishing Diving Charter
........... ....... ..............
2.0-7-
...........
..Fishing Diving Charter
208
............
1 Fishing Diving Charter
............... .......... .. ..................
209
I ..............
Fishing Diving Charter
210
..... ..... ..
Fishing Diving Charter
............... .... ... ..... ...... ........... -
.
211
Fishing Diving Charter
212
..................._.....................I................
Fishing Diving Charter
213
Fishing Diving Charter
214
.1. .
...............
Fishing Diving Charter
. .. . . .. . ... . ..............................................
1 5
...... ....... .
Fishing
Diving
Charter
.............. .. ............ . ............................................
216
Fishing Diving Charter
2171.
.............. .... ........ ....... ......... . .......................
Fishing Diving Charter
218
Fishing Diving Charter
219 1
Fishing Diving Charter
220
Fishing D-i-vina, Charter'* l-
Charter
224...., Fishing Diving Charter
............ .... .......................... - ........... .......... .......... . ........
2.2-5. Fishing Diving Charter
226 Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER CAPTAIN
.HIRE O.N.L.Y.-.- ........ . ................
CHARTER D0929003
t and Water -Related Uses (Continued
RBS MARINE CONSULTING INC
FUNYET CHARTERS
CARD SOUND CHARTERS INC
SAHAGIAN CAPT JOHN D
PAA *A***' D**I*S' E DIVERS''** ** INC
....... ... .... .......... .................. ...... ...............I.... - ..........................
STRIKE ZONE CHARTERS INC
5110 OVERSEAS HWY
............. . ..... ............... ................ ..............................
28230 OVERSEAS HWY
.. ............................................. I .. . ..... ...... ........ .......
5110 OVERSEAS HWY
..... .............. .. ... ........................ ................
6000 PENINSULAR BLVD
I ..................... . ..............................................................
DOLPHIN MARINA
...... ........... - ............. ..............
17000 US HWY I
RICKS MARINE
OCEAN REEF
24834 OVERSEAS HWY
MOBILE MONROE COUNTY
.... ..... ................. ......... . I-- ........................ - ..........
38801 OVERSEAS HWY
............. . .............................................
29675 OVERSEAS HWY
a coastal Management 244 Technical Document: May 2011
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
........R
...
WR
WR
...................
WR
WR
.............
WR
WR
WR
- ...........
WR
W. R
.
W
- ...............
WR
...................
WR
WR
WA
.................
WR
IkR
�kR
W
WR
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - Inventory of Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses (Continued
227
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FISHING
. .................. ...............................
SUTTON DAVID J CAPT
.............. ............. ..................... ..... ...... ............. ................. ........................
228
........ ......... ..........
Fishing Diving Charter
. ............. ............ .. ... .............
CHARTER FISHING
I
T C CHARTERS
2 29
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FISHING
. ........................... ............ .
UNDERSEA RECOVERY INC
..... ..... ................ ___ .... ... ... ...................... ... .. ........... ........................ .. ..... .. .....
- 230
..........
Fishing Diving Charter
. . ...............................
CHARTER FISHING
VAUGHN ROBE * FIT
231
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FISHING
........... .. ............ ........... ...... .......
WILSON DAVID B
... ........ ............... ...............
232
............... .......... ........... ..
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FISHING
YETTER SCOTT
...........
233 i
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FISHING
....... I ........... -.1-11 __ .. ..............
YODER DAVID M
. ............ ..........
234
............................. -.1.1 ..... ................ ..... I ..... . ......
Fishing Diving Charter
................ ............... ...
i CHARTER FISHING&
COFFIN JOHN
DIVING
....... ......... . .. .... .
......... ..... -
.............. - ..... ..........
CHARTER FISHING
FLYING -FIGHTING LADY CHARTERS &
235
Fishing Diving Charter
(PP55 5 .908
OUTFITTERS LLC ........ ..
236
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FISHING
CONCHUBINE FISHING INC
..(E�1699NT)
237
....... ........
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FISHING
SNOOKIN AROUND
..................
238
..........
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FISHING
BACKCOUNTRY
JOHNSON MARK D CART
........ ........
239
.............. ................ ..
Fishing Diving Charter
. . .......................... ...
CHARTER FISHINGD0587470
7
CHARTER MASTER
..................
. ......... ..................
.....................
240
- ......... .. ........... .......... ............... ....
Fishing Diving Charter
.............. - .................. ...... ....
I CHARTER FISHING /
CLARK GEORGE D JR
EL7629JF
................ .............. ............. ...........
241 1
........................... -
Fishing Diving Charter
........... - ............
CHARTER FISHING BOAT
I I ............ .............. .......................
FLORIDA KEYS ANGLERS LLC
........ .. _ . .................... ..........
............ -
242
........................ ....
Fishing Diving Charter
. ...............................
:
CHARTER FISHING BOAT
LEAVE IT TO BEAVER CHARTERS
FL1180MU
........... .............. . ..... .......
243
............................ ...
Diving Charter
Fishing Di
.. .......... . . ............
CHARTER FISHING BOAT
C W MARINE SERVICES INC
. FL1978EM .......... .
............. ............. ................................ ........ ..... .....
........... ...............
244
............. ........
Fishing Diving Charter
..... I ..... ................... I ..............
CHARTER FISHING BOATDEBRUIN
ADAM
z FL5522MT ..........................
. .... . ........................ .. .. .. ........... .. ..........
245
............ ..............................
Fishing Diving Charter
.......................... .. ... .............. .. .- ..........
CHARTER FISHING BOATFL5743GE
. BURSON MYRON RICHARD
..... . .........
. ............... ... ............. ............. .._...1 .............. .. .......... -
246
Fishing Diving Charter
.................. ........... ...........
CHARTER FISHING BOAT
FIN OMINAL FISHING CHARTERS INC
FL9085DD ....
. ......... ........... 11.1--.1 ..................
...................
247
..... ....... . ................ ...
Fishing Diving Charter
. ......................... ................
i CHARTER FISHING
JOHNSON DON CAPTAIN
D01063234 ........... ... ........ ....... .. ..
..... .. .. . .............................. ................... .
...........
248
........... .. ..... ..................
Fishing Diving Charter
................................ .
CHARTER FISHING
D01210261 .
J R & R LLC
249
Fishing Diving Charter
......................... ............
CHARTER FISHING
SINGLETON JOHN M
D0986310 . ........ ...
250
.......... ..... ......
Fishing Diving Charter
. .......... - - ....................
CHARTER FISHING FL
LYIN HAWAIIAN CHARTER INC
7035NJ
........... ...... ........... ..............
..
251
.. .. ....... - ........... ..... .......... .. ........... ..........
Fishing Diving Charter
. . ............ ......
CHARTER FISHING
ALMOST THERE CHARTERS INC
FL0645RY ........ ...... .- ...........
.................. ............... ... - _ ............... ....
252
.................. ...... ........
Fishing Diving Charter
.................. .................
CHARTER FISHING
FL21 I OH K .............. .....
NEW MYSTERY
.... ......... . .. .. .. ........ ...............
..........
253
....... ...... . - .. ........ ........... ... .. .. ........ .... .........
Fishing Diving Charter
............... ...................... ..............
i CHARTER FISHINGFL5386NH
.......... .
INCOGNITO
........... .. .. .......... ... .. ... .. .. ................... ..
...........
254
...... ..... .. .......... .... .. ... ......
Fishing Diving Charter
..........
CHARTER FISHING
FL6330NB ........ ....
KOCH JAMES CART
255
.........
Fishing Diving Charter
. .. ...................................
CHARTER FISHING
FL9671 FG
BARON NEIL
. .........
.......... .- .... ......... ... ........ .... ......... ............
..........
CART DENNIS ROBINSONS FLATS &
256
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FISHING GUIDE
BACKCOUNTRY CHARTER
.......... ........................ ..
257
........... ... I— ... ....... .. ........
Fishing Diving Charter
. .... -.1 ........... .....
CHARTER FISHING/GUIDE
.........
KIDWELL ROBERT N & KIDWELL STACIE N
FL901 1 LIM
...........
..........
258
.
Fishing Diving Charter
.. . ...................... . ........................
CHARTER FL
............ I ........... ..........
SEA SKI CHARTERS
......................
259
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FL1922LS
...................... .............. I
GOTTA GO EXCURSIONS
...................
260
............ .. .............. .. ...........
Fishing Diving Charter
.
.....................
i CHARTER FL 4225HG
................... ........... . .........
MACKO E.D ........................ ......................... . . ............. ...... . .....
. . . .. .... .... ... .
261
................ .......................... ...............................
Fishing Diving charter
........ .....
CHARTER FL 5525MT
.................................
RIGHT HOOK CHARTERS
.1 ............................ I - - .............. .-.1 ........... ......
262
................. . . . -.11 .. ..........
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FL 6058 HV
...........
SMITH CLYDE E JR CART
.......... .............
..............
263
................ __ .... .............. ........... ... ................
Fishing Diving Charter
. . ............
CHARTER FL 6592HK
PARADISE DIVERS INC
..................
264
............... . - .......... - .........
Fishing Diving Charter
. ..... - ...............
CHARTER FL 7283 HK
........... ..
REEL THERAPY CHARTERS
......... ....... ............ ...... . ...... ........... I ......... .. ... ..........
265
.............
Fishing Diving charter
... . ........ ................
CHARTER FL 7771JK
11 1 ........... -.1 ................ - 1...1.... __
REEL THERAPY CHARTERS
_ . ..................... - ..1.. - � ........... . . ........ .
266
Fishing Diving Charter
I I ......... ............
CHARTER FL FL 8807 HK
.. .........................
HERRICKJOHN
.. ............ ........ .... .......... ................. ....... . . ...... ...... ..... ....
267
......................... ....... .... .. .. I ...........
Fishing Diving Charter
..............................
CHARTER FL0266HK ..............
C-HAWK
................ ............ ............. . ..
268
........... .. .... .. ............ ............. ..
Fishing DivingSPANISH
Charter
..... .......
CHARTER FL3512MD
.. I—- ...........
FLY ENTERPRISES INC
. ..... .... I .... ....... .. .. ...............
269
.................
FL3648KA
.....
FLYSC.OU.T.....S.. CHARTERS
.............
................Fishin...g...
270
...D.......v....i.n. g.....C......h. I ..a......t..e....r.......................H...
i Fishing Diving Charter
.A.... .R....T..ER
..... .
� CHARTER F1_57132MR
. .. ........... .................
JERKWATER CHARTERS LLC
... . . ............ -1.1. 1 1 . ............ . ...... ........ ........
271
...................................... .......... ... ...........
Fishing Diving Charter
. ................ ._.. .................
: CHARTER FL6190MA
LAWLOR TRAVIS
. .. ......
272
....
Fishing Diving Charter
. . .. . ......... .
CHARTER FL6329JX
DAN URBAN CHARTERS
..................... ....... . .............. - _._._ ......... . ..
273 . -
. F . i . s .. In . i . n .. a D . i . v . i .. n . Q .. Charter
SOUTH POLE CHARTERS
OCEAN REEF
WR
.........................
100 OCEAN DR
W R
_ .............. ... ................ ...............
KEY LARGO HARBOR
WR
.................... ...................... -
150 STERLING DR
1.1--l..-
WR
1 ......... . ............... ..... ..
13 SEAGATE BLVD
WR
.. ............... .......... ..........
28530 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
.. ................... .... ....... ..............
35 OCEAN REEF DR
- .............
WR
NE CRNR GERALDINE ST
WR
316 EAST SEAV1EW DR
WR
............. -
5130 US HWY 1 STE 2
WR
103900 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
99340 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
-.11 .. ............. ... .1 .. .............
99701 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
............
97000 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
..........
13 SEAGATE BLVD
............. .- ............ ..... ........
WR
527 CARIBBEAN DR
WR
149 SEASIDE AVE
..........
WR
400 OCEAN DR
................. - 1 - ...........
104450 OVERSEAS HWY
I... ... ".. I .............. 11. .1.1
104450 OVERSEAS HWY
28500 OVERSEAS HWY
35 OCEAN REEF DR HS2
... 11 - ............... .. . - ...'..".., ..1.....
MANDALAY MARINA
103800 OVERSEAS HWY
5001 5TH AVE
.1---l- ............ ...........
28500 OVERSEAS HWY
5710 US HWY 1
201 OCEAN REEF DR
EVERGLADES NAT'L PK
........... .. __ .., -.1 .. .. .. .... ... ..... . -
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
200 FLORIDA AVE WR
1149 GREENBRIAR RD I WR
29467 GERALDINE ST
........ .
WR
. 1 1 .......
DROST DR
WR
...477 . ................ -
565 BARRY AVE
WR
................. ..... ...........
21-4-8.3-8. O..V,.E.,R..S.,E.A..S.,.HWY
WR
WATSON BLVD & BOGIE
WR
.................. ............................
38801 OVERSEAS HWY
............ .. ................ .
WR
............................
28530 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
- .................. I I - .._ ................
28530 OVERSEAS HWY
- - I � - � �..
WR
.............. . ............ ................ ....... .
BAHIA HONDA STATE PK
____ ................
WR
I-. .- 1. 1..
I ......... ....................
5710 US HWY I
........
WR
....................... .... - ..
5710 US HWY 1
WR
17000 OVERSEAS HWY
........ ... .... ... ..... ..
WR
....... .....
....... ....................... I
5130 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
- .......... I—- ................... .
251 STATE RD 939 .............
WR
..........
17660 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
.................. .. ........ ...... ..... .............. .... .. .
5130 OVERSEAS HWY
- ............. ....... .. .-I.. I.. � I ..-I..
I WR
Conservation and Coastal Management 245 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - InventUy of Water -De endent and Water -Related Uses Continued
Row
Category Name
Occupation Desc.
Business Name
Business Address
WR o I
274
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER FL8118JX
HAPPY FISHERMA N CHARTERS AND
WR
, ..............._......................................................................_..............._...................................................:..._MARINE
TOWING........................................................................................................................................................
28500 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
275
Fishing Diving Charter
..
CHARTER FL8291JX
... ......... ......... .........
BONE CAY CHARTERS
613 0 OVERSEAS WY
WR
276
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER GUIDE FL0532JU
PERKI. .. .....
47 SEASIDE AVE
WR
277
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER SERVICE
_.... .
BENTLEY SHELBY CAPTAIN
2 8530 OVERSEAS HWY
278
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER SERVICE
BIG KAHUNA CHARTERS
CUDJOE GARDEN MARINA
WR
279
Fishing Diving Charter
.............................. .....
CHARTER SERVICE
... ....... ...
CARLILE TIMOTHY L
17000OVERSEASHWY
Wq
280
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER SERVICE
LITTLE PALM ISLAND ........
28500 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
281
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER SERVICE
D0627486
(�
LAST CHANCE CHARTERS INC
6810 FRONT ST 32
............
282
Fishing Diving Charter
......_ _
CHARTER SERVICE
FL3199SH
CAPT VICKI'S ENT INC
5710 US HWY 1
....
WR
283
Fishing Diving Charter
.
CHARTER SNORKLE &SAIL
QUICKSILVER DOUBLE CROWN LLC
99701 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
84
Fishing Diving Charter
............... . ......
CHARTER SNORKLE & IL SA
D098647
"""
REEF ROAMER DOUBLE CROWN LLC
... ....
99701 OVERSEAS HWY
Wq
285
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER SPORTFISHING
KEY LARGO SPORTFISHING CHARTERS
103100 OVERSEAS HWY STE
286
...... ....... ...... ........
: Fishing Diwng Charter
..................... ..................... . _....................................
CHARTER SREVICE
BRACHER HA
42
CUDJ ..................
OE GARDEN MAR NA
287
, Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTER/ BOAT_
... .._ .....
.............................. ..... ...
SUNDAY INC
... .
201 OCEAN DR
—
WR
288
..............................
Fishing Diving Charter
.. .g ........9 ......................................
CHARTERBOAT
......
CAPT RYAN H ERICKSON
..............................................__.._........._....
28530 OVERSEAS
AS HWY
WR
289
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTERS
FL KEYS KAYAKS &CANOES BY SCARLETWR
SUMMERLAND COVE MARINA
290
Fishing Drying Charter
__ ...... ....
IBIS /K SEAGULL PRODUCTION INC
._ .
MM 24.5
291
............................g...__
Fishing Diving Charter
9
............... .I ..............
CHARTERS
........ .......................
KESSLER STEVEN ""
150SEAENN
292
. ......... ....__.
Fishing Diving Charter
9.. 9
......... .. ........ .... .....
CHARTERS.................""'
KEY FLAT
60 O P RAVE
SULA
vvWR
293
............. _.... .... ...........
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTERS
LIVELY CHARTERS INC
17015 OVERSEAS HWY
29675 OVERSEAS HWY
294
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTERS &TOURS
FL4482GE
""" ""' ""'
ADVENTURE CHARTERS & TOURS INC
6810 FRONT ST
WR
295
......
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTERS BOAT-
KEY WEST RUNNER /ALMOST THERE
WR...............................
.................
FL1087LV
CHARTERS INC
5001 FIFTH AVE
WR
296
j Fishing Drying Charter
CHARTERS FL0253HK
............. ..
CRYSTAL CLEAR CHARTERS
..... _......
477 DROST DR
WR
297
298
; Fishing Diving Charter
......... ........
Fishing Diving Charter
CHARTERS FL8404JX
............................................._ .. .
CHARTERS FL9533JH
TRIPLE DIVE LLC
..... .. .
"'
299
Fishing Diving Charter
CHATER BOAT D0921525
THIRD GENERATION CHARTERS INC
FISH QUEST CHARTERS LP
285 0 OVERSEAS HWY
wR
300
Fishing Diving Charter
CRATER BOAT FL5180BF
......... ................................
TRAPP DANIEL
7007 R D
-
WR
-
301
Fishing Diving Charter
............ ....... .... ....
CHATER BOAT FL7239NK
INSTIGATOR /DREAM CATCHER
5950 INSULAR
5710 PENSULAR AVE
WR
......................
CHARTERS INC
WR
302
FishingDivin Charter
....__...._..._9..................................;.
.............................................................................
CHATER CAPTIAN
NYBLAD GABRIEL J
... .............................. ............ .......__........_..............._..._......_.....................
477 DROST DR
................ ..._........
303
Fishing Diwng Charter
COMM FISHING BOAT
_ D0665551
.............. ....._................. ....................._..................._............................._........-......_.......-........................................................................................_......._..........._................._.
WHIPS N FINS LLC
6580 FRONT
WR
... .
_.........................................
ST
WR...........
304
Fishing Diving Charter
COMMERCIAL CHARTER
_ .
CAPT BRAD NOWICKI INC OFF THE ROCK
"'
...................
......... ........
CHARTERS
WR
305
Fishing Diving Charter
COMMERCIAL CHARTER
NITKA JOHNS
-
5001 5TH AVE
306
Fishing Diving Charter
COMMERCIAL CHARTERS
STRAW HAT CHARTERS
5950 PENINS U LAR "'
WR
307
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE &TACKLE RENTALS &
SERVIC
UNDERSEAS INC
LOTS 3&4 ROGER
WR
SUB
WR
308
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE / SNORKEL TRIPS
DOLPHIN COVE RESEARCH &EDUCATION
....
""--
.......................... ........ _.............
.......
CENTER INC
OVERSEAS HWY
WR
309
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE BOAT
.......................................................... ..
FRED D DIVE BOAT
....
604 PORTIA CIRCLE
W R
310
Fishing Drying Charter
DIVE BOAT (D0600553)
CAPT SLATES ATLANTIS DIVE CENT DIVE
-
----
_...
PROFESSIONAL INC
51 GARDEN COVE V E
311
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE BOAT CHARTERS
45FT
..........................................................."' ""
ATLANTIC BAY RESORT NAUGHN LLC
160 STERLING RD
312
Fishing Diving Charter
.. .............
DIVE BOAT D01122543
...................................... .. . .
.......... .
REEF ADVENTURES INC
PENNEKAMP STATE PARK
WR
313 :
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE BOAT(OCEAN DIVER)
... ...... ....... .
OCEAN DIVERS INC
..................
522 CARIBBEAN DR "`
WR
314
Fishin Divin Charter
DIVE BOAT SANTANA
. .....
OCEAN DIVERS INC
522 CARIBBEAN DR
WR
315
F shing Doming Charter
DIVE CHARTER
AMY SLATES AMORAY DIVE CENTER
104250 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
wR
316
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE CHARTER
RAINBOW REEF DIVE CENTER /EAGLE RAY
-
-..--- ....
DIVERS LLC
99725 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
317
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE CHARTER
SILENT WORLD DIVE CENTER /SILENT
.. .. ....
.... .... ..... ..
WORLD SCUBA LLC
105952 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
318
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE CHARTER & EQUIP
.............................
LOOE KEY REEF RESORT & DIVE CENTER
.. .. .......... ............. .._.....
_.....
-
...
RENTAL
LLC
OVERSEAS HWY
7340 OVERSWR
319
320
Fishing Diving Charter
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE CHARTER BOAT
...... ..
DIVE CHARTER BOAT
PARTIAL PRESS URE DIVING COMPA
"'
-- -
527 CARIBBEAN DR
321 Fishing Diwng Charter
_.
DIVE CHARTER BOAT 1
SCUBA DO INC _ .....
QUIESCENCE DIVING SERVICES INC
522 CARIBBEAN DR 6WR
........ ....
_.._
DIVE CHARTER BOAT
103680 OVERSEAS HWY
- -
WR*
322 Fishing Diving Charter
111/EQUIP RENTALS &
REPAIRS
QUIESCENCE DIVING SERVICES INC
103680 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
Conservation and Coastal Management 246 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - Inventory of Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses [Continued
323
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE CHARTER BOAT 2 .....
QUIESCENCE DIVING SERVICES INC
...
103680 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
324
.... .. ........
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE CHARTER FL 2529 MZ
MARTINEZ MIKE CHARTERS
... .....
527 CARIBBEAN DR
WR
325
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE CHARTERS
...... ......................_..
SEA DWELLERS DIVE CENTER INC
....... ..... ......
99850 OVERSEAS HWY
..... _.
WR
326
Fishing Diving Charter
.........
DIVE CHARTERS & EQUIP
HMS MINNOW DIVE CHARTERS INC
99701 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
RENTALS &REPAIRS
327
Fishing Diving Charter
i DIVE CHARTERS 28FT.
ATLANTIC BAY RESORT NAUGHN LLC
..
160 STERLING RD
_
WR
328
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE CHARTERS
HORIZON DIVERSlHORIZON DIVE
100 OCEAN DR
WR
D01203809
ADVENTURESINC
... ...... ........._ .
........ ...............
..
329
.................... ..... ...........
Fishing Diving Charter
........ ...
DIVE CHARTERS D0953097
HORIZON DIVERS /HORIZON DIVE
ADVENTURESINC
100 OCEAN DR 1
._
WR
_
330
.. _ .. ......_..
Fishing Diwng.Charte..
DIVE DH.. FL8331 HV
.... ....
CAPTAIN SONNYS DIVE CHARTER LLC
15 CENTER LANE
WR
331
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE/FISHING CHARTER
DIVE IN INCORPORATED
80 EAST 2ND ST
WR
BOAT
332
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVE/SNORKEL CHARTER
BLUEWATER DIVERS OF KEY LARGO/C&E
99701 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
D0960593
ADVENTURES LLC _ ..
...........
333
...... ....._
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVING
HELIDIVING AIR & SEA
._... .. ..
178 BUTTONWOOD AVE
WR
334
Fishing Diving Charter
DIVING/TOURISM
CORAL REEF PARK CO INC
._........ .
36850 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
335
...
Fishing Diving Charter
..........
DIVING CHARTER
CLUBFRED DIVERS
5950 PENINSULAR AVE
.. .....
WR
.......
336
Fishing Diving Charter
.. ......
: DO 1225366 DIVING
CORAL REEF PARK CO INC
... ...
102601 OVERSEAS HWY
.....
WR
337
Fishing Diving Charter
DO 952669
FIN RAZER SPORTFISHING /KEY LARGO
99701 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
FISHING ADVENTURES LLC
...
338
Fishing Diving Charter
....
D01126123 CHARTERS
_.. .......... .
X-RAY MANIA CHARTERS
....... ., .
28530 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
339
Fishing Diving Charter
....
D01184748 _.
HIT EM HARD CHARTERS
.... ......_-
5130 US HWY 1 STE 2
WR
340
Fishing Diving Charter
..
.1313.2.1..
341
!, Fishing Diving Charter
............ ....
D0942934 FISH DIVE
GALEFORCE CHARTER GALEFORE INC
29467 GERALDINE ST
WR
ECOTOUR
DBA
_..... .........__
342
Fishing Diving Charter
. _ ........ ...
ECO TOURS
...
CO RIDA KEYS BACKCOUNTRY PADDLING
; 25163 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
_._._.......
343
. _ ...._._ . .. ..........
Fishing DivingCharter
... ........
FERRY SERVICE & BOAT
LITTLE PALM ISLAND
28500 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
RENTALS
344
Fishing Diving Charter
g
FISH &DIVING SERVICE
HAWAIIAN SPIRIT CHARTERS
HA 25 SUMMERLAND YACHT
WR
g
FL3445BH
..........
........_...
_....
345
Fishing Doming Charter
.... ..........
FISHFUL THINKING
FISHFILL THINKING ALMOST THERE
5110 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
FL64...............
346
Fishing Diving Charter
...
FISHING & DIVING FL 8936
.........
HAWAIIAN SPIRIT CHARTERS
MM25 SUMMERLAND YACHT
WR
SH
HAR
347
...
Fishing Diving Charter
....
FISHING CHARTER
ALBURY FISHING CHARTERS INC
..... ....
1313 OCEAN BAY DR
..
WR
348
Fishing Diving Charter
FISHING CHARTER
CUSTOM CHARTERS LLC
5710 US HIGHWAY 1 MURRAYS
MARINA
WR
349
.. g ...9... _ ..._._....
Fishin Divin Charter
FISHING CHARTER
....
LETS GO FISHING CHARTERS LLC
.....
6000 PENISULAR AVE
WR
350
Fishing Diving Charter
..
FISHING CHARTER
PISCIVOROUS CHARTERS
... ..... _ .. .......
5130 OVERSEAS HWY 2
.....
WR
351
...
Fishing Diving Charter
....
FISHING CHARTER
SALTY CRACKER ENTERPRISES INC
..... ..... _ ... _...
EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK
........ .
WR
..
............
352
... ....... .. ..........
Fishing Diving Charter
... ...... ..............
FISHING CHARTER
_....
SCALES 2 TALES CHARTERS
SUNSET COVE MOTEL 99360
OVERSEAS HWY
WR
353
.. ....... . ._........_
FishingDivingCharter
FISHING CHARTER
BLACKFOOT CHARTERS LLC
35 FISHING VILLAGE DR
WR
(FL2506GE)
.....
31. 54
Fishing Diving Charter
FISHING CHARTER BOAT
EXCALIBUR CHARTER
_._._ _
527 CARIBBEAN DR
..._._
WR
355
Fishing Diving Charter
FISHING CHARTER
CAPT KENT DOMINEY CHARTERS
28500 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
SERVICE
_.
356
g ..._g..
Fishin Divin Charter
....._
FISHING CHARTERS
....
SHALLOW WATER CHARTERS
477 DROST DR
WR
FISHING CHARTERS AND
ROUND UP FISHING CHARTERS /CHARTER
7 N END ROAD
WR
357
Fishing Diving Charter
GUIDE SERVICE
FT LAUDERDALE INC
358
. .........
Fishing Diving Charter
... _.
FISHING GUIDE
BRUCE MILLER PHOTOGRAPHY INC
....
50 CLUB HOUSE DR
WR
359
......
Fishing Diving Charter
- ..
FISHING GUIDE ......
CLAUDE M BULLOCK INC
..... ..... ..... ...... ......
80 E 2ND ST
.....
WR
360
Fishing Diving Charter
FISHING GUIDE
........
FECHER RAY CAPTAIN
_...._.. _.. ._.... ......_.
1791 BOGIE DR
_.. _._._.... .......
WR
361
Fishing Diving Charter
FISHING GUIDE SERVICE
DOUBLE O CHARTERS LLC
MO CTY
WR
FL5901 CV ....... ._...__...
......................... _.
362
. .....
Fishing Diving Charter
......
FISHING GUIDE-
BACKCOUNTRY .........
REEL DREAM CHARTERS
5710 US HWY 1
_.
WR
363
............. -_._g . ....._...
Fishing Diving Charter
....
FISHNG CHARTER AND
KENNEDY STERLING CAPT
51 GARDENS COVE
WR
g
TOUR
364
Fishing Diving Charter
FL 5512 LU
KEY LARGO BAREFOOT ADVENTURES LLC
._.
43 FISHING VILLAGE AVE
.....
WR
365
Fishing Diving Charter
....
FL 6779 MG CHARTER
KOKENGE TOM CAPT
.... ... .... ... .....
2645 PINE AVE
WR
....
366
.....
Fishing Diving Charter
FL 1261 RZ SNAPPER
__ .......
TURNBULL W ILLIAM
... ....
1149 GREENBRIAR RD
WR
367
....
Fishing Diving Charter
FL1402ML
KEY LARGO BAREFOOT ADVENTURES LLC
43 FISHING VILLAGE AVE ..
WR
....
368
Fishing Diving Charter
FL3022FG
K S.............. ... .... ... ....
..... .-. .
369
Fishing Diving Charter
FL3173MX
COOL SEAS FISHING
5950 PENINSULAR AVE
..._... .....
WR
370
....
Fishing Diving Charter
FL5397GM
DADDY O TOO ....
5 GEIGER KEY RD
WR
371
Fishing Diving Charter
FL5897LR . ._
KEY LARGO ADVENTURES
139 SEASIDE AVE
WR
Conservation and Coastal Management
247 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - In
372
Fishing Diving Charter
......................._............_._........
373
Fishing Diving Charter
374
_-......... ............... ...........
Fishing Diving Charter
375 .................................
............
, Fishing Diving Charter
...........................................
376
Fishing Diving Charter
377
.......
Fishing Diving Charter
.......
378
.........................................._9......_........_........._
Fishing Diving Charter
...........
379
Fishing Diving Charter
380 1
............. ............. .
Fishing Diving Charter
381
Fishing Diving Charter
.......
382
........
Fishing Diving Charter
383 I Fishing Diving Charter
.............._...... ._I ............... ............... .................... .......... .................
384 1 Fishing Diving Charter
........ .......................
385 Fishing Diving Charter
. ............ ............................................................................
386 Fishing Diving Charter
..................
387
_ ..................
Fishing Diving Charter
....................
388
...................... ..........................................................
1 Fishing Diving Charter
........ ..........
389
Fishing Diving Charter
..........................
.390
:...................... ....
! Fishing Diving Charter
391
Fishing Diving Charter
392
. ...
Fishing Diving Charter
393
Fishing Diving Chart ........
394
.................
Fishing Diving Charter
:.._................... ......... ........ ... ...........
395
................
........._...............
Fishing Diving Charter
396
.......................
Fishing Diving Charter
:......... .................. ...._............
397
......... _._
._._...._....._........_...._.
Fishing Diving Charter
..:................. _...... ....... .......... ................
398
..__..._............
Fishing Diving Charter
.....................................................................
399
Fishing Diving Charter
.........._......................__............_........................__....
400
.......................
Fishing Diving Charter
........... ..........._......_....._........
401
.................
__................._.....
1Fishing Diving Charter
:................ ............... ............._.......
402
........... ...................
Fishing Diving Charter
403
Fishing Diving Charter
.._... ........._....................
404
.......................:................
Fishing Diving Charter
_...........................................
405
...............................
...........
Fishing Diving Charter
-....... ............................................
406
Fishing Diving Charter
_........... ..................
407
................ _. ..................................................
Fishing DivinCharter
....... ........................... ............... _.
408 i
Fishing Diving Charter
409
............ ............... _............ ........
Fishin Diving._Cha rter..........a.
410
Fishing Diving Charter
411
Fishing Diving Charter
412
..... ... .....
Fishing Diving Charter
._.... .................. ,..
413
Fishing Diving Charter
................_............................
414
............ ........... ...
Fishing Diving Charter
..................................
415 _
..... .
Fishing Diving Charter
416
....
Fishing Diving Charter
of Water -
FL6541JM CHARTER BOAT
...................................... ..... ......
FL8556JX
PARASAIL BOAT
RENTALS
PARTY FISHING BOAT
PUBLIC CHARTER BOAT
...... .. .......
PUBLIC SERVICE
....
PUBLIC SERVICE
...... _.................. .......... ..
PUBLIC SERVICE
PUBLIC SE
PUBLIC SERVICE
CHARTER BOAT
PUBLIC SERVICE ...............................
CHARTER BOAT
................
PUBLIC SERVICE FISHING
suU SEHVICE MAR
VAGE
JEHVICE/SAILBOAT RII
............ .....I... _............... ...............
PUBLIC SERVICE/SPOF
FISHING
..............................................................................
SAIL CHARTER
SAILBOAT &KAYAK
RENTAL
SAILING CHARTER
SAILING CHARTER
SAILING CHARTERS
SCUBA &SNORKEL
CHARTERS
SCUBA AND DIVE BOAT
SCUBA DIVE CHARTERS
........ .. _.. ...
SCUBA DIVE CHARTERS
SCUBA DIVING CHARTFF
DIV
SEA BOOTS (D0951122)
......
SEA BOOTS II (FL6192EY
dent and Water -Related Uses (Continue
REEL THERAPY CHARTERS
28530 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
CALM WATER ADVENTURE /REEF.._..............................................................
......... .......... ................_......._.............................
....__......;....__.........
ADVENTURES INC
............... _ ....................................
102601 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
A AFFORDABLE JET SKI RENTALS LLC
.....
3 NORTH CONCH AVE
:..................
W R
FURY MANAGEMENT INC
_........................_.........._....................._.............
6631 MALONEYAVE
WR
KEYS SKIS /AAA ISLAMORADA LLC
_ .
201 OCEAN DR
WR
REFLECTIONS NATURE TOURS
""
1791 BOGIE DR
WR
SEE THE SEA RENTALS ................................................_...83
BARRY AVE.............._.........................._._............._WR..
.......,
OCEAN POINT SUITES PROVIDENT
ATLANTIC RESORTS INC
500 BURTON DR
WR
FLORIDA KEYS ADVENTURE TOURS INC
2- -CANAL ST
LAZY DOG ISLAND OUTFITTERS &-----
WR
OUTDOO. .... .... .
BIG PINE KAYAK ADVENTURES INC
..............
25000 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
1791 BOGIE DR
Conservation and Coastal Management 248
Technical Document: May 2011
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR.
WR
WR
.....:...................
WR
WR
W.R....
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
........... D.........
WD
...........................
WD
..........................
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
..............
WD
.......................
WD
........................
WD
WD
... ............
WD
............ _............
WD
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 -1
417
Fishing Diving Charter
., I I .
418
- - ......... . . - ...........
Fishing Diving Charter
............ .... .................
419
Fishing Diving Charter
420
11 -.1- ............
.. ........ ............. .............
Fishing Diving Charter
............... . ........... . ....... ... ..
421
Fishing Diving Charter
422
...........
Fishing Diving Charter
423
... .. ..........
...........
Fishing Diving Charter
....... .....
424
Fishing Diving Charter
425
........ .. - . ..... .... ...........
Fishing Diving Charter
........ ....... .. ........ .... .......... .. ... .......................
426
Fishing Diving Charter
11.11.11
427
I.., .......... I.-
Fishing Diving Charter
.. ............
428
..... ..................
Fishing Diving Charter
........... ..... . ....... ...
429
Fishing Diving Charter
430
Fishing Diving Charter
. .. ........... .
431
..............
Marinas & Storage
................
432
.. .... ....... .......... ...... ...... ......... ..
Marinas & Storage
...........
433
.................
Marinas & Storage
Marinas ....... ... . .............................
434
Marinas & Storage
435 Marinas& Storage
................. .......... - ........... - ...........
436 Marinas Storage
. .... ........ ... .......... . .. ........... .. . .....
437 Marinas & Storage
438
Marinas &
Storage
439
Marinas &
.. .. ..................
Stora,9,e.,
440
.... . ..... ............................
Marinas
Storage
............-
..
441
........ I
Marinas &Storage
............
...............
442
Marinas&
. ...
Storage
................
......... .
443
..... ........
Marinas&
Storage
444
Marinas &
Storage
445
Marinas &
. ... . -
Storage
1.." 11
446
'.... .... ........
Marinas &
Storage
447 Marinas & Storage
448
Marinas & Storage
449
... ........
Marinas & Storage
450
Marinas & Storage
451
Marinas & Storage
......... .. ..... ..... I I.- -
452
Marinas& Storage
........ ... -
.1-1- .
453
.................. I
IMarinas & Storage
454
. .
Marinas & r a g e
:. ........ . ... - I--
455
Marinas & Storage
.....
456
....... .........
Marinas& Storage
1 ...........
._
457
..........
Marinas & Storage
458
Marinas& Storage
and Water -Related Uses (Continued
CAPT SLATES ATLANTIS DIVE CENT DIVE
.P.�R.O..F..E.§..§..I.O..N..A,.L INC ........... .___ 1.11.1
CRISTAL CLEAR CHARTERS LLC
kif*Ys DIVER i KEYS DIVER SNORKEL
TOURS KEYS WATER ADVENTURES INC
.... .... ........... . .... . ................ .................. - - - .......................
CORAL REEF PARK CO INC
........ .. -1.1. ... ......... .. - ............. . ...... - ............... .. .. ...... ............. ..
ISLAND CHARTERS
. ... ............................. . 1.1- ........... ..........
CARIBBEAN WATERSPORTS DBA
C.A.91B.B..E.AN JET
SKI INC
CORAL REEF PARK CO INC
. - .............. - ............... ....... .. ..........
CORAL REEF PARK CO INC
.. ... ... .. ... ... ... ... .. I - -
SUNSET
U N. SWATERSPORTS. .. .. - .. .. .. ".. INC
. .
...........I.., ...... ... ... ...
EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK BOAT
TOURS TWO INC
- ............... .
CARIBBEAN JET SKI INC
1. --l-I.I.- ............ ........... ............ I.., ........... , - 11.11,
JDI PH MARINA HOLDING LLC
11 . ........... - ............................. ..
KEYS ADVENTURES WATERSPORTS
./P.R.1U.N. K MONKEYS L..L.P I-- .......... I - . ....................
KEY WEST WATER TOURS LLC
.............................. .......... .............. .. .. - ..........
SAND LAKE MARINAAAISG SAND LAKE LP
I .. ........ I - - ................... .. 11 - 11
ROCK HARBOR MARINA RENTALS INC
...... . .... .................................................... ....... .. ..................
TEE TOP FACTORY INC THE
HENSON STEVE R & DEBORAH A
SCHULTZ KENNETH & DEBORAH L
I .......... I ....................... ........... I ................... .. .... .. ... ...........
ANGLERS CLUB MEMBERS ASSOC INC
I .......... ................. ..................... ..................................... ........... -.1-1- .............
CHEVRON ISLAND-R & C ENTRPRISES LLC
....... .... ............ ..... - ........... .......................
HURRICANE HOLE MARINA /HISTORIC
S.E.A.P.9.9T DISTRICT I.N.C.1-1-- -1-1.11-1- ............
MARINERS CLUB KEY LARGO INC/OCEAN
KEY ASSOCIATES LTD
.......... I .......... ... ..................... - - .11- - . ..........
SEAFARER RESORT LLC
.. ...... .. .. .. .. .............. .....................................
ISLAND BAY RESORT ISLAND BAY RESORT
IN.C.., 11.1 11- 1 . .., .............. .. ........ ....
DOLPHIN MARINA ASSOCIATES LTD
DREAM BAY MARINA LLC
DUCK KEY MARINA TURN KEY MARINA
MGMNT SERVICE
............. . ............................. ..... .. ............. ............... ...........
BAY HARBOR LODGE SEE THE SEAS 0
KEY LARGO INC
BLUE FIN MARINA.-MM 67.5 K 11 OCEAN;
MARINA I
- ............ ....
GEIGER KEY MARINA PBP MARINA INC
1-11-1-1 ......... .- __ ............. - ........... ..
LODE KEY REEF RESORT & DIVE CENT
of Water-
SNORKELCHARTERS
............... ...........................................
SNORKEL EXCURSIONS
-.... ................ ........... .. .. ..
SNORKEL EXPRESS BOAT
.............. __ ... ................
SPORT FISHING &
SNORKEL TRIPS
............. ...
TOUR BOAT
... ...............
TOUR BOAT D01 176737
. ......... .. ............ . .......... .................
TOUR BOAT SPIRIT OF
TOURS
......... ........
TOURS/BOAT RENTALS &
MARINA SERV
I ....................... - .................
WATERSPORTS RENTALS
....................... - ............ - .
WATERSPORTS RENTALS
WAVE RUNNER RENTALS
I ................... - ............ . - ........... .. . - .............. . ..
WAVERUNNER TOURS &
BOAT STORAGE
.............. . .... - .............. . ... .................. . ..............
BOAT STORAGE
..... ...... - .. . .....
BOAT/RV/TRAILER
STORAGE & MARINE
R.E.P.A.I.R.-
DRYSTORAGE
... I ... ... ... .... .. . DRY STORAGE
I.., ....................
DRY STORAGE (LOT
24,25.26,27,28) BILLBOARD
SIGN
D�Y*§T
W.A.-R...E.H.Q..U.SE
DRY STRORAGE
........................... ........... ..... .. .....
MARINA
................. .. -
MARINA
MARINA
MARINA
...........
MARINA
.............................. . ......
MARINA & DIVE SERVICE
1. ...........
MARINA SERV & BOAT
RENTALS
MARINA §ff RV/BbAf
RENTALS & RV RENTAL
SITES
MARINA *§ERVAEPA11F*K
B.O..A..T..�.R�.E..N..T.A�.L.S
MARINA SERVICE
MARINA SERVICE
........... ......... -.1.1 . -
MARINA SERVICE
- ............. .. - -.1- 11 .... ..........
MARINA SERVICE
MARINA SERVICE
51 GARDEN COVE DR
WD
.......... - - ....... ... ............. - - - - ..... .....
39 FISHING VILLAGE DR
1-1.1 1 ........... .... . ............
WD
99696 OVERSEAS HWY
................ -
WD
102601 OVERSEAS HWY
24838 OVERSEAS HWY
1. -..... ....... I I I.." .......... .. ". 11
97000 OVERSEAS HWY
....... ....... ............. - I ................ ..,..
102601 OVERSEAS HWY
. ...........
102601 OVERSEAS HWY
5130 OVERSEAS HWY I
I-- .......... .......... .- ................ ..........
1 FLAMINGO LODGE HWY SR
9336
97000 OVERSEAS HWY
. - .......... I - .......... - ................ ........ .
13 SEAGATE BLVD
.............. - ............
107900 OVERSEAS HWY
.. .. ........ - - - _
5130 OVERSEAS HWY
I ............. ... .................
6001 PENINSULAR AVE AKA 8
PENINSULAR AVE
OCEANSIDE DR
........... - I ............. ...
98750 OVERSEAS HWY
WU
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WR
WD
30375 QUAIL ROOST TRAIL WR
- ............ __ ................................
22895 CUDJOE DR WR
...........................
24672 OVERSEAS HWY WR
6409 2ND TERR
WR
........... 11 - ............. .. .. ... ............ ............ .
99 CALLE LIND
1.. 1
WR
_ ............ ........ ....................
50 CLUBHOUSE RD
WD
................. ................
24838 OVERSEAS HWY
...................
WD
5130 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
............ ... .............. ........... ..
97501 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
- I ........... .............. . - - ..................
97684 OVERSEAS HWY
- ............ ....... ... ...... ....
WD
-1-1.1,
92530 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
..1., 1. - - - . ...............
28500 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
I WOODWARD WAY
WD
1149 GREENBRIAR RD
WD
97702 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
81 EAST 2ND ST
WD
_ ...............
5 GEIGER ROAD
..... ... ....
WD
27340 OVERSEAS HWY
I .......... .. _ .......... .. .1. - . ..... ... -
WD
200 FLORIDA AVE
...., .............. .... 1 -1-11-
6631 MALONEY AVE
.......... - ............ ..........
1
599 MORRIS LN
5710 US 1 MM 5 SI
_ ........ ....
299 MORRIS AVE
999 MORRIS AVE 5
Conservation and Coastal Management 249 Technical Document: May:ZU11
WD
...........__-
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - Inventary of Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses Continued
CategaryName
OccupationRow Desc.
Business Name
Business • ,
459 Marinas &Storage
MARINA SERVICE TOWING
&BOAT RENTALS
_......._. _ ... ......_
CORAL REEF PARK CO INC
102601 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
460 Marinas & Storage
MARINA SERVICE/TOWING
&BOAT RENTALS
SAFE HARBOUR MARINA
6810 FRONT ST
WD
461
Marinas & Storage
MARINA SERVICES
COW KEY MARINA MAD COW KEY LLC
5001 5TH AVE
WD
MARINA SERVICES/BOAT
-
462 Marinas &Storage
RENTALS &MARINE
MANATEE BAY MARINE INC
99 MORRIS LN
RE.
WD
463 Marinas & Storage
.............. ......
MARINA/BOAT .. .
RENTAL/DIVE EQUIP
.....
CUDJOE GARDENS MARINA /PIRATES
........
RENTAL
COVE PROPERTIES LLC
477 DROST DR
WD
464
Marinas & Storage
g
.. .....
MARINA/DIVE CHARTERS &
BOAT RENTAL
... ....
PIRATE ISLAND DIVERS INC
103800 O
OVERSEAS HWY
WD
465
Marinas & Stora e
9. ......
MARINA/DOCKS/STORAGE
.. .. __.......
KEY WEST HARBOUR YACHT CLUB
6000 PENNISULAR AVE
Wp
466
Marinas &Storage
MARINA/STORAGE & BOAT
RENTALS
.......... .
CARIBBEAN MARINA &BOAT RENTAL
1250 OVERSEAS HWY
.............
WD
467
Marinas & Storage
9
MARINA/STORAGE &
RENTAL CAMPING EQUIP
_..... ... _... ....
BIG PINE KEY FISHING LODGE INC
_.. _..
33000 OVERSEAS HWY
_............
WD
468
Marinas &Storage
MARINAS
MANATEE BAY CLUB SEAPORT
.. ... ......
.. __.
DEVELOPMENT LLC
C
WD
469
Marinas & Storage
- .....
MARINAS & STORAGE
--- - -......................100
A1A STORAGE
.............. .....................................
I
INDUSTRIAL
AL RDWD
....... 470
Marinas & Storage
..... ..... _...... .._9 _
!
MARINAS & STORAGE
.. . _....__.... ...... ...... ....
ADVANCED MARINE
"""" "" "'
471
Marinas & Storage ... .....................,..................................__..._.................._.._......................................,........
MARINASAVEORAGE
__.._..... RESORT &YACHT CLUB INC
....................................................................................................................................:..........................................................................._................................................................
107050 OVERSEAS HWY
W D
.472......
Marinas& Storage
........................................._9........................_...............
' MARINAS & STORAGE
ATLANTIC
.............
W
473
Marinas & Stora a
.-. g
MARINAS &STORAGE
.... ......... ......
BIG PINE EQUIPMENT & STORAGE
.......
j 5TH AVE
.....
474
Marinas & Stora a
9 .. .......
MARINAS & STORAGE
._......... ......_.. _ .._.......
BLACKWATER SOUND MARINA LLC
103950 OVERSEAS HWY
WD...
lNp
475
Marinas & Storage
g
MARINAS &STORAGE
-.................._.........................................................._...._......._._.........................................._......................_......._._..............._...........,...................
BLUE WATER MARINA INC
230 BANYAN LN
WD
476
Marinas &Storage
MARINAS & STORAGE
COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT KEY LARGO-
...
PORT LARGO RESORT & RAM KEY LLC
751 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
477
Marinas &Storage ......
MARINAS &STORAGE
........ ............ ......... .......
CURTIS MARINE INC
............. ""
229 BANYAN LN
WD
478
Marinas &Storage
MARINAS &STORAGE
GARDEN COVE MARINA DBA SIEVERS
_........ ....
MARINA INC
21 GARDEN COVE DR
WD
479
Marinas & Stora e
.................._9................._......................
MARINAS & STORAGE
GE
..........................................................
.....................................-............................................................................................................._........_............._.............................................................................................................
GIL'S GRILL &MARINA
9 4825 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
480I
Marinas &Storage
_MARINAS &STORAGE
HAMPTON INN KEY LARGO
00 VERSEAS HWY
WD'
481
Marinas & Storage
MARINAS & STORAGE
- ..... . ............ ....... .............................................
KARINA BAY RESORT LLC
................................._.................._.........._................_......................................._.........__:................_..._.............._..........................................._..........._................__..........................
-
107900 OVERSEAS HWY
V�p
482..._
Marinas & Storage
..............._.............................._......_9....................._._;.
MARINAS & STORAGE
KEY
...................._LARGO FISH MARINA INC
1313 OCEAN BAY DR
W D
483
Marinas & Stora e
MARINAS &STORAGE
KEY LARGO GRANDE RESORT &BEACH
9...
CLUB
.. .... ....
97000 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
484
Marinas & Storage
g
MARINAS & STORAGE
KEY LARGO HARBOR MARINA/LACROSS
_
MARINA LLC
400 OCEAN DR
WD
485
Marinas & Storage
MARINAS & STORAGE
KEYS MARINA /SUMMERLAND KEY MARINA
......
.....................................
LLC
24326 OVERSEAS HWY
WD
486
Marinas & Storage
.. . ....
MARINAS & STORAGE
............ _ ....
KOBLICK MARINE CENTER INC
.. .
47 SHORELAND
487
Marinas & Storage
_ ...__ _. _
MARINAS & STORAGE
..... _ ..._......
.... .....................
LARGO SUN VISTA ACQUISITION CO LLC
104550 OVERSEAS HWY
W�
488
4....._......:......................................................_9......_................_.........._....
89
Marinas & Stora e
Marinas & Stora e
9
MARINAS & STORAGE
_............................_........................................,........
MARINAS &STORAGE
LESICK THOMAS
.... _..............................................................................................................:........................................._.......................................................................................................
245000VERSEASHWY
WD
490
....
Marinas &Storage
MARINAS &STORAGE
MARINA DEL MAR RESORT
MARKEY MARINE SERVICE INC
98250.OVERSEAS
491
Marinas & Storage
MARINAS & STORAGE
..................... . ..... .... _
MOLASSES REEF MARINA MOLASSES
HWY
�jyp
-
REEF MARINA CORP
WD
492
Marinas & Stora e
_ g.....
MARINAS &STORAGE
MONROE PARK MARINA
00 MORRIS LN '
493 '
Marinas .. Stora e
MARINAS &STORAGE
NEW FOUND HARBOR MOTEL
1300 BIG PINE AV E
WD
494
Marinas & Stora e
g
MARINAS & STORAGE
NORTHSTAR RESORT ENTERPRISES
WD
-
..............
......
CORP
99096OVERSEAS HWY
WD
495
Marinas & Storage
MARINAS & STORAGE
OCEAN REEF CLUB OCEAN REEF CLUB
"`
496 :..Marinas
& Stora e
9
...........................INC
MARINAS & STORAGE
OLD ISLAND MARINA
5 ..EAN REEF DR
-
WD
4..
...........;
Marinas & Stora e
9 .
_............... .....
MARINAS & STORAGE
...... ............ .
OLD WOODEN BRIDGE FISHING CAMP LLC
1709i BOGIE DRD # 2
WD
498
Marinas & Storage
MARINAS &STORAGE
FARMERS RESORT /LITTLE TORCH
WD --
499
............. . ... ......
Marinas & Stora e
9
MARINAS & STORAGE
RESORT INC
PH MARINA/RESTAURANT LLC
'
WD
500
Marinas ............. ..... ..
....... ............................................. ...
....
ROCK HARBOR MARINA INC
13 SEAGATE BLVD
36 E SECOND ST
WD
501
Marinas & Storage
MARINAS & STORAGE
SAAA BOATS AND TIRES ROCK HARBOR
W�.... -
502
-
Marinas &Storage
MARINAS & STORAGE
MARINA RENTALS INC
SENOR FRIJOLES INC
SEAS HWY
WD
503
9.....
Marinas & Storage
... .. .
MARINAS & STORAGE
................ ... ..
SNAPPERS DOVE CREEK CO-
...............
103900 OVERSEAS HWY
139 SEASIDE AVE "'
WD
504
Marinas & Storage
MARINAS & STORAGE
..... ...
SPIRIT MARINE
MM 25 SUMMERLAND YACHT
WD..
505
- -
.. .
Marinas & Storage
MARINAS &STORAGE
..... ..... .....
STRIKE ZONE CHARTERS INC
29675 OVERSEAS HWY
506
Marinas & Storage
MARINAS & STORAGE
SUITES OF KEY LARGO "" ""
201 OCEAN DR
WD
507
Marinas &Storage
MARINAS &STORAGE
TARPON FLATS OF KEY LARGO
29 SHORELAND DR......
WD
WD
Conservation and Coastal Management
250
Technical
Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - In
508 I Marinas & Storage
509 Marinas & Storage
.......... . .
510 Marinas & Storage
511 Marinas & Storage
512 Marinas & Storage
.... -.. ........................
513 Marinas & Storage
.................:..............._.......................... ....... .. _..._....
514 Marinas & Storage
........ .......... .............
....._._...
515 Marinas & Storage
516 Marinas & Storage
517
Marinas & Storage
........ . ....__......,
518
Marinas & Storage
519
Marinas & Storage
........
520
......... .....................
Marinas & Storage
521
Marinas & Storage
522
Marinas & Storage
....... .............
523
Marinas & Storage
........................................._...............
524
Marinas & Storage
_ ......
525
_ ............
Marinas & Storage
526
Marinas & Storage
_......._.. .
527
.......... _._.I..._......
Marinas & Storage
..
528 .........................
. ........ . _ .................
Marinas & Storage
..............
529
Marinas & Storage
530
Marine Repair
531
Marine Repair
532
...........................
Marine Repair
533
.. ..................
1 Marine Repair
.... ...............
534
.........................
.........
Marine Repair
:...._...................... ............_......
535
Marine Repair
536
...... ...........
Marine Repair
. ........... .. ... ......_.... __..
537
Marine Repair
538
Marine Repair
539
Marine Repair
540
Marine Repair
541
Marine Repair
542
Marine Repair
543
Marine Repair
544
.......... _.........
Marine Repair
545
Marine Repair
546
Marine Repair
547
........
Marine Repair
_........._............
548
.........
Marine Repair
549
Marine Repair
550
Marine Repair
.................
......
551
... ..........
! Marine Repair
....
552
i Marine Repair
553
Marine Repair
of Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses
MARINAS & STORAGE
TREASURE ISLAND PARK __._...
6633 MALONEY AVE
......... ....... ..............
..... ....... ...... ..._.__..... ..
MARINAS & STORAGE
........... ......... .......................... .
VENTURE OUT AT CUDJOE CAY .. ..
701 SPANISH MAIN DR
....... ...................
..... .... ..... ...
MARINAS & STORAGE
_ ... .........
WHITEHURST FAMILY PARTNERSHIP _. .....
LOTS 10-14 BAYWOOD S
.............. ..._.. __......... .._
........ ...-. _.
MARINAS &
STORAGE/BOAT & FISHING
SUGARLOAF MARINA/IASLND AUTO SALES
17015 OVERSEAS HWY
& DIVE EQUIP RENTAL
INC
................ ..... ._............ .........
_............ .... ... ._...
MARINAS &
SUNSHINE KEY RV RESORT & MARIN
38801 OVERSEAS HWY
STORAGE/BOAT RENTALS
... ............. .........
.............
..._....
.........
MARINAS &
PIRATE HAT MARINA LLC
199 MORRIS LN
STORAGE/MARINE REPAIR
MARINAS &
' SEA CENTER LLC BIG PINE KEY FISHING
29740 OVERSEAS HWY
STORAGE/MARINE REPAIR
j LODGE INC __.._.
_.............. ..... _... ......._..............
MARINE REPAIR,AUTO,
CRUZ & LIMA MARINE CORP
98640 OVERSEAS HWY
BOAT & RV STORAGE
MARINE STORAGE &
EQUIP RENTALS &
CORAL REEF PARK CO
BAHIA HONDA STATE PA
REPAIRS
....
MINI STORAGE
TAVERNIER MINI STORAGE INC
135 HOOD AVE
.._ _.._. ........
....
MISC STORAGE
..._.........
ANDREWS STEWART J
.......... ..
5517 5TH AVE SI
--------
. .... ........_..
SELF STORAGE
KEY WEST WELDING & FABRI
......... ...
STORAGE
...
AAA ALL MARINE ._.. _......._.
77 INDUSTRIAL RD
........ ......
STORAGE
........ .........
KEYSBOAT INC
24931 OVERSEAS HWY
.... .......
STORAGE
...... ................... .........
NINEHOUSER APPLIANCE INC
101961 OVERSEAS HWY
..... .......
.....
STORAGE
... ... .. ..
ROCK HARBOR MARINA RENTALS INC
97900 OVERSEAS HWY
STORAGE & COMMERCIAL
gLK STORAGE &RENTALS
75 INDUSTRIAL RD
RENTALS
STORAGE &MARINE
BC ENTERPRISES INC
100480 OVERSEAS HWY
REPAIR
_... ............... _._....__.
...........
STORAGE COMMERCIAL
gLK STORAGE & RENTALS
79 INDUSTRIAL RD
RENTALS
................. .._... ........ ..........._. __.......
STORAGE MINI
K & W ENTERPRISES OF MONROE INC
105700 OVERSEAS HWY
WAREHOUSES
STORAGE RENTAL LOT
...............
TRIPLE J INVESTMENTS INC
.........._ ._ ... ....._._... ........._..
102265 OVERSEAS HWY
TRAILER STORAGE
SPINDRIFT COMPANY
LT S 18&19 B1 CUDJOE
SERVICE
......
MARINEMAX AT OCEAN REEF MARINEMAX
2 FISHING VILLAGE DR
EAST INC
...........................
/MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
.....
DOCKSIDE SERVICES
135 HOOD AVE
BOAT REPAIR
ALL FIBERGLASS REPAIRS _
172 FLORIDA AVE ....................
... ....
BOAT REPAIR
.. ... __....... ....._..
LIGHTHOUSE BOAT CENTER INC
101000 OVERSEAS HWY
_..
............ .. .. .. .... ......
BOAT REPAIR
..... ........
SHIPWRIGHT ARTISAN KEY WEST
6810 FRONT ST
....................... ......................... .. ... _.._. _. _.. ......... ... .......... ......_...
BOAT REPAIR/MARINE TIKI WATER SPORTS INC
PAINTING/ STORAGE YARD
.....
COMMERCIAL TOWING SEA TOW KEY WEST
COMPASS REPAIR & COMPASS SERVICE CENTER
ADJUSTING
DEISEL MECHANICAL TOM GALLAGHER DIESEL SERVICE LLC
REPAIR
..........
FIBERG
FIBERGLASS SHOP THE
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
WD
neither
neither
neither
W R.........
WR
neither
WR
neither
WR
neither
neither
neither
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
........_................
94381 OVERSEAS HWY WR
6840 F............
......-
229 BANYON LN WR
2 B FISHING VILLAGE
104525OVERSEAS HWY
....... _.._
FIBERGLASS
............... .. ......... ..........
ALL ABOARD FIBERGLASS REPAIRS LLC
104335 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
REPAIR/MARINE STORAGE
........_.__ .
....... _._.. ........
MARINE CANVAS REPAIR
............. _................. ........... .. .... .. ........
COCOA MOES DOCKSIDE CANVAS
30375 QUAIL ROOST TRAIL
UNIT N
WR
MARINE CARPENTRY
KEY WEST WOODWORKS
6810 FRONT ST
WR
SERVICE
..... ......... ........... _.
111 .......... _._._
MARINE REPAIR
CUDJOE GARDENS MARINA &DIVE
477 DROST DR
WR
CENTERING
......_
MARINE REPAIR
_........_. .. ......... .. .....
FLORIDA KEYS WATERCRAFT INC
102451 OVERSEAS HWY B
WR
.....
MARINE .... . REP . AIR
GARDEN COVE MARINE SERVICES
.. ...... ......
105664 OVERSEAS HWY
......... ............
WR
.......
MARINE REPAIR
GULF ATLANTIC ELECTRIC OF THE KEYS
57004TH AVE
WR
NC
MARINE REI. PAIR
J & B MARINE REPAIRS
92466OVERSEAS HWY
WR
MARINE REI.PAIR
JOE S B1.OATW0RKS
156 FLORIDA AVE
... ........
WR
MARINE REPAIR
KEY LARGO BOATING CENTER /TREASURE
98150 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
COAST BOATING CENTER INC
.. _. ._...
MARINE REPAIR
..... .._. _..... .
KEYS YAMAHA SERVICE INC
5950 PENINSULAR AVE
WR
...
MARINE REPAIR
......... . _. .....
MARINA MANAGEMENT OF THE KEYS LLC
200 FLORIDA AVE
....
WR
.. .__._...
MARINE REPAIR
_ _.. .........................
PERFORMANCE MOBILE MARINE INC
200 FLORIDA AVE
......... .. ...._
. WR
MARINE REPAIR
RIVA SOUTH MOTORSPORTS /RIVA
102250 OVERSEAS HWY
WE
YAMAHA SOUTH INC
Conservation and Coastal Management 251 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - Inventor of Water-Deglendent and Water -Related Uses Continued�
Row Category Name
Occupation Desc.
Business Name
8 1 usin . Address . . . ......
— V?z
564 Marine Repair
I ............. ............. ....................... ............ I
MARINE REPAIR
...... . ... ....... . .......... ........... . . . ................
...... ..
* THRASHER
ess
...
i Mu CTY
WRI
555 Marine Repair
....... . ..................
MARINE REPAIR & BOAT
RENTALS
FAST ACTION MARINE INC.
........... - .............. - ..............
30233 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
......................
........... ... .......... ... ..
i-
556 Marine Repair
........................... ..... ......... .... .......... .........
........... . ................ . .............. .............. I ................... ...........
MARINE REPAIR
ELECTRONICS
...... ... ........ ..
.......... .........
QUARTERDECK INC THE
.. .......................... .... ................. ........... .......... .............
5635 4TH AVE SI
WR
....................
WR
557 Marine Repair
.............. ..... .... . .. .......... ................
MARINE REPAIR ONLY
. ............... ....................... . .....
R & R DIESEL
5176 US 1 HWY
558 Marine Repair
MARINE REPAIR SERVICE
CARBONS MARINE SERVICE &
WR
.................. I ....... ..............
SUPPLY
82 HENRY MORGAN DR
WR
559 Marine Rep
Repair
............ ......... .. .... ............. .............. ...............
MARINE REPAIR SERVICE
. ... ....... ...... ............ ........................................... ..........
COLUMBIA YACHT SERVICE
........ ...... ... .............. ....... . .... ............
135 ELLIS DR
560. Marine Repair
.. ...........
MARINE REPAIR SERVICE
....... .... .......... . . ... ..... . ...... ............... ..... . ........
. ........................... - ................. . ....... ... . ............. - ..............................
I ISLAND MARINE REPAIR INC
..............
106 MARINA AVE
WR
.. ...........
561 Marine Repair
MARINE REPAIR TOWN A'N'bAE, W S-0 R-0-0ifEffR SERVICE /DE***,L,TA,*
WR
.............. ................
SALVAGE
. .......... . ....................... . ....... ................ ...........
MARINE INC
5600 3RD AVE
WR
562 Madne Repair
REPAIR
1 MARINE REPAIR TOWING & BLACKBEARD MARINE TOW & ALVA
.............. ............ . ... .. ...... .................
... .... ...... ... .... ...
. ...S.A.L.Y.A.PE ................ ............ ...... ....... -
HUTCHINGS & SONS INC DBA
145 VALOIS BLVD
WR
563 Marine Repair
i MARINE REPAIR TOWN
SALVAGE BOYZ-N-THEIR TOYZ MARINE
23000 OVERSEAS HWY
.......... . .............. ..........
564 Marine Repair
... .......................... ............................. . ... ..............
MARINE REPAIR TOWINb'*9
..........
W R
.............. .................... ....................
.......... ... ............ .. ... . . . ................. -
COFFIN JOHN
CENTRAL & GERALDINE
WR
565 Marine Repair
MARINE REPAIR TOWING
SALVAGE
...........................
ISLAND MAINTENANCE & REPAIR
...... . .................... .............. ................... .............. .......
MO CTY
....
.......... ..........................
566 Marine Repair
..... . ... ................. I ....................
MARINE REPAIR TOWING
... ......... ..........
...................................... ..................... ......................................
WR
.................
........................ ............... ............... ............. ..............
. ; SALVAGE . . ... ...................
... .... .. ... ... .... ... .. ..................
JOHNNYS MARINE REPAIR INC
104525 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
567 Marine Repair
MARINE REPAIR TOWING &
SALVAGE
. .... ................. .............. . .. ......... ...
K & K MOBILE MARINE
.............. ...... ... ......... ........... .. ............
MO CTY
.....................
.............. ...............
568 Marine Repair
......................
.......... ............ . ......................... ............
MARINE REPAIR TOWING
SALVAGE
SAFE HARBOR DIESEL REPAIR
. .......... ............
6810 FRONT ST
WR
. ... .............
............ ........... .....
569 Marine Repair
. ....... ............................................................ .................
MARINE REPAIR TOWNd9***
... . ..............
........... ............... ..... ..... - .......... .......................... .............
WR
................ ..
...-.1 ... . .......... - ...............
S.A.L.Y.A.PE ..................................... . ........
... .... .. .... ... SALVAGE ..
SPIRITTOWING
25500 US 1
WR
570 Marine Repair
.................
MARINE REPAIR/BOAT
RENTAL SERVICE
................... ... .......
SUGARLOAF KEY K 0 A
................ .............. . .............. ........... .......... ...........
MM 20 STATE ROAD 939
WR
571 1 Marine Repair
.......... ............ ............. - ....................... .............. - .............
MARINE TOWING
- ..............
.... . ......... ....... - . ................... ... ... .................... ..... . .................... ............... .....................
ADVENTURE E..N.,V.I-.R.,O.,M..E..N..T..A..L IN.C�C
..........
10 PIGEON DR
...........
572 Marine Repair
MARINE TOWING'***'&'
.. .... ... ... .... . ... .. . ... .. . ... ....
ADVANCED MARINRECOVERY& **
OWING RE
WR
.................................... ... ....... ..............
SALVAGE
....... ........ I . ................................ I .......... ........... .............
SALVAGEINC
47 SHORELINE DR
WR
573 Marine Repair
................. ... ....... . ...
MARINE TOWING &
SALVAGE
............... . ............. . ....... .... ................... I ......... . ..... ... ... ...... ............................. ................
BLUE WATER MARINE SERVICES INC
. ........... .......... . ... ............. ..............
11400 OVERSEAS HWY 115
... . ......
....... .... ............... .............
574 Marine Repair
.............
. ...... ... .... .. . . .... ................. ............ ... ......... ......
MARINE TOWING &
. ..... ......... ... ..................... ...............
CANNONBALL ENTERPRISES
............. .. ........... ........... - - .............. ..............
PILOT HOUSE MARINA
WR
. - .............. .. ....................
575 Marine Repair
....-SALVAGE
................. ............. ............ ..............
MARINE TOWING &
......................
OW BOAT US BIG PINE KEY LOWE14Rff�§
...................
WR
........ .............. .................................... - . ......... . -
-SALVAGE
.......... .. . . ....................... ........ ...
MARINE TOWING&
.. ................
28500 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
576 Marine Repair
MARINE TOWING SALVAGE
SEA TOW OF KEY LARGO /POWERS.
................ ....................... ................
.............. I ............ .... .......... ... .......................... ...........
. ..................................... ................ - ............................. ...........
MARINE SERVICE LLC
21 GARDEN COVE DR
WR
577 Marine Repair
.......... - ...................................... ........ ....... - .................. -
MARINE TOWING,
SALVAGE & DIVING
.......................... .................... ............. ............. .................
............ .... ......
DOUBLE D MARINE
...............
178 BUTTONWOOD AVENUE
:
..........................
WR
578 i Marine Repair
....... ... ... ......... .......................
MARINE WELDING
.....- ......................... . ........... . ........... ...................................... ...................
WELDON 2
............................... ............... ........... 11 ........... .... ............................
579 Marine Repair
WffbN �kkb
................... ..................... .. ................ ... ................ - .......................................
156 FLORIDA AVE
.......... ........... . ...........
WR
-
.......... ................
REPAIR
............... ...............................................
FABRICATORS INC
124 INDUSTRIAL RD
WR
580 Marine Repair
........
MOBILE MARINE ffNi3i
REPAIR
...................... ....
SLACK OFF MOBILE MARINE
................ - .................. - ............ .......... ..........
MO CTY
............
.. . . ....... .... ...........
581 Marine Repair
................................
................... . ..... - ............
OUTBOARD IN-E
D & MAR
STORAGE REPAIR
................
ROUILLARDS MARINE
............... ..........
98468 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
582 ...Manne Repair
. . . .. - . - .. . . ..........
............................... .......................... ................................
REPAIRS BOATS
............ ........... .......... .................... ................... .................
GUS TOY BOX LLC
........................... ... . ..................
WR
583
Marine R
e p air
................................... ...............
.......... ..... .. . ..................... I .................. ................
SALVAGE
B* ..........
MAGRUDER INC
100850 OVERSEAS HWY
............... . .. ................. ........... . ........................ - ....................................
W
.......... - --
I
584 Mobile Marine Service
.... . ..................... . .................................................. .................
BOAT TRAILERS& MARINE
. . ....
7007 SHRIMP RD
........... ..........
WR
.................... - ............ ............. .....
REPAIS
. . ... ,. - .............................. .....
ON THE SPOT TRAILER REPAIR INC
. ......
MO CTY
WR
585 Mobile Marine Service
..........
ENVIORN,
CONSULTING
I ....... . ..... ................ ................ . .. ............... ........................... ..................................
CBE MARINE LLC
...................... .......... - ...................
MO CTY
.......... - ...........................
586 Mobile Marine Service
- .......... .......................
.... . ............... . ..................
MARINE & CAR AUDIO
IINSTALLATION
........................ . .........
MOTION MARINE & CAR AUDIO
............. ................
MO CTY
WR
........................................................................ ..........
...........
WR
587 Mobile Marine Service
MARINE & R.V REPAIR
MARINE& R.V. JE S,
....... ..........
.......... ............ ......
588
.................Mobile Marine Service
. ... ............................... ................... I
MARINE & TRAILER REP4i'14"
INC
INC
T,,R,A**,*l L E*R-S H *0 P-TH E IN* C
MO CTY
..................
WR
589 Mobile Marine Service
MARINE CLEANING
.......................... . .......... .. . ...... . ...... ...................................... ................ ........ ......
CHRISSIES MARINE SERVICES
...................... .. ......... ................
WR
.......... - ..........
590 Mobile Marine Service
............ ..... ........
. ......................... ............. .
MARINE CONSULTANT
.............................
.................. . ................................................ ........................ ................. .......... .............
BWG BOATWORKS LLC
MO CTY
.......... -
WR
591 Mobile Marine Service
.
Py
MARINE HYDRAULIC
...... ........... ..... ....... ... ...... .. ............. ................ .................
11 ORANGE DR
............................ ..-...........
'7 'Mobile
.REPAIR.........
... ... ... ... . ...
............... . ....................
DOLPHIN HYDRAULICS
31019 AVENUE G
WR
592 Marine Se rvice
............... .......
........... .
MARINE MAINTENANCE
.......... .... ............... ...................... 11 i
............
................. - ..................... ........................... ..........
D & L MARINE MAINTENANCE
. .................... .. ........ .............. ..........
MO CTY...
TY
............. . ... ....
593 Mobile Marine Service
MARINE MAINTENANCE
MOBILE M* ARINE MAINTENANCE & YACHT
WR
*
594 M'o'b*i*1'e M-a r'ine*'S*" Service
............
. ..................... ... . ........................... . ..... ....................... ..........
MARINE MECHANIC
COMMISSIONING
J & J MARINE SERVICE INC
MO CTY
....... ....... ................. ............. .......... .......... ...........
WR
595 Mobile Marine Service
...........
MARINE REPAIR . ... ..
...................... ......... .. ............ .............. . ....... .... ...... .....
BLUE WATER MOBILE MARINE
MO CTY
.. ... .... ........ ........... .................
MO CTY
WR
. .......
596 Mobile Marine Service
... ............... ...... ... ... .... ........................
MARINE REPAIR
........................ ................... .......... ...................... ...........
'61 MOBILE SERVICE
............. :111,
M *0 CTY
WR
............ . - ....................................................................... ......................
..........
WR .. ... .. ...
Conservation and Coastal Management
252-----Technical
—DOCument.
May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - Inventory of Water-DeiRendent
and Water -Related Uses Continued
Rij,,iness Addres,
WR or
Row
597
Category Namc
Mobile Marine Service
Occupation Dv�
' MARINE REPAIR
Business Name
CONCH REPUBLIC MARINE LLC
....... . ._.._......_._..
MO CTY
.... .... ......_.
WR
598
Mobile Marine Service
.... ...
MARINE REPAIR
JAMES ROBERTS MOBILE MARINE
MO CTY
WR
SERVICES
599
Mobile Marine Service
MARINE REPAIR
KEYS MOBILE MARINE LLC
MO CTY
WR
600
..... .. ....;..
Mobile Marine Service
_ ..............
MARINE REPAIR
LEBOEUFS OUTBOARD REPAIR
MO CTY
WR
601
! Mobile Marine Service
MARINE REPAIR
PETER J ANGELOTTI BOAT REPAIR
...........
MO CTY
WR
......
602
... .. ......... ... ....
: Mobile Marine Service
_ _
MARINE REPAIR
...... ..
PETERS MOBILE MARINE
.. ......
MO CTY
WR
603
.............. .......
Mobile Marine Service
MARINE TRANSPORT
CDT
MO CTY
WR
SERVIC
604
Mobile Marine Service
MARINE WELDING &
ARC TECH WELDING & REPAIR SERV
MO CTY
WR
REPAIR _.._..._..
THOMPSON INDUSTRIES LLC
........ . ......... .....
605
...
Mobile Marine ServiceMBL
AUTO &MARINE
HARRYS BEST DETAILING
MO CTY
WR
DETAILING
........ ...
606
._....... . .... ......._..
Mobile Marine Service
MOBILE MARINE
........
JOHN FERRARO MOTORSPORTS LLC
..._ ...... ......... .....
MO CTY _..
WR
607
.
Mobile Marine Service
.....
MOBILE MARINE
QUALITY MARINE SERVICE
.................. .........
MO CTY
WR
_............
608
._.... .... ...............
: Mobile Marine Service
...
MOBILE MARINE BOAT
RAINBOW BOAT CARE INC
MO CTY
WR
DETAILING
.. ...
__..
__...__.. ..............
... ......- .
MOBILE MARINE
TURN OF THE CENTURY WOODEN BOAT
MO CTY
WR
609
Mobile Marine Service
CARPENTRY _......... _;.,
WORKS
......_. .. ........- . ..... .___.. _........
........... _ . ..._.....
......
610
........................... ....._.......
Mobile Marine Service
..... _._.... ........._
MOBILE MARINE
STEM TO STERN YACHT SERVICES INC
MO CTY
WR
DETAILING __...
_..
................ .. ........ .......
.........
MOBILE MARINE HULL
TIM MACSHANE MOBILE MARINE
MO CTY
WR
611
Mobile Marine Service
CLEANING
MAINTENANCE
........
612
..........
Mobile Marine Service
MOBILE MARINE
MAINTENANCE
MONTES MAINTENANCE
... ... .._.......
MO CTY
.... _ ........_.... _.
WR
............ ......
.......... .. ...
MOBILE MARINE
WILLIAM SCHIRRA MOBILE DIESEL &BOAT
MO CTY
WR
613
Mobile Marine Service
MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE ... .......
............ .......
614
..._........ .. ........
Mobile Marine Service
..... _.... ............
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
..
CANNON MOBILE MARINElGARY N
CANNONINC
MO CTY
WR
615
.......... _...... ....._.....
Mobile Marine Service
... ..._....
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
..........
DAVIS MARINE CORP
MO CTY .......
WR
616
.......
Mobile Marine Service
, .. _ ..... ........ .... .......
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
.....
DONALD KELLEY MARINE REPAIR
.. ... .....
MO CTY
WR
..
617
Mobile Marine Service
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
GARDEN COVE MARINE SERVICES
............
MO CTY
WR
618
...... ......... ...
Mobile Marine Service
...... ... .. ......
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
......
GLADDING MARINE SERVICE INC
... ...
MO CTY
WR
619
. .....
Mobile Marne Service
. .......................
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
GOTCHA COVERED LLC
MO CTY
WR
620
Mobile Marine Service
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
.......
I KNOW BOATS INC
..............
MO CTY
WR
621
... ........_.. .........
Mobile Marine Service
...._...... ....
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
JOE PARKERS ALL MARINE SERVICE
......... ... _
MO CTY
WR
622
Mobile Marine Service
..
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
PAUL S MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
..........
MO CTY
WR
.......
623
._.:
Mobile Marine Service
.._... .... _ .
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
REEF MARINE MAINTENANCE
MO CTY
WR
624
. ..
Mobile Marine Service
.... ..... ... .....
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
S JONES INC
MO CTY
WR
625
......
Mobile Marine Service
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
SAUDER LISA & JOHN
MO CTY
WR
626
Mobile Marine Service
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
SK MARINE SERVICE INC
.. .....
MO CTY
WR
627
Mobile Marine Service
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
..
SKINNYS MARINE MART LLC ._
MO CTY
WR
628
......... ...... ..
Mobile Marine Service
.... ..................... ...... ..............
M........
.... .. ....
629
Mobile Marine Service
. ...... ........_._.. .
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR
TRI COUNTY YACHT & MARINE SERVICE
MO CTY
WR
INC
.............. ......... ........
630
Mobile Marine Service
....... ......
MOBILE MARINE REPAIR &
_
ARNOLD'S AUTO & MARINE REPAIR INC
5540 3RD AVE
WR
SALVAGE ..
.. ..... _.........
__. _ .
...................._... ..
MOBILE MARINE
631
Mobile Marine Service
REPAIR/MARINE
V & T BOAT REPAIR & MAINTENANCE
MO CTY
WR
DETAILING
__
632
... ....
Mobile Marine Service
... ..._. ....
MOBILE MARINE REPAIRS
..
DIMICH ROD
...
CTY-1111-
MO11
WR
.......
633
......... ..._ ........
Mobile Marine Service
.... ..
MOBILE MARINE RIGGING
..
MARINERS ADVANTAGE
.... .. ......
30880 WITTERS LANE
WR
.......
634
.: ..... ..
Mobile Marine Service
_..
MOBILE MARINE SERVICE
GREAT WHITE MARINE SERVICES .....
MO CTY
WR
635
Mobile Marine Service
..--_._ . ... .. .. ......
MOBILE MARINE SERVICE
SOUTH FLORIDA YACHT SERVICE LLC
.. ....
MO CTY
WR
636
.. .. ........
Mobile Marine Service
.........
MOBILE MARINE SERVICES
....
KIPP DOUGLAS L
MO CTY
WR
..
637
_............................. ....... ....._
Mobile Marine Service
_ .. .
MOBILE MARINE SERVICES
.. .......
SERGIO KUSHCHOVY DIVER
_ ...... ..........
MO CTY
WR
638
........ _._.. ..... _. ._.._.
Mobile Marine Service
MOBILE MARINE
FLORIDA KEYS MARINE SERVICES
MO CTY
WR
SERVICESS
639
Mobile Marine Service
MOBILE OUTBOARD
PREFERRED OUTBOARD SERVICE
MO CTY
WR
MARINE SVC
_ ._
_--
640
.................
Mobile Marine Service
..
MOBILE/MARINE PAINTING
SHORT STROKE MARINE INC
MOCTY
WR
MAN ITAN
641
.......
Mobile Marine Service
..... _...
MOBILE/MARINE REPAIR
..
ACTION MARINE & DIVE INC
MO CTY
WR
642
.......... ... ......... ... ...........
Mobile Marine Service
..... .. _. ......._. .
MOBILE/MARINE REPAIRS
PROFESSIONAL YACHT MAINTENANCE
KEY LARGO PYM INC
MO CTY
.......
WR
643
Mobile Marine Service
_. .......... _... .. ......
MOBILE/MARINE REPAIRS
... . _
RICK ALVAREZ REPAIR & SERVICE
... ... _ ...... ..........
MO CTY
WR
644
..... .... ..._.
Mobile Marine Service
....
SERVICE: MOBILE MARINE
GRESH MARINE REPAIR
MO CTY
WR
REPAIR . ......
............... _......... .. ......._... _ _
_._...
_..
645
..........
Marine Retail Sales
.... ..._.
&WHOLESALE (MARINE
FLORIDA KEYS MARINE LIFE LLC
29431 BIG PINE ST
WR
LIFE)
_
Conservation and
Coastal Management
253 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.19 - lnventgU of Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses Continued
CategoryDesc.
Business Name
Business Address
646 Marine Retail Sales
. ...
BOATS TRLR &MARINE
PRODUCTS
................................
LIFETIME DOCK AND LUMBER INC
24536 OVERSEAS HWY
WA
WR
647 Marine Retail Sales
BOATS,TOOLS &MARINE
EQUIPMENT
... ..._.. ..__... .......
_... ......... ..... ..
SKEETERS MARINE REPAIR MAR CAYA INC
30641 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
648
Marine Retail Sales
MARINE & RV SUPPLY
GULF ATLANTIC ELECTRIC OF THE KEYS
.
INC
5700 4TH AVE
WR
649
Marine Retail Sales
MARINE ACCESSORIES
............ ......
BUTTONWOOD BAY CONDO ASSOC INC
96000 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
650
Marine Retail Sales
....... ....
MARINE CANVAS
....................... ......
.. ....
BAYSIDE MARINE CANVAS KEY LARGO INC
103100 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
651
Marine Retail Sales
MARINE RETAIL SALES
PROFESSIONAL YACHT MAINTENANCE
---
....... .. .. .....
KEY LARGO PYM INC
84 ROCK HARBOR DR
WR
652
653
Marine Retail Sales
- ..........
Manne Retail Sales
MARINE SALES
PETERSON VENTURES LLC
654
Marine Retail Sales
MARINE SUPPLIES
MARINE SUPPLIES
KEY WEST HARBOUR YACHT CLUB
6000 PENN SULAR AVE
WR
KEYS MARINE SERVICE & SALVAGE INC
5550 5TH AVE
WR
655
Marine Retail Sales
MARINE SUPPLIES,BAIT &
GARDEC N OVEMARINA /SIENAVERS MARI,BOAT
SALES
..__............
INC
21 GARDEN COVE DR
W R
656
Marine Retail Sales
CORAL NIMENTAL MARINE &
CO
ATLANTIC REEF AQUACULTURE LLC
17156 BONTA LANE WEST
657
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL AUTO & MARINE
PARTS
BIG PINE MARINE & AUTO REPAIR
B AVE & 2ND ST
WR
658
...... .... _ ... ...WR
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL BOAT &MARINE
STORE
MARKEY MARINE SERVICE INC
...... ....
98250 OVERSEAS HWY
659
." .................... ..........
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL BOAT
DEALER/MARINE SUPPLIES
....... . ......
MANATEE BAY MARINE INC
99 MORRIS LN
WR..
WR
660
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL BOATS &MARINE
SUPPLIES
BLACKWATER SOUND MARINA LLC
103950 OVERSEAS HWY
661
............
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL MARINE &CAR
AUDIO
.. .... ......
MOTION MARINE & CAR AUDIO
97300 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
662
Manne Retail Sales
........
RETAIL MARINE
SEA CENTER LLC BIG PINE FISHING
"'
WR
-
..
PRODUCTS
LODGE INC
29740OVERSEAS HWY
! WR
663
Marine Retail Sales
_..............
RETAIL MARINE SALES
DOLPHIN MARINA ASSOCIATES LTD
28500 OVERSEAS HWY
664
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL MARINE SUPPLIES
CHRIS CARBONS MARINE SERVICE &
""
...................................-
..... .....
SUPPLY
..
82 HENRY MORGAN DR
WR
665
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL MARINE SUPPLIES
KEY LARGO HARBOR MARINA/LACROSS.....................
................... _ _... ...
MARINA LLC
400 OCEAN DR
WR
666
Manne Retail Sales
RETAIL MARINE SUPPLIES
_......................_.........._........................_.,.
MURRAY Y MARINE INC
5710 US 1 MM 5 SI
667
Manne Retail Sales
RETAIL MARINE SUPPLIES
_..............._.........._......._...._......................................................._..._............._....__........._..........._......................_............_........_.__......................................._............
WEST MARINE PRODUCTS INC
103400 OVERSEAS HWY 124
WR
WR
668
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL MARRE"SUPPLIES
& PREPACKAGED SNACKS
'
COW KEY MARINA MAD COW KEY LLC
5001 5TH AVE
........ ....
669
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL MARINE SUPPLIES
TRL BTS
ALLABOARD FIBERGLASS REPAIRS LLC
104335 OVERSEAS HWY
670
.. .....
Marne Retail Sales
......
RETAIL SALES MARINE
PARTS
_
,BOAT DOCTOR'S QUARTERS
V�q
..
..... .. ............
22815 CUDJOE DR
WR
671
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL SALES MARINE
..............
DUCK KEY MARINA TURNKEY MARINA
"
SUPP
MGMNT SERV INC
1149 GREENBRIAR RD
WR
672
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL SALES MARINE
SUPP
KEY LARGO ANGLERS
50CLUBHOUSE RD
673
...-
Marine Retail Sales
RETAIL SALES MARINE
KINGS KAMP BLACKWATER SOUND
WR
--
.. .._..
SUPP
HOLDINGS LLLP
103650 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
674
...
Marine Retail Sales
_.
RETAIL SALES MARINE
SUPP
"'
LARGO SUN VISTA ACQUISITION CO LLC
104550 OVERSEAS HWY
675
.... .. _ .. .
Marine Retail Sales
.............................
RETAIL SALES MARINE
SUGARLOAF MARINA/ISLAND AUTO SALES
WR
....
..........
SUPPLY .._.
INC
17015 OVERSEAS HWY
WR
676
........
Manne Retail Sales
RETAIL SALES -AUTO &
MARINE
SOUTHERN MOST HOT RODS
30582 5TH AVE
677
...
Marine Retail Sales
....._...
......
RETAIUMARINE
SUPPLIES/BOATS
....................
BLUE WATER MARINA INC
230 BANYAN LN
WR
678
.. -......... ....
Marine Retail Sales
.......
....... ........ .
RETAILANHOLESALE
MARINE PARTS
... ... .......... . .
AAA ALL MARINE
77 INDUSTRIAL RD
WR
679
Marine Wholesale
...................................... ..... ....
MARINE EQUIPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL MOORINGS
WR
Sales
SUPPLIES
_
INTERNATIONAL INC
172 LORELANE PL........
WR..........
680
Marine Wholesale
Sales
MARINE PARTS
... "' .. - .. _ ...
KEYS HYDRAULICS
-
681
Marine Wholesale
WHOLESALE/RETAIL
......... .
601 PORTIA CRWR
Sales
MARINE SUPPLIES
CURTIS MARINE INC
229 BANYON LN
WR
682
Mannas &Storage
MARINAS &STORAGE
NEWFOUND HARBOR MOTEL (SEACAMP)
1300 BIG PINE AVE
............_..........._......:.._.........._.........._.._
....................
WD
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 254 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe Countv Comprehensive Plan Update
Some of the decline in the number of commercial fishing vessels can be attributed to less
dock space, higher dockage fees, and the rising cost of living in the Keys (see Chapter 2.0
Future Land Use Element). During the period 1980-1990, the number of commercial fishing
boats declined 6 percent while the number of pleasure boats increased 67 percent. This
increased demand for recreational marinas has squeezed the supply of commercial fishing
marinas and increased the pressure to redevelop commercial fishing marinas for
recreational marina use.
Conflicts also occur where adjacent shoreline uses are incompatible. The potential for
conflict is greatest among water -dependent or water -related uses which may be perceived
as nuisance -producing (commercial fishing and support facilities, boat storage, marine
repair, marine industrial, fish houses) and uses that are reliant on the scenic quality and
amenity provided by a shoreline location (recreational, residential, tourist -related
services). The noise, smells, and visual character of some water-dependent/water-related
uses may be undesirable to adjacent tourist, residents, and recreation users. Often, existing
water-dependent/water-related uses do not become troublesome until newer residential
and commercial uses locate on adjacent sites. The harborside area in Marathon is one of
many existing locations where conflicts result from residential uses sited adjacent to
commercial fishing uses.
Increased shoreline development, which may contribute to the destruction of marine
habitats and a decrease in fish populations, conflicts with commercial fishing activities
which are dependent on marine resources and conservation uses which attempt to protect
and preserve marine resources. Some active recreational activities (motor boating, water-
skiing, and jet -skiing) can potentially damage marine resources valued by other
recreational activities (scuba/snorkeling, recreational fishing) as well as commercial
fishing. Water -dependent recreation uses present a different conflict. Friction between
active and passive recreational uses can occur where shared recreational facilities do not
allow adequate separation.
3.20.2.2 Working Waterfronts
A "recreational and commercial working waterfront" is defined in the Florida Waterway
and Waterfront Improvement Act, Florida Statute Sec. 342.07, as "a parcel or parcels of real
property that provide access for water -dependent commercial activities, including hotels and
motels as defined in s. 509.242(1), or provide access for the public to the navigable waters of
the state. Recreational and commercial working waterfronts require direct access to or a
location on, over, or adjacent to a navigable body of water. The term includes water -
dependent facilities that are open to the public and offer public access by vessels to the waters
of the State or that are support facilities for recreational, commercial, research, or
governmental vessels. These facilities include public lodging establishments, docks, wharfs,
lifts, wet and dry marinas, boat ramps, boat hauling and repair facilities, commercial fishing
facilities, boat construction facilities, and other support structures over the water." Prior to
2006, hotels and motels were not included in the definition.
Conservation and Coastal Management 255 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Working waterfronts are important because they contribute to the economy, heritage, and
overall quality of life and provide the coastal community character that visitors come to the
Keys to experience (http://www.cues.fau.edu/toolbox/subchapter.asp?SubchapterID
=120&ChapterID=4). In Islamorada, for example, working waterfronts have given the area
the nickname of "the sportfishing capital of the world" and the working waterfronts attract
tourists worldwide to compete in fishing tournaments.
As the coastal population increases, there is more competition for waterfront access and
consequently, property values rise. There is increasing pressure to redevelop, often to uses
that are not water -dependent. Many traditional working waterfront uses are squeezed out
by more intense private residential and commercial developments. For example, this has
been evident on Stock Island - home to an important community of workers and
businesses that serve the local economy. Stock Island has been facing increased pressure
to redevelop many of its waterfront industries into upscale residential communities. Of
significance is the fact that this island contains the only industrial, deepwater port
remaining in the lower Keys.
Recognizing the importance of addressing the loss of recreational and commercial working
waterfronts, the Florida Legislature passed the Florida Waterway and Waterfront
Improvement Act of 2005 to encourage preservation of working waterfronts. One
requirement of the Florida Waterway and Waterfront Improvement Act of 2005 applicable
to the County, a waterfront community, is for the County's Comprehensive Plan (see
Chapter 2.0 Future Land Use Element, and Chapter 13.0 Recreation and Open Space Element)
to set forth regulatory incentives and criteria that encourage the preservation of
commercial and recreational working waterfronts, including public access. Also, coastal
local governments must include strategies that will be used to preserve the recreational
and commercial working waterfronts (Chapter 163.3178(2)(g), F.S.) in the shoreline use
component of the coastal management element.
The DCA's Waterfronts ://www.dca.state.fl.us/
fdcp/ p/ Floridaa Program (http://www.dca-state.fl.us/ waterfronts) provides assistance to local governments in revitalizing their
working waterfronts through resources for planning and the provision of intense technical
assistance and training. DCA's publication Guiding the Way to Waterfront Revitalization:
Best Management Practices (DCA, 2007b) is a guide that provides an overview of what is
happening at waterfronts around the United States, presents a series of best practices,
highlights lessons learned, illustrates the key components of the Waterfronts Florida
Program through case studies, and provides information on additional working
waterfronts resources such as funding sources, planning tools, and project management.
The DCA's Waterfronts Florida Program offers help to all coastal local governments in
Florida to revitalize their working waterfronts by providing resources for planning. In
addition, the Program designates selected communities to receive technical and limited
financial assistance through the Waterfronts Florida Partnership Program. New
communities are designated as Waterfronts Florida Partnership Communities through a
competitive application process held every two years. Since 1997, a total of 23
communities have received designation as Waterfronts Florida Partnership Communities.
Once it receives the designation, a community receives intensive technical assistance and
Conservation and Coastal Management 256
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
limited financial assistance from the DCA, resulting in a new or refined community -
designed vision plan (special area management plan) to guide the revitalization of the
community's designated waterfront area. There are no designated Waterfronts Florida
Partnership Communities in the County.
The County retained the SFRPC and the Center for Urban and Environmental Solutions of
Florida Atlantic University (CUES) to develop the Monroe County Marine Management
Strategic Plan (SFRPC, 2005). Completed in December 2005, the Monroe County Marine
Management Strategic Plan provides a comprehensive strategy for protecting and
preserving the working waterfronts of the County. It presents a coordinated
implementation strategy specifying government policies, programs, regulations, and
legislative measures to establish the structure to achieve the objective of preserving the
working waterfront. It included a Marine Facilities Database with maps of an inventory of
marine facilities.
Subsequently, the County retained SFRPC and CUES to develop the Working Waterfronts
Preservation Master Plan. Dated April 30, 2007, the Working Waterfronts Preservation
Master Plan incorporated several products including (1) the Working Waterfronts Master
Plan which included proposed CDMP and LDR amendments, (2) an updated Marine
Facilities Database and GIS Map which added over 100 facilities to a previous inventory
developed in the 1990s, and (3) the Monroe County Marina Siting Plan which was required
by State statute. The Marina Siting Plan helps to inform marina development through
criteria -based site suitability analysis and maps of suitability zones.
The amount of loss of working waterfronts in the Keys has not been quantified. In the
Monroe County Working Waterfronts Preservation Master Plan (SFRPC, 2007), current and
historic County property appraiser's data were analyzed to pinpoint changes in property
codes indicative of working waterfront conversion. These data did point to broad land use
changes. For example, property codes would show that a certain property converted from
commercial to vacant. However, property codes did not provide sufficiently detailed
information to extract changes related to working waterfronts from the database and
identify the precise characteristics of these changes. In addition, the County building
permit data were obtained and analyzed in the hopes of generating a more complete
picture of working waterfront conversion. This dataset reflected all permitted new and
modified structures in the Keys; however, it only classified new structural changes into
general categories —residential, commercial, and industrial —impeding the ability to isolate
working waterfront properties and classify new property uses unfolding there. Finally,
State data were obtained from the Department of Business and Professional Regulation and
Department of Revenue. These datasets only denoted conversion of a subset of the County
parcels affected by conversions and did not specify the new uses to which parcels were
converted. In conclusion, existing data sources could not provide a sufficiently specific
understanding of working waterfront conversion because of their limited structure and
content. Regardless of the limitations of the existing datasets, one need only travel through
the Keys to see the significant change and redevelopment of waterfront properties and
marine -related uses (SFRPC, 2007).
Conservation and Coastal Management 257 Technical Document: May LU11
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
The economic importance of working waterfronts was estimated in the Monroe County
Working Waterfronts Preservation Master Plan (SFRPC, 2007). A demographic and
economic analysis showed the following under the two scenarios tested: (1) the loss of the
entire commercial fishing industry and associated fish houses without any replacement
economic activities was estimated to lead to a reduction of approximately three percent in
economic output for the Florida Keys over a 25-year horizon; and (2) the conversion of half
of the marinas and boatyards into residential units, with the corresponding increase of the
resident population, could lead to almost two percent in additional economic output for the
County. These impacts, while modest when viewed from a strictly economic perspective,
do not consider the historical and cultural value of the "working waterfront" in the County
(SFRPC, 2007).
3.20.2.1.1 Marine Facilities Invento
The Working Waterfronts Preservation Master Plan (SFRPC, 2007) included an updated
Marine Facilities Database and GIS Map. The Marine Facilities Database is an inventory of
marine facilities in the County. It updated a previous database developed in the 1990s. The
inventory was prepared using the original County database, the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Research Institute (FWRI) Marinas Database, the FDEP Marinas Database, public websites,
aerial photographs, and field investigations. The survey information was tabulated and
also presented on the GIS Map. A series of maps illustrated facilities in the Upper Keys,
Middle Keys, Lower Keys, and on Stock Island. Each facility was categorized as follows:
Characteristic Description of FacilityCharacteristic
Marina (Monroe
Marina means a facility for the storage (wet and dry), launching and mooring
rFacili
County)
of boats together with accessory retail and service uses, including
restaurants and live-aboards, charter boat and sport diving uses, except
where prohibited, but not including docks accessory to a land -based
dwelling unit limited to the use of owners or occupants of those dwelling
units
Commercial
Fishing
Any water -dependent facility (marina, boat yard, etc.) that provides support
services to commercial fishing activities
Seafood Processing
Seafood Sales
Any water -dependent fac ility that receives fresh seafood for processing
Any water -dependent facility that receives fresh seafood from commercial
fishermen for resale
Trap Yard
Space for storage of lobster traps and access to load / unload them on
vessels
Charter Fishing
Any water -dependent facility (marina, boat yard, etc.) that provides support
services to recreational fishing activities (charters) and/or sales/rentals of
e ui ment and su lies for recreational fishing
Sport Diving
Any water -dependent facility (marina, boat yard, etc.) that provides support
services to recreational diving activities and/or sales/rentals of equipment
and supplies for diving
Boat
Manufacturing of marine vessels
Manufacturing
Boat Sales
Retail sales of marine vessels
Boat Repair
Any water -dependent facility that provides maintenance and/or repair
Conservation and Coastal Management 258
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Facility
Characteristic Description of Facility Characteristic
services for marine vessels
Fuel Sales
Any water -dependent facility that provides retail marine fuel sales
Pump -out.
Pump -out capability associated with a qualified marine facility
Restaurant
Restaurant associated with a qualified marine facility
Residential
Residential housing (including single family, multi -family and
condominiums) associated with a qualified marine facility - excludes
workforce housing for the facility
Hotel / Motel
Hotel / motel associated with a qualified marine facility, including cabins
and/or rentals aces in campgrounds and transient RV parks
Live-aboards
lips, docks or mooring sites where live -aboard vessels are allowed to moor
Docks / Broadside
Docks or broadside space available for rental (including transient) or
purchase, or owned by associated residential for the benefit of owners
Wet Slips
Wet slips available for rental or purchase, or owned by associated
residential
Moorings
Mooring sites available for rental or purchase, or owned by associated
residential
Rams
One or more points of access to the water for launching trailered vessels
Parking
Parking for vehicles and/or trailers associated with a qualified marine
facility
Lifts / Hoists
Equipment that can lift marine vessels to move them between the water and
dry storage or maintenance and repair facilities
Dry Storage
Dry stack inside or outside and outside storage for marine vessels
Source: SFRPC, 2007
The marine facility database contained information on a total of 545 facilities, of which 260
are in unincorporated Monroe County. There are a total of 176 marinas in unincorporated
Monroe County, including 13 commercial fishing marinas and 4 boatyards:
Marine Facility Type
Unincorporated
Incorporated
Total
Marinas
176
240
416
Primary Use
61
97
158
Commercial Fishing
13
18
31
Boatyard
4
7
11
Other
44
72
116
Accessory Use
87
92
179
Residential Use
28
51
79
Other
84
45
129
Total Facilities
260
285
545
Number of Wet Slips
2,730
2,380
5,110
Source: SFRPC, 2007
The majority of the facilities in the inventory (386) include docks or some type of
broadside space, and 251 have wet slips that attach to the docks. There are 63 facilities in
the inventory that offer charter boat fishing and 8 that offer sport diving services; 59 offer
fuel sales and 46 offer pump -out; 197 have ramps, 27 have lifts or hoists, and 48 offer dry
storage. Many of the facilities are associated with residential uses such as a condominium
(171) or a hotel/motel (126), and 55 offer berthing or services for live -aboard vessels.
Conservation and Coastal Management 259 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.20.2.1.2 Marina Siting Plan
The Working Waterfronts Preservation Master Plan (SFRPC, 2007) included the Monroe
County Marina Siting Plan (CUES, 2007). The Marina Siting Plan was prepared in April
2007 by CUES at Florida Atlantic University. The Marina Siting Plan identified specific
criteria for new or expanding marina facilities with three or more slips. The Plan identified
areas with adequate water depth and good flushing (requiring no new dredging) and do
not have substantial concerns with impacts to manatees, crocodiles, turtles, seagrasses, and
other marine resources. Based on the criteria, site suitability was identified. The Marina
Siting Plan provides three categories of site suitability zones defining Preferred,
Conditional, and Exclusionary locations for new or expanded marinas with three or more
slips. Site suitability was mapped, to the extent data currently exist; using Geographic
Information System (GIS) techniques and maps are included in Appendix E of the Marina
Siting Plan (CUES, 2007).
"Exclusionary" shoreline segments include those areas with a water depth of less than four
feet below mean low water (within 100 feet of a parcel boundary, per maximum dock
length), and/or include existing conservation lands managed at a protection status of 1 as
defined by FNAI. This category includes parcels already acquired under the Florida
Forever program and designated at a protection status of 1. It should also be noted that
lands adjacent and in proximity to boat restricted areas, such as those in the FKNMS
(including, but not limited to, Wildlife Management Areas with access restrictions
designated "no -access buffer zones," "no -motor zones," and "closed"), as well as those
described in Monroe County Code Section* 5.5-108 c d
() and () ("combustion engine
exclusion" and "motorboats prohibited" zones), can be considered "Exclusionary' for the
purposes of the Plan.
"Preferred" shoreline segments include those areas with a minimum water depth of four
feet (within 100 feet of a parcel boundary, per maximum dock length) and a minimal risk of
natural resource impacts. Preferred areas are considered appropriate for all types of new
or expanding marinas.
"Conditional" shoreline segments include those areas where there is a moderate risk of
natural resource impacts. Criteria include a minimum water depth of four feet (within 100
feet of parcel boundary, per maximum dock length). In addition, any or all of the following
conditions may be present:
• The land is managed at a protection status of 2 or 3 as defined by the FNAI.
• The parcel boundary includes an area of continuous seagrass.
• The parcel is in an area of known American crocodile range.
• The water quality of an adjacent canal is listed as poor.
• The parcel is in an area of high watercraft manatee mortality (within the County).
• The parcel boundary includes a beach known to be used for sea turtle nesting.
Conservation and Coastal Management 260
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• The parcel is listed by the Florida Forever Board of Trustees as lands proposed and
approved by the State's Acquisition and Restoration Council for acquisition because of
outstanding natural resources.
The Marina Siting Plan (CUES, 2007) includes recommendations for the County to take to
protect, preserve, and enhance public water access and boating -related uses.
3.20.2.3 Live-Aboards
A live -aboard vessel is defined in the Monroe County Code as:
• any vessel used solely as a residence;
• any vessel represented as a place of business, a professional or other commercial
enterprise, or a legal residence, except for commercial fishing vessels; or
• any vessel with a person or persons living aboard that is anchored, moored, or docked
in the same location for seventy-two consecutive hours.
The definition in Chapter 327.02, F.S. is different, specifically excluding commercial fishing
boats:
• any vessel used solely as a residence; or
• any vessel represented as a place of business, a professional or other commercial
enterprise, or a legal residence, and
• A commercial fishing boat is expressly excluded from the term live -aboard vessel.
Because the State's definition is narrower, it excludes many vessels that the County
normally considers to be live -aboard vessels. The discussion of live -aboard vessels in the
following sections is based on the County's broader definition.
3 20 2 31 Service Demands of Live-Aboards
Although live-aboards technically reside on water, they rely on a number of dockside
services (dockage, toilets, showers, laundry, telephone, mail, ice, refrigeration, parking,
dinghy dockage, and pump -out), commercial services (stores, restaurants), and community
services (medical, dental, fire, police, and education). According to a 1988 survey of live-
aboards (Antonini et al., 1990), services most often sought include:
• improved dockside facilities;
• showers and restrooms;
• sewerage pump -out facilities;
• recreation; and
• public dinghy dockage (Antonini et al., 1990)
Conservation and Coastal Management 261 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.20.2.3.2 Conflicts between Live-Aboards and Land Residents
There were six locations where single family homes are located in proximity to
concentrations of live -aboard vessels: Pine Channel, Boot Key, Key Colony, Coco Plum, Key
Largo Beach, and Port Largo Canal.
Live-aboards are commonly perceived by shore residents as transients who degrade the
coastal environment and contribute little to the coastal community. Live-aboards complain
of the noise generated by recreational boaters and restricted access to the shore. Major
areas of conflict include:
• access from the live -aboard boats to the shoreline;
• disposal of kitchen and sanitary wastes;
• abandonment of vessels;
• location, crowding, and appearance of live -aboard vessels;
• live -aboard settlement rights and preemptive uses of water space;
• surveillance of live -aboard activities by local authorities;
• general impact of live -aboard vessels on the scenic and ecological qualities of the
waterfront; and
• appropriate fees for live -aboard services.
Both shore residents and live-aboards ranked sewerage as the number one waterfront
problem. Water quality issues associated with live -aboard vessels is discussed in Section
3.5.3.2.5.(Live-Aboard Vessels).
Escalating conflicts in Boot Key Harbor area, where there is a high concentration of live -
aboard vessels, once led to harbor blockades by live-aboards and boarding of live -aboard
vessels by law enforcement agencies (Antonini et al., 1990). Subsequently, the Boot Key
Harbor Mooring Field was established. It contains 226 permanently -attached engineered
mooring. systems. It has been successful in accommodating the needs of live-aboards,
increasing overall harbor capacity, and reducing many of the user conflicts.
3.20.3 Need for Water -Dependent and Water -Related Uses [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(a),
F.A.C.]
The inventory of water -dependent and water -related facilities is listed in Table 3.19 and
provides information on the number and type of water -dependent and water -related
facilities. A capacity analysis for sandy beach, boat ramps, and non -boat fishing facilities
(see Chapter 13.0 Recreation and Open Space Element) determined a surplus of these
facilities based on the current functional population. Despite the fact that water -dependent
and water -related uses are a part of the history and culture that makes the Keys unique,
there are no population -based standards to determine the capacity and need for other
types of water -dependent or water -related facilities.
Conservation and Coastal Management 262
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
The County has identified a need for the establishment and management of mooring fields.
A mooring field is a controlled area where boaters tie up to a floating buoy that is attached
to the bottom by a heavy anchor or by an augered system. Each buoy is assigned to a
boater by a harbormaster and a fee is charged (daily or monthly). Managed mooring fields
have been acknowledged by the County and FDEP as a way to:
• eliminate abandoned and derelict vessels;
• provide anchorage and services for transient vessels;
• reduce damage to benthic habitats; and
• eliminate sewage discharges.
The County's Marine Resources Office (formerly Department of Marine Resources)
conducted a survey of 15 anchorage sites within the County (Monroe County Department
of Marine Resources, 2002). Five sites within unincorporated Monroe County were
identified as moderate to high priority sites that needed anchorage management:
• Buttonwood Sound;
• Community Harbor;
• Rock Harbor;
• South Pine Channel; and
• Boca Chica Harbor.
A common problem identified in all five areas was the high number of abandoned and
derelict vessels. Other identified problems were the lack of pump -out facilities or pump -
out boats, inadequate landing areas, and the need to provide adequate restrooms, showers,
shops, marina facilities, and vehicle parking.
The County is participating in the FFWCC's anchorage ordinance pilot program. Section
327.4105 F.S. established the pilot program in 2009 to develop and test policies and
regulatory options that promote the establishment and use of public mooring fields,
protect the marine environment, and allow for local regulation of non -live -aboard vessels.
Currently, local governments have no authority to regulate the anchoring activity of non -
live -aboard vessels. The pilot program will provide the authority for the County to develop
such anchoring regulations. Any anchoring ordinances created by the County will be
reviewed for approval and permitting by FFWCC. Enforcement of anchoring regulations
developed under the pilot program may be provided by any local or State law enforcement
agency under Sections 327 and 328, F.S. The FFWCC will submit a report of the pilot
program findings by 2014, and all ordinances enacted through the pilot program will
expire concurrently with the expiration of the pilot program on July 1, 2014 unless re-
enacted by the Florida Legislature.
Conservation and Coastal Management 263 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
3.20.4 Areas in Need of Redevelopment in the Coastal Area [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(a),
F.A.C.]
The entire County is located within a coastal area. Therefore, the areas in need of
redevelopment in the coastal area are identical to those identified in Chapter 2.0 Future
Land Use Element.
3.21 Analysis of the Economic Conditions and Trend of the Coastal Area
[Rule 9 J-5.012(2)(a), F.A.C.]
The entire County is located within the coastal area. Therefore, the economic conditions
and trends of the coastal area are identical to those identified in Chapter 2.0 Future Land
Use Element.
3.22 Effects of Future Land Uses on the Coastal Environment [Rule 9J-
5.012(2)(b), F.A.C.]
The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) seeks to preserve, protect, develop and, where
possible, to restore and enhance the resources of the nation's coastal zone. It encourages
coastal states to develop and implement comprehensive management programs that will
balance the need for coastal resource protection with the need for economic growth and
development in the coastal zone. If a management program developed by a coastal state is
approved by the U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), the state is authorized to review certain federal activities affecting
the land or water uses or natural resources of its coastal zone for consistency with its
program. This authority is referred to as "federal consistency" and allows states to review
the following:
• activities conducted by or on behalf of a federal government agency,
• activities requiring federal licenses or permits,
• permits issued under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act for offshore minerals
exploration or development, and
• federally funded activities (federal assistance to state and local governments)
The Florida Coastal Management Program (FCMP) was approved by NOAA in 1981 and is
codified in Chapter 380, Part II, F.S. The FCMP consists of a network of 24 Florida statutes
(i.e., enforceable policies) administered by nine State agencies and five water management
districts.
Federal consistency reviews are integrated into other review processes (e.g., Florida State
Clearinghouse, environmental resource permits, and joint coastal permits) conducted by
the State depending on the type of federal action being proposed. Regardless of the process
used, the review of federal activities is coordinated with the applicable FCMP member
agencies, which includes the Department of Community Affairs. Agencies authorized to
review and comment on the consistency of federal activities subject to State review under
Conservation and Coastal Management 264 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
the FCMP are those agencies charged with the implementation of' the statutes and rules
included in the federally approved program.
Each agency is given an opportunity to provide comments on the merits of the proposed
action, address concerns, make recommendations, and state whether the project is
consistent with its statutory authorities in the FCMP. The Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, as the designated lead coastal agency for the State,
communicates the agencies' comments and the State's final consistency decision to federal
agencies and applicants through the approval or denial of a permit.
This framework allows the State to make integrated, balanced decisions that ensure the
wise use and protection of the State's water, property, cultural, historic, and biological
resources; protect public health; minimize the State's vulnerability to coastal hazards;
ensure orderly, managed growth; protect the state's transportation system; and sustain a
vital economy.
3.22.1 Effects of Future Land Uses on Natural Habitats [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(b),
F.A.C.]
3.22.1.1 Effects on Vegetative Cover [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(b), F.A.C.]
3,22.1.1.1 Natural Habitats and Future Land Use
A geospatial GIS analysis was conducted to examine the potential effects of proposed future
land uses on vegetation cover. The analysis overlayed the existing vegetation cover map
(habitat map) with the Future Land Use map.
A comparison of the existing vegetation cover map with the Future Land Use map is a
useful indication of the potential effect of future land use on habitat. It must be noted,
however, that these two maps do not align precisely due to differences in how the County
has created the GIS layers for these maps (e.g., where the shoreline is depicted along
mangrove fringes is locally different in the two databases). The methods by which the
maps were created, and the inherent differences between them, are outlined in Chapter 2.0
(see Chapter 2.0 Future Land Use Element). As a result of these differences, there are
apparent discrepancies in the acreages of natural habitats in this section compared to other
sections in this Conservation and Coastal Element.
Table 3.20 identifies the amount of existing natural habitats on future land use
designations, based on the Future Land Use map series. Current land uses coded as
Developed Lands or Impervious Surface were not included in this analysis because they do
not contain natural habitats. 78.4 percent of the total acreage for all natural habitats have a
future land use of Conservation or Residential Conservation, suggesting that a majority of
natural habitat acreage has a relatively high level of protection. This is evident for all
individual habitat types (Mangrove, Hammock, Pineland, etc.) except for Water (which
includes both salt and freshwater ponds), Exotic dominated lands, and Beach/Berm. For
Conservation and Coastal Management 265 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Water (which includes both salt and freshwater ponds) and Exotic dominated lands, future
land use is primarily Conservation, Residential Conservation, and Military use. For Beach
Berm, future land use is 31.3 percent for Recreation followed by 26.8 percent for
Residential Conservation. This is the only natural habitat with a relatively small
percentage of land categorized as Conservation.
The natural communities that have the most percentage located in future residential land
uses (low density, medium density, and high density residential) are Exotic dominated
lands (31.8 percent), Freshwater Wetlands (30.1 percent), Tropical Hardwood Hammocks
(26.4 percent), Undeveloped lands (24.4 percent), Pinelands (22.6 percent), Beach/Berm
(19.6 percent), and Buttonwood (13.4 percent). Although located in future Residential land
use designations, residential (and other) development is controlled by the ROGO/NROGO
ordinances and by the the Tier Overlay Ordinance [see Section 3.19 (Effects of Future Land
Use on Natural Resources) and below]. Most of the highest quality habitats are located in
Tier 1 lands. For example, 95 percent of all of the Freshwater Wetlands in the Keys are
located in Tier 1, 93 percent of Tropical Hardwood Hammocks are located in Tier 1, 98
percent of Pinelands are located in Tier 1, 83 percent of Beach/Berm are located in Tier 1,
and 90 percent of Buttonwood are located in Tier 1. The Tier Overlay Ordinance is
summarized in the following section.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
t-unservanon ana coastal Management 266 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.20 - Summary of the Acres and Percentages of Natural Habitat Located within
Each Future Land Use Designation
Future Land Use Acres Percent of Total
Mangrove
Agriculture
6.43
< 0.01
Airport District
0.98
< 0.01
Conservation
16,728.27
57.2
Education
0.06
< 0.01
Industrial
14.76
0.1
Institutional
S.97
< 0.01
Military
938.37
3.2
Mixed Use Commercial
84.37
0.3
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
11.89
< 0.01
Public Buildings
0.60
< 0.01
Public Facilities
6.86
< 0.01
Recreation
862.64
2.9
Residential Conservation
8,868.74
30.3
Residential High
27.41
0.1
Residential Low
191.54
0.7
Residential Medium
134.05
0.5
Undesi nated
1,396.51
4.8
Total Mangrove
29,270.47
Scrub Mangrove
Agriculture
0
-
Airport District
0.18
< 0.01
Conservation
4,432.25
44.6
Education
0.34
< 0.01
Industrial
10.98
0.1
Institutional
0.09
< 0.01
Military
821.98
8.3
Mixed Use Commercial
5.92
0.1
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
0.01
< 0.01
Public Buildings
0.83
< 0.01
Public Facilities
1.17
< 0.01
Recreation
66.09
0.7
Residential Conservation
4,118.91
41.5
Residential High
3.33
< 0.01
Residential Low
110.99
1.1
Residential Medium
15.26
0.2
Undesi nated
344.17
3.5
Total Scrub Mangrove
9,932.51
Conservation and Coastal Management 267 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.20 - Summary of the Acres and Percentages of Natural Habitat Located within
Each Future Land Use Designation (continued)
11 a ►cai naruwoou nammocx
Agriculture
1.10
< 0.01
Airport District
0
Conservation
4,079.26
51.6
Education
18.82
0.2
Industrial
5.60
0.1
Institutional
4.52
0.1
Military
126.95
1.6
Mixed Use Commercial
173.19
2.2
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
12.86
0.2
Public Buildings
8.38
0.1
Public Facilities
21.16
0.3
Recreation
226.17
2.9
Residential Conservation
1,131.60
14.3
Residential High
50.93
0.6
Residential Low
1,605.62
20.3
Residential Medium
437.86
5.5
Undesi nated
0
Total Tr o ical Hardwood Hammock
7,904.00
Pinelands
A riculture
0
Air ort District
0
Conservation
1,140.64
64.9
Education
0
Industrial
4
4.02 02
02
Institutional
0.
Militar
0
Mixed Use Commercial
45.79
2.6
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
0.22
< 0.01
Public Buildin s
0
Public Facilities
0
Recreation
0.02
< 0.01
Residential Conservation
161.80
9.2
Residential Hi h
0
Residential Low
296.99
16.9
Residential Medium
100.54
5.7
Undesi nated
0
Total Pinelands
1,757.17
-11- vaLAU11 aiiu %.uasLai management 268 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.20 - Summary of the Acres and Percentages of Natural Habitat Located within
Each Future Land Use Designation (continued)
Future Land Use Acres Percent of Total
Buttonwood
Agriculture
0
-
Airport District
0.04
< 0.01
Conservation
1,630.21
43.4
Education
0
-
Industrial
2.38
0.1
Institutional
11.88
0.3
Military
296.26
7.9
Mixed Use Commercial
26.59
0.7
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
8.61
0.2
Public Buildings
1.06
< 0.01
Public Facilities
5.17
0.1
Recreation
95.68
2.5
Residential Conservation
1,163.80
31.0
Residential High
4.48
0.1
Residential Low
395.45
10.5
Residential Medium
104.83
2.8
Undesi nated
7.45
0.2
Total Buttonwood
3,753.87
Salt Marsh
Agriculture
0.28
< 0.01
Airport District
1.60
0.01
Conservation
1,178.41
44.7
Education
0
-
Industrial
4.95
0.2
Institutional
0.82
< 0.01
Military
264.46
10.0
Mixed Use Commercial
19.01
0.7
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
0
-
Public Buildings
0
-
Public Facilities
0.43
< 0.01
Recreation
31.23
1.2
Residential Conservation
1,000.66
38.0
Residential High
1.55
0.1
Residential Low
81.80
3.1
Residential Medium
43.54
1.7
Undesi hated
7.41
0.3
Total Salt Marsh
2,636.15
Conservation and Coastal Management 269 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.20 - Summary of the Acres and Percentages of Natural Habitat Located within
Each Future Land Use Designation (continued)
Water
A riculture
0.74
< 0.01
Air ort District
0
Conservation
976.72
28.4
Education
0
Industrial
122.68
3.6
Institutional
1.82
0.1
Militar
685.24
19.9
Mixed Use Commercial
39.93
1.2
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
17.24
0.5
Public Buildin s
0
Public Facilities
3.61
0.1
Recreation
157.80
4.6
Residential Conservation
992.49
28.8
Residential Hi-1-
14.72
0.4
Residential Low
69.01
2.0
Residential Medium
29.11
0.8
Undesi nated
332.43
9.7
Total Water
3,443.52
Freshwater Wetland
A riculture
0
Air ort District
0
Conservation
493.09
48.4
Education
5.15
0.5
Industrial
0.68
0.1
Institutional
0.76
0.1
.-Military
26.93
2.6
Mixed Use Commercial
2.10
0.2
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
0
Public Buildings
0
Public Facilities
0
Recreation
0.09
< 0.01
Residential Conservation
183.04
18.0
Residential High
.56
03
Residential Low
251.56
2
Residential Medium
5.85
..
5.1
Undesi nated
0
Total Freshwater Wetland
1,018.70
Conservation and Coastal Management 270
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.20 - Summary of the Acres and Percentages of Natural Habitat Located within
Each Future Land Use Designation (continued)
Beach Berm
Agriculture
0
Airport District
0
-
Conservation
9.07
7.9
Education
0
-
Industrial
0
-
Institutional
5.04
4.4
Military
6.82
6.0
Mixed Use Commercial
1.33
1.2
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
0.18
0.2
Public Buildings
0
-
Public Facilities
0.85
0.7
Recreation
35.67
31.3
Residential Conservation
30.63
26.8
Residential High
3.45
3.0
Residential Low
8.62
7.6
Residential Medium
10.22
9.0
Undesi nated
2.21
1.9
Total Beach Berm
114.08
Undeveloped Land
Agriculture
4.09
0.2
Airport District
11.71
0.6
Conservation
92.81
5.0
Education
3.13
0.2
Industrial
113.08
6.0
Institutional
15.45
0.8
Military
694.40
37.1
Mixed Use Commercial
230.38
12.3
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
20.40
1.1
Public Buildings
0.26
< 0.01
Public Facilities
4.76
0.3
Recreation
36.78
2.0
Residential Conservation
188.42
10.1
Residential High
27.47
1.5
Residential Low
162.68
8.7
Residential Medium
266.76
14.2
Undesi nated
0
-
Total Undeveloped Land
1,872.55
Conservation and Coastal Management 271 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.20 - Summary of the Acres and Percentages of Natural Habitat Located within
Each Future Land Use Designation (continued)
Future ' Use Acres P. rcent of Total
Exotic
A riculture
0
Air ort District
0
Conservation
19.17
5.9
Education
0.01
< 0.01
Industrial
6.82
2.1
Institutional
0.34
0.1
Militar
120.86
37.0
Mixed Use Commercial
18.61
Mixed Use Commercial Fishing
2.23
5.7
Public Buildings
0
0.7
Public Facilities
1.04
Recreation
0.3
Residential Conservation
2.38
0.7
35.50
10.9
Residential Hi h
0.6
2.00
Residential Low
5.0
Residential Medium
16.21
26.2
85.73
Undesi nated
4.8
Total Exotic
15.82
326.72
rrnTAi Ai i VVTTTT"T i w.,.....,.-...
Conservation and Coastal Management 272
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.22.1.1.2 Tier Overlay Ordinance
The Tier Overlay Ordinance currently in place in the County classifies environmentally
sensitive lands as Tier I or Tier I1 (Big Pine Key and No Name Key only). Parcels classified
as Special Protection Area (III -A) have a medium development probability, while Tier III
represents the majority of developable acreage in the County. The Tier Overlay analysis
was conducted by using the tier GIS database that is based on parcel informationand was
provided by Growth Management Division. This database shows different acreages than
those shown for the future land use analysis. These differences are primarily due to the
way offshore islands were mapped. Off shore islands do not have a tier designation and
Ocean Reef is exempt from the tier system. Despite these differences, overall trends are
apparent and are discussed in this section.
Approximately 3,000 vacant parcels have a Tier III designation and account for
approximately 650 acres. Approximately 90 percent of the parcels are residential lots
under a quarter acre in size. Table 3.21 summarizes the amount of natural habitat land in
each tier category by each planning area. The tier designations for some individual parcels
are subject to change as the tier designation gets re-classified or as undesignated parcels
are assigned to a tier. Therefore, it is recognized that the amount of natural habitat in each
tier category will change as the tier designations change. However, Table 3.21 provides
current (2010) conditions and an indication of which habitats are generally well protected
in the Tier Overlay Ordinance and which ones are not as well protected. In addition, most
freshwater wetlands are protected by the Tier Overlay Ordinance, ROGO/NROGO, and the
LDRs. In addition, filling or alteration of freshwater wetlands would be subject to permit
authorization by the SFWMD and/or FDEP and the USACE.
Most of the land in each land use category is categorized as Tier 1 (90.5 percent). Land
owned by the federal government as military lands (no tier designation) makes up the next
largest percentage of land (5.3 percent of the total). As a percentage of the total, Tier II
represents only 0.1 percent of land because they are found only in the Lower Keys.
Because the Middle Keys have a relatively small amount of land in the unincorporated
portion of Monroe County, this planning area has a small amount of natural habitats in all
categories. Some habitat types are present only in the Lower Keys Planning Area or
predominantely in the Lower Keys Planning Area (Pinelands, Freshwater Wetland, and Salt
Marsh). Buttonwwood Wetlands and Beach/Berm habitats are found predominately in the
Lower Keys. Mangroves are present throughout the Keys, although scrub mangroves are
found predominately in the Lower Keys. The Water category includes both freshwater and
salt ponds so that this category is found throughout the Keys. Undeveloped land, which
includes open, scarified, or disturbed lands, occurs throughout the Keys with the highest
acreage in the Lower Keys. Similarly, because of the larger amount of natural habitats and
undeveloped parcels, the acreage dominated by Exotic species is the most prevalent in the
Lower Keys.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 273 Technical Document: May /.ult
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.21 - Summary of Acreage of Each Natural Habitat Type Included in Each Tier
Category
Mangrove
Lower
Ke s
9,533.5
2.3
75.E4.9
MiddleKe
s
575.2
0
7.3
Upper
Ke s
11,163.1
0
18.3
9.6
Man rove Total
21,271.8
2.3
100.7
14.5
Scrub Man rove
Lower
Ke s
7,802.4
0
14.4
0
Middle
Ke s
25.7
0
0
0
Upper
Ke s
319.6
0
5.1
0.3
Scru�Mangrove
Tota8,147.7
0
19.5
0.3
Tr o ical Hardwood Hammock
Lower
Ke s
3,578.4
7.3
7.7
29.3
Middle
Ke s
89.9
0
0
0
Upper
Ke s
2 ,988.E
0
39.8
130.1
Tropical Hardwood
Hammock Total
6,656.9
7.3
47.5
159.4
Pinelands
Lower
Ke s
1,649.5
5.3
8.6
0
Middle
Ke s
0
0
0
0
Upper
Ke s
0
0
0
0
Pinelands Total
1,649.5
5.3
8.6
0
Buttonwood Wetlands
Lower
Keys 2,358.9 3.6 14.5
6.5
Middle
Ke s 84.6 0 18.5
0
Upper
Keys 709.5 0 1.8
12.7
Buttonwood
Wetlands Total 31153.0 3.6 34.8
19.2
123.6
C57
36.1
35.8
195.5
22.8
551.1
20.1
1.0
0
3.2
14.4
0
0.6
38.2
551.1
23.9
18.4
95.4
15.6
1.2
0
2.6
71.6
0
117.3
91.2
95.4
135.5
18.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18.1
0
0
9.2 256.7 20.4
0 0 0.8
1.7 0 8.6
10.9 256.7 29.8
Conservation and Coastal Management 274 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan U
Table 3.21 - Summary of Acreage of Each Natural Habitat Type Included in Each Tier
Category (continued)
Tier
Salt Marsh
Lower
2,136.4
1.5
25.7
0.2
Keys
Middle
31.4
0
0
0
Keys
Upper
102.3
0
1.8
0
Keys
Salt Marsh Total
2,270.1
1.5
27.5
0.2
Freshwater Wetland
Lower
915.8
0
2.9
7.8
Keys
Middle
0
0
0
0
Keys
Upper
0
0
0
0
Keys
Freshwater Wetland
915.8
0
2.9
7.8
Total
Water
Lower
1,014.8
0
33.0
0.5
Keys
Middle
31.6
0
0.7
0
Keys
Upper
833.4
0
8.5
0.1
Keys
Water
1,879.8
0
42.2
0.6
Total
Beach Berm
Lower
72.5
0
0.3
4.8
Keys
Middle
9.0
0
0.4
0
Keys
Upper
1.3
0
0.8
1.0
Keys
Beach Berm Total
82.8
0
1.5
5.8
Undeveloped Land
Lower
320.2
32.2
193.4
14.2
Keys
Middle
2.5
0
26.7
0
Keys
Upper
113.4
0
99.3
27.2
Keys
Undeveloped Land
436.1
32.2
319.4
41.4
Total
Undesignated
10.5
213.8
14.0
0
0
4.3
0
0
0.4
10.5
213.8
18.7
4.2
26.9
1.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.2
26.9
1.7
9.9
283.1
91.9
1.9
0
0
12.0
0
1.9
23.9
283.1
93.8
1.2
2.7
2.9
0.6
0
1.6
0.5
0
0.1
2.3
2.7
4.6
21.9
482.9
46.1
0.1
0
0
16.6
0
31.0
38.6
482.9
77.1
Conservation and Coastal Management 275 Technical Document: May "LU11
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Table 3.21- Summary of Acreage of Each Natural Habitat Type Included in Each Tier
Category (continued)
C
Lower
Keys
106.0
1.5
25.1
0
Middle
Ke s
1.8
0
13.6
0
Upper
Keys
12.2
0
7.4
0
Exotic
Total
120.0
1.5
46.1
0
Florida Ke s Total
46,583.5
53.7
650.7
249.2
Percent of Total
90.5%
0.5%
Tho �; a - - -
Undesignated
6.3
39.3
16.6
0
0
0
4.3
0
8.3
39.3•
24.9
A
2,716.6
5.3%
605.5
1.2%
_ — «mil uc316iidL1u11s for some individual parcels are subject to change as the tier designation for a parcel is
re-classified or as undesignated parcels are assigned to a tier. Therefore, it is recognized that the amount of
natural habitat in each tier category will change as the tier designations change. However, the table provides
a snapshot of current conditions and an indication of which habitats are generally well protected in the Tier
Overlay Ordinance and which ones are not as well protected.
Tiers are:
I = Tier I (see Section 3.19)
II = Tier II
III = Tier III
III -A = Special Protection Area (SPA)
Undesignated areas include:
N = Property does not have a Tier designation. Most of these occur in Ocean Reef (which is exempt from
the Tier Overlay Ordinance) and some right of way parcels. Some lots were not originally designated
because of mapping errors; the majority of which are currently being reviewed by the Tier
Designation Review Committee and will be designated at a later date.
M = Military land use - no Tier designation.
U =Properties that originally had a Tier designation but became undesignated by a court order. This
court order was in response to the Everglades Law Center's analysis of the TierOverlay Ordinance.
Therefore, it was determined that a number of parcels should be re -designated. The Tier Designation
Review Committee is currently addressing the issues.
Conservation and Coastal Management 276
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
ROGO/NROGO and the Tier Overlay Ordinance were designed to direct development to
areas already disturbed or to infill areas. Taken together, parcels classified as either III, III -
A, or undesignated make up 3.0 percent of the total acreage under the Tier Overlay
Ordinance.
3.22.1.2 Effects of Future Land Uses on Coastal Flooding [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(b),
F.A.C.]
Most of the land area in the Florida Keys is 2 to 3 feet above high tide. The maximum
elevations of 18 feet are found in only two locations [see Section 3.7 (Floodplains)]. In
addition, a large percentage of the County is located within the Coastal High Hazard Area
(CHHA; defined as the evacuation zone for a Category 1 hurricane; see Section 3.23.2
(Coastal High Hazard Area). As a result, the Keys are susceptible to storm flooding.
It is likely that future development will take place within the designated floodplain and the
CHHA. The current ROGO/NROGO and the Tier Overlay Ordinance as well as the LDRs
discourage development in flood prone areas, particularly the CHHA. In addition, several
Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies specifically protect those areas that have flood
water storage and attenuation features (mangroves, salt ponds, saltmarsh, and buttonwood
wetlands, and freshwater wetlands). The policy document also seeks to restore native
vegetation within the floodplains. The current LDRs discourage new development within
the coastal floodplains through the ROGO/NROGO ordinance by assigning -4 points for an
application that proposes development within a " Y' zone on the FEMA flood insurance rate
map. The LDRs specify flood protection measures, floodplain encroachment standards, and
permit requirements [Chapter 122 (Floodplain Management)].
As the coastal area develops, it is anticipated that there is a desire to develop or re -develop
in areas known as "working waterfronts" [see Section 3.20.2.2 (Working Waterfronts)].
The Working Waterfronts Preservation Master Plan included the Monroe County Marina
Siting Plan, which identified specific criteria for new or expanding marinas. The Plan
identified areas with adequate water depth and good flushing (requiring no new dredging)
and do not have substantial concerns with listed species and other marine resources.
The need to protect, maintain, or expand working waterfronts and code requirements as
well as permitting requirements of State and federal agencies will be a balance of future
development in the transition area between marine and terrestrial resources.
3.22.1.3 Effects of Future Land Uses on Wildlife Habitat [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(b),
F.A.C.]
The most suitable habitat for listed species and unprotected plant and animal species is
located within parks, preserves, and refuges (Table 3.18). These lands and a majority of
remaining suitable habitat are located within lands predominately categorized as Tier I
lands. As discussed for each listed species, the most suitable habitat for each terrestrial
species is generally located in lands protected by the Tier Overlay System (Table 3.21).
Conservation and Coastal Management 277 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The County's ROGO/NROGO as well as the LDRs further protect these habitats. In addition,
most wetlands (freshwater marsh, salt marsh, buttonwood, salt ponds, freshwater lenses,
mangroves, and some areas of tropical hardwood hammocks and pinelands), which
provide habitat for several protected species, are protected by State and federal
regulations.
The tier boundaries on Big Pine Key and No Name Key were designated using the Big Pine
Key and No Name Key HCP and the adopted community master plan for Big Pine Key and
No Name Key. The HCP, developed in conjunction with an Incidental Take Permit, protects
the highest quality habitat and directs development to areas that have already been
impacted. Thus, future development would affect lands that have little or no habitat value
for protected wildlife species.
3.22.1.4 Effects of Future Land Uses on Living Marine Resources
[Rule 9J-5.012(2)(b), F.A.C.]
Living marine resources include seagrass beds, coral communities, and mangroves. This
section will discuss the various federal, State, and County actions that have been taken to
protect these resources.
3.22.1.4.1 Effects of Future Land Uses on Seagrass Beds
The FKNMS Management Plan provides the basis for future federal, State, and local
conservation activities affecting the resources of the FKNMS, including its seagrass beds.
The County's Comprehensive Plan and LDRs provide similar goals, strategies, and code
regulations to provide protection to seagrass communities.
Seagrass beds protection in the future can be achieved through the LDRs and by actions of
the Monroe County Marine Resources Office. The LDRs currently prohibit new dredging in
the Florida Keys and prohibits maintenance dredging within areas vegetated with seagrass
beds. No new dredging has taken place in unincorporated Monroe County in recent years
and it is expected that this trend will continue. State regulations oversee placement of boat
docks and associated structures. However, inexperienced boaters often contribute to
benthic resource damage. The FKNMS Management Plan has implemented the Mooring
Buoy and Waterway Management Action Plan to reduce vessel damage to seagrass beds (as
well as coral reefs and other benthic communities). The Marine Resources Office
coordinates with FDEP to develop a consistent policy prohibiting mooring buoy fields over
seagrass beds. The Marine Resources Office identifies derelict vessels and receives
financial assistance to remove them.
3.22.1.4.2 Effects of Future Land Uses on Coral Communities
The FKNMS Water Quality Protection Plan monitoring program was established to study
the status and trends of the coral communities. Monitoring has identified a large loss of
coral and that many of the causes of these declines originate from outside the influence of
Conservation and Coastal Management Zug
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
the County. Losses have been attributed to nutrients and water flows from the mainland or
from ocean/gulf currents. Warming ocean temperatures associated with global climate
change have been identified as a major factor in coral bleaching. Solutions will require
action on local, regional, and global scales, many of which are out of the control of the
County. However, the water quality provisions discussed in the next section are in the
control of the County and it is anticipated that, under these provisions, nearshore water
quality will be improved.
3.22.1.4.3 Effects of Future Land Uses on Mangroves
No documented reports of mangrove losses in the Keys have been due to poor water
quality. However, they are sensitive to herbicides, petroleum products, and heavy
sediment loads. Most of the County's mangroves are protected in federal or State parks,
preserves, or refuges. The FKNMS Management Plan provides the basis for future federal,
State, and local conservation activities affecting the resources of the FKNMS, including its
mangrove forests. The Plan identifies the regulatory strategies and responsibilities for
resource protection. It includes a public education program for mangrove conservation.
Current LDRs limit the alteration of fringing shoreline mangroves along much of the Keys'
unaltered open water shorelines and along altered shorelines and shorelines of artificial
waterways. The LDRs, as well as State and federal regulations, specify the heights and
amount of mangrove trimming that is allowed by exemption or by permit.
3.22.1.5 Effects of Future Land Uses on Water Quality [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(d), F.A.C.]
Point source discharges have reduced significantly since the mid-1970s. Wastewater point
source discharges were reduced from 70 in 1974 to five in 2010. With the waters in the
Florida Keys being designated as Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW), it is more difficult to
meet the higher standards and obtain point source discharge permits. Dischargers are
opting for alternative disposal methods such as regional facilities using deep well injection.
As regional domestic wastewater facilities come on line, developed properties within the
service region will be required to connect to the new facilities, reducing the use of septic
tanks. Further, Senate Bill 550 amended Chapter 381, F.S. to ensure the proper
management of OSTDS. The new law requires documented inspections and stricter
discharge standards. Along with the reduction of point source discharges as a result of
regional facilities, and the maintenance and repair of OSTDS systems that remain, the law
will play a role in improving the water quality in the County.
Other potential sources of water quality degradation are landfills, marinas, live -aboard
vessels, pesticide application, and stormwater runoff. The County has no active landfills.
Monitoring of the inactive sites has not identified any leaching into marine waters.
However, continued monitoring will allow the implementation of remedial actions if
problems are discovered. Wastewater generated from live -aboard vessels can result in
localized water quality degradation. Enforcement of the Clean Vessel Act prohibiting the
discharge of raw sewage from live -aboard vessels in conjunction with the No Discharge
Zone designation prohibiting discharge of sewage into all waters of the FKNMS resulted in
Conservation and Coastal Management 279 Technical Document: May Z011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
the use of pump -out facilities. The pump -out facilities will also result in improvements to
water quality at marinas. The application of pesticides is currently regulated by the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); however, in 2011, an NPDES
permit will be required for the discharges of biological and chemical pesticides that result
in a residue in State waters. Although much of the development in the Keys occurred prior
to the implementation of stormwater treatment criteria, discharges of stormwater runoff
from new or modified facilities must meet the OFW receiving water standards, which will
protect and improve the water quality in the Keys.
3.22.2 Effects of Future Land Uses on Historic Resources
[Rule 9J-5.012(2)(c), F.A.C.]
All of the Keys are located within the coastal area. Therefore, the effects of future land use
on historic resources in the coastal area are identical to those identified in Chapter 2.0
Future Land Use Element.
3.22.3 Effects of Future Land Uses on the Built Environment
All of the Keys are located within the coastal area. Therefore, the effects of future land uses
on the Built Environment are identical to those identified in the Traffic Circulation Element;
Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities Element; Solid Waste Element; Sanitary Sewer
Element; and the Drainage Element.
3.23 Natural Disaster Planning [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(e), F.A.C.]
3.23.1 Hurricane Evacuation Planning [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(e)1., F.A.C.]
3.23.1.1 Introduction
A guiding principle of growth management and comprehensive planning is the protection
of the public health, safety, and welfare. The most common catastrophic threat to public
safety in the coastal areas of the Florida is the potential loss of life and property from storm
surge, flooding, and high winds associated with hurricanes. Nowhere in Florida is this
hurricane threat as grave as it is in the Florida Keys due to the 112-mile long evacuation
route, plus the potential for near total inundation by the hurricane storm surge. The
severity of the threat is such as to preclude any policy option other than evacuation to the
mainland, particularly when faced with a Category 3 to 5 hurricane.
On September 7, 2005, Executive Order 05-178, created the Coastal High Hazard Study
Committee. The Committee was charged with studying and formulating recommendations
for managing growth in coastal high hazard areas. Legislation passed in the 2006 Session
encompassed many of the Committee's recommendations. Rule 9J-5.012(3)(b)6. and 7.,
F.A.C. require objectives in the Comprehensive Plan to direct population concentrations
away from known or predicted coastal high hazard areas and maintenance or reduction of
hurricane evacuation times. The State's Department of Emergency Management manages
Conservation and Coastal Management 280
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
the update of studies, ensures they are done consistently, and ensures that the
methodology used for modeling storm surge is that used by the National Hurricane Center.
Section 163.3178(9)(c), F.S. requires that "No later than July 1, 2008, local governments
shall amend their future land use map and coastal management element to include the new
definition of coastal high -hazard area and to depict the coastal high -hazard area on the
future land use map."
The County's specific emergency response procedures are detailed in the Monroe County
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) (November 2007). This plan
outlines the procedures and protocols for coordinating emergency response and
evacuation procedures, and is incorporated in this Conservation and Coastal Management
Element by reference. However, it is not discussed in detail in this section because the
procedures contained in the plan are periodically updated and refined to ensure that
emergency response procedures remain current, flexible, and sufficient to meet the
demands of a storm event.
3.23.1.2 Hurricane Vulnerability
The County's subtropical location, extensive shoreline, and proximity to the Caribbean Sea
in an area of high hurricane activity make it among the most hurricane vulnerable areas in
the United States. Hurricanes are defined as tropical cyclonic disturbances with winds in
excess of 74 miles per hour. Most hurricanes form between 5 and 20 degrees latitudes in
all tropical oceans except the South Atlantic and eastern South Pacific (Monroe County
Department of Emergency Management, 1991). Hurricanes are most common in the
County in September and October, although they'have occurred in all months between June
and December. One of the greatest threats posed by hurricanes are their erratic and
irregular tracks, making prediction of landfall difficult. Between 1886 and 1987, 43
tropical storms of hurricane intensity have passed within 125 miles of Marathon, with an
average of one storm within a 125 mile radius every 2.4 years. Since 1987, there have been
several active hurricane seasons. From 1998 through 2009, hurricanes that have required
evacuations or required declaration of a State of Local Emergency in Monroe County
include Hurricane Georges (1998), Hurricane Floyd (1999), Hurricane Irene (1999),
Hurricane Ivan (2004), Hurricane Dennis (2005), Hurricane Rita (2005), Hurricane Wilma
(2005), Hurricane Ernesto (2006), Tropical Storm Fay (2008), Tropical Storm Gustav
(2008), and Tropical Storm Ike (2008). Of the 43 recorded hurricanes that have occurred
within 125 miles of Marathon between 1886 and 1987, 22 have been classified as major
(Category 3, 4, or 5) on the Saffir-Simpson Scale, which measures hurricane intensity based
upon wind speed and barometric pressure).
Conservation and Coastal Management 281 Technical Document: may Luii
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Central
Barometric
Central
Wind
Wind
Pressure
Barometric
Speed
Speed
Category (millibars)
Pressure (inches)
(MPH)
(Knots)
Likely Damage
1
2
>980
>28.94
74-95
64-83
Minimal
3
965-979
28.50-28.91
96-110
84-96
Moderate
945-964
27.91-28.47
111-130
97-113
Extensive
4
920-944
27.17-27.88
131-155
114-135
Extreme
Source:
Monroe County Department of Emergency Management
>155
>135
Catastrophic
Damage caused by hurricanes can be divided into three categories: wind damage, storm
surge and inland freshwater flooding. The most devastating damage is caused by storm
surge. Storm surge is responsible not only for a large proportion of coastal property
damage, but also for 90 percent of hurricane -caused deaths. Storm surge occurs along a 40
to 50 mile long dome of water caused by high winds near the storm's center that can strike
the coast near where the eye, or center, of the hurricane makes landfall. Storm surge is the
height of water above normal tide level, with wind -driven waves super -imposed on the
surge. Storm surge is caused when water that is displaced by wind -driven water on the
surface can no longer be dissipated because of the shallow depths near shore, so that water
builds up and moves with the storm as it approaches land. The island nature of the Keys
and large areas of coastline along Florida Bay, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Atlantic Ocean
make the County vulnerable to the impacts of storm surge from major water bodies.
The storm surge associated with any one storm is difficult to predict, since the surge is a
factor of the strength of the hurricane, its direction and speed, and the tide period when it
makes landfall. To predict the possible effects of storm surge, the National Hurricane
Center has developed a complex computer model known as SLOSH (Sea and Lake Overland
Surge from Hurricanes). The SLOSH model maps for the County are valuable for indicating
areas that may be affected by storm surge. However, they cannot be used as predictive
tools for identifying areas that would be impacted by a particular storm event.
The Hurricane Vulnerability Zone is defined by Rule 9J-5.003, F.A.C. as:
"...areas delineated by the regional or local hurricane plan as requiring evacuation. The
hurricane vulnerability zone shall include areas requiring evacuation in the event of a
100-year storm or Category 3 storm event".
This definition would place the entire County, including the mainland, in the Hurricane
Vulnerability Zone. The mainland is included because it serves as part of the Lake
Okeechobee drainage basin, and flooding is anticipated if the lake was impacted by a
hurricane.
Conservation and Coastal Management 282
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.23.1.3 Hurricane Evacuation Considerations
The County uses a staged/phased evacuation approach that takes into account the type of
evacuee (tourists, mobile home residents, permanent residents, etc.) and five geographic
evacuation zones. The actual timing and sequence of the evacuation by zones varies
depending on the characteristics of the individual storm.
3.23.1.3.1 Number of Persons Requiring Evacuation
As a result of the entire County being located within the Hurricane Vulnerability Zone, the
population at risk is defined as all county residents and seasonal population. This
"functional population" is the basis of the calculation of hurricane evacuation clearance
times for the County. As reported in Demographic Analysis for the Statewide Regional
Evacuation Study, the estimated population of Monroe County (site built homes, mobile
homes, and hotel -motel units) in 2006 was 83,081.
3.23.1.3.2 Evacuation Routes
One of the most critical parts of a hurricane evacuation is the route to be used by evacuees.
From Key West to Key Largo (MM 106), U.S. 1 provides the only route out of the County. At
MM 106, partial diversion of the traffic to SR 905 (Card Sound Road) can occur.
3.23.1.3.3 Transportation and Hazard Constraints on the Evacuation Routes
Many portions of both U.S. 1 and Card Sound Road are low-lying, and therefore prone to
flooding. There are many points along U.S. 1 between MM 7.5 and MM 112.6 that are below
7 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD). The presence of these low points
necessitates early evacuation of the County in advance of the arrival of a hurricane.
3.23.1.3.4 Evacuation Times
Hurricane evacuation clearance time in the County, as determined by modeling efforts, is
one of the key factors used to control growth within the County, as required by Chapter 28-
20.140 F.A.C. Clearance time is defined as, "...the time required to clear the roadways of all
vehicles evacuating in response to a hurricane situation. Clearance time begins when the
first evacuating vehicle enters the road network and ends when the last evacuating vehicle
reaches its destination.""
Based upon the current policies established in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan, the County
must achieve evacuation clearance within 24 hours. Since development of the initial Miller
Model in 2000, the County amended the comprehensive plan, adding Policy 216.1.8, which
requires phased evacuation with visitors leaving 48 hours, mobile home residents leaving
36 hours, and permanent residents leaving 30 hours in advance of tropical storm winds in
a Category 3-5 storm.
' Ewing, R. Monroe County Hurricane Evacuation Clearance Time — Final Report, September 17, 2010.
Conservation and Coastal Management 283 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Clearance time modeling, through various iterations of the Lower Southeast Florida
Hurricane Evacuation Study, prepared by Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. (PBS&J), has
been conducted for the County since the early 1990s. In 2000, pursuant to the
requirements of the County's Work Program (see Section 2.2.7), Miller Consulting
developed The Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Model (the "Miller Model") to "...measure
and analyze the unique characteristics of the Florida Keys and to determine the clearance
time required to evacuate the Florida Keys up to Florida City, based upon existing US 1
conditions." This model is based on the number of dwelling units and capacity of roadway
links.
In November of 2009, County staff, municipal representatives, DCA and other State of
Florida agencies attended a Hurricane Modeling Work Group meeting to develop various
assumptions to be used in the hurricane evacuation modeling. Two assumptions used
previously in the modeling effort have been substantially changed since the initial model
was developed, including the original participation rates and flow rates, which are: 1) 70
percent participation (meaning 70 percent of the people would evacuate) and 2) maximum
FDOT capacity of roadways.
During 2010, two substantial modeling efforts were completed:
• The Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Model
The County, with the DCA participation, commissioned an update to the original Florida
Keys Hurricane Evacuation Study commonly known as "The Miller Model". In 2008, the DCA
retained Professor Earl Baker at Florida State University to conduct a survey of residents in
unincorporated Monroe County regarding whether or not they would evacuate their homes
if mandatory evacuation notices were issued for Category 3-5 hurricanes. The results
indicate that close to 90 percent of those surveyed would evacuate. In June 2010, Dr. Brian
Wolshon, P.E. of Louisiana State University and Joaquin Vargas, P.E., of Traf Tech
Engineering, Inc, (for FDOT) provided revised traffic flow rates. Dr. Reid Ewing, Ph.D.,
Professor of City and Metropolitan Planning at the University of Utah, conducted a
modeling effort, using the Miller Model, to accommodate phased evacuation, the FDOT 5-
Year Work Program roadway projects, as well as updated participation rate and traffic flow
rate assumptions to determine projected clearance time results.
Pursuant to Rule 28-20.140 F.A.C. (see below), this model will serve as the tool DCA uses to
evaluate comprehensive plan amendments that propose increases in density and intensity;
the County's annual ROGO allocations that affect build -out; and the mandatory 24-hour
evacuation requirement under Chapter 380.0552(9)(a)(2), F.S.
• The South Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study
The South Florida Regional Planning Council (SFRPC), with the assistance of the FDOT,
PBS&J and Miller Consulting, Inc., finalized a regional evacuation study that includes
Conservation and Coastal Management 284 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Miami -Dade, Broward, and Monroe Counties to model hurricane evacuation from a regional
perspective, assuming multi -county evacuation at the same time. Although hurricanes are
a prominent concern in the study, the study includes an "all hazards" analysis to prepare
for other types of evacuations as well, such as inland flooding or wildfires.
As it pertains to Monroe County, according to the SFRPC, The South Florida Regional
Hurricane Evacuation Study is to be considered an operational tool that highlights
weaknesses which need to be addressed in the regional evacuation system. Over 13,000
scenarios were run, identifying needs, such as traffic bottle necks, that could be
incorporated into the FDOT District Long Range Transportation Plan. It is also an
emergency management tool as it relates to planning for the placement and distribution of
equipment and personnel to address an evacuation event. In addition, there is associated
software available that would enable emergency managers to run their own scenarios for
emergency management planning purposes.
The summary results of these two models are provided below:
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 285 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Model (The Miller Model), Summary Results
ow Occupancies (2001)
High Occupancies
(2008)
Occupancy by Zone 1=67%;
2=54%;
Occupancy by Zone
1=84%; 2=67%;
3=47%; 4=35%; 5=46%;
6=52%; 7=27%
3=59%; 4=44%; 5=58%;
6=65%;
7=34%
High
Low Participation
High Participation
Low Participation
Approx.
pprox.90-95%
Approx.70%
Participation
Approx. 90-
2001 Lanes/2001
95%
Miller Flow Rates
16 hours 16
18 hours 50
18 hours 32
22 hours 6
2001Lanes/2010
minutes
minutes
minutes
minutes
FDOT Flow Rates
18 hours 58
22 hours 28
22 hours 8
27 hours 2
2015 Lanes/2010
minutes
minutes
minutes
minutes
FDOT Flow Rates
16 hours 16
16 hours 16
16 hours 16
18 hours 40
10
minutes
minutes
minutes
minutes
tes
und
Ig
16 hours 16
inutes
17 hours 16
17 hours 4
20 hours 16
mm
minutes
minutes
minutes
Time -Final Report, September
Source: Ewing, R. Monroe
County Hurricane
Evacuation Clearance
17, 2010.
The South Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study, Summary Results
Scenario
Assumptions
Clearance
F2005Baseline
Simultaneous evacuation of tourist, mobile
Time Hours
home residents and permanent residents
■ 100% evacuation participation rate for all units
37.5 hours
2005 Baseline
types
W Only the effect of permanent resident
incorporating Phased
Evacuation of Tourists and
evacuation on clearance time is measured.
Tourists and mobile home residents are taken
23.6 hours
Mobile Home Residents
out of the evacuation in accordance with
(Test Scenario 1)
Monroe County's adopted phased evacuation
plan.
■ 100% evacuation participation rate for
permanent residents
Monroe County Phase
0 Only permanent resident evacuation is
Evacuation with miller
measured
Model Participation Rates
P
0
75 /o evacuation participation rate for
18.2 hours
(Test Scenario 8) 1
permanent residents
Source: 2006 South Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Traffic Study.
Conservation and Coastal Management 286
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The evacuation clearance times in the updated Miller Model range from 16 hours, 16
minutes to 27 hours, two minutes. Evacuation clearance times in the Regional Study
ranges from 18 hours, two minutes to 37 hours, five minutes. The distinctions between
the models are explained in the Monroe County 30-Day Report 2010, (Papge 3) and the draft
Rule 28-20.140 F.A.C. (see below). The DCA notes that for regulatory purposes, Monroe
County, as an Area of Critical State Concern, is to follow the requirements specified within
the proposed (November, 2010) Rule 28-20.140 F.A.C., which is expected to be adopted in
May, 2011 and be effective July 1, 2011.
The Rule outlines various tasks to be achieved relative to hurricane evacuation. They are:
• By July 1, 2011, Monroe County shall enter into a memorandum of understanding
with the Department of Community Affairs, Division of Emergency Management,
Marathon, Islamorada, Key West, Key Colony Beach, and Layton after a notice
and comment period of at least 30 days for interested parties. The memorandum
of understanding shall stipulate, based on professionally acceptable data and
analysis, the input variables and assumptions, including regional considerations,
for utilizing the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Model or other models
acceptable to the Department to accurately depict evacuation clearance times
for the population of the Florida Keys.
• By July 1, 2011, the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Model shall be run with
the agreed upon variables from the memorandum of understanding to complete
an analysis of maximum build -out capacity for the Florida Keys Area of Critical
State Concern, consistent with the requirement to maintain a 24-hour evacuation
clearance time and the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study constraints. This
analysis shall be prepared in coordination with the Department of Community
Affairs and each municipality in the Keys.
• By July 1, 2011, the County and the Department of Community Affairs shall
update the data for the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Model as
professionally acceptable sources of information are released (such as the Census,
American Communities Survey, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, and
other studies). The County shall also evaluate and address appropriate
adjustments to the hurricane evacuation model within each Evaluation and
Appraisal Report.
• By July 1, 2011, the Department of Community Affairs shall apply the derived
clearance time to assess and determine the remaining allocations for the Florida
Keys Areas of Critical State Concern. The Department will recommend
appropriate revisions to the Administration Commission regarding the allocation
rates and distribution of allocations to Monroe County, Marathon, Islamorada;
Key West, Layton and Key Colony Beach or identify alternative evacuation
strategies that support the 24-hour evacuation clearance time. If necessary, the
Department of Community Affairs shall work with each local government to
Conservation and Coastal Management 287 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
amend the Comprehensive Plans to reflect revised allocation rates and
distributions or propose rule making to the Administration Commission.
3.23.1.3.5 Protected Impact of the Anticipated Population Density Proposed in the Future
Land Use Element
Population is one of several factors that impacts hurricane evacuation and clearance time.
If all other factors are kept the same (capacity of roadway links, behavior of evacuees,
storm characteristics, phasing of evacuation, etc.), a higher population will increase
clearance time, and a lower population will decrease clearance time. The ability to safely
evacuate residents and visitors in advance of an approaching hurricane is paramount.
Thus, growth as managed through the Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) allocations of
housing units, should not exceed the point where the ability to safely evacuate the Keys is
compromised. This would mean that once a certain population/housing unit count is
reached, it would not be safe to allow additional population/housing units.
3.23.1.3.6 Special Needs of the Elderly Handicapped Hospitalized or other Special Needs of
the Exrstma and Anticipated Populations
Monroe County Social Services has a Special Needs Registry Program that offers assistance
to persons with special needs living in the Keys during evacuation and sheltering.
Registered persons are those persons who have requested transportation assistance in the
event of an evacuation, including handicapped and transportation -disadvantaged persons.
As of mid-2005, the Special Needs Registry includes approximately 363 people enrolled in
the Special Needs Hurricane Evacuation Program due to age, medical condition, or other
factors and require assistance from the County to evacuate during an emergency (Source:
Monroe County Local Mitigation Strategy, November 2005, Chapter 2).
Live-aboards are a special hurricane evacuation issue. Live -aboard vessels are generally
not capable of surviving a major hurricane, and many vessels do not have the ability or
necessary speed to move from predicted hurricane impact zones. Occupants of live -aboard
vessels may not have a vehicle to evacuate by U.S. 1. The evacuation plan should contain
provisions for safe evacuation of live-aboards.
3.23.1.3.7 Measures that the Local Government Could Ado t to Maintain or Reduce
Hurricane Evacuation Times
The evacuation plan should be monitored and updated periodically to reflect changes in the
size and distribution of the population, empirical data from actual hurricane evacuations,
changes in roadway capacities, and other data. The staged/phased evacuation plan can be
optimized to maintain or reduce evacuation times.
Conservation and Coastal Management 288
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.23.1.4 Hurricane Shelters
While County policy mandates that 100 percent of County residents and visitors be
evacuated to the mainland prior to arrival of a Category 3 or greater hurricane, and
evacuation is a wise action in the face of any hurricane threat, shelter and refuge must be
provided as a contingency for those who may not leave. In addition, shelters within the
County must be provided during less severe Category 1 and 2 storms. During Category 3 or
greater storm events, these shelters will not be opened as shelters. For those remaining
who are unable to leave or who choose not to leave after an evacuation order, Refuges of
Last Resort are opened. The locations of these facilities are announced at a predetermined
time prior to the onset of tropical storm force winds. These facilities are not publicized
until the time of their opening.
The locations of and approximate capacities of existing hurricane shelters available for
County residents are:
Location
Capacity
Key West High School: 2100 Fla ler Ave., Key West
352
Sugarloaf Elementary School: Crane Blvd., MM 19
307
Stanley Switlik Elementa School: U.S. 1 Gulfside, MM 48.5
280
Coral Shores High School: U.S. 1 Oceanside, Plantation Key, MM 90
236
Back -Up Shelters Only
St. Justin Catholic Church: U.S.1 Gulfside, Key Largo, MM 105.5
136
Ponciana School: 1407 Kennedy Drive, Key West
248
These shelters are for Category 1 and 2 storms for residents of Monroe County including
Ocean Reef. For Category 3, 4, and 5 storms, the general public shelter is located out of the
County at Florida International University in Miami -Dade County (Source: Monroe County
Emergency Management, June 9, 2010 and June 23, 2010).
As of mid-2005, the Special Needs Registry includes approximately 363 people enrolled in
the Special Needs Hurricane Evacuation Program due to age, medical condition, or other
factors and require assistance from the County to evacuate during an emergency (Source:
Monroe County Local Mitigation Strategy, November 2005, Chapter 2). Special Needs are
evacuated to Florida International University for all hurricane intensity categories. They
are not sheltered within the County. The Florida International University Recreation
Center can accommodate 787 general population evacuees or 262 special needs evacuees.
3.23.2 Coastal High Hazard Area [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(e)3., F.A.C.]
In response to the impacts noted during the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons, State
legislation was passed (HB 1359 .amending portions of Chapter 163, F.S.) that identified
new hurricane evacuation planning requirements and a new definition of the Coastal High
Hazard Area (CHHA). The new definition of the CHHA is the area below the elevation of
the Category 1 storm surge line as established by a Sea, Lake and Overland Surges from
Hurricanes (SLOSH) computerized storm surge model" (Section 163.3178(2)(h), F.S.). The
Conservation and Coastal Management 289 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
State of Florida Division of Emergency Management obtained grant money through the
Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and
charged the Regional Planning Councils to conduct regional evacuation modeling and
studies across the State, including modeling and boundary mapping for the CHHA.
The South Florida Regional Planning Council is currently undertaking SLOSH modeling for
the Miami -Dade, Broward, and Monroe County region which will delineate the storm tide
limits. The current CHHA boundary is shown on Map Series 3.7. The information in the
subsections below is based on the current SLOSH model and the current CHHA maps, and
may require update after release of the boundary maps by the SFRPC.
3.23.3 Existing Infrastructure within the Coastal High Hazard Area
3.23.3.1 Roadways
U.S. 1, the primary roadway of the Florida Keys, extends from the Miami -Dade County line
to Key West. For most of its length, this roadway is of sufficient elevation to be located out
of the CHHA. However, a number of low points are located below 7 feet NGVD in elevation
and thus are subject to flooding [see Section 3.23.1.3 (Hurricane Evacuation
Considerations)]. In addition, there are 41 bridges totaling 19 miles in length on the
unincorporated portion of the County connecting the many keys (see Chapter 4.0 Traffic
Circulation Element). Although the roadway surface of theses bridges is elevated above the
CHHA, their support structures are not.
Because of its role as a link between U.S. 1 and outlying residential areas, much of the
county road network is located within the CHHA. Card Sound Road is a county road which
provides an alternate route to U.S. 1 connecting CR-905 on North Key Largo with the
mainland. The County road system includes 37 bridges totaling 1.6 miles in length. The
longest of these bridges is the Card Sound Bridge which connects North Key Largo with the
mainland.
3.23.3.2 Potable Water Facilities
The primary transmission main connecting the Florida City Wellfield in Miami -Dade
County with the County runs the length of U.S. 1 to Key West. This main is buried on land
and runs along the sides of the bridges connecting the keys. This main is connected to a
series of storage and pumping facilities and a separate network of small distribution lines
serving developed portions of the Keys, including areas within the CHHA. Recent water
main installations have been buried as a means of hazard mitigation. Chapter 122
(Floodplain Management) of the Monroe County LDRs requires that new or replacement
water supply systems in areas of special flood hazard (the 100-year floodplain, a more
extensive area than the CHHA) be installed in accordance with the methods and practices
that minimize flood damage.
Conservation and Coastal Management 290
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.23.3.3 Sanitary Sewer Facilities
Developed areas within the CHHA are served by a variety of wastewater facilities including
community sanitary sewer collection and treatment facilities. Privately owned and
maintained OSTDS include septic tank systems and cesspools, and package treatment
plants. Chapter 122 (Floodplain Management) of the Monroe County LDRs requires that
new or replacement sanitary sewer systems installed in areas of special flood hazard be
constructed to minimize infiltration of floodwaters into the system and discharge from the
system into floodwaters.
3.23.3.4 Man -Made Drainage Facilities
For the most part, developed as well as undeveloped portions of the County within the
CHHA are not served by man-made drainage facilities. The SFWMD has issued permits for
residential, commercial, and roadway projects allowing stormwater discharge to the Gulf of
Mexico, Florida Bay, and Atlantic Ocean (see Chapter 11.0 Drainage Element).
3.23.3.S Shore Protection Structures
Public shore protection structures in the County include structures located near bridges
and at other locations along U.S. 1 which are maintained by FDOT. Groins have been
constructed at the Bahia Honda State Recreation Area Beach to control erosion. Private
shoreline structures including riprap and vertical bulkheads have been constructed
throughout the Keys, especially along manmade water bodies. The County does not
currently permit hardened vertical structures which are damaged beyond repair to be
replaced with sloping revetment structures. Beach and dune erosion and accretion trends
including the effects of shore protection structures are discussed in Section 3.10
(Beach/Berm Communities).
3.23.4 Post -Disaster Redevelopment [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(e)2., F.A.C.]
Post -disaster redevelopment refers to the short- and long-term actions that will be taken to
recover from the effects of a natural or man-made disaster which results in extensive
damage to property. Planning for post -disaster redevelopment is of paramount
importance in the County because a large percentage of the County's land area is located
within the CHHA and thus is vulnerable to hurricane damage from a relatively minor
(Category 1) hurricane. More intense hurricanes would have higher storm surges and thus
would likely inundate a larger area, resulting in more extensive damage. Closely related to
post -disaster redevelopment planning is hazard mitigation, which refers to the
implementation of programs prior to the occurrence of a natural or manmade hazard
which serves to avoid or reduce the probability of a disaster occurrence (loss of life or
property).
Conservation and Coastal Management 291 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.23.4.1 Existing Land Use in the Coastal High Hazard Area
The majority of land within the CHHA is either owned for conservation purposes or is
vacant. Much of the existing development in the County is concentrated along U.S. 1 in
areas that are located outside of the CHHA. However, a significant portion of the CHHA is
developed for a variety of uses including residential (single-family detached homes, mobile
homes, multi -family apartments, and mixed -use residential areas), commercial (general
commercial, tourist commercial, and commercial fishing), institutional, public, and military
uses.
3.23.4.2 Structures with a History of Repeated Damage in Coastal Storms
Data provided by FEMA to the Florida DCA identifies properties that are, or have been,
insured by the National Flood Insurance Program and that have received two or more
claims of at least $1,000. Within unincorporated Monroe County there are 161 repetitive
loss properties (based on data as of October 2003). The cumulative payments (claims paid
on building damage and on contents damage) range from just over $2,000 to more than
$238,000 (Source: Monroe County Local Mitigation Strategy, November 2005).
3.23.4.3 Proposed Land Use in the Coastal High Hazard Area
Because of the low-lying nature of the Keys, approximately a large percentage of the County
is located within the CHHA. The area outside of the CHHA is largely confined to a linear
zone along much of U.S. 1.
Future development throughout much of unincorporated Monroe County, including the
areas within the CHHA, is controlled by ROGO and the Tier Overlay Ordinance. Points are
deducted to discourage development in environmentally sensitive areas. In addition,
points are deducted on applications that propose development within a "Y' flood zone on
the FEMA flood insurance rate maps. Proposed future land uses in the CHHA are identified
in Chapter 2.0 Future Land Use Element.
3.23.4.4 Hazard Mitigation Measures
In the State Mitigation Plan, the Florida DCA uses six general categories or approaches to
mitigation. These are summarized in the County Local Mitigation Strategy, November
2005.
Preventive measures keep problems from getting started or getting worse. When hazards
are known and can be factored in to development decisions early in the process, risks are
reduced and future property damage is minimized. Building, zoning, planning, and/or code
enforcement officials usually administer these activities:
• Planning and zoning;
• Open space preservation;
wabtai i•iauagemenr 292 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Building codes and enforcement; and
• Infrastructure design requirements.
Property protection measures are actions that go directly to permanently reducing risks
that are present due to development that pre -dates current codes and regulations and
include:
• Property acquisition in floodplains;
• Relocation out of hazard -prone areas;
• Elevation of structures in floodplains; and
• Retrofit of structures in high wind zones.
Emergency services measures are taken immediately before or during a hazard event to
minimize impacts. These measures are the responsibility of city or county emergency
management staff, operators of major and critical facilities, and other local emergency
service organizations and include:
• Alert warning systems;
• Hazard/weather monitoring systems;
• Emergency response planning;
• Evacuation;
• Critical facilities protection; and
• Preservation of health and safety
Structural projects are usually designed by engineers and managed and maintained by
public entities. They are designed to reduce or redirect the impact of natural disasters
(especially floods) away from at -risk population areas:
• Levees, floodwalls, dunes, and berms;
• Drainage diversions; and
• Stormwater management facilities.
Natural resource protection projects preserve or restore natural areas or their natural
functions. Park and recreation organizations, conservation agencies or wildlife groups may
implement such measures:
• Wetland protection or restoration;
• Beach and dune protection; and
• Erosion and sediment control.
Public information programs advise property owners, potential property owners, and
others of prevalent hazards and ways to protect people and property. A public information
office usually implements these activities, often with private partner support:
Conservation and Coastal Management 293 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Flood maps and data;
• Public information and outreach;
• Technical assistance for property owners;
• Real estate disclosure information; and
• Environmental education programs.
The County and the cities all have ongoing programs and activities that contribute to
disaster resistance even if those actions were not initiated in response to the Local
Mitigation Strategy process. For example, every jurisdiction issues building permits and
administers a floodplain management ordinance. New buildings and infrastructure must
comply with current Florida Building Code and regulations which are deemed to be
sufficient to minimize future damage due to hurricanes, high winds and flooding. Every
jurisdiction maintains its roads, which reduces the likelihood of washout damage. The
County and the cities participate in public information and outreach, encouraging residents
and visitors to be aware of the potential for hurricanes, and to be aware of the actions to
take to reduce property damage and to facilitate safe evacuation. Similarly, the utilities
have on -going responsibilities intended to reduce the impacts of natural hazards. The
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority has contingencies for drought. The Florida Keys Electric
Cooperative, the Key West City Electric System, and Florida Power and Light take steps to
minimize damage to their infrastructure and distribution systems to be able to recover as
quickly as possible after hurricanes.
3.23.4.5 Post -Disaster Redevelopment
Immediately following the passage of a hurricane or other disaster occurrence, the focus of
governmental agencies shifts from evacuation and shelter to recovery. Post -disaster
recovery operations consist of the following three stages:
• immediate safety and damage survey, including assessing the status of the remaining
populations;
• immediate repair and cleanup actions and re-entry procedures for the population
evacuated from the County; and
• long-term recovery including redevelopment.
During the first stage of post -disaster recovery operations, governmental agencies and
utility companies conduct an initial survey of the damaged area to identify immediate
safety and health concerns. Movement by the public may be restricted during this period
and shelters remain open. Actions taken during this stage include the immediate removal
of safety and health hazards and the initiation of search and rescue operations.
During the second stage of post -disaster recovery operations, local,. State, and federal
officials assess damage; assess the needs of the remaining population; and assist with
marshalling resources to meet those needs. This stage will likely last from two to five days.
During this period, the public may find that little food or other amenities are available and
shelters may remain open.
Conservation and Coastal Management 294
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
The final stage of post -disaster recovery operations involves long-term rebuilding and
redevelopment of damaged properties, a period which could last one year or longer.
During this stage, the County will be responsible for the review and permitting of proposed
redevelopment.
Planning for the first two stages of post -disaster recovery primarily involves
intergovernmental coordination among federal, State, and local agencies; and
interdepartmental coordination within the County government. The State of Florida has in
place hurricane coordination procedures which prescribe immediate post disaster actions
to be taken as well as procedures for damage assessment and disaster relief. These
procedures, which are carried out in coordination with federal and local agencies, are
constantly being updated and refined as deficiencies are identified. Examples of such
deficiencies which are currently being investigated include prevention and control of post -
disaster looters arriving by boat, the staging and availability of equipment for debris
removal, and the stockpiling and disposal of debris. Because new issues continually arise
and the best methods for addressing such issues may change, annual assessment and
coordination of post -disaster is necessary. Such coordination is especially needed to
involve agencies which do not normally address disaster preparedness in their day to day
operations (e.g., the FDEP and the Monroe County Public Works Department). The
County's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan currently addresses coordination
procedures during the period immediately preceding the occurrence of a hurricane.
Equivalent coordination procedures for immediate post -disaster recovery operations
should be implemented and reviewed on an annual basis.
The County formulated in August 2003, with the guidance of the SFRPC, a Post -Disaster
Redevelopment Plan (PDRP) to address the short- and long-term stages of post -disaster
redevelopment. The PDRP establishes goals, objectives, and policies for procedures and
programs for immediate repair, replacement, and cleanup operations following a disaster
and long-term rebuilding and redevelopment. The plan addresses immediate recovery
activities such as search and rescue/fire suppression, emergency law enforcement, damage
assessment, temporary housing, relocation of displaced residents, and debris removal. The
PDRP also addresses the following issues related to long-term post -disaster
redevelopment:
• Establishment of a post -disaster redevelopment task force to guide implementation of
the PDRP;
• Establishment of permitting procedures which allow for an orderly process of
reviewing private and public redevelopment proposals after a disaster. These
procedures should specify coordination mechanisms required to implement permitting
procedures (e.g., building inspector and other staff assistance programs) and criteria
for distinguishing between minor and major repair and replacement;
• Procedures for the identification of damaged infrastructure and consideration of
alternatives to its repair or replacement in the CHHA;
Conservation and Coastal Management 295 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
• Identification of particularly vulnerable areas within the CHHA (e.g., FEMA- designated
V zones and repetitive loss areas). Measures should be implemented for such areas
which encourage the relocation or replacement of infrastructure away from them and
limit redevelopment following occurrence of a hurricane; and
• Procedures for the advance identification of redevelopment areas (e.g., any areas
identified as being in need of redevelopment pursuant to the Florida Community
Redevelopment Act, Chapter 163, Part III) and implementation of redevelopment plans
for such areas upon damage or loss due to a natural disaster.
3.24 Public Access Facilities [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(g), F.A.C.]
Public access facilities are those which allow the public access to the beach or shoreline.
The County's island configuration offers the public a variety of opportunities for physical or
visual access to the beach and shoreline.
3.24.1 Existing Public Access Facilities
For the purposes of compiling the existing information on public access as required by
Chapter 163.3178 F. S. and 9J-5.012(2)(g) F.A.C., it is necessary to establish basic
definitions and criteria for the selection of these facilities as they are not only numerous
but also varied in description throughout the County. "Public Access" is defined in 9J-5.003
F.A.C. as, " ... the ability of the public to physically reach, enter or use recreation sites
including beaches and shores." The definition of "public access" is not fully clear; therefore,
for the purpose of this summary, the definition of this term will be: 'Any water -oriented
facility available to the public in general either without fee or by use of a paid fee or by being
a patron of the business that provides the facility." The term "water -oriented" as used in this
study means any facility that is actually on the water and controls the access to the water.
The key element under this summary is the public's access to the water. For example,
under this definition, John Pennekamp State Park would be a public access facility. It has
boat ramps and as a State Park is classified as a public facility, but a fee is charged to enter
the park and use the boat ramps. Another example would be a private business such as a
camping resort with boat ramps: the public user would have to be a patron and/or pay a
fee to use those boat ramps. This would also be a public access facility.
From these general terms, this summary has grouped the uses into six categories:
1. Marinas and Dockage;
2. Boat Ramps;
3. Fishing Piers and Boardwalks;
4. Public and Commercial Docks;
S. Beaches, Shorelines, and Waterfront Parks; and
6. Scenic Overlooks.
Conservation and Coastal Management 296
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
In total, there are 221 public and private facilities in unincorporated and incorporated
areas which provide public access to the beach or shoreline (Table 3.22). The locations of
these facilities are shown on the Map Series 3.6.
Marinas & Dockage 1 38 5 21 65
Boat Rams
3
29
9
24
65
Fishing Piers &
1
23
5
11
40
Boardwalks
Public & Commercial
1
3
0
0
4
Docks
Beaches, Shorelines,
1
22
6
15
44
Waterfront Parks
Scenic Overlooks
1
0
0
2
3
Total
8
115
25
73
221
*Includes publicly -owned facilities plus privately-ownect taciuties wmcn avow puuuc access wiui a lee paiu.
Includes unincorporated and incorporated areas.
Each category is addressed below as to the type of facilities included and the general
physical characteristics which define them. Only those facilities that occur within the
unincorporated area of the County are reported, with the exception being any facility,
within an incorporated city, that is owned by the Federal or State government, Monroe
County, or by non-profit conservation groups such as The Nature Conservancy and Florida
Keys Land and Sea Trust. Also included would be facilities that are owned and operated
somewhat autonomously from the city governments (examples include The Boy Scouts and
The Audubon Society). These government, non-profit, and related facilities are included
because they generally provide regional public access from incorporated as well as
unincorporated areas.
Marinas and Dockage: Included in this category are facilities that are licensed as a
$,marina", providing they have water access. The traditional larger boat -on -water storage
docks and associated services such as gas, repair, parts, maintenance facilities, or utility
hook-ups would be part of this end of the definition. On the lower end, any business
facility, such as a campground, which advertises a "marina" on site, may only provide dock
storage and limited utility hook-ups. These latter "marinas" might fall under the associated
item of "dockage". Here the public may only be able to access the site by water and tie their
boat up for a limited period of time. Because there is not a clear distinction between them,
marinas and dockage are consolidated into a single category.
Boat Ramps: For this summary, if a particular site has more than one ramp, the both ramps
were counted. Also ramps were counted without concern to available parking. The
condition of the boat ramp was not taken in consideration. Some ramps are of proper
concrete construction and grades and have designated trailer parking. Other ramps are no
Conservation and Coastal Management 297 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
more than areas where the public has used the land bank to push their boat into the water;
these typically can service only small lightweight boats. If a private business, such as a
resort, advertises a boat ramp as one of its amenities to it's guests, the ramps are included
within this inventory. Privately -owned ramps that are not available to the public are not
included.
Fishing Piers and Boardwalks: For fishing piers, these include docks or catwalks where no
boats would be tied up but were directly over water. In the County there are old vehicle
bridges that no longer serve vehicles but allow fishing from them. In a private business, if
"fishing" is advertised separate from the dockage of boats, these are included in the
inventory of these facilities. In the County, there are some sites that are generally natural
conservation areas where a hiking or boardwalk system has been developed for the use of
the public which winds through natural areas including over water or marsh. These
"boardwalks" may not be traditional wood, but may be on grade trails as long as it
traverses through water areas or natural marsh or flood prone areas.
Public and Commercial Docks: This category includes those dock sites in the County where
commercial private boat charter businesses operate; and where the public, as the clients,
would have access to these docks. Also included are those sites where the public traveling
by boat could pull up and temporarily moor while using the adjacent facilities. An example
of this would be a water side restaurant where patrons could arrive and depart by boat.
This category is difficult to quantify without a physical inventory throughout the County to
field -verify the data; however, the inventory included in this category, which is by no
means exhaustive, was researched through internet and other research sources.
Beaches Shorelines and Waterfront Parks: These three elements have been grouped
together because of their similar uses by the public. "Waterfront Parks" is easily counted as
they are specific in their locations and ownership. Under the term "beaches" there is a
wide range due to the character and geology of the County. Beaches range from tens of feet
to miles in length and the geology ranges from native sands and limestone to imported
sand on man-made beaches. If a private business, such as a resort, advertised a beach as an
amenity, it was counted. "Shorelines" are difficult to define, especially since the County is
almost entirely shoreline of some type. For the purposes of counting it in this category, a
"shoreline" must be on the water, separate in ownership from any adjacent business, and
defined as a site with some boundaries; generally this means a vacant and undeveloped
parcel owned by a governmental agency.
Scenic Overlooks: This was indicated in 9J-5 as a category and for this summary it is
counted separately from many of the other categories which might also offer scenic
overlooks. This list includes sites that offer a scenic overlook but no other facilities
(marinas, boat ramps, fishing piers, boardwalks, docks, beaches, etc). For example, some of
the abandoned vehicle bridges, some of which the public can fish from, offer scenic
overlooks directly out over the water. If the public can fish from them, then they were
counted in the category of fishing piers. If not, then they are counted as scenic overlooks.
The Florida Department of Transportation offers some pull off areas, or wayside parks
(with no other facilities) along U.S. 1, SR 905, SR 905A, SR 4, and Card Sound Road; these
Conservation and Coastal Management Z98
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
were counted as scenic overlooks. Because there are many informal areas that provide
scenic overlooks, the reported number of scenic overlooks in this category is probably
lower than the actual number, but a more accurate count would require extensive field
investigation.
3.24.2 Coastal Roads and Facilities Providing Scenic Overlooks
3.24.2.1 Overseas Highwa
While serving as the County's primary highway and major vehicular link to the mainland,
the Overseas Highway (U.S. 1) also serves as one of the County's primary ways of providing
public access to the scenery and natural beauty of the Florida Keys. For most of its 112
miles, stretching from the Miami -Dade County Line to Key West, U.S. 1 is within a half mile
of the Atlantic Ocean, Florida Bay, or the Gulf of Mexico. The highway includes 42 bridges
which provide panoramic views of the water and the Middle and Lower Keys. The highway
has some small pull -off areas. For the most part, these pull -offs are informal rather than
developed viewing areas. However, approaches to Bahia Honda and Long Key State Parks
include designated pull -off areas.
3.24.2.2 Old Highway and Railroad Bridges
Along some portions of U.S. 1, the old highway and railroad bridges have been retained as
fishing piers and viewing areas. These bridges allow pedestrian access to the water. Public
access points are identified in Table 3.23.
Tnhh- R_21 - fnastal Roads and Facilities ProvidinLy Scenic Overlooks
Location
Lower Matecumbe Key -Craig Key
Mile
Marker
73
Planning Overlook Fat'ilities 0%vilership/
Area Maintained
Middle Keys Beach, parking, fishing FDOT
Channel Two Catwalk
73
Middle Keys
Fishing area, parking
FDOT
Channel Five Catwalk- Long Key
71
Middle Keys
Fishing area, parking
FDOT
Fat Deer Key
53.5-56
Middle Keys
Fishing, parking, boat ramp
FDOT
Old Seven Mile Bridge / Sunset Park
40-47
Lower Keys
Fishing, parking
FDOT
Spanish Harbor Wayside Park
33
Lower Keys
Boat ramp. parkingFDOT
Big Pine Key- Old Wooden Bridge
Marina
30.5
Lower Keys
Fishing areas, parking
FDOT
Little Torch Key S.R. 4
29
Lower Keys
Boat ramp
County
Kemp Channel Bridge
23.5
Lower Keys
Fishing area, parking
FDOT
Shark Key to Saddlebunch Key
11.5-15
Lower Keys
Boat ramp, parking
FDOT
Boca Chica
6.5
Lower Keys
Catwalk
FDOT
Source: Monroe County Growth Management uivision.
Conservation and Coastal Management 299 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
3.24.3 Capacity of and Need for Public Access Facilities
The inventory of public access facilities in Table 3.22 provides information on the number
and type of existing public access facilities. A capacity analysis for sandy beach, boat
ramps, and non -boat fishing facilities (see Chapter 13.0 Recreation and Open Space Element)
determined a surplus of these facilities based on the current functional population.
There are no population -based standards to determine the capacity and need for other
water -dependent public access facilities such as:
• public access points to the beach or shoreline through public lands;
• public access points to the beach or shoreline through private lands;
• parking facilities for beach or shoreline access;
• coastal roads and facilities providing scenic overlook;
• marinas; and
• public docks.
Future demand for public access facilities is discussed in Chapter 13.0 Recreation and Open
Space Element.
3.25 Existing Infrastructure in the Coastal Area [Rule 9J-5.012(2)(h), F.A.C.]
The entire County is located within the coastal area. Therefore, existing infrastructure in
the coastal area is identical to the infrastructure in the following Elements:
• Chapter 4.0 Traffic Circulation;
• Chapter 6.0 Ports, Aviation and related Facilities;
• Chapter 8.0 Potable Water;
• Chapter 9.0 Solid Waste;
• Chapter 10.0 Sanitary Sewer; and
• Chapter 11.0 Drainage.
3.26 Energy Conservation and Reduction of Greenhouse Gases
[Rule 9J-5.013(1)(d) and (e), F.A.C.]
Monroe County recognizes that greenhouse gas emissions reductions are critical to avoiding
the impacts of climate change globally. Pursuant to Section 163.3177(d)(d), F.S., a
Conservation Element for the conservation, use and protection of natural resources of the
area must include factors that affect energy conservation.
While the County has initiated an effort to start addressing greenhouse gas emissions
through multiple actions, this section analyzes the natural resource factors that affect energy
conservation. The remaing requirements of recent legislation related to the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions (HB 697 passed in 2008) are met through the required elements
of the Comprehensive Plan. Because of Monroe County's unique resources and geography,
Conservation and Coastal Management 300
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
these issues will be addressed more fully in a new optional element of the Comprehensive
Plan on Energy Conservation and Climate Change.
The County has a task force to provide recommendations to the BOCC for environmentally
sound practices and techniques to protect the environment and to make recommendations
on issues related to climate change. The Green Initiative Task Force was created on June
18, 2008 (Resolution No. 177-2008) by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners.
Originally called the Green Building Code Task Force, the name was officially changed with
the adoption of Resolution 121-2009 on April 15, 2009. The website is
http://monroecofl.virtualtownhall.net/ Pages/MonroeCoF]_ExtenServ/GITF. Additionally,
the County has recently received a grant from the Florida Energy and Climate Commission
to begin energy conservation retrofits on its buildings.
3.26.1 Energy Reduction and Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction
The County has signed the U.S. Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement. The County has also
passed several resolutions, including Resolution 235-007 which established milestones to:
• conduct a greenhouse gas emissions inventory;
• establish a greenhouse gas emissions target;
• develop an action plan to meet the local greenhouse gas reduction target;
• implement the action plan; and
• monitor and report progress.
The first step towards developing an energy conservation program is development of a
baseline of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. Pursuant to that end, the County
developed a 2005 baseline greenhouse gas inventory of County facilities. The Green
Initiative Task Force recommended to the Board of County Commissioners on February 17,
2010 to set a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions related to County operations by 20
percent by year 2020. The County is finalizing a communitywide greenhouse gas inventory
and a recommendations document.
3.26.2 Land Use and Natural Resource Factors that Affect Energy Conservation and
Reduction of Greenhouse Gases
A basic natural resource factor affecting energy conservation is the use of the land and
preservation of it. Lands occupied by developed uses contain buildings and structures
affecting use as well as infrastructure that requires energy consumption (e.g., lighting, air
conditioning). This use of energy by occupied lands contributes to greenhouse gas
emissions. Vacant but cleared lands generally do not have infrastructure that requires
energy consumption, and these areas neither increase or decrease greenhouse gases. Lands
that are occupied by vegetated natural resources generally do not have infrastructure that
requires energy consumption, and the vegetation has some capacity to reduce greenhouse
gases through carbon sequestration processes. Therefore, land uses that negatively affect
energy use and conservation include developed lands, and land uses that beneficially affect
Conservation and Coastal Management 301 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
energy use and conservation include natural resources such as hammocks, pinelands, exotic
vegetated dominated lands, and mangroves and other wetlands. These vegetation
community types are quantified in Sections 3.9 (Wetlands) and 3.11 (Upland Vegetation).
Map Series 3.8 depicts the Energy Conservation Areas.
Land use and natural resource factors that improve energy conservation and reduce
greenhouse gases include green initiatives such as:
• Conserving the remaining natural vegetated habitats, and reducing the amount of
vegetation to be removed when a site is developed;
• Using native shade trees and landscaping to expand green spaces in scarified and
developed areas;
• Instead of sod in turf grass lawns, easements, and rights -of -way; using native plants and
trees to provide greater carbon sequestration;
• Using green (vegetated) roofs and other sustainability practices;
• Using local community gardens and local commercial urban farming operations - these
provide carbon sequestration and reduce long-distance transportation of produce; and
• Using water conservation strategies (including but not limited to use of cisterns,
stormwater on -site collection systems used for irrigation, and bio-swales) that reduce
the demand for surface water treatment in the natural environment while maintaining
the viability of freshwater wetlands and upland forested natural communities.
Implementing the Tier Overlay Ordinance, ROGO, and the other land development controls
affect energy conservation. The shift of the County's land acquisition efforts in recent years
to focus on the higher quality hammocks is a natural resource factor affecting energy
conservation. Establishing a recurring funding source for effective long-term management
of acquired lands can increase or maintain their carbon sequestration attributes.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 302 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe Countv Comprehensive Plan Update
3.27 Literature Cited
Andrews, K., L. Nall, C. Jeffrey, and S. Pittman, 2008. The state of coral reef ecosystems of
Florida. In: The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific
Freely Associated States. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration.
Technical Memorandum NOS NCC OS 73.
Alexander, T.R., 1953. Plant succession on Key Largo, Florida involving Pinus caribaea and
Quercus virginiana. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Science 16:133-
138.
Alexander, T.R. and J.D. Dickson, 1972. Vegetational changes in the National Key Deer
Refuge, part II. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Science 35:85-96.
Antoine, J.W. and J.L. Harding, 1963. Structure of the continental shelf of northeastern Gulf
of Mexico. Technical Report 63-13T, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M
University, College Station, Texas. 18 pp.
Antonini, G.A., L. Zobler, H. Tupper, and R. Ryder, 1990. Boat live-aboards in the Florida
Keys: A new factor in waterfront development. Florida Sea Grant Report Number
SGR-98, FLSGP-T-90-007.
http://nsgl.gso.uri.edu/flsgp/flsgpt90007/flsgpt90007index.html.
Avery, G.N. and L.L. Loope, 1980. Endemic taxa in the flora of south Florida. South Florida
Research Center Report T-558.
Baggett, H.D., 1982. Schaus' swallowtail. Pp. 73-74 in: Franz, R. (ed.). Rare and endangered
biota of Florida, Volume six, Invertebrates. University Presses of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida. 131 pp.
Ballantine, D., and H.J. Humm, 1975. Benthic algae of the Anclote Estuary I. epiphytes of
seagrass leaves. Florida Scientist 38(3):150-162.
Barbour, T., and G.M. Allen. 1982. The white-tailed deer of eastern United States. Journal of
Mammology 3:65-78.
Barbour, D.B., and S.R. Humphrey, 1982. Status and habitat of the Key Largo woodrat and
cotton mouse (Neotoma floridana smallii and Peromyscus gossypinus allapaticola).
Journal of Mammology 63(1):144-148.
Bergh, C., 2009. Initial Estimates of the Ecological and Economic Consequences of Sea
Level Rise on the Florida Keys through the Year 2100, The Nature Conservancy, The
Florida Reef Resilience Program, August 2009. http://www.frrp.org/SLR.htm.
Conservation and Coastal Management 303 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Boesch, D.F., N.E. Armstrong, C.F. D'Elia, N.G. Maynard, H.W. Paerl, and S.L. Williams, 1993.
Deterioration of the Florida Bay ecosystem: an evaluation of the scientific evidence.
Report prepared for the Interagency Working Group on Florida Bay, sponsored by
the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the National Park Service, and the South
Florida Water Management District.
Boyer, J.N. and H.O. Briceno, 2008. 2008 Annual Report of the Water Quality Monitoring
Project for the Water Quality Protection Program of the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary, Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International
University, Miami, FL, http://serc.fiu.edu/wqmnetwork.
Braden, A.W., R.R. Lopez, C.W. Roberts, N.J. Silvy, C.B. Owen, and P.A. Frank, 2008. Florida
Key deer Odocoileus virginianus clavium underpass use and movements along a
highway corridor. Wildlife Biology 14:155-163.
Brand, L.E., 2002. The transport of terrestrial nutrients to south Florida coastal waters.
Pages 361-414 in J.W. Porter and K.G. Porter, editors. The Everglades, Florida Bay,
and Coral Reefs of the Florida Keys - An Ecosystem Sourcebook. CRC Press, Boca
Raton.
Brown, L.N., 1978. Key Largo woodrat. Pp. 11-12 in: Layne, J.N. (ed.). Rare and endangered
biota of Florida, volume one, Mammals. University Presses of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida. 52 pp.
Camp, Dresser, and McKee, 2001. Monroe County Stormwater Management Master Plan,
Vol. 1-2.
Carr, A.W., and C.J. Goin, 1955. Reptiles, amphibians and freshwater fishes of Florida.
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 341 pp.
Cazenave, A., A. Lombard, and W. Llovel, 2008. Present-day sea level rise: A synthesis.
Geoscience , 761-770.
CH2M Hill, 2000. Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan, Vol. 1-8.
Chafin, 2000. Field guide to the rare plants of Florida. Florida Natural Areas Inventory,
Tallahasee, Florida.
Chester, R.H., 1974. Canal coral surve: Florida Keys. A Report for the Society for
Correlation of Progress and Environment.
Chiappone, M., A. White, D.W. Swanson, and S.L. Miller, 2002. Occurrence and biological
impacts of fishing gear and other marine debris in the Florida Keys. Marine
Pollution Bulletin 44: 597-604. http://faculty.mdc.edu/mchiappo/
chiappone_et_al_2002_ florida_keys_marine_debris_mar-pollut_bull_44.pdf.
7, vaLlUll ai,u I-uasrai management 304 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Church, J. A. and N.J. White, 2006. A 20th century acceleration in global sea -level rise.
Geophysical Research Letters 33, L01602, doi:10.1029/2005GL024826.
Clark, J.R.,1977. Coastal ecosystem management. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York.
Cook, C., 1997. Reef corals and their symbiotic algae as indicators of nutrient exposure.
Final Report submitted to the Water Quality Protection Program as cited in
Kruczynski, 1999. As cited in FEMA, 2000.
CSA, 1991. Water quality protection program for the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary: Phase 1 report (draft). Continental Shelf Associates, prepared for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta, GA.
CUES, 2007. Monroe County Marina Siting Plan. Center for Urban and Environmental
Solutions at Florida Atlantic University, April 2007.
http://www.sfrpc.org/data/MCWorkWater/MonroeCountyMarinaSitingPlanFinal.p
df.
DCA, 2007a. Annual Assessment Report, Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Work
Program Year 10, July 13, 2006 - July 12, 2007. Florida Department of Community
Affairs, September 28, 2007.
DCA, 2007b. Guiding the Way to Waterfront Revitalization: Best Management Practices,
Florida Department of Community Affairs, June 2007. Available online at
http://www.dca.state.fl.us/FDCP/DCP/waterfronts/Files/BPGuide.pdfhttp://www.
dca.state.fl.us/FDCP/DCP/waterfronts/Files/BPGuide.pdf.
DCA, 2010. Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern. 2010 Removal of Designation
Report. Florida Department of Community Affairs, Division of Community Planning,
Areas of Critical State Concern Section.
de la Cruz, A.A., 1982. The impact of crude oil and oil -related activities on coastal wetlands
- A review. Proceedings of International Wetlands Conference, Delhi, India.
Donahue, S., A. Acosta, L. Akins, J. Ault, J. Bohnsack, J. Boyer, M. Callahan, B. Causey, C. Cox, J.
Delaney, G. Delgado, K. Edwards, G. Garrett, B. Keller, G.T. Kellison, V.R. Leeworthy,
L. MacLaughlin, L. McClenachan, M.W. Miller, S.L. Miller, K. Ritchie, S. Rohmann, D.
Santavy, C. Pattengill-Semmens, B. Sniffen, S. Werndli and D.E. Williams, 2008. The
State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the Florida Keys. In: The State of Coral Reef
Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States. National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. Technical Memorandum NOS NCC
OS 73.
Emmel, T.C., 1986. Status survey and habitat requirements of Florida's endemic Schaus'
swallowtail butterfly. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Division of
Wildlife, Nongame Wildlife Section, Tallahassee, Florida.
Conservation and Coastal Management 305 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Enos, P., 1977. Quarternary sedimentation in South Florida: part 1-holocene sediment
accumulations of the South Florida Shelf margin. Geological Society ofAmerica
Memoir 147:1-130.
Ernst, S.H. and R.W. Barbour, 1972. Turtles of the United States. University of Kentucky
Press, Lexington, Kentucky. 299 pp.
Evink, G.L., 1981. Hydrological study in the areas of Cross Key, Florida. Florida Department
of Transportation, FDOT FL-ER-16-81.
Ewing, R., 2010. Monroe County Evacuation Clearance Time - Final Report, University of
Utah, Department of City & Metropolitan Planning, September 17, 2010.
FDEP, 2002. Critical Beach Erosion Areas in Florida. Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, Bureau of Beaches And Coastal Systems, Division of Water Facilities,
Report No. BCS-99-02. 75 pp.
FDEP, 2006. Air Monitoring Report 2006, Department of Environmental Protection,
Division of Air Resource. Accessed 6/2010: http://dep.state.fl.us/ air/air-quality/
tech rpt/amr06.pdf
FDEP, 2008. Strategic Beach Management Plan for the Florida Keys Region. Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems.
Accessed 5/2010: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/ beaches/publications /pdf/SBMP/
Florida%20Keys%2ORegion.pdf.
FDEP, 2009. Critically Eroded Beaches in Florida. Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems. Accessed 5/2010:
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/ beaches/publications/pdf/ CritEroRpt09.pdf,
FDEP, 2010. Wastewater Facility Information. Accessed 7/6/2010: http://dep.state.fl.us/
water/wastewater/facinfo.
FDER, 1987. Florida Keys monitoring study, water quality assessment of five selected
pollutant sources in Marathon, Florida Keys. Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation, Marathon, Florida. 196 pp.
FDER, 1988, Campbell's Marina Study. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,
Marathon, FL.
FDER, 1990. Boot Key Harbor Study. Preliminary draft manuscript. Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation, Marathon, Florida.
FEMA, 1989. Flood Insurance Study, Monroe County Florida and incorporated areas.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
Conservation and Coastal Management 306
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
FEMA, 2002, Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment, Wastewater Management
Improvements in the Florida Keys, Florida. Federal Emergency Management Agency,
URS Group, Inc., Miami Springs, Florida.
FEMA, 2005. Flood Insurance Study, Monroe County and Incorporated Areas, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 2005. Community Number - 12087CV000A.
Fenner. D. and K. Banks. 2004. Orange cup coral, Tubastraea coccinea invades Florida and
the Flower Garden Banks, Northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Coral Reefs 23: 505-507.
Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, 2009. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission Status and Trends 2008 Report - Florida's Inshore and Nearshore
Species. http://research.myfwc.com/features/category_sub.asp?id=2972.
Florida DNR, 1991a. Coupon Bight Aquatic Preserve Management Plan. Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, Florida. 193 pp.
Florida DNR, 1991b. Management Plan for Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve: Card Sound.
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation.
Florida DNR, 1989. Monroe County Beach Restoration Management Plan. Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee, Florida. 39pp.
Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council, 2007. List of Florida's Invasive Plant Species. Internet:
http://www.fleppc.org/07list.htm.
FIMC, 1991. The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Program: An opportunity for
state involvement and coordination in resource protection. Florida Interagency
Management Committee. Tallahassee, Florida.
FNAI, 2009. Rockland Hammock. Guide to the Natural Communities of Florida (Draft
Revised Edition). June 2009 Draft.
Fourqurean, J.W. and S.P. Escorcia, 2008. Seagrass Monitoring in the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary, FY 2008 Annual Report, Executive Summary. Southeast
Environmental Research Center and Department of Biology, Marine Sciences
Program. Florida International University. 9 pp.
Fuss, L., 2000. Keys canal water may be hazardous to health, study finds. Miami Herald,
Sunday June 14, 2000.
Ginsburg, R.N., 1964. Florida Bay, Introduction. In: R.N. Ginsburg (Ed). South Florida
carbonate sediment. The Geological Society of America, Annual Convention. 11 Pp.
Conservation and Coastal Management 307 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Ginsburg, R.N., 1956. Environmental relationships of grain size and constituent particles in
some south Florida carbonate sediments. Bulletin of the American Association of
Petroleum Geologists 40(10):2384-2427.
Grinsted, A. J., 2008. Reconstructing sea level from Paleo and projected temperatures 200
to 2100AD. Climate Dynamics, 34: 461-472.
Hanson, C.E., 1980. Freshwater resources of Big Pine Key, Florida. U.S. Geological Survey
Open File Report 80-447.
Harrington J. and T.L. Walton, 2008. Climate change in coastal areas in Florida: Sea level
rise estimation and economic analysis to year 2080. Florida State. University,
Tallahassee, FL. Available at http://www.c*efa.fsu.edu/
uploaded%20currents%20projects/ FSU%208%2014%202008final.pdf.
Hartman, D.S. 1978. West Indian manatee. Pp. 27-30. In: Layne, J.N. (Ed.). Rare and
endangered biota of Florida, Volume One, Mammals, University Presses, Gainesville,
Florida. 52 pp.
Heald, E.J. and W.E. Odum. 1970. The contribution of mangrove swamps to Florida
fisheries. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute 22: 130-135.
Heimlich, B.N., F. Bloetscher, D.E. Meeroff, and J. Murley, 2009. Southeast Florida's Resilient
Water Resources: Adaptation to Sea Level Rise and Other Climate Change Impacts.
Center for Urban and Environmental Solutions and Department of Civil Engineering,
Environmental, and Geomatics Engineering. Florida Atlantic University.
Hipes, D., D.R. Jackson, K.N. Smith, D. Printiss, and K. Brandt, 2001. Field guide to the rare
animals of Florida. Florida Natural Areas Inventory. Tallahassee, Florida.
IARU, 2009. International Alliance of Research Universities, 2009. Climate Change: Global
Risks, Challenges & Decisions. Synthesis Report, International Alliance of Research
Universities, Copenhagen.
IPCC, 2007. 4th Assessment Report. International Panel on Climate Change, 2007.
Jaap, W.C., 1982. The ecology of the coral reefs of south Florida: a community profile. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biol. Svc., Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-82/02.
Jaap, W.C., 1984. The ecology of the south Florida coral reefs: a community profile. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-82/08. 138 pp.
Jaap, W.C. and P. Hallock, 1990a. Coastal and nearshore communities: Coral reefs. In: N.
Phillips and K. Larson (Eds.). Synthesis of available biological, geological, chemical,
socio-economic, and cultural resource information for the South Florida area.
Continental Shelf Associates. Contract no 14-12-0001-30417. 657 pp.
Conservation and Coastal Management 308
Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Jaap, W.C. and P. Hallock, 1990b. Coral reefs. Pp. 574-616. In: Myers, R.L. and J.J. Ewel
(Eds.). Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando.
Jackson, D.R., 1989. The fauna of freshwater and non -tidal wetlands on Big Pine Key. pp.
37-58 in ML Robertson, J.M. Young eds. Freshwater and Surface Water Resources of
Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida. The Nature Conservancy, Key West, Florida.
122 pp.
Jacobsen, T., 1983. Crocodilians and islands: status of the American alligator and the
American crocodile in the lower Florida Keys. Florida Field Naturalist 11(1):1-24.
Johnson, A.F. and M.G. Barbour, 2001. Dunes and Maritime Forests. Pg. 429-480. In
Myers, R.L. and J.J. Ewel (eds.). Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida
Press, Orlando.
Johnson, A. F. and K. Gulledge, 2005. Update to a 1992 assessment of Florida's remaining
coastal upland natural communities. Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee,
Florida.
Jones, J.A. 1977. Morphology and development of southeastern Florida patch reefs. pp.
231-235 in Proceedings: 3rd International Coral Reef Symposium. Rosensteil School
of Marine & Atmospheric Science. University of Miami, Miami, Florida.
Jones, R. and J. Boyer, 2001, Water Quality Monitoring Project: FY 2000 Annual Report.
Published by the Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International
University under contract to USEPA.
Kalla, P.I., 2000. Technical Summary Document for the Advance Identification of Wetlands
of the Florida Keys. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4, Science and
Ecosystem Support Division, Athens, GA.
Karl, T. R., et al., 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States. U.S. Climate
Change Science Program and NOAA. Cambridge University Press.
King, W., and T. Krakauer. 1966. The exotic herpetofauna of southeastern Florida
Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Science 29:149-154.
King, W., and T. Krakauer, 1968. The ecology of the neotropical toad, Bufo marinus, in south
Florida. Herptological24:214-221.
Kissling, D.L., 1977. Coral reefs in the lower Florida Keys: a preliminary report. Pp. 209-
215. In: H.G. Multer (Ed). Field Guide to some carbonate rock environments:
Florida Keys and western Bahamas. U.S.G.S. Open File Report 70-010. Kendall/Hunt
Publishing Company, Florida.
Conservation and Coastal Management 309 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Klein, H., 1970. Preliminary evaluation of availability of potable water on Elliott Key, Dade
County, Florida. U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 70010.
Kochman, H.I., 1978. Eastern indigo snake. Pp. 68-69 in: McDiarmid, R.W.(ed.) Rare and
endangered biota of Florida, Volume Three, Amphibians and Reptiles. University
Presses of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 74 pp.
Koopman, B., J.P. Heaney, F.Y. Cakir, M. Rembold, P. Indeglia, G. Kini, 2006. Ocean Outfall
Study. Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida.
Prepared for Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/ water/reuse/docs/oceanoutfallstudy.pdf.
Krakauer, T., 1970. The invasion of the toads. Florida Naturalist 44:12-14.
Kramer, P.A., 2003. Synthesis of coral reef health indicators for the Western Atlantic:
Results of the AGRRA program (1997-2003). In: Lang JC (Ed.). Status of coral reefs
in the western Atlantic: Results of initial surveys, Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef
Assessment (AGRRA) Program. Atoll Research Bulletim 496:1-58.
Kruczynski, W. L., 1999. Water Quality Concerns in the Florida Keys: Sources, Effects, and
Solutions. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary, Water Quality Protection Program, September 1999. 68 pp.
http://floridakeys.noaa.gov/ research_monitoring/wgpp_white_paper.pdf.
Kruer, C., 1991. Draft assessment of Florida's remaining coastal upland natural
communities. Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, Florida.
Kushlan, J.A., 1979. Feeding ecology and prey selection in the white ibis. Condor, 81:376-
389.
Kushlan, J.A., J.C. Ogden and A.L. Higer, 1975. Relation of water level and fish availability to
wood stork reproduction in the southern Everglades, Florida. U.S. Dept. of the
Interior, Geological Survey. Open File Report 75-434. Tallahassee, Florida. 56 pp.
Lane, E., 1981. Environmental Geology Series - Miami Sheet. Florida Geological Survey Map
Series 101, Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee, Florida.
Lane, E., 1986. Geology of the state parks in the Florida Keys. Florida Geological Survey
Leaflet No. 14, Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee, Florida.
Langevin, C.D., M.T. Stewart, and C.M. Beaudoin, 1998. Effects of Sea Water Canals on Fresh
Water Resources: An Example from Big Pine Key, Florida. Ground Water, 36: 503-
513.
Conservation and Coastal Management 310 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Lapointe, B.E., 1989. Pollution of Ground Waters and Surface Waters of Big Pine Key, Pp.
100-116. In_ M. L. Robertson, J.M. Young (Eds.) Freshwater and Surface Water
Resources of Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida. The Nature Conservancy, Key
West, Florida.
Lapointe, B.E., J.D. O'Connell, and G.S. Garrett, 1990. The effects on on -site sewage disposal
systems on nutrient relations of groundwaters and nearshore surface waters of the
Florida Keys. Biogeochemistry 10: 289-307.
Lapointe, B.E., J.D. O'Connell, and G.S. Garrett, 1999. Nutrient couplings between on -site
sewage disposal systems, groundwaters, and nearshore surface waters of the
Florida Keys., Biogeochemistry (now Biodegradation) 10: 289-307.
Lapointe, B. E., W.R. Matzie and P.J. Barile, 2002. Biotic phase -shifts in Florida Bay and fore
reef communities of the Florida Keys: linkages with historical freshwater flows and
nitrogen loading from Everglades runoff. In: J. and K. Porter (Eds.). The Everglades,
Florida Bay, and Coral Reefs of the Florida. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
Layne, J.N., 1974. The land mammals of South Florida. Geological Society of America
Memoir 2: 386-413.
Lazell, J.D., 1984. A new marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris) from Florida's Lower Keys.
Journal of Mammology 65:26-33.
Lazell, J.D., 1989. Wildlife of the Florida Keys: A Natural History. Island Press, Washingon,
D.C. 253 pp.
Lewis, R.R.,III., 1980. Impacts of oil spills on mangrove forests. In: Second International
Symposium in Biological Management of Mangroves in Tropical Shallow Water
Communities, Port Moresby, Madang, Papua New Guinea.
Lewis, R.R.,II1, R.G. Jr. Gilmore, C.W. Crewz, and W.E. Odum, 1985. Mangrove habitat and
fishery resources of Florida. Pp. 281-336. In: W. Seaman, Jr., (Ed.). Florida Aquatic
Habitat and Fishery Resources. Florida Chapter of the American Fisheries Society,
Kissimmee.
Livingston, R.J., 1990. Inshore marine habitats. Pp. 549-573. In: Meyers and Ewel (Eds.)
Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando.
Lloyd, J.M., 1991. Part 1: 1988 and 1989 Florida petroleum production and exploration.
Florida Geological Survey Information Circular No. 107, Florida Geological Survey,
Tallahassee, Florida.
Lodge, T.E., 2005. The Everglades Handbook: Understanding the Ecosystem. Second
Edition. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
Conservation and Coastal Management 311 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Loftus, W.F. and J.A. Kushlan, 1982. The status of the Schaus' swallowtail and the Bahama
swallowtail butterflies in Biscayne National Park. South Florida Research Center
Report M-649. 18 pp.
Lopez, R.R., 2001. Population ecology of Florida Key deer. Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M
University. College Station, Texas. 203 pp.
Lugo, A.E. and S.C. Snedaker, 1974. The ecology of mangroves. Annual Review of Ecology
and Systematics. 5:39-64.
Lund, F., 1978. Atlantic hawksbill, Atlantic leatherback, Atlantic loggerhead. in: McDiarmid,
R.W.(ed.). Rare and endangered biota of Florida, Volume Three, Amphibians and
reptiles. University Presses of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 74 pp.
Marszelak, D.S., 1984. Florida reef tract marine habitats and ecosystems (map series,
1:30,000 scale). Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, Univeriity
of Miami, Miami, Florida, and U.S. Dept. Interior, Minerals Management Service, New
Orleans, Louisiana.
Marszelak, D.S., G. Babashoff, M.R. Noel and D.R. Worley, 1977. Reef distribution in South
Florida. Pp. 223-230. In: D.L. Taylor (Ed.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Coral
Reef Symposium, Vol. 2. Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science.
University of Miami, Miami, Florida.
Maul, G.A., 2008. Florida's changing sea level. Shoreline: May 2008. Florida Shore and
Beach Preservation Association. 3 p. http://www.fsbpa.com/publications.html.
McCleery, R.A., 2003. Aspects of Key Largo Woodrat Ecology. M.S. Thesis. Texas A&M
University.
McGuire, H.L., 2002. Taxonomic status of the great white heron (Ardea herodias
occidentalis): an analysis of behavioral, genetic, and morphometric evidence. Final
Report. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Tallahassee, Florida,
USA.
Merchant, R. and J. Haberfeld, 1988. Memorandum: Characterization of secondarily treated
domestic sewage disosed of via Class V injection wells (boreholes) in the Florida
Keys. FDER, Marathon, FL.
Meyers, R.L. and J.J. Ewel (eds.), 1990. Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida
Press, Orlando.
Miller, M.W. and A.M. Szmant, 2008. Lessons learned from experimental key -species
restoration. Pp. 219-233. In: Precht, W.F. (Ed.). Coral Reef Restoration Handbook,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
., auu %,uasiai management 312 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners, Florida Department of Transportation,
District 4, and Florida Department of Community Affairs. 2006. Habitat
Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) and other
Protected Species on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, Monroe County, Florida.
Report prepared for the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
Monroe County Department of Emergency Management, 1991. Monroe County hurricane
preparedness evacuation and shelter plan. Monroe County Department of
Emergency Management, Key West, Florida.
Monroe County Department of Marine Resources, 2002. Keys -Wide Mooring Field System.
Preliminary Planning Document.
Monroe County Growth Management, 2008. Monroe County Area of Critical State Concern
De -Designation Report, Final Document. Monroe County Growth Management
Department.
Montegue, C.L. and R.G. Wiegert, 2001. Salt Marshes. Pg. 481-516. In Myers, R.L. and J.J.
Ewel (Eds.). Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando.
Mozumder, P. and E. Flugman, 2009. Adaptation Behavior in the Face of Global Climate
Change and Accelerating Sea -Level Rise, Survey Responses from Federal, State,
Regional and Local Management Personnel, Environmental Specialists,
Policymakers and Community Leaders in the Florida Keys, U.S.A. A Report by the
Program for Adaptation to Climate Change and Extreme Events (PACE) at Florida
International University (FIU). May 2009.
Multer, H.G., 1977. Field Guide to Some Carbonate Rock Environments, Florida Keys and
Western Bahamas. Kendall/Hunt Publ. Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 415 pp.
Nagelkerken, I. and G. van der Velde, 2004. A comparison of fish communities of subtidal
seagrass beds and sandy seabeds in 13 marine embayments of a Caribbean island,
based on species, families, size distribution and functional groups. Journal of Sea
Research 52: 127-147.
Nelson, C.E., C. Crumley, B. Fritxche, and B. Adcock, 1989. Behavioral analysis in lower
southeast Florida hurricane evacuation study update. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Jacksonville, Florida.
NMFS, 2006. Recovery Plan for Smalltooth Sawfish (Pristis pectinata). Prepared by the
Smalltooth Sawfish Recovery Team for the National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver
Spring, Maryland.
NOAA, 2004. Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Seagrass Restoration in
the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. National Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration.
Conservation and Coastal Management 313 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
NOAA, 2008. State of the Science Fact Sheet, Ocean Acidification, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Association, May 2008. http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education
/yos/resource/01state_of science.pdf.
Odum, W.E. and C.C. McIvor, 1990. Mangroves. Pg. 517-548. In: Myers, R.L. and J.J. Ewel
(Eds.). Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando.
Odum, W.E., C.C. McIvor, T.J. Smith, III., 1982. The ecology of the mangroves of south
Florida: a community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological
Services, Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-81/24. 144 pp.
Ogden, J.C., 1978a. American crocodile. Pp.21-2. In: McDiamird, R.W.(ed.). Rare and
endangered biota of Florida, Volume Three, Amphibians and reptiles. University
Presses of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 74 pp.
Ogden, J.C., 1978b. Status and nesting biology of the American crocodile, Crocodylus acutus,
(Reptilia, Crocodilidae) in Florida. Journal of Herptology 12:183-196.
Ogden, J.C., 1978c. Wood Stork. Pp. 3-4. In: Kale, H.W.II (Ed.). Rare and endangered biota
of Florida, Volume Two, Birds, University Presses of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
121 pp.
Ogden, J.C., J.A. Kushlan and J.T. Tilmant, 1978. The food habitats and nesting success of
wood storks in Everglades National Park 1974. U.S.Dept. of the Interior, National
Park Service Natural Resources Report No.16, Washington, D.C. 25pp.
Olmstead, I.D., and L.L. Loope, 1984. Plant communities of Everglades National Park. Pp.
167-184. In: Gleason, P.J. (Ed). Environments of South Florida, Present and Past II.
Miami Geology Society, Coral Gables, Florida.
PBS&J, 1989. Technical memorandum: Monroe County comprehensive plan hurricane
evacuation analysis. Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., Talahassee, Florida.
Porter J.W. and K.G. Porter. 2002. The Everglades, Florida Bay, and Coral Reefs of the
Florida Keys: An Ecosystem Sourcebook. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
Precht, W.F. and M. Robbart, 2006. Coral reef restoration: The rehabilitatioan of an
ecosystem under siege. Pp 1-24. In: Precht, W.F. (Ed.). Coral Reef Restoration
Handbook. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
Rahmstorf, S., 2007. A semi -empirical approach to projecting future sea -level rise. Science
315(5810): 368-370.
Randazzo, A.F. and R. Halley, 1997. Geology of the Florida Keys. Pp. 251-259. In: Geology
of Florida. University Press of Florida, Florida.
u-.. cauu %_uastai management 314 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Robblee, M.B., T.R. Barber, P.R. Carlson, Jr., M.J. Durako, J.W. Fourqurean, L.K. Muehlstein, D.
Porter, L.A. Yarbro, R.T. Zieman, J.C. Zieman. 1991. Mass mortality of the tropical
seagrass Thallassia testudinum in Florida Bay (USA). Marine Ecology Progress
Series 71: 297-299.
Robertson, W.B. Jr., 1978. Roseate tern. Pp. 39-40. In: Kale, H.W.II (Ed.). Rare and
endangered biota of Florida, Volume Two, Birds. University Presses of Florida,
Gainesville, Florida. 121 pp.
Rosenau et al., 1977. Springs of Florida. Bulletin 31 (Revised). Tallahassee: State of
Florida, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Resource Management,
Bureau of Geology.
Ross, M.S., 1989. Effects of hydrologic factors on the vegetation of Big Pine Key. Pp. 29-36.
In: M.L. Robertson, J.M. Young (Eds.). Freshwater and Surface Water Resources of
Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida. The Nature Conservancy, Key West, Florida.
122 pp.
Ross, M.S., J.J. O'Brien, and L.J. Flynn, 1992. Ecological site classification of Florida Keys
terrestrial habitats. Biotropica 24: 488-502.
Ross M.S., J.J. O'Brien, and L. da Silveira Lobo Sternberg, 1994. Sea level rise and the
reduction in pine forests in the Florida Keys. Ecological Applications 4: 144-56.
Ross, M.S., J.J. O'Brien, R.G.Ford, K. Zhang, and A. Morkill. 2009. Disturbance and the rising
tide: the challenge of biodiversity management on low -island ecosystems. Frontiers
in Ecology and Environment 7: 471-478.
Rudnick, D.T., Z. Chen, D.L. Childers, J.N. Boyer and T.D. Fontaine, III., 1999. Phosphorus
and nitrogen inputs to Florida Bay: the Importance of the Everglades Watershed.
Estuaries 22:398-416.
Rudnick, R., C. Madden, S. Kelly, R. Bennett, and K. Cunniff. 2006. Report on Algae Blooms
in Eastern Florida Bay and Southern Biscayne Bay. Coastal Ecosystems Division.
South Florida Water Management District. Available at http://floridakeys.noaa.gov/
news/algae_blooms.pdf.
Schomer, N.S., and R.D. Drew. 1982. An ecological characterization of the Lower
Everglades, Florida Bay and the Florida Keys. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of
Biological Services, Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-82.58.1.
Scurlock, J.P., 1996. Native trees of the Florida Keys. 1996. Laurel and Herbert, Inc.
Sugarloaf Shores Florida.
Conservation and Coastal Management 315 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Scoffin, T.P., 1970. The trapping and binding of subtidal carbonate sediments by marine
vegetation in Bimini Lagoon, Bahamas. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 40:249-
273.
SFRPC, 2005. Monroe County Marine Management Strategic Plan. South Florida Regional
Planning Council and the Center for Urban and Environmental Solutions of Florida
Atlantic University. December 2005. http://www.sfrpc.com/mcmmsp.htm.
SFRPC, 2007, Monroe County Working Waterfronts Preservation Master Plan. South
Florida Regional Planning Council. April 30, 2007. http://www.sfrpc.com/
MCWorkwater.htm.
SFWMD, 1991. Final draft surface water improvement and management plan for the
Everglades. Volumes I, II, IJI, IV, Appendices A-D, South Florida Water Management
District, West Palm Beach, Florida.
Silvy, N.J., 1975. Population density, movements and habitat utilization of Key deer,
Odocoileus virginianus clavium. Ph.D. dissertertation., Southern Illinois University,
Carbondale, Illinois. 152 pp.
Simberloff, D., and E.O. Wilson, 1969. Experimental zoogeography of islands: the
colonization of empty islands. Ecology 50:278-296.
Snedaker, S.C., 1990. Water quality problems and issues in the Florida Keys. In: Robertson,
M.L. (Ed.). The Florida Keys marine waters and coral reefs strategies for
improvement. The Nature Conservancy, Key West, Florida. 35 pp.
Snyder, J.R., A. Herndon, and W.B. Robertson, Jr., 1990. South Florida Rockland. Pp. 230-
277. In: Meyers and Ewel (eds.). Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central
Florida Press, Orlando.
Somerfield, P.J., W.C. Jaap, K.R. Clarke, M. Callahan, K. Hackett, J. Porter, M. Lybolt, C. Tsokos,
and G. Yanev, 2008. Changes in coral reef communities among the Florida Keys,
1996-2003. Coral Reefs 27: 951-965.
Spitzer, N.C., 1983. Aspects of the biology of the silver rice rat Oryzomys argentatus.
Unpublished M.S. Thesis, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, 101 pp.
Spitzer, N.C. and J.D. Lazell, Jr., 1978. A new rice rat (Genus Oryzomys) from Florida's
Lower Keys. Journal of Mammology 59:787-792.
Steiner, T.M., O.L. Bass, Jr. and J.A. Kushlan, 1983. Status of the eastern indigo snake in
southern Florida national parks and vicinity. Southern Florida Center (Everglades
National Park), Report #SFRC-83/01. 25 pp.
u.,., auu f-uastai management 316 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
Stewart, M.T., M.J. Wightman and K.M. Beaudoin, 1989. The freshwater lenses of Big Pine
Key. In: M.L. Robertson, J.M. Yound (Eds). Freshwater and Surface Water Resources
of Big Pine Key, Monroe County, FLorida. The Nature Conservancy, Key West,
Florida. 122 pp.
Stober, Q.J., K. Thornton, R. Jones, J. Richards, C. Ivey, R. Welch, M. Madden, J. Trexler, E.
Gaiser, D. Scheidt and S. Rathbun, 2001. South Florida Ecosystem Assessment -
Phase I/II - Everglades stressor interactions: hydropatterns, euthrophication,
habitat alteration, and mercury contamination. Monitoring for adaptive
management: implications for ecosystem restoration. United States Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA 904-R-01-002.
Szmant, A.M., and A. Forrester, 1996. Water column and sediment nitrogen and
phosphorus distribution patterns in the Florida Keys, USA. Coral Reefs 15:21-41.
Tabb, D.C., 1967. Prediction of estuarine salinities in Everglades National Park, Florida, by
the use of ground water records. PhD. Dissertation, University of Miami, Coral
Gables, Florida.
Taylor, W.K., 1998. Florida wildflowers in their natural communities. University Press of
Florida, Gainesville.
Teas, H. and J. Kelly, 1975. Effects of herbicides on mangroves of South Vietnam and
Florida. Pp. 719-728. In: Walsh, G., S. Snedaker, and H. Teas (Eds.), Proceedings of
the International Symposium of the Biological Management of Mangroves,
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Tetra Tech, Inc., 1983. Ecological impacts of sewage discharges on coral reef communities.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 420-9-83-010, Washington, D.C. 85 pp.
Thomas, T.M., 1974. A detailed analysis of climatological and hydrological records of South
Florida with reference to man's influence upon ecosystem evolution. Pp. 82-122.
In_Gleason, P.J. (Ed.). Environments of South Florida: Present and Past. Miami
Geological Society, Miami, Florida.
Tilmant, J.T., 1989. Foreword (symposium on Florida Bay, a subtropical lagoon). Bulletin
of Marine Science 44:1-2.
Tomlinson, P.B., 1980. The biology of trees native to tropical florida. Maria Moors Cabot
Foundation for Botanical Research and Atkins Garden Fund of Harvard University.
480 pp.
UNEP, 2010. Solid Waste and Marine Litter. United Nations Environment Programme
Caribbean Environment Programme. http://www.cep.unep.org/ publications -and -
resources/ marine -and -coastal -issues -links/ solid -waste -and -marine -litter.
Conservation and Coastal Management 317 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update
USACE and SFWMD, 2004. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement - Florida
Keys Water Quality Improvements Program, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Jacksonville District and South Florida Water Management District, August 2004.
http://www.evergladesplan.org/
pm/projects/non_cerp_sf projects_fkwgip.aspx#info
USACE and SFWMD, 2006. Florida Keys Water Quality Improvements Program, Program
Management Plan, Final, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jacksonville District and
South Florida Water Management District, September 2006.
http://www.evergladesplan.org/
pm/projects/non_cerp_sf projects_fkwgip.aspx#info.
USDA, 2010. Soil Maps and Soil Data. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service. http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app (Soil Maps Version 1, Aug 2, 2007;
Soil Data Version 2, Jan 13, 2010).
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1995. Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. Draft
Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement. Volume II. Development of
the Management Plan: Environmental Impact Statement. Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary, Key West, Florida.
U.S. Department of Commerce, 2007. Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Revised
Management Plan. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration,
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, Key West, Florida.
U.S. Department of the Interior, 1988. Coastal Barriers Study Group. Executive summary.
In: Report to Congress: Coastal Barrier Resources System. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Washington, D.C. 27 pp.
U.S. Department of the Interior, 1989. Big Cypress National Preserve Draft General
Management Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Statement. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Atlanta, Georgia.
USEPA, date unknown. Hazardous waste assessments, Monroe County, Florida, Component
two: Identification of abandoned dump sites. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
16 pp.
USEPA, 1996. Water Quality Protection Program for the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Battelle Ocean Sciences, Duxbury,
Massachusetts, and Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. Jupiter, Florida.
US EPA, 2009. Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.1, Coastal Sensitivity to Sea Level Rise:
A Focus on the Mid -Atlantic Region. U.S. Climate Change Science Program.
USFWS, 1999. South Florida Multi -species Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Southeast Region. Atlanta Georgia.
Conservation and Coastal Management 318 Technical Document: May 2011
Monroe Countv Comprehensive Plan Update
USFWS, 2006. Biological Opinion issued to Federal Emergency Management Agency. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Letter Report issued August 8, 2006. FWS/R4/ES.
USFWS, 2008. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment.
Lower Florida Keys National Wildlife Refuges: National Key Deer Refuge; Key West
National Wildlife Refuge; and Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuge. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region, Atlanta,
Georgia.
USFWS, 2009. Lower Florida Keys National Wildlife Refuges. Comprehensive Conservation
Plan. National Key Deer Refuge, Key West National Wildlife Refuge, Great White
Heron National Wildlife Refuge Monroe County, Florida. October, 2009.
Wanless, H., 2008. Miami -Dade County Climate Change Advisory Task Force Science and
Technology Committee Report: Statement on Sea Level in the Coming Century.
Weiner, A.H., 1979. The hardwood hammocks of the Florida Keys: an ecological study.
National Audubon Society and Florida Keys Land and Sea Trust. Key West, Florida.
Zieman, J.C., 1972. Origin of circular beds of Thalassia (Spermatophyta: Hydrocharitaceae)
in South Biscayne Bay, Florida, and their relationship to mangrove hammocks.
Bulletin of Marine Science 22:559-574.
Zieman, J.C., 1982. The ecology of the seagrasses of south Florida: a community profile. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-
82/25. 158 pp.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Conservation and Coastal Management 319 Technical Document: May 2011
nn
W W
a
°
.n
o
�W
'C s.
O
ccq
Cvj CL
Lfi
Ca
nL
c)
C U
O 0.
cn O
to
y s: O C1
a,
aui
a n, u O
x
aU .�
a� `n y w
O a. a) cam.
O m O
2
Y
CSC • V
y ° G.
" ���
o
a.� Ln
000
r w
O
° w
L
""
E
'Ti C C
O°
`_'
s: N
O C •L7
y
C�4 p
C
N
i •C
CO
p y Q
6.
N c
y C
vi
N
C �,•j
p
y >
N
a) 'C >, L,
i
� CA
M
C
�"
'C U a) CV
L U M
cC O COS.+
N
,O
•� cC
y
COcu C
0
L O
O O O
tG Cs"
p
'CS
> CC
CLnO
Cn
cu
Cn
M
0
>
3�
�W>0
O~ A
u
L
..O '
C6 u 0
O CO V)
° y
O
D
O y u
"o
N -0 C .a
O O O O O L
L
C
O m O
C7 COO Ou bOD
O Q'
to
a)U O"
fZ' 0
CO -0 'O °" O
Q v .>
'O vi
'C
S•^ O O u
a �°i �'C c+:
C a.).
.� y
bO a) 'O V) a)
TS
O O -C O V
c06 a>'i
x c
o
a
° o
Z
❑
h
O C C
,
L L
O O
v T5 CU
CL
O O iL
O C6 U i a)
y'' C
U
C1 .0 x
L �+ L
C4 v)
C4 •� O
y o
O O 3
�- cz a)
Q
� o
3
p a o o
u i
�
O c4
c y C u
c
c ,� 0 O
�, y
�p
> Cv o `n c
° c 3 c
0)
a)
4. � o
c-0
o ce o
m
CU
a
>
a, u oj
c .^ V) o
u �,
u a�
aa)
o w > u
> x V, v
a) .O O CL
Q aOj 6'
a)
c6 ,—,
C V) j
V) a.+ O •� V M
v)
'B
y
n
u C O O
�
C�
.,C O >, cE
F•
.� O En
O 0 O
UO � C
O O
w
o
x c u
o w
m�
c �_ c o
u C n.
C3 F
0 E a0� ' En
V
"� CLO .�
s:
N w >, U
0
.� CO .0 U
O � .�
H y '4 ,C
rl
:r \
O7 C
O >+
O" O 'B w
O Ln
O N
c`.. u
° i a0)
s:
a a) 0 a a)
O Cn
L5 v
y _
'u
vi y C a) ra
ca V)
y M
y y
Os:,
y .0
0
-° O
,,
LO 'sr ate.+ Ca y0, y
ice.+
C:
° •� .L vi
'C C
CL
p c)
0
�i
�y
•"' W
L C
Cl.
C4
c r1
�+ C4
C4
C
CU
a)
o ° LO vi
G
a) o Ca
7
y
w x F"
O O
Cc
i U CO O N
L
L.
OLn
O ,.O
O p a) v)
,..+ w OfV C
to
L .0 1:
L L.75 -a
O GO
c
x O
CU
v, — E� cc
E— w L x
vO
C] y
SO'
N
,-+
.°n
,
u �
d
r0+ 'CD
a
0 0
M
M
M
M
M
U C
U
U
L)
U
C
U
U
7
0
M
C
h a
U
^� V L VI
U °O
Q) V r S
C>6 •° i
L
o
p U CC
V) ^�
W y
O
7
u
L
L O
LO,
[Cf
0:)
N
by U '6
Q
a) 'CS
O O
C>
h
c4 O
X 0)CC
L7D `� m
>
U
C
O
7 p y¢
L
ti
y Cl.
'i
C
z- y C cam,
�"' 'b Q) V] Cl
U
��
C4
C 3 0
CL N
U
O O Q CL
O vU a)
CL >
En cu
.^ C
O
Ln
cu u
+�
cz
V)
En
O CC
y V)
y
C
C:. CC y �- p
L.f)
aj U >
>,
C
'Ln
u
U
CU > E �
C6 s^ C6
c0 C
mcz
u o +�
.c V) m
u°
a
CCLfi
^p y
O
O 6) cw U CD
u C
N
O E
N J..+
w LO
'C L O C
.a > =
Ln
O C y a) tn
C y — >
"C CU
U
N Q�
>>
ct
C U V,
C
c�
Oy)
C4 L Its
a i' O
^- CS
3 w >
�-
F
c0 Q- C C C
O C O
y }' +� u >
O
O
CL
p:
sU. O
c U
h
ca
cz
yr
°
E^ In0. L
CL� 'C
U t4
V) u
O U p \
E- OD L co Cn
O i >U
Sx Cn
bA SU
bA
C Its
Cn
i L 6) U bA
a)
-C
O
V) bA
C
O
CLn
Cj
CU
U a) -M
L O y
p C
CO
C U
c0
U
U c� a)
ftY
N DD 6) U
�
C
,a
C
bC.D
i
w C
C a)
cuCU
v
C
•� O sue.
tU. y .0
C
U
L
a)
rn
4) L Ln
C C U >' i
a) Q) U
h
y
L
O
'i
C
a)
L
O C
C
O
L
a)cu
o
C
a
C
4
co
3
o°
N C
a -°a ° 3
v n C6
O
M>
y C5
E C U L
C
u
C
CL
y C>
V,
C
y
C
C4
a�
V,
0 CL
y
�D CU
i '' 4C-
O
a)
i ro
a4
ca o
m
--
L m C
a �, a� o
>, �7
=
a C
W
U
an
C
L
U fC U L,
m U
—
tDz
O 'i °
O
M
W
+'�•'
L y
0 0
U
b C
L
°
vU,
Lcu
cLi
0)
-C O
C- L 3 0-
0
O
m O
C
C—
V)
? m
a) �y
L +U�
L O CL -C
i i y
C .0 M C 'C
Q)
'�
C E
-C C
�
.. O
O
C
Cma CU
C> In O
v v y a)
0)
ii
p 0
C
C
V
L
N
N O +'
>
+'
cu O U
aJ •3 aJ C
'''
Cc
,--i r
m
m
rn
m
rn
Cn
n'm
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
O
M
N
.� .�
u
u
O
C
a
-
N
M
_
O
yE"
o1,
C
E
'CS a p
o
LD
L
CU O
bi,
C L
O
o
LC
w
a
++ a s
O
p L.
N C.
u
Rf
a u
x
X
u
a
a
a
ca
m m
L
p w i
w
M
tit >1
u
L
w
sue, .0
tC
h
cu
F"
L
W
-%
>
CL
cl f m
°
c
O
O
L O v aw
O •Ltl >
a cz
'�
c6
L.
O L
RI
>
W
tLS10 O 'C
Z CU
a)
C
Ci
V
bz cc
api
>
> 'J
a) �'
u
F
i
w i
aCZ x sa
G O w>
ai
ai
p
L 4:
a7 i Q) L
U L
L
Sa. L
L L
O Q)
a) a)
F aF u OQv
¢
cn uto
yr
to
cu
,
a75
T-
zu�-a
cz
U
CUar.
a) ,�
a i LT.
O
O' a O cC
O, a
cn
C.
p
G ca.
cC C
"a O '
a
CO F � cC
En � ^
ct
s
ca
u
a
'�
a
a
a
O
C
a O
k II
a
O .�
> y
L y
O sa, su. N
UO
.N
..
L 7
O C
L. Lp
c0
.p ?�
m F
V3 u a .�
�O
G.
h— w O
"' V) cC
bOA
a
CL
{.+ CU6
^
p
o
u p
U
m w
O
u c, a a.
a oo
w'C
L
OL.
L7
� >
RS c6 rC
o o_
OV3cC
c0
�+ a
L
L F L
CL'
.0 .� ctf
Z '''
oz�°
c a a
n$
�+LL�on�c>'a3>.c�
m a L o c
o
tu L L
bb
aoiCU
a)
M �,
o o
a
N
o ro
ca
C1
^ao
U L �••'
U L •'O
^o
CC
O
fin
...
O b a Q)
o a
L L
O
� U
v' h Ln
vai
L
cn O
u
i -M
O
L� a)
0. +'
V) L L
a o O p O
CL
Oa
CL ^�
O a
i
v
N p
O p O -
V,
TS
i] Lx
Cl O CC O C] N
II.. y y .V)
!]
U U IU IU IU IUIU IU IU
W
Lr
7.
'O
tLS
O 'TJ QS n C].
yO
i,
•�
O 00, LYl O � W yR,, O i �_
i�', N
R
� cn O � a. R .0
ul W
yO bA E i+ L R
�
'_ y WO'
LnUO C m aOi
O
. _
L.--
• a.
y
tOi7 L U
R tz O- L �
i:+ R
L
y L L
y '�
b0 GJ O
�' •� Y L y L O
•,UU•
c
c a
a
a
�' ° a a
C.)¢
c
C
cz
O O
O O CU
D
a)
=
R 'O y U R N i
i
R
bD R a)bD ¢' R
w w
N
b0 p U
° ° O -O
N
ai N
_�
L � L
60)
L
aUi C.)O
L L L
bbz z`n. o .O CU
O O O O O R L L O„
L L
b0
to to
Q sO. Q
Q
Q Q Q
C.7 b0A COO toiO. E Q Q fII C7 cOC
Q Q
y O 7
O
7
1 U W
V
QczU
G7 Q)
O
x ° R O
aucu
i
•N I
CD.N
7J
R
h
'O
O
U
a)
R R R y O
p
Ln
'C
cnx
N
� •�
CD
LO
U R N
cu
tn
is
O. O cu
to Ln
L.
L
.i rc o
Ln
o
w
3 0
IN
ry N W_
U
VI
B
y
C'n O cy0
0.1
M O
� 'O
y
Ln_o
a
3
a�
o
m
U
a�cu
CJU
O,
4
CJ
O cOC O
is O
w
U
O a)
W y
cu
Vi
O
L
y V
U x
i W
m° aLi
R
O
aO vO
V) U +•+
.ice R
L U
U
U
R U
U y L R
N
Q
R ^w
w cu
°
R U
U
i- ° Otn
L
0
0 0
Cz
J
U R G)
SR TS
C
'_
4-
p
o
O U Lns'�.+
+�
bD p L
V)
Ll. C7
i W
v o
y W Gi
o
y
t4 x
QJ
R R
c� n �
y
.: V)..
a�
.1 a)9
R o
>
�'
S o ° -a
a
vi y R
R cN
R
O •_
y^O•,
CL O O
GJ
�vj L
LnW
O O .E L
Ln
tzx
o-a o
O Ln
to o
_�
Q Q
Q m�
O. 2
iJ Q�4
M
U
W
O
M
"IZ
O
O ca
LL
Ln
H
p
y,
^ cu o
+- o
a) "a
�'
o
cs
a)
(A
a D
cu
°
cu
a
o o
�
CSC
��" N
:�
[UQ �
U U �
SU•'
�
�
cu
aJ
°
nj
M
M
.. Q yp
O O v -a
C_O
G' O
O
0
O O
O
-1
Ln
G c G1
a, a
u
> Q
L
Q
o
Q)
s
cC O
cu cu
°
C p
O
+�
to
4]
L
a)
CC
>
cp
O YJ
v O
CA
O a) O
X
(U
C
C1
a)
u s
=
e p
O
O
vOi
.> C •
>
O r.4
,u
O
O
i> co cC
Q)
M
.
V
O O
C3
O
C
Q
E" CL co
W
x ¢
Q
0 Q
O u
O
u> O
O
N O O
i.+
O
n.
7
,�
O
O rA
O i
Wp Y
O
,'O.+ n.
>'
�--i O .a -a _u
U �..i X
C'L'
L ,x
�-'
O a)
p .0
v'.-i �'' O
O M
O O +'
O a' Q) "U
h
4a)
> O
_O O
aJ L7
y sc
� u
Ct O N a)
u o
> a)
Q) u
a)
c o x m a� �.
0
3 +�
un
va'i c
u ^c c
m
a Q,
ca c
o Q, y M
c
s.
z. u O
i
S1 p
CD
a, X m O
O L'
v
B>,
N= O O
.0
i+ p
.O O
h aJ •M
L O
•� O O i
.�+
Q C. cQ
cE
,� a) w ,,,,
,•
.O
L. a) .= ai
>, O
c�^i O O
m +-+ L
^O
M .CF,
TO 0
O Q cu u y O cu 's..
O
m 0
O
cn Q)
GO
.x .x
V tOQj
3
Q)
O Q' ..O
.E
't.'
a) ,� -0 C
cn O ttY T3 c4 a) i, a) En
Ln
o
man
u
3
p x p° x
u v
° i
V)
�°
a> a� .0
G w i
cu
Ln
fC . V)
(n J..+
Q) CO m ,B
cz
2r 3,
m 00 ' n
— Q) 3 C
Fes- u
C Z x �+ = vv) L.0 a) °t'
O
Z
S�
ei n.
TJ M
C '> 00
c i Q) u
ti O C
O
N B
C O Q u
r C O a u
i i
O _O
U
�.
c.,.i
M
r-4 s.
i L' cQ
N
CYSQ
m
a)
C-i
M lz i+
O Q)
U
cn aJ
d' L(j ,� „�
M -- cn s. �, u _O
Uicu
u
a� C
Q) .x
u l-..c u
M �. m= C
u o Q)
M i''
r+
cu M +-' Q�J Q L" V)
u u u u v
M
W
x
u O
O
cn .0 E.
O O R u
Ln u n. 0) a) a)
a) w .� O
V) �' cn `" v a� O
u
O
'i''
In L
Lq a) M p> >' 9l. O U yi
S:L'C3
m
�"� 00 N Q) m +'�•� C O y
(n
Ln
cu •�
a. u
II. sa. W O U O U ,� y
N
N k N
0 0 ca u vOj
� IU IU IU IU IU IU IU
O
v
uu •;
M °
O i
o
w
y L+
n
L
U O
iJLn
,.�
.
u
a� O
a)
0.1 O O >
O
o
p
+-+
cE
•U a7
O O u
^
aJ
m
CO
L
i O > ^
a
cn
,^, y cn
vi L
L
.N a)m
y
Ln
U Ln
N L
cu CU
O
OL L1...0 C Ln
U
U
u
u ,L
Ln
O O
O O L cn
oZj
O (n
.0 F
`�
..
�+ Q
L\
m w O
C4 �.
VUi
O
N
� C
•O
vS fC � U CD _U
.cu
C4
p
�p
cz
aD�vti.cn
0
O
RS
U cn Ln
C O
O u
O
y O O+ O
B\
p
O
O t4 O
^C O M
T�
,,
a iz +' a>
>
co rz
x
y
C\ O
O U
CCS
+3
U
U U
•-� U WU
w w >
N
N
w
L
bA
L
b0 w O
U
OO Z O a)
L S.U.
OD b0 OL
SU,
CD
GO
T.U.
bD
¢ 3
¢ o a
C
r o a .� o r>~
¢¢ a
¢
¢
¢
GO.O
L n•
aJ
Z r C
-O
O0 0 4+ O
V)MOO
C O
N
u
d0 U
.� X O
c
a) .= y 'O
p .O
O
C
CL L—
c6 i
w
f4
(� 1 r
fC
4)
R.
o
W� O
O
y tLc
o
L
cu
o
p y
.^
O m
O U N
a)
N ...n. C E O
u
L
O
> o L
>
ia. m E O ''' O
a) C6
M Cn ca .a
a °'
CU
V
- C n
Ln t4
L
a)
c
U rJ CU O c4
O
�
L10
O". au o Cs��
-0
u Q'
O ..0
m=
Ln
O O
_= sU..
^ O
M
m
m
Op
O
mticsU»
O O
En .i.� � «S
M
�. Ln O
Ln M � ,L'
C CE
N V)i
CL i O
a 3
M i¢
Cn
O
Ln
O
Ca
e^
U
sN.
O
.�
CC
U >
L
to
r+•-+
U
d" h m
ccO C U
>,
cr,
CDU O O U v
in
to
cc
0 O
I-q
M fC V
O J
M M
G1 cn a CL F
C�'i �U
O w
II O N 3' O-m
G .L
O
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
fNi
Iz
a)
,S]
O
W
O
�
E
O
L
O
a
w
LL.
>
L
h
i
_U
a)
L
L
X
a)
a)
L
O
v
Q)cz
o
in.i•' Q )
a
°
L
�
L o c i
,c V
w
c a)
H y
a)
�_�
•fn
f4
U`o
L
in
„�; O
o °
L
.c
C: - O w
O
Ex-
a) O V) w O G
fC U O
V) CL)-o
w
>
°' M. O O a) -; L
a0i
O -C
-O O V) ° vi O bl
i a c-
CLn O U �; O
O
C7 �L75 a)
L
n - s0. O O
L �D lu
L .a 0)
,..+ c m L cC U
� � y � �••' �
� Via:+ � S L 3 Y �
O a°i
cn y .. c ` cn
>
L L L
'O a 0
Qrq
om' n
E^y O U ro
Sn O O O
o" v
;,
O' M V) a)
V)
O
M
d 'C
O L O cLa x y
CL u O J CL O L
L 6Ui c4 U 7
Ln L' S.O. S7 Cn O O
'C7
n CL .�
N 3 CS. O cc)C w
L p) O n
CO ti y
V,
c o
V bQ) Ln
cC --
v r.
>,E';
° °
o v
Sr +=+ to O n• 'Z,S
y
r CD i o p C
•� -o E U o a°i
O cC Ln
CU
N -M M L
N y vi RS N 14
M Cl M m
d T3 S� O 4 O a)
.x a y
M O-M i M O O
O
O co y
oco
U U IUIU IU lU IU
M
U
'O
O
0
O
M
n
n U
U
a)
V) m U
F^
n
O y U
O
0
V) L -
Cc cG V
O
to
y 'a3
0
Q L
4]
u c
H
Q
C
�
C)
O
L C4 ,4, -�
N
.O L
'>
.� Q tUi�
to
v7 C4
O
a)
U O
U
U
L
o
4 L
a)
t
C4 a) = - y
-=
> t4
GC
O
p
• CC
— �; V)
L
'—
i+ a)
�
O V) U
7
°�
0)
V3 �
u
y
y
(Q
U
.O a) L- CU
CII > -0 ^=
W
N C
4
Cn d +'
O U
L
cC
>
_O CN O
p
c0 N
O
•�
x
''� C (U0 0
CL
w
p Q U
cuC. ° m WO
.O
U Cn u7
v a) m y
p
eD ca Q
cu
L
cu C: CC
N 4U.
CC b.+ bQ f4
CL Cn
cn OU to °
a)
O a1 >>
O a) U
O Cn t n
p y v s0 O
C u Uqp '� Lam,
U O U i
3 ° o
° ¢>
c � L°°
a o i n
Q)
n'
a) "-'
M V) W > �..'
C/) p>
aj 4,1
O S O L_
.0 "M
O �..+
. CII
O ° -C
bD .fl
>, �•
LO v
.G
Ln p y C>
u C
c a,
CC y L
M
(n m N a)
U ? _U L. '9 CC .L' 'Ci
Ij
cu
O O
M O F-'
N d CL ct u
v
M C CC .0
p Ct
M ca `� ra
W >,
Co ^C Orl ca L
O a)
V) y O
O u) a) , m U i+
M to y
M C i. y
^Q
— U W N ^G mCc
u �
CA >> Q)
� �
�
z
U aj
U
y '.3 Q
a7
O a)
GD
'm
V)
CO N y O
Cn O ,� O u ^p a)
a) c. U a1 'C
cu
L
0 w F O
'a0 >
c U
O
O3 'y. .� U U
O� c•-• NL. O x O>
Ju O
U O
e-i C i R
r-i Q rn U U,
0IL)
I p O V O
>
C1. C7 U Q 'O
sr
�+ O
M
M
M
M
U
U
U
U
H
L �
O ly
w
a) Ln
h
C y
ill f�l
y
d
x
cu
E
w
fC
C
I�
Rf
CA
O
U
I
O
M
v o
a
o L i
G M
O
F-
V) V)
aJ
c
�
� a
V
ro
ro ro
a a
° ro
u s�
O ro
a
CU
o 2s
v
Ts
c
ro
ct
.m
o
y
❑ c
C7 a,
o
_
2:1
_O
ro
Q%
_=
U
f,
SQ. L
L. j=
SO, 4 C
bDcz
^y
v y
aLi 6
i au
•• >
c
ro a
°
c o
C
3
R
3
C
cLC
LQ
CU
•�
Q Q
rn
� ro
Q ro�
u
cn
L
v, O M
p,
)
a
VI
V)
cu
o
ro o F"
Lo
5
w x
°: —''
3 cu
cu c
a)
a)
a) O
v7 a+ v)
y a)
U
bn
Q1
cu U a) a)
y
.> v ro
w
Ln
W
aJ
^ h _�
° A 3
o m
V)
oz v
m >� y
o°
3
00 O �
u CU .� Ov m
U)
a; �'
ro
0 4- � •� c � ro U �
o � O con '� o L '-'
i � �
un
'v
a a O
o
n c m o
o
o o a --
o U W ro
ro.
3 n f4 a' " L u
o �' °
E
cu °Ln a ro
c u
ai
aoi
v o
cuQ
v
CU o ti Z ;�
�° p C .c
a
y
a)cu
O �' C a) y N(
U N OU C
� �+ CU
ro CO +' �' N x
wt:z p �"! 00 dA y ro "Q cj O
•'0 4- o ro
M
Q
3 O+ �... N L i+ M L1.
ro O cu w °�
6
O
i
,Ln
iM UL a)m
o ro O ro G t-
U
ro
o C3 +�' CL u�>
M L
0 Q�
O +'
ro G
ro, e— C4 V) Mi L - O ro
m. � w
c v -c ri ro ro o >-
x
O 5
L
y C
x U
N U O ro a) C
a) o u r- J-' a) O
ca a) N 3
:z � GL O O h
to ro O + '� d ro
.cu
C .� w s% +' w
O .Q 6) cu ro +.., co w
s, O L
O L^ O -Cf
a) ti
ij ro o
E-N ❑
y
U O N •� A
ci ci o �s w CL rz
°; ° o °L' ai
.0
cn v°
M
M M
M
�
�
v
:!-�j
0
M
C+
to C
=
cYi
y
>
y
�
N
V)
N
Y
V)
o
u o
y
O
U
y
L
L
J-I
:n)
y —
O
y
•U
c0
y w
S]
V)
N
ONtz
�
y
p
y "U
N i
v
y
O
O
CZ cz
V)
a
�
0
>
d
C
L
M O
V)
>
y
m
4-
CU 0.)L
C
di
L
2) Iz
> C)
.�
L
Q
¢
Q i
L O
bA b0 -0
Q Q
vu) c)
y � O � y
V1 cu
�2
"O >> w
4.. >>
�, y C a) L
E. E
O 60 v
0�^) —lu E>
M n p
CU
CL)
"C
a) cuM LL. C) L tc .^.,
L 'CS
(a U L C6
p c6
y
r'
2
0 N .a) y
L
�+
M. O O
.9 y y,
y
O
,-)
J..1 V1 is. L
y 2 y
y V)
; p .�
d-� Ln -Z Jy.�
i
�•, i O
i .— V
to cu
C 'O [n m
O y it U
�' M Y fL/7 �$.y'
r•+ ,�.
U cu
y y (� "'� >
m >i
O o y o c
— m"
y o
Ln ° y
y., +•' -
ctl i U
y
O
x
> y y y
O L
y V)
s
byA >
in y y
C
3 0
v) =
v, a)O
V)
CD
O C
C •x
c6 'O fa L
c0
O N O O
O N C
O C O
tocu
y y O
� ems.,
O y
y y
CL O C y
°''��
� �
y ct1
u
— p y
- L y (v
L C
C o Q)
ca�
' C
L L -0
O i.+ iC.+ W
y O
M to O y w
bA II. [C p
E
y 4� p
a)ty
Ln
O^ o
_C .O
o
.� O
o f U y—
o
a L
... y
�+ W �, fn aj
M >, O
m 'B
C 0)
M
y a)GD C
" V]
y O 'O i c9 -
r.O
N O y y t6
G) O
O
cqL.
O y y w
to .� CCy y
I� -C �+
_
O 0.> a) •c:>
M r6 OL
co a. - y
M C .� Gam^,
M .� CCL) r-+
d'
-O
7 'Lf °
D. -5 o w O,
d E E o
a •� Q" o
° � d O
m
cp.) .�
cn ca
M
M
M
M
M
U
U
U
U
U
0
O
M
En En
CU M tn-i
L G M
h u
C
.fl -0
7—
O ti V O
Gi.
y +'�..+ R M
_c
v v c o
O
fa u
>
y
M
O
W O
W tiu
O
N
A
r6
O i
O
ca
u y f"'4 V
y
u
CL u
x
fC
L
O
Ca y,
L
oa
o
C
F to o
o
O
N z O
`O w
o
-o
O
cOa L.V,
O L w
t'a
i O M O V
u :
v
u
'C
7J
O
V
cz W O
bn
CU
-p CL y d u V 'C
F V) L.
b0
L
to
J
C: C On (n
v p Op C En
N 'C
Uu
O — O L V u L _N
� L fa
GJ L
°
_., U
o
o m ° o,
a °
u>
o
OCL h
m Ca �"� f�a +Ocu '
ai >
W 3 v 3 'a V)
4
v aoi
O U
bD T3 fa O
p u�L" C y ^^�• .0
�...�
T1
¢� u
CL p
.0 i ca CU O
'''
w w O
_ ca O .z .o u
y
m .� r..+ ..0 "CS to C: C:
O fn o V O F L U ca u
= �
b0 3 L v�
c cacu
w
o o � y z �
.o Ts bQ °
c
p� O Lc�4
^ro
O
Q y N
y m L 'O..y. 4' °
-
N p
ct
cn Cl. C �T. u :� t,6
O O �
.0
O ° O
'O
C3 Z O
L m
.G M y .0 U Cl)
i+
y C: y= a
L Ln
C m O
M O
O
y
O
O
N
O
V
rj
M O vi co> M C O N
M R ca cam. p y
V C; -•
) i+ O
N C:
rn
V Cy L(u
O .�,,,
L
�vj
C
"a
J
M V x� w
O Lx] �a O CZ w cyII p
C N cLa
O 'CY
y
,
L
O
.
O
mp W°
X> C s.
cz
L3 Cl
d tNr]
N
VN
yu
CY i L
M
..0
M M M
M
U
vL-1 .c
U
U
c
►E3
0
O
M
Q' O
Ln a)
y0" O C t4
O
ro
cu
a.
O
V) aL
ro> a y
cn •� -a
cz
O
6> > O
'fl O W
L
ro O
4.
qD p 3
c4
U
m L
O
L r-+ O
U
U aJ
L
n O
O L
O O v
G. y
a) a
CLn
dG +-� O
��
'C >
ct .�
•i O L
C7
y G O N
cn
> i1
U
Q)
Ln
o
ro 3 fl
O
ro ap L
CA L"
y is ro
ca
w L tx
c—C)
Q) u
-.
'C
r-yi0
(a QJ
•O y
y
C N ro
C cz a>
�, o CL ro
ca
c
Ln
CZ CL)
_
O
'CS
O
...
ro cL0
.n . ro L
cz
_
cC
-C
_L
•>
cn
Ln 7-- �•' CE
'_' tom' '�
bD v .y
i••'
v
L J-+
ai
L
ai
L
a
muH
a o
f6 y
¢ u u¢�¢
u¢
tx
O a> O L
;, ro
II
a)
'�
�
Q �
o
F cz ai
3
v
ro
au
GL
a,
vi Ln O ,,
o O
L
c
o
a) __
¢�
ro
o
6� y
I V cn O "-' "'
cn O O
O
—
c>4 S cn
u w
O
ro
O
a s
.(1)
�
ro )
_U
a) O
"CS a R
O
C -�
O
a
U O
'C
a) O O
.�
v .a O a.)
�
L
cu
C
L' .m
(LS L
'�
L
�
Ln
U
O
L
[)
N
cu
Q
�+
m
73
Q1
N
'�
En tic
cn
n
cm
llu
lc
ca
a)
cLC
>
C C
°y
'o f>3
ro 41
_
O
U
ro
N
L
L
N p
rl ro
"^O ro a) ate.+
M ^^+ ro
-0
,_,
ro
y0
ro
N
O N ro O
al 3
�.
Ln
y
ro
a)
LG +� •
cu
'c
a�
G
ro
L '
c >
n — cn
w
m
3
cc
N
.�. Q] L
D >?'
L
O
�
rl ice.
O
vI
'= N�
._
O y
w
O
N
N OL r
y O
aLi
O L
C C
a
_
F- ° °
v
o
ci c,
C �
x �
v
C U
CU
M
M
y
M
M
M
M
v
v
C0.7 0
C�.J
V
V
V
C
rl Z
vi
cu
.6 E O cuca
E N
ca .d Z
L M
'NOCL pp �0.+ y v v1
L y G i1. C W u O ti O ff,' 'S
V1 .O
G7
p c6
E
Z
3
H ) cu
O C O
O
C M. M
^a O u O
i O 'B v G
0.
i
O 'C r-
O a' cn 'd ti
,�
— O C: = N 'O to
�'
U_ j cu
CL p C
ca .4
ca "" CL i .O y
ai cu
O
O O
?
N
O as L VcyC
m s Z cz m�
II
X w
r
O C R
^
i, o y
is
F ca E
v
-
�
ncu
C
CL
C
O L.
—> y E •a a ca
X 0.
•p
41 d..
o C's> u V m
:E o E o o o
E
? a
yam+
C u
cu�' p O
LOU
.te
v M
s> to F 3 3
N
S E d
li
n
r
w 'II O
cu
L
U
C 'fl u �
Q) L .I..+ L•�
L
N L
p
y
= C
` • > p N a'
61 CL m ^ h O mO
Jam,
C CL
.b
y
cu
D\
ice.
m L ai t
yCD
a a> o o
O L
c '�
a u
O C,� O
}'
M.
a.)
a' � y o 3
C y II. O
t
to 7 F 7 •c C
ai^
o
C
aoi n
E O
Ln
L.,�
cLOC
O
1-1 N u
L
cu LL - 'T U"
U L .0 p u
Co m "" .0 � �
N
m cu
fa
O
r
cuM cC
y
d C O
E O CL i... L1 p q O
O E c E o o
L
O N
,�..+
U M U
c O M N
Q u .X
UO
H C°
v� O
R
d'
C: OJ m
U
- u cu cu .o
O ay�i ^�
+� wo 3 E a,> c
h
cz o
M
3
O
E •O c0 C L ca �"'� bD �, L �
3 c
1 F'
o
L �"'
O C,
° cu
m o,� w• a o` ra
ai ° � a �
II
aa,
v cL
a 3 o a, = 0. a c
E �
•�
�Fcz n -,
N O C L O
Ecn�� u ca.E.E cac�
to Off.+'
x u �w
O p
fa GJ W
v7
pLn
E nw
=
0
a °' a
°
V v
O
cu
° C
—
7
C Q O
=
n O
t4 L G
N
w u
E O O
O O
¢
u L
3
o'
L
cov
cN
O
O .Q
rA
LU• O
O 7 cu
C
,C
O
°
X
0n
o
O
C cu
cu�
Q� W
y L O
N
L
.'� .a
U y i
a L
aL+
cz
1-0
N°
w o
3
`r v
s..
E v
CU
t�
c
aU
.�
M
M
U
U
O fV
w
a� N
H Q7
O cc
ap
H
4t
�.i
O
tw
m
'C
m
era
H
e4
O
U
T,
0
M
m
N
bD
bVA
> •C
to
m LS
C
y ca
L �
ca
C70
U
B O
0.
bA
cn
i
O
U
0
CA
L.
cC
O
O
Ln
CU
Ln O
,U
.^.
b.0
a)
.4-- cu
O
p
to
C
>� °
•�
'O
m
�'
cc
cc
U
u
° O
V
>
c4
'C
�
n
a)
cz
a
CU
cn
C
L
°
Ln
CL)
C
css
C
C)
V
3
CUmM
x
ao
Z
F-
Q
Q
f n
.X o
bA
'p
cya R
w�
yr.
Ln
co
a
—
i n
tw a :o
>
L
00
>
ocz
En
cC
cCC
cC
00
O
>
uj
�>>.
cu
cu
rA
O y
O
bD
C U
¢ L
i
❑
cr
C—
C
C
p
z>
C
>
� En
a
R1 c0
a _
°
o
�
� L
°o°
C uQ
O N
-
o°°
a
C
L
ca
o>
C>
a
bo
a
o
Ts
o
°
o U
c
o
L. C) �..+
zi
c4 >
C
y
3
o
U .L
O �.'�
o°
w
C o
°
c
a o
O
,Lr-,
O_
C°
U o
F-
s,
a
V°
c LW
cn N
a) C
C C
o p
y0
O
o
O V
4 .a o
i
p°
�
m
C
ra
O bJ] ice.
'�y>,
O
U
N
O
O
C
R
a
�--i 7 -
= C
, Ln
ft5
^C
N
C
y=
O
� i+
cn
O
fly., .�
C Q
'LS
U°
O
cn
m
�'
a)
�+
C am.+ cn
C
V
Lu
p
L
CL
O
U i
C
cu .—
a) L
ca
�+
CV w
a.+
a)
.-y V
.y
aJ C
m
V -0
a, V) y
LC O
a) -
°)CLyc
++
co
cam L
.c�
Ln m a)cu
cz u
roCI
y O
^
M O
rmr tcC,
G .�
cC .�
E- .::
''"�
M
O
CJ
`"'c
M
v7
ca
Gl. F-
X
Q)
.� c�a ,� c�
M ., m ..^
O
v�
`� cu
M �
\
O
i. rl
O \
Gl
>
cu
cu Lz
M
M
M
M
U
U
U
U
U
U
L; ❑
U
O
M
c
O
O
cc
C.,
W
�
U
L
'Q
U
�
U
L
_y
w
y
O
I
O
U
"CS
O
U
c
>
N
-. M M
O
�
O�
y
O U
�
L
O
C
C3
G
bz
�
cu
y
o
-oLnm
a c
LT.
x
a
to
y
'o U
W
to
ct
.O
m °
cuO
x
V)
Vn
En
bD
m
Q1
U
d
CB
aj
�
E
) U
>
>
>
H
U
L
L
N
L
a!
CA
L
L
L
f6 y Cn y
°
i CL)
Ln
a
LS r U
... U L. „tea ,.., „� O
U
U U
O L
p CL
:
O ..N. m i] tC O O N°
E tiA
cu
C
CLCtio
-p ^O
.., O O y O
° °' O >
°
C
y O = m
� E o° a
>
3 L. 3
>
° au
o c
6� yi cu ,L' U h U
v v
C >tDn
n S"r
to
Ln
>
f..
� O u
O
c aOO.+
y
Op
Ocu
n O �O
.aW L
to O y y
U L
° L
L
f �-' U S"
RS M cr.
E"a
L O
N
tto -p LLn r 0 0° U
O U O
O L
y
a>
3 m w m °;
p ci
h fl N' �
y L
cu
C
11
O
C�° L
-
Lc. i. y
U
v,
= U
r O
L.
� \
O r•.� CO Cn > 3 a. O
� L. � .�
fC m y
C N
v
:Q+
00 "I
cC OD
3 .0 O O a, -[ o raa
W U
X C x
>
>, y
C c�
Rf \
H p
cn
t 4
i. 7
<d
cu
w
M
cu
Ln
coy A
�
�° p
c m
- °A `-'
r,
an
cri a`° C'i
Mf cn
cz
0.
LM
z
z
z
O
N
o
°
a
a)
a
^
v y
a U
d
L L
O
a
a
a
O
>i
>,
i L
.I.J
a
a
a
uLn
CSi CD
m
m
V)
p
Q
vi
f4
• .
aL�'1
N
V]
N
a
V,
RS
m
m
co
CZ
f�
Ix
CG
C6
�
M
L
a C
cn
CA
O
O
C
y
i u
cQ
c4
c4
O
U
za.
N
a
to M
-�
a
tz M
a
bA M
bLD
O
a.
L
•.�
a�
"C3
a
ate.-+ a
O �
�
O �
O ..
ca
'o
•U
a
^O
U Ou
O
U O
y
"Ti
N
'"0
a
aaa
L
i
aa) a
Y..
�a-.
cC
C4
L
fI$
U
E Z
x
M aA
°°
a
cc to
m aA
G
O
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
s
s
a
a
E
o �~
�
L
L
L
L
L
L
U 't
U u
<
U U
Utc
U
y
¢
¢
¢
¢¢
¢
x CE
N
L
U
p'�''
y
7L
O C ,C O p
i'�.a p
L: ip.,
.�
=
•s0�., ,a
O
.-
co
y. n• a f� Q., CSi ^�• Q.
fn
a
ro
L.
J�
('�j'"
cC v)
y L
^•
cn
p
p
m
'-"' a
U a
u O p rd i
u a
mx
•L
U
a; W
C
m m a
p w
a
y CL
o
c
y
°°
.a ra ca o a .� a
3 a
0) a
f
a.
n
y.
Ln
o� L:
a
y
L a
y i v ao a
G, ^C
o
o
n
L ca
L .x
_a
72
O y
cz
y0
O
°
a
o
W
�. p c.. O O
Ln
> U
a
ti a
° p
a
a_+
a
o
...
a
'
M. f
C]
m
cn
a � a _O p
} O O a
to O
a
O i
C fl i
.^, m
ra
O
C
i
v
a
O O
0
cn R -' O a a y
a.+ .N
•�
O a cn
"�-'
O >, �
O �''
i
- i
p
O
N a
`-� a
O O
OU
O
'O
i
G
cy6
L
-p
O
,•,
_U
O L L
p y
aD O
c.
cn
'�
L-
y
V) LS
a > ^ - O O
O N 'C cn
..
L O
U can
vp •L:
'C j cz
3 cn O
cam, .�
O
�>„
a
y
a
'�
_
•�
pOp _
r`•
aa)i
a
-='
Z
+-' > O 'p
L L>, a a .� O � rJ
° S].
y -Z
p
MD
O_
�cRS
"C G
h
L
O
a i
'�
i
t" cn
>
.�
a y a a cE a
f1 O L L
CC >
O a
c4 y >
.-C O
y
L O
c6 cII �
La.
CS
„^-,
C
cn
a
a s
Otic
`L
Lc. r-
n L ° it a a
OU
L
a
^
ca
a
.�
'O
a Cp
B
L
3
O
[C
fl
cn m O y O G O
m
__ n
o°
c0
a 3>`
a
y
�
° o m
a
.�
a u
o
>° y CU a
m
°
O w
O '�
O
a
C
O U
p L
u o
o °'
�... =
0 0 0
.0
C F ro
a
y
o o
ice.+
a
y o
V,
a a
00
a)
'�
O L vai a
U i-0
m
C
.�
fb C4
.N. a aa.+
�.
a •�
fC L y
m
a
.-C
y C. a
,s
a =
�
CZ L
a
E
p y m is m =. a
w C cC C_
fy a
L .^.
E rC
-L- CQ V
E L
cn Z
.i:
E-
.� M
O a n
E^ w
U
ca
..Li
E-
N d,
N
N
N
r,
z Ln
l0 Lo
%D %C
M
a
a
M
d a
d a
d a
-
-
�-'�
ifi cE
�
V)
CD
CD
co
CO
M C4
M M.
M
M
M 0..
M O.
M IL
M
M
M
M
M
►m
rz
U
CA
V)
a�
'O
. CL
;N ►7
Ca
'C
O O
�
C
C
C
O
cu bbz
v
a)
a)
w
U
CO
co
m
m
.L
U C)
6)
N
CU'
U
a CO
y
L
L
L
L
L E
U
N
06
M
O
O
L)
U
a)
O
w
v_Oi
O
a)
TS
'Ci
t0
L
L
L
c0
CO
C
L
L
LU,
U
(1]
a)
tDn
to
C6
O
6Li O v OU
o
COO
O
•^ w U
6�i
bD .^ V
bD LO
L ti..
O
c0 �"'
Y.
r
O
p 75
U C
O
U±i
>
•f".
CD L O a)
CL
C
m
n. rn
4., L^
y ,�
O
O
v
v
O v y
U
O
O
O
+•, O a)
.O N O .O
cu
O> C
i bD
CO
r U
>,
O c0 aOi
M. O a) -0
.� X
v 6)
o 'O
O s.
y E
Lz ^O C4 V)
C
i
U
ate)
y
p
O
CO OL y o O
w
y
0� 'C
L m O� •�
O
y .�
O p O
N N
;� U�
O O a
'O
>
w
�'
O ^� Q"
Off„
O
-O Vi O
a)
a)
O •O
v o
�
O
•�
�
Cz
L
..�
O
1J .
cz
— o
�
O -,
a
o
c 3 bA
vi
cG a)
O
o a
o`
o C a�
O y o
'''
M. O
cu
m a
Z
cucn
O
G�
O.. c0 vOi •U
L .O CL p„
•p ^O
� CO
V) m a)
U L
O ,,_,
x ,_,
O InEn CD Ln
> 3 'U
N
C
U
>, cam. �
m
?
�
LO
= },
L C L
V)
� O O
L .O
�
a) _O O
v n
sO, y C
bA c0
'�
�; N
C O m
C0
•CO Z L.
CO
UO cti
i O`
W O �
L"
O a O
O .0 .�
W ..0 L)
c0 O �, CO
O CL �`"
O
_O �'
y
L ..0
cu
L
-.' O
U
,�,' •O
>, �..i "'
a,
L. S.U. CO
>, ,� v
L]. y
a)
_�
y
CO V) L
F
cu u cu
a)
�"
U bD O ...
v) "'O O
.�C .�
G"
b0 CO .a O CL
,"�
>' N
(O/) M x >
a �,
o f
o
L L m o
bo v �.
n a)
a, u a>
o$ a�
Rs ^- L. bQ ca c
o
a)
0 3 au
u.
¢ -a
< 21 `' E
°
H
�. n
o
cu
"- fl 3
. �°
o cn
MM MM O
cr
.NN--� eN
MM CMr•i
t-
T-4
C
a�
O
.L
y
L
°
L
CY'
a
�
�
co
TJ
2)
'C
C.)a)
C!
a)
a)
N
v
w
a)
V)
a
V)
v,
C
a>J
'O
L
w
L
L
(L)
L
L
L
_
L
'LS
N ..O N
0�03 o
L N
O
L cn
L cn >, p
= bA a)
UoL�
�' m°
��cy
cu
u
p^
bn .�
a
m y
a) O> L
C y}
u
~
^-
CU
^
m
N O, u O
O M.
�
.""
p O O
O- , a)
..+
N
N
Gy O ""
.�
w
N u
'LS C O �,,
p y>, �1. c
u
C
�a L
'C °
.0
> bD vOi
•-
Ou
O O
O
Ln
L o
o
c ^ a)
> .
G
v
O=
O C Ln
L
a
a
a) 3
aV) ° a
7cu
Z
V) u °
cL6
OD �' +�-' O tLC
"C
O
,..� p
N
O.
.�
a
.°
V)
t)
i
O
W
�'
^C a)
L
u cuO a) tt'7
�•' O i
"C3
m
^
LO
4.
U
a
•O
^
CA a)'+-
�, ° cn
O
o
w
o
v)
n cu
F. 3 en M
M
p
° L
°
m p
°
p °)
i o"-—
a a L
tn
O
m
E o
o
E
ao 'u ao
f6 o a
° o
ai a
s-0 M •�
a� a� o
o
0
C�
C m C
O L C4
U,+
L
p z a)M
CU
-1:5_...
'� b�D i -� a;
U
C Utdc > .fl
v7 ,�,
>>
i>. '— L)
>i to .N
m
L
fIi r+
O aJ
m
a)
S].. Q)
U ,�.+ v� N w
p •� CO
'�
cu? NO
C�
rs
x o
um
W 0
c m
C v
c
E
o 3
o
3
o
>
m
u L�rC u
,
cn
ci
cn
cn°
OD
Lr)
in
In
M
a)
M
M
N
M
C6
CD
M
M
M
U
O
M
u
O
a�
c,
'L3
Q)
S.,
C
O
C
w
G.>
TS
R
S.
GJ
'CS
w
'C
O
cn
O
U � 4 y
O > > N
L
> S. L
a0i
M p ,� °' cOtl
Ln
H c v ° x on c c
o °
N -o O° W > GLi ts. N iC O s V) O s. v •� x �-
Y a� U o c w H" ° c� ru M
�, ° � cam, a. � x � �
Piz�� �� y O TS O s. cC C7 vi .0 .- M Q• M - C r v � � to
Of a) Ect
L.Cz GL N Cx L O w ° ° �C O cu .� a
ca
O a) c, > c6 Cp O > U O '-' GJ Cl. G _O O ° C W
a f4 u ° w 3 °°° ° a w ca c° L w Ln ° ° y? �.°° o
n >ca cam, X U +> y ° >' m , au
S] c0 n y � y cu
y O 'O x y '�.+ p y p O p 0 cn +.+ cu
v 3 -c o
lio�D C '� C Cc O O° i O C y= o CU
O o c o o o a °' o ff `o w U w ao E v � o 0 0
� .o c = u
to ItO bD y y _ O y fx ca x N S] G O> h
d Li .]
ri U G w � ._cC . o m-o dxc.waE a 0H 0x =c6
M.
_o
++ ri
W
w� rn
d
cu ' d
x Ln
u `� m
LO
Ln
U A a a
E— U
i�
O
M
O
O
N
N
O
,--1
G
•� O
cc
bD
O
cu
to
C '' O
O'
-.I....',
V)
O V)
C
C
C
++ O
h
ai
ai
ai
y
N
cu L
� i G.
aJ
V)
�'
>
bn
cu
C=
? O O
L'i E
C
O
CL)�"
Ln
w m m '� N w w w
cuC
.V,
_
L.'
O '�+ O a)
i
M .� p
t z
'�'� V) == — N u i
�+'... +.+ C w m .E ca w 3
O o
cu�,
O
L O
cl
O
c u o
O O L
cu b v
cu
cz
3
N
a) C 6) a) ,
z> C.)O
i!
Li CC p O i i. o m cu
CL)
CD •E a' 'O O CL)
to
V) y
p v
y ,�
w a.G
cu
.., O ..., O
U ,� cn
O
O
O N N ��,, L E �m •E �,0.,
+)
O-
O O O TJ
O
G) O u
CL M
+� -O C- '� '7 u En
O
u
a,
u ,,
o �,
s O
o L
C
c6 0
°
bz
x '�
o a .
a) E -o >, a,
E.
G
�,
° c
c L c
° L O
o c7
>
aU u
L w o w n L c u a�
cu .0 co °
M y p
cu
o
U ° O 3 o o> o
m
Qy"
CL
m O V)+�.�
u
y
Ln
t
V
C u Qi
_ �+: 6)
�
�� c0
O CZ
L
i u C u
ri L c0 O O a) V)
CD
r ,
� CL �'.'
—3
O dA
E
�' cts U,
s-
c,.., u
N
p >, ,_,
a "o cn o% a Ln- c c
u p a'
c
o d>¢
a L
o
a� o s E u L ci
ca
n
O
O 6 y
b�A L O U
E w E cu y 7S
C 4L
uo
a,
•
ocz
M.
+^
H a
m
a°11C
o a
o ti a 3 c"c v
E� V) fn .—+
--� ctY �+
Ln >
p L.fJ
O
d
G.
y
Ln
C�
O�
•.'7•
i•+ d "O
N
N
cu
M
M
M
C6
M
E h
cn
cn
cn
co
v
RS 0�
V C fs
O
M
0
c
O
a
a�
sa.
to
¢
0
c
O
a
a)
La.
d0
¢
v
L cu
bD
¢
ai
ta.
to
¢
�
°:
ai
a
by
¢
°;
ai
a)
L
¢
O
N
u
O
"O
o
M
y
L
Q
O
u bp
c4
-a O O
Om
yc
m
a
B(L)—
0a O@Lo
i--aui
rn
O
ai
C
a C)
ctO
ca
+
L
O C v L C
V) -p
cn C
o p
u x O
O
U
U
3 L a a O a
a
�' u
n
NLO
O m
USA a'
L a �;
a 'U
L a fLC �+
O ..L4 c4
a
y
�
v� a ,C
V) L Q)
LC
y m
a O u
n
O
V N
>, a
C a L
L L a o a u E y
a En o al
L. L u
o
p O
`n o
a
O O O C a a O
to
-0 CL ....
i.+ E CL 0
0
gn TO
d 'L3
a >,
a u a
� U
v
u
a
p %•„ -C u
L. .�
O En L
L
a
LC c6
a cv
uu�
O
En N
G N> S] m O ,..�
-14
L E 'CS L O
•C
o
? v
r-
u V-4
s Yo ,
CL O
w
L
p
:CSC
N
M
TJ
Gl
y
^o
C
Ou
..O ca c0 cC
O.
O
..>.
u a
a v)
N�Ln
.0
d L
-0 Lr)
S
coe--�
O
O
aw a,�
a
v12
N
�a
a:
a
ari
►7
SR
3
v
o
a ,,
�
as
E
:C o
a
a,
C
n,
�
ro
O
a^
bA
m
v
U
O
N
^aC
v
U
iy.
bI
.O
N
4J L:
>
O
Ln
U
�
to
N
x
O
O
M
O
O
O
/ p
U�
3
x
O
O
a)
(U
"'
C)
vi vs
w
a1
O O
O
x
L,7cz
y
y
tL1
pp V3
U
a
O
O
•o
o
cs
c
o
3
u +�
'
L
C°
tea,
v
a
o
>
C
C
s0
,y0,,,
Ln
a
L
O U
L
aj
y U
cz
U
y
U
U
L
L
,��, U
>
tz
cn z
�
x
Q
O,
o
-o
s
x
2 � U y
¢�
C
O
au °
3
a'oi
z p'
3
�s CU w
u
E
y
y
En
O y
���++
y0
y
O R O
Ln
1
L
l
au
y
'O
�...
X
cu
Z O
x
'I'llO
y
Q)
O
>
cu
'LS
cu
O
y
�
Ln
En
cu
>
y
L�
..
O
O
¢= L
.� y
y
_
L
•� y C
tD
O fl
T�
x _�
O
O
O
cC!
N
N y C vi
..
p aj
U
"LS
Lti L C
r
cu� O
>
CC
o
O
CG
i'
m cv
y �C
s~ cu
C
CD
C d yn
V
`4
y
7
a)
Si y n
A O
N
U N
Ln
N
u
ate.+ ^
L y
y
y
►a O 'C 'Li
O L
Q,
y C
O
W N
`� cu
.� O O
>
G O
X b
CL
aj
CL
X
U
�
.�—
L
GLi > c6
O
O
O
O
�
y
7J
CDF..,
\ >✓
O
.0 c4
M
+A T.
W 0)
Y•. L
cC
Ln L cn
E"
v
p
6J
as e o
a
cp :u
i.:
d
CA
ci
Q: Obi
N
co N
O lti [LS � CC
O !C `""�
N
N
M
M
d
Ln
l7A
O�
rl .M-1
vA aM
c.�A CL
a
a
n
a
n
n
nM
►j
06
0
O
M
E
_
o
O O � < > i,
O
U Q
y�
sue', O O. o Q_
i �O m cn U C.7 r,,
O '-' O
~
o
O •O
ate.+ cv r-a
+� ti
C
cu ai a
o =
C
3 E O o
O a' 4 �
o f
�, O w ca C
�
O n
y, a,
a
fx U [x7 c CL m `S `�
U Lx] aM
cn O
,x
Q
0
'C
O
U
CG
G
L
O
'Z3
�
O
L
�
�
Cs:
C
W
ca
U
a
V)
L
Q)
L
4.1
C6
•'C5
c4
fn
QJ
.lam
L
c+:
Ln
CC
o
to
i
'O
ca
O
�
�
�
O
ca
a
C6
c
aon
a
o
N i
N
N
N
ei
W
w
(U
4
En
N
y
w
o
y
¢
z
a
u
L.
d
,r 'y
o
6) Qa
O L ~
y O
to Ln (�
N a)O
cn L
CL O
O "O p
O 0.> N
w L
CL a)O
O •� O
N
CU
C O CN
'4
Q.)
O
.N
-� C; C
O N\ O O O ca
O E O .N1 C
cC O O\ v O
s'x.
m w
N N
S
N N
�' O N
U
O
L1. U �--� C7 U
f4
U
cV
U N
f4
U
L
L N
O! y
O U U GJ r O p `. w O O m m O s
v GU , p L v U 0� M cti C1 _ vi C
n> Z O C .0 ca y O c00 cy0 + w mO
L1 d Cx. r0 O CD+•+ cC L O U •s: 6) N •j t9
L1, O L, CUC U L y+ TS � vj
pL Rf +•� 61 G �..+ y L. y N U
O > � e-•i v > ,x h .� Ln Gl G) Z i ,., i:. U �, ... iy O N
GY. •L O J.J b�.+ v U M .-. O ft .(: i]„ cu
L V
o ca M x w n °; c° o a� o o h
° o n ra c o v a� °' o o
C Z O a o y c6 tin m ° Ca (1)
F Z o a .r cn a° cx n� cOa .� ^' o C° Q O a cn
cYi
c4 3 cC O
i1. � .O T1 �••' N
C O L C
> O
GxJ O L p —
cuU y O
•� E o L 3
u Nam„
� y u m _�
U CC Ln
0 Ln
'O w
6) c4 L O y w
CD u R O� i O
--
fl. O .� O ,i •O C c«O..
CU
GJ c4 L x O M
CL Jam.+ L
C1 C6 w N O U O
U V) p
O n O tc
40cz
O_ L
O Lr)
x w caCU a � ca
w o, tx o >
w
a, Lno x '°
� O w O w L
z a, o
a U N
O
z°-°
O O v) w O
O I bA >1 Ocu
0 3
�+ .a Ln " c -2 Y E E p c
m (1) CU L o w co
0. U" > cLn —
V -F ri cri o ,� •o
M75
M M O
M M
O OO `� (�ri �., N
c� CZ to
. o >
H
.o v aLi o v oN M. c Q) oN Q..4 y C o �-
N .> M x "� y> p ^° N ,> \ O E L. O
ca ai uN m N m Q uN E u�
N
sc'.N �vtxw mUO:CY
CF.'.
+�
N
W
U
.-
° .o
V)
Lx o w
W
L+ E � y
y
� m
e
CCi
cB �xa
c
o y o
0 0
C
o�
•- 0 0
6J
Na'�.+
.0 a.)a
.m
Q)�
L^G'
y
N
U
o
C4 L � N
LT. W �..�
.0 ° N yU+ L
cC .0 L
N
.0 CO
U O, ^ 00
tin
b� W 0
Gi CL' `M.
O °yc".
bA U V, Lz,
Lz,
< M
N
O'
i V°] N
'C
(4
U
U
o °
c�.
ro a�
L
L y
�
O .0
by
i x
C U
O
U O
C
°
C
c
ul
cz
cs
a a °
i
U V)
a'
�
•s.
c4
n• fi
O � C
p
'C
-
t6 'CS
RS
U
CC
N
L
C4 C i
O C
y
C
f4
L
C .O
w
cu
C
Ln -05
c4
by
L cu
> CL
L
L'
C4 =
O O O
^
N O.
N Q'
i
O
C
U +O °
m
cu L
>�
0
v
a�
Ln
r
N
M
�•
Ln
e-•1 �--i
N
N
N
GJ
(u N
M
M
bA
bD
GA
U
U
�.�.j
)
cu
Cn
..O .O
•>
.a O .�
.� .O •>
v� in
.�
U �--i
y to U e--1
.� y p
y in a)
.^ O
CC6Ln
xL.
U
L E U N
OJ
u C
C
U LL
c
G U CG 2
U C4 LL
Y.., (1
•+'��
x Le
V
"a
u -fl Or CL
V
-
V
O
KUi L
G. 'LS
CL
O
M..-
MO
O .-..
O C: O
i
GJ m m
h +.+
y N
_V p
M 'O
y p
V
Z
cts „�
d CL
"U i
�+--�
14 O
V
O
y
co
,�
y
to O
cC O 0
•L
m
tC p,
O mL s0.
V5 It
Q.
m
ate.+
m a)
p
h
O
L
0
O d CL
w
O �
sue,
N
.•�
S
�+ "a
d
CL y w
p V Ili m L
O L]. X— d
O
V,
L.O .. y
O
6.O
In
7
f!1
i
v
O
O L 'O
p
p?�
=
u Z
w 0. a�
cn
CL)
a;>�
.O
mIli
y
m
(C L
p CL
i"" N
=••' OL. — r-1 V
CL
L ,..i i
_�
uj .Ili "II S]
w
.
.0
.S:
cC
.� m -0 _0
> p il. M 'O
R
ct
CL O O
?+ c4 .0
.0
m c4 V
L
L
a.>
L
t6
O
C:
+�
O
O
D
c,..,
bD
o
O
C
L
L
C/] r_cu
'y
0
L
i
n
Mtx
U
Iv an
a)
c
L
I
c
m O
p to
«S O
3
y O
i+
C cz
mcu y
U N
Mccu
G r
U
U
m
Ili
lu
v 14
O O
V
x c
L
c y
a
G1 ..O
C
U ¢
UoM
O c0
V) E
TS
C
G
p
� i
f4 >
O
V i
�
L �.
U U
n m
c4
� U U
'O
U
V)
0 V _ C:) O
CC 0 N
Lo
cL4 O � �
U Q
'xs,
C: O N
N
U Q N
° � � �a M c � o ° ,✓ m ca � > � � v °
cC ^ N r^— >, n. i .O G�
- O = "
•p
O CL O O O W O V M- U O O a� •p Z �, L- N CJ i ° >,
U O z 'C U O ca L O O sU O 'C U O O " I I � O x p� U O^ i
c4 O cG C) Q
y II. y O ^L3 � > :u cC > � O •� U O � � O ,•U, � cC � J.U.. JU-� � i J.U.+ O O J
U U U U U t6 y p 0 0 0 0 0 OCL
.. U
Ln
r-+ C7 CC vi U CY. Cn J.� CY, Cl' (••) p cC S]. L]. C 3 i
O
0 L ^_
Ln
bA U L �L. p O a. Ln _ n.
C4 .0
tn
C6 u r-1 L y @ V1 Ln•� N V) cn 67 U CU tC p C O. •-
� U pp U
U cc1 C4 p p 0 ij
LO� Jam..+ C, N i
O
c,�, U � U U .0 ,— cJ.,, � J•._ C4 U �
U C a O
Ucz
� .O crj O U p m O
U ^� U vi U .� 3 .p U,-C
U -M > m En J� O `4 O
cz
7J O cz U O E N . ^ cu GJ
ILI
V) U ^ V)Cn
U CA y O p cG •� - N O O U L O O
n V,C O
On N '� Cp a) v O ,a 6>i m a) Ln
U cn
L •iJ .^. GJ J..+ .0 rh U
4. y a ° L a� •= x °
a): V) L C bD CO U� y= e-•I i •� iJ
cC 'tS W +� U sU. .a C p ;� U U
U .O ice.+ U J.U.+ v �aU. M L �L J.O.+
N
L � ..a O '� p U t0 C i:U O "O ^° U O —•
L
cu
.Y.. cC O, O i U U O^ J✓ cn ° U Q• ° V L p �."
LnU CuL O 'w O
CD E
CU
cu
cLC O O ° J-J U 6>i C .� to C U u bO.0 N O cB
ca O ca U a� CG
r� U U a
3
m O p . O NO
O U
OCD L" � U O
U Q N Y, N O N .4 Cn N Cn Q
�
i1.;
O
M
w
N
� �
��
O �y
w
a� N
y
� y,i
O �
aq
ayi
v
a�
00
c
ea
is
H
0
c.�
0
'�
ea
�,
as
h
G"
O
U
O
M
O+
N
� N
❑ 0 0
C7
V) '�
y y ca c
c Ln L N fe
Lt, n
U
U
LC •� � y 'i� w O
vi
c>cu e > LO .fl
O
ct O api
bA
C +
u
y y •� M
i�'.� � t,C, 'G
i p
.�-+ 'O �^-y
�.•' p cti
CC U L U
mm
O
�
a)C) r
'�''
.=
_
U
G) Cz
In E
to
U ce
O v7 u cue
u y o o y C6
p=
c— o�
�, 4., O
I
..0 u
o w °'
cn 6
m
y
y
Ln
o In
U
3>
tip° c
�
y oEn m u co O
L'
'CS
L O u [6 ce
"
t6
O i
�:
.
p
a>'i
O
.�
w
a) V
V)-M o y
y
W> o m M u Vi
a. o
° o o
O tn p ¢ L y O„
.� O �O
y
'O ca ,a? O
L�
ce `+— •^•
ca L s-
i.+ O �
i+
u n' u
u
ce Q
a) O
RS In y
.0
_ y cz
O
m ^p F-� 'C y
cn '6
.O
CL
.�
y
ce :], m u
+•� p y
a.) L. O
3 y '> y i
y y
ce
a) , L
y - a) y L (L)
cn y
= L'
u
y
..
4. � m
O
° y o
C¢ N
to yIn z L C3 C3
n
c6
L y L
N L O
cc
p u
O^
ce O u
O
cz y= ce re C
,�•;�
r y N J
ti
O
UA j p O
d O
C1 C i[t m
KulQ) U CS N
O
O
ce Ci. y O L y 'e3
>
cue
•� O +- c,.., ,� O cC
O
m m
u >
O
cu
O
In
m
^ p U .O
o a) o m
m�'
a
CQ) �••' Jam+ > y
aoD
'O L to
�.
�'
y v `.'" :7
y L
�.
ct Q
y
y
w �" y
_x O..—u p
L
+�.+ _O ce
O Q. O +'�•+
y •L
y O p
tz
y "Li '•'�
�i y U
y
y y
Cn
Q
L Ce
ce L C4 L RS
y i O y
p C6
OJ M >, CC ..0 U a)O
D,
y
n v, p
C c6
E o m O E^ w u
O
u
p O a)
E C 7
co
f 5 m C) C S
V) ca
Q)
L
U
H
r-I
O N
cz L \
U
U O N
cz ( U
w
O
M
O
M
CU
_ O TS ^C (1) = O -O B a 'C U F O C U> 6 L
cc m U a)
mu m
a a m¢ .° v�M.
° U ° a °0 c L
° a L
> , E- O a m > ° F cn
cct
a doCU U x v p a, O
a)
U �vl O C w U a) m > ^a -O
_ C cu Jam+ � L � W _ ..0 C _U U
En a)
a s U M
U CU U i 3
L.
u U m a m O r.G. Q) OU u O
G. (u o u In v - O n C" Z `� O y
B C> v0 .> L ° .L X O U. L cu C m sue.
A c a aL, L t C p � F `° ti CII Ll. ca
tz O cC O cn [i O L Z p., G>i
aJ G
C N
• a. a 3 `- 0 6 aUi a'a ca o
L y W ci.. i'. CO, fC '� ' u a) i
r ccn o L a°
C C ai c1: ca m L X u cu
i cc m > > 0 4° w +, u O
a) O w Q) y a) y L� O n y� O
o ccz u ,�, a fl j Gi o cn O o O O a
aD 75 L U N x a, 3 '� c o
w o z M..c o V, L> _CrI o �+ p n
h _O m_c au a> =V) Ln L', x 3 0' n L CU u
U A c4 >
v, N Cz. p QJ > O rl5 b0 w> N
M _ m cn
UrqO U O
a) 'C U ,i C a) U i>'. i7 N , = U L U ,L' U F.'r sU..
� CU
O U p o cC a) v, II. > O U L1 C C� L O m
CZ
x° a 3 �' cz L ; a cv C� 0)= t L c o >, -c '>
'C V] U 3 .O c`' L O
.� O O° O L cOC m O m m cm U y N M M y O
cv R: cn ca a) C iO 3 z U= i
cL
a 3
O
a Ln
Ln ca
VI
�cnxcG
ti
o c o c CDO N O N O N
U O N U O N U O N
Cn < y y U mtn C,
V) < Ln
E
O N
w
d Ln
W
O �
Q
y
a)
a
d
tw
e�
C
c�
m
H
O
v
C
C
H
O
U
O
:Yi
c 3
° p °
o Ln
Eo �..+ p O .O O >,
� Le)a�
o L. � a L.`L° a
cu
cE In z -o a n
to
Ly o U >
p � N O -• •�. .O cG � L � � N
Z Q II 14, k° c6 xLn
b0
N
OJ h i QO 'G '> +-' O •O sue, i L
p > U N U
Q L a c O to p 0 0
a Q
o a a = O
Cl) aLn
b�A o Q U E
(C 'LS p Q C1, •u Q"� Q)
N U
cu
QJ
N p OZ, rz
a
ro L°rz
= a
a� 4
° a ° U a a ca ca sL
C a Q N y 0 0 0 •� 0 p U M O a
O Z '� ti Q •k l _ •� L blJ i yO rn
a..0
c o 4t° a N: 3 °
3
0
L
° � O
,--q -0
cu
t Q x
Z
=" a oZ
V
L cc)
00
0
M
N
M
U m
rp, C C O O O
O
CJ O 4 '� CS U O x
U N N N U U
cn � -
=
0 0 z rp o
O U 'T3 a �j v C
Ln O •+;� O vi •Qi C w C-M
L.
0 CU
C O s-
O' O to F
h
G C n sU O O m C C)C
a) L C C i y O y Sr
.� Q) ° L v7 C S]. ate.+ --� L. '� C) i.+ > to
f�C ,� Q) Q) I f4 C4 L. to Q) ia. r. C6 �-" ,��. •a)
W C LS ca Ln O y U 3 U O 6) y ° 6u C O +' s -m O O O
C cC .O 6Ui O i j > 'O Lz+'�-' c f�4 ,C CL a� . t+'9 L w > -0 y to A. C N U
;� CJfif S.O.. M O LO �' -� +-' f�4 O V O N ,� L CC L y , O
SO•, O O Lx. '� of �- v7 v) ' ,L�, '� i V) Sn 'f3 L O O O Ci. C .O O L
Q) y O O y a) ^f Ca E., f4 qA RS C ,�, a) ,.-. O O
bz to a)U Sz a) L, a)
0 Er co c
^° " C ,.� CA N ,� 0 cC 3 a) O m 'S3 cE � .� y y w O U V) U
cu i.+ >,i 6N C u U O O U p w 3 i p rn C Cq
+' Sn L] O O O v O i C y O O Sr m O O C _
Ln
^CS N '�"' L s...O E E-� t C ca •00 — "r-� U C ^O C bcaD ^fl i''
C h •pp dD O �.,r', V) a) w C U" U O ai O 3 v •� C cOC �+ C S.O.. y
ca H O C C C '- n O O O O i O C w p> to U
° o� acai vi � ° F" a) Z a) x U v ti
yC W .0 s .. ai WCD ,� O" � ai C C O u OU OU
z 'i C fl E O 'y 'vS +' C v C1 i p 3 O C z0 E iC LQ > O
a) U U O a) +� C C' O ° O C O O O f~�4 .O
C ai C_ O ,°, C4 C n O C 3 C° C y O C O_ CM. E O z. C
v
cu mC
sLM. n JC O O tx i4+ 0 mU U i
Vi
M. ° C u" O V o M o ° F"
M S.O. 'C p C '..ir O w .0 �'' C cN '�'� .0 C L' +' cCa c9 a0i ��.+ O U b.p C
0.F-' a0, .^ y CO ,� Cn vS .� i—W w ,C, � cn
c6 i i ca '-' L
Ln
fa
a C C n .0 Q. N y C1 .� s0 Y U u
>
c/) O C G u O a) C O O a L m V) -p O ctj 'Jn >
Cl. cu
UO a) U s bA •� .,'-„ +-+ c4 a) O CS' C O ,� ,x O i M C y MC
U y O `"" s. a 30 ? �}, U O a) a> > v ,.� U L a) L" C C W U a
117 Ct
to "a O ti0 J U r U a) C ,Q, s. i. �'' ° U d II. '--, C .� >' U ++
v) s~ C a) �+ 'O
bOD a) y y •bD 'b Lam. � C m L .� U ,UU, C C� V' a) ,�.+ C U tC U • V y U C.
C .�+ C O m O O -c m U a) ca +=+ aS ^C3 O �: E
m m° o y m c'n ¢ o 3 u
r
cu
cc
on
M.
T
4,i
O
M
n
r
_z u
o b
> c
n,
a- O
Lnh
cu
cu y
o a)
a) O
II Q U •C
Z ro r
a E
o •°' L � m
N c6
d
xLT. LO
Cu
tw m
C O
a)
t u v O
L 'C
o
o•
° h
to
C1. � u
cu
o
U U cn a O
O 41 CO
C O
.tDn
a � aa)
v L
=
En
Ln
y N u ca
c4 O
o 3 a
r, a
fS3CU
cnCJ
RS
t
3 � °° � °q
3
O M y c6
.0 O
cu
"C3 U h
L .V)
+ u M_ y o
y L
O
o
L A w
E m
U o Z L
O U ..a �'
°' Ln
❑. O
o
y a�i z Q
C cn c W ca U
L%
~
c4
E o
N \ CN
NO
dftfm
L
xN
i ca \
i Ln
N
M J r
cC \
cn m
0
o o �- ° Lf)
GJ 0..a
O ro O C O
`--� � i O C06 f6D O ro y ••
cn 'C y
'z ro a m cu GV')' O u
M C) U h O y O. p ro .�
> C] ro Y > CL) 3 �'
o cYc y y y
u ro h O 'L3 6U tLC a) w V
ti U C� u = - " iO+ O -O vui - O
M
W CU CU
m m CU
CA
C N O p>
c e0
H C C] E It
tm C
vi
O _ h CU +�•+ vi v� Q)
u O C C
y O
V uu T3 m C Ou
!C
L"
CC
tp
y
to
0
U
C
O
O
L
61
N
C
O
U
O
M
Ln
M
CCD
O C O ''V,U
f4
V) am i
U 4
,
U
.N
..O U :E
C •C -^, .� .� � ,�
.O
S= U U
O Q W p
U
3 n° v=
c o 3
U° c `y°
e°'n
a w° a w o
U
O
Cn = U
Ln
o
_° °
U
O-a co v
E
a a O L_ y°
O F"
cu
F"'
> v u O °
.t� .O �..+
U
_Vl
C4
O
O
U
G
O
s.
w
'O
n•
[n
5...
ci
O n•
c°
L
°
� �
o
L. x
�
U .a
Cn
U
n'
au m
rU„y
V)
�
N
I O
V
'a O
°
y
CN6
O
O
�
4-.
i
y
ct
u)
�D
0
Q.
N
.�
Q
cu
m
Ln
CC c-i
CG �
fO r-1
�
L
cQ O
� N
ca O
C
Lr).yyJ
CU
CA M
C/� M
L `"I
O iy
w
dLn
H
O Cfl
a, G
y
oj
�i
c
aj
W
cz
m
L�
0
N
U
_
i:+
,-.�
a� 't3
p
'•� •.r � 'C3
.0 Cp
o c�a _p
U L
o
.3
o
r coo
o M
cu i
a
4° �°
p
a cu
°
GD O
O L cu
�' ..O
.p o
[n
i G�
_�
N n'' -C3
.. i cu
co
,O
Q.c�C
c�
�" °
O r.+ O y
p0 ^p
O
p 'L3
'O
a'
0 p
y U cC
6)
'�'
O
•C abDi
a)
r
_
s.
p
o •N +� y
tS O
O iLn
10 rn
U
O s0
m ccz
°
•°
U O cm
C
'C7 'pp :.= a]
O y
C O i
y ctl
O
O y
mn
'B
sue..
Q U ¢'
`-'
7. .� N
cV i 'C .p L
W +•„
V) W X
OcC
"O
O
O uo
a
>
)`
cCc4 i
V)
cC
co
.0
io
s.
7
O
O
S:
O
U
'C
n O
'Cf
N
U �
'CS p
V) U
m -^
U
C4 'tf
O c0
.;
s> m
O c6
V] S.
O
O o
pA U
O O
O �
p N
II.
c0
N U
z- s
N (6
z
�
z �
°
M
° m
En
cVo >
ni V x
m
U
p O
2 W U
N c."".. m M
\
O
O
ll
>>
Cn M
N
Ln M
U2 M
O N
LL
d N
rA
J. y
O �
ap
y
47
C
d
Om
ca
C
to
O
M
M
L
-Cl
L
a7 C
'C
N
y,
� U
c._. •v
�
O
m .N
>
U bD O O
u
F U �,
O F
CO U
i O
'B "O N O
� O m
L f4 3
C M1 p
cu OD M. '^ sU.
j
N
O y
C� ¢u
sue'. U y
U
Op
y
G) II > U
,5,,.,
N v
_O
U
bD
U
cn c6 p
Q E—' CLC Z O
O O)
,�
9
Cn O C> L
O (> ^O
v
m
'CS
�
O
Ln
L
ice+
O
C
OA
O
+�
O
U
CC
�
ca
.fl
�
Y
O
c4
�
U
O
(t
OA
O
>�
u >
fII
U
� OA
'•' 'B
O
Q
I •O
L
� 41
.,O
c
L
O
O
u O
Ln
J
" U
cu
O
O
sU,
OA ^O
N
+'
O
O
O O
O
Cl. i
cQ
O i
O
O i
n
7 0
rj
N c0
(rj �
N
❑ O 'Inlu
n O
M
cnr�v `_°z
cnwmZ
F--
L �
L r-1
L �•--I
fE O
C O
4 O
C
y \
Ln
\
Ln
\
L Ln
Ln M
Ln M
Ln M
F�
O
M
o
V)
L
U
�
s
Q)
V)
u
ai
i
u
ca
y0
E
Ln
4�.Ln
N
u aJ c�C
� U y'�., d
v w 75
�O
L
O f4
Q"
a)
p
iL
C6 bIJ
y
'O�
�"
V)
'" a)
� O
O
.O
O cC
L
ro
" y
+,LQ,
M. U
cC m , f4 p
'C V, `�
'O
II y njj
h
6) ca y
L L]
C
bD L"
RS
G)
t4
v>
V)
�E-�
.� p
3w
v)
u> O
G)
�F�•�
o
i
a�
o-a o 0
�F-E�2s
oTSCav
�=
u.n-a m
°'o�
� o
L.
x
n•
L
O
bD
N
L.+
RS
U
a..
fC
t4
R
L n.
� L
cz
O fE
.0
U
a� y
N
O
a)
V)
U O
t9
•�
y
O
a
y o
x
au
a
aa))
w
u
ca
0
a, o
f0 >
m
� b
�
�
ca.
0
N
0
N
M
M
v
c6 e-I
•
cC �
O
m O
yam.+ Lr,
C6
C N
Ln M
C% M