Florida's Wetlands An Update on Status and Trends, 1985 to 1996

Thomas E . Dahl U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Branch of Habitat Assessment Washington, D.C .

Atlanta, GA; Dr. Ken Burnham Acknowledgments Cooperative Research Unit, Many people within the U.S. Colorado State University, Ft. Fish and Wildlife Service have Collins, CO; Mr. John Hefner, provided technical, administrative Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and or editorial support for this project. Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA; Dr. The author would like to thank the Wiley Kitchens, Florida Cooperative following individuals: Dr. Mamie Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Parker, Ms. Kathleen Short and University of Florida, Gainesville, Mr. William Knapp, Mr. Everett FL.; Mr. Andreas Mager, Jr., Wilson, Fisheries and Habitat Assistant Regional Administrator, Conservation ; Dr. Benjamin Tuggle, Habitat Conservation Division, Division of Resource and Habitat NOAA-National Marine Fisheries Conservation ; Mr. John Cooper, of Service, St. Petersburg, FL; and the Branch of Habitat Assessment. Mr. Steve Rockwood Waterfowl Numerous personnel from the Biologist, Florida Fish and Wildlife National Wetlands Inventory Center Conservation Commission, in St. Petersburg, FL. helped with Fellsmere, FL. data preparation, collection and field reconnaissance. All photographs are by the author unless otherwise noted. Publication Technical review of the manuscript layout and final illustration of the was provided by the following report were done by Ms. Elizabeth experts: Mr. William Ainslie, Ciganovich, and photographs were Chief, Wetlands Section, U.S. revised by Ms. Marta Anderson and Environmental Protection Agency, Ms. Erinn Dornaus, U.S. Geological Survey, Cartography and Publishing The author and U.S. Fish Program, Madison, WI. and Wildlife Service wish to acknowledge Richard Young*, This report should be cited as Cartographer, who was follows: responsible for digital data verification and who produced T. E . Dahl. 2005. Florida's wetlands : many of the data tables and an update on status and trends 1985 Geographic Information System to 1996. U.S. Department of the Coverphotograph: graphics in this report. Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Forested wetland, Washington, D .C. 80 pp. Collier County, *Current address U.S. Fish and Wildlife Florida. Service, Portland, OR. Conversion Table

U.S. Customary to Metric inches (in.) x 25.40 = millimeters (mm) inches (in.) x 2.54 = centimeters (cm) feet (ft) x 0.3048 = meters (m) miles (mi) x 1.609 = kilometers (km) nautical miles (nmi) x 1.852 = kilometers (km)

square feet (ft2) x 0.0929 = square meters (m') square miles (mil) x 2.590 = square kilometers (km') acres (A) x 0.4047 = hectares (ha)

gallons (gal) x 3.785 = liters (L) cubic feet (ft') x 0.02831 = cubic meters (m3) acre-feet (A-ft) x 1233 .5 = cubic meters (mi)

ounces (oz) x 28.3495 = grams (g) pounds (lb) x 0.4536 = kilograms (kg) short tons (tons) x 0.9072 = metric tons (t) British Thermal Units (BTU) x 0.2520 = kilocalories (kcal)

Fahrenheit degrees (F) 0.556 (F - 32) = Celsius degrees (C)

Metric to U.S. Customary millimeters (mm) x 0.03937 = inches (in.) centimeters (cm) x 0.3937 = feet (ft) meters (m) x 3.281 = feet (ft) kilometers (km) x 0.6214 = miles (mi)

square meters (m2) x 10.764 = square feet (W) square kilometers (km2) x 0.3861 = square miles (miz) hectares (ha) x 2.471 = acres (A)

liters (L) x 0.2642 = gallons (gal) cubicmeters (m3) x 35.31 = cubic feet (ft=;' cubicmeters (ms) x 0.0008110 = acre-feet (A-ft)

milligrams (mg) x 0.00003527 = ounces (oz) grams (g) x 0.03527 = ounces (oz) kilograms (kg) x 2.2046 = ounces (oz) metric tons (t) x 2204.62 = pounds (lb) metric tons (t) x 1.102 = short tons (tons) kilocalories (kcal) x 3.968 = British Thermal Units (BTU)

Celsius degrees (C) --->. 1.8 (C) + 32) = Fahrenheit degrees (F) Contents

Executive Summary...... 7

Introduction ...... 10

Study Area and Procedures ...... 12

Results : Status, Distribution and Trends...... 33

Discussion ...... 46

Summary ...... 67

Literature Cited ...... 69

Appendix A: Definitions of Habitat Categories Used in the Florida Status and Trends Study...... 74

Appendix B : Changes in Florida's wetland classifications, 1985 and 1996 ...... 78

List of Figures

Figure 1. General locator map of Florida names and places referenced in the text ...... 12

Figure 2. Map of the physiographic sampling strata used in this study ...... 13

Figure 3. Exposed tidal flats of an intertidal estuarine wetland in Wakulla County, Florida, 1993 ...... 14

Fig-tire 4. Florida's barrier islands, 1996 ...... 15

Figure 5. High altitude, color infrared photograph of a portion of Shark Valley, Florida Everglades, 1996 ...... 16

Figure 6. Mangrove islands (red) as shown on color infrared photography of Florida Bay, 1996 ...... 17

Figure 7. Florida's major water bodies, 1996 ...... 18

Figure 8. Freshwater springs near Ocala, Florida, 1993 ...... 19

Figure 9. Florida counties, 1996 ...... 19

Figure 10. Sample plot distribution within Florida, 1996 ...... 22

Figure 11 . Sample of 1996 color infrared aerial photography used to identify and classify wetlands...... 23

Figure 12. Original wetland area in Florida and estimated remaining portion ...... 33 Figure 13. Average annual net wetland loss in Florida (Sources: Hefner 1986, Frayer and Hefner 1991, this study) ...... 34

Figure 14. Net loss of wetlands to uplands, 1985 to 1996...... 34

Figure 15. Distribution of estuarine emergent wetland in Florida, 1996 ...... 37

Figure 16. Distribution of estuarine shrub wetland in Florida, 1996...... 38

Figure 17. Proximity of urban areas to Florida's wetlands, 1996 ...... 39

Figure 18. Long term trends of intertidal wetland types in Florida, 1950s to 1996 ...... 41

Figure 19. Long term trends of freshwater wetland types in Florida, 1950s to 1996 ...... 45

Figure 20 . Net losses and gains of wetlands to various land use types, 1985 to 1996 ...... 45

Figure 21 . Example of intertidal wetlands along Florida's coastline in close proximity to development ...... 46

Figure 22. Florida's sand beaches offer recreational, commercial and aesthetic benefits to people ...... 46

Figure 23. Loss and gain of Florida's estuarine nonvegetated wetlands, 1985 to 1996...... 48

Figure 24. Estuarine salt marsh of north Florida dominated by black needlerush (Juncus roemerianus), 1994 ...... 49

Figure 25. Mangroves and surrounding waters of Florida Bay, 1991 ...... 50

Figure 26. Mangroves were concentrated within Federal, State and other conservation lands along Florida's Gulf Coast, 1996...... 50

Figure 27. Mangrove rehabilitation project in Fort De Soto Park, Pinellas County ...... 51

Figure 28. Loss or gain of estuarine shrub habitat between 1985 and 1996 ...... 51

Figure 29. Freshwater forested wetland dominated by red maple (Acer rubrum) and water oak (Quercus nigra), St. John's River, Florida ...... 53

Figure 30. Forest wetlands gained or converted from various cover-types, 1985 to 1996...... 54

Figure 31. Forested wetlands lost or converted to various cover-types, 1985 to 1996 ...... 54

Figure 32. Loss of forested wetlands to uplands, 1985 to 1996 ...... 55

Figure 33. Example of freshwater shrub wetland, Corkscrew Swamp, Florida, 1994 ...... 55

Figure 34. Loss of freshwater shrub wetlands to uplands, 1985 to 1996 ...... 56

Figure 35. Example of a freshwater emergent wetland in central Florida, 1996 ...... 56

Figure 36. 1985 and 1994 color infrared aerial photograph of wetlands and small lakes, Hatchbend, Florida ...... 57

Figure 37. Loss of freshwater emergent wetlands to uplands, 1985 to 1996 ...... 57

Figure 38. A constructed freshwater pond in a residential neighborhood, Brandenton, Florida, 1996 ...... 58

Figure 39. Long term trends of freshwater pond area in Florida ...... 58

Figure 40. 1985 and 1994 color infrared aerial photographs near Panama City, Florida ...... 59

4 Figure 41 . Acres of new ponds created from uplands in Florida, 1985 to 1996 ...... 59

Figure 42. A wetland creation/restoration site in southwestern Florida, 1999 ...... 60

Figure 43. Percentage of wetland area restored or created (ponds and emergent wetlands) from various upland land uses in Florida, 1985 to 1996 ...... 64

Figure 44. Conservation lands designated as Federal, State, local or private preserves, refuges, parks, reserves, or sanctuaries in Florida, 1996...... 65

List of Tables

Table 1 . Wetland, deepwater and upland categories used in this study ...... 21

Table 2. Wetland habitat descriptions, characteristic plant species and classification ...... 28

Table 3. Change in wetland area for selected wetland and deepwater categories, 1985 to 1996 ...... 35

Table 4. Estimated acreage of wetlands within the physiographic regions of Florida, 1996 ...... 36

Table 5. Comparison of marine and estuarine wetland area for Florida and the conterminous United States (Sources: Dahl 2000, this study) ...... 39

Table 6. Mean area and size range of individual estuarine wetlands within sample units in Florida, 1996 ...... 39

Table 7. Changes in estuarine and marine intertidal wetlands, 1985 to 1996...... 40

Table 8. Changes in marine and estuarine intertidal wetlands, 1985 to 1996...... 41

Table 9. Distribution of freshwater wetland types by physiographic region in Florida, 1996 ...... 43

Table 10. Mean area and size range of individual freshwater wetlands within sample units in Florida, 1996 ...... 43

Table 11. Changes in freshwater wetlands, 1985 to 1996 ...... 44 L Executive Summary

Before Florida became a State to 1996. It has provided the most in 1845, there were an estimated recent and comprehensive estimates 20.3 million acres (8.2 million ha) of the status and trends of wetland of wetlands . Over time, wetlands habitats within the State. have been drained, dredged, filled, leveled, and flooded to the extent An interagency group of statisticians that about half of the original developed the design for the wetland acreage remained. national status and trends study. Within Florida, the study design The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was stratified, random sampling has produced a series of status with 636 randomly selected sample and trends reports on Florida's plots, each four square miles (2,560 wetlands . The first (Hefner 1986) acres or 1,040 ha) in area. These estimated the rate ofwetland plots were examined, using remotely conversion to have been 72,000 sensed data in combination with field acres (29,150 ha) per year between work, to determine wetland change. the mid 1950s and the mid 1970s. Twenty two percent of the plots Those estimates captured trends were field verified, and rigorous from the period preceding efforts quality control measures were taken to protect and restore wetlands . to ensure data integrity and quality. Society's views about wetlands have Estimates of changes over time changed considerably and interest were made for wetland area and by in the preservation of wetlands has wetland type. increased as the values of wetlands have become more fully understood . The study incorporated all wetlands, This became evident in the Service's regardless of land ownership, as updated wetlands status and trends part of the sampled landscape. report for Florida (Hefner and Because wetlands in coastal areas Frayer 1991) that covered the period are important to a variety of fish and from the mid 1970s to the mid 1980s. wildlife, a supplemental sampling During that period the estimated stratum was added along the rate ofwetland loss had declined to Atlantic and Gulf coastal fringes. 23,700 acres (9,600 ha) per year. Determining what caused wetland The Emergency Wetlands Resources loss or gain was an important part of Act (Public Law 99-645) was enacted assessing the effectiveness of policy to promote the conservation of or management actions. As part of our Nation's wetlands . The Act this study, the Service worked with required the Service to conduct other Federal agencies to examine wetland status and trend studies of and field test wetland loss and gain the Nation's wetlands at periodic attribution categories which included intervals. This report has been upland urban development, upland produced as a supplemental effort agriculture, upland silviculture, and details the status and trends upland rural development, and other Corkscrew of Florida's wetlands from 1985 miscellaneous lands. Swamp, Collier County, Florida. and marine nonvegetated vegetated The conversion of marine and Status of wetlands occurred in Florida. estuarine wetlands to deepwater Wetlands in These nonvegetated wetlands were habitats involved losses to open commonly referred to as shores, water bay bottoms (deep water Florida, 1996 sand or mud flats, bars and shoals. estuaries), or open ocean .

Florida's wetlands included coastal Florida's coastal zone contained Freshwater Wetlands estuaries, mangrove islands, wet about 21 percent of all estuarine prairies, freshwater springs, cypress and marine wetlands found in the There were an estimated 10.2 swamps, cattail marshes and many conterminous United States. A million acres (4.1 million ha) of other types. Wetlands were found high percentage (92 percent) of freshwater wetlands in Florida in throughout the State from the Dry 1996. Freshwater wetlands made up estuarine shrub wetlands found in Tortugas to the Okefenokee Swamp 90 percent of all wetland area in the the conterminous U.S. were located along the Georgia border and from State. An estimated 98 percent were in Florida, whereas only 8 percent Cape Canaveral to the Gulf Islands vegetated while the remaining 2 of the estuarine emergent (salt near Pensacola. percent were open water ponds. marsh) wetlands were found along the State's coast lines. An estimated In 1996, an estimated 11 .4 million Within the freshwater system, 31 percent of all nonvegetated acres (4.6 million ha) ofwetlands approximately 5.6 million acres (2.3 estuarine and marine habitats within found in Florida occupied million ha) were forested wetlands, the conterminous approximately 29 percent of area of United States 1 .8 million acres (725,000 ha) were the State, a greater percentage of were found in Florida. shrubs, 2.6 million acres (1 .1 million the land surface than any other state ha) were emergent wetlands or in the conterminous United States. The mean size of emergent salt marshes and 241,000 acres (98,000 marsh wetlands and estuarine shrub ha) were freshwater ponds. Ninety percent of Florida's wetlands wetlands in the sample sites were by area were freshwater systems. slightly less than 23 acres (9 ha). The The size of freshwater wetlands The remaining 10 percent were estuarine nonvegetated wetlands in this study indicated forested marine or estuarine intertidal sampled averaged just over 10 acres wetlands were larger than shrubs wetlands . Of the original wetland (4 ha). or emergent wetlands . Forested area in Florida, about 56 percent wetlands averaged 17.7 acres (7 ha) remained. Florida's intertidal wetlands with emergent marshes and shrub sustained a net loss of 500 acres (200 wetlands each averaging 9.9 acres (4 The estimated average annual rate ha) or less than 1 percent during ha) and 7.1 acres (3 ha) respectively. of wetland loss was 5,000 acres this study period. Compared with The mean size of freshwater ponds (2,030 ha) between 1985 and 1996. the results from the 1970s to 1980s, was 1 .7 acres (0.7 ha). This was an 81 percent decline in there was an 83 percent decline in the annual rate of loss as reported the loss rate of marine and estuarine Florida's freshwater wetlands for the 1970s to 1980s. Important wetlands. declined by an estimated 52,000 factors that contributed to the acres (21,100 ha) or 0.5 percent decline in the wetland loss rate The estimated loss of 17 acres (7 ha) between 1985 and 1996. This was included Federal, State and local of estuarine emergent wetland to an average annual net loss of 4,740 legislation, ordinances and initiatives upland was statistically insignificant. acres (1,920 ha) and represented an that protected wetland habitats, 82 percent decline in the rate of loss Seventy five percent of the estuarine the application and enforcement since the 1970s to 1980s era. shrub losses were attributable to of wetland protection measures, some form of coastal development. elimination of some incentives for Freshwater vegetated wetlands This may have involved construction wetland drainage, public education declined by an estimated 91,000 of bridges, roadways, urban or and outreach about the value and acres (36,800 ha) or 0.9 percent. suburban development or other functions of wetlands, private land Freshwater emergent wetlands infrastructure Twenty percent initiatives, coastal monitoring and . exhibited the largest losses declining protection programs, and programs of the estuarine shrub losses by an estimated 260,000 acres and policies that promoted wetland were attributed to agriculture (10,500 ha) or 9.0 percent. These restoration and creation. and 5 percent were due to other losses were partially offset by gains unidentified upland land uses. in other freshwater wetland types. Marine and Estuarine Wetlands Seventy-one percent of the losses Freshwater forested wetlands An estimated 314,400 acres (127,290 to estuarine shores was attributed exhibited a net gain over the course ha) of estuarine emergent or to urban expansion along the coast. of this study. This was in contrast saltmarsh wetlands, 616,300 acres The remaining 29 percent was due to long term trends which had (249,510 ha) of estuarine shrubs and to expansion of other unidentified exhibited continual decline since the 206,400 acres (83,560 ha) of estuarine types of upland land use. 1950s. There was an estimated net gain of 22,500 acres (9,100 ha) due in were indicative of prolonged periods high growth areas throughout the large part to the maturation of shrub of drought that allowed woody State. Collectively urban and rural wetlands reclassified as forested plants to become established in development activities accounted for wetlands . Forested wetland gains emergent wetlands, or the invasion an estimated 72 percent of the net resulted from the conversion of of shrubs such as Brazilian Pepper wetland losses. almost 300,000 acres (118,500 ha) of or Melaleuca. shrub wetland to forested wetland. Development outside established The vast majority of these lands Freshwater ponds increased in area urban areas was termed rural were in production ofwood products by over 39,000 acres (15,800 ha), development and included road for lumber, pulp, chip and paper almost 20 percent. Forested wetland construction, buildings for homes products . area increased slightly (0.4 percent) or industry, mining operations, golf while shrub wetlands increased by courses, etc. Rural development was There were an estimated 1,791,100 an estimated 8.9 percent. These responsible for more freshwater acres (725,140 ha) of wetland shrubs gains largely overshadowed the forested wetland loss than other in 1996. This represented a gain of losses to freshwater emergents. land use categories . An estimated an estimated 146,400 acres (59,300 26,400 acres (10,700 ha) of forested ha) or almost 9 percent. There was wetlands were lost to rural a close interrelationship between development wetland shrub acreage and wetland Attribution of forest acreage as many areas Much of the wetland acreage loss were rotating from shrub to forest Wetland Losses to agriculture occurred in southern following timber cutting. There was Net losses of wetland between 1985 Florida where freshwater emergent also a large amount of emergent and 1996 were attributed to urban wetlands were converted to citrus wetland (306,000 acres or 123,900 ha) and rural development, (72 percent) production, horticulture, growing that was converted to shrub wetland and agriculture (28 percent). Small landscape or other ornamental during this study period. net gains were recorded from plants, greenhouses, sod farms silviculture and the "other uplands" and other agricultural uses. The From the 1970s to 1980s, the land use categories . net losses attributed to agriculture estimated loss of freshwater declined by 79 percent compared emergent wetlands was 110,000 Urban development destroyed to the estimated losses attributed acres (44,500 ha). This study a variety of freshwater wetland to agriculture from the 1970s to indicated the loss rate of freshwater types. Losses attributed to urban 1980s. There were an estimated emergent wetland more than expansion were fairly evenly divided 127,940 acres (51,800 ha) of wetlands doubled as an estimated 260,200 between freshwater forested, shrub that were restored or created acres (105,340 ha) were lost in and emergent wetlands . from uplands. Approximately 67 Florida between 1985 and 1996. The percent took place on agricultural conversion of freshwater emergent Loss of wetlands to urban and rural lands. Agricultural programs that wetland to shrub wetland involved development involved drainage promote wetland restoration, pond 286,900 acres (116,150 ha). Changes for homes, resorts, golf courses, creation and land retirement were of the magnitude that occurred industry, roads, bridges and other responsible for these gains. in Florida between 1985 and 1996 infrastructure . It occurred in

St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, an emergent marsh on Florida's Gulf'Coast. Introduction

The mission of the U. S. Fish and panther (Felts concolor corgi), Wildlife Service is to conserve, West Indian manatees (Trichechus protect, and enhance fish and manatus) and five species of sea wildlife and their habitats for turtles are critically endangered and the continuing benefit of the require Federally designated species American people . The Service has coordinators. responsibility for the protection and stewardship of endangered Wetlands support Florida's fish and wildlife, migratory birds, certain wildlife populations. Coastal beaches marine mammals, and their habitats. provide nesting habitat for thirteen Changes in the status of wetlands species of shorebirds and about 90 potentially affects migratory and percent of all loggerhead sea turtles endangered species. Florida's nesting in the United States (U.S. coastal, inland waters and wetlands Fish and Wildlife Service 1996). provide habitats for a large number Estuaries and near shore habitats of resident species and are the are nurseries for ecologically and wintering destination for many other economically important fish and migratory species. Approximately shellfish. Herons, egrets, ibises, 75 species of mammals, 283 species spoonbills and storks reside in Florida wetland wildlife, below,from amphibians wetlands and are a conspicuous left to right: whooping crane (Gnus of birds, 122 reptiles, 57 americana), manatee (Trichechus and 126 fishes can be found in the part of Florida's wildlife resources manatus), great egret (Ardea alba), State (Millsap et al. 1990). Forty (Runde 1991). Seventeen percent wood stork (Mycteria americana), green two ofthese species are listed of Florida's wildlife species are treefrog (Hyla cinera), and loggerhead as endangered by the U. S. Fish not found elsewhere in the United turtle (Caretta caretta). and Wildlife Service. The Florida States. Some portions of south Shrimping boats andfisherman in Florida. (Photos courtesy of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.)

Florida support the only subtropical change. The most recent study rates declined (Frayer and Hefner ecological communities in the detailed the status and trends of 1991). However, since that time, the continental U.S. making it one of our Nation's wetlands from 1986 to population has continued to increase North America's most important 1997 (Dahl 2000) . It provided the dramatically. Florida ranked seventh reservoirs of biological diversity. most comprehensive estimates of the in the Nation for population growth current status and trends of wetland between 1990 and 2000. This growth People also benefit from Florida's habitats. Although designed as part has necessarily been accompanied abundant wetland and water of the national assessment, the data by extensive land-use changes resources. Much of the State's collected as part of that effort meet and increasing demand for water, tourist industry is based on the criteria for providing statistical resources and space. In addition, ability to access and enjoy coastal estimates of wetland status and invasive species have spread, waters and beaches. Inland waters trends for the State of Florida. The compromising the function and support sport fishing, canoeing, following sections report the results value of wetlands and waterways boating and other water sports . of the Florida data analysis. throughout the state. The presence Wetlands provide opportunities for of invasive species in wetlands and viewing and photographing nature, Previous Service reports on waterways has been problematic, birdwatching, hunting and other Florida's wetland trends have used a and reconciling increasing demands outdoor activities . Other products similar subset of the national status for water resources has continued produced by wetlands are used by and trends data set (Hefner and as an issue in Florida. These industry or commercial enterprises. Brown 1984; Hefner 1986; Frayer circumstances, accompanied by Coastal waters support commercial and Hefner 1991). Those reports extensive land use changes, have and recreational fisheries. Cypress examined Florida's wetland trends generated continued interest in the mulch and peat are used for from the 1950s to 1970s, and from status of the State's wetlands . Many horticultural purposes, timber the 1970s to 1980s, respectively. challenges to maintaining wetland products for construction and Data from those studies indicated habitat availability and quality manufacturing, mineral extraction that Florida had lost substantial remain. and freshwater supplies are all be wetland acreage. The cypress associated with wetlands in Florida. strands fringing the Atlantic coastal This report presents the latest ridge, the pond apple forests south wetland status information on The Emergency Wetlands Resources of Lake Okeechobee and the tropical Florida's wetland resources and Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-645) was hardwood hammocks were some provides estimates of losses or gains enacted to promote the conservation of the wetland types that had been that occurred between 1985 and of our Nation's wetlands . The Act greatly reduced over time (U.S. 1996. The data for the State were requires that the Fish and Wildlife Fish and Wildlife Service 1996) . the first to be analyzed beyond the Service conduct wetland status These types, once conspicuous and national data set and provide new and trend studies of the Nation's expansive landscapes, were reduced information about wetland trends wetlands at periodic intervals. to highly fragmented remnant specific to Florida. These data have This is accomplished by the use ptaches in South Florida (Davis and been supplemented with additional of a stratified, random sampling Ogden 1994). sources of information on wetland design where sample plots are community types to provide a more examined with the use of remotely With the advent of measures to comprehensive understanding of sensed imagery, in combination with conserve wetlands during the 1970s Florida's wetland resources. field work, to determine wetland and 1980s, Florida's wetland loss Study Area and Procedures

A combination of geological history, Florida's unique ecosystems . Coastal climate, geography, environmental estuaries, mangrove islands, wet forces and human habitation prairies, freshwater springs, cypress have shaped Florida's landscape. swamps, cattail marshes and many Florida's 8,400 miles (5,220 km) other types were found throughout of coastline, 13 river basins and the State from the Dry Tortugas nearly 8,000 lakes have been vital to to the Okefenokee Swamp along the state's recreation and tourism the Georgia border and from Cape industry (GAP Commission 2001). Canaveral to the Gulf Islands near Water has been key to many of Pensacola (Figure 1).

?ensa

Gulf Islands NationaISeashore l palclc -lu~ lirr o

0 62 miles lorhrc im oh, Bur

N1(Y' cir' l-, q, n Ml let lacliarl Rircr La~ncm

Cape anaveral Z

hrl,itci

Ch,w/ntt Harhrn

Figure 1. General locator map ofFlorida names and places

referenced in the text. Soldier Key z

Dry Torrugas ,'9 The total land area of Florida was beach and dune complexes, dense (97 km) from salt water (Marth and approximately 58,560 square miles subtropical vegetation in the south Marth 1992). Florida was considered (151,670 sq. km)' . Florida's mean and temperate hardwood forests in the wettest State with more wetland elevation was 100 ft. (31 m) (Sharp the north. Karstic (i.e. limestone) and surface water area than other 1992). Throughout south Florida relief features including caves, sinks States in the conterminous U.S. and in the coastal stretches of and low hills occurred in the north (Dahl 1990). the Big Bend area, relief of less western portion of the State. Water than 6 feet (2 m) was widespread bodies, whether they were coastal or For this study, Florida was stratified (Fernald and Purdum 1992). The inland were common, and no portion into three physiographic regions landscape included coastal estuaries, of the State was more than 60 miles (Figure 2). These included:

'This study incorporated some estuarine embayments not included in the total land area figure.

The Myakka River

Physiographic Region

Gulf-Atlantic Rolling Plain Gulf-Atlantic Coastal Flats Coastal Zone

Figure 2. Map ofthe physiographic sampling strata used in this study. Figure 3. Exposed tidalflats of an intertidal estuarine wetland in Wakulla County, Florida, 1993.

features 1-3 meters high (Duever et Coastal Zone al. 1982). Rock shoreline stretched The Coastal Zone encompassed the discontinuously from south of St. near-shore areas of Florida and Augustine to Jupiter Inlet. Rocky included barrier islands, coastal shores were also found on the marshes, exposed tidal flats (Figure windward side of some of the Florida 3) and other features not in the Keys. landward physiographic zones. The Coastal Zone represents an area There were numerous islands where salt water was the overriding that formed barriers between the influence on biological systems and Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico was not synonymous with any State and the mainland. Some segments of or Federal jurisdictional coastal zone Florida's barrier islands have been definitions. designated as part of the Federal Coastal Barrier Resources System. Florida had 8,426 miles (13,557 km) The Barrier Islands Act of 1983 of tidal shoreline bordering both removed undeveloped islands from the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Federal flood insurance protection Mexico. Included as part of this and resulted in 33 locations being coastline were 700 miles (1,126 km) designated as coastal barriers of sand beaches and 4,510 islands under this legislation. The system 10 acres (4.1 ha) or larger (Morris was expanded to include several 1991). more sites by the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990 (U.S. Few rock shorelines occurred along Dept. of Interior 1995). In all, 67 the Florida coast. These were high sites encompassing 285,146 acres energy intertidal environments (115,444 ha) of coastal island where beach or coral had weathered segments were designated as part of to form irregularly shaped rocky this system in Florida (Figure 4) .

( ( , (/(I ~- KC,//

Coastal vacation and residential development, Indian Rocks Beach

Garson Island Santa R Mareno Point St. Andrew Four Mile Village Peninsula",, Complex Point \ 11 Deer Lake Complex Cape San Blas \. ~~/ ~Dog Island \~ Indian. '-~St . George Island

f-

Figure 4. Florida's barrier islands, 1996. rose slightly above the surrounding Florida Bay. Slopes averaged less Gulf-Atlantic landscape (Bailey 1980) . that 2 inches per mile (3 cm per km) Coastal Flats as water flowed in a southwestern The Everglades covered much of direction across the Everglades and The Gulf-Atlantic Coastal Flats south Florida. These vast wetlands into Florida Bay (McPherson and physiographic region described by occupied a flat marl and limestone Halley 1996). Hammond (1970), encompassed most shelf covered with shallow peat of the Florida peninsula. The Coastal deposits (Figure 5). Elevations in The Big Cypress Preserve, adjacent Flats were characteristically level, the Everglades drainage system to the Everglades was made up of but low beach ridges provided some ranged from 14 feet (4.3 m) near cypress strands, wooded sloughs topographic relief as tree hammocks Lake Okeechobee to sea level at and wet prairies (Duever et al. 1986).

A

Figure 5. High altitude, color infrared photograph ofa, portion ofShark Valley, Florida Everglades, 1996. (Aerial photo courtesy ofUSGS.) South and west of the Everglades of tropical trees (Figure 6). The Lauderdale/West Palm Beach, and the Big Cypress Preserve are Everglades, contiguous with the Tampa/St . Petersburg, Ft. Myers, the Ten Thousand Islands. This Big Cypress Preserve and the Ten Orlando, Jacksonville and Pensacola. area supported the most extensive Thousand Islands area, form one Much of Florida's citrus and mangrove swamp in the United of the largest expanses of wetlands vegetable crop were grown in this States (U.S. Fish and Wildlife found in the conterminous United region of the State. Service 1996). The mangrove States. islands were dissected by numerous tidal channels dotted with Indian The Gulf-Atlantic Coastal Flats also mound hammocks of slightly higher included many highly populated elevation which support a variety urban centers such as Miami/Ft.

Figure 6. Mangrove islands (red) as shown on color infrared photography of Florida Bay, 1996. (Aerial photo courtesy ofFL DEP)

{load center: 81`29° 25°50°N an estimated 10,550 miles (16,975 Gulf-Atlantic Other Important km) of flowing water systems in Rolling Plain Florida (Morris 1991). Alluvial rivers Facets of originating in piedmont Alabama The Gulf-Atlantic Rolling Plain Florida's Water and Georgia and running south included a portion of the northern through the Florida panhandle panhandle, and the northern Resources carried sediments made up of sand, part of peninsular Florida. It was Water has sustained many of the silt or clays. Others originiating in contiguous with physiographic zones State's unique ecosystems and the coastal plain are dominated by extending south from Alabama and has been key to the recreation base flows. Examples include the Georgia. This region of the State, as and tourism industry (Figure 7). Suwannee and St. Johns Rivers delineated by Hammond (1970), was Florida's 8,426 miles (5,220 km) of where waters were often colored an area of slightly higher elevation coastline provide vast socioeconomic black from the high levels of tannic and it supported largely temperate- value as well as important ecological acid in the runoff from surrounding zone vegetation (Duever et al. 1982). resources. swamp hardwoods. (The wetlands Omernik (1987) described similar surrounding these rivers were often physiographic settings as smooth There were 34 major river systems referred to in colloquial terms as to irregular plains with a mosaic in Florida (Marth and Marth 1992). "red river bottoms" or "red river of crop land, forest, pasture and Collectively, there were 1,711 swamp" and "black water river urbanized areas. rivers and streams that made up bottoms" depending on the origins

;o~-

tpulcr h,

r nv Bamunu Rii'~ r

n v

Deepwater Habitats

Large Lakes

Rivers Ch, ~ fcrrhnr n

Figure 'T'. Florida's major water bodies,1996. of the river water.) The wetlands Nation's second largest freshwater Florida's population increased by adjacent to these rivers provide lake wholly within the U.S. borders. 23.5 percent making it the fourth food chain support, fish and wildlife Geologists have estimated that most populous state in the Nation habitat, erosion control, water Florida may have nearly 600 (U .S. Census Bureau 2002) . Tourism quality protection, flood storage and freshwater springs (Figure 8), a was the leading industry, agriculture control and deep aquifer recharge number classified as first magnitude was second as Florida was one (Taylor et al. 1990) . springs with average flows of of the top producers of citrus, greater than 100 cubic feet/sec (2.8 sugarcane, tomatoes, foliage, honey Other freshwater resources included cubic meters/sec) (Morris 1991). and strawberries (Marth and Marth 7,800 lakes, nearly all naturally 1992). formed from sink holes or solutional There were 67 counties in Florida depressions . Lake Okeechobee is the (Figure 9) . Between 1990 and 2000

Figure 8. Freshwater springs near Ocala, Florida, 1993.

Figure 9. Florida, counties, 1996. three attributes: (1) at least expected to occur within each Study Methods periodically, the land supports stratum. Each sample plot was Wetland Definition and Classification predominantly hydrophytes, (2) 2.0 miles (3.218 km) on a side, or the substrate is predominantly 4 square miles total area equaling Cowardin et al. (1979) was used undrained hydric soil, and (3) 2,560 acres (1,036 ha). Six-hundred- to define wetland for this study. the substrate is nonsoil and is and-thirty-six sample plots were This ecological definition was the saturated with water or covered analyzed in this study (Figure National standard for wetland by shallow water at some time 10). For each sample plot, aerial mapping, monitoring and data during the growing season of photography (i.e. digital orthophoto reporting as determined by each year. quarter quadrangle) was acquired the Federal Geographic Data and interpreted to identify wetlands, Committee . It was a two-part Habitat category definitions used in deepwater habitats and uplands. definition as indicated below: this study appear in synoptic form Plots were initially allocated to in Table l. Complete definitions strata based on the best information Wetlands are lands transitional ofwetland types and land use available about wetland area between terrestrial and aquatic categories used to conduct this study and variability by strata and on systems where the water table is are in Appendix A. a standard optimal-allocation usually at or near the surface or formula for stratified simple- the land, is covered by shallow Study Design random sampling. This stratification water. scheme had ecological, statistical, Within the physiographic regions and practical advantages because For purposes ofthis described above, sample plots were the physiographic divisions within classification, wetlands must randomly allocated in proportion Florida coincided with factors that have one or more ofthefollowing to the amount ofwetland acreage effected wetland distribution and

One of'the world's largest and deepest freshwater springs, Wakulla Springs is a pristine river sanctuary. Florida panther (Fells copcolor coryi). (Photo courtesy ofEverglades National Park.)

Table 1 . Wetland, deepwater, and upland categories used in this study. The definitions for each category appear in Appendix A.

Category Cwn,tnon Description

Salt Water Habitats

Marine Subtidal" Open ocean

Marine Intertidal Near shore

Estuarine Subtidal°- Open water/bay bottoms

Estuarine Intertidal Emergents Salt marsh

Estuarine Intertidal Forested/Shrub Mangroves or other estuarine shrubs

Estuarine Unconsolidated Shore Beaches/bars

Estuarine Aquatic Bed** Submerged or floating estuarine vegetation

Riverine (may be tidal or nontidal) River systems

Freshwater Habitats Palustrine Forested Forested swamps

Palustrine Shrub Shrub wetlands

Palustrine Emergents Inland marshes/wet meadows

Palustrine Unconsolidated Shore Shore beaches/bars

Palustrine Unconsolidated Bottom Open water ponds

Palustrine Aquatic Bed Floating aquatic/submerged vegetations

Lacustrine Lakes and reservoirs

Uplands

Agriculture Cropland, pasture, managed rangeland

Urban Cities and incorporated developments

Forested Plantations Planted or intensively managed forests, silviculture

Rural Development Nonurban developed areas and infrastructure

Other Uplands Rural uplands not in any other category ; barren lands *Deehte(der habitat

**Tech it icol lim itatioos de.sc) ,ibed in the text

abundance. Thus, this study design Changes in areal extent or type of Geological Survey) participated was well suited for determining wetland observed on the sample in field reconnaissance trips and wetland acreage and trends . plots between 1985 and 1996 were quality control reviews from April recorded . Field verification of 1999 through May 2000. Wetland changes were determined features on the aerial photography by intensive analysis of the was done for 138 plots or 22 percent For each sample plot, the extent aerial photography (Figure 11), of the total sample. Field verification of change among all wetland interpretation of wetland types addressed questions regarding types between the two dates of and hydrologic conditions, and image interpretation, land use photography was used to estimate determination of the changes that coding, and attribution ofwetland the total area of each wetland occurred between the respective gains or losses. Field work was also type. Areas of the sample plot that target dates. The mean dates of done as a quality control measure had been identified in previous the aerial photography used to to verify that plot delineations were eras as wetlands but that were determine wetland trends were correct. Verification involved field no longer wetlands, were placed 1985 and 1996, with the difference visits to a cross section ofwetland into five land use categories, being an average of 11 years. For types and geographical settings. which included agriculture, upland this study, wetlands 3 acres (1.2 ha) Field work was used to update forested plantations, upland areas and larger composed the target sample plots based on observations of rural development, upland urban population. Actual results indicated of on-the-ground conditions . Low landscapes and other miscellaneous that for each wetland category level reconnaissance was done by lands. The outputs from this analysis included in the study, the minimum helicopter for some plots inaccessible were change matrices that provided size represented was less than on the ground. Representatives from estimates of wetland area by type 1.0 acre (0.4 ha). However, not all three Federal agencies (Natural and observed changes over time. wetlands less than the target size Resources Conservation Service, The advantages of this design category were detected . Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. were that it focused entirely on

® Status and Trends 4-Square Mile Sample Plots (636 Total)

Figure 10. Sample plot distribution within Florida,, 1996. monitoring wetland change, it was files at any scale to directly overlay a spatially rectified file, any change used to monitor conversions between onto an image base. The wetlands information could be inserted to the ecologically different wetland types, interpreter viewed the new imagery correct geospatial position in the and it measured wetland gains and and made change notations directly plot boundary. Area information was losses. on the image overlay. This process recalculated from the new digital file was greatly facilitated by the use by use of a geographic information Advances in computerized of rectified digital orthophoto system. This process eliminated cartography helped to reduce labor quarter quadrangle imagery manual drafting, registered the intensive tasks and to improve data obtained with the assistance image overlays to georeferenced quality and geospatial integrity. of the Florida Department of coordinates, and reduced imprecise Newer technologies allowed the Environmental Protection. Because lines (line pixel width) inherent in generation of existing digital plot the plot information was already in older scanning technologies.

Figure 11. Sample of1996 color infrared aerial photography used to identify and classify wetlands. (Aerial photo courtesy ofFL DEP)

Quad center : az 19`W zs ts'N 23

The geospatial analysis capability in wetland area without further analyses because they were not built into this study provided assessment of species composition or detectable . a complete digital database to wetland quality. better assist analysis of wetland " Seagrasses or Submerged change information. Rigorous Aquatic Vegetation-The quality control inspections were detection of submerged aquatic built into the interpretation, data Study vegetation was difficult using collection and analysis processes. aerial photography without Amore complete description of Limitations extensive surface-level the techniques used to accomplish Due to the limitations of using aerial observations, tide stage data, the interpretation, registration, photography as the primary data water clarity data and low and change detection is provided source to detect wetlands, certain surface waves (Ferguson et al. in various technical manuals (U.S. habitats were excluded from this 1993). Seagrasses and other Fish and Wildlife Service 1994a, study by design. These included: submerged plants inhabited the 1994b) . Detailed discussion of the intertidal and subtidal zones of geographic information systems " Small Limesinks or Limestone estuaries and near shore coastal design, quality control procedures Sinkholes-These cavities or waters (Orth et al. 1990). The and the statistical aspects of the four most common seagrasses depressions were variable in study design were presented by found in Florida were widgeon size and were associated with Dahl (2000). grass (Ruppia maritima), partially or completely collapsed shoal grass (Halodule wrightii), limestone rock. They were This study produced estimates of turtle grass (Thalassia considered a type of wetland total wetland area and changes for testudinum) and manatee grass if they the State of Florida, and included all were observed to hold (Syringodium filiforme) . lands and waters of the State within standing water. Large limesinks or sinkholes detected on the sampling frame, regardless of were Collectively, Florida had been land ownership. Statistical estimates the aerial photography and reported to have between 1.9 were used to expand the sample data included in the study results and 2.7 million acres (769,230 to specific physiographic regions, based on their cover type. to 1,093,100 ha) of seagrasses wetland types or were generated However, many limesinks (Sargent et al. 1995). Florida's for the entire State . The reliability were small (less than 1 acre seagrasses were not delineated of each estimate generated was or .5 ha), and tree canopies as part of this study. expressed as the percent coefficient or other vegetation may have ofvariation (% C.V) associated masked their presence . In Reefs-Tropical reef with that estimate. This study these instances, sinkholes communities (coral or tuberficid was designed to measure changes were excluded from the report worm reefs) were found offshore

Mashes Islan County Park

Unique coastal marsh ecosystem ofMashes Island County Park, Wakulla County, Florida.

in south Florida waters. These narrow band of shallow water During 1998 and 1999, the Natural reefs range in water depth from (< 10 m) reef habitat covered Resources Conservation Service and less than 1 m to 41 m. Maximum approximately 360 sq. km and the Service launched a concerted coral reef development was was the planets third largest effort to develop a uniform system restricted to the south and barrier reef system in the world of definitions to attribute wetland western portions of the State, (Miller and Crosby 1998). Coral losses and gains to their causes. The along a line extending from reef extent and changes were categories used to determine the Soldier Key to the Dry Tortugas not quantified as part of this cause of wetland losses and gains are (Jaap 1984). Oyster (Crassostrea study. Although data from other described below. mrginica) reefs also occurred in studies were available for only the intertidal zone adjacent to limited geographical sites, there Agriculture marshes or mud flats (Bahr and has been widespread agreement Lanier 1981) . There were also that coral reef area has been The definition of agriculture approximately 329 permitted declining (Millhouser et al. 1998). followed Anderson et al. (1976) and artificial reefs in Florida coastal included land used primarily for waters. Most of these occurred " Ephemeral Water-When the production of food and fiber. in deep water, however several defining and classifying wetlands Agricultural activity was shown were in 7 to 8 feet (2-2.5 m) of Cowardin et al. (1979) did not by distinctive geometric field and water (Pybas 1991). recognize ephemeral water areas road patterns on the landscape as a wetland type. Therefore, and/or by tracks produced by Coral reefs were concentrated ephemeral water areas were not livestock or mechanized equipment. complexes of corals and other included in this study. Agricultural land uses included organisms that constructed a horticultural crops, row and close limestone structure in shallow grown crops, hayland, pastureland, waters (Jaap 1984). They were native pastures and range land and important links to a number Attribution of farm infrastructures. Examples of of fishery and benthic marine Freshwater agricultural activities within each resources and along with land use included: seagrasses and mangroves Wetland Losses formed a vital component of Horticultural crops consisted the coastal ecosystem. The only in Florida of orchard fruits (limes, bananas, emergent coral reefs found in the The process of identifying or grapefruit, oranges, peaches, conterminous U.S. were located attributing cause for wetland losses avocados, other citrus and like in the Florida Keys extending or gains has been investigated by species). Also included were south from Miami and Soldier both the Service and the Natural nuts such as almonds, pecans Key to the Dry Tortugas. This Resources Conservation Service. and walnuts; vineyards including

Everglades National Park

1'h,e 'mseate spoonbill (Ajaia ajaja) prefers mangrove swamp and salt marsh habitats . (Photo courtesy ofEverglades National Park.) grapes and hops; bush-fruit such Rural Development Other Land Uses as blueberries; berries such as Rural developments occurred in Other Land Use was composed strawberries or raspberries ; rural and suburban settings outside of uplands not characterized by and commercial flower and fern distinct cities and towns. They were the previous categories. Typically growing operations. characterized by nonintensive land these lands included native prairie, use and sparse building density. unmanaged or nonpatterned upland Row and Close Grown Crops Typically, a rural development was forests and scrub lands, and barren included field and sugar cane, a crossroads community that had a land. Lands in transition between sweet corn, sorghum, soybeans, corner gas station and a convenience different uses were also in this cotton, peanuts, tobacco, sugar store and were surrounded category. beets, potatoes, other truck by sparse residential housing. vegetables including melons, Scattered suburban communities Transitional lands were lands in beets, cabbage, cauliflower, located outside of a major urban transition from one land use to pumpkins, tomatoes, sunflower centers were also included in this another. They generally occurred and watermelon. Close grown category as were some industrial in large acreage blocks of 40 crops also included wheat, oats, and commercial complexes ; acres (16 ha) or more. They were barley, sod, ryegrass, and similar isolated transportation, power, characterized by the lack of any graminoids. and communication facilities; strip remote sensor information that mines; quarries; and recreational would enable the interpreter to Hayland and pastureland areas such as golf courses. reliably predict future use. The included grass, legumes, Major highways through rural transitional phase occurred when summer fallow and grazed native development areas were included in wetlands were drained, ditched, grassland. the rural development category. filled, leveled or the vegetation has been removed and the area was Other farmland included Urban Development temporarily bare. farmsteads and ranch headquarters, commercial Urban land consisted of areas of During April, 1999, cooperative feedlots, greenhouses, hog intensive use in which much of the interagency field evaluations were facilities, nurseries and poultry land was covered by structures conducted to test the definitions facilities . (high building density). Urbanized used by the Service on the wetland areas were cities and towns that status and trends plots to attribute Forested Plantations provided goods and services through wetland losses or gains. Field a central business district. Services exercises involving the participation Forested plantations consisted such as banking, medical and legal of the Service and the Natural of planted and managed forest office buildings, supermarkets and Resources Conservation Service stands and included planted pines, department stores made up the were conducted in central and south Christmas tree farms, clear cuts and business center of a city. Commercial Florida. These exercises consisted other managed forest stands. These strip developments along main of a careful review of determinations were identified by observing the transportation routes, shopping made on 31 sample plots. Field following remote sensing indicators: centers, contiguous dense residential evaluation of these plots resulted 1) trees planted in rows or blocks; areas, industrial and commercial in no disagreement among agency 2) forested blocks growing with complexes, transportation, power representatives with how the uniform crown heights; and 3) and communication facilities, city Service attributed wetland losses or logging activity and use patterns. parks, ball fields and golf courses gains as to cause. were included in the urban category. Florida's Everlades during a dry season, 1990. Table 2. Wetland habitat descriptions, characteristic plant species and classification designation(s) as found in this study.

Habitat-Community Designation for Type and Synonyms Description Characteristic Plant Species References This Study

Coastal Zone

Mangrove Forest- Salt tolerant trees that are Red mangrove (Rhizophora Florida Natural Estuarine Shrub Mangrove Swamp; adapted to continual flooding mangle) Areas Inventory Shrub; Mangle; and salt water. Mangroves Black mangrove (Avicennia and Florida Dept . Tidal Swamp; germinans) Mangrove grow along low energy of Nat . Resources Islands shorelines in the subtropical White mangrove (Laguncularia (1990), Florida intertidal communities that racemosa) Soil Conservation tolerate very little frost. Buttonwood (Conocarpus erecta) Service (1992), They are most common in the Odum et al. (1982), southern portions ofthe State Odum and Melvor particularly south of Charlotte (1990), U.S. Army Harbor, in the Ten Thousand Corps of Engineers Islands area and along Florida (1988) . Bay.

Salt Marsh Estuarine salt marshes are Black needlerush (Juncus Carlton (1977), Estuarine tidally flooded communities Roemerianns) Dressler et al. Emergent dominated by species of Smooth cordgrass (Spartina (1987), Drew and grasses, rushes or sedges alternifora) Schomer (1984), that form along low wave- Seashore saltgrass (Distichlis Florida Natural energy coastlines and river spicata) Areas Inventory mouths. Marshes dominated Saltmeadow cordgrass (Spartina and Florida Dept. by black needlerush (often in patens) of Nat . Resources nearly pure stands) are most Glasswort (Salicornia spp .) (1990), Montague common growing on mud Saltwort (Batis maritima) and Wiegert deposits flooded by high tide. (1990) . They are found primarily from Apalachicola Bay south to Tampa Bay and form as much as 50 percent of Florida's salt marsh area . Smooth cordgrass is adapted to frequent tidal flooding and a saline environment. This species is prevelent in the coastal marshes along the Atlantic coast in the northeastern part of the State.

Brackish Marsh These wetlands, composed Saltmeadow cordgrass (Spartina Carlton (1977), Estuarine or of herbaceous species, are patens) Florida Natural Palustrine characterized by low or Sea ox-eye (Borrichia frutescens) Areas Inventory Emergent fluctuating salinity. These areas Saltmarsh aster (Aster and Florida Dept. are subject to tidal influence tenmcfolius) of Nat . Resources as well as freshwater inflows Sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense) (1990), Stout such that neither estuarine nor Bulrushes (Scirpus spp.) (1984), Wolfe et al. freshwater plants attain full Big cordgrass (Spartina (1988) . dominance . cynosuroides) Marshelder (Iva ftutescens)

Beach Sand or mud beaches are Nonvegetated Gore (1992) Estuarine nonvegetated wetlands or Marine periodically inundated bywave Intertidal action between low and high Unconsolidated tide. The sediments are usually Shore sand or mud.

Flats, Shoals, Bars Tidal flats are composed of Nonvegetated or sparsely U.S. Army Corps Estuarine sand or mud found in hyper- vegetated flats: of Engineers or Marine saline conditions along the Saltwort (Bans maritima) (1988) . Intertidal Flats coast or on the landward side of Glasswort (Salicornia spp .) or Reefs barrier islands. Shallow water Salt grass (Distichlis spicata) sand flats become exposed at Sea bite (Suaeda linearis) low tide. They may become sparsely vegetated by scattered succulent halophytic forbs. Nonvegetated, often partly Oyster bars develop in low- submerged and dominated by energy tidal areas with inflows the eastern oyster (Crassostrea of freshwater from sources such virginica) as rivers and tidal creeks . These areas are always nonvegetated and may become completely submerged at high tide. Table 2. Wetland habitat descriptions, characteristic plant species and classification designation(s) as found in this study-Continued.

Habitat-Community References Designation fbr Type and Synonyms Description Characteristic Plant Species This Study

Coastal Zone-Continued Open Water Estuary Deep water portion of bays, Nonvegetated Bahr and Lanier Estuarine inlets or sounds (1981), Florida Subtidal Natural Areas Inventory and Florida Dept. of Nat. Resources (1990).

Open Ocean Deep water Nonvegetated Marine Subtidal Coastal Flats and Rolling Plain

Forested Wetland Cypress Ponds; Dome swamps or cypress Bald cypress (Taxodium Darst et al. (1996), Palustrine Cypress Strand; ponds are characterized as distichnm) Ewel and Odum (Freshwater) Cypress Gall; Cypress shallow, usually circular or Pond cypress (Taxodium (1986), Lake Forested Dome oval depressions dominated by asendens) County Water cypress, black gum or tupelo . Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica) Authority (1995). "Strands" refer to shallow Water tupelo (Nyssa aquatica) elongated depressions or channels dominated by cypress trees. These wetlands are flooded for long periods during the year. They are common where high water tables and topographic depressions allow these wetlands to develop as isolated islands intermixed with pine flatwoods and pastures .

Hydric Hammock; This forested wetland type American elm (Ulmus americana) Florida Natural Palustrine Hardwood Hammock occurs at low elevations and Red maple (Acer rubrum) Areas Inventory (Freshwater) usually on thin soils of sand Cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) and Florida Dept. Forested and loam over limestone. They Sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana) of Nat. Resources are most common in north and Sweetgum (Liquidambar (1990), Vince et al. central Florida and support a styraciflua) (1989), Simons et diversity of plant species. These Water oak (Quercus nigra) al. (1989), Ward wetlands flood occasionally, but Laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) (1943). for short periods of time. Box Elder (Acernegundo) Swamp ash (Fraxinus paucif ora)

Bayheads Bayheads are forested wetlands Loblolly bay (Gordonia lasianthus) Florida Natural Palustrine with a mix of broadleaf and Swamp bay (Persea borbonia) Areas Inventory (Freshwater) evergreen bay tree species. Sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana) and Florida Dept. Forested They are almost continually Sweetgum (Liquidambar of Nat. Resources saturated but may be inundated styraciflua) (1990), Lake with shallow water. Soils of Slash pine (Pines elliottii) County Water bayhead wetlands are organic Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica) Authority (1995), and acidic. Willow (Salix spp.) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1988).

Mixed Hardwood These forested wetlands Bald cypress (Taxodium Ewel (1990), Palustrine Swamp; Floodplain are dominated by deciduous distichnm) Florida Natural (Freshwater) Swamp; Bottomland tree species and are found Red maple (Acer rubrum) Areas Inventory Forested Swamp in seasonally flooded basins, Dahoon holly (Ilex cassine) and Florida Dept. on flooded soils along river Pop ash (Fraxinus caroliniana) of Nat. Resources or stream channels and in Cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) (1990), Ward (1943), depressions or oxbows within Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica) Wolfe et al. (1988). river floodplains. Soils are Winged elm (Ulmus alata) variable mixtures of sand, Willow (Salix spp.) organic and alluvial sediments. Sweetgum (Liquidambar Seasonal and often prolonged styracifua) inundation is a characteristic . Water oak (Quercus nigra) Overcup oak (Quercus lyrata) Water Tupelo (Nyssa aquatica) Water Hickory (Carya aquatica) Green Ash (Faxinus Pennsylvania) Laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) Table 2. Wetland habitat descriptions, characteristic plant species and classification designation(s) as found in this study-Continued.

Habitat-Community Designation for Type and Synonyms Description Characteristic Plant Species References This Study Coastal Flats and Rolling Plain-Continued Pine Flatwoods Pine flatwoods may be Florida's Long leaf pine (Pines palustris) Abrahamson and Palustrine most common ecological Slash pine (Pines elliottii) Hartnett (1990), (Freshwater) community. They occur on flat, Loblolly pine (Pines taeda) U.S. Army Corps Forested poorly drained, sandy soils Pond pine (Pines serotina) of Engineers that are underlain by clay or (1988) . hardpan . Wet pine flatwoods will have standing water for several weeks during the rainy season . In Florida, pine flatwoods may be a mixture of wetland and upland.

Shrub Wetlands

Dwarf or Scrub Dwarfor scrub cypress Pond cypress (Taxodium Duever et al. 1986, Palustrine Cypress wetlands are found on asendens) Ewel (1990), Ward (Freshwater) frequently flooded rock or (1943) . Shrub marl soils in south Florida. The largest concentration ofthese wetlands is in the Big Cypress region in the southwestern part of the State. These wetlands have low densities ofstunted pond cypress with sparse understories .

Shrub Swamp Florida's shrub wetlands Titi (Cyrilla racemiflora) U.S. Army Corps Palustrine are characterized by dense Black titi (Cliflonia monophylla) of Engineers (Freshwater) shrubbery in areas where Swamp haw (Viburnum nudism) (1988), Wolfe et al. Shrub the water table is close to the Swamp honeysuckle (1988). surface and standing water (Rhododendron viscosum) pockets are common . They Buttonbush (Cephalanthus often border pine flatwoods, occidentalis) cypress or blackgum swamp Sweet pepperbush (Clethra forests. alnifolia) Willows (Salix spp.) Stiff Cornel (Corms foemina) Alder (Alms serrulata)

Shrub Bogs There are a small number Sphagnum moss (Sphagnum spp.) Florida Natural Palustrine ofbogs in Florida that are Black titi (Cliftonia monophylla) Areas Inventory (Freshwater) found around lakeshores, in Pond pine (Pines serotina) and Florida Dept. Shrub dome swamps and in sink White cedar (Chamaecyparis of Nat. Resources holes (generally north of thyoides) (1990), U.S . Army Highlands County) . Shrub Buttonbush (Cephalanthus Corps of Engineers bogs occur on peat substrate occidentalis) (1988), Wolfe et al . that is continually saturated . Sundew (Drosera capillaris) (1988) . Characteristic vegetation is Pitcher plant (Sarracenia minor) composed of sphagnum moss and dense evergreen shrub thickets . Freshwater Marsh

Long Hydroperiod Deep marsh-may contain White water lily (Nymphaea Gunderson (1994), Palustrine more than 110 species of ordorata) Hart and Newman (Freshwater) hydrophytic plants . Neverwet (Orontium aquaticun) (1995), Kushlan Emergent Yellow lotus (Nelumbo lutea) (1990) . Naiad (Nayas guadalupensis) Bladderwort (Utricularia spp.) Pondweed (Potamogeton spp .)

Moderate Hydroperiod Shallow marsh-may contain Cattail (Typha spp .) more than 175 species of Bullrush (Scirpus spp.) hydrophytic plants . Pickerelweed (Pontederia lanceolata) Arrowhead (Sagittaria latifolia) Spikerush (Eleocharis spp .) Maidencane (Panicum hennitomon) Fire flag (Th,alia geniculata) Tracy's beakrush (Rynchospora tra.eyi) Table 2. Wetland habitat descriptions, characteristic plant species and classification designation(s) as found in this study-Continued .

Designation for Habitat-Community Description Characteristic Plant Species References Type and Synonyms This Study Coastal, Flats and Rolling Plain-Continued

Short Hydroperiod Includes swales and wet Maidencane (Panicum prairies, which occur in low hemitonton) areas throughout Florida . Saw grass (Cladium jamaicensis) These wetlands are often dry Muhly (Muhlenbergiafillipes) for part ofthe year. Some wet Cordgrass (Spartina bakeri) prairies in Florida support over White-topped sedge (Dichromena 320 species of herbaceous and colorata) woody hydrophytes . St. John's- wort (Hypericum fasciculatum) Spikerush (Eleocharis cellulosa)

Freshwater Pond Many manmade ponds in Pickerel weed (Pontederia Hart and Newman Palustrine Florida have been created lanceolata) (1995), U.S. Army (Freshwater) for water retention, aesthetic Arrowhead (Sagittaria latifolia) Corps of Engineers Unconsolidated purposes, or agricultural use . Rushes (Juncos spp.) (1988) . Bottom (Ponds) These open water ponds may Duck weeds (Lemma spp.) be maintained or periodically Spatterdock (Nuphar luteum) treated to be free ofvegetation. Water lily (Nyinphaea odorata) Other areas such as borrow Water shield (Brasenia schreberi) pits or excavations have filled Bladderworts (Utricularia spp.) with water over time and may be fairly deep or lack nutrients to support aquatic vegetation. Other ponds throughout the State support submerged, floating or emergent wetland vegetation. These wetlands are characteristically small (less than 20 acres or 8 ha) and hold shallow water during years of normal precipitation .

Springs Florida has numerous Southern Naiad (Najas Florida Natural Palustrine freshwater springs which guadalupensis) Areas Inventory (Freshwater) originate from artesian openings Tape grass (Vallisneria americana) and Florida Dept. Unconsolidated in the underground aquifer. Eelgrass (Sagittaria latifolia) of Nat. Resources Bottom or Springs are usually clear and Pond weed (Zannichellia palnstris) (1990), Nordlie Palustrine have sand bottoms or exposed Muskgrass (Chara spp.) (1990). Emergent limestone along a central Wild Rice (Zizania aquatica) channel . Many ofthe larger springs are used extensively for recreation particularly fishing, snorkeling, tubing, canoeing and swimming .

A canal in the Everglades . Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Results: Status, Distribution and Trends

This study estimated that in 1996 The estimated average annual rate there were 11.4 million acres (4.6 of wetland loss was 5,000 acres million ha) of wetlands in Florida. (2,030 ha) between 1985 and 1996. Wetlands occupied approximately This was an 81 percent decline in 29 percent of the area of the State, the annual rate of loss as reported a greater percentage of the land for the 1970s to 1980s (Figure 13). surface than any other state in Between 1985 and 1996, estimated the conterminous United States wetland losses in Florida made (Dahl 1990). The bulk (90 percent) up about 12 percent of the total of Florida's wetlands by area were National wetland loss. freshwater systems. The remaining 10 percent were marine or estuarine Results from this study indicated intertidal wetlands. About 56 that 11.5 percent of Florida's percent of the original wetland area wetlands were located within the of Florida remained in 1996 (Figure coastal zone physiographic region. 12). Wetland data for Florida from The majority of wetlands, by area, 1985 to 1996 are presented in were within the Gulf-Atlantic Appendix B, and are summarized in Coastal Flats (82.7 percent) and Table 3. smaller percentage (5.8 percent)

Original Wetlands in Florida, Circa 1780

Remaining Wetlands in Florida, 1996

Ponds 2%

Freshwater Freshwater Shrub 16% Emergent 23%

Intertidal 10% Freshwater Forested 49%

Figure 1,2. Original wetland area in Florida and estimated remaining 10% portion. are Intertidal were located in the Rolling Plain physiographic region (Table 4).

Urban and rural development accounted for an estimated 72 percent of the total estimated loss. Agriculture was attributed with the remaining 28 percent of the losses (Figure 14). Small gains in wetland were attributed to upland forest plantations, the "other" uplands category and from deepwater.

Pond created Florida also had an estimated 4.3 by mineral million acres (1.8 million ha) of extraction. deepwater lakes.

80,000

60,000

N 40,000 a

20,000

1954-74 1974-84 1984-96

Figure 13. Average annual net wetland loss in Florida (Sources: Hefner 1986, Frayer and Hefner 1991, this study).

Urban Rural Development 28% 44% Agriculture Figure . Net loss ofwetlands 14 28% to uplands, 1985 to 1996. Table 3. Change in wetland area for selected wetland and deepwater categories, 1985 to 1996. The coefficient of variation (CV) for each entry (expressed as a percentage) is given in parentheses.

Area, in Thousands ofAcres

Change, Change Wetland/Deepwater Category Estimated Area, 1985 Estimated Area, 1996 1985-96 (in Percent)

Intertidal Habitats 27 .5 26 .5 -1 .0 Marine Intertidal -3 .6 (38.1) (38.3) ( ) 183.4 179.8 -3 .5 -1 .9 Estuarine Intertidal Nonvegetated' (20.8) (20.8) ( ) 926.7 930.7 4.0 Estuarine Intertidal Vegetated2 0.4 (10.7) (10.7) (63.1) 1,137.6 1,137.1 -0 .5 All Intertidal Wetlands <-0.1 (9 .3) (9.3) (73.0)

Freshwater Habitats 201.4 240.6 39 .2 Freshwater NonvegetatedB 19 .5 (7 .7) (7.4) (24.3) 10,085 .5 9,994.2 -91.3 -0 .9 Freshwater Vegetated' (3 .9) (3.9) (46) 2.897 .1 2,636.9 -260 .2 Emergent -9 .0 Freshwater (9 .6) (9.9) (26.7)

5,543.7 5,566.2 2.5 Freshwater Forested -2 .3 (4 .8) (5.0) (") 1,644.7 1,791.1 146.4 Freshwater Shrub 6.6 (9 .3) (8.7) (80.8) 10,085 .5 10,234.8 -52.1 All Freshwater Wetlands -0 .5 (3 .8) (3.8) (80.2) 11,424 .5 11,371 .9 -52.6 All Wetlands -0 .5 (3 .6) (3.5) (79.7)

Deepwater Habitats 1696 .2 1,676.4 -19.8 Lacustrine 5 -1 .2 (16.6) (16.7) N 135.3 136.7 1.4 Riverine 1.0 (32.5) (32.3) (60.6) 2,504.7 2,530.1 25 .4 Estuarine Subtidal 1.0 (5 .4) (5.3) (94.9) 4,336.2 4,343.2 7.0 All Deepwater Habitats 0.2 (7 .2) (7 .1) (-1 ) 15,760 15,715.1 -45.6 All Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats'' -0 .3 (2 .7) (2.7) ( ) Statistically ztn)-eliable 'Includes the categories: EstuarineIntertidal Unconsolidated Shore. = Includes the categories : Estuarine Intertidal Emergent and Estuarine Intertidal Shrub. 'Includes the categories: Palustrine Aquatic Bed, Palustrine Unconsolidated Bottom and Palustrine Unconsolidated Shore. a Includes the categories : Palustrine Emergent, Palustrine Forested and Palustrine Shrub. Table 4. Estimated acreage of wetlands within the physiographic regions of Florida, 1996.

1996 Area Percent CV Wetland Categ ory Acres Hectares Coastal Zone Freshwater Wetlands Freshwater forested 73,430 29,717 26.3 Freshwater shrub 42,742 17,298 21 .9 Freshwater emergent 57,827 23,402 37.1 Freshwater unconsolidated shore 69 28 67.1 Freshwater unconsolidated bottom 14,224 5,756 17.6 Freshwater aquatic bed 608 246 58.4 Total Freshwaterwetland area for region 188,900 76,447 19.4 Intertidal Wetlands Estuarine intertidal shrub 614,930 248,859 13.7 Estuarine intertidal emergent 291,466 117,955 17.3 Estuarine intertidal unconsolidated shore 179,674 72,713 20.8 Total Estuarine wetland area for region 1,086,070 439,527 9.6 Marine intertidal 28,855 10,463 39.1 Total Marine wetland area for region 25,855 10,463 39.1 Total wetland area for region 1,300,825 526,437 8.3 Gulf-Atlantic Coastal Flats Freshwater Wetlands Freshwater forested 4,975,550 2,013,577 5.5 Freshwater shrub 1,682,972 681,090 9.2 Freshwater emergent 2,524,909 1,021,817 10.3 Freshwater unconsolidated shore 8,356 3,382 31 .0 Freshwater unconsolidated bottom 174,100 70,457 9.0 Freshwater aquatic bed 15,659 6,337 21 .2 Total Freshwater area for region 9,381,546 3,796,660 4.1 Intertidal Wetlands Estuarine intertidal shrub 1,378 558 55.0 Estuarine intertidal emergent 22,933 9,281 79.0 Estuarine intertidal unconsolidated shore 245 99 59.6 Total Estuarine wetland area for region 24,556 9,938 75.5 Marine intertidal 606 245 98.2 Total Marine wetland area for region 606 245 98.2 Total wetland area for region 9,406,708 3,806,843 4.1 Gulf-Atlantic Rolling Plain Freshwater Wetlands Freshwater forested 517,266 209,335 10.2 Freshwater shrub 65,411 26,472 21 .8 Freshwater emergent 54,176 21,925 25.8 Freshwater unconsolidated shore 579 234 54.7 Freshwater unconsolidated bottom 23,026 9,318 15.4 Freshwater aquatic bed 3,986 1,613 31 .1 Total Freshwater area for region 664,444 268,897 9.6 Total wetland area for region 664,444 268,897 9.6 marine nonvegetated wetlands . of Apalachicola Bay and along the Intertidal Nonvegetated wetlands were coastal inlets of Nassau and Duval commonly referred to as shores, counties in the northeast portion of Marine and sand or mud flats, bars and shoals. the State. Estuarine The approximate distribution and In 1996, there were an estimated Wetlands abundance of estuarine emergent 616,300 acres (249,400 ha) of shrub wetlands in Status and Distribution : wetlands along Florida's coast line is estuarine shown in Figure 15. These saltmarsh Florida. The estuarine shrubs were This study estimated there were habitats were found in embayments, comprised of halophytic trees and slightly more than 1.1 million estuaries and behind coastal shrubs growing in brackish or saline acres (460,300 ha) of marine and barriers along the Atlantic seaboard tidal waters. This category was estuarine wetlands, comprising 10 and the Gulf of Mexico. Saltmarsh dominated by species of mangroves percent of the area of all wetlands in vegetation was sparse or absent (Rhizophora mangle, Avicennia Florida. This included an estimated along the shorelines of Sarasota germinans and Laguncularia 314,400 acres (127,290 ha) of County, the Florida Keys and the racemosa).2 Mangroves represented estuarine emergent or saltmarsh highly urbanized areas of Palm subtropical or tropical intertidal wetlands, 616,300 acres (249,510 Beach, Broward and northern Dade ha) of estuarine shrubs and 206,400 counties. Saltmarshes were more TThis study did not differentiate distribution acres (83,560 ha) of estuarine and extensive in the "Big Bend" region or extent at the species level.

Cover of Estuarine Emergents, in Percent

<5 5-9 10-19 20-49 50

Figure 15. Distribution ofestuarine emergent wetland in Florida, 1996. communities that tolerated very Zone. However, some estuarine The mean size of emergent salt little or no frost (Tomlinson 1986). emergent, shrub and nonvegetated marsh wetlands and estuarine shrub They were most common in the wetlands extended into the Coastal wetlands within the sample sites subtropical portions of the State Flats physiographic region (2.2 were slightly less than 23 acres (9 particularly south of Charolette percent). This occurred primarily ha) . The estuarine nonvegetated Harbor, in the Ten Thousand Islands along tidal rivers and salt water wetlands sampled averaged just over area and along Florida Bay (Figure canal systems. 10 acres (4 ha) (Table 6). 16). Less dense stands of estuarine shrubs were found in Biscayne Bay, Florida's coastal zone contained Although much of Florida's the Indian River Lagoon, Tampa about 21 percent of all estuarine population lives along or close to Bay, Ponce de Leon Inlet and and marine wetlands and 92 percent the coastline, less than 10 percent of Homosassa Bay. The occurrence of the estuarine shrub wetlands the marine and estuarine wetlands of estuarine shrubs was observed found in the conterminous United sampled were located within or extending as far north as the St. States. Whereas, only 8 percent adjacent to urban areas (Figure 17). Mary's River Inlet and Apalachee of all estuarine emergent (salt Bay, however, these areas may have marsh) wetlands were found along contained salt tolerant shrub species the State's coast lines (Table 5). other than mangroves. An estimated 31 percent of all nonvegetated estuarine and marine Almost all (97.8 percent) estuarine habitats within the conterminous wetlands were located in the Coastal United States were found in Florida.

Occurrence of Estuarine Shrubs O Present or Sparse Some Estuarine Shrubs

Shrubs More Common

Figure 16. Distribution ofestuarine shrub wetland in Florida, 1996. Table 5. Comparison of marine and estuarine wetland area for Florida and the conterminous United States. (Sources: Dahl 2000; this study.)

Contermimous U.S. 1986-97 (Thousands ofAcres) Florida Area Florida Area as Trend 1996 Florida Trendd of Wetland Category 1997 Area (in Percent) percentage (in Percent) (in Acres) National Totals Marine Intertidal 130.9 -2.2 26.5 -3.6 20.2 Estuarine Nonvegetated 580.1 -0.3 179.9 -1.9 31.0 Estuarine Emergent 3,942.4 -14.5 314.4 -0.6 8.0 Estuarine Shrub 672.8 +6.6 616.3 +1.0 91.6

Table 6. Mean area and size range of individual estuarine wetlands within sample units in Florida, 1996.

Mean Acres Range, inAcres Wetland Category (Hectares) (Hectares) Estuarine Shrub 22.8 .02 to 2,500 (9.2) (.008 to 1,013) Estuarine Emergent 22.9 .02 to 1,225 (9.3) (.008 to 508) Estuarine Flats/Bars 10.1 .05 to 1,021 (4.0) (.02 to 414)

Wetland Deepwater Urban Centers

Figure 17. Proximity ofurban areas to Florida's wetlands, 1996. Trends from 1985 to 1996 vegetated wetland gains. Florida's some form of coastal development. Marine and estuarine nonvegetated intertidal wetlands sustained a net This may have involved construction wetlands declined by an estimated loss of 500 acres (200 ha) or less than of bridges, roadways, urban 4,500 acres (1,820 ha) between 1985 1 percent during this study period. or suburban development or and 1996. Most of these losses were Frayer and Hefner (1991) reported a infrastructure . Twenty percent believed to have been the result of net decline of 2,900 acres (1,170 ha) of the estuarine shrub losses coastal erosion and storms . to all marine and estuarine wetlands were attributed to agriculture from the 1970s and 1980s. Compared and 5 percent were due to other Estuarine vegetated wetlands, which with the results of this study there unidentified upland land uses. combined estuarine emergents was an 83 percent decline in the and shrubs, increased slightly loss rate of marine and estuarine Seventy-one percent of the losses during this study period . Although wetlands . to estuarine shores were attributed estuarine emergents declined in to urban expansion along the coast. area by about 1,800 acres (730 ha), Long-term trends in intertidal The remaining 29 percent of the loss this was overshadowed by increases wetland types are shown in Figure to upland from this category was due in estuarine shrub wetlands 18. to expansion of other unidentified yielding a net gain for the estuarine types of upland land use. vegetated category as seen in Table Attribution of Losses and Conversions 7. Estuarine shrubs increased by -Marine and Estuarine Wetlands The conversion of marine and an estimated 5,800 acres (2,350 estuarine wetlands to deepwater ha). Overall, intertidal estuarine The area of marine and estuarine habitats involved losses to open vegetated wetlands increased by wetland lost to uplands is shown in water bay bottoms (deep water approximately 4,000 acres (1,620 ha) Table 8. The loss of 17 acres (7 ha) estuaries), or open ocean. between 1985 and 1996. of estuarine emergent wetland to upland was statistically insignificant. Intertidal nonvegetated losses Seventy-five percent of the estuarine were ameliorated by the estuarine shrub losses were attributable to

Table 7. Changes in estuarine and marine intertidal wetlands, 1985 to 1996. The coefficient of variation (CV) for each entry (expressed as a percentage) is given in parentheses .

Area in Thousands ofAcres

Area Wetland Category Estimated Area . Estimated Area, Gain or Loss, (as Percentage) 1985, 1996 198 .5-96 of All Intertidal Wetland, 1996

Nonvegetated

Marine Intertidal 27.5 26 .5 -1.0 (38.1) (38 .3) M 2.3

Estuarine Intertidal Nonvegetated 183 .4 179 .9 -3.5 20.8 20.8) M 15 .8 Vegetated

Estuarine Emergent 316.2 314.4 -1 .8 (17.2) (17 .0) (*) 27.7

Estuarine Shrub 610.5 616.3 5.8 (13.7) (13.7) (83.8) 54 .2

Estuarine Intertidal Vegetatedl 926 .7 930.8 4.0 (10.7) (10.7) (63.1) 81 .9

Net Intertidal Change 1,137.6 1,137.1 -0 .5 100 *Statistically unreliable 'Includes the category: Estuarine Unconsolidated Shore. =Includes the categories: Estuarine Emergent and Estuarine Shrub.

Table 11. Changes in marine and estuarine intertidal wetlands, 1985-96.

Acres Percentage of Change as Change, Converted Percentage of All Intertidal 1985-96, Area Lost to Area, Wetland Category Upland to Deepwater Intertidal Gross Wetland in in Percent Florida, 1996 Change

Marine [ntertidal 2.3 -4 .0 0 657 6.5

Estuarine Nonvegetated 15 .8 -1 .9 249 6,561 67 .8

Estuarine Emergent 27 .7 -0 .6 17 290 3.1

Estuarine Shrub 54 .2 1.0 2,185 90 22 .6

Gross Change to Intertidal Wetlands 2,451 7,598 100

A. Nonvegetated Intertidal Wetland y 1,300 ,

F= 1,200

VL <11,1100 1 1950s 1970s 1980S 1996

B. Estuarine Shrub Wetland C. Estuarine Emergent Wetland 650 400 _ti _y C C H 625 y 375 0 0 t 600 ~- 350

5;15 L 325 a 550 300 , 1950s 1970s 1980S 1996 1950s " 1970s 1980S 1996

Figrcr(- 18. Long term trends ofintertidal wetland types in Florida, 1950s to 1996. Glades and Okeechobee counties. Freshwater Forested wetlands were most Wetlands dense in the Fakahatchee Strand and Big Cypress Preserve areas of Status and Distribution Collier County, and the Big Bend In 1996, there were an estimated counties of Levy, Dixie, Taylor, 10.2 million acres (4.1 million ha) of Jefferson, Wakulla, Franklin and freshwater (palustrine) wetlands Gulf. Bottomlands adjacent to river that comprised 90 percent of all and stream systems and the wet wetland area in the State. An pine flatwood areas of the Florida estimated 98 percent were vegetated Panhandle also contained moderate the remaining 2 percent were open numbers of forested wetlands. water ponds. Nationwide, Florida Pockets of forested swamps also had an estimated 10.2 percent occurred in Volusia County east of of all freshwater wetlands in the Lake George, the Green Swamp conterminous United States. area of Polk County and around Blue Cypress Lake in Indian River Of these freshwater wetlands, County. there were an estimated 5.6 million acres (2.3 million ha) of forested Freshwater emergent wetland wetlands, 1 .8 million acres (725,000 distribution was concentrated in ha) of shrubs, 2.6 million acres (1 .1 what was the historic Everglades million ha) of emergent wetlands ecosystem, extending from Lake or marshes and 241,000 acres Okeechobee through the Everglades (98,000 ha) of freshwater ponds. National Park including the western Almost 92 percent of these wetlands margins of St. Lucie and Martin were located in the Coastal Flats Counties . Emergent marshes and physiographic region of the State. wet prairies were also prevalent in DeSoto and Charlotte Counties . Freshwater forested wetlands The Kissimmee River system in were distributed throughout Okeechobee and Osceola Counties as the State excluding much of the well as the St. John's River system Everglades and the Florida Keys. in Volusia, Brevard and Indian River Forested wetlands were sparse in Counties supported considerable Pinellas, Marion, Suwanee, Hendry, emergent wetlands as did Sumpter

Sawgrass Lake, Florida. and Lake Counties in central wetlands (about 9 percent) were also the emergent wetlands occurred in Florida. found in this physiographic region. urban areas.

Few freshwater wetlands were The size of freshwater wetlands Trends from 1985 to 1996 found within the Coastal Zone contained within the sampling of this physiographic region. These study indicated forested wetlands Florida's freshwater wetlands occurred in the interior portions of had a mean size larger than shrubs declined by an estimated 52,000 barrier islands, and where rivers or emergent wetlands (Table 10) . acres (21,100 ha) or 0.5 percent flowed into coastal estuaries. Forested wetlands were 17.7 acres between 1985 and 1996. This was Less that 2 percent of Florida's (7 ha) with emergent marshes and an average annual net loss of 4,740 freshwater wetlands were located in shrub wetlands 9.9 acres (4 ha) acres (1,920 ha). The average annual this coastal stratum (Table 9). and 7.1 acres (3 ha) respectively. rate of freshwater wetland loss had The mean size of freshwater ponds declined 82 percent since the 1970s The Coastal Flats contained most identified in this study was 1.7 acres to the 1980s. of the freshwater wetlands in (0.7 ha). Florida. Almost 90 percent of the Freshwater vegetated wetlands forested wetlands, 94 percent of There was a noticeable difference declined by an estimated 91,000 the freshwater shrubs and nearly in the type of freshwater wetland acres (36,800 ha) or 0.9 percent. 96 percent of freshwater emergent found within or adjacent to urban Freshwater emergent wetlands marshes were in the Coastal Flats. areas in Florida. About 25 percent exhibited the largest losses declining ofthe forested wetlands sampled by an estimated 260,000 acres A small percentage of freshwater were in urban settings, whereas (10,500 ha) or 9.0 percent (Table 11). shrubs and emergents was found less than 3 percent of freshwater in the Rolling Plain. Some forested shrub wetlands and 5 percent of

Table!). Distribution of freshwater wetland types by physiographic region in Florida, 1996.

Estimated Area in 1 Percentage of'Total Physiooraphic Region Acres Percent CV Freshwater Wetland (Hectares) 66,444 Gulf-At] antic Rolling Plain (268,897) 9.6 6

9,381,546 92 Gulf-At : antic Coastal Flats (3,796,660) 4.1 188,900 Coastal Zone (76,447) 19 .4 2

10,234,890 3.8 100 Total Freshwater Wetland (4,142,003 'Percent coefficie-W of va-riatiorr is expressed as (standard error/mean)*100 .

Table '10. Mean area and size range of individual freshwater wetlands within sample units in Florida, 1996.

Mean Acres Range in Acres Wetland Category (Hectares) (Hectares)

17 .7 .02 to 2,554 Freshwater Forested (7.2) (.008 to 1,034)

7.1 .02 to 2,339 Freshwater Shrub (2 .9) (.008 to 947)

9.9 .02 to 2,5571 Freshwater Emergent (4.0) (.008 to 1,036)

1.7 .03 to 1432 Freshwater Ponds (0.7) (.012 to 58)

Types 2.0 .02 to 80 Other 117iscellaneous Freshwater (0.8) (.008 to 32)

'The itpl er size limit zvas restricted by sample plot size. We up} er size limit reflected the area of ponds connected in series. Freshwater ponds increased in area urban development and agriculture attributed to agriculture during the by over 39,000 acres (15,800 ha), (Figure 20). Small net gains were 1970s to 1980s. almost 20 percent. Forested wetland recorded from silviculture and the area increased slightly (0.4 percent) "other uplands" land use categories . while shrub wetlands increased by Freshwater an estimated 8.9 percent. These Loss of wetlands to urban and rural gains largely overshadowed the development involved drainage Lakes and losses of freshwater emergents for homes, resorts, golf courses, wetlands . industry, roads, bridges and other Reservoirs infrastructure . Urban and rural Long term trends in freshwater development activities accounted for About 49,000 acres (19,800 ha) of wetland types indicated that an estimated 72 percent of the net freshwater lakes were created from freshwater ponds continued to wetland losses. uplands between 1985 and 1996. increase over time. Freshwater Despite these gains, lacustrine forested wetlands reversed a long Agriculture accounted for an term trend and sustained a net gain estimated 28 percent loss of deepwater areas experienced a net in area, while emergent wetlands freshwater wetlands . Primarily decline of 19,700 acres (8,000 ha), or continued to decline (Figure 19). in south Florida, where emergent 1.2 percent. The loss of deepwater wetlands were converted to citrus habitats to freshwater wetlands Attribution of Losses and Conversions production, horticulture, growing helped offset wetland losses to -Freshwater Wetlands landscape or other ornamental upland land uses. plants, greenhouses, sod farms and Net losses of freshwater wetland other uses. The net losses attributed between 1985 and 1996 were to agriculture declined by 79 percent attributed to rural development, compared to the estimated losses

Table 11 . Changes in freshwater wetlands, 1985 to 1996. The coefficient of variation (CV) for each entry (expressed as a percentage) is given in parentheses.

Area in, Thousands ofAcres Wetland Category Estimated Area, Estimated Area, Change, Change 1985 1996 1985-96 (in Percent) Freshwater Vegetated Wetlands 5,543 .7 5,566.2 22~.5 Freshwater Forested (4.8) (5 .0) ( ) 0.4

Freshwater Shrub 1,644.76 1,791.1 146 .5 (9.3) (8 .7) (80 .8) 8.9 2,897.1 2,636.9 -260.3 -9.0 Freshwater Emergent (9.6) (9.9) (26 .7)

All Freshwater 10,085 .5 9,994.2 -91.3 Vegetated Wetlands (3.9) (3.9) (46) -0.9 Freshwater Nonvegetated Wetlands

Ponds* 195 .1 231 .6 36.5 (7.9) (7.5) (25 .1) 18 .7 6.3 9.0 Miscellaneous Types (19.6) (28 .9) (862) 42.9

All Freshwater 2014 240.6 392 Nonvegetated Wetlands (7.7) (7.4) (24 .3) 19.5

All 10,286.9 10,234 .8 -52.1 Freshwater Wetlands (3.8) (3.8) (80.2) -0.5 'Statistically u.rzreliable. 'Includes the categories : Fresht ater , Agtta.tic Bed and Freshwater Ujzcorzsoliidated Bottom A. Freshwater Forested Wetland

2,001) B. Freshwater Shrub Wetland _5,000 C. Freshwater Emergent Wetland y H 4,500 y t64,000- H . E 1,401) r- 3,000 - 1,201) a 2,500 C.) Q a 41,001 2,000 a 1950s 1970s 1980s 1996 L1950s 1970s 1980s 1996 Figure 19. Long term trends offreshwater wetland types in Florida, 1950s to 1996.

601 Gains

40

0

c

-411 -

-611 Agriculture Forest Urban Rural Other Deepwater Plantations Development Land Use Category

Figure 20. Net losses and gains ofwetlands to various land use types, 1985 to 1996. Discussion

In 1996, Florida had an estimated Intertidal 1 .1 million acres (460,300 ha) of marine and estuarine wetlands. Marine and Twenty-one percent of all intertidal Estuarine wetlands in the conterminous United States were found in Florida. While Wetlands only 8 percent of the estuarine salt marsh vegetation in the lower 48 Three major categories of estuarine States was found along Florida's and marine wetlands were included coastline, the State harbored over in this study: estuarine intertidal 91 percent of the estuarine shrub emergents (salt and brackish habitat of the Nation. water marshes), estuarine shrubs (mangrove swamps or mangles and Less than 1 percent of Florida's other salt tolerant woody species), wetland losses between 1985 and and estuarine and marine intertidal 1996 were intertidal wetlands . nonvegetated wetlands . This later During previous eras, development category included exposed coastal along the Gulf and Atlantic coast beaches subject to tidal flooding, as was probably at the expense of well as sand bars, tidal mud flats, wetlands and open land (Lynch shoals, and sand spits. et al. 1976; Lins 1980). Because

Figure 21. Jupiter Inlet, Florida, 1997. (Photo courtesy ofNOAA).

Jupiter Inlet Lauderdale by -" tithe Sea

Figure 22. Lauderdale by the Sea. (Photo courtesy ofNOAA.) intertidal wetlands often occupy for many organisms important prime scenic locations immediately Nonve,getated to intertidal food web such as along the coastline, in the past, Marine and polychaete worms, crustaceans, many were developed for residential mollusks and amphipods (Livingston and resort communities (Figure Estuarine 1990). 21). Other studies have indicated that as of 1995, over 60 percent of Wetlands Florida's sand beaches have Floridians lived within 5 miles of the Nonvegetated intertidal wetlands provided considerable recreational, coast (Florida Coastal Management included sand and mud flats, beaches commercial and aesthetic benefits Program 1999a). However, since flooded by the tides at regular to people (Figure 22). This wetland then, most of Florida's shoreline intervals and shallow water features type has also been important to habitats have been protected either such as sand bars and shoals. It was unique wildlife species. For example, by regulation or through public estimated that there were more the green sea turtle (Chelonia ownership. These mechanisms in than 206,000 acres (83,600 ha) of mydas) and the loggerhead combination with continued outreach marine and estuarine nonvegetated sea turtle (Caretta caretta) use and educational efforts have been wetlands in 1996 than there were in sandy beaches for nesting sites. responsible for reducing intertidal 1985 . The highest nest densities of wetland losses between 1986 and loggerhead turtles have been found 1997. Intertidal flats were nonvegetated in southern Broward County from (or sparsely vegetated) saline Cape Canaveral to Sebastian Inlet Although the net loss of marine and areas that were inundated during (Hopkins and Richardson 1984). estuarine wetland was small, in the high tides or storms. These flats Florida beaches have also been estuarine environment there were were usually composed of sand important as nesting habitats important changes. An estimated or mud and were found scattered for several species of shore birds three times as much estuarine along Florida's coastline. When (Johnson and Barbour 1990). wetland was converted to deepwater flooded with shallow water, sand than was lost to upland. The flats provided habitat for sport The constant movement of conversion to deepwater primarily fish such as the sand sea trout sediment and water resulting affected nonvegetated intertidal (Cynoscion arenarius), bonefish from tidal influences, wave action wetlands as a result of scouring, (Albuta vulpes), tarpon (Magalops and coastal storms, made these sediment movement, or shifts of atlanticus), snook (Centropomus wetlands dynamic. The erosion sand or mud substrates resulting undecimalis), and red drum and accretion of sand or mud was from dredging, coastal storms, wave (Sciaenops ocellatus). Exposed flats a continual process in response to action, or water currents. of sand or mud provided habitat the number and severity of coastal

The loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) uses sandy beaches for neting. A tracking device was attached to this turtle before it returned to the sea. (Ron Hagerty) storms, wind and wave action, and estuarine nonvegetated wetland currents. Coastal storm frequency in 1996. Frayer and Hefner Estuarine and strength may have modified the (1991) reported that Florida had Emergent rates of sediment deposition and experienced a net gain of 4,000 erosion (Williams et al. 1999). By acres (1,620 ha) in nonvegetated Wetlands scouring away sand flats or bars, or intertidal wetland from the 1970s depositing sand to create or elongate to the 1980s. Results from this Estuarine emergent (saltmarsh) sand spits and shallow water shoals, study estimated a net loss of 4,500 vegetation occurred along coastal storms had the potential acres (1,820 ha) of nonvegetated low energy shorelines often to reconfigure long stretches of intertidal wetland between 1985 behind barrier islands or within shoreline. and 1996. This trend corresponded embayments and tidal river systems. with data collected between 1989 Estuarine emergent marshes were Dredging, placement of fill, beach and 1993 that indicated an increase typified by salt-tolerant plants renourishment or construction in shoreline erosion of nearly 7 periodically flooded by tidal waters of shoreline armorment also percent in Florida (Florida Coastal (Cowardin et al. 1979). Researchers has affected coastal sediments Management Program 1999a). have found plant species vary in shallow water environments. Certain segments of Florida's depending on location (Carlton Coastal armoring including the coastline exhibited erosion and 1977; Duever et al. 1982; Montague construction of sea walls, jetties, accretion of sediments between and Wiegert 1990). Those found bulkheads, stabilization of shorelines 1985 and 1996 (Figure 23). These along the Atlantic coast in Nassau, or protecting inlets may have types of intertidal wetlands have Duval and St. Johns counties for exacerbated or relocated some of the demonstrated temporal changes example, were dominated by smooth coastal erosion processes (Bergquist in the past. The long term trends cordgrass (Spartina alterniffora). 1996) . indicated an overall reduction in Whereas, salt marshes along the the losses that were reported for Gulf of Mexico (Dixie, Levy and Florida had an estimated 206,400 nonvegetated intertidal wetlands Taylor counties) were generally acres (38,560 ha) of marine and from the 1950s to 1970s. dominated by black needle rush

Figure ,23. Loss and gain ofFlorida's estuarine non-vegetated wetlands, 1985 to 1996.

Loss Due to Erosion or Subsidence

Gain Due to Accretion or Deposition

.11 V-1 I (Juncus roemerianus) as shown in losses to upland land use (17 acres accounting for only 3 percent of Figure 24. or 7 ha) and deepwater systems (290 estuarine salt marsh decline. acres or120 ha) were observed. The ecological value of estuarine Modest estuarine salt marsh gains salt marsh wetlands has been well Estuarine salt marsh was lost to were observed in the counties of documented (Livingston 1984, deepwater where the vegetation was Wakulla and Taylor along the Gulf Montague and Wiegert 1990). scoured or buried by sediments, or Coast and, Duval and St. John's These wetlands were important as was washed away by rising water County along the Atlantic. These nursery areas for fishes, shellfish, or turbulent wave action. Without gains helped offset losses of salt crustaceans and other benthic sufficient support around the plant marsh that occurred elsewhere in organisms. Salt marshes also base and root structures, vegetation the State. provided valuable habitat for birds fragmented and washed away. This and other wildlife, help transport occurred along the coast lines of The major factor in the net decline valuable nutrients, prevent erosion Citrus and Hernando counties. of salt marsh wetlands was the and buffer the impacts of coastal Statewide this was only a minor conversion to estuarine shrubs storms. cause for the decline in salt marsh, primarily along the Gulf coast in Sarasota, Charlotte, Lee, Collier, Salt marsh vegetation accounted Monroe and south Dade counties. for less than one third of the estimated intertidal wetlands in Florida in 1996. There were an estimated 314,000 acres (127,290 ha). These marshes decreased by an estimated 1,800 acres (730 ha) or 0.6 percent between 1985 and 1996. This continued a downward trend that has been documented since the 1950s, albeit the rate of decline has Mashes Island County Park, Wakulla slowed considerably. Only modest County, Florida .

Figure ,~4 . Estuarine salt marsh ofnorth Florida dominated by black needlerush (JLwcas roemerianus), 199!x. Estuarine Shrub Wetlands The most notable component of the estuarine shrub category were the mangroves (Figure 25). Florida has always been the primary location of mangrove wetlands in the United States. Mangrove species are uniquely Figure 25. adapted to saline environments Mangroves and and ecologically, mangroves surrounding have waters ofFlorida supported a diversity of wildlife Bay, 1991 . (Odum and McIvor 1990). Mangrove communities and surrounding waters of south Florida support Spalding et al. (1997) also noted most extent of black mangrove more than 220 species of fish, 24 that large expanses of mangroves (A. geminans) occurred at about species of reptiles and amphibians, occurred in protected areas such as 30 degrees N. latitude. Although 18 mammals and 181 bird species Everglades National Park. Results scattered stands of mangrove shrubs (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from this study have also indicated a have been found along the north 1996). Other values of mangrove close relationship between mangrove coast of the Gulf of Mexico (Odum wetlands include exporting organic wetland distribution in south Florida and McIvor 1990), these wetlands matter to coastal food chains, and Federal or State designated have been exposed to freezing stabilizing shorelines and protecting conservation areas (Figure 26). temperatures that greatly reduced inland areas from hurricane damage Conversely, only 7 percent of all their number and distribution. (Mitsch and Gosselink 1993). estuarine shrub wetlands were Other salt-tolerant or invasive associated with urban areas. woody plants in these northern The geographic extent of mangroves wetlands included false willow has been influenced by cold Occurrences of estuarine shrub (Baccharis angustifolia), saltbush temperatures, hurricanes, and wetlands in north Florida may have (Baccharis halimifolia), buttonwood human induced stressors (Spalding included woody species other than (Conocarpus erectus), bay cedar et al. 1997). There has been general mangroves. Mitsch and Gosselink (Suriana maritina) and Brazilian agreement among researchers (1993) indicated that the northern- pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius). that the greatest concentrations of mangroves occurred along the southern tier of counties including Lee, Collier, Monroe and Dade (U.S . Fish and Wildlife Service 1996, Spalding et al. 1997, Wilson 1998).

Occurrence of Estuarine Shrubs

Present or Sparse

Some Estuarine Shrubs

Shrubs More Common

Conservation Areas

Figure 26 . Mangroves were concentrated within Federal, State and other conservation lands along Florida's Gulf Coast, 1996 . Estuarine shrub area increased in establishment of exotic shrub within the estuarine shrub category Florida from 610,500 acres (247,170 species within and bordering was not possible. This study was ha) to 616,300 acres (249,510 ha) estuarine wetlands . Brazilian designed to measure changes in between 1985 and 1996. Historically, pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) wetland area by generalized life thousands of acres of mangroves for example, was capable of form (woody shrubs) without further were destroyed by dredging, establishment in a broad range of assessment of species composition or ditching, diking or filling wetlands hydrologic conditions including wetland quality. along Florida's coastline (Patterson intertidal mangroves (McCann et 1986; Odum and McIvor 1990) . There al. 1996). When viewed from aerial Although some estuarine shrub has also been ongoing controversy photography, monospecific stands wetlands were lost to open water over continued development of golf of this invasive species appeared systems, most of the losses were courses and residential housing within the intertidal zone. Duever attributed to upland land use. An along marginal mangrove habitats et al. (1986) and Habeck (1995) estimated 75 percent (1,635 acres (Twilley 1998). Specific legal recognized exotic shrub invasion or 662 ha) of the estuarine shrub protection for mangrove wetlands was a continuing problem in Florida. area converted to upland was due was enacted by the State in 1985. Without qualitative or species to construction activities or land This, in combination with mangrove specific information, determining the development along the shoreline restoration and conservation ecological impact of the increased (Figure 28) . practices, such as restrictive removal extent of exotic shrubs observed and pruning, has helped increase the extent of mangroves in south Florida (Figure 27). This has resulted in slight increases in estuarine shrub wetland area. HABITAT RESTORATIO A contributing factor that AREA accounted for increased estuarine THE PARK DEPARTMENT IS WORKING TO ELIMINATE INVASIVE EXOTIC PLANTS AT shrub area, was the invasion and FORT DE SOTO PARK. THIS AREA HAS ALSO SUFFERED DUE TO EXTENSIVE VEHICLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC AND THEREFORE IS BEING CLOSED TO ALLOW THE AREA TO RECOVER. AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL ONLY COUNTY OR

Figure ,27. Mangrove rehabilitation project in Fort De Soto Park, Pinellas County.

Losses to Upland Developed Land Use

Gains

Figure ,28. Loss or gain ofestuarine shrub habitat between 1985 and 1996. Exotic Plant et al. 1996). In 1995, Florida's Invasive Aquatic Plants Inventory Species in Florida's indicated that hydrilla was most widespread in the waters ofAlachua, Wetlands . Brevard, Citrus, Gulf, Highlands, Leon, Okechobee, Osceola, Polk, No discussion of Florida's wetlands and Seminole Counties (FL Dept. of would be complete without some Environmental Protection 1996b). Melaleuca orpunk tree. (Photo acknowledgment of the presence courtesy of'the South Florida of harmful exotic species in the Water hyacinth (Eichhornia Water Management District.) ecosystem. Because of the subtropical crassipes): This floating aquatic climate and abundance of aquatic plant is one of the most prolific invaded the cypress-pine ecosystem habitats, Florida is especially plant species to inhabit Florida's and displaced areas of cypress susceptible to infestations of exotic lakes, rivers and canals systems. (Taxodium distichum) with dense aquatic and wetland plants (FL Water hyacinth blocks waterways monospecific Melaleuca forest (Myers Coastal Management Program and limits boat traffic, recreation, 1986). There are concerns for the 1999b). Exotic aquatic plants such as and wildlife use. Large expanses of long-term protection of regional water Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata) can this plant impede the ability of the tables, increased expenditures for the choke waterways, inhibit navigation snail kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis) to treatment of allergies caused by this and recreational activities, reduce find important food items (Griffen plant, degradation of wildlife habitat spawning habitat for fish and degrade 1989) and mats ofwater hyacinth can and the high costs associated with water supplies (McCann et al. 1996). crowd out native aquatic plants and control and eradication (McCann et al. Other exotic wetland plants such as thus reduce biological diversity in 1996) . Melaleuca quinquenervia (Cajeput) freshwater ecosystems. The extent of and Brazilian Pepper (Schinus water hyacinth has been reduced due Brazilian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) have demonstrated to control efforts by the State and U.S. terebinthifolius): Brazilian pepper a remarkable ability to invade Army Corps of Engineers. In 1995, is an aggressive shrub species that and colonize portions of Florida's acres ofwater hyacinth could still be grows well under a range of conditions landscape . These plants often form found in Okechobee, Osceola, Seminole including coastal mangrove sites, along monospecific stands that dominate and St. Johns counties (FL Dept. of dikes, levees or ponds, hammocks, natural flora (U.S. Department of Environmental Protection 1996b). and drier pinelands (Tarver et al. Interior 1994). Several of Florida's 1988). These plants often create a more notorious exotic plants include dense canopy and eliminate almost all the following: herbaceous understory (Ewel 1978). In the 1990s, it was reported that Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata): thousands of acres existed in central, This plant has become a serious and south Florida, the Florida Keys aquatic weed problem in Florida's and other islands of the State (Bennett freshwater environments. Hydrilla and Habeck 1991). Because of its Water hyacinthfilling a canal. grows rapidly in waterways and will (Photo courtesy ofDr Terry environmental tolerance, Brazilian out-compete native submerged aquatic McTique, NOAA) pepper is a threat to invade and plant communities (FL Coastal colonize both freshwater and some Management Program 1999b). By the Melaleuca (Melaleuca estuarine wetlands in Florida. early 1990s hydrilla had infested more gninquenervia), Cajeput or Punk than 40 percent of Florida's public Tree: This tree species is perhaps waters and was spreading (McCann the most insidious exotic to invade Florida's wetlands. The principal reason for its original introduction in Florida, was for drying up the Everglades (Thayer et al.1990). Melaleuca trees can grow up to 25 m tall and exist in soil conditions ranging from dry sand to muck covered with several feet ofwater (Tarver et al. 1988). Although there are no precise estimates of the extent of Melaleuca throughout the State, the species is Hydrilla verticillata or "water thyme. " prevalent throughout south Florida. (Photo courtesy ofColette Jacona-, U.S. Within the Everglades and Big Brazilian pepper: (U.S. Fish and Geological Survey.) Cypress National Preserve, it has Wildlife Service.) Freshwater Wetlands Florida's freshwater wetland resources have been tremendously important. Commercially valuable products such as hardwood timber, softwood for pulp and paper products, cypress mulch for gardening, and bottled spring water come from wetland areas. The long growing season and abundant forage supplied by wetland vegetation fringing many Florida lakes have made 8-10 pound largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) an angler's delight. Some Florida springs and their surrounding wetlands hide archeological or paleontologic discoveries of scientific significance .

Four major types of freshwater Figure 29. Freshwater wetlands were included within this forested wetland study. Three of these types were dominated based on vegetative life form and by red maple included forested wetlands, woody (Acer rubrum) shrubs and wetlands dominated by and water oak emergent or herbaceous plants. The (Quercus nigra), fourth type was freshwater ponds St. John's River, less than 20 acres (8.0 ha). Florida.

In 1996, there were an estimated for the three vegetated freshwater the State to south Florida. The 10,234,800 acres (4,143,600 ha) of wetland categories (emergent, shrub proportion of forested wetland to freshwater wetlands in Florida. In and forest) were combined there emergent marsh also changed in the conterminous United States, was an estimated net loss of over a north to south gradient within freshwater wetlands occupied about 91,000 acres (36,940 ha). Freshwater the State . In the panhandle region, 5 percent of land surface (Dahl ponds (nonvegetated) increased in wetland forest to marsh ratios have 2000). Freshwater wetlands occupied area by an estimated 39,200 acres been approximated at 10:1, whereas slightly over 27 percent of Florida's (15,860 ha). The net result was that the ratio was 3:1 in central Florida land area, making Florida the freshwater wetlands in Florida and 1 :5 in south Florida (FL Dept. of wettest State by area in the lower 48 declined by and estimated 52,000 Comm. Affairs 1988). United States. acres (21,080 ha). Freshwater forested wetlands This study indicated that Florida Freshwater Forested Wetlands exhibited a net gain in area over had 11 percent of all forested the course of this study. This was in wetland area in the conterminous Forested wetlands were most contrast to long term trends which U.S.; 10 percent of the wetland abundant. In 1996, there were an have continually declined since the shrubs and 10 percent of the wetland estimated 5,566,200 acres (2,253,500 1950s. Frayer and Hefner (1991) emergents, by area. Slightly more ha). This comprised 54 percent of the reported a net loss of 184,000 acres than 4 percent of the Nation's open total freshwater area for the State. (74,500 ha) of forested wetland water ponds occurred in the State. Forested wetlands appeared in many from the 1970s to the 1980s. This Freshwater wetlands sustained 99 different ecological associations and study estimated a net gain of 22,500 percent of the all wetland losses in included wet pine flatwoods, mixed acres (9,100 ha) because of the Florida between 1985 and 1996. hardwoods, river swamps, cypress maturation of shrub wetlands that domes, and hydric hammocks became forested wetlands . Net gains Between 1985 and 1996, freshwater (Figure 29). in forested wetland area did not forested and shrub wetlands and result from restoration of former freshwater ponds had increased in Species diversity and forested wetland or creation of new wetland area. These gains were offset by wetland community types decreased from uplands. The net gain of large losses of freshwater emergent as sampling progressed from the forested wetland from uplands was wetlands . When wetland trends more temperate northern part of 46 acres (19 ha) over the 11 years and statistically was not significant (Figure 30). Forested wetland gains resulted from the conversion of almost 300,000 acres (118,500 ha) of shrub wetland to wet forest. Most of these lands were observed in production of wood products L 150,000 for lumber, pulp, chip and paper products . 100,000 Timber production has been a major land use activity in Florida's 50,000 forested wetlands (Ewel 1990, Hart and Newman 1995). The amount of forested wetland in a cyclical Shrub Emergent Ponds Uplands pattern of growth, cutting and Wetland Wetland regrowth increased substantially Land Use Category over the past two decades. From the 1970s to 1980s, approximately Figure 30. Forest wetlands gained or converted from various cover-types, 1985 to 234,000 acres (94,700 ha) of wetland 1996. trees and shrub habitats alternated between more mature forested wetland stands and wet shrubs once the trees were cut. The amount or wetland area included in the wetland shrub, to forest, to shrub cycle had more than doubled to 500,000 acres (202,400 ha) by 1996.

Large blocks of wetland area changed classification from forested to other wetland types (primarily shrubs) as seen in Figure 31 . The long term effects of changes Shrub Uplands Emergent Ponds Lakes in forested wetland community Wetland Wetland structure and composition on Land Use Category wildlife populations and other environmental aspects was unclear. Figure 31. Forested wetlands lost or converted to various cover-types, 1985 to 1996. Some researchers have reported that silvicultural activities changed wetland areas retained their wetland expansion of other infrastructure the character of the surrounding characteristics and a small gain in as a result of rapid growth. An landscape, and possibly changed the wetland area resulted from what estimated 11,500 acres (4650 ha) hydroperiod, water depth, water had formerly been upland managed of forested wetland area was lost quality and ultimately the fish and forest. within urbanized cities and towns. wildlife value (Hart and Newman Although Frayer and Hefner (1991) 1995). Others have indicated that Forested wetland losses to various did not use a "rural development" cutting and replacement of Florida's upland land use categories upland category to describe wetland old forests with single species that indicated that these wetlands losses, their findings indicated that were commercially more desirable remained vulnerable to urban and urban development accounted for seriously damaged the wildlife value rural development. Construction over 39,000 acres (15,830 ha) of of forests (FL Dept. Env. Protection activities in urban and urbanizing forested wetland loss during the 1996a). rural settings accounted for 79 previous decade. percent of forested wetland losses In recent years, silvicultural best to upland (Figure 32). Development Agriculture was attributed with management practices have given activities in rural areas accounted the loss of an estimated 6,700 acres more emphasis to protecting and for over 26,400 acres (10,700 ha) of (2,700 ha) during the 11 year period . maintaining certain wildlife values forested wetland loss. This occurred This was a 20-percent reduction in during forestry activities (FL Dept. throughout Florida, and included the rate of forested wetland loss of Ag. and Consumer Services building development on the urban attributed to agriculture between 1993). During this study, forestry fringe, bridge and road construction, the 1970s and 1980s (Frayer and practices did not result in a loss of industrial development, construction Hefner 1991). wetland area. Forested and shrub of recreational facilities and Other miscellaneous upland land uses were attributed with 7 percent of the forested wetland loss to Urban and Rural Development 79% uplands during the study. Agriculture 14% Freshwater Shrub Wetlands Othe Uplands 7°° Shrub wetlands included areas dominated by woody vegetation less tall (6 m) (Figure 33). In than 20 feet Figure 32. Loss offorested wetlands to uplands, 1985 to 1996. Florida's shrub swamps, titi (Cyrilla racemiFla. ora), black titi (Cliftonia monophylla), swamp honeysuckle (Ewel 1990) that were common in The increased amount of shrub (Rhododendron viscosum), swamp south Florida especially in the Big wetland may have been the result haw (Viburnum nudum), willow Cypress National Preserve. of drier conditions . Several authors (Salix spp.) and swamp bay (Mitsch and Ewel 1979, Ewe11990) (Persea palustris) were common There were an estimated 1,791,100 have discussed the importance of species. Many shrub wetlands acres (725,140 ha) of wetland hydroperiod and fire frequency to had been invaded by Brazillian classified as shrubs in 1996. This species composition and productivity pepper (Shines terebinthifolius) or represented a gain of an estimated in Florida wetlands . Wilson and Melaleuca quinquenervia. 146,400 acres (59,300 ha) or almost Loomis (1967) and Mitsch and 9 percent between 1985 and Gosselink (1993) presented the Cowardin et al. (1979) did not 1996. Trends in wetland shrubs concepts of classical hydrarch distinguish between true wetland were strongly influenced by the succession where shallow water shrub communities and wetlands interrelationship between wetland lakes or wetlands tended to move dominated by tree species less than shrub acreage and wetland forests. toward drier sites and eventually 20 feet tall (6 m). Consequently, Also, there was also a large amount became terrestrial habitat. Changes all small, wet trees were classified of emergent wetland (306,000 in hydrologic conditions did as shrub wetlands . This included acres or 123,900 ha) converted to influence these trends however; "dwarf" or "scrub" cypress wetlands shrub wetland during this study. there has been little information on

Figure 33. Example offreshwater shrub wetland, Corkscrew Swamp, Florida, 1994 . the long term dynamics of species composition or life form transition that have resulted from drier Agriculture Urban and Rural 30% conditions over regional landscapes. Development 54% Of the freshwater shrub wetlands Other Uplands converted to upland, 54 percent or 16% 21,100 acres (8,550 ha) were drained for urban and rural development purposes . Another 11,600 acres Figure 3.4. Loss (4,700 ha) were lost to agriculture offreshwater shrub wetlands to uplands, 1985 to 1996. and 6,500 acres (2,630 ha) were lost to other miscellaneous uplands Most notable among the wildlife The "River of Grass" formed by the (Figure 34). There were gains to the supported by these wetlands were Everglades, Homosassa Springs, wetland shrub category from upland the wading birds. There were 16 Cypress Gardens, Silver Springs forested plantations during this species of wading birds in Florida and Myakka River State Park were period. with representatives from three all examples. Emergent wetlands families: the herons (Ardeidae), the also provided environmental quality Freshwater Emergent Wetlands storks (Ciconiidae), and the ibises values. They were important and spoonbills (Threskiornithidae) components of the hydrologic cycle, Emergent wetlands generally (Collopy and Jelks 1989). retained flood waters and served as contained shallow water and were Freshwater wetlands provided depositories for nutrients. dominated by herbaceous plants feeding habitats that were important (Figure 35). They included areas to the survival of these wading bird In 1996, there were an estimated known as marsh, swale, slough, wet species. During the wet season 2,636,900 acres (1,067,600 ha) of prairie, wet savanna, reed swamps (June through November) many freshwater emergent wetland and glades. Relatively frequent emergent wetlands were flooded in Florida. Emergent wetlands fires in combination with fluctuating with shallow water that maximized declined by an estimated 9 percent water levels have maintained the prey production for birds (Collopy between 1985 and 1996. This was integrity of many of Florida's and Jelks 1989). the largest decrease of any wetland emergent wetlands (Kushlan 1990). category sampled, and these losses Other values provided by emergent overshadowed the area gained Emergent wetlands supported wetlands benefitted people . in forested, shrub wetlands and abundant wildlife that included Aesthetics have played an important freshwater ponds. aquatic invertebrates, fishes, role in defining natural areas amphibians, reptiles and mammals. throughout Florida's landscape.

Figure 35. Example of afreshwater emergent wetland in central Florida, 1996. Frayer and Hefner (1991) estimated duration and intensity of flooding also restored or created on land the loss of freshwater emergent or frequency of wildfires (Figure previously classified as agricultural wetlands to have been 110,000 acres 36). Changes of the magnitude that uplands. An estimated 60,100 (44,500 ha) between the mid 1970s occurred in Florida between 1985 acres (2,430 ha) of agricultural and 1980s. Results from this study and 1996 were indicative of prolonged upland were converted to emergent indicated the loss rate more than periods of drought that allowed wetlands and offset some of the doubled, an estimated 260,200 acres woody plants to become established losses. Wetland restoration, creation, (105,340 ha) . in emergent wetlands, or the invasion land retirement or set aside of shrubs such as Brazilian pepper or programs were responsible for many The conversion of freshwater Melaleuca. of these changes in land use. Anet emergent wetland to shrub wetland loss of 38,300 acres (15,500 ha) was involved 286,900 acres (116,150 ha). Agriculture was responsible for attributed to agricultural land use. Historically there have always been some of the emergent wetland loss to That accounted for 63 percent of the small conversions between wetland upland land uses. An estimated 98,400 losses to upland (Figure 37). types (i.e. shrub to emergent acres (39,800 ha) were lost to upland and emergent to shrub) based on agriculture. Numerous wetlands were

1985 1994

Figure 36. 1985 and 199! color infrared aerial photographs of'wetlands and small lakes, Hatchbend, Florida. (Photos courtesy ofFL DEP)

' Rural Agriculture Development 63% _ 19%

Figure 37. Loss offreshwater emergent wetlands to uplands, 1985 to 1996. Figure 38. A constructed freshwater pond in a residential neighborhood, Brandenton, Florida, 1996 .

Under the definitions of upland to 1995-96 by about 266,000 acres Freshwater Ponds land uses used by the Fish and (107,700 ha) (FL Dept. of Ag. and Freshwater ponds (Figure 38) Wildlife Service to conduct this Consumer Services 1998). Some of continued to increase throughout study, agriculture was a broadly that expansion resulted in drained the State . Between 1985 and 1996 applied term that included many wetlands. pond area increased by 39,200 acres agricultural products not limited to (15,900 ha) . This was almost a 20 commodity crops or traditional row Urban and rural development percent increase over the previous crop agriculture. For example in were attributed with 18 and 19 decade and continued a long term 1997, Florida led the Nation in the percent of the freshwater emergent upward trend (Figure 39). production of 18 major agriculture losses to uplands, respectively. commodities including sugarcane, "Other" upland land uses and This study included freshwater oranges, grapefruit, fresh tomatoes, upland forested plantations were ponds that were functionally and bell peppers, ferns, sweet corn, snap responsible for net gains back to qualitatively different, and there beans, fresh cucumbers, tangerines, emergent wetland. Each category were many different kinds of ponds temple oranges, fresh squash, showed the creation or restoration of found throughout Florida. Some radishes, gladioli, tangelos, eggplant, about 4,900 acres (2,000 ha). were natural, others manmade. and house plants (FL Dept. of Ag. and Consumer Services 1998). Florida also produced watermelons, endive, mushrooms, peanuts, 250 -1 tobacco, limes, other citrus, potatoes, blueberries, strawberries, lettuce, carrots, cabbage, and ornamental 200- plants and trees for homes, offices and gardens. Agriculture as a land use category in this study also 150- included buildings, field roads and infrastructure directly associated 100- with agricultural operations. Many of the products listed above were not covered under the "Swampbuster" 50 provisions of the Farm Bill and wetlands were subject to drainage 77 without penalty. Citrus production 1950s 1970s 1980s 1996 in Florida had expanded the number of acres in production from 1985-86 Figure 39. Long term trends offreshwater pond area in Florida. Open water ponds were created Florida (U.S. Dept. of Ag. National Upland agriculture was the largest as water retention basins in urban Agricultural Statistics Service 2001). contributor to the freshwater areas, water traps on golf courses ponds category (Figure 41). Rural (Figure 40), ornamental landscape Freshwater ponds exhibited net development activities were features for housing or office increases from all of the upland responsible for an estimated 2,000- developments or as a result of rock categories with the exception of acre (800 ha) loss in ponds. This was mining operations. All of these met rural development. About 23,700 due to the reclamation of open water the wetland definition of Cowardin acres (9,600 ha) of freshwater bodies that had been created during et al. (1979). Very few ponds for ponds were created on agricultural phosphate mining operations . catfish farming have been created in lands between 1985 and 1996.

1985 1994

Figure 40. 1985 and 199! color infrared aerial photographs near Panama City, Florida. (Photos courtesy ofFL DEP.)

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000 a 5,000

Urban Other Forest Rural Upland Plantations Development Land Use Category

Figure 41. Acres ofnew ponds createdfrom uplands in Florida, 1985 to 1996. term "restoration" has also been ha) of restoration or creation from Wetland used to describe the return of uplands in Florida. Approximately Restoration, land area to a former condition or 67 percent of the wetland restoration function. Some projects designed or creation took place on agricultural Protection and to restore hydrologic function or lands. Agricultural programs that remove exotic species from wetlands promote wetland restoration, Conservation have not increased the area of the pond creation and land retirement Efforts wetland base. Thus, while successful were responsible for these gains. restoration projects have been very Wetland restoration or creation There has been considerable beneficial, the amount of wetland was dominated by open water emphasis in the last decade on area has not changed. Direct pond creation in urban areas and wetland restoration or rehabilitation comparisons ofwetland restoration accounted for a small percentage of activities . Many worthwhile estimates from this study with other the wetland area restored or created projects have been completed by studies using different definitions of between 1985 and 1996. Rural Federal, State, local and private restoration cannot be made. development and managed forest organizations and citizens (Figure plantations accounted for 6 percent 42) . In Florida, the term restoration Gains in wetlands from upland land each of the wetland area restored has been used to describe various uses were tabulated as part of this or created. "Other" upland land use management practices such as study. Emergent wetland and ponds restored or created 18 percent of the beach clean-up, removal of exotic predominated the wetland from wetland area (Figure 43). plants from existing wetlands or upland restorations. There were the enhancement of condition. The an estimated 127,940 acres (51,800

Figure 42. A wetland creation/restoration site in southwestern Florida, 1999 . A waterway in the Everglades. areas (Lord 1993). The wetlands of EVERGLADES the Everglades had been drastically RESTORATION reduced in size and some suffered from mercury contamination. Others PROJECT suffered water quality problems, water supply and diversion Extending more than half the controversies, declining wildlife length of the Florida peninsula, the populations, increasing pressure watershed of Florida's Everglades from ecotourism, urban and once covered more than 10,800 agricultural expansion, and an influx square miles (27,970 sq. km). of exotic plant species (Dahl and This large wetland complex was Allord 1996). interconnected by rivers, lakes open ponds, marshes, tree islands, During the early 1990s, five Federal wooded hammocks, bays and Departments, the Environmental coastal mangrove swamps . Surface Protection Agency, in partnership water traveled slowly from Lake with the tribes, State and local Kissimmee 200 miles (320 km ) agencies, reached a consensus that southwest to reach Florida Bay and the Everglades should be restored. the Gulf of Mexico. The South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Initiative was developed During the 1900s, more than half Habitat restoration. (Robert Owens) of the wetlands that made up this vast ecosystem were destroyed or degraded, many having been drained By 1990, competition for water in or filled for agriculture or residential south Florida was intense. There housing (U.S. Fish and Wildlife were competing demands to support Service 1996). Canals and levees rapidly growing population centers, were constructed to drain, retain or agriculture and meet the water alter the hydrology of the wetlands resource demands of State and of south Florida. As a result of these Federal parks, reserves, sanctuaries alterations, most of the peripheral and preserves (McPherson and wet prairie, cypress forests and all of Halley 1996) . The remaining the custard apple (Annona Glabra) Everglades comprised about 2,300 Native pond apple and spatterdock. forest that were associated with the square miles (5,960 sq. km), three (Photo courtesy ofthe South Florida historic Everglades have been lost fifths ofwhich was impounded and Water Management District.) (Davis et al. 1994). managed as water conservation

Fish and Wildlife Service firefighters monitor a prescribed burn. (John and Karen Hollingsworth) Research on maintain, to the to restore and the Everglades extent possible, the elements of the System . (Photo south Florida ecosystem to resemble courtesy of the natural functions of a healthy, Everglades balanced and functioning freshwater, National Park.) estuarine and marine environment (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996).

Restoring the Everglades remains an enormous challenge that involves returning essential functions to a large and diverse ecosystem. It constitutes the largest wetland restoration effort ever undertaken, and is estimated to cost billions of dollars and take up to 30 years to complete (Eggleston et al. 2000). The ability to manage the hydrology of the Kissimmee River, Lake Okeechobee, the Everglades and associated waters, while providing Wetlands of the for the needs of urban, rural and Everglades. agricultural users will determine the (Photo courtesty future of natural resources of south ofEverglades Florida. National Park.

1990

.9 ,S

The extent ofthe greater Everglades system in South. Florida, 1911 and 1990. 63 As human development pressures have continued in Florida, there have been increased demands placed on all natural resources. Land needs for wildlife habitat, recreation, green space and surface water protection have been increasingly threatened . In response, Florida has identified acquisition of environmentally sensitive lands as one of its most important strategies for environmental protection (FL Dept. Environmental Protection 1996a). The Conservation and Recreation Lands Program, Save Our Rivers, Save Our Coasts, Land Acquisition Trust Fund Programs and the Preservation 2000 program represented commitments on the part of the State and the Water Management Districts to acquire environmentally important lands. Wetland creation and wildlife habitat restoration on lands overlook historic Pelican There were almost 7 million acres Island National Wildlife Refuge in 2002. (George Gentry) (2,834,000 ha) of land that had been acquired between State and Federal agencies in Florida (FL Dept. Environmental Protection Aquatic Preserves, International the many government agencies 1996a). Many of these lands included Biosphere Reserve, World Heritage involved in wetland conservation important wetland habitats. As Site, and Wetland of International efforts in Florida. The application shown in Figure 44, these lands Importance (Ramsar Sites). and enforcement ofwetland have been acquired in key coastal protection measures, elimination wetland areas, the Everglades and Florida had also identified of some incentives for wetland the south Florida ecosystem, key "Strategic Habitat Conservation drainage, public education and watersheds or rivers and other Areas." These lands (about 4.8 outreach, private land initiatives, strategic locations for the protection million acres or 1,943,300 ha), were coastal monitoring and protection of endangered species or rare subject to loss and degradation programs, and wetland restoration habitat types. because of development pressure and creation actions also contributed and represented some of Florida's to wetland conservation over the Land acquisition has been only one most "at risk" resources (FL Dept. past decade. Private organizations part of the conservation strategy. Environmental Protection 1996a). have also had an important role Many wetlands in Florida have other in wetland conservation and special designations to help ensure Other important factors that protection in Florida. Many recognition of value or protection . were part of Florida's wetland private-interest groups have kept Some of these designations have conservation efforts included the public informed on wetland included the following: National Federal, State and local legislation, issues, organized citizen networks Estuarine Research Reserves, ordinances and initiatives. and lobbied for wetland protection National Marine Sanctuaries, Darst et al. (1996) has provided measures (Darst et al. 1996). National Estuary Program, Florida a comprehensive discussion of

Figure 43. Percentage ofwetland area restored or created (ponds and emergent wetlands) from various upland land Forest Plantations uses in Florida, 1985 to 1996. 6% Ding Darling National Wildlife Refuge

Protected wetlands prowide recreation for people and habitat for native plants and animals. Birdwatehers (above) enjoy a sunny day of spotting birds at Ding Darling National Wildlife Refitge. (George Gentry) An alligator surfaces to rest on a log at the Corkscrew Sanctuary in Collier County (right) .

Federal

State

Other

Figure 4y! . Conservation lands designated as Federal, State, local or private preserves, ref2,iges, parks, reserves, or smzctuaries iii Florida, 1996.

Dr

Summary

Wetlands have been an important there had been dramatic progress part of Florida's landscape as they made in slowing the rate of loss. have provided many values to wildlife and people . The U.S. Fish Less than one percent of the wetland and Wildlife Service has developed losses that occurred between 1985 and maintained a program to assess and 1996 were intertidal wetlands, changes in the Nation's wetland as marine and estuarine wetlands acreage. The statistical design used an estimated 500 acres in the National trend study also declined by produced reliable wetland area (200 ha) over the 11-year period. estimates for Florida. Six-hundred- These losses were attributed to and-thirty-six sample plots were construction activities along the analyzed using digital orthophoto coast, and coastal erosion. Most quarter quadrangles to identify of Florida's shoreline had been wetlands, deepwater habitats and protected either by regulation or uplands. Changes in areal extent through public ownership. These or type of wetland observed in the mechanisms in combination with 1996 sample plots between 1985 and continued awareness and educational were recorded . Field verification efforts were responsible for reducing was accomplished for 138 plots or 22 wetland losses between percent of the sample. During April intertidal 1999, cooperative interagency field 1986 and 1997. evaluations were conducted to test the definitions used by the Service There were an estimated 10,234,800 on the wetland status and trends acres (4,143,600 ha) of freshwater plots to attribute wetland losses or wetlands . Between 1985 and 1996, gains. The study produced estimates freshwater forested and shrub oftotal wetland area and changes wetlands and freshwater ponds for Florida that included all lands increased in area. These gains were and waters of State regardless of the offset by large losses to freshwater land ownership. emergent wetlands . Florida's freshwater wetlands declined by an As of 1996, Florida had 11 .4 million estimated 52,000 acres (21,100 ha) or acres (4.6 million ha) of wetlands . 0.5 percent between 1985 and 1996. Of this, 10 percent were estuarine This was an average annual net and 90 percent were freshwater loss of 4,740 acres (1,920 ha) for the wetlands . Between 1985 and 1996 period. The average annual rate of the average annual net loss of freshwater wetland loss declined 82 wetlands in Florida was 5,000 percent since the 1970s to the 1980s acres (2,030 ha). This rate of loss era. was an 81-percent reduction from the annual rate reported for the There were an estimated 127,940 previous decade by the Service. acres (51,800 ha) of wetlands Urban and rural development restored or created from uplands accounted for an estimated 72 in Florida. Approximately 67 percent of the loss. Agriculture was percent took place on agricultural attributed with the remaining 28 lands. Agricultural programs that percent of the losses. Small gains in promote wetland restoration, pond wetland were attributed to upland creation and land retirement were Rookery Bay silviculture, the "other" uplands responsible for these gains. National category as well as an increase from Estna~rine deepwater. Although Florida had not Of the net wetland losses to upland Research Reserve. reached "no-net-loss" of wetlands, land use, the urban and rural development categories were recreational purposes. Parks, attributed with 72 percent of the preserves and management areas losses. Agriculture was attributed protect exemplary remnants of most with 28 percent of the losses. Net of Florida's natural ecosystems gains came from silviculture and (Myers and Ewel 1990). Restoration the "other" upland categories . efforts have been underway to try There was no net loss attributed to and rehabilitate some of Florida's silvicultural practices. There were watersheds and wetlands . In the gains to the wetland shrub category future, Florida faces difficult and freshwater emergents from challenges to try and balance upland silviculture. There was also a economic growth, rapid population net gain in wetland from the "Other" immigration and growth with limited upland land use category. natural resources, land and carrying capacity. Wetlands were a pervasive The wetland loss rate in Florida has feature of the landscape, and will been reduced substantially since remain an important benchmark the last half of the 20th century. The to the ecological and economic State and the Federal Government sustainability of Florida and the had purchased substantial amounts Nation. of land for conservation and

Corkscrew Sanctuary. Abrahamson, W.G. and D. C. Hartnett . birds in relation to the physical 1990 . Pine Flatwoods and dry and biological characteristics of prairies . In. R.L. Myer s and freshwater wetlands in southwest J.J. Ewel (eds.). Ecosystems of Florida. Florida Game and Fresh Florida. University of Central Water Fish Comm. Nongame Florida Press, Orlando, FL. Wildlife . Program Final Rept. pp . 103-149 . 102 p. Anderson, J.R., E .E. Hardy, J.T. Roach Cowardin, L.M, V Carter, EC . Golet, and and R.E . Winter. 1976 . A land E.T. LaRoe. 1979 . Classificatio n of use and land cover classification wetlands and deepwater habitats system for use with remote sensor of the United States. Department data. U.S . Geological Survey of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Professional Paper 964. U.S . Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Geological Survey, Washington, 131 p. D.C. 28 p. Dahl, T.E. 1990 . Wetlands losses in the Bahr, L.M. and WP Lanier. 1981 . The United States 1780s to 1980s. ecology ofintertidal oyster reefs Department of the Interior, of the south Atlantic coast: A U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, community profile . U.S. Fish Washington, D.C. 21 p. and Wildlife Service, Office of Dahl, T. E. 2000 . Status and trends of Biological Services, Washington, wetlands in the conterminous D.C . FWS/OB S 81/15.105 p. United States 1986 to 1997. Bailey, R. G. 1980 . Description of the U.S . Department ofthe Interior, ecoregions of the United States. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S . Department ofAgriculture, Washington, D.C. 82 p. Forest Service. Miscellaneous Dahl, TE . and J.G. Allord. 1996. History Publication Number 1391. 77 p. ofwetlands in the conterminous Bennett, ED . and D.H . Habeck. 1991. United States . National Water Brazilia n peppertree-prospects Summary on Wetland Resources. for biological control in Florida. U.S. Geological Water-Supply In. TD . Center, R.E Doren, R.L. Paper 2425, Reston, VA. pp. 19-26. Hofstetter, R.L . Myers and L.D. Darst, M.R., H.M . Light and BY Whiteaker (eds.). Proceedings McPherson . 1996. Florida wetland of the symposium on exotic pest resources . In. National water plants, National Park Service, summary on wetland resources . Denver, CO. NPS/NREVER/ U.S. Geological Survey, Water- NRTR-91/06. Supply Paper 2425, Reston, VA. Bergquist, G.T. 1996 . Florida State of pp. 153-160 . the coast report. Florida Coastal Davis, S.M ., L.H . Gunderson, WA Park Management Program, Florida and J.E. Mattson .1994. Landscape Department of Community dimensions, composition, and Affairs, Tallahassee, FL. 28 p. function in a changing Everglades Carlton, J.M. 1977 . A survey of selected ecosystem. In. S.M. Davis and coastal vegetation communities J.C . Ogden (eds.) Everglades- of Florida. Florida Department The ecosystem and its restoration . of Natural Resources Marine St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, Research Laboratory. Florida FL. pp. 419-444 . Marine Research Publication Davis, S.M. and J.C . Ogden. 1994. Number 30, St. Petersburg, FL. Everglades-The ecosystem and 40 p. its restoration . St. Lucie Press, Collopy, M.W and H.L. Jelks. 1989. Delray Beach, FL. pp . 1-7. Distributio n of foraging wading Dressler, R.L ., D.W. Hall, K.D. Perkins 69 and N.H. Williams . 1987. habitat with aerial photography. Soil and water relationships of Identification manual for wetland Photogrammetric Engineering Florida's ecological communities : plant species of Florida. Institute and Remote Sensing . 59(6): Ecological community No . 19- of Food and Agricultural Sciences 1033-1038 . Mangrove Swamps . Soil Survey SP-35. Gainesville, FL. 297 p. Fernald, E .A. and E.D. Purdum . 1992 . Staff, Gainesville, FL. 20 p. Drew, R.D. and N.S . Schomer. 1984. An Atlas of Florida . University Press Frayer, WE and J.M . Hefner. 1991 . ecological characterization of the of Florida, Institute of Science Florida wetlands status and Caloosatchee River/Big Cypress and Public Affairs, Florida State trends, 1970s to 1980s. U.S . Fish Watershed. U.S . Fish and Wildlife University, Gainesville, FL. 280 p. and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA. Service, FWS/OBS-82/58.2. Florida Bureau of Aquatic Plant 31 p. Washington, D.C . 225 p. Management . 1996 . Invasive GAP Commission . 2001 . The Florida Duever, L.C., J.F. Meeder and M.J. aquatic plants inventory. Florida critical benchmarks goals report. Duever. 1982. Ecological portion Environmental Publishing, Inc., The Florida Commission on Florida peninsula natural Gainesville, FL. Government Accountability to the region theme study. Final Report Florida Coastal Management Program. People, Tallahassee, FL. unk . p. to the National Park Service, U.S. 1999a. Florida Assessment of Gore, R .H. 1992. The Gulf of Mexico . Department of Interior. National Coastal Trends-Disruption of Pineapple Press Inc., Sarasota, Audubon Society. Ecosystem coastal physical processes-Miles FL. 384 p. Research Unit, Naples, FL. 398 p. oferoding shoreline. Florida Griffen, J. 1989. The Everglades kite . Duever, M.J., J.E. Carlson, J.F. Meeder; Department of Community Aquatics 11(3) :17-19 . L.C. Duever, L.H. Gunderson, Affairs, Tallahassee, FL. 143 p. Gunderson, L.H . 1994. Vegetation of L.A. Riopelle, T.R. Alexander, Florida Coastal Management Program . the Everglades: Determinants R.L . Meyers and D.P Spangler. 1999b. Florida Assessment of of community composition . In. 1986. The Big Cypress National Coastal Trends-Degradation S.M. Davis and J.C . Ogden (eds.) Preserve . Research Report No. 8, and restoration of coastal Everglades-The ecosystem and National Audubon Society, New ecosystems-Change in acreage its restoration . St. Lucie Press, York, NY 455 p. of invasive non-indigenous Delray Beach, FL. pp. 323-340 . Eggleston, J.R., T.L. Embry, R.H. (exotic) aquatic plants . Florida Habeck, D.H . 1995 . Biological control Mooney, L. Wedderburn, C.R. Department of Community of Brazilian peppertree . The Goodwin, H.S . Henkel, K.M.H. Affairs, Tallahassee, FL. 143 p. Florida Naturalist . Vol. 68, Pegram, and TJ. Enright. 2000 . Florida Department of Agriculture and No . 1. Florida Audubon Society, The U.S . Geological Survey Consumer Services. 1998. Florida Casselberry, FL. pp. 9-11 . program on the South Florida Agricultural Facts-Florida Hammond, E .H. 1970. Physical Ecosystem : 2000 proceedings . Agriculture Overview. Tallahassee, subdivisions of the United Presentations made at the FL. unk. p. States ofAmerica. In. U.S . Greater Everglades Ecosystem Florida Department of Agriculture Geologica l Survey. National atlas Restoration Conference, and Consumer Services. 1993 . ofthe United States of America. December 11-15,2000, Naples, Silviculture Best Management Department ofthe Interior, FL. Open-File Report 00-449 . Practices . Tallahassee, FL. 98 p. Washington, D.C. 61 p. 246 p. Florida Department of Community Hart,-R . and J.R. Newman. 1995 . The Ewel, J. 1978. Ecology of Schinus . Affairs . 1988 . Mapping and importance ofisolated wetlands Schinus-Technical proceedings of Monitoring ofAgricultural Lands to fish and wildlife in Florida. techniques for control of Schinus Project (1984-1987) County data. Florida Game and Fresh Water in south Florida: A workshop Tallahassee, FL. unk. p. Fish Commission, Nongame for natural area managers . Florida Department of Environmental Wildlife Program Project Report, Unpublished report of Sanibel- Protection. 1996a. Strategic Tallahassee, FL. 145 p. Captiva Conservation Foundation, Assessment of Florida's Hefner, J.M. 1986 . Wetlands of Florida Ft. Myers, FL. 87 p. Environment-Change in Wildlife 1950s to 1970s. In. Estevez, Ewel, K.C. 1990. Swamps . In. R.L . Habitat/Strategic Habitat E.D., J. Miller, J. Morris and Myers and J.J. Ewel (eds.). Conservation Areas. Tallahassee, R. Hamman (eds.). Managing Ecosystems of Florida. University FL. pp. 26-31. Cumulative Effects in Florida of Central Florida Press, Orlando, Florida Department of Environmental Wetlands. New College FL. pp. 281-323. Protection. 1996b. Invasive Environmental Studies Program Ewel, K.C . and H.T Odum . 1986. aquatic plants inventory. Bureau Publication No. 37 . Omnipress, Ecological patterns in cypress ofAquatic Plant Management, Madison, WI. pp . 23-31. swamps. In. K.C. Ewe l and H.T. Tallahassee, FL . unk. p. Hefner, J.M. and J.D. Brown Odum (eds.). Cypress Swamps . Florida Natural Areas Inventory and 1984 . Wetland trends in the University of Florida Press, Florida Department of Natural southeastern United States. Gainesville, FL. pp. 5-6. Resources . 1990 . Guide of the Wetlands . Vol. 4. pp. 1-11 . Ferguson, R.L., L.L . Wood and D.B. natural communities of Florida. Hopkins, S.R. and J.J. Richardson. Graham. 1993. Monitorin g Tallahassee, FL. 111 p. (eds .). 1984. Recovery plan for spatial change in seagrass Florida Soil Conservation Service . 1992 . marine turtles . Marine Turtle Recovery Team, National Marine Marth, D. and M.J. Marth. 1992. Florida pp . 358-364 . Fisheries Service, Department of Almanac 1992 -1993. Pelican Myers, R.L . and J.J. Ewel. 1990. Commerce . Washington, D.C. Publishing Company, Gretna, LA. Problems, prospects, and unk. p. 432 p. strategies for conservation. In. Jaap, W.C . 1984. The ecology of the McCann, J.A., L.N . Arkin and J.D. Myers, R.L . and J.J. Ewel (eds.) . south Florida coral reefs: A Williams . 1996 . Nonindigenou s Ecosystems of Florida. University community profile . U.S. Fish and aquatic and selected terrestrial of Central Florida Press, Orlando, Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. species of Florida . University of FL. pp. 619-632 FWS/OB S 82/08.138 p. Florida, Center for Aquatic Plants, Nordlie, F.G. 1990 . Rivers and springs. Johnson, A.E and M.G. Barbour. 1990. Gainesville, FL. In. Myers, R.L . and J.J. Ewel Dunes and maritime forests . In. McPherson, B.E and R. Halley. 1996. (eds.). Ecosystems of Florida. R.L . Myers and J.J. Ewel (eds.). The south Florida environment- University of Central Florida Ecosystems of Florida. University A region under stress . U.S . Press, Orlando, FL. pp. 392-425 . of Central Florida Press, Orlando, Geological Survey Circular Odum, WE. and C .C . McIvor. 1990. FL. pp. 429-480 . 1134 . National Water-Quality Mangroves. In. R.L . Myers and Kushlan, J.A. 1990. Freshwater marshes . Assessment Program. Department J.J. Ewel (eds.). Ecosystems of In. R.L . Myers and J.J. Ewel of the Interior, U.S . Geological Florida. University of Central (eds.) . Ecosystems of Florida. Survey, Reston, VA. 61 p. Florida Press, Orlando, FL. University ofCentral Florida Miller, S.L . and MY Crosby. 1998. The pp . 517-548. Press, Orlando, FL. pp. 324-363. extent and condition of U.S . coral Odum, WE., C.C. Mclvor and T.J. Lake County Water Authority, 1995. Our reefs-NOAA's State ofthe Coast Smith, 111 . 1982 . The ecology of vital wetlands . Lake County Water Report . National Oceanic and the mangroves of south Authority, Tavares, FL. 28 p. Atmospheric Administration, Florida: A community profile . U.S. Langbein, WB. and K.T Iseri. 1960. Silver Spring, MD . Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of General introduction and Millhouser, WC ., J. McDonough, Biological Services, Washington, hydrologic definitions manual of J.P Tolson and D. Slade. 1998 . D.C. FWS/OB S 81/24.144 p. hydrology. Part 1. General surface Managing coastal resources Omernik, J. M. 1987 . Ecoregions of water techniques . U.S. Geological NOAAs State of the Coast Report . the conterminous United States. Survey, Water-Supply Paper National Oceanic and Atmospheric Supplement to the Annals of 1541-A, Reston, VA. 29 p. Administration, Silver Spring, the Association of American Lins, H.E, Jr. 1980. Patterns and trends MD . Geographers, 77 (1) : pp. 118-125. of land use and land cover on Millsap, B.A., J.A. Gore, D.E. Runde Orth, R.J., K.A. Moore and J.E Nowak. Atlantic and Gulf coast barrier and S.I . Cerulean. 1990 . Setting 1990. Monitoring seagrass islands, U.S . Geological Survey priorities for the conservation of distribution and abundance Professional Paper 1156, Reston, fish and wildlife species in Florida. patterns : A case study from the VA. unk . p. Wildl. Monog. 111 :1-57. Chesapeake Bay. Pages 111-123. Livingston, R. J. 1984. The ecology of Mitsch, W.J. and K.C. Ewel. 1979. In. S.J. Kiraly, EA. Cross and J.D. the Apalachicola Bay system : An Comparativ e biomass and growth Buffington (eds.) . Federal coastal estuarine profile . U.S. Department of cypress in Florida wetlands . wetland mapping programs . Biol . of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Am. Midl . Nat . 101 :417-426. Rept. 90 (18). Department of the Service, FWS/OBS-82/05, Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink . 1993 . Interior, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Washington, D.C. 148 p. Wetland s (2nd edition). Van Service, Washington, D.C. Livingston, R. J. 1990. Inshore marine Norstrand Reinhold, New York, Patterson, S.G. 1986 . Mangrove habitats . In. Myers, R.L. and NY 722 p. community boundary J.J. Ewel (eds.). Ecosystems of Montague, C.L. and R.G. Wiegert. 1990 . interpretation and detection of Florida. University of Central Salt marshes . In. Myers, R.L . areal change on Marco Island Florida Press, Orlando, FL. and J.J. Ewel (eds .). Ecosystems Florida: Application of digital pp. 549-573 . of Florida. University of Central image processing and remote Lord, L.A. 1993. Guide to Florida Florida Press, Orlando, FL. sensing techniques . U.S. environmental issues and pp . 481-516 . Department ofthe Interior, information . Florida Conservation Morris, A. 1991 . The Florida handbook National Wetlands Research Foundation, Winter Park, FL. 1991-1992 . The Peninsular Center, Washington, D.C. Biol. 364 p. Publishing Company, Rept . 86(10) . Lynch, MY, B.L . Laird, N.B. Theberge Tallahassee, FL. 720 p. Patton, J.E . and WS. Judd . 1986. and J.C. Jones. (eds.). 1976. An Myers, R.L. 1986 . Ecological Vascular flora of Paynes Prairie assessment of estuarine and compression of Taxodium Basin and Alachua Sink nearshore marine environments. distichum var. nutans by Hammock, Alachua County, FL. Special Report in Applied Marine Melateuca quinquenervia in Castanea 51, 88-110 . Science and Ocean Engineering southern Florida. In. K.C. Ewel Pybas, D.W 1991. Atlas of artificial reefs No 93. OBS, Fish and Wildlife and H.T Odum (eds.). Cypress in Florida. Florida Sea Grant Service, Department of the Swamps. University of Florida College Program, University Interior, Washington, D.C. 132 p. Press, Gainesville, FL. of FL., Gainesville. Sea Grant Educational Bulletin 20. 40 p. hardwood forests : Their functions System ; Notice . Part V Fish and Reed, PB. 1988. National list of plant and values. In. Gosselink, J.G., Wildlife Service. Federal Register, species that occur in wetlands. L.C. Lee and TA. Muir (eds.). February 23, 1995, 60 (36) . NERC-88/18.40. Department of Ecological Processes and pp . 10268-10283. the Interior. U.S . Fish and Wildlife Cumulative Impacts: Illustrated U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service . 1994a. Service, Washington, D.C. by Bottomland Hardwood Wetland Continuous wetlands trend Runde, D.E. 1991. Trends in wading Ecosystems. Lewis Publishers, analysis project specifications bird nesting populations in Inc. Chelsea, MI . pp. 13-86. (photo-interpretation and Florida 1976 -1978 and 1986-1989. Tomlinson, PB . 1986. The Botany of cartographic procedures). Wetland Nongame Wildlife Section, Mangroves . Cambridge University Status and Trends, National Division ofWildlife, Florida Game Press. 419 p. Wetlands Inventory Center, St. and Freshwater Fish Commission. Twilley, R.R. 1998. Mangrove wetlands. Petersburg, FL. 60 p. Tallahassee, FL. 90 p. In.. Messina, M.G. and W.H. U.S . Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994b. Sargent, FJ., WB. Sargent, TJ. Leary, Conner (eds.) . Southern Technical specifications and D.W Crewz and C .R. Kruer. 1995. Forested Wetlands : Ecology and protocols for Status and Trends Scarring of Florida's seagrass: Management. Lewis Publishers, digital files. Wetland Status assessment and management CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. and Trends, National Wetlands options. Florida Marine Research pp. 445-473 . Inventory Center, St. Petersburg, Institute Report TR-1 unk . p. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers . 1988 . A FL. 35 p. plus appendices. Sharp, J.G. 1992. Florida facts and guide to selected Florida wetland U.S . Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996 . The figures (21st edition). Florida plants and communities . CESAJP South Florida Ecosystem . U.S. Trend Magazines, Inc., St. 1145-2-1, Jacksonville District : Fish and Wildlife Service-South Petersburg, FL. 40 p. Regulatory Division, Jacksonville, Florida Ecosystem Office, Vero Simons, R.W., S.W Vince and S.R. FL. 319 p. Beach, FL. 45 p. plus Appendices . Humphrey. 1989. Hydric U.S. Census Bureau . 2002 . State and Vince, S.W, S.R. Humphrey and R.W. hammocks: A guide to County Quickfacts-Florida . On- Simons. 1989. The ecology of management. U.S . Fish and line resources a wwwquickfacts . hydric hammocks : A community Wildlife Service Biological Report census.gov/qfd. profile . U.S. Fish and Wildlife 85 (7.26 Supplement), Washington, U.S. Department of Agriculture . 1975 . Service Biological Report 85(7.26). D.C . 89 p. Soil taxonomy : A basic system Washington, D.C . 81 p. Spalding, M.D., F Blasco and C.D. Field of soil classification for making Ward, D.B . 1943 . Rare and endangered (eds.). 1997. World Mangrove and interpreting soil surveys . biota of Florida: Volume five- Atlas. The International Soc. for Department of Agriculture. Soil Plants. University Press of Mangrove Ecosystems, Okinawa, Conservation Service, Soil Survey Florida, Gainesville, FL. 175 p. Japan. 178 p. Staff, Agricultural Handbook 436, Wilson, R.E 1998. Mangroves in Florida, Stout, J. 1984. The ecology of irregularly Washington, D.C. 754 p. U.S.A. Wetlands Journal 10 (1): flooded salt marshes of the U.S. Department of Agriculture . 1991 . pp 12-20. northeastern Gulf of Mexico : A Hydric Soils of the United States. Wilson, C.L . and WE . Loomis . 1967. community profile . U.S. Fish and Soil Conservation Service, Botany, 4th ed. Holt, Rinehart and Wildlife Service Biological Report Miscellaneous Publication Number Winston, New York, NY. 626 p. 85 (7 .1). Washington, D.C. 98 p. 1491, Washington, D.C . pages Williams, K. A.S . Pinzon, R.P Stumpf Tarver, D.P, J.A. Rogers, M.J. Mahler unnumbered . and E .A. Raabe. 1999 . Sea-level and R.L . Lazor. 1988. Aquati c U.S. Department of Agriculture, rise and coastal forests on the and wetland plants of Florida, 4th National Agricultural Statistics Gulf of Mexico . Open-File Report edition . Bureau of Aquatic Plant Service . 2001 . Florida State 99-441 . U.S . Department of Management, Florida Department Report, Florida Aquaculture . the Interior, Geological Survey, of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, Washington, D.C . Center for Coastal Geology, FL. 125 p. U.S. Department of the Interior. St. Petersburg, FL. 87 p. plus Thayer, D.D., K.K. Langeland, WT 1994. Big Cypress National Appendices. Haller and J.C . Joyce. 1990. Preserve . Briefing statements Wolfe, S. H., J.A. Reidenauer and Weed control in aquaculture and for 1994-National Park Service, D.B . Means. 1988 . An ecological farm ponds. Florida cooperative Washington, D.C. 14 pp. characterization ofthe Florida extension Service, University of U.S. Department of the Interior. 1995. panhandle . U.S . Fish and Wildlife Florida, Gainesville, FL . 24 pp. Coastal Barrier Improvement Service Biological Report 88(12) . Taylor, J.R., M.A. Cardamone and Act ; Technical corrections to Washington, D.C. 277 p. WJ. Mitsch. 1990. Bottomland the Coastal Barrier Resources

Right: Mangrove thicket of coastal south Florida. 73 Appendix A. Definitions of Habitat Categories Used in This Status and Trends Study

Wetlands'

In general terms, wetlands are lands where saturation with water is the dominant factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its surface. The single feature that most wetlands share is soil or substrate that is at least periodically saturated with or covered by water. The water creates severe physiological problems for all plants and animals except those that are adapted for life in water or in saturated soil.

Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. For purposes of this classification wetlands must have one or more of the following three attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes, 2 (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil, I and (3) the substrate is non-soil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year.

The term wetland includes a variety of areas that fall into one of five categories : (1) areas with hydrophytes and hydric soils, such as those commonly known as marshes, swamps, and bogs; (2) areas without hydrophytes but with hydric soils-for example, flats where drastic fluctuation in water level, wave action, turbidity, or high concentration of salts may prevent the growth of hydrophytes; (3) areas with hydrophytes but non-hydric soils, such as margins of impoundments or excavations where hydrophytes have become established but hydric soils have not yet developed; (4) areas without soils but with hydrophytes such as the seaweed- covered portions of rocky shores ; and (5) wetlands without soil and without hydrophytes, such as gravel beaches or rocky shores without vegetation.

Marine System The Marine System consists of the open ocean overlying the continental shelf and its associated high energy coastline. Marine habitats are exposed to the waves and currents of the open ocean. Salinities exceed 30 parts per thousand, with little or no dilution except outside the mouths of estuaries. Shallow coastal indentations or bays without appreciable freshwater inflow and coasts with exposed rocky islands that provide the mainland with little or no shelter from wind and waves, are also considered part of the Marine System because they generally support typical marine biota.

Estuarine System The Estuarine System consists of deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetland that are usually semienclosed by land but have open, partly obstructed, or sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Offshore areas with typical estuarine plants and animals, such as red mangroves (Rhizophora maizgle) and eastern oysters (Crassostrea virginica), are also included in the E stuarine System.

'Adapted from Cowardin et al . 1979 . ''The U.S . Fish and Wildlife Service has published the list of plant species that occur in wetlands of the United States (Reed 1988). "U .S . Department of Agriculture has developed the list of hydric soils for the United States (U.S . Department of Agriculture 1991).

Marine and Estuarine Subsystems Subtidal The substrate is continuously submerged by marine or estuarine waters .

Intertidal The substrate is exposed and flooded by tides. Intertidal includes the splash zone of coastal waters.

Palustrine System The Palustrine (freshwater) System includes all non-tidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses or lichens, farmed wetlands, and all such wetlands that occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean derived salts is below 0.5 parts per thousand. It also includes wetlands lacking such vegetation, but with all of the following four characteristics: (1) area less than 20 acres (8 ha) ; (2) active wave formed or bedrock shoreline features are lacking; (3) water depth in the deepest part of basin less than 6.6 feet (2 meters) at low water; and (4) salinity due to ocean derived salts less than 0.5 parts per thousand.

Classes

Unconsolidated Bottom Unconsolidated Bottom includes all wetlands with at least 25 percent cover of particles smaller than stones, and a vegetative cover less than 30 percent. Examples of unconsolidated substrates are: sand, mud, organic material, cobble-gravel.

Aquatic Bed Aquatic Beds are dominated by plants that grow principally on or below the surface of the water for most of the growing season in most years. Examples include seagrass beds4, pondweeds (Potamogeton spp.), wild celery (Vallisneria americana), waterweed (Elodea spp.), and duckweed (Lemma SPO.

Unconsolidated Shore Unconsolidated Shore includes all wetland habitats having two characteristics: (1) unconsolidated substrates with less than 75 percent areal cover of stones, boulders or bedrock and; (2) less than 30 percent areal cover of vegetation other than pioneering plants.

Emergent Wetland Emergent Wetlands are characterized by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes, excluding mosses and lichens. This vegetation is present for most of the growing season in most years. These wetlands are usually dominated by perennial plants.

Shrub Wetland Shrub Wetlands include areas dominated by woody vegetation less than 20 feet (6 meters) tall. The species include true shrubs, young trees, and trees or shrubs that are small or stunted because of environmental conditions .

Forested Wetland Forested Wetlands are characterized by woody vegetation that is 20 feet (6 meters) tall or taller.

Palustrine Farmed Farmed Wetlands are wetlands that meet the Cowardin et al. definition where the soil surface has been mechanically or physically altered for production of crops, but where hydrophytes will become re-established if farming is discontinued.

'Although some seagrass beds may be evident on aerial photography, water and climatic conditions often prevent their detection. Deepwater Habitats Wetlands and deepwater habitats are defined separately because the term wetland has not included deep permanent water bodies . For the purposes of conducting status and trends studies, riverine and lacustrine are considered deepwater habitats. Elements of marine or estuarine systems can be wetland or deepwater. Palustrine includes only wetland habitats.

Deepwater habitats are permanently flooded land lying below the deepwater boundary of wetlands . Deepwater habitats include environments where surface water is permanent and often deep, so that water, rather than air, is the principal medium within which the dominant organisms live, whether or not they are attached to the substrate. As in wetlands, the dominant plants are hydrophytes ; however, the substrates are considered non-soil because the water is too deep to support emergent vegetation (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1975).

Riverine System The Riverine System includes deepwater habitats contained within a channel, with the exception of habitats with water containing ocean derived salts in excess of 0.5 parts per thousand. A channel is "an open conduit either naturally or artificially created which periodically or continuously contains moving water, or which forms a connecting link between two bodies of standing water" (Langbein and Iseri 1960).

Lacustrine System The Lacustrine System includes deepwater habitats with all of the following characteristics: (1) situated in a topographic depression or a dammed river channel; (2) lacking trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses or lichens with greater than 30 percent coverage ; (3) total area exceeds 20 acres (8 ha). Similar wetland and deepwater habitats totaling less than 20 acres may also be included in the Lacustrine System if an active, wave-formed or bedrock shoreline feature makes up all or part of the boundary, or if the water depth in the deepest part of the basin exceeds 6.6 feet (2 meters) at low water.

Snorkeler at Fort Jefferson on the Dry Tortugas. (Photo courtesy ofEverglades National, Park.) Uplands Agriculture' Agricultural land may be defined broadly as land used primarily for production of food and fiber. Agricultural activity is evidenced by distinctive geometric field and road patterns on the landscape and the traces produced by livestock or mechanized equipment. Examples of agricultural land use include cropland and pasture; orchards, groves, vineyards, nurseries, cultivated lands, and ornamental horticultural areas including sod farms; confined feeding operations; and other agricultural land including livestock feed lots, farmsteads including houses, support structures (silos) and adjacent yards, barns, poultry sheds, etc.

Urban Urban land is comprised of areas of intensive use in which much of the land is covered by structures (high building density). Urbanized areas are cities and towns that provide the goods and services needed to survive by modern day standards through a central business district. Services such as banking, medical and legal office buildings, supermarkets, and department stores make up the business center of a city. Commercial strip developments along main transportation routes, shopping centers, contiguous dense residential areas, industrial and commercial complexes, transportation, power and communication facilities, city parks, ball fields and golf courses can also be included in the urban category.

Forested Plantation Forested plantations include areas of planted and managed forest stands. Planted pines, Christmas tree farms, clear cuts, and other managed forest stands, such as hardwood forestry are included in this category.

Forested plantations can be identified by observing the following remote sensing indicators: 1) trees planted in rows or blocks; 2) forested blocks growing with uniform crown heights; and 3) logging activity and use patterns.

Rural Development Rural developments occur in sparse rural and suburban settings outside distinct urban cities and towns. They are characterized by non-intensive land use and sparse building density. Typically, a rural development is a cross-roads community that has a corner gas station and a convenience store which are surrounded by sparse residential housing and agriculture. Scattered suburban communities located outside of a major urban center can also be included in this category as well as some industrial and commercial complexes ; isolated transportation, power, and communication facilities; strip mines ; quarries ; and recreational areas such as golf courses, etc. Major highways through rural development areas are included in the rural development category.

Other Land Use Other Land Use is composed of uplands not characterized by the previous categories. Typically these lands would include native prairie ; unmanaged or non-patterned upland forests and scrub lands; and barren land. Lands in transition may also fit into this category. Transitional lands are changing from one land use to another. They generally occur in large acreage blocks of 40 acres (16 ha) or more and are characterized by the lack of any remote sensor information that would enable the interpreter to reliably predict future use. The transitional phase occurs when wetlands are drained, ditched, filled, leveled, or the vegetation has been removed and the area is temporarily bare.

'Adapted from Anderson et al . 1976 77