DOCSLIB.ORG

Foundation Document Biscayne National Park Florida August 2018 Foundation Document

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Foundation Document Biscayne National Park Florida August 2018 Foundation Document 826 SOUTH KEY BISCAYNE MIAMI BILL BAGGS MATHESON KENDALL CAPE FLORIDA STATE PARK HAMMOCK PARK BISCAYNE C HA NN 1 STILTSVILLE EL S A F E T Y DEERING ESTATE AT CUTLER V A L PARK BOUNDARY V E e g SOLDIER KEY d CUTLER e L FOWEY ROCKS RIDGE k c la B Brewster BISCAYNE Reef NATIONAL PARK INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY NK BA RAGGED KEYS ED B (private) R Star E H Reef T BLACK POINT PARK A Boca Chita Key FE LEWIS CUT M BOWLES BANK A E SANDS KEY R ANDS CUT BISCAYNE BAY S T S BACHE Convoy Point SHOAL F L Dante Fascell Visitor Center Elliott Key U G HOMESTEAD BAYFRONT PARK Pelican Bank MARGOT FISH Long SHOAL Reef PARK BOUNDARY ELLIOTT KEY E V O C H IC W D N SA FLORIDA SANCTUARY BOUNDARY Ajax Adams Key KEYS s Reef as NATIONAL P t CAESAR CREEK MARINE h ig SANCTUARY n d i CAESAR CREEK M TOTTEN KEY BANK CUTTERSHALLOWS BANK Water Depths Coral reef near water surface OLD RHODES KEY Shoal or spoil area 0–6 feet 6–12 feet BROAD CREEK Over 12 feet INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY PARK BOUNDARY Ranger station Boat launch CARD SOUND Restrooms Gas dock JOHN PENNEKAMP Picnic area Marina CORAL REEF Self-guiding trail Primitive STATE PARK campground KEY LARGO 905 FLORIDA KEYS North 0 2 Kilometers NATIONAL MARINE 0 2 Statute Miles SANCTUARY 0 2 Nautical Miles Biscayne National Park Contents Mission of the National Park Service 1 Introduction 2 Part 1: Core Components 3 Brief Description of the Park 3 Park Purpose 5 Park Significance 6 Fundamental Resources and Values 7 Other Important Resources and Values 9 Interpretive Themes 10 Part 2: Dynamic Components 11 Special Mandates and Administrative Commitments 11 Assessment of Planning and Data Needs 11 Analysis of Fundamental Resources and Values 11 Analysis of Other Important Resources and Values 27 Identification of Key Issues and Associated Planning and Data Needs 31 Planning and Data Needs 32 Part 3: Contributors 35 Biscayne National Park 35 NPS South Florida/Caribbean Network 35 NPS Southeast Region 35 Partners 35 NPS Denver Service Center – Planning Division 35 Appendixes 36 Appendix A: Enabling Legislation and Legislative Acts for Biscayne National Park 36 Appendix B: Inventory of Special Mandates and Administrative Commitments 40 Appendix C: Past and Ongoing Park Planning and Data Collection Efforts 46 Foundation Document Biscayne National Park Mission of the National Park Service The National Park Service (NPS) preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The National Park Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world. The NPS core values are a framework in which the National Park Service accomplishes its mission. They express the manner in which, both individually and collectively, the National Park Service pursues its mission. The NPS core values are: · Shared stewardship: We share a commitment to resource stewardship with the global preservation community. · Excellence: We strive continually to learn and improve so that we may achieve the highest ideals of public service. · Integrity: We deal honestly and fairly with the public and one another. · Tradition: We are proud of it; we learn from it; we are not bound by it. · Respect: We embrace each other’s differences so that we may enrich the well- being of everyone. The National Park Service is a bureau within the Department of the Interior. While numerous national park system units were created prior to 1916, it was not until August 25, 1916, that President Woodrow Wilson signed the National Park Service Organic Act formally establishing the National Park Service. The national park system continues to grow and comprises more than 400 park units covering more than 84 million acres in every state, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. These units include, but are not limited to, national parks, monuments, battlefields, military parks, historical parks, historic sites, lakeshores, seashores, recreation areas, scenic rivers and trails, and the White House. The variety and diversity of park units throughout the nation require a strong commitment to resource stewardship and management to ensure both the protection and enjoyment of these resources for future generations. The arrowhead was authorized as the official National Park Service emblem by the Secretary of the Interior on July 20, 1951. The sequoia tree and bison represent vegetation and wildlife, the mountains and water represent scenic and recreational values, and the arrowhead represents historical and archeological values. 1 Foundation Document Introduction Every unit of the national park system will have a foundational document to provide basic guidance for planning and management decisions—a foundation for planning and management. The core components of a foundation document include a brief description of the park as well as the park’s purpose, significance, fundamental resources and values, other important resources and values, and interpretive themes. The foundation document also includes special mandates and administrative commitments, an assessment of planning and data needs that identifies planning issues, planning products to be developed, and the associated studies and data required for park planning. Along with the core components, the assessment provides a focus for park planning activities and establishes a baseline from which planning documents are developed. A primary benefit of developing a foundation document is the opportunity to integrate and coordinate all kinds and levels of planning from a single, shared understanding of what is most important about the park. The process of developing a foundation document begins with gathering and integrating information about the park. Next, this information is refined and focused to determine what the most important attributes of the park are. The process of preparing a foundation document aids park managers, staff, and the public in identifying and clearly stating in one document the essential information that is necessary for park management to consider when determining future planning efforts, outlining key planning issues, and protecting resources and values that are integral to park purpose and identity. While not included in this document, a park atlas is also part of a foundation project. The atlas is a series of maps compiled from available geographic information system (GIS) data on natural and cultural resources, visitor use patterns, facilities, and other topics. It serves as a GIS-based support tool for planning and park operations. The atlas is published as a (hard copy) paper product and as geospatial data for use in a web mapping environment. The park atlas for Biscayne National Park can be accessed online at: http://insideparkatlas.nps.gov/. 2 Biscayne National Park Part 1: Core Components The core components of a foundation document include a brief description of the park, park purpose, significance statements, fundamental resources and values, other important resources and values, and interpretive themes. These components are core because they typically do not change over time. Core components are expected to be used in future planning and management efforts. Brief Description of the Park Biscayne National Park was established in order to preserve and protect for the education, inspiration, recreation, and enjoyment of present and future generations a rare combination of terrestrial, marine, and amphibious life in a tropical setting of great natural beauty. Biscayne National Park is located south of Miami, Florida. It is a marine park consisting of mostly submerged land and includes coral reefs, sandy shoals, 4,825 acres of mostly undeveloped mangrove shoreline, and more than 40 keys or islands primarily composed of limestone and coral. The primary means of access to park waters is by private, partner, or commercial permit-holding operators. Visitors come to the area for recreational opportunities including boating, fishing, snorkeling, SCUBA diving, paddling, birding, and nature viewing. Biscayne National Park is recognized for its natural resources, which represent a combination of terrestrial, estuarine, and marine resources in a subtropical setting of great natural beauty. The park can be divided generally into four prominent ecosystems: (1) terrestrial mangrove shorelines, (2) shallow estuarine system (Biscayne Bay) with diverse bottom communities, (3) keys (islands), and (4) coral reefs and hardbottom habitat. The coral reefs of Biscayne National Park are due east of the keys and are part of the Florida Reef Tract that stretches from the Dry Tortugas to Martin County. Much of the northern part of the Florida Reef Tract is in the park and makes up much of the northernmost extension of living coral reefs in the United States. Most of the shallow, protected waters of Biscayne Bay contain the estuarine environment of the park, which primarily supports seagrasses and hardbottom communities. 836 41 MIAMI 826 1 Key Biscayne 0 10 Kilometers 874 997 0 10 Miles Florida’s Turnpike Biscayne BISCAYNE Bay NATIONAL 821 PARK EVERGLADES SW 137 Avenue NATIONAL Homestead Dante Fascell Visitor Center ATLANTIC PARK Florida City SW 328 Street OCEAN 9336 997 o FLORIDA KEYS NATIONAL rg a MARINE SANCTUARY L 1 905 y e JOHN PENNEKAMP CORAL K REEF STATE PARK To Key West 3 Foundation Document Biscayne National Park has a rich history of aboriginal occupation and use, Spanish and English exploration, pirates, smuggling, shipwrecks, marine salvaging, agriculture, and commercial development that reflects the continual link between humans and the sea that has characterized this area for the past 10,000 years. Remnants of this cultural history are present throughout the park and are represented by both terrestrial and submerged cultural resources.
Recommended publications
  • Socan Monitoring Workshop

    Socan Monitoring Workshop

    SOCAN MONITORING WORKSHOP Image credit: Lauren Valentino, NOAA/AOML 2/28/17 WorksHop Report SOCAN MONITORING WORKSHOP SOCAN MONITORING WORKSHOP IDENTIFYING PRIORITY LOCATIONS FOR OCEAN ACIDIFICATION MONITORING IN THE U.S. SOUTHEAST SUMMARY The Southeast Ocean and Coastal Acidification Network (SOCAN) held a worksHop in CHarleston, SoutH Carolina to facilitate discussion on priority locations for ocean acidification monitoring in tHe SoutHeast. The discussion included identification of key gradients in physical, chemical and biological parameters along tHe SoutHeast coast, a review of current monitoring efforts, and an assessment of stakeHolder needs. Sixteen monitoring locations were identified as potential acidification monitoring locations (see page 12). The following three monitoring locations were HigHligHted as priority sites tHat would furtHer our understanding of the chemistry and regional drivers of ocean acidification and address stakeholder needs: (1) Sapelo Island, GA (2) Gulf Stream, offsHore of Gray’s Reef, GA (3) Biscayne National Park, FL The workshop concluded witH a discussion of logistics and opportunities to pursue monitoring at tHe recommended locations. A copy of tHe agenda is included in Appendix 1. PROCEEDINGS Approximately 16 experts gatHered for tHe SOCAN Monitoring Workshop to outline recommendations for priority ocean acidification monitoring locations in tHe SoutHeast (Attendee List, Appendix 2). The worksHop began witH introductory remarks regarding tHe structure and responsibilities of SOCAN and SECOORA. Following the introductory remarks, participants reviewed the proposed agenda; no modifications were made. The first half-day was spent reviewing tHe state of ocean acidification science and regional response. Kim Yates sHared a syntHesis of tHe 2016 SOCAN State of the Science meeting, wHicH included a review of webinars and key findings related to OA chemistry, modeling and organismal response.
  • Biscayne National Park's Fishery Management Plan

    Biscayne National Park's Fishery Management Plan

    WATER Credit: iStock.com/Matt_Potenski Biscayne National Park’s Fishery 77% Management Plan OF 35 FISH STOCKS STUDIED Biscayne National Park is a national treasure 5 WITHIN THE PARK ened, some on the verge of collapse. If ac- and home to part of the third largest barrier tion isn’t taken and fish populations and ARE OVERFISHED, reef ecosystem in the world. 95% water, MOST CAPTURED habitat health continue to decline, the Park Biscayne is the largest marine park in the BEFORE THEY Service will have failed at its fundamental National Park System, created to protect, “a HAD A CHANCE TO mission to protect Biscayne National Park in SPAWN.1 rare combination of terrestrial, marine, and perpetuity for all Americans. Implementing amphibious life in a tropical setting of great a marine reserve and science-based fisheries natural beauty” for present and future management policies are key to protecting 3 generations. In addition to its ecological and restoring Biscayne’s marine resources. value, the park is a significant economic 95% driver, supporting a variety of economic and Biscayne’s Fishery Management Plan DECLINE IN REEF recreation activities, such as fishing, diving, Biscayne National Park’s Fishery Manage- FISH CATCHES IN snorkeling, and boating. According to a ment Plan (FMP), finalized back in 2014, BISCAYNE SINCE National Park Service report, in 2018 over aims to increase the average size and abun- THE 1960s.2 450,000 visitors to Biscayne spent more than dance of target fish species in the park by $30 million, supporting 398 local jobs and 20% by creating park-specific fisheries man- generating more than $42 million for the lo- agement regulations and reducing fishing- cal economy.4 related habitat degradation.
  • Rapid Response and Restoration for Coral Reef Injuries In

    Rapid Response and Restoration for Coral Reef Injuries In

    Nova Southeastern University NSUWorks Oceanography Faculty Reports Department of Marine and Environmental Sciences 6-1-2007 Rapid Response and Restoration for Coral Reef Injuries in Southeast Florida: Guidelines and Recommendations Chantal Collier Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Coral Reef Conservation Program Richard E. Dodge Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center, [email protected] David S. Gilliam Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center, [email protected] Kelly Gracie Tetra Tech EC Inc. Lisa Gregg Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission See next page for additional authors Findollo outw thi mors aend infor addmitationional a boutworkNs oavta: hSouthettp://nastseuwrn orkUnivs.enorsitvya.aenddu/oc the Oc_faceacrnoegrporaptshic Center. Part of the Marine Biology Commons, and the Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons Recommended Citation Collier, C., R. Dodge, D. Gilliam, K. Gracie, L. Gregg, W. Jaap, M. Mastry, and N. Poulos. 2007. "Rapid Response and Restoration for Coral Reef Injuries in Southeast Florida: Guidelines and Recommendations." The eD partment of Environmental Protection, 63pp. This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Marine and Environmental Sciences at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Oceanography Faculty Reports by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Chantal Collier, Richard E. Dodge, David S. Gilliam, Kelly Gracie, Lisa Gregg, Walter Jaap, Mike Mastry, and Nikki Poulos This report is available at NSUWorks: http://nsuworks.nova.edu/occ_facreports/11 RAPID RESPONSE AND RESTORATION FOR CORAL REEF INJURIES IN SOUTHEAST FLORIDA Guidelines and Recommendations A Maritime Industry and Coastal Construction Impacts Focus Area Project of the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative June 2007 Rapid Response and Restoration for Coral Reef Injuries in Southeast Florida: Guidelines and Recommendations Dedicated to Dr.
  • Florida Forever Work Plan

    Florida Forever Work Plan

    Florida Forever Work Plan January 1, 2003 prepared by South Florida Water Management District Florida Forever Work Plan Contributors South Florida Water Management District Florida Forever Work Plan January 1, 2003 Contributors Christine Carlson Dolores Cwalino Fred Davis Jude Denick Juan Diaz-Carreras Andy Edwards Paul Ellis William Helfferich Sally Kennedy Phil Kochan Tom McCracken Kim O’Dell Steve Reel Bonnie Rose Dawn Rose Wanda Caffie-Simpson Andrea Stringer iii Florida Forever Work Plan Contributors iv Florida Forever Work Plan Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 1999, the Florida Forever program was created, which authorized the issuance of bonds in an amount not to exceed $3 billion for acquisitions of land and water areas. This revenue is to be used for the purposes of restoration, conservation, recreation, water resource development, historical preservation and capital improvements to the acquired land and water. The program is intended to accomplish environmental restoration, enhance public access and recreational enjoyment, promote long-term management goals and facilitate water resource development. The water management districts create a five-year plan that identifies projects meeting specific criteria for the Florida Forever program. Each district integrates its surface water improvement and management plans, Save Our Rivers (SOR) land acquisition lists, stormwater management projects, proposed water resource development and water body restoration projects and other activities that support the goals of Florida Forever. Thirty-five percent of the Florida Forever bond proceeds are distributed annually to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for land acquisition and capital expenditures in order to implement the priority lists submitted by the water management districts.
  • Nature-Based Coastal Defenses in Southeast Florida Published by Coral Cove Dune Restoration Project

    Nature-Based Coastal Defenses in Southeast Florida Published by Coral Cove Dune Restoration Project

    Nature-Based Coastal Defenses Published by in Southeast Florida INTRODUCTION Miami Beach skyline ©Ines Hegedus-Garcia, 2013 ssessments of the world’s metropolitan areas with the most to lose from hurricanes and sea level rise place Asoutheast Florida at the very top of their lists. Much infrastructure and many homes, businesses and natural areas from Key West to the Palm Beaches are already at or near sea level and vulnerable to flooding and erosion from waves and storm surges. The region had 5.6 million residents in 2010–a population greater than that of 30 states–and for many of these people, coastal flooding and erosion are not only anticipated risks of tomorrow’s hurricanes, but a regular consequence of today’s highest tides. Hurricane Sandy approaching the northeast coast of the United States. ©NASA Billions of dollars in property value may be swept away in one storm or slowly eroded by creeping sea level rise. This double threat, coupled with a clearly accelerating rate of sea level rise and predictions of stronger hurricanes and continued population growth in the years ahead, has led to increasing demand for action and willingness on the parts of the public and private sectors to be a part of solutions. Practical people and the government institutions that serve them want to know what those solutions are and what they will cost. Traditional “grey infrastructure” such as seawalls and breakwaters is already common in the region but it is not the only option. Grey infrastructure will always have a place here and in some instances it is the only sensible choice, but it has significant drawbacks.
  • Assessment of Natural Resource Conditions in and Adjacent to Biscayne National Park Natural Resource Report NPS/BISC/NRR—2012/598 Peter W

    Assessment of Natural Resource Conditions in and Adjacent to Biscayne National Park Natural Resource Report NPS/BISC/NRR—2012/598 Peter W

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Assessment of Natural Resource Conditions In and Adjacent to Biscayne National Park Natural Resource Report NPS/BISC/NRR—2012/598 Peter W. Harlem, Joseph N. Boyer, Henry O. Briceño, James W. Fourqurean, Piero R. Gardinali, Rudolph Jaffé, John F. Meeder, Michael S. Ross Southeast Environmental Research Center Florida International University Miami, FL 33199 December 2012 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado Pg. xxiii Executive Summary This report is an assessment of the conditions of natural resources in Biscayne National Park (BNP) based on the compilation, review and evaluation of existing information on the Park’s natural resources. This review evaluates threats and stressors, and is intended to improve understanding of BNP resources to help guide Park management to address the identified threats, which are supported by enhanced data collection, research and assessment efforts. The report is focused on broad resource components, namely terrestrial resources and aquatic systems including: wetlands, canals, bay waters, marine/reef areas and ground waters. Biotic and abiotic resource components are considered in the review. The objectives of the assessment are to: Provide a review/compilation of existing information on BNP natural resources. Provide a list and description of threats/stressors to these resources. Develop a semi-quantitative ranking of the threats to resource components and the extent of existing information. Identify research needs based on information gaps and degree of threat to the resources. There are many threats to the resources of BNP and many gaps in our knowledge of the functioning of the Biscayne Bay ecosystem.
  • Biscayne National Park National Park Service

    Biscayne National Park National Park Service

    National Park Service Marine Reserves for People A National Park Perspective Biscayne National Park National Park Service Mark Lewis Superintendent Biscayne National Park [email protected] 786-335-3643 Biscayne National Park National Park Service From just south of Key Biscayne to just north of Key Largo. Biscayne National Park National Park Service Adjacent to approx 3 million people Biscayne National Park National Park Service Biscayne National Park • preserves and protects 173,000 acres of reefs, islands and most of Biscayne Bay; • contains over 5,000 patch reefs; • is the largest tropical marine park in the National Park system; • is a tourism, recreation & education destination for over ½ million people each year. Biscayne National Park National Park Service Mission of the National Park Service ...to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. Biscayne National Park National Park Service Why consider a marine reserve for Biscayne NP? The purpose of the marine reserve would be to provide the public the opportunity to experience a healthy, natural reef with a wide diversity of fish species and sizes; Biscayne National Park National Park Service Why consider a marine reserve for Biscayne NP? to create an area of the park where visitors can experience greater abundance, larger individuals, and higher diversity of fishes, corals, and other organisms. Biscayne National Park National Park Service Why consider a marine reserve for Biscayne NP? If you go to Yellowstone NP you expect to see bison; If you go to Redwoods NP you expect to see giant trees; Biscayne National Park National Park Service Why consider a marine reserve for Biscayne NP? If you go to the largest tropical marine park in the national park system, you expect to see healthy coral reefs teeming with diverse and large fish.
  • Monroe County Stormwater Management Master Plan

    Monroe County Stormwater Management Master Plan

    Monroe County Monroe County Stormwater Management Master Plan Prepared for Monroe County by Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. August 2001 file:///F|/GSG/PDF Files/Stormwater/SMMPCover.htm [12/31/2001 3:10:29 PM] Monroe County Stormwater Management Master Plan Acknowledgements Monroe County Commissioners Dixie Spehar (District 1) George Neugent, Mayor (District 2) Charles "Sonny" McCoy (District 3) Nora Williams, Mayor Pro Tem (District 4) Murray Nelson (District 5) Monroe County Staff Tim McGarry, Director, Growth Management Division George Garrett, Director, Marine Resources Department Dave Koppel, Director, Engineering Department Stormwater Technical Advisory Committee Richard Alleman, Planning Department, South Florida WMD Paul Linton, Planning Department, South Florida WMD Murray Miller, Planning Department, South Florida WMD Dave Fernandez, Director of Utilities, City of Key West Roland Flowers, City of Key West Richard Harvey, South Florida Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ann Lazar, Department of Community Affairs Erik Orsak, Environmental Contaminants, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Gus Rios, Dept. of Environmental Protection Debbie Peterson, Planning Department, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Teresa Tinker, Office of Planning and Budgeting, Executive Office of the Governor Eric Livingston, Bureau Chief, Watershed Mgmt, Dept. of Environmental Protection AB i C:\Documents and Settings\mcclellandsi\My Documents\Projects\SIM Projects\Monroe County SMMP\Volume 1 Data & Objectives Report\Task I Report\Acknowledgements.doc Monroe County Stormwater Management Master Plan Stormwater Technical Advisory Committee (continued) Charles Baldwin, Islamorada, Village of Islands Greg Tindle, Islamorada, Village of Islands Zulie Williams, Islamorada, Village of Islands Ricardo Salazar, Department of Transportation Cathy Owen, Dept. of Transportation Bill Botten, Mayor, Key Colony Beach Carlos de Rojas, Regulation Department, South Florida WMD Tony Waterhouse, Regulation Department, South Florida WMD Robert Brock, Everglades National Park, S.
  • Tortugas Ecological Reserve

    Tortugas Ecological Reserve

    Strategy for Stewardship Tortugas Ecological Reserve U.S. Department of Commerce DraftSupplemental National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Environmental National Ocean Service ImpactStatement/ Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management DraftSupplemental Marine Sanctuaries Division ManagementPlan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), working in cooperation with the State of Florida, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, and the National Marine Fisheries Service, proposes to establish a 151 square nautical mile “no- take” ecological reserve to protect the critical coral reef ecosystem of the Tortugas, a remote area in the western part of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. The reserve would consist of two sections, Tortugas North and Tortugas South, and would require an expansion of Sanctuary boundaries to protect important coral reef resources in the areas of Sherwood Forest and Riley’s Hump. An ecological reserve in the Tortugas will preserve the richness of species and health of fish stocks in the Tortugas and throughout the Florida Keys, helping to ensure the stability of commercial and recreational fisheries. The reserve will protect important spawning areas for snapper and grouper, as well as valuable deepwater habitat for other commercial species. Restrictions on vessel discharge and anchoring will protect water quality and habitat complexity. The proposed reserve’s geographical isolation will help scientists distinguish between natural and human-caused changes to the coral reef environment. Protecting Ocean Wilderness Creating an ecological reserve in the Tortugas will protect some of the most productive and unique marine resources of the Sanctuary. Because of its remote location 70 miles west of Key West and more than 140 miles from mainland Florida, the Tortugas region has the best water quality in the Sanctuary.
  • Biscayne National Park, Florida

    Biscayne National Park, Florida

    National Park Service Biscayne U.S. Department of the Interior Camping Guide to Biscayne National Park Boca Chita Key Tent camping is permitted in designated areas on Elliott and Boca Chita Keys. These islands are accessible by boat only. Camping is limited to fourteen (14) consecutive days or no more than thirty (30) days within a calendar year. Reservations are not accepted. The sites are available on a first-come, first-served basis. No services are available on the islands. Facilities Elliott Key: Freshwater toilets, cold water showers, and drinking water are available. Boca Chita Key: Saltwater toilets are available. Sinks, showers and drinking water are NOT available. Fees There is a $15 per night per campsite camping fee. The fee includes a standard campsite (up to 6 people and 2 tents). If docking a boat overnight, there is a $20 fee that includes one night camping. Group campsites (30 people and 5 tents) are $30 per night on Elliott Key. Group campsite is available by reservation only (305) 230-1144 x 008. Holders of the Interagency Senior or Access passes receive a 50% discount on camping and marina use fees. The fee is paid at the self- service fee station on each island. It is your responsibility to make sure that your fees are paid. NPS rangers will verify payment compliance. Camping/marina use fees must be paid PRIOR to 5 p.m. daily. Anyone who arrives after 5 p.m. must pay camping/ marina use fees immediately upon arrival. Any vessel in the harbor after 5 p.m.
  • Biscayne National Park U.S

    Biscayne National Park U.S

    National Park Service Biscayne National Park U.S. Department of the Interior South Florida Natural Resources Center Freshwater Discharge and Protecting the Coastal Ecosystem in Biscayne National Park Erik Stabenau, Ph.D., Oceanographer National Park Service South Florida Natural Resource Center Everglades & Biscayne National Parks 950 N. Krome Ave, Homestead, FL 33030 Requests to: [email protected] (305)224-4209 Overview Ecological & Hydrologic Targets for Western Biscayne National Park Consideration for downstream ecosystem in water management – Specific conditions and goals – Triggers for dry season flow Multiple lines of evidence – Sensitivity to system during dry season – Quantity and timing Biscayne National Park South Florida Natural Resources Center Biscayne National Park South Florida Natural Resources Center ~1900 1996 Changes in the Nearshore Areas Historic trend of increasing salinity in the nearshore zone 1900 Mesohaline conditions (5 to 18 PSU) 1996 Polyhaline conditions (18-30 PSU) USGS Circular 1275, Impact of anthropogenic development on coastal groundwater hydrology in Southeastern Florida, 1900 – 2000. Biscayne National Park South Florida Natural Resources Center Impacts Changing habitat and reduced diversity Biscayne National Park South Florida Natural Resources Center Ecology and Salinity Late dry season target: Average monthly salinity from 15 to 25 PSU. Never exceed 30 PSU Figure 5 from “Ecological Targets…” report summarizes the optimal salinity range for a variety of species in the coastal zone. Biscayne National
  • In Florida Archaeology

    In Florida Archaeology

    Indigenous Florida Panhandle Tomoka Northeastern Florida Shipwreck Trail Archaeology Project 2021 IN FLORIDA ARCHAEOLOGY Saving Angola Community-based Archaeology as Grassroots Activism FLORIDA HISTORICAL SOCIETY ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE ON THE COVER EDITORS’ NOTE A barrel well was among the important features uncovered during excavation of the Angola site in Bradenton. Once cleared of soil, water seeped into the well as it had in the past, TABLE OF reflecting the image of a modern archaeologist. Courtesy of Sherry Robinson Svekis CONTENTS BACK COVER NOAA archaeologists record two shipwreck INDIGENOUS sites in the Florida Keys National Marine 02 Sanctuary. Courtesy of Brenda Altmeier (top) NORTHEASTERN FLORIDA and Matt Lawrence (bottom) Searching for a Mocama Indian Community FROM PALEO-INDIAN ANNE V. STOKES, PH.D. KC SMITH 08 TO PROTOHISTORIC FLORIDA HISTORICAL SOCIETY BOARD FLORIDA HISTORICAL SOCIETY St. Vincent Island’s Enduring OF DIRECTORS AND CEO OF SEARCH BOARD OF DIRECTORS Native Occupation As with everything in the past year, the covid pandemic Digital History Project highlighted by KC Smith is a wonderful upended archaeological research. Field schools were resource for researchers. FLORIDA PANHANDLE cancelled or postponed; contract firms worked on fewer 14 infrastructure projects; and research-related travel came Fred Gaske’s article illustrates how a seemingly unimportant SHIPWRECK TRAIL to a halt. However, while archaeologists worldwide groused artifact can tell a rich story and add new interpretation to a A Bridge between the Archaeological about the pandemic’s effects, the pause in field studies site. It also illustrates the importance of context within history and Artificial actually allowed folks to catch up on lab work, think about and archaeology.