PART III. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES IMPACTS QUESTION 12 - VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE See State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, F.S.) GOAL( 9); POLICY ( 7) GOAL (10); POLICIES ( 1),( 3),( 4),( 6) GOAL (16); POLICY ( 2) A. Identify the dominant species and other unusual or unique features of the plant communities on Map F. Identify and describe the amount of all plant communities that will be preserved in a natural state following development as shown on Map H. The land use types and vegetative communities within the boundaries of the site were reviewed in the field and classified utilizing the FLUCCS, Level III (FDOT, January 1999) (Map F). The boundaries of all wetlands and surface waters on the site were delineated in accordance with SWFWMD Chapter 62-340, F.A.C., and the ACOE pursuant to the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Manual) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plan Region (Version 2.0) (November 2010). The SWFWMD or ACOE have not reviewed the wetland delineations in the field. Map F2 depicts the approximate locations of all wetlands/surface waters and the vegetative cover and community types for all wetlands, surface waters and uplands within the project boundaries. The site currently supports seven different land use types/vegetative communities within its boundaries. There were no unusual or unique vegetative communities on the site. The following provides brief descriptions for each of the land use types/vegetative communities identified within the subject property boundaries: Uplands Cropland and Pastureland (210): The pastures were dominated by bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) with scattered occurrences of live oak (Quercus virginiana), American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), grape vine (Vitis sp.), winged sumac 21 (Rhus copallinum), blackberry (Rubus sp.), dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), cudweed (Pseudognaphalium sp.), Carolina cranesbill (Geranium carolinianum), yucca (Yucca sp.), pricklypear (Opuntia humifusa), and tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum). There was also evidence of remnant crops of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) and watermelon (Citrullus lanatus). Hardwood-Coniferous Mixed (434): The canopy and subcanopy taxa consisted of live oak, laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), water oak (Quercus nigra), longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), slash pine (Pinus elliottii), sand live oak (Quercus geminata), cabbage palm, turkey oak (Quercus laevis), scrub oak (Quercus inopina), and common persimmon (Diospyros virginiana). Herbaceous and shrub taxa included saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), blueberry (Vaccinium sp.), greenbrier (Smilax sp.), grape vine, American beautyberry, pawpaw (Asimina sp.), blackberry, bahiagrass, cudweed, Canada toadflax (Linaria canadensis), tropical soda apple, pawpaw (Asimina sp.) bluestem (Andropogon sp.), gallberry (Ilex glabra), staggerbush (Lyonia sp.), tarflower (Bejaria racemosa), blackroot (Pterocaulon pycnostachyum), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), elephantsfoot (Elephantopus sp.), common persimmon, and cottonweed (Froelichia floridana). Utilities (830): Vegetation was similar to the cropland and pastureland (210) with evidence of prior peanut crops. Wetlands and Surface Waters Reservoirs less than 10 acres (4 hectares) which are dominant features (534): Both surface water features were heavily used by cattle and contained no vegetation within the interior of the ponds. Surface water 2 located in the northwest corner of the site exhibited bahiagrass around the perimeter of the pond. Freshwater Marsh (641): Most of these areas were utilized by cattle and vegetation was disturbed. Species included duckweed (Lemna sp.), manyflower marshpennywort (Hydrocotyle umbellata), dotted smartweed (Polygonum punctatum), dock (Rumex sp.), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), common buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), southern watergrass (Luziola fluitans), spikerush (Eleocharis sp.), false reinorchid (Habenaria sp.), threadleaf arrowhead (Sagittaria filiformis), water spangles (Salvinia minima), maidencane (Panicum hemitomon), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), water-hyacinth (Eichhornia sp.), watershield (Brasenia schreberi), floating marshpennywort (Hydrocotyle ranunculoides), soft rush (Juncus effusus), and blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica var. sylvatica). Wet Prairie (643): Most of these areas were heavily utilized by cattle. Evidence of mowing in and around the systems was observed. Species included manyflower marshpennywort, dotted 22 smartweed, mild waterpepper (Polygonum hydropiperoides), mock bishopsweed (Ptilimnium capillaceum), southern watergrass, alligatorweed (Alternanthera philoxeroides), flatsedge (Cyperus sp.), creeping primrosewillow (Ludwigia repens), bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon), tropical soda apple, Nuttall’s thistle (Cirsium nuttallii), dogfennel, and cudweed. The edges of some of the systems contained live oak, sweetgum, cabbage palm, crabgrass (Digitaria sp.), and dead oaks in the weatland interior. The majority of the site is in improved pasture or row crops with lesser components of upland forests. The site will be mass-graded. Therefore, none of the existing land uses or vegetative communities will remain except for approximately eight acres around the existing bald eagle nest and approximately seven acres of wetlands. B. Discuss what survey methods were used to determine the absence or presence of state or federally listed wildlife and plants. (Sampling methodology should be agreed to by the regional planning council and other reviewing agencies at pre- application conference stage.) State actual sampling times and dates and discuss any factors that may have influenced the results of the sampling effort. Show on Map G the location of all transects, trap grids, or other sampling stations used to determine the on-site status of state or federally listed wildlife and plant resources. Prior to on-site reconnaissance, a list of state and federally listed fish, wildlife, and plants reported to occur in Marion County, Florida, was prepared along with a brief description of the preferred habitat for these species. Identification of vegetative cover types and wildlife surveys on the site were conducted during April 2016 and June 2016 to determine the occurrence or likelihood of occurrence for listed (protected) species. Species listed for protection under provisions of the ESA of 1973, 16 United States Code 1531- 1544, December 28, 1973, as amended 1976-1982, 1984, and 1988 and Florida rule [68A-27.0001 – 27.007, F.A.C. and reported to occur within Marion County, Florida, are represented in Table 12.1 . (Note: The FWC adopted new rules for listing imperiled fish and wildlife species effective on November 15, 2010 and amended October 9, 2013. Species previously classified by FWC as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Species of Special Concern (SSC) were approved for reclassification as Federally Endangered (FE), Federally Threatened (FT), State-designated Threatened (ST), or as SSC, a temporary category of protection for those species that needed additional data in order for FWC to determine whether they should be listed as ST or removed from the Florida list. Based on the regulatory changes to Chapter 68A-27 in 2010, FWC officially adopted the imperiled species management system and initiated preparation of the Draft Imperiled Species Management Plan (ISMP). The Draft ISMP is a strategic, comprehensive plan designed to conserve 57 fish and wildlife species over the next 10 years. The Draft ISMP includes supporting Draft Species Action Plans (SAPs) addressing individual species needs and Integrated 23 Conservation Strategies for multiple species and their shared habitats. The final Draft ISMP and SAPs were adopted by the FWC on November 16, 2016. The final adopted ISMP and SAPs have been incorporated herein. The likelihood of occurrence, listed within this table, is based on a comparison of known general habitat requirements of these species with the habitats found on or near the site, the quantity, quality, and adjacency of these habitats, as well as any observations or sign of these species during the field review. The likelihood of occurrence for listed species was rated as high, moderate, low, unlikely, or not applicable based on knowledge of a species’ habitat preference and site conditions. A likelihood of occurrence given as “unlikely” indicates that no, or very limited, suitable habitat for this species exists on the site, but the site is within the documented range of the species; “not applicable” indicates that the habitat for this species does not exist on or adjacent to the site and/or the site is not within the documented range of the species. Scientists conducted a 15% vehicular and pedestrian survey within all the habitat types on the site (Map G). A total of 63 transects were conducted over a five-day period (April 6, 7, 12, 19, and June 30, 2016). All state or federally listed fish or wildlife species observed (including sign) were documented. In addition, based on prior observations by scientists of a Florida scrub-jay adjacent to the site, a formal Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) survey in accordance with the USFWS 2007 survey protocol was conducted on the site (see Map G2). C. List all state or federally listed wildlife and plant resources that were observed on the site and show location on Map G. Given the plant communities on-site, list any additional state or federally listed wildlife and plant resources expected to occur