DOCSLIB.ORG

CRAS) Report Volume 1 of 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CRAS) Report Volume 1 of 2 Final Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) Report Volume 1 of 2 January 2014 Introduction Revised January 2017 US 41(SR 45) From Kracker Avenue to South of SR 676 (Causeway Boulevard), Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study Final Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) Report – Volume 1 of 2 Work Program Item Segment No. 430056 1 ETDM Project No. 5180 Hillsborough County, Florida Prepared for: FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT SEVEN Prepared by: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. In association with: American Consulting Engineers of Florida, LLC January 2014 Introduction Revised January 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) conducted a Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study to evaluate alternative improvements for US 41 (SR 45) from Kracker Avenue (milepoint 15.784) to south of SR 676 (Causeway Boulevard – milepoint 22.791) in Hillsborough County (Figure 1-1), a distance of approximately 7.0 miles. Study objectives included: determine proposed typical sections and develop preliminary conceptual design plans for proposed improvements, while minimizing impacts to the environment; consider agency and public comments; and ensure project compliance with all applicable federal and state laws. Improvement alternatives were identified which will improve safety and satisfy future transportation demand. A State Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was prepared for this study and approved on January 12, 2017. This Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Report (CRAS) was prepared as part of this PD&E study. This project was conducted in accordance with the requirements set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and Chapter 267, Florida Statutes. It was carried out in conformity with Part 2, Chapter 12 (Archaeological and Historical Resources) of the FDOT PD&E Manual and the standards contained in the Florida Division of Historical Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual (FDHR 2003; FDOT 1999). In addition, this study meets the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A‐46, Florida Administrative Code (FAC). The purpose of the CRAS was to identify any archaeological sites and historic resources located within the project area of potential effect (APE), and to assess their significance in terms of the criteria of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The archaeological APE was defined as the existing and proposed right of way (ROW); the historical APE includes the archaeological APE as well as the adjacent properties. A review of the Florida Master Site File (FMSF) and NRHP indicated that 19 previously recorded archaeological sites are located within one‐half mile of the study corridor. Of these, the plotted locations of seven sites (8HI16, 8HI17, 8HI26, 8HI35, 8HI71, 8HI6747, and 8HI10215) are adjacent or proximate to the study corridor. The background research suggested a variable potential for archaeological sites. As the result of field survey, no new archaeological sites were identified. Evidence of two previously recorded sites, 8HI26 and 8HI10215, was found within the project APE, and the FMSF data were updated. Neither site, as contained within the US 41 project APE, is considered eligible for listing in the NRHP due to the low artifact density and diversity, and low research potential. In addition, both sites have been disturbed through construction of US 41, the adjacent railroad, and other nearby constructed features. Archaeological survey within and proximate to the recorded locations of 8HI16, 8HI17, 8HI35, 8HI71, and 8HI6747 yielded negative results. While no human remains were observed within the project APE during the current survey, the findings of previous work indicate that if any land altering activities are planned outside the existing US 41 (SR 45) PD&E Study Page i Kracker Avenue to S. of Causeway Blvd WPI Segment No.: 430056 1 Final Cultural Resource Assessment Report eastern ROW located between Ohio and Michigan Avenues, archaeological monitoring is warranted given the possible presence of human remains. Background research revealed that 18 previously recorded historic resources are located within the project APE. Historical/architectural survey resulted in the identification and evaluation of 121 historic resources, including 99 buildings (8HI1022B, 8HI1058A, 8HI1058B, 8HI1058C, 8HI1058D, 8HI1059, and 8HI12024 through 12116); 10 building complex resource groups (8HI1058, 8HI12117 through 12123, 8HI12127, and 12128); seven bridges (8HI1007, 8HI11793, and 8HI12019 through 12023); and five linear resource groups (8HI10237, 8HI12124 through 12126, and 8HI12129). Of the 121 historic resources located within the project APE, 10 were previously recorded in the FMSF and 111 were newly identified. Eight previously recorded historic resources are no longer extant. The Alafia River Swing Span Bridge and Tender Station (8HI1007) is considered potentially eligible for NRHP listing under Criterion A in the area of Transportation and under Criterion C in the area of Engineering. Also, the CSX Railroad (8HI10237) is considered potentially eligible for NRHP listing under Criterion A in the area of Transportation. Current plans for the US 41 improvement project suggest that there will be no involvement with the Alafia River Swing Span Railroad Bridge and Tender Station (8HI1007) and the CSX Railroad (8HI10237). None of the other linear resources and bridges, nor the historic buildings and building complex resource groups, is considered potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP due to their commonality of style and construction and their lack of known significant historical associations. There is no potential for historic districts. In conclusion, given the results of background research and archaeological and historical/ architectural field surveys, the Alafia River Swing Span Bridge and Tender Station (8HI1007) and the CSX Railroad (8HI10237) are considered potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP. All other recorded resources are not considered NRHP‐eligible. It is anticipated that the proposed project will have no involvement with the Alafia River Swing Span Bridge and Tender Station and the CSX Railroad. If the FDOT recommended alternative has involvement with either resource, a determination of effects will be prepared and coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Proposed pond and floodplain compensation (FPC) sites were not identified in the PD&E Study; they will be evaluated during design. US 41 (SR 45) PD&E Study Page ii Kracker Avenue to S. of Causeway Blvd WPI Segment No.: 430056 1 Final Cultural Resource Assessment Report Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... i SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 PD&E STUDY PURPOSE ..............................................................................................1‐1 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..............................................................................................1‐1 1.3 EXISTING FACILITY AND PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS .................................................1‐1 1.4 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED ...................................................................................1‐5 1.5 REPORT PURPOSE ......................................................................................................1‐6 SECTION 2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING.................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 LOCATION AND SETTING ...........................................................................................2‐1 2.2 PHYSIOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY ................................................................................2‐1 2.3 SOILS AND VEGETATION............................................................................................2‐3 2.4 PALEOENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................2‐4 SECTION 3 CULTURAL CHRONOLOGY ................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 PALEO‐INDIAN ...........................................................................................................3‐1 3.2 ARCHAIC ....................................................................................................................3‐4 3.3 FORMATIVE .............................................................................................................. 3‐6 3.4 MISSISSIPPIAN ...........................................................................................................3‐7 3.5 COLONIALISM ............................................................................................................3‐8 3.6 TERRITORIAL AND STATEHOOD..................................................................................3‐9 3.7 CIVIL WAR AND AFTERMATH ...................................................................................3‐12 3.8 TWENTIETH CENTURY ..............................................................................................3‐14 SECTION 4 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS..................................................... 4-1 4.1 BACKGROUND RESEARCH AND LITERATURE REVIEW ...............................................4‐1 4.1.1 Archaeological Considerations .....................................................................4‐1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • W. MICHAEL DENNIS, Ph.D
    W. MICHAEL DENNIS, Ph.D. Areas of Specialization: Wetland delineation, permitting and mitigation; plant taxonomy and ecology; remote sensing and aerial photointerpretation; threatened and endangered (T&E) species; and wildlife evaluations. Experience: President, Breedlove, Dennis & Associates, Inc. (BDA), Winter Park, Florida. 1997 to present. Principal, BDA, Winter Park, Florida. 1984 to present. Vice President, BDA, Winter Park, Florida. 1983 to 1997. Senior Scientist, Breedlove & Associates, Inc., Gainesville, Florida. 1981 to 1983. Projects and responsibilities included development of technical data and management of projects in the following areas: Vegetation analysis and wetlands jurisdictional evaluations for land development activities in Alachua, Baker, Bay, Brevard, Broward, Charlotte, Citrus, Clay, Collier, Columbia, Dade, Dixie, Duval, Escambia, Flagler, Franklin, Gadsden, Gilchrist, Hamilton, Hardee, Hendry, Hernando, Highlands, Hillsborough ,Indian River, Jackson, Lake, Lee, Leon, Levy, Liberty, Manatee, Marion, Martin, Monroe, Nassau, Orange, Osceola, Palm Beach, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Putnam, Santa Rosa, Sarasota, Seminole, St. Johns, St. Lucie, Sumter, Suwannee, Taylor, Volusia, Wakulla, Walton, and Washington counties in Florida. Vegetation mapping of plant communities in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee, Virginia, Kentucky, New Jersey, Mississippi, and North Carolina. Wetlands evaluations for phosphate, sand, and limerock mining activities. Wetland evaluations and permitting for major theme parks
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Wiggins Prairie Mitigation Bank, Hillsborough County, Florida
    CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE WIGGINS PRAIRIE MITIGATION BANK, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA For: Southern States Land & Timber, LLC 2205 W. Pinhook Road, Suite 200 Lafayette, Louisiana 70508 Prepared by: Florida’s First Choice in Cultural Resource Management Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 (941) 379-6206 Toll Free: 1-800-735-9906 November 2016 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE WIGGINS PRAIRIE MITIGATION BANK, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA For: Southern States Land & Timber, LLC 2205 W. Pinhook Road, Suite 200 Lafayette, Louisiana 70508 By: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 Marion Almy – Project Manager Elizabeth A. Horvath – Project Archaeologist Katherine Baar – Archaeologist November 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) performed a cultural resource assessment survey (CRAS) of 79 acres of the Wiggins Prairie Mitigation Bank for Southern States Land & Timber, LLC in October 2016. Portions of the 492-acre parcel had been previously surveyed, and the current investigations focused on those areas where subsurface disturbance is anticipated. The purpose of the survey was to locate and identify any archaeological sites and historic resources within the project area of potential effects (APE) and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The archaeological APE consists of those lands that will be subject to subsurface disturbance and have not previously been surveyed for cultural resources. The historical APE consists of the entire property. The survey was requested by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), who reviewed U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) file number SAJ-2016-00429-TMF (Parsons 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • 7.0 Literature Cited
    7.0 Literature Cited Aresco, M.J. and M.S. Gunzburger. 2004. Effects of Large-Scale Sediment Removal on Herpetofauna in Florida Wetlands. Journal of Herpetology 38(2): 275-279. Bachmann, R.W., M.V. Hoyer, and D. Canfield. 2000. The potential for wave disturbance in shallow Florida lakes. Lake and Reservoir Management 16 (4): 281-291. Blindow, I., A. Hargeby, and G. Andersson. 2002. Seasonal changes of mechanisms maintaining clear water in a shallow lake with abundant Chara vegetation. Aquatic Botany 72: 315- 334. Brinson, M.M., L.J. MacDonnell, D.J Austen, R.L. Beschta, T.A. Dillaha, D.L. Donajue, S.V. Gregory, J.W., Harvey, M.C. Molles, Jr., E.I. Rogers and J.A. Stanford. 2002. Riparian Areas: Functions and Strategies for Management. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C. Brinson, M.M. 1988. Strategies for assessing the cumulative effects of wetland aeration on water quality. Environmental Management. 12(5):655-662. Canfield, Jr., D.E. and M. V. Hoyer. 1992. Aquatic macrophytes and their relation to the limnology of Florida lakes. University of Florida SP115 Gainesville, Florida. Canfield, D.E., Jr, J.V. Shireman, D.E. Colle, W.T. Haller, C.E. Watkins, II., and M.J. Maceina. 1984. Predication of Chlorophyll a concentrations in Florida lakes: Importance of Aquatic Macrophytes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 41: 497-501. SAS (Statistical Analysis Software). 2009. Cary NC. Cooke, D., E.B Welch, S. Peterson, and S.A. Nichols. 2005. Restoration and Management of Lakes and Reservoirs, Third Edition. Taylor and Francis Group, New York.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Public Workshop for Minimum Flows and Levels Priority Lists and Schedules for the CFWI Area
    Joint Public Workshop for Minimum Flows and Levels Priority Lists and Schedules for the CFWI Area St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) September 5, 2019 St. Cloud, Florida 1 Agenda 1. Introductions and Background……... Don Medellin, SFWMD 2. SJRWMD MFLs Priority List……Andrew Sutherland, SJRWMD 3. SWFWMD MFLs Priority List..Doug Leeper, SWFWMD 4. SFWMD MFLs Priority List……Don Medellin, SFWMD 5. Stakeholder comments 6. Adjourn 2 Statutory Directive for MFLs Water management districts or DEP must establish MFLs that set the limit or level… “…at which further withdrawals would be significantly harmful to the water resources or ecology of the area.” Section 373.042(1), Florida Statutes 3 Statutory Directive for Reservations Water management districts may… “…reserve from use by permit applicants, water in such locations and quantities, and for such seasons of the year, as in its judgment may be required for the protection of fish and wildlife or the public health and safety.” Section 373.223(4), Florida Statutes 4 District Priority Lists and Schedules Meet Statutory and Rule Requirements ▪ Prioritization is based on the importance of waters to the State or region, and the existence of or potential for significant harm ▪ Includes waters experiencing or reasonably expected to experience adverse impacts ▪ MFLs the districts will voluntarily subject to independent scientific peer review are identified ▪ Proposed reservations are identified ▪ Listed water bodies that have the potential to be affected by withdrawals in an adjacent water management district are identified 5 2019 Draft Priority List and Schedule ▪ Annual priority list and schedule required by statute for each district ▪ Presented to respective District Governing Boards for approval ▪ Submitted to DEP for review by Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • FLORIDA STATE PARKS FEE SCHEDULE (Fees Are Per Day Unless Otherwise Noted) 1. Statewide Fees Admission Range $1.00**
    FLORIDA STATE PARKS FEE SCHEDULE (Fees are per day unless otherwise noted) 1. Statewide Fees Admission Range $1.00** - $10.00** (Does not include buses or admission to Ellie Schiller Homosassa Springs Wildlife State Park or Weeki Wachee Springs State Park) Single-Occupant Vehicle or Motorcycle Admission $4.00 - $6.00** (Includes motorcycles with one or more riders and vehicles with one occupant) Per Vehicle Admission $5.00 - $10.00** (Allows admission for 2 to 8 people per vehicle; over 8 people requires additional per person fees) Pedestrians, Bicyclists, Per Passenger Exceeding 8 Per Vehicle; Per $2.00 - $5.00** Passenger In Vehicles With Holder of Annual Individual Entrance Pass Admission Economically Disadvantaged Admission One-half of base (Must be Florida resident admission fee** and currently participating in Food Stamp Program) Bus Tour Admission $2.00** per person (Does not include Ellie Schiller Homosassa Springs Wildlife State Park, or $60.00 Skyway Fishing Pier State Park, or Weeki Wachee Springs State Park) whichever is less Honor Park Admission Per Vehicle $2.00 - $10.00** Pedestrians and Bicyclists $2.00 - $5.00** Sunset Admission $4.00 - $10.00** (Per vehicle, one hour before closing) Florida National Guard Admission One-half of base (Active members, spouses, and minor children; validation required) admission fee** Children, under 6 years of age Free (All parks) Annual Entrance Pass Fee Range $20.00 - $500.00 Individual Annual Entrance Pass $60.00 (Retired U. S. military, honorably discharged veterans, active-duty $45.00 U. S. military and reservists; validation required) Family Annual Entrance Pass $120.00 (maximum of 8 people in a group; only allows up to 2 people at Ellie Schiller Homosassa Springs Wildlife State Park and Weeki Wachee Springs State Park) (Retired U.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenways Trails [EL08] 20110406 Copy.Eps
    R 17 E R 18 E R 19 E R 20 E R 21 E R 22 E MULTI-USE, PAVED TRAILS Suncoast NAME MILES Air Cargo Road 1.4 G HILLSBOROUGH Al Lopez Park 3.3 BrookerBrooker CreekCreek un n CorridorCorridor Suncoast H Aldermans Ford Park 1.9 w y Trail Amberly Drive 2.8 l B LakeLake DanDan 39 Bayshore Boulevard Greenways 4.4 EquestrianEquestrian TrailTrail Lake s GREENWAYS SYSTEM F z e n Lut rn R P d w OakridgeOakridge Brandon Parkway 1.4 o EquestrianEquestrian TrailTrail HillsboroughHillsborough RRiveriver LLUTZUTZ LAKEAKE FERNF D Bruce B Downs Boulevard 4.8 BrookerBrooker CCreekreek ERN RDRD StateState ParkPark B HeadwatersHeadwaters 75 NNewew TTampaampa Y e Cheney Park 0.3 TrailTrail c A LutzLutz W u Commerce Park Boulevard 1.4 KeystoneKeystone K Tam r BlackwaterBlackwater Bruce B Downs Bl Downs B Bruce R ew pa B A N N Bl FloridaFlorida TrailTrail PPARKWAY L reek CreekCreek PreservePreserve Compton Drive 1.4 C D TrailTrail Bl E E ss Copeland Park 2.3 D K CypressCypress TATAR RRD N SUNSETSUNSET LNLN Cro O R Y P H ON GS T N A I I I O R V CreekCreek SP D G Cross County Greenway 0.8 S 275 G A R H W R H WAYNE RD A YS L R L C T 41 579 C CROOKED LN DairyDairy A O A A Cypress Point Park 1.0 N N L N KeystoneKeystone C P O D E D N LAK R FarmFarm C H D H T r Davis Island Park 0.5 U r O O R U Lake U S D SSUNCOAS 568 D A A Bo N G y S Desotto Park 0.3 co W Keystone T K u P N R I m D L E D BrookerBrooker CreekCreek t Rd 589 l RS EN R V d E VVanan DDykeyke RdRd a GRE DeadDead E Shell Point Road 1.2 Y I NNewew TampaTampa R ConeCone RanchRanch VVanan DDykeyke RRdd AV L LIVINGSTON
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Flows) Documents and Reports
    Projects & Programs Minimum Flows and Levels Minimum Flows and Levels (Environmental Flows) Documents and Reports Priority List and Schedule Contacts 2010 Board Approved MFL Priority List and Schedule Marty Kelly Ecologic Evaluation Section Manager River Systems and Springs 1-800-423-1476 (FL only) or river (352) 796-7211, ext. 4235 title report appendix review system/spring Anclote River System Mark Barcelo Anclote River Recommended Minimum Flows and Levels Hydrologic Evaluation Section Manager Alafia River Minimum Flows and Alafia River Levels — Freshwater Segment 1-800-423-1476 (FL only) or Determination of Minimum Flows (352) 796-7211, ext. 4242 Alafia River for the Lower Alafia River Estuary Proposed Minimum Flows and Levels for the Upper Segment of the Braden River Braden River, from Linger Lodge to Lorraine Road Dona Proposed Minimum Flows and Bay/Shakett Levels for Dona Bay/Shakett Creek Creek below Below Cow Pen Slough Cow Pen Slough Analysis of Hydrologic and Hillsborough Ecological Factors Related to the River Establishment of Minimum Flows for the Hillsborough River Middle Hillsborough River: Water Hillsborough Levels, Water Quality and Water River Management Lower Hillsborough River Low Hillsborough Flow Study Results and Minimum River Flow Recommendation Proposed Minimum Flows and Levels for the Upper Segment of the Hillsborough Hillsborough River, from Crystal River Springs to Morris Bridge, and Crystal Springs Study of Salt Transport in the Lower Hillsborough River Using a Hillsborough Laterally Averaged River Two-Dimensional
    [Show full text]
  • Arlington Park Residents From: Karin Murphy, Director of Urban Design
    To: Arlington Park Residents From: Karin Murphy, Director of Urban Design Studio Date: February 1, 2016 Re: Arlington Park Neighborhood Association - Form-based Code Updates The attached materials were distributed to the attendees of the Arlington Park Neighborhood Meeting held on Tuesday, January 19, 2016. These materials were used as part of an interactive discussion of the status of the Form-based Code (FBC), to receive feedback, and to discuss continued opportunities for participation. Also included for discussion was the potential code amendment language requested by the neighborhood to address façade/frontage requirements for single family lots within the neighborhood. Materials distributed included language originally discussed as well as alternative language provided by Neighborhood and Development Services Staff. The discussion included the possibility of the amendment proceeding independently of the FBC process as part of an upcoming text amendment that NDS is processing. Arlington Park Form-based Code Status Update January 19, 2016 We are in the process of completing the most significant component of the City of Sarasota’s Form- Based Code, which are the City-Wide Zoning Map and Draft Special Requirements Plans. All other modules and sections of the code are built upon these maps. We had hoped to have completed this work in the fall of 2015, but unfortunately we have had to do a significant audit of the existing maps and data sets in order to create the new zones and geographic information system maps. As we have been creating and proofing the maps, we also spent 2015 finishing walking audits and public outreach events so all of the City’s neighborhoods, property owners and stakeholders have been given the opportunity to participate in public outreach events and sessions.
    [Show full text]
  • Alafia River Corridor Nature Preserve Management Plan
    Alafia River Corridor Nature Preserve Management Plan Submitted to the Southwest Florida Water Management District as a Requisite of the Save Our Rivers and Preservation 2000 Programs Prepared by HDR Engineering Inc. Prepared for Hillsborough County Parks, Recreation and Conservation Department Regional Parks/Conservation Section 10940 McMullen Road Riverview, FL 33569-6226 2010 Table of Contents Topic Page Number 1. Purpose of Acquisition............................................................................................................... 4 2. Location and Conformance with Local Plans............................................................................ 5 3. Natural Features....................................................................................................................... 10 a. Vegetation/Plant Communities ........................................................................................... 10 b. Soils..................................................................................................................................... 14 c. Elevation ............................................................................................................................. 19 d. Drainage Basin/Watershed/Hydrology ............................................................................... 19 4. History of Changes in Natural Features................................................................................... 22 5. Cultural Resources..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Integrated Water Quality Assessment for Florida: Sections 303(D), 305(B), and 314 Report and Listing Update
    2020 Integrated Water Quality Assessment for Florida: Sections 303(d), 305(b), and 314 Report and Listing Update Division of Environmental Assessment and Restoration Florida Department of Environmental Protection June 2020 2600 Blair Stone Rd. Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400 floridadep.gov 2020 Integrated Water Quality Assessment for Florida, June 2020 This Page Intentionally Blank. Page 2 of 160 2020 Integrated Water Quality Assessment for Florida, June 2020 Letter to Floridians Ron DeSantis FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF Governor Jeanette Nuñez Environmental Protection Lt. Governor Bob Martinez Center Noah Valenstein 2600 Blair Stone Road Secretary Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400 June 16, 2020 Dear Floridians: It is with great pleasure that we present to you the 2020 Integrated Water Quality Assessment for Florida. This report meets the Federal Clean Water Act reporting requirements; more importantly, it presents a comprehensive analysis of the quality of our waters. This report would not be possible without the monitoring efforts of organizations throughout the state, including state and local governments, universities, and volunteer groups who agree that our waters are a central part of our state’s culture, heritage, and way of life. In Florida, monitoring efforts at all levels result in substantially more monitoring stations and water quality data than most other states in the nation. These water quality data are used annually for the assessment of waterbody health by means of a comprehensive approach. Hundreds of assessments of individual waterbodies are conducted each year. Additionally, as part of this report, a statewide water quality condition is presented using an unbiased random monitoring design. These efforts allow us to understand the state’s water conditions, make decisions that further enhance our waterways, and focus our efforts on addressing problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Living in Florida's Watersheds
    Balancing Water Needs … Protecting Natural Systems Southwest Florida Water Management District The Comprehensive Living in Watershed Management Initiative LEVY MARION Florida’s The District’s Comprehensive Watershed Management (CWM) initiative, established in Withlacoochee 1994, manages water resources by evaluating how CITRUS River Watershed Watersheds various systems and activities interconnect within each of the District’s 11 major watersheds. SUMTER HERNANDO CWM brings together land and water Springs Coast LAKE resource planning to lay the groundwork Watershed for a coordinated, science-based approach PASCO to watershed management that uses the Hillsborough latest Geographic Information System River Watershed technology and other modeling tools. Tampa Bay/ Anclote River HILLSBOROUGH Watershed POLK Teams made up of representatives PINELLAS Alafia River Watershed from the District, local governments Lake Wales Ridge and other interested organizations, Peace River Watershed as well as watershed residents, Little Manatee River Watershed Watershed MANATEE identified needed research and HARDEE projects to improve the health of the Manatee River Watershed 11 watersheds. Many of these studies Myakka HIGHLANDS River and projects are now being accomplished Southern Coastal Watershed or are planned within the District’s Watershed Watershed DESOTO SARASOTA Management Program. CHARLOTTE The Southwest Florida Water Management District manages and protects water resources in west-central Florida, one of Florida’s fastest-growing regions. Central to this mission is balancing current and future demand for water while safeguarding the natural systems that supply this vital resource. Population in the 16-county region is expected to swell to 5.4 million by 2020, more than doubling the number of people living here in 1980, requiring investment in new water sources and greater water conservation.
    [Show full text]
  • George E. Tillitson Collection on Railroads M0165
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf1j49n53k No online items Guide to the George E. Tillitson Collection on Railroads M0165 Department of Special Collections and University Archives 1999 ; revised 2019 Green Library 557 Escondido Mall Stanford 94305-6064 [email protected] URL: http://library.stanford.edu/spc Guide to the George E. Tillitson M0165 1 Collection on Railroads M0165 Language of Material: English Contributing Institution: Department of Special Collections and University Archives Title: George E. Tillitson collection on railroads creator: Tillitson, George E. Identifier/Call Number: M0165 Physical Description: 50.5 Linear Feet(9 cartons and 99 manuscript storage boxes) Date (inclusive): 1880-1959 Abstract: Notes on the history of railroads in the United States and Canada. Conditions Governing Access The collection is open for research. Note that material is stored off-site and must be requested at least 36 hours in advance of intended use. Provenance Gift of George E. Tillitson, 1955. Special Notes One very useful feature of the material is further described in the two attached pages. This is the carefully annotated study of a good many of the important large railroads of the United States complete within their own files, these to be found within the official state of incorporation. Here will be included page references to the frequently huge number of small short-line roads that usually wound up by being “taken in” to the larger and expending Class II and I roads. Some of these files, such as the New York Central or the Pennsylvania Railroad are very big themselves. Michigan, Wisconsin, Oregon, and Washington are large because the many lumber railroads have been extensively studied out.
    [Show full text]