DOCSLIB.ORG

September 20, 2018 Jeff Sedloff June Engineering Consultants 32 West Plant Street Winter Garden, FL 34787 Proj

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
September 20, 2018 Jeff Sedloff June Engineering Consultants 32 West Plant Street Winter Garden, FL 34787 Proj September 20, 2018 Jeff Sedloff June Engineering Consultants 32 West Plant Street Winter Garden, FL 34787 Proj: Folsom Subdivision Site – Hillsborough County, Florida Parcel ID #U-21-28-20-ZZZ-000002-13230.0 (BTC File #100-76) Re: Environmental Assessment Report Dear Mr. Sedloff: During September of 2018, Bio-Tech Consulting, Inc. (BTC) conducted an environmental assessment and wildlife survey of the approximately 19.05-acre Folsom Subdivision Site. This site is located at the physical address of 9737 Commodore Drive, within Section 21, Township 28 South, Range 20 East; Hillsborough County, Florida (Figures 1,2 & 3). The environmental assessment included the following elements. • Review soil types within the project boundaries • Evaluation of land use types/vegetative communities • Review for occurrence of protected flora and fauna • Review of development constraints and permitting SOILS According to the Soil Survey of Hillsborough County, Florida, prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), two (2) soil types occur within the subject property boundaries (Figure 4). These soils include the following: Jeff Sedloff – June Engineering Consultants Folsom Subdivision Site – Hillsborough County, Florida (BTC File #100-76) Environmental Assessment Report Page 2 of 7 • Candler fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (#7) • Tavares-Millhopper complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes (#53) Candler Fine Sand; 0 to 5 percent slopes (#7) is a nearly level to gently sloping, excessively drained upland soil mapping unit, which may include up to 18% of dissimilar soil types. Typically Candler fine sands have a surface layer of dark gray fine sand about 6 inches think. A seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 80 inches. Permeability is rapid and available water capacity is very low. The soil is suitable for citrus crops and moderately suitable for pasture or sand pine. Associated with its permeability, the soil is known for droughtiness and leaching of soil nutrients. Consequently, soil erosion, the instability of cut banks and groundwater contamination associated with seepage are recognized management concerns. Tavares-Millhopper complex; 0 to 5 percent slopes (#53) are nearly-level-to-gently-sloping, moderately-well drained soils found in low-lying areas of uplands and on low ridges of flatwoods. Generally, this soil unit is composed of about 63 percent Tavares soil and 26 percent Millhopper soils, although dissimilar soils may comprise up to 13 percent of these areas. Tavares soil surface is dark grayish brown fine sand to a depth of 6 inches supported by pale brown sand to a depth of about 32 inches. The surface layer of Millhopper soil is about 4 inches of dark gray fine sand over subsurface layers of brown fine sand to a depth of 9 inches and light yellowish brown fine sand to about 25 inches. Tavares soil has a seasonal high water table at a depth of 40 to 80 inches for more than 6 months, which recedes to a depth below 80 inches during extended dry periods. Millhopper soil has a seasonal high water table at a depth of 40 to 60 inches for 1 to 4 months per year, which recedes to 60 to 72 inches for 2 to 4 months. Tavares soils have rapid permeability while Millhopper soil permeability is rapid in the surface and subsurface layers and moderate in the subsoil. Available water capacity is very low and low for Tavares and Millhopper soils, respectively. The common land uses on these soils include pasture, home sites and urban development, although some areas have developed cultivated crops and citrus on these soils. The main management concerns associated with this mapping unit include droughtiness, leaching of soil nutrients, instability of cut banks and the potential for groundwater contamination. The Florida Association of Environmental Soil Scientists (FAESS) does not consider main components or inclusions from soil types associated with the subject site to be hydric. This information can be found in the Hydric Soils of Florida Handbook, Fourth Edition (March 2007). Jeff Sedloff – June Engineering Consultants Folsom Subdivision Site – Hillsborough County, Florida (BTC File #100-76) Environmental Assessment Report Page 3 of 7 LAND USE TYPES/VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES The Folsom Subdivision Site currently supports two (2) land use types/vegetative communities within the subject property boundaries (Figure 5). These land use types/vegetative communities were identified utilizing the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System, Level III (FLUCFCS, FDOT, January 2004). The upland land use types/vegetative communities within the subject property consists of Low Density Residential (110) and Improved Pasture (211). There are no wetlands/surface waters within the subject property boundaries. The following provides a brief description of the land use types/vegetative communities identified within the Folsom Subdivision Site. Uplands: 110 Residential, Low Density (approx. 0.65 acres) In the southern-central portion of the site, is a mobile home residence that is best classified as Residential, Low Density (110), per the FLUCFCS. Vegetative species identified within this area consists of bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum), live oak (Quercus virginiana), and muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia). 211 Improved Pastures (approx. 18.40 acres) The majority of the property is active and maintained pasturelands and this area is best classified as Improved Pastures (211), per the FLUCFCS. Vegetative species identified within this area consists of bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum), live oak (Quercus virginiana), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), water oak (Quercus nigra), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), slash pine (Pinus elliottii), camphortree (Cinnamomum camphora), guineagrass (Megathyrsus maximus), lantana (Lantana spp.), rattlebox (Crotalaria spp.), American pokeweed (Phytolacca decandra), yellow thistle (Cirsium horridulum), caesarweed (Urena lobata), muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), greenbriar (Smilax spp.), passionflower (Passiflora coccinea), beggar ticks (Bidens alba), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), climbing hempvine (Mikania scandens), balsam apple (Momordica balsamina), tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum), and dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium). Wetlands/Surface Waters: There were no wetland or surface water land use types/vegetative communities identified within the Folsom Subdivision Site property boundaries. Jeff Sedloff – June Engineering Consultants Folsom Subdivision Site – Hillsborough County, Florida (BTC File #100-76) Environmental Assessment Report Page 4 of 7 WILDLIFE AND PROTECTED SPECIES Using methodologies outlined in the Florida’s Fragile Wildlife (Wood, 2001); Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity Standard Methods for Mammals (Wilson, et al., 1996); and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s (FFWCC’s) Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines (April 2008 - revised May 2017); an assessment for “listed” floral and faunal species was conducted at the site. This assessment included both direct observations and indirect evidence, such as tracks, burrows, tree markings and vocalizations that indicated the presence of species observed. The assessment focused on species that are “listed” by the FFWCC’s Official Lists - Florida’s Endangered Species, Threatened Species and Species of Special Concern (May 2017) that have the potential to occur in Some County (see Table 1). The following is a list of those wildlife species identified during the evaluation of the site: Reptiles and Amphibians green anole (Anolis carolinensis) Cuban brown anole (Anolis sagrei) Birds Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata) Northern Mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) Northern Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis) Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus) Mammals eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) None of the above identified species are listed in the FFWCC’s Official Lists - Florida’s Endangered Species, Threatened Species and Species of Special Concern (May 2017). The following provides a brief description of particular wildlife species as they relate to the development of the site. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) State protected by F.A.C. 68A-16.002 and federally protected by both the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (1940) In August of 2007, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) removed the Bald Eagle from the list of federally endangered and threatened species. Additionally, the Bald Eagle was removed from FFWCC’s imperiled species list in April of 2008. Although the Bald Eagle is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act, it is still protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and FFWCC’s Bald Eagle rule (Florida Administrative Code 68A-16.002 Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). Jeff Sedloff – June Engineering Consultants Folsom Subdivision Site – Hillsborough County, Florida (BTC File #100-76) Environmental Assessment Report Page 5 of 7 In May of 2007, the USFWS issued the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. In April of 2008, the FFWCC adopted a new Bald Eagle Management Plan that was written to closely follow the federal guidelines. Under FFWCC’s new management plans, buffer zones are recommended based on the nature and magnitude of the project or activity. The recommended protective buffer zone is 660 feet or less from the nest tree, depending on what activities or structures are already near the nest. A FFWCC Eagle permit
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FLORIDA GOLDEN ASTER Chrysopsis Floridana
    FLORIDA GOLDEN ASTER Chrysopsis floridana Above: Photo of Florida Golden Aster flower cluster. Photo courtesy of Laurie Markham. Left: Photo of Florida Golden Aster plant. Photo courtesy of Laurie Markham. FAMILY: Asteraceae (Aster family) STATUS: Endangered (Federal Register, May 16, 1986) DESCRIPTION AND REPRODUCTION: Young plants of this perennial herb form rosettes with leaves that are covered with dense, white, short-wooly hairs. Upright stems that grow from the rosettes are 0.3-0.4 meters (1-1.5 feet) tall, with closely-spaced, obovate-elliptic, hairy leaves. The leaves are nearly as large at the top of the stem as at the bottom. The flower heads are arranged in a more or less flat-topped cluster. Each head is slightly over 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) in diameter. Both the central disc and the rays are yellow. This plant is short-lived, and reproduces entirely by seeds. Its seeds are apparently dispersed primarily by the wind. RANGE AND POPULATION LEVEL: Florida golden aster is currently known from Hardee, Hillsborough, Manatee and Pinellas Counties, Florida. 2004 surveys on Hillsborough County lands have discovered several new populations (Cox et al. 2004). Additional survey will be conducted in 2005 on additional Hillsborough and Manatee Counties land. Systematic surveys should be continued and De Soto and Sarasota Counties should be included in this search. Historic sites include Long Key (St. Petersburg Beach) in Pinellas County, and Bradenton Beach and Bradenton in Manatee County. HABITAT: The species grows in open, sunny areas. It occurs in sand pine-evergreen oak scrub vegetation on excessively-drained fine white sand.
    [Show full text]
  • Cocoa Beach Maritime Hammock Preserve Management Plan
    MANAGEMENT PLAN Cocoa Beach’s Maritime Hammock Preserve City of Cocoa Beach, Florida Florida Communities Trust Project No. 03 – 035 –FF3 Adopted March 18, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE I. Introduction ……………………………………………………………. 1 II. Purpose …………………………………………………………….……. 2 a. Future Uses ………….………………………………….…….…… 2 b. Management Objectives ………………………………………….... 2 c. Major Comprehensive Plan Directives ………………………..….... 2 III. Site Development and Improvement ………………………………… 3 a. Existing Physical Improvements ……….…………………………. 3 b. Proposed Physical Improvements…………………………………… 3 c. Wetland Buffer ………...………….………………………………… 4 d. Acknowledgment Sign …………………………………..………… 4 e. Parking ………………………….………………………………… 5 f. Stormwater Facilities …………….………………………………… 5 g. Hazard Mitigation ………………………………………………… 5 h. Permits ………………………….………………………………… 5 i. Easements, Concessions, and Leases …………………………..… 5 IV. Natural Resources ……………………………………………..……… 6 a. Natural Communities ………………………..……………………. 6 b. Listed Animal Species ………………………….…………….……. 7 c. Listed Plant Species …………………………..…………………... 8 d. Inventory of the Natural Communities ………………..………….... 10 e. Water Quality …………..………………………….…..…………... 10 f. Unique Geological Features ………………………………………. 10 g. Trail Network ………………………………….…..………..……... 10 h. Greenways ………………………………….…..……………..……. 11 i Adopted March 18, 2004 V. Resources Enhancement …………………………..…………………… 11 a. Upland Restoration ………………………..………………………. 11 b. Wetland Restoration ………………………….…………….………. 13 c. Invasive Exotic Plants …………………………..…………………... 13 d. Feral
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Golden Aster Chrysopsis (=Heterotheca) Floridana Small
    Florida Golden Aster Chrysopsis (=Heterotheca) floridana Small he Florida golden aster is a perennial herb in the Federal Status: Endangered (May 16, 1986) aster family with a distribution limited to a few Critical Habitat: None Designated Tcounties in west-central Florida. The Florida golden Florida Status: Endangered aster occurs in sand pine and oak scrub or in disturbed areas at the edges of scrub. Recovery Plan Status: Contribution (May 1999) This account represents South Floridas contribution to Geographic Coverage: South Florida the existing recovery plan for the Florida golden aster (FWS 1988). Figure 1. County distribution of the Florida golden aster. Description Chrysopsis floridana is a perennial herb with stems that are woody toward the base and non-woody above. The plants have basal rosettes (clusters of leaves at ground level) with leaves 4 to 10 cm long, 1.5 to 2.0 cm wide; the leaves of the rosette are densely short-wooly pubescent. The stem leaves are nearly the same size from the top to the bottom of the stem; they are obovate-elliptic, slightly clasping the stem, entire, and densely short-wooly pubescent. The flower heads are grouped into a more or less flat-topped cluster of 1 to 25 heads at the top of the stem. Each head is slightly over 2.5 cm in diameter. Both the central disc and the rays are golden yellow. C. floridana is distinguished from other members of its genus by its perennial habit, the woodiness of its stems, the wooliness and the shape of the stem and the leaves, and the way the flower heads are arranged in a flat-topped cluster (Semple 1981, Wunderlin et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Suncoast Grapevine
    www.ficus.usf.edu/orgs/suncoastwww.suncoastnps.org The Suncoast Grapevine Newsletter of the Suncoast Native Plant Society, Inc. Volume 28 Number 5 May 2011 Chrysopsis floridana Restoration Efforts: Bok Tower Gardens, a National Historic Landmark Presented by Cindy Campbell Wednesday, May 18 @ 7pm Hillsborough County Extension Service Ms. Cindy Campbell will be talking about the work her team at Bok Tower Gardens has done reintroducing one of the most interesting rare endemics that is found right here in central Florida, Chrysopsis floridana. This native plant is a beautiful aster with frosty white hairs on its foliage that gives it protection from the harsh conditions of the white sand scrubs it is found in. While working at Bok Tower Gardens , Cindy has learned very much about the growing characteristics of Chrysopsis floridana as well as many other species of endangered plants in Florida. Her team has pioneered many growing techniques and plant reestablishment techniques of rare plants. Her work will ensure that the population of these beautiful plants will continue to improve. Cindy organized efforts along with our Suncoast chapter and numerous other groups to plant over 1,000 Chrysopsis floridana plants at SWFWMD’s Southfork Tract in Manatee County. Later, our chapter participated in monitoring the condition of the restoration. Detailed data of health, failure rate, and size were recorded. This monitoring program is to continue for five years. Cindy is currently the rare plant curator at Bok Tower Gardens in Lake Wales. Previously, she has worked at the Disney Preserve and at The Nature Conservancy Preserve in Kentucky.
    [Show full text]
  • State and Federally Listed Species for Hillsborough County
    State and Federally Listed Species for Hillsborough County - Note: Only federally listed plant species are included; “=”means a.k.a.; “SA” means similarity of appearance Scientific Name Common Name State USFWS Habitats Used Amphibians Rana capito Gopher (=crawfish) frog Sp. Spec. Concern Longleaf Pine/Turkey Oak Hills, Sand Pine Scrub, Scrubby Flatwoods, Xeric Oak Hammock (uses ephemeral wetlands for breeding) Birds Aphelocoma coerulescens Florida scrub-jay Threatened Threatened Sand Pine Scrub and Scrubby Flatwoods Aramus guarauna Limpkin Sp. Spec. Concern Mangrove Swamp, Freshwater Marsh & Ponds, Cypress Swamp, Springs, Slough, Sawgrass Marsh, Ruderal (impoundments, canals, sugarcane, etc.) Athene cunicularia floridana Florida burrowing owl Sp. Spec. Concern N. & S. FL Flatwoods (dry prairie or grassland habitat), Ruderal (primarily pasture) Charadrius alexandrinus Southeastern snowy plover Threatened N. & S. FL Coastal Strand (west coast only) tenuirostris Charadrius melodus Piping plover Threatened Threatened N. & S. FL Coastal Stand, Nearshore Reef Egretta caerulea Little blue heron Sp. Spec. Concern N. & S. FL Coastal Strand, Wet Prairie or Slough, Freshwater Marsh & Ponds, Mangrove Swamps, Cypress Swamp, Sawgrass Marsh, Salt Marsh, Shrub Bog & Bay Swamp, Ruderal Egretta rufescens Reddish egret Sp. Spec. Concern Mangrove Swamp, N. & S. FL Coastal Strand, Salt Marsh Egretta thula Snowy egret Sp. Spec. Concern N. & S. FL Coastal Strand, Wet Prairie or Slough, Freshwater Marsh & Ponds, Mangrove Swamps, Cypress Swamp, Sawgrass Marsh, Salt Marsh, Shrub Bog & Bay Swamp, Ruderal Egretta tricolor Tricolored (=Louisiana) heron Sp. Spec. Concern N. & S. FL Coastal Strand, Wet Prairie or Slough, Freshwater Marsh & Ponds, Mangrove Swamps, Cypress Swamp, Sawgrass Marsh, Salt Marsh, Shrub Bog & Bay Swamp, Ruderal Eudocimus albus White ibis Sp.
    [Show full text]
  • PALM 31 3 Working.Indd
    Volume 31: Number 3 > 2014 The Quarterly Journal of the Florida Native Plant Society Palmetto Rare Plant Conservation at Bok Tower Gardens ● Yaupon Redeemed ● The Origin of Florida Scrub Plant Diversity Donna Bollenbach and Juliet Rynear A Collaboration of Passion, Purpose and Science Bok Tower Gardens Rare Plant Conservation Program “Today nearly 30 percent of the native fl ora in the United States is considered to be 1 of conservation concern. Without human intervention, many of these plants may be gone within our lifetime. Eighty percent of the at-risk species are closely related to plants with economic value somewhere in the world, and more than 50 percent are related to crop species...but it can be saved.” – Center for Plant Conservation Ask the average Florida citizen to name at least one endangered native animal in the state and they will likely mention the Florida manatee or the Florida panther. Ask the same person to name one endangered native plant and they give you a blank stare. Those of us working to conserve Florida’s unique plant species know this all 2 too well, and if the job isn’t diffi cult enough, a lack of funding and support for the conservation of land supporting imperiled plant communities makes it harder. Bok Tower Gardens Rare Plant Conservation Program is one of 39 botanical institutions throughout the United States that collaborate with the Center for Plant Conservation (CPC) to prevent the extinction of native plants in the United States. Created in 1984, CPC institutions house over 750 living specimens of the nation’s most endangered native plants, the largest living collection of rare plants in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Bill Baggs Cape Florida State Park
    Lake Manatee State Park Advisory Group Draft Unit Management Plan STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Division of Recreation and Parks March 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................1 PURPOSE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PARK ....................................... 1 Park Significance ................................................................................1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE PLAN..................................................... 2 MANAGEMENT PROGRAM OVERVIEW ................................................... 7 Management Authority and Responsibility .............................................. 7 Park Management Goals ...................................................................... 8 Management Coordination ................................................................... 8 Public Participation ..............................................................................8 Other Designations .............................................................................9 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMPONENT INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 11 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT..................................... 12 Natural Resources ............................................................................. 12 Topography .................................................................................. 12 Geology ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 14. Wildlife and Forest Communities 341
    chapteR 14. Wildlife and Forest Communities 341 Chapter 14. Wildlife and Forest communities Margaret Trani Griep and Beverly Collins1 key FindingS • Hotspot areas for plants of concern are Big Bend National Park; the Apalachicola area of the Southern Gulf Coast; • The South has 1,076 native terrestrial vertebrates: 179 Lake Wales Ridge and the area south of Lake Okeechobee amphibians, 525 birds, 176 mammals, and 196 reptiles. in Peninsular Florida; and coastal counties of North Species richness is highest in the Mid-South (856) and Carolina in the Atlantic Coastal Plain. The Appalachian- Coastal Plain (733), reflecting both the large area of these Cumberland highlands also contain plants identified by subregions and the diversity of habitats within them. States as species of concern. • The geography of species richness varies by taxa. • Species, including those of conservation concern, are Amphibians flourish in portions of the Piedmont and imperiled by habitat alteration, isolation, introduction of Appalachian-Cumberland highlands and across the Coastal invasive species, environmental pollutants, commercial Plain. Bird richness is highest along the coastal wetlands of development, human disturbance, and exploitation. the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, mammal richness Conditions predicted by the forecasts will magnify these is highest in the Mid-South and Appalachian-Cumberland stressors. Each species varies in its vulnerability to highlands, and reptile richness is highest across the forecasted threats, and these threats vary by subregion. Key southern portion of the region. areas of concern arise where hotspots of vulnerable species • The South has 142 terrestrial vertebrate species coincide with forecasted stressors. considered to be of conservation concern (e.g., global • There are 614 species that are presumed extirpated from conservation status rank of critically imperiled, imperiled, selected States in the South; 64 are terrestrial vertebrates or vulnerable), 77 of which are listed as threatened or and 550 are vascular plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Status Assessment Version 1.0
    Florida Golden Aster (Chrysopsis floridana) Species Status Assessment Version 1.0 Photo by Alafia River State Park July 2018 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4 Atlanta, GA Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Species Federal Status 3 2 SPECIES BIOLOGY 3 2.1 Species Description and Taxonomy 3 2.2 Life History and Demography 4 2.3 Habitat 6 2.4 Abundance and Distribution 8 2.4.1 Historical 8 2.4.2 Current 8 2.5 Genetics 10 3 SPECIES NEEDS FOR VIABILITY 11 3.1 Individual Level 11 3.2 Population Level 12 3.3 Species Level 12 4 INFLUENCES ON VIABILITY 13 4.1 Habitat Availability 14 4.2 Habitat Management 14 4.3 Introductions 15 4.4 Climate Change 16 5 CURRENT CONDITION 18 5.1 Delineating Populations 18 5.2 Current Resilience 18 5.2.1 Population Size 19 5.2.2 Habitat Protection 21 5.2.3 Habitat Area Available 22 5.2.3.1 Measuring Available Habitat 23 5.2.4 Classifying Resilience 27 5.3 Current Redundancy and Representation 32 ii 6 FUTURE CONDITION 34 6.1 Future Considerations 34 6.1.1 Habitat Quantity 35 6.1.2 Habitat Quality 35 6.1.2.1 Development Risk Assessments 38 6.2 Future Scenarios 44 6.2.1 Status Quo 44 6.2.2 Pessimistic 45 6.2.3 Targeted Conservation 45 6.2.4 Likelihood of Scenarios 49 6.3 Future Resilience 49 6.4 Future Redundancy and Representation 53 LITERATURE CITED 54 APPENDIX 57 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was prepared by Stephanie DeMay (Texas A&M Natural Resources Institute), Todd Mecklenborg (U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Golden Aster Scrub Nature Preserve Land Management and Land Use Plan
    GOLDEN ASTER SCRUB NATURE PRESERVE LAND MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE PLAN GOLDEN ASTER SCRUB NATURE PRESERVE LAND MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE PLAN 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 Location of the Golden Aster Scrub Nature Preserve The Golden Aster Scrub Nature Preserve is located in southern Hillsborough County, in Sections 1, 2, and 12, of Township 31 South, Range 19 East. The site lies adjacent to the western right-of-way of I-75 and north of Big Bend Road (SR 672) near Apollo Beach, Florida. The Bullfrog Creek Scrub Preserve lies south of the Golden Aster Scrub Nature Preserve, and the Kitchen Nature Preserve lies to the northwest. Electrical transmission corridors traverse the Preserve north to south, as well as along the southern tip. The CSX Transportation System, Inc. railroad forms the western boundary. The Preserve is accessed from a gate on the end of East Bay Road and consists of 1161.75 acres of land and 29.65 acres of open water. Surrounding land use includes low to medium density residential areas, agriculture, and institutional with the location of Eisenhower Junior High and East Bay High School on the southern boundary on the Preserve. A Hillsborough County maintenance unit is also found on the southern boundary. Figure 1 provides a location map of the Golden Aster Scrub Nature Preserve, as well as other public lands in the vicinity. Appendix A provides the legal description, lease agreement with the Conservation and Recreational Lands Program (CARL), easements, and other legal documents for the Preserve. 1.2 History and Objectives of the Preserve The Golden Aster Scrub Nature Preserve has been used for open cattle grazing for the last 70 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Suncoast Grapevine
    www.www.ficusficusficus.usf.edu/orgs/suncoastwww.suncoastnps.org.usf.edu/orgs/suncoast The Suncoast Grapevine Newsletter of the Suncoast Native Plant Society, Inc. Volume 26 Number 2 FEBRUARY 2009 The Rare Plant Conservation Program at Bok Tower Gardens Hillsborough County Extension Service February 18, 2009 at 7pm Presented by Juliet Rynear Most of you may know the 157-acre Historic Bok Sanctuary (HBS) for its garden walkways, dominant carillon tower and the panoramic hilltop view. Less well- known is its affiliation with the National Center for Plant Conservation (NCPC) a national consortium of 28 botanical gardens and arboreta dedicated to saving America’s endangered plants. The HBS collection is one of two NCPC affiliates in Florida; Fairchild Tropical Gardens in Miami is the other. The HBS collection includes plant and seed from many of Florida’s endangered plant populations. Our February guest speaker comes from HBS to provide an overview of the endangered species program and will then focus on one of the endangered plants that the program currently working on – Chrysopsis floridana, the Florida goldenaster. Hillsborough County has the biggest populations of Florida goldenaster in the state! Ms. Juliet Rynear, our February guest speaker, has a lifelong love of plants and our natural world. Before moving to Florida in June 2008, she was a member of both the Mississippi and Nevada chapters of The Nature Conservancy and Mississippi and Nevada chapters of the Native Plant Society. She received a Masters degree in Environmental Policy and Natural Resource Management and has a Certificate in Applied Plant Conservation – both from the University of Denver.
    [Show full text]
  • Conserving North America's Threatened Plants
    Conserving North America’s Threatened Plants Progress report on Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Conserving North America’s Threatened Plants Progress report on Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation By Andrea Kramer, Abby Hird, Kirsty Shaw, Michael Dosmann, and Ray Mims January 2011 Recommended ciTaTion: Kramer, A., A. Hird, K. Shaw, M. Dosmann, and R. Mims. 2011. Conserving North America’s Threatened Plants: Progress report on Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation . BoTanic Gardens ConservaTion InTernaTional U.S. Published by BoTanic Gardens ConservaTion InTernaTional U.S. 1000 Lake Cook Road Glencoe, IL 60022 USA www.bgci.org/usa Design: John Morgan, [email protected] Contents Acknowledgements . .3 Foreword . .4 Executive Summary . .5 Chapter 1. The North American Flora . .6 1.1 North America’s plant diversity . .7 1.2 Threats to North America’s plant diversity . .7 1.3 Conservation status and protection of North America’s plants . .8 1.3.1 Regional conservaTion sTaTus and naTional proTecTion . .9 1.3.2 Global conservaTion sTaTus and proTecTion . .10 1.4 Integrated plant conservation . .11 1.4.1 In situ conservaTion . .11 1.4.2 Ex situ collecTions and conservaTion applicaTions . .12 1.4.3 ParameTers of ex situ collecTions for conservaTion . .16 1.5 Global perspective and work on ex situ conservation . .18 1.5.1 Global STraTegy for PlanT ConservaTion, TargeT 8 . .18 Chapter 2. North American Collections Assessment . .19 2.1 Background . .19 2.2 Methodology . .19 2.2.1 Compiling lisTs of ThreaTened NorTh American Taxa .
    [Show full text]