HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 Conservation Plan
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, SEBASTIAN AREA-WIDE
FLORIDA SCRUB-JAY HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
for the'
Issuance of an Inciderrtal 'Take Permit
Under Section 1 O(a)( 1 )(B) of the Endangered Species Act
to
IndiailRiver County. Board of County Commissioners and
City of Sebastian
for
Take of the Florida Scrub-Jay. (Aphelocoma coerulescens)
in
City of Sebastian and
Northern Indian River County, Florida
Preoared bY: ,
Smith Environmental Services
Attn: Lisa H. Smith
1 290 Pine island Road
Merritt Island, Florida 32953
(407) 455-2242
FINAL REPORT
MARCH 2000
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Illustrations
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 .1 . Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action
1.2 Government Regulations Pertaining to the Sebastian HCP
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/IMPACTS
2.1 Sebastian HCP Boundaries (HCP Plan Area)
2.2 Property Ownership Status of Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas
2.3 Description of the Proposed Action
2.4 Description of the Species Considered Under
the Sebastian HCP
2.4.1 Biological Overview of the Florida Scrub-Jay
3.0 HCP PLAN AREA BASELINE INFORMATION
3.1 FWS Consultation History and Existing Data
for Sebastian Highlands Scrub-Jay Habitat Lots
3.2 Sebastian HCP Plan Area - Population Status
and Habitat Utilization
3.3 South Brevard County Florida Scrub-Jay
Population Status
3.4 Documentation of the Occurrence of Federal
and State Protected Species Within the HCP Plan Area
3.5 Other Regulatory Laws Relevant to the HCP Plan Area
3.6 Sebastian HCP Plan Area Habitat Types and
Surrounding Land Use Descriptions
4.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
4.1 Determination of Acreage of Potential Scrub-Jay Habitat
to be Impacted, Preserved and Restored
4.1 .1 Methodology
4.1.2 Acreage of Privately-Owned Sebastian Highlands
Potential Scrub-Jay Habitat Lots
4.1.3 Acreage of Existing (Occupied) Scrub-Jay Habitat
on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
4.1.4 Acreage of Unoccupied, Restorable Scrub-Jay
Habitat on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
4.2 Estimated Amount or Extent of Take
4.3 Analysis of the Effect of the Take on the North
Indian River County/South Brevard County Metapopulation
Page
iv
1
3
5
8
8
13
14
14
15
27
27
39
43
44
45
46
51
51
51
63
63
64
64
65
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont,)
4.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT (cont.)
4.4 Alternatives Considered
4.4.1 Alternative 1: No Action Alternative
4.4.2 Alternative 2: Proposed Action - Issuance
of an ITP and Implementation of Sebastian HCP
4.4.3 Alternative 3: Issuance of the ITP and Acquisition
of the Unit 1 7 Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area
5.0 SEBASTIAN HCP OPERATING CONSERVATION PROGRAM
5.1 Habitat Management Considerations
5.2 Potential Effects of Habitat Restoration and Management
Treatments on Other Species of Conservation Concern
5.3 Sebastian HCP Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Restoration and
Management Program (HCP Management Program)
5.3.1 Identification of Land Manager and Prescribed
Burn Manager
5.3.2 Phase One - Habitat Restoration Activities
- Mechanical Treatments and Restoration Burning
5.3.2.1 Mechanical Treatments
5.3.2.2 Restoration Burning Treatments
5.3.2.3 Minimization Measures
5.3.3 Phase Two - Habitat Management Activities
5.3.4 Schedule for Implementation of Habitat
Restoration and Management Treatment Actions
5.4 Sebastian HCP Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Management
Monitoring Program (HCP Monitoring Program)
5.4. 1 Monitoring Parameters
5.4.1 .1 Habitat Quality Studies
5.4.1.2 Florida Scrub-Jay Territory Studies
5.4. 1 .3 Habitat Loss Within ITP Impact Area
5.4.2 Schedule for Monitoring Implementation Schedule
and Reporting
5.5 Unforeseen/Extraordinary Circumstances
5.6 Funding
Literature Cited
List of Preparers
ii
Page
68
68
70
72
75
77
81
81
83
84
84
87
94
95
95
96
97
97
99
99
99
100
101
102 .
111
II
i I
I
i I
I
I
I
I
I
I"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Documentation of 11/16/99 Indian River Board of County
Commissioners and 1/12/00 City of Sebastian City Council
Approval of Sebastian HCP and Authorization to Transmit to U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service
Documentation of Participation by School Board of Indian River
County, FL (12/14/99)
City of Sebastian - Amending Code of Ordinance Section 42-48,
Control of Open Burning (Ordinance No. 0-99-37 dated 12/01/99).
Appendix B: Relevant Government Agency Correspondence
Appendix C: The Institute for Regional Conservation -
Preliminary Vascular Plant Checklist
iii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
,I
,I
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
v
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Sebastian Area-Wide Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Conservation Plan (Sebastian
HCP) is a local government effort to resolve a long-standing conflict between the
conservation of the Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), federally listed as
threatened species, and residential development within Florida scrub-jay habitat
located in the City of Sebastian's 14,000:l: lot Sebastian Highlands platted
residential subdivision. The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
(IRC Board) and the City of Sebastian are initiating this conservation effort with
cooperation from the School Board of Indian River County (School Board). The IRC
Board and City of Sebastian will serve as the lead agencies for implementation of
the Sebastian HCP. The School Board will participate by allowing IRC to conduct
recommended conservation management actions on targeted School Board
properties.
The IRC Board and the City of Sebastian have agreed to participate as co-applicants,
hereafter referred to as "Applicants", in the implementation of the Sebastian HCP.
Documentation of IRC Board (excerpts of minutes from 11/16/00 IRC Board meeting)
and City of Sebastian City Council (Resolution No. R-00-05 dated 1/12/00) action
authorizing this inter-governmental partnership and the transmittal of this Sebastian
HCP to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is provided in Appendix A. The
School Board agreed to serve as a cooperating entity. pursuant to Resolution No.
2000-05 dated December 14, 1 999 (see Attachment A). This resolution establishes
1 2:t acres of scrub habitat at Pelican Island Elementary School as an outdoor
environmental classroom and allows IRC to manage this property for conservation of
scrub habitat and Florida scrub-jays.
The Applicants are seeking an incidental take permit (ITP) from FWS pursuant to
section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). The
Applicants are requesting that the ITP authorize, for a period of 30 years, the take of
the threatened Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) incidental to residential
home construction within 317 one-quarter acre Sebastian Highlands lots
(79.3:t acres) that are currently recorded at the City of Sebastian's Building
Department pursuant to FWS designation as potentially occupied by Florida scrub-
jays.
The Applicants recognize that authorized encroachment of residential development
within the 3.1 7 Sebastian Highlands lots presently subject to FWS regulation, as
residential build-out occurs, will likely result in the expansion and/or shifting of
Florida scrub-jay territories into new, although poorer quality, habitat areas of the
Sebastian Highlands subdivision. If these newly occupied platted residential areas
were not considered under this Sebastian HCP, then they would be individually
subject to section 9 of the ESA prohibitions. To ensure that the ITP provides
sufficient regulatory coverage for lot owners who do not currently have scrub-jays
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
occupying their lands but who may in the future, the Applicants are seeking
coverage for the entire platted residential area within Sebastian Highlands.
As a result of participation either directly or indirectly in the Sebastian HCP, the
City of Sebastian and School Board also foresees the possibility of future
development impacts on scrub-jays on an 88.1 :t acre commercial parcel located on
City of Sebastian-owned Sebastian Airport and on a 4::l: acre parcel located along
the southern boundary of the Pelican Island Elementary School grounds. These
parcels do not currently support scrub-jays and are not suitable for use by scrub-
jays at this time, however habitat management actions directed by this Sebastian
HCP to enhance the dispersal potential of scrub-jays through these mesic habitats
could result in permanent or seasonal use of these parcels at some point in the
future. Therefore, the Applicant requests that the ITP address the potential for
take of Florida scrub-jays incidental to future commercial and school development
on said parcels.
The Sebastian HCP proposes a combination of compensatory mitigation measures
for compliance with the conservation requirements of section 1 O(a) (2) of the ESA.
These mitigation measures include:
· Conservation, restoration and management, in perpetuity, of optimal Florida
scrub-jay habitat conditions within 324:t acres of potential scrub jay habitat to
support additional scrub-jay families and within 6.5::l: acres of mesic flatwoods
to create a 100' wide dispersal corridor at the Sebastian Airport to facilitate
movement between scrub-jays subpopulations. This perpetual corridor adjoins
and runs the length of the northern runway. These total combined 330.5:t
acres are referred to herein as the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas and
are comprised of:
280::l: aces of potential scrub-jay habitat on lands acquired by Indian
River County under the County Environmental Lands Program (the
North Sebastian Conservation Area, the Wabasso Scrub Conservation
Area, and the Sebastian Highlands Conservation Area)
32::l: acres of occupied scrub-jay habitat in the northwest corner of
the Sebastian Airport property, plus the 100 foot wide (6.5::l: acre)
"perpetual corridor" buffer along the northern runway
12::l: acres of occupied scrub-jay habitat on the Pelican Island
Elementary School campus currently used and managed for outdoor
environmental education programs.
· Enhancement of scrub-jay dispersal opportunities on the Sebastian Airport by:
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.) conservation and management of an existing 20':t wide hedgerow located
between the municipal golf course and the southern runway, in perpetuity, to
create a low vegetative structure (~ six (6) feet high) and 2.) provision for
interim management of an open landscape structure on an 88.1:t acre
commercially zoned parcel on Sebastian Airport adjoining the subject 100' wide
perpetual corridor. This provides for a total 94.6:t acre dispersal corridor at
Sebastian Airport prior to the City of Sebastian's commercial development of
said parcel.
The FWS and Applicants agreed that future ingress/egress into the 88.1 :t acre
commercial parcel on Sebastian Airport would include a 40' easement along the
extreme western boundary to allow for expansion of Roseland Road and an 80'
easement along the northern property boundary extending east from Roseland
Road to the commercial development site.
· Elimination of the multiple negative effects potentially resulting from habitat
fragmentation by formalizing the City of Sebastian's abandonment of plans to
extend Gibson Street (130 Street) through the North Sebastian Conservation
Area core scrub habitat areas.
The FWS and the Applicants agreed that use of the "habitat-based approach" for
development of the Sebastian HCP would provide the greatest benefits to the
Applicants, the Sebastian Highlands private residential lot owners, and the North
Indian River/South Brevard County Florida scrub-jay metapopulation, of which the
affected Sebastian Florida scrub-jay subpopulations are a part.
The Sebastian HCP will focus on restoring and managing, in the long-term, the oak
scrub, scrubby flatwood, and mesic matrix habitat types occurring within the Scrub-
Jay Habitat Compensation Areas to optimize habitat conditions for use by scrub-jays.
Use of the habitat-based approach permits the Applicants to assess the
demographic impacts of habitat destruction and habitat protection and management
from a landscape or ecosystem perspective. It also serves to protect the broad
range of native species associated with the Atlantic Coastal Ridge scrub ecosystem
under the terms of the HCP and provides greater flexibility to the Applicants in
dealing with future changed circumstances.
1 .1 . Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action
The purpose of the Sebastian HCP is to:
a. Provide for greater regulatory certainty to the Applicants and private
residential lot owners within the platted residential subdivision of
Sebastian Highlands in meeting the fast-growing social and economic
needs of this residential community.
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I:
I.
I
I
1
1
1
I
This will be achieved by including gll of the platted residential lots
within the Sebastian Highlands subdivision into the Sebastian HCP
Plan Area for consideration of changes that are reasonably foreseen to
potentially affect the functioning HCP. Using the habitat-based
approach, the Sebastian HCP addresses the stochastic nature of
Florida scrub-jay territories in response to changing demographic and
environmental conditions.
b. Protect the broad range of native species characteristic of the Atlantic
Coastal Ridge scrub ecosystem.
The beneficial attributes of this rare and vanishing ecosystem (Meyers
1 990) will be protected by implementing specific habitat restoration
and management actions to return the combined 330.5:t: acre Scrub-
Jay Habitat Compensation Areas to conditions representative of the
historical landscape and thereby optimal for native species of
conservation concern adapted to this fire-dependent, open landscape.
For purposes of this HCP, the Florida scrub-jay will function as the
indicator species to set habitat management goals within the Scrub-
Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
c. Enhance the recovery potential of the North Indian River County/South
Brevard County metapopulation, the fourth largest Florida scrub-jay
metapopulation and most important metapopulation for species
recovery along the Florida's Atlantic Coast (Breininger and Oddy
1998), by increasing the population persistence probability of the
Sebastian scrub-jay subpopulations.
This will be accomplished by restoring and maintaining optimal scrub-
jay habitat conditions within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas, inclusive of the mesic flatwood dispersal corridors to be
maintained on the Sebastian Airport properties. These corridors, as
described above, will function to reduce the negative effects of habitat
fragmentation by providing a vital open landscape linkage between the
Sebastian scrub-jay subpopulations and the St. Sebastian River Buffer
Reserve/South Brevard County core scrub-jay population. Thes.e
dispersal corridors will also function to benefit other species of
conservation concern moving through this area.
Habitat loss and fragmentation, and the degradation of habitat quality as a result of
fire exclusion, are the primary factors which endanger the long-term persistence of
the Florida scrub-jay population occupying the Atlantic Coast Subregion {Breininger et
al. 1996a; Stith et al. 1996; Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a; Swain et al. 1995; Breininger
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
and Oddy 1998). The Sebastian HCP is also designed to address these factors which
currently threaten the persistence of the Sebastian Florida scrub-jay subpopulations.
The FWS recognized, as early as 1991, that regulation of occupied scrub-jay habitat
located within the 14,000:t platted one-quarter acre residential lots of the Sebastian
Highlands subdivision on an individual lot-by-Iot basis results in increased
fragmentation and degradation of suitable scrub-jay habitat' in this area due to small-
scale mitigation resolution and absence of large-scale habitat management. In
addition, this regulatory approach significantly encumbers the land use of multiple
private lot owners by requiring procurement of individual HCPs prior to residential
development.
Remnant Atlantic Coastal scrub habitat remains in the Sebastian Highlands
subdivision in severely fragmented patches within a highly developed suburban
residential landscape matrix. The adverse influences of the expansive urbanization,
including habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, and increased vulnerability to predation,
on the demographic success of the Florida scrub-jay families persisting in the
Sebastian Highlands subdivision are emphasized by the severe scrub-jay population
decline documented in this area. Demographic studies of colorbanded scrub-jays in
known territories conducted within the incorporated limits of the City of Sebastian,
comprised primarily of the Sebastian Highlands residential subdivision, during the
seven year period, 1991 to 1998, documented a 54% decline from 35 breeding pairs
to 16 breeding pairs (Toland unpubl. data).
Implementation of a functioning HCP that directs immediate and intensive habitat
restoration and management of the remaining Atlantic Coastal scrub habitat
patches is needed not only to ameliorate the severe Florida scrub-jay population
decline, but also to relieve the regulatory burden from residential lot owners
desiring to develop their properties.
1.2. Government Regulations Pertaining to the Sebastian HCP
The Florida scrub-jay was federally listed as a threatened species on June 3, 1987.
This Federal listing granted protection to the Florida scrub-jay in accordance with
Section 4(d) and 9 of the ESA (16 USC 1531 -1543), and by regulations promulgated
thereunder (50 CFR Part 17), which prohibit the "take" of a federally listed species.
The Secretary of the Interior alld the FWS are primarily responsible for administratiop
of the ESA. .
"Take" is defined to mean harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct (Section 3(8) of the
ESA). IIHarm" and "harass" have been further defined in FWS regulations 50 CFR
17.3. "Harm" is interpreted to include significant habitat modification or degradation
which results in death or injury to listed species to such an extent as to significantly
disrupt normal behavioral patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding,
5
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
feeding or sheltering. "Harass" is defined as an intentional or negligent act or
omission which creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife by annoying it to such an
extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns which include, but are not
limited to, breeding, feeding or sheltering. Therefore, any activity as described above,
may constitute a violation of Section 9 of the ESA. The Section 9 prohibitions against
"take" apply to actions conducted by ".. .any person subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States..". The term "person" was further interpreted in a 1988 amendment to
the ESA to include actions carried out by states, counties and municipalities. This
includes the issuance of land clearing and development permits by local governments,
such as the City of Sebastian.
The ESA provides two regulatory methods to the "person" who wishes to conduct
development activities on land containing federally listed species. The regulatory
method that is used is based on whether the project is a Federal activity or a non-
Federal activity. Federal activities include, but are not limited to, the issuance of
Federal permits, authorization, or funding. In either case, the permitted "take" of a
listed species is referred to as an "incidental take". Incidental take is defined as any
take of a listed species that results from, but is not the purpose of, carryin9 out an
otherwise lawful activity (Section 1 0(a)(1 )(8), ESA).
The first method for procurement of an "incidental take" authorization is for Federal
activities. This is accomplished through Section 7 of the ESA, Interagency
Cooperation, by issuance of an "incidental take statement" from the FWS. Section
7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that each Federal agency, in consultation with the FWS,
insure that any action it authorizes, funds or carries out, is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of habitat determined to be critical to such species.
The second method, which addresses non-Federal activities such as the private
development concerns addressed herein, is the issuance of an "incidental take" permit
from the FWS in accordance with Section 1 0(a)(1 )(8) of the ESA. This method
requires that the applicant submit a conservation plan, referred to as a Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP). The goal of the HCP program is to ensure that the effects of
the authorized incidental take will be adequately minimized and mitigated to the
maximum extent practicable (FWS and National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS]
1996). The Congressional intent of the HCP program was to institute "... a process
that, at its best, would integrate non-Federal development and land use activities with
conservation. goals, resolve conflicts between endangered species protection ana
economic activities on non-Federal lands, and create a climate of partnership and
cooperation" (FWS and NMFS 1996). The Sebastian HCP, as presented herein, is
designed to comply with the Congressional intent of the HCP program.
The Florida scrub-jay is also protected in accordance with the Wildlife Code of the
State of Florida (Chapter 39, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)), administered by
the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), formerly the Florida
6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I.
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC), where it is listed as a
threatened species. The State of Florida, in Chapter 39, F.A.C., defines take
similarly to the ESA, except that protection of occupied habitat is not specifically
included in the State's definition of "take". The FWC will be requested to provide
comment to the Sebastian HCP as part of the public review process.
In accordance with Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the ESA, this document assesses the
effects of the proposed take on the Florida scrub-jay population and provides
conservation strategies that serve to minimize and mitigate these potential adverse
effects.
7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/IMPACTS
2.1. Sebastian HCP Boundaries (HCP Plan Area)
The Sebastian Highlands subdivision is located in the northernmost part of Indian
River County, Florida, within the incorporated limits of the City of Sebastian. Figure
1 provides a Vicinity Map showing the location of the City of Sebastian and the
expansive Sebastian Highlands subdivision. Sebastian Highlands is an active
14,000:f: lot residential subdivision platted in the 1950's by General Development
Corporation (GDC), currently known as Atlantic Gulf Communities (AGC). The City
of Sebastian experienced one of the highest rates of growth, 237%-337%, in the
State of Florida between 1980 and 1990 (Fernald et a/. 1992). A rapid rate of
growth continues in this municipality.
The Sebastian HCP ITP impact area (ITP impact area) is defined by all platted
residential lots located within the Sebastian Highlands subdivision. The ITP impact
area is inclusive of the 317 one-quarter acre Sebastian Highlands lots (79.3:f: acres)
currently recorded at the City of Sebastian's building department as designated by
the FWS as potentially occupied by Florida scrub-jays. As a result of habitat
enhancement actions to be implemented by the Applicants under this Sebastian
HCP, the ITP impact area also includes the possibility of a future take of scrub-jays
on the 88.1:f: acre Sebastian Airport commercial property owned by the City of
Sebastian and on four (4) acres located along the southern boundary of the Pelican
Island Elementary SctlOol grounds owned by the School Board. It is important to
reiterate that the subject total 92:f: acres is currently not used by and is unsuitable
for use by Florida scrub-jays.
The ITP impact area and the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, as described
below, define the project boundaries of the Sebastian HCP (HCP Plan Area). In
accordance with the regulatory criteria set forth under section 10(a}(2}(A), a
qualitative analysis of the potential adverse impacts of the proposed taking on the
North Indian River/South Brevard County Florida scrub-jay metapopulation, of which
the Sebastian Florida scrub-jay subpopulations are a part is presented herein. Steps
to be taken by the Applicants to minimize and mitigate such impacts are also
covered under this HCP.
The combined 330.5:f: acre Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are comprise,d
of 324:f: acres of Florida scrub-jay potential habitat types (oak scrub, scrubby
flatwoods, and mesic matrix habitat types), both occupied and unoccupied by
scrub-jays, and the 6.5:t acre mesic flatwood Sebastian Airport dispersal corridor. The
Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are located on the following publicly-owned
lands: 1.) the 406:f: acre North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area, 2.) the 38.5:f:
acre Sebastian Airport properties, 3.) the 10:1: acre Sebastian Highlands Scrub
Conservation Area (34 Lots in Unit 17), 4.} the 11.9:t acre Pelican Island
Elementary School scrub (located in Unit 17), and 5.) the 111:1: acre Wabasso
8
r_---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
Q~~(:r1 Ji~::,
1'-,' ,", -._ 'J..., \
~:~J. ':~~"4 _I, _ '. J:"F-~:.' i
.. ....... 1 '-_".I.:,;. t,....L...J
FIGURE
1
VICINITY MAP
City of Sebastian I Sebastian Highlands
SOURCE: FLORIDA ATlAS AND GAZETTEER DELORME MAPPING COMPANY 1989
9
N
I~--
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Scrub Conservation Area. Total acreage of public lands within these conservation
properties is 577.4:!: acres, of which 324:t acres support scrub that is occupied or
through restoration can be colonized by scrub-jays. The 6.5:!: acres of mesic
flatwoods to be managed at Sebastian Airport will provide a vital corridor for
dispersing scrub-jays.
As discussed in Section 4.1.3 below, the 330.5:!: acre Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas does not include the 34.6:t acre portion of the Wabasso
Scrub Conservation Area that was previously used by Indian River County as
compensatory mitigation for the take of one (1) Florida scrub-jay territory incidental
to the construction of the County Road 512 improvements project (FWS Log No. 4-
1-96-432). .
Figure 2 provides an overlay, on an 1994 high resolution orthophoto quad (OOQ),
of the location of the 31 7 FWS designated potential scrub-jay habitat lots to be
impacted in the Sebastian Highlands as part of the overall ITP impact area and the
proposed Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas. This aerial display clearly reveals
the expansive suburban nature of Sebastian Highlands subdivision and the severe
habitat fragmentation that presently characterizes the Sebastian HCP Plan Area.
An important fact that must be considered in determining the sufficiency of the
proposed Sebastian HCP conservation initiative in meeting the regulatory
requirements of section 10(a)(2)(A) of the ESA is that the proposed Scrub-Jay
Habitat Compensation Areas represent the largest, most contiguous, and the best
quality scrub-jay habitat parcels remaining in the HCP Plan Area. Some residential
lots to be impacted in Unit 17 of Sebastian Highlands under this HCP are
recognized to contain high quality scrub habitat; however, as clearly depicted on
Figure 2, the remaining scrub is highly fragmented by developed residential lots and
roads. In addition, the application of prescribed fire within the one-quarter acre lots,
to manage optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions in the long-term, is not practicable
within this existing high density residential landscape.
Due to the fragmented landscape conditions presently characterizing the HCP Plan
Area, the ability of the Applicants to "design" a scrub sanctuary that considers the
biological criteria set forth by Fitzpatrick et al. (1 994a) for development of a
functioning Florida scrub-jay reserve (e.g. considerations of connectivity,
geographic distribution, habitat quality, management potential, etc.,) was not an
option. However, the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas currently owned b"y
Indian River County: the North Sebastian Conservation Area, Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area, and Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area (Unit 17 - 34
lots), were each acquired by this local government at the recommendation of the
FWS based on the 1 996 scrub-jay core habitat reserve design developed by this
Federal agency (Toland 1996). The referenced properties were designated by the
1 996 FWS reserve design as core habitat conservation areas essential to the long-
10
r---
I
I
I
,
II
I
I
I
I
I,
I,
I
I:
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
term persistence of Sebastian scrub-jay subpopulations (Toland 1996) (see discussion
in Section 3.1 below).
Based on a summer/fall 1998 survey conducted in support of this HCP, the
Sebastian Florida scrub-jay population was determined to consist of two (2)
subpopulations, referenced herein as the north sub population and the south
subpopulation. These subpopulations were defined using criteria set forth in
Fitzpatrick et al. (1994a) and Stith et al. (1996) to describe the spatial structure of
Florida scrub-jay populations using data on geographic distribution and natal
dispersal distances. "Subpopulations" are separated by gaps of 2.2 miles (3.5 km).
This distance represents the maximum dispersal distance for 80% of all dispersals
at Archbold Biological Station. The south subpopulation is comprised of a total of
9, and potentially, 10 scrub-jay families. These southern families are primarily
located in Units 10 and 17 of the Sebastian Highlands subdivision (seven (7)
families), and the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area two (2), possibly three (3),
families). The north subpopulation consists of a total of four (4) scrub-jay families,
three (3) families in the North Sebastian Conservation Area and one (1) family
within the extreme western portion of the Sebastian Airport properties covered
under this HCP (Carroll and Associates 1997). These 13 to 14 scrub-jay families
comprise the Sebastian HCP study population (study population). It should be noted
that an additional five (5) scrub-jay families are documented to occupy.habitat on
and adjoining the Sebastian Golf Course and the Sebastian Elementary School
properties (Toland unpubl. data). These properties are not included within the
Sebastian HCP Plan Area. These families are part of the north subpopulation and
should greatly benefit from habitat conservation actions proposed under this
Sebastian HCP.
The study population is part of the fourth most important metapopulation of the
species (study metapopulation) (Breininger and Oddy 1998). Stith et al. (1996)
described "metapopulations" as populations that are separated by 7.5 miles (12
km), representing the maximum dispersal distance of more than 99% of all
dispersals at Archbold. Most of this fourth largest metapopulation occurs in south
Brevard County, although at least 12 pairs occur on the St. Sebastian River State
Buffer ReseNe (SBR) and on the adjoining Carson Platt Estate Property located in
Indian River County (Breininger and Oddy 1998). The Carson Platt Estate Property
will be added to the SBR in the immediate future. The families on Carson Platt have
never been surveyed and scrLlb-jay sUNeys on the Coraci section of the SBR hav.e
only recently. been initiated (Breininger pers comm.). These pairs do not appear on
the statewide sUNey because of previous access permission problems (Breininger
pers comm.). Observations of historical and recent aerial photography indicate that
with extensive restoration these areas could support dozens of Florida scrub-jay
pairs (Breininger pers comm.). If all public lands proposed or acquired are restored,
the total size of this regionally important metapopulation could approach 140 pairs
(Breininger and Oddy 1998).
12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
conditions along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge ecosystem in North Indian River County
are consistent with the habitat requirements of other native species that use this
unique ecosystem (Schmalzer et al. 1994, 1999; references in Breininger and Oddy
1998; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a).
Studies conducted by the FWS in support of the South Florida Multi-Species Recovery
Plan (USFWS 1999, USFWS unpubl. data) determined that federally listed plant
species do not occur within the Sebastian HCP Plan Area. Therefore, federally listed
plants are not addressed under this HCP.
2.4.1 Biological Overview of the Florida Scrub-Jay
Descriotion
The Florida scrub-jay is a 2.5 to 3-ounce, 12-inch-long, blue and gray crestless jay
that is endemic to peninsular Florida (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). It is the
only bird species that is endemic to peninsular Florida (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). In
the adult plumage, a necklace of blue feathers separates the whiter throat from the
gray underparts and a white superciliary line or eyebrow often blends into a whitish
forehead. The back is gray and the tail is long and loose in appearance (Fernald
and Toland 1991). Juvenile scrub-jays less than about five (5) months of age can
be identified by their dusky brown head and neck and shorter tail (Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1984). In late summer and early fall, immature scrub-jays undergo a
partial molt of body feathers that renders them indistinguishable from adults in the
field (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). Adult male and female Florida scrub-jays
are not distinguishable by plumage, but are differentiated by a distinct "hiccup" call
vocalized only by females (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1986).
Florida scrub-jays are generally associated with Florida's unique scrub habitat, a
fire-maintained ecosystem dominated by evergreen oaks (Quercus spp.) typically
occurring on the sandy well-drained soils of relict coastal and inland dune systems
geographically unique to peninsular Florida (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984;
Myers 1990; Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Fernald and Toland 1991). The restriction of
Florida's oak scrub communities to well-drained sandy soils results in a habitat type
that naturally occurs as patches of scrub oak within a matrix of mesic shrub
communities on poorly-drained soils (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984, 1991;
Myers 1990; Bergen 1994; Breininger et al. 1995, 1996b; Breininger and Oddy
1 998). The occurrence of scrub on high, dry lands has precipitated the wide-spread
loss of this geographically limited habitat type to commercial/residential development
and to agricultural conversion (FNAI 1990; Fernald 1989; Fitzpatrick et al. 1991).
Due to this wide-spread loss of Florida's scrub habitat, FNAI (1 990) has ranked this
natural community as imperiled, both globally and within the State of Florida.
In response to the extreme environmental conditions and limited spatial extent of the
scrub natural community, the Florida scrub-jay has evolved into a habitat specialist
15
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
that has adapted by developing a unique social system that includes permanent
monogamy, year-round territoriality, cooperative breeding, an intrafamilial dominance
hierarchy, delayed dispersal, food caching, and an exceptional sentinel system
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1977; Stallcup and Woolfenden 1978; Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1984). The Florida scrub-jay is non-migratory and occupies permanent
year-round territories averaging 22.5 acres in size (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984;
Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Fitzpatrick et al. 1 994a). This species is one of the few
cooperative breeding birds in the Eastern United States, whereby surviving fledgling
scrub-jays usually remain with the breeding pair in their natal territory as "helpers,"
forming a closely-knit, cooperative family group (Stallcup and Woolfenden 1978;
Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). Group size ranges from two (2) to eight (8) birds,
but pre-breeding families average 2.8 individuals (usually a pair with from 0 to 2
helpers) (Fitzpatrick et al. 1 994a). Helpers participate in scanning for predators,
territorial defense against neighboring scrub-jay groups, predator-mobbing, and the
feeding of both nestlings and fledglings (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984).
Distribution
Florida scrub-jays were historically distributed throughout the Florida peninsula in
suitable habitat in 39 of the 40 counties south of, and including, Levy, Gilchrist,
Alachua, Clay, and Duval (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). The only county on the
peninsula that historically lacked scrub-jays was Monroe (Fitzpatrick et al. 1 994a).
Currently, the much-reduced range of the Florida scrub-jay extends from Flagler to
Palm Beach counties on the Atlantic Coast (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). On the Gulf
Coast, scrub-jays persist in small and distantly isolated populations from Levy south
to Collier counties (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). In interior Florida, this species persists
mainly on federal properties in Putnam and Marion counties south to Polk,
Highlands, and Glades counties (Fitzpatrick et al. 1 994a).
The present day Florida scrub-jay population is distributed within five (5)
"Subregions", with well over half of the State's remaining jays occurring in three
(3) core populations with at least 400 breeding pairs each (Fitzpatrick et al.
1 994a). These core population centers are associated with the Atlantic Coastal
Ridge (Merritt IslandlCape Canaveral), the Mount Dora Ridge (Ocala National
Forest), and the Lake Wales Ridge and associated ridges. These extensive scrub
ridges constitute major Subregions within the overall distribution of Florida scrub-
jay: the Atlantic Coast Subregion, the Ocala Subregion, and the Lake Wales Ridg.e
Subregion (Fitzpatrick et al. 1 994a). Soil maps indicate that even prior to habitat
modification by humans, these three (3) major Subregions were separated from one
another by habitat types that were mostly unsuitable for use by scrub-jays
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). Today, these gaps have expanded due to encroaching
citrus groves and burgeoning residential developments (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a,
1 994b).
16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I;
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
The remaining two (2) Subregions are the Northern Gulf Coast Subregion and the
Southern Gulf Coast Subregion (Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a). Historical records of
Florida scrub-jay sightings and the distribution of sandy soils indicate that the Gulf
Coast populations extending from Levy County south to Lee County originally
comprised a fourth major contiguous population of scrub-jays (Fitzpatrick et at.
1994a). However, due to the extensive loss of habitat along the Gulf Coast, this
once contiguous population has been functionally separated into the two (2)
Subregions defined above (Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a).
Habitat Suitabilitv
The most abundant and conspicuous plant indicators of scrub habitats are four (4)
species of shrubby, stunted, sclerophyllous-Ieaved oaks: Quercus geminata, Q.
chapmani/~ Q. myrtifo/ia, and Q. inopina (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Myers
1990; Schmalzer and Hinkle 1 992; Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a). Most scrub plants are
endemic to Florida, and are adapted to nutrient-poor soils, periodic drought,
seasonally high rainfall, and frequent fires (Abrahamson 1984; Fitzpatrick et at.
1 994a).
Optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat (Fitzpatrick et at. 1991; Breininger 1992; Breininger
et at. 1995, 1996b) occurs as patches of oak scrub (focal habitat), embedded within
a low and open mesic shrub landscape (matrix habitats) (Breininger et at. 1996b).
Optimal oak scrub focal habitat exhibits the following characteristics: 1.) greater than
50% of the shrub layer comprised of scrub oaks (Quercus spp.), 2.) 10%-30% of the
area comprised of open space (bare sand or sparse herbaceous vegetation); 3.) 0% to
15% pine canopy cover; 4.) a shrub height of 3.9 to 5.6' (1.2 to 1.7 m) without
patches of tall scrub 5.6' (1. 7m) comprising areas larger than 1 acre (0.4 ha); and 5.)
> 328' (100m) from a forest (Breininger et at. 1995, 1 996b). A forest is defined as
an area exhibiting a canopy closure of > 65% (Breininger et at. 1995, 1996b). The
essential elements of optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat are: the presence of scrub
oaks, numerous patchy open spaces, an open pine canopy, and low shrub landscape
structure.
Native matrix habitats, principally scrubby and mesic pine flatwoods, and swale and
depression marshes, are important components of optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat
landscapes (Breininger et at. 1995, 1996b). These native matrix habitats provide prey
species for Florida scrub-jays and habitat for other species of conservation conce~n
(Breininger et at. 1995, 1996b). The high flammability of the native matrix habitats
often serves to spread fire into the fire-resistant oak scrub habitats (Breininger et at.
1995, 1996b). The matrix habitats also provide habitat to Florida scrub-jays during
periods of habitat degradation of the preferred oak scrub habitat (Breininger and Oddy
1998) .
Long-term studies at Kennedy Sp,ace Center (KSC), located on Merritt Island, Brevard
County, Florida, found that scrUb-jays occupy a broad range of habitat conditions,
17
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
Ii
11
I
I
I
I,
I
I,
I
I
I
including areas that are marginal for them (Schmalzer et al. 1994). However,
demographic success studies at KSC suggest that mortality exceeds reproductive
success in areas on KSC that do not exhibit optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions, as
described by Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick (1984), Fitzpatrick et al. (1991), and
Breininger 1992 (Schmalzer et al. 1994).
The open canopy and low shrub community structure of optimal scrub-jay habitat
landscapes enhance habitat defendability as it provides the perched scrub-jay with a
full view of its territory and an unobstructed flight path for the rapid defense of
territorial boundaries (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). The low, open vegetative
community structure of preferred scrub-jay habitat also allows for effective
surveillance of both aerial and ground predators (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1 984).
Predation, particularly by hawks, is the primary cause of Florida scrub-jay mortality
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). Florida scrub-jays residing in large landscapes
surrounded by other scrub-jay families are safer from predation than isolated families
living in fragmented edge habitats due to the early warning system that is provided by
the contiguous families (Breininger et al. 1996b). Maintenance of an open habitat
landscape structure also enhances population persistence as it provides an
opportunity for nonbreeders to detect vacancies in their surroundings and disperse
into these areas with reduced chance of predation from woodland hawks (Breininger
et al. 1 996a).
The effectiveness of the scrub-jays' important territorial defense and predator
surveillance behavior is significantly reduced in tall, disturbed scrub and wooded
matrix habitats (Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Breininger et al. 1991, 1995, 1996b). The
increased presence of avian competitors within tall, overgrown or wooded habitats
and the reduction in the visual range of the sentinel, which exposes the scrub-jay
group to surprise attacks by aerial predators, such as hawks, are factors which
reduce habitat quality (Breininger et al. 1991, 1995). Adult mortality is high and
reproductive success is low for scrub-jay groups residing within tall, disturbed habitat
types (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Schmalzer et al.
1994).
Fragmentation of native habitats and replacement with urban habitats increases the
densities and hunting efficacy of nest predators such as fish crows (Corvus
ossifragus), raccoons (Procyon 10 tor) , and house cats (Felis catus) that are much
less common in optimal xeric oak scrub habitat (Breininger 1999). Fragmented anp
urbanized landscapes also increase the numbers of potential competitors like the
blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata) (Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Breininger 1999).
The intervening landscape matrix affects scrub-jay dispersal behavior (Fitzpatrick et
al. 1994a). Protected scrub habitats most effectively sustain scrub-jay
subpopulations if they are located within a matrix of surrounding habitats that can
be safely negotiated by dispersing scrub-jays (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). Brushy
pastures, scrubby corridors along railway and country road right-of-ways, and open
18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
habitat types allow for foraging and provides links for colonization among scrub-jay
subpopulations (Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a). Expansive bodies of water, dense forest,
urban development, suburban residential areas, shopping malls, major highways,
and treeless, wide-open pastures inhibit dispersal movement of scrub-jays
(Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a).
Scrub - A Fire-Adaoted Natural Community
The vegetative composition and structural features characterizing optimal Florida
scrub-jay focal habitat, as defined above, represent native oak scrub habitat
conditions; conditions which are created and maintained by periodic, high intensity
fires (Myers 1990; Breininger et at. 1995, 199Gb). The fire regime in scrub habitat
types is extremely variable (Myers 1990; Adrain and Farinetti 1995). It is dependent
upon both the productivity (rate of fuel accumulation) of the scrub site and the
surrounding matrix habitats (Myers 1990; Adrain and Farinetti 1995). Accumulation
of fuels is slower in oak dominated scrub occurring on well-drained, infertile soils of
the sand ridges (Myers 1990). In addition, the horizontal distribution of fuels in oak
scrub on sand ridges is patchy due to the presence of numerous openings of bare
sand which characterize this scrub habitat type. These factors result in a fire-
dependent habitat type that is not very flammable and does not ignite easily (Myers
1990). Therefore, fires that burn into oak scrub habitat patches are generally ignited
in the surrounding matrix habitats, such as pine flatwoods, occurring on poorly
drained, fertile soils, which possess and rapidly accumulate continuous fine surface
fuels (Myers 1990; Adrian and Farinetti 1995). When fires do occur in the scrub
landscape, it usually results in a complex mosaic of slightly burned, intensely burned,
and unburned area types (Myers 1990). This patchy burn effect is important as the
presence of scrub habitat in various stages of development enhances habitat diversity
and reduces potential adverse effects of the fire to dependent species with special
habitat requirements (Myers 1 990).
Because scrub is a pyrogenic ecosystem, its flora and fauna have developed
adaptations to fire and are dependent on periodic fires to provide for the low, open
scrub in which they have evolved (Myers 1990; Schmalzer et a/ 1994). One of the
adaptations of Florida scrub-jays to frequent fires is the establishment and defense of
large territories. "Ownership" of a large territory increases the scrub-jay group's
probability of free access to enough habitat patches in optimal condition (Woolfenden
and Fitzpatrick 1984). Fire. influences vegetative community composition and
structure through its frequency and/or intensity (Myers 1 990). Scrub oaks, saw
palmetto, and ericaceous shrubs regenerate from fire primarily by sprouting, and
recovery is rapid (Schmalzer and Hinkle 1991). Species composition and richness
change little (Schmalzer et at. 1994). The quality of an oak scrub patch for use by
scrub-jays is a factor of time since fire (Breininger et a/. 1 996b). The suppression of
fire within scrub habitats can result in a dense and overgrown vegetative structure, a
condition that effectively decreases scrub-jay habitat suitability {Cox 1984;
19
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Schmalzer et al. 1994; Myers 1990; Breininger et
al. 1995, 1996a, 1996b; Breininger and Oddy 1998; Breininger 1999).
Reoroduction and Demograohv
Age at first breeding in the Florida scrub-jay ranges from one (1) to seven (7) years,
with most individuals becoming breeders between the ages of two (2) and four (4)
years (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 19911. Male scrub-jays become breeders later in
life than females (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1991). Nesting is synchronous,
normally ranging from March 1 through June 30 (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1990,
Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). However, in the Treasure Coast Region of Florida,
persistent renesting attempts after nesting failures, and double brooding after
successful nesting by as much as 20% of the breeding pairs, may extend the
nesting season through the end of July (Toland unpubl. datal. Scrub-jays typically
build their nests in Shrubby oaks, 3.2 to 6.4' (1 to 2 m) in height. Preferred nesting
sites are Quercus inopina on the Lake Wales Ridge (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick
1984) and Quercus myrtifolia on the Atlantic Coastal Ridge (Toland 1991).
Florida scrub-jay clutches usually contain three (31 or four (41 eggs, are incubated
for 17 to 18 days, and fledging occurs 16 to 19 days after hatching (Woolfenden
1974, 1978; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). Only the breeding female incubates and
broods eggs and nestlings (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 19841. During incubation,
breeding males are often conspicuous on sentinel perches within 165' (50m) of the
nest (Toland unpubl. data). Mean annual productivity for stable populations of
scrub-jays is 2 fledglings per pair per year (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1990;
Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a) and the presence of helpers improves fledging success
(Mumme 1993). Fledglings remain dependent upon adults for food for eight (8) to
10 weeks after leaving the nest (Woolfenden 1975; McGowan and Woolfenden
1 990). Nesting failures are nearly always caused by predation, most frequently by
ground-based predators including snakes, raccoons, and domestic cats (Schaub et
al. 1992; Toland unpubl. data; Breininger unpubl. data).
Recruitment of new scrub-jay territories generally occurs when the dominant male
helper acquires both a mate and a portion of his natal territory through a process
termed territorial budding (Fitzpatrick et al. 1991). Florida scrub-jays may also obtain
a breeding space when an established territory is vacated due to death of one or both
of the established breeders or, more rarely, family breakups (Fitzpatrick et al. 199~;
Breininger ef. al. 1 996b). Although the dispersal distance of Florida scrub-jays is
directly related to the surrounding habitat types and intervening landscape features,
most Florida scrub-jays pairs establish territories within one (1) to three (3) territories
(984' [300m] to 3281' [1 OOOm]) of their natal ground (Breininger et al. 1 995). In
suitable habitat, more than 95 % of all observed scrub-jay dispersals are two (2) miles
(3.2 km) or less in distance and rarely do they exceed five (5) miles (8 km)
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1 994a). All dOGumented scrub-jay dispersals exceeding five (5) miles
20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
have been across unsuitable habitat conditions, including suburban residential
communities, pastures, and woodlands (Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a).
Predators and the Sentinel System
Predators on adult Florida scrub-jays are relatively few, with the exception of
falconid and accipitrid raptors. House cats and bobcats (Fe/is rufus) have been
documented to prey on adult scrub-jays (Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a). Eastern coach
whips (Masticophis flagellum), Eastern indigo snakes (Drymarchon corais coupertl,
and great horned owls (Bubo virginianus) occasionally prey on adult scrub-jays
(Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a). However, the most dangerous native predators to scrub-
jays are the Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperill, sharp-shinned hawk (A. striatus),
merlin (Falco co/umbarius), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and peregrine falcon
(F. peregrinus) (Breininger et a/. 1995, 1996a, 1996b; Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a;
McGowan and Woolfenden 1989).
In response to foraging efficiency of these raptors, Florida scrub-jays have evolved
a well-developed sentinel system (McGowan and Woolfenden 1989). Individuals
within a family group take turns occupying an exposed perch above the oak shrubs
scanning for predators. When a raptor is spotted nearby, the sentinel jay gives a
distinctive warning call and all group members dive for cover in the nearest dense
vegetation.
Food Habits and Caching
Florida scrub-jays forage mostly on or near the ground, often along the edges of
natural or man-made openings. Animal food items consist primarily of terrestrial
arthropods (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Fernald and Toland 1991; King et a/.
1992). Vertebrate prey items comprise the minority of the diet, but may include a
wide array of species weighing up to one (1) ounce (more than 1/3 the body
weight of a scrub-jay), including treefrogs, lizards, snakes, nestling birds, and mice
(Toland unpubl. data; King et a/. 1992).
Acorns are extremely important in the diet of Florida-scrub jays from August
through November. During this time, scrub-jays harvest and cache thousands of
scrub oak acorns throughout their territory. Each scrub-jay may cache 6,000 to
8,000 acorns per year (DeGange et a/. 1989). Acorns are typically buried beneat.h
the surface of the sand in openings in the scrub during fall, and retrieved and
consumed in winter and early spring. Scrub-jays on the Atlantic Coastal Ridge
frequently cache acorns in pine trees (Pinus spp.) at heights of from 1 to 30 feet
(0.3 to 9m), usually in forks of branches, distal pine boughs, under bark, or on
epiphytes (Toland unpubl. data).
21
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Scrub Habitat Loss and Florida Scrub-Jay Pooulation Decline
Scrub habitats associated with Florida's barrier islands, mainland coasts, Ten Mile
Ridge, and Lake Wales Ridge are some of the most imperiled natural communities in
the United States, with estimates of habitat loss since pre-settlement times ranging
from 70% to more than 85% (Bergen 1994; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). The most
important and pervasive causes of scrub habitat loss are commercial/residential
development and agricultural conversion (Fernald 1989; Fitzpatrick et al. 1991,
1 994a). Much of the remaining parcels of scrub are fragmented and in various
states of degradation due primarily to widespread fire suppression (Fernald 1989;
Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a; Breininger et al. 1996a, 1996b; Breininger and Oddy
1998; Breininger 1999). Statewide Florida scrub-jay population trends have closely
mirrored scrub habitat loss; the present-day population is no more than 15% of the
pre-settlement population estimate (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a).
The most precipitous scrub-jay population decline occurred during the 1980's and
1990's with an estimated 25% to 50% reduction in scrub-jay numbers (Fitzpatrick
et al. 1994a, 1994b; Toland unpubl. data; Breininger and Oddy 1998; FWS 1999).
Florida scrub-jays are presently functionally or completely extirpated from 10 of 39
counties historically occupied by scrub-jays, including Alachua, Broward, Clay,
Dade, Duval, Gilchrist, Hendry, Hernando, Pinellas, and St. Johns Counties
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a, 1994b). As of 1994, half of all remaining Florida scrub-
jays occurred in Brevard County (1,232 families) and Highlands County (890
families) (Fitzpatrick et al. 1 994a). A total of 19 counties contained 30 or fewer
breeding pairs of scrub-jays, 'Of which the majority of these counties would have
historically supported hundreds to thousands of scrub-jay families (Fitzpatrick et al.
1994a, 1994b).
The Florida scrub-jay was censused across its entire range during 1 992-93 in an
effort to determine its statewide distribution and population status (Fitzpatrick et al.
1994b). This study documented about 4,000 breeding pairs of Florida scrub-jays,
with approximately 2/3 of the population inhabiting non-Federal lands (Fitzpatrick et
al. 1994b). Extrapolating from average scrub-jay group size (2.8) resulted in an
estimate of about 11,000 Florida scrub-jays as of 1993 (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994b).
Cox (1987) estimated that 15,400 to 22,800 jays comprised the statewide Florida
scrub-jay population as of 1984. This estimate is thought to be conservative as
Cox is suspected of missing a substantial number of smaller scrub-jeW
subpopulations and isolated family groups (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994b).
The statewide census documented 52 breeding pairs of scrub-jays in Indian River
County (Toland 1993; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994b). Subpopulations within the Atlantic
Coastal Subregion were monitored from 1988 through the present at Sebastian
(Toland unpubl. data), Merritt Island (Breininger et al. 1995), Valkaria (Toland
unpubl data; Breininger and Oddy 1998), the southern Brevard County mainland
(Breininger and Oddy 1998) and southern Brevard County barrier island (Breininger
22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1999). These studies document a 10-year decline of at least 50% in the Atlantic
Coastal Ridge scrub-jay population.
Scrub-Jays in Residential Landscaoes
The habitat structure and landscape matrix used by Florida scrub-jays residing in
residential landscapes differs significantly from native scrub habitat conditions
(Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a; Thaxton and Hingtgen 1996; Breininger 1999; Toland
unpubl. data). As residential build-out occurs, suitable scrub-jay habitat patches
become smaller and increasingly isolated from neighboring patches (Fitzpatrick et
a/. 1 994a). Within highly fragmented residential landscapes, such as that
exemplified by the Sebastian Highlands ITP impact area (see Figure 2), demographic
success of the population decreases (Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a; Thaxton and
Hingtgen 1996; Breininger 1999; Toland unpubl. data). The habitat quality of the
isolated scrub patches declines due primarily to fire exclusion and the introduction
of ornamental landscape and exotic plants (Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a; Breininger
1 999). Predation from domestic animals (house cats) and urban-adapted avian
competitors, blue-jays and fish crows, increases mortality rates of scrub-jays within
the fragmented residential landscape (Breininger 1999; Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a). In
addition, nonbreeding scrub-jays are forced to disperse greater distances through
hostile landscapes, exposing the dispersing individual to increased predation and
vehicular collisions (Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a; Thaxton and Hingtgen 1996;
Breininger 1999, Toland unpubl. data). All suburban scrub-jay populations studied
are declining because of poor demographic success. (Toland 1991; Fitzpatrick et a/.
1994a; Thaxton and Hingtgen 1996; Breininger 1999). .
It is interesting to note that scrub-jays residing in residential landscapes appear to
initially benefit from development; population densities are reported to increase in
lightly developed suburban areas where many patches of scrub remain and build-
out is 33% or less (FWS 1999; Toland unpubl. data). This is probably a response to
supplemental food sources (feeders) (Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a), creation of openings
in the scrub, and visual buffers (buildings) between neighboring jay families
(Toland, pers. observ.). However, as human development escalates towards
complete build-out, the increased risk of predation decreases survival potential of
fledgling jays and successful nesting attempts (Toland 1991; Bowman unpubl.
data; Breininger 1999). Because adult scrub-jays are relatively long-lived, resident
pairs often persist for years in some of the most densely human-populated Florid.a
suburbs (Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a). Although these suburban jays often continue to
nest, they incur high nest failure rates (Toland 1991; Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a).
In fragmented residential landscapes, scrub-jays disperse earlier and become
breeders at younger ages than scrub-jays in contiguous native scrub systems
(Toland unpubl. data; Breininger 1999). Many females and some males disperse
during their first year in contrast to delayed dispersal in native habitats (Breininger
1 999). Nesting in suburban habitats starts earlier and ends later than in native
23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
scrub, with much higher renesting attempts (three (3) to four (4)) and double
brooding (20%) than in native habitats (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a; Toland unpubl.
data). The loss of native scrub plants and introduction of ornamental vegetation
alters the predominant shrub species in disturbed sites, causing more variation in
scrub-jay nest sites than in natural habitats. In intensively developed suburbia,
scrub-jays often nest higher than in native scrub and almost exclusively in non-
native shrubs and trees (Fitzpatrick et al. 1 994a).
In large, natural habitats, Florida scrub-jays generally retain their territories and
attract new replacement mates following the death of their spouse (Woolfenden
and Fitzpatrick 1984; Breininger et al. 1996b). In fragmented populations, females
frequently disperse, often for long distances, after the death of a mate until they
find an available male in another habitat patch (Breininger 19991. Conversely,
Breininger (1999) found that dispersals by males within fragmented residential
landscapes are limited to nearby clusters where they become nonbreeders until a
breeding vacancy becomes available in the cluster of their residence. Breininger
(1999) found that males represent the limiting sex in a cluster even when the total
population had fewer females.
Thaxton and Hingtgen (1996) reported that scrub-jays usually moved from small
suburban scrub fragments into larger tracts of scrub and not from large tracts into
smaller fragments. Once extinction occurred within the suburban scrub fragment
the potential for recolonization of the abandoned habitat fragment by scrub-jays
from larger tracts is low (Breininger 1999). Dispersals by either sex may be limited
across fragmented residential landscapes if extinction occurs in intervening
fragments, as dispersing scrub-jays may be influenced by the presence of other
scrub-jays and not just the availability of scrub habitat (Stith et al. 1 996). The
value of maintaining scrub-jays in suburban habitat fragments is that they may be
an important source, although temporary, of individuals to colonize unoccupied,
potential scrub-jay habitat areas following restoration to suitable habitat conditions
(Breininger 1999).
These above findings have several conservation management implications: 1.)
where possible, scrub-jay reserves should be close together (within about one (1)
mile [1.6 km]) to accommodate the low dispersal tendencies of males (Breininger
1999); 2.) scrub habitat patches within the suburban residential matrix must be
managed for optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions to maximize demographic succes.s
within the patch (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a; Breininger 1999), and 3.) scrub
fragments should be maintained no more than 2.6 miles (4.2 km) to facilitate the
dispersal of females across the suburban landscape (Breininger 1999). The
contribution of scrub-jay clusters residing in suburban/urban fragments to the long-
term population size of their associated metapopulation is expected to be minimal
because of the poor demographic success exhibited by these fragmented clusters
(Breininger 1999).
24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Modeling of Pooulations and Metaoooulations
The Florida scrub-jay has been the subject of rigorous time-specific probability of
persistence models (Fitzpatrick et a/. 1991; Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1991;
references in Breininger et al. 1996b; Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a). These demographic
models suggest that populations of at least 400 territories have a 99% probability
of survival for 100 years and are referred to as "core" populations (Fitzpatrick et al.
1994a). "Satellite" populations are composed of at least 100 breeding pairs of
scrub-jays and have an 85 to 90% probability of survival for 100 years (Fitzpatrick
et a/. 1994a). A subpopulation with less than 10 breeding pairs has about a 50%
probability of extinction within 100 years (Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Fitzpatrick et al.
1994a; Stith et al. 1996).
Florida scrub-jays generally disperse up to two (2) miles with normal maximum
dispersals ranging up to five (5) miles in suitable habitat (Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a).
Thus, breeding territories within about two (2) miles of one another are considered
part of the same population or sub population (Stith et al. 1 996; Fitzpatrick et al.
1 994a). A metapopulation is comprised of a group of interbreeding subpopulations
that are separated from one another by no more than 7.5 miles (Stith et al. 1996).
Small subpopulations of jays are less likely to go extinct if located within the
normal two (2) mile dispersal radius of neighboring scrub-jay subpopulations
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1991; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a).
Population modeling suggests that a strong correlation exists between habitat
quality and scrub-jay population extinction risk (Breininger et al. 1999). Habitat
models predict population declines of 25 % every five years in large unburned tracts
(Breininger et al. 1996b). Population modeling suggest that scrub-jay population
increases after restoration to optimal habitat will be slow. These relationships
suggest that scrub restoration activities should be prioritized in, areas that have
scrub-jays remaining or are proximal to scrub-jay sub populations at risk (Breininger
et a/. 1999). This conclusion is based on slow population responses expected in
unoccupied areas and the severe declines occurring in existing populations
attributed to infrequent burning.
Although local populations of scrub-jays have become extremely small in many
areas, probabilities of extirpation remain predominantly affected by habitat loss,
habitat degradation through fire suppression, and stochastic influences o.n
population dynamics (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994a).
In addition, the Florida scrub-jay has a sedentary social system that naturally
creates small effective population sizes and increased levels of inbreeding
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). Although matings between immediate family
members are rare, matings between first-cousins, second-cousins, and other close
relatives are quite common, even in large, contiguous populations (Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1978). For these reasons, the species exhibits reduced genetic
variability compared to the western scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californicus) and other
25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
congeners (Peterson 1 990).
Numerous subpopulations as small as 15 breeding pairs, have survived since pre-
settlement times despite being isolated by natural physiographic conditions
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). Therefore, it is doubtful that increased inbreeding
resulting from present day reductions in Florida scrub-jay subpopulation sizes will
significantly affect survival potential to the same magnitude as would ecological
and demographic factors (Lande 1988; Simberloff 1988; Fitzpatrick et al 1994a).
Habitat loss and unnatural succession resulting from fire suppression are factors
that will most likely precipitate extinction of the Florida scrub-jay (Fitzpatrick et al.
1994a; Breininger and Oddy 1998).
26
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 HCP PLAN AREA BASELINE INFORMATION
3.1 FWS Consultation History and Existing Data for Sebastian Highlands Scrub-
Jay Habitat Lots
The FWS consultation history and existing data for the Florida scrub-jay
subpopulations residing within the HCP Plan Area are primarily recorded in
correspondence between the FWS, the City of Sebastian, and Indian River County.
The conflict between residential development and conservation of the Florida scrub-
jay has been a predominant issue in the City of Sebastian from 1991 to the
present. The number and location of the privately-owned platted Sebastian
Highlands scrub lots for which the FWS has exerted jurisdiction pursuant to Section
9 of the ESA has evolved over time - a response to the population dynamics of
Florida scrub-jays residing in an increasingly fragmented urban landscape.
The information presented herein was collected from a, search of the Indian River
County Environmental Planning Section file on this long-standing issue and from
consultations with Jan King, of the City of Sebastian Growth Management
Department and FWS staff. Most of the data was derived from historical
correspondence between the FWS, City of Sebastian, and Indian River County and
informational tables generated by the City of Sebastian in order to track the Sebastian
Highlands scrub lots designated by the FWS as occupied or potentially occupied by
scrub-jays. Existing management plans for conservation lands purchased under the
Indian River County Environmental Lands Program {FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech
Consultants, Inc. 1995, 1996, 1998} and a scrub-jay survey conducted for the City
of Sebastian (Carroll and Associates 1997) were also reviewed.
The City of Sebastian is the only government entity involved in this issue that
maintains a consolidated database of the Sebastian Highlands scrub-jay habitat lots
that are subject to FWS review pursuant to the provisions of the ESA. This data
base is referred to by the City of Sebastian as "Areas of Scrub Habitat" and is
updated periodically by the City of Sebastian upon verbal release of a designated
scrub lot by the FWS (J. King, City of Sebastian, pers. comm.). The FWS began to
verbally release the Sebastian Highlands scrub lots in June 1995 {J. King, City of
Sebastian, pers. comm.}. In response to this FWS policy, the City of Sebastian
maintains a ledger to track the regulatory status of the platted lots in Sebastian
Highlands. The data base maintained by the City of Sebastian does not provide an,Y
demographic. information with regard to the status of Florida scrub-jay occupation
on the affected Sebastian Highlands scrub lots. The existing demographic data
presently used by the FWS to determine if a designated lot is occupied by scrub-
jays is based on surveys conducted by this agency in 1996 {M. Jennings, FWS,
pers comm.}. Currently, the FWS reviews the regulatory status of each designated
Sebastian Highlands scrub lot on a lot-by-Iot basis. At the request of the lot owner,
the local FWS representative conducts a site visit to determine if proposed
residential construction would result in adverse impacts to suitable scrub-jay habitat
27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
II
I
I
II
which would potentially result in a taking of Florida scrub-jays (M. Jennings, FWS,
pers. comm.).
Although the Florida scrub-jay was federally listed as a threatened species in 1987,
FWS involvement in land development actions was not common until 1991. In
June 1991, the FWS informed all State, County and Local municipalities, including
Indian River County and the City of Sebastian, that they were potentially liable for
third party Section 9 take violations that may result from issuance of land clearing
and development permits within areas occupied by Florida scrub-jays. This far-
reaching FWS notification responded to the 1987 listing of the Florida scrub-jay
and the 1988 Congressional amendment to the ESA which defined the
responsibility of State, County and Local municipalities in ensuring that authorized
activities do not violate Section 9 prohibitions against take.
The potential adverse impacts of the 14,000:t lot Sebastian Highlands residential
development project on the Florida scrub-jay sub population residing within the
incorporated limits of the City of Sebastian was initially recognized by the FWC in
the late 80's (FWS, November 12, 1996 correspondence to Indian River County -
see Appendix B). By 1991, the FWC had completed a comprehensive four (4) year
survey, which determined that 35 scrub-jay families occurred within the city limits
of the City of Sebastian (FWS, November 12, 1996 correspondence to Indian River
County) .
In June 1992, the City of Sebastian agreed with the FWS to develop a habitat
conservation plan. The City recognized that it was the only viable regulatory
method available to resolve the conflict between residential housing construction
and conservation of the Florida scrub-jay subpopulations residing within the
incorporated limits of the City of Sebastian (FWS, November 12, 1996
correspondence to Indian River County). During this period the, FWC and FWS
initiated informal consultation with the City of Sebastian regarding scrub-jay
conservation. To guide future conservation actions, FWS staff developed a scrub-
jay core habitat reserve design (Toland 1996). The objective of this reserve design
was to identify those habitat areas within the City of Sebastian that were
considered essential (Conservation Areas), and less essential (Incidental Take
Areas), to the long-term persistence of the Sebastian scrub-jay subpopulation. The
Conservation Areas selected during this early planning effort included: 1.) Sebastian
PUD/lndustrial Tract (presently known as the North Sebastian Conservation Area),
2.) Sebastian Airport/Golf Course, 3.) Sebastian Elementary School-Industrial
Areas, 4.) Vicker's Grove, 5.) Easy Street (presently known as Unit 17 - 34 Lots or
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area), and 6.) Pelican Elementary School
and surrounding 177 platted lots in Unit 17 (Toland 1996). The Conservation Areas
were selected based on the size of parcel (25 to 50 acres), contiguity and condition
of xeric scrub, occupation by scrub-jays, connectivity (located within normal scrub-
jay dispersal distance - two (2) miles), and ability to implement habitat management
and restoration actions to increase carrying capacity of the parcel for scrub-jays
28
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(Toland 1996). The designated Incidental Take areas included 266 lots in the
southern and northern Sebastian Highlands (Toland 1996).
By 1993, a 20% reduction in the number of scrub-jay families was documented
with only 27 families accounted for in the City of Sebastian (FWS, November 12,
1 996 correspondence to Indian River County). This reduction in the Sebastian
scrub-jay subpopulation was attributed to a high demand for housing in the
Sebastian Highlands, coupled with an absence of a comprehensive enforcement
policy by the FWS and lack of willingness on the part of the City of Sebastian to
develop and implement a conservation plan (FWS, November 12, 1996
correspondence to Indian River County).
In 1994, the IRC Board voted to develop a county-wide HCP to address scrub-jay
conservation in Indian River County, including the City of Sebastian (Toland 1996;
R. DeBlois pers. comm.). In May 1994, the Sebastian City Council agreed to
participate in development of the county-wide HCP provided that the process
would not require expenditures from the City of Sebastian (City of Sebastian,
September 7, 1994 correspondence to Indian River County). In consultation with
Indian River County and the City of Sebastian, the FWS delineated the scrub
habitat areas essential to survival of the Atlantic coast scrub-jay population in
Indian River County (Toland 1996). These areas, as shown on Figure 3 - Scrub Jay
Habitat Conservation HeareR Areas, were to serve as the foundation of the county-
wide HCP for Florida scrub-jays (Toland 1996). The six (6) scrub-jay core habitat
areas initially identified within the City of Sebastian, as listed above, were included
in this county-wide mapping.
In an effort to further several comprehensive plan policies and objectives, including
front-end implementation of the county-wide HCP, Indian River County began to
actively acquire large scrub parcels through its Environmental Lal")ds Acquisition
Bond Program with up to 50% matching funds from the FCT Program (R. DeBlois,
pers comm.).
In October 1995, Indian River County acquired the 111:t acre Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area, one of the larger parcels designated by the FWS on the Scrub-
Jay Habitat Conservation "Core" Areas map. In late 1996, Indian River County
acquired the 387:t acre North Sebastian Conservation Area, formerly known as the
AGC Industrial Tract/St. Sebastian P.U.D. Recently, Indian River County added 1 ~
acres to the North Sebastian Conservation Area, resulting in a total project area of
406:t acres. This conservation area, which is part of the proposed Sebastian HCP
Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, represents the largest scrub parcel
remaining along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge in north Indian River County.
During the 1994-95 time period, Indian River County endeavored to further its HCP
initiatives to acquire FWS designated core scrub-jay habitat areas by creating the
Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech
29
-~'-;:T~""" -:.:-",...r~~.!F'?"'!!:f?:"iT::c"";c;;- --
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Consultants, Inc. 1996). This project was composed of 180 undeveloped platted
lots within Unit 17 of Sebastian Highlands (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech
Consultants, Inc. 1996). The Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project was
approved in early 1995 as a FCT 50% cost-share project (Indian River County
Memorandum, September 11, 1996 - see Appendix B). Both the FWS and City of
Sebastian supported implementation of this acquisition project. It would have
served to significantly enhance scrub-jay conservation efforts in the City of
Sebastian and alleviated much of the conflict surrounding private development in
the platted Sebastian Highlands lots (FWS, February 7, 1995 correspondence to
Indian River County; September 11, 1996, Indian River County Memorandum - see
Appendix B).
In July 1996, the IRC Board voted to approve the purchase of "Phase 1" of the
Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project lots (September 11, 1996, Indian River
County Memorandum). Phase 1 consisted of 50 out of 56 lots owned by Atlantic
Gulf Communities (AGC) lots in Unit 17 (September 11, 1996, Indian River County
Memorandum). In September 1996, the Indian River County Environmental Planning
Staff recommended that the IRC Board approve the purchase of 47 individual
privately-owned lots as "Phase II" of the Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project
(September 11, 1996, Indian River County Memorandum). Consolidation of this
acquisition package was an immense task by the Indian River County
Environmental Planning Staff, as it required Staff to contact, negotiate a purchase
price, and procure signed purchase contracts with 47 different lot owners. During
the negotiation process for acquisition of the subject lots, 33 of the 47 lot owners
received a certified letter from the Indian River County Utilities Department
(September 11, 1996, Indian River County Memorandum). This correspondence
notified them that their lot was subject to a waterline assessment for construction
of a new waterline serving the subject residential area (September 11, 1996, Indian
River County Memorandum). The utility assessment averaged 17:f: % of the
appraised value of each affected lot. The timing of this assessment impeded the
County's Environmental Planning Section negotiation process to purchase the same
lots for conservation. Several private lot owners expressed extreme displeasure at
the prospect of paying a utilities assessment to Indian River County prior to selling
the lot to the same government entity (September 11, 1996, Indian River County
Memorandum) .
In August 1996, the Indian River County Land Acquisition Advisory Committe,e
(LAAC) voted to recommend to the IRC Board not to approve the acquisition of
Phase II of the Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project (September 11, 1996,
Indian River County Memorandum). The primary concerns expressed by the LAAC
was that the overall Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project was not a viable
acquisition based on expected high level of habitat management constraints and
the position of the conservation project in a highly fragmented urban landscape
(September 11, 1996, Indian River County Memorandum). On September 17,
1996, the IRC Board concurred with the LAAC recommendation and rejected
31
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
purchase of the subject 47 platted lots in Phase II of the Sebastian Scrub
Conservation Area project. The Board's decision halted all acquisition efforts in the
Unit 1 7 platted lots comprising the Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project
(Indian River County, October 17, 1996 correspondence to the FWS - see Appendix
B). The loss of the Unit 17 core scrub-jay habitat caused the Indian River County
Environmental Planning Staff, in consultation with the FWS, to re-evaluate the
mitigation strategy needed to develop a county-wide or Sebastian area-wide HCP.
Throughout the two-year process, there had been an informal understanding
between the FWS and Indian River County that acquisition and management of the
North Sebastian Conservation Area, Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area, and
Sebastian Highlands Unit 1 7 lots would serve to provide a substantial portion of the
mitigation needed to support a county-wide HCP (FWS, November 12, 1996
correspondence to Indian River County).
It is important to note that at the urging of the FWS, the IRC Board subsequently
authorized the purchase of a block of 34 contiguous lots in Unit 17, a portion of
the Phase 1 of Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project. These lots are part of
the proposed Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, referred to herein as the
10:t acre Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area. The FWS supported this
effort based on the opinion that the "... 34 AGC lots, in combination with Pelican
Elementary School scrub, may provide enough suitable habitat to minimize the
adverse effects of habitat fragmentation due to losses in the remainder of Unit 17.
These scrub parcels, if properly managed, may be essential "stepping stones" for
dispersal of scrub-jays from and to northern Indian River County..." (FWS,
November 12, 1996 correspondence to Indian River County). In consideration of
the loss of the Unit 17 scrub lots, the November 12, 1996 FWS correspondence to
Indian River County identified other conservation actions that Indian River County
could explore to support an HCP. Two of the referenced actions included the
management of scrub habitat located on the Sebastian Airport/~olf Course and
Sebastian and Pelican Island Elementary School. In October 1997, both the City the
Sebastian and School Board of Indian River County agreed to review a conservation
plan that requires implementation of habitat management actions on the referenced
parcels (City of Sebastian, October 9, 1997 correspondence to Indian River
County; School Board of Indian River County, October 2, 1997 correspondence to
Indian River County - see Appendix B).
In response to the FWS recommendation to continue with development an,d
implementation of an HCP, the IRC Board approved a request from the
Environmental Planning Section to solicit consultant proposals for development of
the subject Sebastian Area- Wide Scrub-Jay Habitat Conservation Plan in December
1997. In March 1998, Indian River County issued a Request for Proposals, RFP #
8047. In July 1998 Smith Environmental Services (SES) was authorized to proceed
with development of this Sebastian HCP. Consolidation of existing data and
performance of field surveys to update the existing information were undertaken by
SES through October 1998. An informal meeting was held with FWS staff on
32
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
October 29, 1998 to discuss the preliminary findings from the existing data search,
field surveys, and HCP elements. Additional information needed in support of plan
development was collected by SES through April 1999.
In September 1999, SES submitted a final draft report to IRC for transmittal and
review by all participating entities, including the public and FWS. The City of
Sebastian held a public meeting to discuss the City's participation on October 27,
1999. The City Council unanimously moved to approve the HCP concept at that
meeting. The City of Sebastian's City Council provided final approval to staff to
proceed with submittal of HCP and ITP application at the January 12, 2000 public
meeting (see Attachment A).
The IRC Board held their public meeting on the Sebastian HCP on November 16,
1999. This meeting resulted in the IRC Board unanimous approval of Staff's
recommendation to proceed with the Sebastian HCP and transmit such to FWS, in
conjunction with the ITP application. The School Board for Indian River County held
its first public meeting on the HCP on November 16, 1999.
The School Board objected to a participation resolution in support of the HCP due
to concerns regarding future development needs at Pelican Island Elementary
School. Staff from IRC, FWS, and the School Board drafted a revised resolution for
Board review and approval. This resolution, as presented in Appendix A, was
unanimously accepted by the School Board at their regularly scheduled December
14, 1999 public meeting.
Existing Data - Location and Number of Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots Recorded
as Occuoied or Potentially Occuoied by Florida Scrub
During the initial informal consultation period between the FWS, FWC, and the City
of Sebastian in 1991-92, a map was developed by the FWC, in cooperation with
the FWS to define the location and number of the Sebastian Highlands lots
occupied or potentially occupied by Florida scrub-jays, and thereby subject to
development review by the FWS (J. King, City of Sebastian, pers. comm.). An
untitled table, presented as Table 1, developed by the City of Sebastian shows that
this original mapping encompassed 2030 lots. Of this total number, 553 lots had
already been altered to provide residential housing. At some unknown point during
this initial informal consultation period, the FWS implemented a blanket relea~e
policy for all- Sebastian Highlands scrub lots that had been previously cleared and
were maintained as grass or contained dense stands of pine trees (J. King, City of
Sebastian, pers. comm). A total of 1,204 lots were subsequently released by the
FWS under this blanket release policy. Of the 2030 scrub lots originally designated
by the FWS and FWC as potentially occupied by scrub-jays, 273 scrub lots of
regulatory concern remained after refinement of this original mapping.
33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 1
City of Sebastian
1225 MAIN STREET 0 SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958
TELEPHONE (561) 589-5537 0 FAX (561) 589-2566
:i:::":.::.:i;i::i!:.::::i::.:::.:}::::i::omGINAF1:~;!:::::HH:::::::ii:::';:.;:.tii::,,'i: \N'(j<::of:Lots.:
Scrub Lots 2030
Minus lots already improved 553
Minus lots released by USFWS 1,204
Remaining Scrub Lots 273
...... ..............ADDmONS.mO'MKP:..ON.3iL2(9S.. .............'= :!!N04:'ofL'QtS(
~~~~~~~~~~i~~~~~~~~~~!:' :;:. :. :.: : :: ..' ;':: ': : :~.: . :: "; .:L:." g. :~'~" ~~::.:::~;;;::::~~~;:~j
... ..... ... ... . . -, ..,.. ..... ..... . . .. .,.
Scrub Lots added to map 1 19
Minus lots already improved on additional list 26
Minus lots released on additional list 9
-
Remaining scrub lots on additional list 84
.....'=CO.MBINATIO]~fO]:-'MAI#AND.REVJsIONS....'=. :!:Iio~:~tLQtsi::
. -.. . . .. . ... . .... . ... ... ". .........,
::;::: ::: .: . "::. : '."::: .;'; ": .::;.: :.::';.:' :'. :::::::
. ' ....... ... .' .... . , .
Total SCI;Ub Lots 2,149
Minus total lots already improved 579
Minus total lots released 1,213
Total Remaining Scrub Lots 357
34
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Based on the data presented in Table 1, the original mapping of the affected
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots was revisited by the FWS in March 1995. As a
result of this additional review, 119 scrub lots were added to the list, of which 26
were determined to be already developed and nine (9) were released pursuant to
the FWS blanket policy. The 1995 map revision resulted in the addition of 84 scrub
lots of regulatory concern. The combined 1992 and 1995 mapping data for the
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots designated a total of 2,149 scrub lots of regulatory
concern, of which 579 were determined to be already developed and 1,213 were
subsequently released for development under the FWS blanket policy.
The final result of this three (3) year informal consultation process was that
residential development activities on 357 Sebastian Highlands lots were identified
as subject to incidental take authorization from the FWS. Interim to this time
period, on May 5, 1994, the FWS issued a letter to the City of Sebastian which
defined 184 platted lots in Unit 17 of the Sebastian Highlands which needed to be
acquired as part of the regional HCP that was being considered at that time.
In a revised list released by the City of Sebastian on July 17, 1995, in response to
a June 26, 1995 FWS directive, the number of platted lots identified in the
Sebastian Highlands as occupied or potentially occupied by Florida scrub-jays had
increased to 456. This table entitled City of Sebastian Scrub-Jay Areas is provided
as Table 2 for review.
Table 3, Sebastian Highlands Potential Scrub-Jay Habitat Lots, was generated by
SES from tabulated information obtained from the updated City of Sebastian Scrub-
Jay Areas - Revised 8/27/98 and, subsequently, updated pursuant to information
maintained by the City of Sebastian's Growth Management Department as of
October 7, 1998. Therefore, Table 3 provides the location and number of the
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots considered by the FWS as occupied or potentially
occupied by Florida scrub-jays as of October 7, 1 998. A total of 31 7 lots in the
Sebastian Highlands are identified. Therefore, between July 1995 and October
1998, 139 lots or 30% of the Sebastian Highlands scrub lots identified in July
1995 as occupied or potentially occupied by Florida scrub-jays have been released
by the FWS for residential development.
Identification of Existing Data Deficiencies
The existing -recorded data base reviewed by SES did not sufficiently document the
extent of habitat occupancy by scrub-jays, population status, habitat quality, or
acreage of restorable scrub-jay habitat within the publicly-owned lands proposed as
compensation areas subject to this HCP. Surveys were conducted by SES
biologists in the summer/fall of 1998 to obtain these required data. The results of
these surveys are provided below in Section 3.2.
35
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
TABLE 2
CITY OF SEBASTIAN
SCRUB JAY AREAS
THE LOTS LISTED BELOW LOCATED IN UNIT 17 OF THE SEBASTIAN
HIGHLANDS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THE UNITED STATES FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE AS THOSE LOTS THAT NEED TO BE ACQUIRED AS
PART OF THE REGIONAL HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (B.C.P.).
. BLOCK 450 LOTS 5,6 S/H UNIT 17 "'Z-
,.'BLOCK 451 LOTS 5-7,11,14,15,17-22S/H UNIT 17 \~
. BLOCK 454 LOTS 1-5,7,8,41-44 S/H UNIT 17 \\
. BLOCK 565 LOTS 1-7,9,10 S/H UNIT 17 ~
BLOCK 566 LOTS 1-9,'21-23 S/H UNIT 17 ,l-
" BLOCK 571 LOTS 1-6,9,10,13-16,18 S/H UNIT 17 \~
'. BLOCK 572 LOTS 1,2,4,6-20 S/H UNIT 17 \,e
BLOCK 573 LOTS 15,18-23,26,27 S/H UNIT 17 q
:\: - BLOCK 574 LOTS 11-13 S/H UNIT 17 ~
. BLOCK 576 LOTS 1,26,32,33 S/H UNIT 17
BLOCK 577 LOTS 2-10 S/H UNIT 17 9
. BLOCK 578 LOTS 16-23 SIB UNIT 17 e
.BLOCK 579 LOTS 6-12,15,16,24,25 S/H UNIT 17 \~
-.BLOCK 584 LOTS 1-14,24,26-29 S/H UNIT 17 ~,
. BLOCK 585 LOTS 3-12 S/H UNIT 17 \0
- BLOCK 586 LOTS 1-4,23-26 S/H UNIT 17 e
. BLOCK 607 LOTS 1-7 S/H UNIT 17 .,
BLOCK 610 LOTS 1,2,15,16 S/H UNIT 17 ~
.I . =~) BLOCK 611 LOTS 19-23 S/H UNIT 17 '5
. BLOCK 618 LOTS 25 Sill UNIT 17 \
'. BLOCK 620 LOTS 3,23-26 S/H UNIT 17 5
BLOCK 621 LOTS 12,13 S/H UNIT 17 2-
\e2.
PELICAN ISLAND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, TRACT G
AAA LAST REVISIONS HADE PER LETTER FROM THE U.S. FISH
AND WILDLIFE SERVICE DATED 6/26/95.
AAA LIST COMPLETED AND RELEASED BY THE CITY OF
SEBASTIAN BUILDING DEPARTMENT 7/17/95.
SCJAY.DOC
36
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
nn_n___~nn l
I
TABLE 2 (cont.)
CITY OF SEBASTIAN
SCRUB JAY AREAS
BLOCK 138 LOTS 6-15 S/H UNIT 4 \0
BLOCK 139 LOTS 1-2,19-20 S/H UNIT 3 "l
BLOCK 141 LOTS 1-28 S/H UNIT 3 2'i'
BLOCK 145 LOTS 22-25 S/H UNIT 3 ~
BLOCK 150 LOTS 1-21 S/H UNIT 5 2.
BLOCK 151 LOTS 2-29 S/H UNIT 5 1..1-
BLOCK 153 LOTS 1-16 S/H UNIT 5 . <I~
BLOCK 154 LOTS 1-16 S/H UNIT 5 ' .
"
BLOCK 155 LOTS 1-10 S/H UNIT 5 \(
BLOCK 156 LOTS 9-19 S/H UNIT 5 ' ,
. ,
BLOCK 157 LOTS 8-13 S/H UNIT 5 ~
BLOCK 158 LOTS 12 sin UNIT 5 \
BLOCK 162 LOTS 1-6,24-29 S/H UNIT 5 12-
BLOCK 240 LOTS 1-11 S/H UNIT 10 \'1
BLOCK 241 LOTS 1-15 S/H UNIT 10 \~
BLOCK 242 LOTS 1-19 S/H UNIT 10 ' .'.
BLOCK 243 LOTS 1-24 SIH UNIT 10 ...: .
-01
BLOCK 244 LOTS 6-20 S/H UNIT 10 \S
BLOCK 261 LOTS 7-29 SIH UNIT 10 ':" ~
2i'{
INDUSTRIAL AREA OFF GIBSON STREET
SEBASTIAN AIRPORT
SEBASATIAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE
ST. SEBASTIAN P.U.D.
TRACT 2, COLLIER PLACE (TERMINATED P.U.D.)
VICKERS GROVE, LOTS 37-42, 85-90 - -.. \Z-
***NOTE: REFER TO THE SCRUB JAY MAP FOR EXACT
LOCATIONS CONCERNING SOME OF THE AREAS LISTED
ABOVE. ***
37
- - -~---~-
I
I Table 3.
I
I
I Unit 5 Block 1 50 Lot 3, 4, 8-10,12-14,17, 18, 21 1 1
I Unit 5 Block 151 Lot 2-5, 7-9, 11, 13, 15-21, 24 17
Unit 5 Block 1 53 Lot 1-6, 8-13 12
Unit 5 Block 154 Lot 2, 5-7, 9-11, 1 3-1 5 10
1 Unit 5 Block 155 Lot 3-6, 8 5
Unit 5 Block 1 56 Lot 9, 11-13, 15-19 9
Unit 5 Block 157 Lot 9-11 3
1 Unit 5 Block 1 62 Lot 1, 4, 5, 24-29 9
1 Unit 10 Block 240 Lot 3,4,6-10
Unit 10 Block 241 Lot 1-4,6-10,12-15
Unit 10 Block 242 Lot 1,3,5,6,8,10,12-18
1 Unit 1 0 Block 242 Lot 4,8,10,12,14-16,18-22
Unit 10 Block 244 Lot 6,7,10,11,13-16,16A,17-19
Unit 10 Block 261 Lot 8-15 21-28
I Unit 17 Block 450 Lot 5, 6 2
Unit 1 7 Block 451 Lot 5-7,11,14,15,17-22 12
I' Unit 1 7 Block 454 Lot 1-5,7,8,41-44 1 1
Unit 17 Block 565 Lot 1-7, 9, 10 9
I Unit 17 Block 566 Lot 1-9, 21-23 12
Unit 17 Block 571 Lot 1-6, 9, 10, 13-16, 18 13
Unit 17 Block 572 Lot 1, 2, 6-20 17
I Unit 1 7 Block 573 Lot 15, 18-23, 26, 27 9
Unit 1 7 Block 574 Lot 11 -1 3 3
Unit 1 7 Block 576 Lot 1, 26, 32, 33 4
I Unit 1 7 Block 577 Lot 2-9 8
Unit 1 7 Block 578 Lot 1 6-1 8, 21 -1 3 6
I Unit 1 7 Block 579 Lot 6-12, 15, 16, 24, 25 11
Unit 17 Block 584 Lot 29 1
Unit 17 Block 607 Lot 1 - 7 7
I Unit 17 Block 610 Lot 1, 2, 1 5, 1 6 4
Unit 17 Block 611 Lot 1 9-22 4
Unit 1 7 Block 618 Lot 25 1
I Unit 1 7 Block 620 Lot 3, 23-26 5
Unit 17 Block 621 Lot 12, 13 2
I 38
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A significant decline of the Sebastian scrub-jay sub population has been
documented in the FWS files from 1991 to 1996. The primary cause for this
population decline was reported to be habitat degradation from lack of fire or
mechanical management actions (Toland 1996). Increased vulnerability to vehicular
collisions and predators as a result of the severe habitat fragmentation are also
potential factors contributing to the documented decline in the Sebastian scrub-jay
subpopulation. Poor reproductive success and survival within the Atlantic Coast
and Lake Wales Ridge populations in 1997 was reported to be wide-spread and
was attributed to an epidemic documented across much of the Florida scrub-jay
range (Breininger and Oddy 1998; Breininger 1999). In consideration of the fact
that habitat quality within the affected Sebastian Highlands scrub lots continued to
decline between 1 996 and 1 998 and that demographic success of Florida scrub-jay
populations along the Atlantic Coast was particularly poor in 1997, SES biologists
determined that that up-to-date habitat occupancy and habitat quality data, with an
emphasis on habitat quality, should be obtained within the affected Sebastian
Highlands scrub lots in order to accurately define the incidentai take levels and
sufficiency of mitigation measures proposed under this HCP. The results of this
survey, as provided below, confirmed that families within the Sebastian Highlands
landscape continue to be lost.
3.2 Sebastian HCP Plan Area - Population Status and Habitat Utilization
Pervasive residential development in Indian River County has resulted in an
estimated scrub habitat loss of approximately 90% since pre-settlement times
(Fernald 1989). Much of the remaining parcels of scrub are fragmented and in
various states of degradation due primarily to widespread fire suppression. The City
of Sebastian experienced rapid human population growth during the 1980's
(Fernald 1989;" Fernald et al. 1992). Reflecting the increase in the human
population has been a precipitous expansion of commercial retail businesses and
large residential communities. From 1991 through 1998 individual family lots
throughout the Sebastian Highlands residential subdivision continued to be cleared
for house construction while the remaining patches of xeric oak scrub and scrubby
pine flatwoods continued to grow taller and denser in the absence of wildfire or
prescribed habitat management. All of these changes in the landscape have
reduced the spatial extent of suitable scrub habitat in the Sebastian Highlands,
precipitated a deterioration in habitat quality, exponentially increased habitat
barriers and presented multiple potentially fatal scrub-jay encounters with roadway
traffic, domestic pets, and toxic pollutants. As demonstrated by the documented
decline in the HCP study population, each of these human-induced changes has a
negative influence on the demographic success of Florida scrub-jays.
Demographic studies of the Florida scrub-jay populations in Indian River County
began in 1988 (Toland 1991, 1993, 1996, unpubl. data). The Indian River County
scrub-jay core population was concentrated within the boundaries of the City of
Sebastian and adjoining scrub properties. Two subpopulations, as described in
39
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Section 2.2 above, have persisted in Sebastian during this long-term study (Toland
unpubl. data). These subpopulations are separated by less than 3 miles (4.8m) of
predominantly built-out residential neighborhoods.
As discussed above, the study population is part of the South Brevard
County/North Indian River County metapopulation. This metapopulation, which
extends from Winter Beach in Indian River County north to Malabar in Brevard
County (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a; Breininger and Toland unpubl. data), is composed
of several sub populations that are within the normal maximum Florida scrub-jay
dispersal distance (Stith et al. 1996) of one another. A scrub-jay subpopulation of
at least a dozen pairs exists on the St. Sebastian River State Buffer Reserve (SBR)
and extends over the Indian River-Brevard County Line to provide a linkage between
the South Brevard and the Sebastian HCP study population (Breininger and Oddy
1998). Data collected during the 1993 Statewide Census (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994b),
in conjunction with recent studies (Toland 1996; Breininger and Oddy 1998),
provided the basis to rank this Florida scrub-jay metapopulation as the fourth
largest in Florida and the most important metapopulation for species recovery along
the Florida's Atlantic Coast (Breininger and Oddy 1998).
A total of 240 individual scrub-jays were colorbanded to support demographic
studies conducted by Toland (1991, 1993, 1996, unpubl. data) within the
incorporated limits of the City of Sebastian. This colorbanding facilitated the
identification of 35 territories between 1989 and 1991 (Toland unpubl. data). Data
relating to nest site selection, nesting success, survival, helper influence, dispersal,
mortality, food habits, and habitat suitability were collected for a sample of 174
nests. Family size averaged 3.0 individuals per group with 63% of the breeding
pairs accompanied by at least one helper. Clutch size averaged 3.8 and average
brood size was 3.0 (Toland un pub I. data). Median incubation date was April 7th
and median hatching date was April 24th. Approximately 72% of the nestlings
successfully fledged. Mean annual productivity was 1.9 young fledged per pair
per year. Median fledging date was May 10th and 70% of all nesting attempts
were successful in fledging at least one young (Toland unpubl. data).
Habitat characteristics were assessed in one-half acre patches around each nest
tree and categorized as optimal, suboptimal, ancillary, or lawn (Toland 1991).
Nesting success (percentage of nest attempts that fledged at least one young) was
positively correlated to nest site habitat quality; success rates for optima.l,
suboptimal, ancillary, and lawn were 91, 67, 48, and 25%, respectively. Habitat
features comprising each scrub-jay territory were assessed and characterized as
optimal contiguous, optimal fragmented, and suboptimal fragmented. Nesting
success was positively correlated with territory quality; success rates for optimal
contiguous, optimal fragmented, and suboptimal fragmented were 79, 77, and
59%, respectively (Toland 1991). Mean annual productivity of scrub-jays in the
study area was 2.2 young fledged per pair in contiguous, optimal scrub; 1.8 young
fledged per pair in fragmented, moderately developed scrub; 1.2 young per pair
40
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
fledged in highly fragmented, suboptimal scrub; and about 0.5 young per pair In
residential lawns. Long-term studies at Archbold Biological Station have previously
documented that mean annual productivity of scrub jays is 2.0 young per pair per
year in stable populations where natality counterbalances mortality (Fitzpatrick et
al.1991).
The subject demographic studies found that scrub-jays dispersed at earlier ages and
farther distances than is reported for contiguous natural scrub landscapes (Toland
unpubl. data). A total of 64 dispersals were documented, including 40 females and
24 males (Toland unpubl. data). The mean dispersal distance by females was 2.4
miles (3.8 km) [range = 0.2 mi. (0.3 km) to 5 mi. (8.0 km)] and the mean dispersal
distance by males was 0.9 miles (1.4 km) [range=0.5 mi. (0.075 km) to 2.9 mi.
(4.7 km)]. Four females were known to disperse 4 miles (6.5 km) between the
most northern clusters of the north subpopulation and the Sebastian
Highlands/Pelican Island Elementary School southernmost clusters (Toland unpubl.
data). The longest dispersal was 5 miles from a female that emigrated into the
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area from a cluster located on the Sebastian
Airport/Golf Course (Toland unpubl. data). Most of the documented dispersals in
the City of Sebastian were 2 miles or less (80% of females and 92 % of males)
(Toland unpubl. data).
Breininger (1999) documented similar patterns on the urbanized and extensively
fragmented South Brevard County barrier island, where females dispersed an
average of 4.5 miles (7.3 km) and maleS dispersed an average of 0.6 miles (1.0
km). On the Gulf Coast, Thaxton and Hingtgen (1996) reported average dispersal
distances in urban areas to be 5 miles for females and 1.2 miles (1.9 km) males.
These urban dispersal patterns contrast significantly with those documented for
contiguous, optimal scrub at Archbold Biological Station where mean dispersal
distances for females are 0.6 miles (1.0 km) and for males are 0.2 miles (0.3 km)
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984).
Scrub-jays in the Sebastian study area dispersed and nested at earlier ages than in
undisturbed scrub systems. A total of 41 known-age dispersals were documented
during the study (26 females and 1 5 males). The mean age of dispersing females
was 14.2 months (range = 4 to 36 months). The mean age of dispersing males
was 28.2 months (range = 11 to 60 months) (Toland unpubl. data). Breeding by
yearlings, especially females, was relatively common during the Sebastian scrub-jay
study (Toland unpubl. data). Florida scrub-jays will breed earlier than normal when
the chance arises in disturbed landscapes subject to population declines (Breininger
1999). Nesting by yearlings has also been reported for scrub-jay subpopulations in
Palm Bay and the South Brevard County barrier island (Breininger 1999).
During 1993, Indian River County and the City of Sebastian were censused for
Florida scrub-jays as part of the Florida state-wide survey (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994b).
This survey resulted in documentation of 52 families of scrub-jays in Indian River
41
1-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
County: none on the barrier island, 12 on the Ten Mile Ridge, and 40 on the
Atlantic Coastal Ridge (Toland 1993, 1996). The majority of remaining scrub-jay
families in Indian River County continued to persist in the incorporated limits of the
City of Sebastian, where scrub-jay territories declined from 35 in 1991 to 27 in
1993 (Toland unpubl. data, Toland 1996). Most of the territories that were
abandoned were in outlying parcels of the Sebastian Highlands that were composed
of predominantly disturbed, overgrown mesic flatwood and palmetto-Iyonia
shrubland vegetation, including slash pine (Pinus elliottil1, cabbage palm (Sabal
palmetto), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), gallberry (/lex glabra), saw palmetto
(Serenoa repens), fetterbush (Lyonia fruticosa), and staggerbush (L. lucida),'as well
as landscaped lawns, ornamental plants, and scattered live oaks (Quercus
virginiana). This disturbed matrix habitat characterizes the majority of the habitat
fragments remaining within the platted residential lots of Sebastian Highlands.
The 1996 Florida scrub-jay population census for Sebastian documented a
continued decline down to 20 breeding pairs (Toland 1996, unpubl. data).
During late summer/early fall of 1998, known remaining territories were censused
for 51 hours between July 19th and October 14th in support of this HCP. Following
survey methods used since 1988 (Fitzpatrick et al. 1991), this study documented
the loss of 4 more territories within the Sebastian Highlands subdivision, resulting
in a total of 16 territories within the incorporated limits of the City of Sebastian.
This represents a 54% population decline from the 35 breeding pairs documented
in the City of Sebastian in 1991 (Toland unpubl. data). The location of these
remaining territories is provided in Section 2.1 above. One notable increase
occurred in the Sebastian Highlands-Unit 17/Pelican Island Elementary School south
subpopulation cluster, where the scrub-jay territories increased from 3 to 5. This
increase in territories was a result of territory budding by 2 colorbanded males.
The Sebastian south subpopulation also includes the Wabasso Scrub Conservation
Area cluster containing two (2), possibly three (3), breeding pairs. The Wabasso
Scrub Conservation Area is located just south of the incorporated limits of the City
of Sebastian (see Figure 2). The Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area is less than one
mile south of the Pelican Island Elementary School/Sebastian Highlands
Conservation Area scrub-jay subpopulation (see Figure 2 - "Unit 17 Conservation
Areas"). The Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area scrub-jay families were
colorbanded in support of demographic studies during 1988 through 1991 (Toland
1996, unpubl. data). Several dispersals between this cluster and the Pelican Island
Elementary School cluster occurred between 1990 and 1993 (Toland unpubl. data)
Two colorbanded scrub-jay families were monitored at the Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area through the 1996-97 breeding season. These families primarily
occupy the north one-half of the conservation tract. The 1998 survey conducted
at the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area in support of this HCP found that these
two (2) families continued to occupy nearly the same habitat areas. However, a
42
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
third pair of unbanded scrub-jays was observed foraging in the northernmost
section of the habitat restoration parcel that was mechanically renovated in
January 1998. This area is adjacent to,. and south of, the two historic territories
(Toland unpubl. data). Therefore, the 1998 nesting season included a total of two
(2) distinct Florida scrub-jay territories and a third pair possibly pioneering a
territory in the restored area.
Each of the two (2) colorbanded scrub-jay families at Wabasso Scrub Conservation
Area included two (2) juveniles as recent as August 6, 1998. Therefore, their
mean annual productivity was 2.0 nutritionally-independent young per pair per year.
Nesting was not recorded for the third and newest pair of scrub-jays that were
observed foraging in the northern section of the habitat restoration parcel, as well
as on the adjacent golf course. Although the number of territories (2) remained
stable on the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area from 1988 through 1998,
individuals per family had been declining prior to habitat restoration in 1998 (Toland
unpubl. data).
Implementation of the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area Habitat Restoration and
Management Plan (SES 1996) during early 1 998 initially appears to have been
successful in restoring habitat conditions that are suitable for recruitment of an
additional scrub-jay on this conservation tract. Additional habitat restoration and
management activities, as covered under this HCPj are needed on Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area to optimize the scrub habitat for use by scrub-jays.
3.3 South Brevard County Florida Scrub-Jay Population Status
From 1993 through 1998, colorbanding and monitoring of Florida scrub-jays was
accomplished just north of the City of Sebastian in southern Brevard County
(Fitzpatrick et at. 1994b; Breininger and Oddy 1998). From 1997 through 1998,
investigations included colorbanding of 107 individuals in 42 breeding territories
(Breininger and Oddy 1998). The study sites extended over 8 miles from the
Sebastian Buffer Reserve along the southern Brevard County line to the City of
Malabar (Breininger and Oddy 1998). Data were also collected on 26 territories in
suburban Palm Bay and 12 territories on the Sebastian Buffer Reserve.
Between 1993 and 1998, all subpopulations in southern Brevard County declined
by more than 50% inclusively, due primarily to expansive decline in habit~t
suitability for scrub-jays (Breininger and Oddy 1998). A widespread epidemic during
1 998 may have augmented scrub-jay mortality in much of Florida including this
metapopulation (Breininger and Oddy 1998). Breininger and Oddy (1998) found
that almost no habitat in southern Brevard County was optimal for scrub-jays and
most was suboptimal due to long-term fire suppression and resulting habitat
succession and overgrowth.
43
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The immediate mechanical cutting of trees and aggressive application of prescribed
fire was determined to be an essential action at all of the south Brevard County
sites to prevent extinction of this population (Breininger and Oddy 1998). This
urgency to implement immediate habitat restoration activities to slow the rates of
scrub-jay population decline extends over into the HCP Plan Area and is reflected in
the HCP operating conservation program presented below in Section 5.0.
3.4 Documentation of the Occurrence of Federal and State Protected Species
Within the HCP Plan Area
The HCP Plan Area was assessed for the occurrence of other Federal or State
protected species by referencing the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI)
December 1997 database entitled Species and Natural Community Summary for
Indian River County, by reviewing past studies conducted on the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas by FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech Consultants, Inc. (1995,
1996, 1998), and by reviewing studies completed by the FWS. In addition,
random pedestrian transect surveys to determine the presence of protected species
were performed as part of the 1998 field surveys conducted in support of this
HCP.
Protected species are plants and animals which are listed as endangered, threatened,
or species of special concern by the FWS in 50 CFR 17.11 & 17.12, by the FWC in
Rules 30-27.003&004 and 39-27.05, F.A.C., and Florida Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services (FDACS) in Section 581.185-187, F.S. The FWC document,
Official Lists of Endangered and Potentially Endangered Fauna and Flora in Florida,
published August 1, 1997 and compiled by Tom H. Logan, FWC Endangered Species
Coordinator, provides a summary listing of all of the protected species of concern
occurring within the State of Florida. The Federal interpretation of take is described
above in Section 1.2.
Table 4 provides a list of protected species either confirmed to occur or expected
to occur in the potential Florida scrub-jay habitat identified within the HCP Plan
Area (Toland unpubl. data). As stated in Section 2.4 above, federally listed plant
species do not occur within the HCP Plan Area. A Preliminary Vascular Plant List
prepared by The Institute for Regional Conservation from site surveys conducted on
November 21, 1995 at the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area, Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area, and North Sebastian Conservation Area is provided in
Appendix C.. This plant list confirms that no federally listed plants occur on the
subject conservation properties. Several wetland dependent avian species and the
bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) were observed to use wetland habitats
located within the landscape matrix of the HCP Plan Area (Toland unpubl. data).
44
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 4. Protected Wildlife Species Occurring or Potentially Occurring within the
HCP Plan Area.
Common Name Scientific Name Regulatory Agency Protection Status
Eastern Indigo Drymarchon corais FWS and FWC Threatened and
Snake couperi Threatened
Florida Scrub-Jay Aphelocoma FWS and FWC Threatened and
coerulescens Threatened
Florida pine Pituophis FWC Species of Special
snake melanoleucus Concern (SSC)
mU.Qitus
Florida mouse Podomys f10ridanus FWC SSC
Florida gopher Rana capito FWC SSC
frog
Gopher tortoise Gopherus FWC SSC
Polyphemus
3.5 Other Regulatory Laws Relevant to the HCP Plan Area
Residential development actions conducted within the ITP impact area have the
potential to result in the "taking" of State protected wildlife species listed above in
Table 4 and/or the dredging and filling of wetlands.
In accordance with Chapter 39, F.A.C., it is the sole responsibility of the private
landowners of the affected Sebastian Highlands lots to procure permit authorization
from the FWC prior to engaging in construction activities that may result in the
taking of a State protected species, such as the gopher tortoise and/or listed
burrow commensals. Habitat restoration and management actions to be
implemented on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas in accordance with this
HCP will serve to provide habitat benefits to the protected species potentially
occurring within these habitat areas.
Wetlands and surface waters are protected by the State of Florida in accordance with
the regulatory program authorized under Part IV, Chapter 373, F.S. The Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) administers this program for single-
family residential projects. Wetlands are afforded Federal regulatory protection
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (ACOE) administers this Federal program. Again, it is the sole
45
I
I
I
I
I
II
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
responsibility of the private landowners of the affected Sebastian Highlands lots to
procure permit authorization from the appropriate regulating authorities. Habitat
restoration and management actions to be implemented on the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas in accordance with this HCP, such as construction of fire
perimeter breaks, shall avoid, wherever practicable, dredge and fill impacts to
wetlands and/or surface waters.
Federal authority for protection of historic properties is set forth in the National
Historic PreseNation Act of 1996 (Public Law 89-655), as amended. The State of
Florida regulates impacts to significant archeological or historical sites under the
provisions of section 267.061, F.S. It is unlikely that significant archeological or
historic properties remain within the Sebastian Highlands ITP impact area due to the
present level of development within this area.
A county-wide cultural resource survey was completed in 1 992 by The Archeological
Historical ConseNancy, Inc. (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech Consultants, Inc.
1995). This survey determined that no archeological or historic sites are known or
expected to occur on the Indian River County-owned Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech Consultants, Inc. 1995, 1996,
1 998). It is doubtful that the remaining Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Area
properties contain historical sites. As part of FCT Grant Award Agreement, Indian
River County is obligated to take appropriate protective measures i~ the event historic
sites are found on their conservation properties (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech
Consultants, Inc. 1 995). The habitat restoration and management actions to be
implemented on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas in accordance with this
HCP are directed to minimize adverse impacts to the conseNation site by
implementing measures which minimize soil disturbance.
The City of Sebastian shall inform citizens of the above State and Federal regulations
as part of the City's building permit application package for residential construction.
Local zoning regulations and hazardous material concerns potentially affecting the
Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas have been assessed by the Applicants as part
of the land acquisition procedures for these properties (R. DeBlois pers. comm.).
3.6 Sebastian HCP Plan Area Habitat Types and Surrounding Land Use
Descriptions
Scrub vegetation community types are associated with ridges of well-drained to
moderately-well drained soils (Kurz 1942; Laessle 1942, 1958; Schmalzer et al.
1999). Along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge, scrub communities occur as patches
within a matrix of poor to moderately-well drained flatwoods and isolated wetlands
(Breininger et al. 1988, 1991; Schmalzer et al. 1999). This diverse mosaic of
habitat types describes scrub landscapes that are optimal for Florida scrub-jays
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Breininger 1992; Breininger et al. 1995, 1996b).
46
1
1
1
I,
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The classification of the habitat types identified within the scrub landscapes in the
HCP Plan Area are generally based on the FNAI Guide to the Natural Communities
ot Florida (FNAI 1990) classification system. A brief description of each community
type, including associated soils, is presented below. The landscape context of the
HCP Plan Area is clearly displayed on Figure 2. It is primarily comprised of
suburban/urban complex. A detailed description of habitat types within the Indian
River County-owned Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas can be found in the
management plans developed for each of these sites in support of the FCT grant
awards (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech Consultants, Inc. 1995, 1996, 1998).
The Sebastian Highlands ITP impact area is characterized by small remnant patches
of scrub and mesic habitat communities sparsely interspersed within a massive,
fast growing urban residential landscape. Figure 2 vividly portrays the multiple
habitat disturbances that have occurred within the historical Atlantic Coastal Ridge
scrub landscape as a result of development of the Sebastian Highlands subdivision.
With the exception of the affected Unit 17 scrub lots located near the Pelican
Island Elementary School compensation area, most of the potential scrub-jay
habitat areas remaining within the Sebastian Highlands are composed of disturbed
and overgrown mesic flatwood and palmetto-Iyonia shrubland vegetation, as
described above in Section 3.2. Review of the Soils Survey of Indian River County,
Florida (Wettstein et al. 1987) determined that the mesic communities within the
ITP impact area occur primarily on the nearly level, poorly drained EauGallie,
Myakka, Immokalee, Oldsmar, and Malabar fine sands.
Fragmented patches of xeric oak scrub remain within the delineated affected Unit
17 residential lots and both of the Unit 17 Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
(Pelican Island Elementary School/Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area)
(see Figure 2). The vegetative composition of this scrub community is generally
characterized by an open canopy of slash pine with an open to closed shrub
understory dominated by scrub oaks (Quercus geminata, a. chapmanii, Q.
myrtitolia), staggerbush, tarflower (8etaria racemosa), saw palmetto, shiny blueberry
(Vaccinium myrsinites), and hogplum (Ximenia americana). A diversity of herbaceous
ground cover species is found within this habitat type, including: beak rush
(Rhynchospora megalocarpa), silk grass (Pityopsis graminitolia), gopher apple (Licania
michauxit), prickly pear cactus (Opuntia humitusa), blazing star (Liatris spp.), deer
tongue (Carphephorus spp.), and wiregrass (Aristida stricta). Ground lichens (Cladonia
spp.) and Florida rosemary (Ceratiola ericoides) are also associated with this scrub
habitat. The scrub communities identified in the subject Unit 17 areas are associateOd
with the nearly level to gently sloping, moderately-well drained Archbold and Pomello
sands, 0 to 5% slopes (Wettstein et al. 1987).
The vegetative structure of the oak scrub habitat occurring within Unit 17 varies - a
response to time since fire and surrounding human-induced disturbances. Some of the
oak scrub habitat within the Unit 17 Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas is
currently unsuitable for use by scrub-jays due to a dense pine canopy, overgrown
47
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
shrub stratum, and absence of open patches of sand. These areas can be restored to
optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions by application of appropriate habitat restoration
strategies. A small patch of the oak scrub habitat remaining in Unit 17 on and
adjoining the Pelican Island Elementary School compensation area exhibits optimal
scrub-jay habitat conditions, e.g. sparse pine canopy cover and a low, open shrub
community. The scrub habitat types occurring within the Unit 17 ITP impact area and
Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas have not been managed in the past. As part
of an environmental education program at Pelican Island Elementary School, the
School Board authorized the DOF to conduct a prescribed burn of the oak scrub
habitat within the Pelican Island Elementary School compensation area (R. DeBlois
pers. comm.). This prescribed burn was successfully implemented in the Spring 1999
(R. DeBlois pers. comm.).
Habitat types defined on the Sebastian HCP Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
include: sand pine, oak scrub, rosemary scrub, scrubby flatwoods, mesic flatwoods,
palmetto-Iyonia shrubland, disturbed lands, depression marsh, and inland swamp. The
scrub habitat types are: sand pine scrub, oak scrub, rosemary scrub, and scrubby
flatwoods. Each of these habitat types have formed in association with somewhat
poorly drained to excessively drained soil types, and exhibit a scrub oak vegetative
cover component ranging from 5% to > 50%.
The mesic matrix habitat types are: mesic flatwoods and palmetto shrubland. These
natural communities are associated with poorly drained soils and exhibit a less than
5 % scrub oak cover.
The disturbed habitat types are those areas altered by anthropogenic activities and
are presently infested by Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) and/or covered by
wild grape vine (Vilis spp.). The disturbed habitat areas were found to occur on both
xeric and mesic soil types.
The marshes and inland swamp are depressional wetland communities dominated by
herbaceous vegetation and associated with very poorly drained sandy soils. Review of
historical imagery revealed that the inland swamp habitat type identified on the North
Sebastian Conservation Area was previously an open marsh habitat which has
succeeded into a wetland forest dominated by a mixture of hydrophytic trees as a
result of fire exclusion.
Sand Pine Scrub
The sand pine scrub habitat type is found on the North Sebastian Conservation Area
along the higher areas of the Atlantic Coastal Ridge. This community type occurs on
the nearly level to gently sloping moderately-well drained Archbold and Pomello sand,
o to 5% slopes and the excessively-drained St. Lucie sand, 0 to 8% slopes and
Astatula sand, 0 to 5% slopes (Wettstein et al. 1987). It is vegetatively
characterized by a dense sand pine (Pinus clausa) canopy with an oak scrub
48
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
understary. This understary is similar in vegetative campasitian to. the aak scrub
faund in Unit 17 af Sebastian Highlands, as described abave. Review af histarical
imagery faund that the extent af the sand pine scrub farest habitat an the Narth
Sebastian Canservatian Area has expanded significantly aver time due to. reduced fire
frequencies.
Oak Scrub
The aak scrub habitat type is faund an each af the Scrub-Jay Habitat Campensatian
Areas, with the largest cantiguaus patch accurring an the Wabassa Scrub
Canservatian Area. The aak scrub habitat accurs primarily an the nearly level to.
gently slaping, maderately-well drained Archbald and Pamella sands, 0 to. 5% slapes
(Wettstein et a/. 1987). Within the Narth Sebastian Canservatian Area, aak scrub is
also. assaciated with the nearly level and samewhat poorly drained Satellite fine sand
sail type (Wettstein et a/. 1987). The apen aak scrub areas determined to. histarically
accur an the excessively-drained sails are currently daminated by sand pine, as
described abave. The vegetative descriptian for this habitat type is provided abave
for the aak scrub identified in Unit 1 7 af Sebastian Highlands.
Rosemarv Scrub
A small patch af rosemary scrub was identified an the Narth Sebastian Conservation
Area. This scrub habitat type was differentiated from the surrounding sand pine and
oak scrub habitat types due to a daminance of Flarida rasemary with numeraus apen,
sandy areas. This scrub habitat type occurs an the nearly level, somewhat poorly
drained Satellite fine sand soils (Wettstein et a/. 1987).
Scrubbv Flatwoads
The scrubby pine flatwaads scrub habitat type was identified within the Narth
Sebastian Conservation Area and along the western boundary af the Sebastian
Airpart campensatian properties. It is vegetatively characterized by a shrub layer
dominated by saw palmetto. interspersed by scrub aaks and an open to. closed canapy
of slash pine. Sails af the scrubby flatwaads identified on the subject campensatian
areas are the nearly level, paorly drained Myakka and Immakalee sands and the nearly
level, somewhat paarly drained Satellite sands (Wettstein et a/. 1987).
Mesic Flatwoads
Mesic flatwoads are the predominant matrix habitat type of the scrub landscapes
within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Campensatian Areas. This natural cammunity type is
comman on the North Sebastian Canservation Area/Sebastian Airport compensation
sites and Wabasso Scrub Conservatian Area. It is vegetatively characterized by a
dense slash pine canopy with a shrubby understary dominated by saw palmetto.,
fetterbush, and gallberry. Herbaceaus ground caver, daminated by wiregrass, is
49
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
J
sparse due to either a thick layer of pine needle duff or the dense shrub layer.
Cabbage palm is scattered within the mesic slash pine canopy at the North Sebastian
Conservation Area. Soil types of the mesic flatwoods on the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas are the nearly level, poorly drained Myakka, EauGallie, and
Immokalee fine sands (Wettstein et al. 1987).
Palmetto - Lvonia Shrubland
The palmetto-Iyonia shrubland classification is applied to describe a natural
community that is essentially a mesic flatwoods without the pine canopy component.
This habitat type is identified within the North Sebastian Conservation Area and
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area. The dense shrub community characterizing this
habitat is dominated by saw palmetto, fetterbush, and gallberry on the same Myakka
and Immokalee fine sand soils (Wettstein et al. 1987) as the mesic pine flatwoods
Disturbed Lands
This land use classification type is used to describe vegetatively disturbed areas on
poorly drained soils dominated by Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), an exotic
and invasive species and/or grape vine, a native species that rapidly colonizes
disturbed sites.
Deoression Marsh/lnland Swamo
Numerous, isolated depression marshes are interspersed within the scrub landscapes
at the North Sebastian Conservation Area/Sebastian Airport and the Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area. They are formed on the very poorly drained Myakka fine sand,
depressional soil (Wettstein et aJ. 1987). The marshes are generally characterized by
a dense herbaceous cover dominated by sand cordgrass (Spartina bakenl,
broomsedges (Andropogon spp.), blue maidencane (Amphicarpum muhlenbergianum),
red root (Lachnanthes caroliniana), hatpin (Eriocaulon spp.), yellow-eyed grasses
(Xyris spp.), and rushes (Rynchospora spp). Shrub species including buttonbush
(Cephalanthis occidentalis) and willow (Salix caroliniana) occur in the deeper pockets
of these wetland communities. Wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera) and saltbush (Baccharis
halmifolia) are invading the upper margins of some of the depression marshes.
The inland swamp is a successional forested wetland community dominated by re.d
maple (Acer rubrum).
The primary disturbance regime within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
that negatively influences the persistence of Florida scrub-jays on these properties is
fire suppression and habitat fragmentation. Implementation of the scrub management
and restoration strategies recommended herein is critical to the viability of the
Sebastian Florida scrub-jay population and the Atlantic Coastal Ridge scrub
ecosystem on which it depends.
50
1
1
I
I,
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
4.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
4.1 Determination of Acreage of Potential Scrub-Jay Habitat to be Impacted,
Preserved and Restored
4.1 .1 Methodoloav
Habitat Studies
High resolution digital orthophoto quads (DOOs) were obtained for the HCP Plan Area
to display required data. The DOOs are available across a wide area and provide
consistent, convenient, high quality templates for managing and displaying spatial
data using readily available software (e.g. ArcView, ARC/INFO) on most hardware
platforms, using Windows 95 or Unix operating systems (Breininger and Oddy 1998).
The DOOs were used in this analysis as a template to view the spatial location of the
ITP impact area, Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, and core areas of the South
Brevard County/North Indian River County metapopulation, and to assign specific
habitat and demographic attributes with digital photography as a background.
Imagery from 1943, 1957, and 1965 were obtained to qualitatively describe habitat
changes over time for purposes of assessing the potential for habitat restoration to
provide optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions. As illustrated by Figure 2, use of DOQs
is valuable in this study as they clearly reveal the predominant land use within the
HCP Plan Area.
Habitat pOlygons were digitized for each of the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas in ARC/INFO coverage and include the following attributes: acreage of habitat
polygons, habitat type, potential for restoration as scrub-jay habitat, soil moisture
condition (xeric, mesic, or wet), need for pine thinning, shrub' height class (a
measurement of habitat quality), and occupation by scrub-jays. Definition of these
attributes for each polygon provided a mechanism to evaluate the regulatory
compliance of this HCP and to determine the habitat restoration/management needs
for each site. Field surveys were conducted in the summer/fall of 1998 to review the
mapped polygons for accuracy with regard to habitat composition and structure and
potential for habitat restoration to provide optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions.
Additional surveys were conducted at each compensation area to up-date the number
and extent of. scrub-jay territories occupying these sites. .
The mapped habitat polygons are presented for each Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas in the Figures 4, 6, and 8 with the digital photography as a
background. Figures 5, 7, and 9 provide the corresponding habitat polygons
sequentially numbered for identification and evaluation. Descriptions of the habitat
types defined within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are presented above
in Section 3.6.
51
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I]
I
11
Ii
I
I,
I,
IJ
Figure 4. Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area/Sebastian Airport
0.7
I
0.7
1.4 Miles
I
o
N
w
E
52
s
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
Ii
II
Ii
I]
Figure 5. Florida Scrub..Jay Habitat Polygons
North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area/Sebastian Airport
0.6
I
Ii
II
IJ
o
0.6
1.2 Miles
N
Scru~ay habitat reserves
ExIsting, occupied scrub-jay habitat
Restorable, unoccupied scrub-Jay habitat
Mesic flatwoods within 1 DDm from oak scrub habitat
Disturbed lands within 100m tom oak scrub habitat
- Wetlands
'; Mesic flatwoods . not potential scrub-Jay habitat
E
w
s
53
r-
I
I
I
I
Ii.
II
I!
Ii
Ii
II
II
I)
I]
Ii
I)
I
I
I]
II
""""'....,;.:'-'
Figure 6. Florida Scrub..Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
Pelican Island Elementary School
and
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area
0.2
I
o
0.2
0.4 Miles
I
N
D Scrub-jay reserves.shp
E
w
54
s
I
I
I'
I
I
I:
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I)
0.2
I
Figure 7. Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Polygons
Pelican Island Elementary School
and
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area
Scrub-jay habitat reserves
lR1 Existing, occupied scrub-Jay habitat
D Restorable, unoccupied scrub-jay habitat
Ii Mesic flatwoods within 100m from oak scrub habitat
Disturbed lands within 100m from oak scrub habitat
- ::':"oods . not potential scrub-jay habllal
o
0.2
0.4 Miles
N
w
E
s
~
I
I
I
I:
I
I
I;
I}
I
Ii
Ii
- I
Ii
II
Figure 8. Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area
0.2
I
0.2
0.4 Miles
I
o
N
w
E
D Scrub-jay habitat reserves
s
56
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 9. Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Polygons
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area
0.1
I
o
0.1
0.2
0.3 Miles
I
N
Scrub-jay habitat reserves
I~l Existing, occupied scrub-jay habitat
Restorable, unoccupied scrub-jay habitat
I Mesic flatwoods within 100m frrn oak scrub habitat
Disturbed lands within 100m from oak scrub habitat
~ :::i~:WOOdS forests. not potentlal habitat
57
w
E
s
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The attributes assigned to each mapped polygon are provided in Table 5,
Characteristics of Habitat Polygons within Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
The total calculated acreage for the mapped habitat polygons described in Table 5
and covering all publicly owned land assessed under this HCP is 645.8 acres. The
total surveyed acreage for the same area is reported to be 665.5:t acres. Therefore,
a 3% error in this analysis is recognized, however it is considered insignificant as it
represents an "under-compensation" of calculated mitigation acres. Please note that
the four (4) acre parcel located along the southern boundary of the Pelican Island
Elementary School complex and the subject of future take authorization under this
HCP is not shown on any of the figures presented herein. The boundaries of this area
are defined as the undeveloped lands located on the south boundary of the Pelican
Island Elementary School grounds, exclusive of the 1 2:t acre compensation area
described by Polygon Nos. 44, 45, 46, and 47 (Figure 7).
Potential scrub-jay habitat comprising the majority of the total 330.5:t acre Scrub-
Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are defined by the scrub habitat types: sand pine
scrub, oak scrub, rosemary scrub, and scrubby flatwoods. It includes the sand pine
scrub and scrubby flatwoods which have become forest (> 65% tree canopy cover)
due to the absence of period fire and habitat fragmentation. Review of the historical
imagery determined that these currently forested scrub habitat areas exhibited
suitable open scrub-jay habitat attributes in the past.
Potential scrub-jay habitat also includes mesic flatwoods within 328' (100m) of, and
palmetto-Iyonia shrublands adjacent to, the delineated scrub habitat types. The
restoration and management of these mesic habitat areas as potential scrub-jay
habitat must be considered under this HCP. Numerous studies have documented that
scrub-jay territories are not restricted to oak scrub ridges (Breininger et at. 1 991,
1995, 1998a; Duncun et at. 1995; Breininger and Oddy 1998). Figures 5, 7, and 9,
have been color-enhanced to facilitate rapid interpretation c;>f. the assigned
attributes.
As presented in Section 2.4.1 above, optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat (Fitzpatrick et
at. 1991; Breininger 1992; Breininger et at. 1995, 1996b) occurs as patches of oak
scrub (focal habitat), embedded within a low and open mesic shrub landscape (matrix
habitats) (Breininger et at. 1 996b). Native matrix habitats, principally mesic pine
flatwoods and depression marshes, are important components of the scrub landscape
used by Florida scrub-jay (Breininger et at. 1995, 1996b). Matrix habitat areas
without scrub oak and within approximately 1970' (600m) of scrub oak were
documented by Breininger and Oddy (1998) to be frequently used by scrub-jays.
These native matrix habitats provide prey species for Florida scrub-jays and habitat
for other species of conservation concern (Breininger et at. 1995, 1996b; Schmalzer
et at. 1999). The high flammability of the native matrix habitats often serves to
spread fire into the fire-resistant oak scrub habitats (Breininger et at. 1995, 1996b).
The matrix habitats provide habitat to Florida scrub-jays during periods of habitat
degradation of the preferred oak scrub habitat (Breininger and Oddy 1 998).
58
I
I Table 5. Characteristics of Habitat Polygons within Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas
I Polygon Acres Habitat type Potential Xeric or Pine Shrub Occupied
I scrub-jay Mesic or thinning height
habitat Wet class
1 9.6 Sand pine Yes Xeric Yes Mixed tall No
I 2 23.3 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
3 6.4 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
4 6.7 Sand pine Yes Xeric Yes Mixed tall No
I 5 4.9 Scrubby Yes Xeric Yes Too tall No
flatwoods
6 17.1 Oak scrub Yes Xeric Yes Mixed tall Yes
I 7 6.6 Oak scrub Yes Xeric Yes Mixed tall Yes
8 6.5 Mesic flatwoods No Mesic Yes Too tall No
(Corridor)
II 9 21.4 Mesic flatwoods Yes Mesic Yes Too tall Yes
10 27.1 Mesic flatwoods No Mesic No Too tall No
11 24.1 Mesic flatwoods No Mesic No Too tall No
12 20.8 Scrubby Yes Xeric Yes Mixed tall No
I flatwoods
13 6.0 Scrubby Yes Xeric Yes Too tall Yes
flatwoods
I 14 3.5 Oak scrub Yes Xeric No Optimal Yes
15 10.2 Mesic flatwoods Yes Mesic Yes Too tall No
16 1.0 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
I 17 2.8 Mesic flatwoods Yes Mesic Yes Mixed tall No
18 2.2 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
19 16.2 Scrubby Yes Xeric Yes Too tall No
Ii flatwoods
20 23.8 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
21 0.3 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
I 22 8.0 Mesic flatwoods Yes Mesic Yes Too tall . No
23 0.9 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
24 21.3 Mesic flatwoods Yes Mesic Yes Too tall No
I 25 5.1 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
26 5.1 Scrubby Yes Xeric Yes Too tall No
flatwoods
I 27 18.1 Sand pine Yes Xeric Yes Mixed tall Yes
28 1.4 Marsh . No Wet No N/A . No
29 1.0 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
I 30 4.6 Rosemary Yes Xeric Yes Mixed tall Yes
31 9.0 Oak scrub Yes Xeric No Mixed tall Yes
32 0.9 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
I 33 0.9 Disturbed Yes Mesic Yes Too tall No
I
I. 59
I I
I Table 5. Continued.
Polygon Acres Habitat type Potential Xeric or Pine Shrub Occupied
I scrub-jay Mesic or thinning height
habitat Wet class
I 34 5.0 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
35 26.5 Scrubby Yes Xeric Yes Mixed tall Yes
flatwoods
I, 36 8.7 Disturbed Yes Xeric Yes Too tall No
37 25.4 Palmetto-L yonia Yes Xeric No Mixed tall Yes
38 4.3 Mesic flatwoods Yes Mesic Yes Too tall No
I 39 6.3 Disturbed Yes Mesic Yes Too tall No
40 37.7 Inland Swamp No Wet No N/A No
41 2.8 Oak scrub Yes Xeric Yes Too tall Yes
42 1.7 Oak scrub Yes Xeric Yes Too tall Yes
I 43 1.5 Oak scrub Yes Xeric Yes Too tall Yes
44 4.6 Oak scrub Yes Xeric Yes Optimal Yes
45 2.5 Oak scrub Yes Xeric Yes Too tall Yes
I'
, 46 2.0 Oak scrub Yes Xeric Yes Too tall Yes
47 2.8 Scrubby Yes Xeric Yes Too tall Yes
flatwoods
I 48 5.2 Pal metto-L yoni a Yes Mesic No Mixed tall Yes
49 0.7 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
50 15.1 Oak scrub Yes Xeric No Optimal Yes
I 51 17.7 Oak scrub Yes Xeric Yes Mixed tall Yes
52 0.3 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
53 4.8 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
I 54 16.4 Mesic flatwoods No Mesic No Mixed tall No
55b 34.6 Oak scrub Yes Xeric No Optimal Yes
56 2.9 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
I, 57 2.6 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
58 2.4 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
59 1 .1 Mesic flatwoods Yes Mesic Yes Mixed tall No
I 60 1.6 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
61 0.7 Marsh No Wet No N/A No
62 1.6 Mesic flatwoods Yes Mesic Yes Mixed tall No
I 63 1.4 Mesic flatwoods Yes Mesic Yes Too tall No
64 88.1 Mesic flatwoods No Mesic Yes Too tall No
I Total Potential Scrub-Jay Habitat - 324.0 j;; acresd
Total Occupied Scrub-Jay Habitat ;. 194.1 j;; acres
I Total Unoccupied Potential Scrub-Jay Habitat - 129.9 j;; acres
I · -Polygon 8- represents the 100' wide (6.5:l: acre) Sebastian Airport dispersal corridor
b-Polygon 55- represents the C.R. 512 Mitigation area
c_ Polygon 64- represents the 88.1 :l: acre Sebastian Airport Commercial Property
I d_ Excludes Polygons 8, 55, and 64
IJ 60
----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The proximity of forests and patches of tall shrubs greater than one acre (0.4 hectare)
has been shown to have a negative impact on demography (Breininger et al. 1995;
Breininger and Oddy 1998). Tall vegetation reduces the scrub-jays ability to scan their
surroundings for long-distances; thereby increasing their vulnerability to predation by
woodland hawks (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Schmalzer et al. 1994;
Breininger et al. 1995; Breininger and Oddy 1998). Management of the matrix
habitat types as low, open habitat areas enhances the dispersal potential of scrub-
jays (Breininger and Oddy 1 998). The spatial arrangement of habitat structure affects
demographic success and must be considered in management for population
persistence of Florida scrub-jays (Breininger et al. 1991, 1995, 1998a; Duncun et al.
1995; Breininger and Oddy 1998). Mesic flatwood forests that were observed to be
present on historical imagery within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas and
are located > 328' (100m) from focal scrub habitat types were not classified as
potential scrub-jay habitat to be covered under this HCP.
Each habitat polygon was also evaluated to define management needs for restoration
to conditions that are optimal for scrub-jays. This includes habitat quality
considerations of pine thinning and shrub height class. It also defines the current
extent of habitat use by existing scrub-jay territories to avoid negative impacts to
these territories as a result of proposed habitat restoration and management actions.
The acreage of habitat currently used by scrub-jays on the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas was determined to assist in the determination of the regulatory
sufficiency of this HCP.
Optimal scrub-jay habitat features a tree canopy cover of less than 15%. Therefore,
potential scrub-jay habitat polygons exhibiting a tree canopy cover of greater than
15% are recommended for pine thinning. Review of Table 5 shows that pine thinning
is recommended within most of the habitat polygons.
The shrub height mapping classes evaluated for each habitat polygon included: 1.)
too short [entire polygon < 3.9' (1.2m) tall], 2.) optimal [polygon exhibited a mosaic of
too short (<3.9' (1.2m)) and optimal (3.9-5.6' (1.2-1.7m tall))] and had no too tall
scrub [> 5.6 (1. 7m) tall] patch greater than 1 acre in size, 3.) mixed tall (polygon
exhibited a mix of too tall patches > 1 acre in size and short and/or optimal scrub),
and 4.) too tall [entire polygon was > 5.6' (1.7m tall)]. This attribute was used to
classify habitat quality within the shrub stratum for purposes of recommending
mechanical and fire management needs. Table 6, Habitat Quality Classificatio!1
Regarding Shrub Height and Habitat Management Needs, describes each habitat
quality attribute.
Scrub-Jay Occuoancy Studies
The final characteristic that was evaluated was the determination of present use of
the habitat polygon by Florida scrub-jays. As presented above in Section 3.2, the
known remaining scrub-jay territories located within the compensation areas and
61
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 6.
Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Quality Classification Regarding Shrub Height
And Habitat Management Needs.
Shrub Height Description Minimum Mapping Habitat Management
Class Unit Needs
Too short Entire polygon was No patch taller than Mosaic burning
< 1 20 cm tall 1 20 cm was > 1 acre needed within 3-8
years.
Optimal Polygon was mix of At least 1 patch of Mosaic burning
. . short (< 120 cm) and optimal scrub was > 1 needed within 2-5
optimal scrub (1 20- acre and at least 1 years.
1 70 cm tall) and had patch of short scrub
no tall scrub (> 170 was > 1 acre. No
cm tall). patch of tall scrub was
> 1 acre.
Mixed tall Polygon was mix of At least 1 patch of tall Some mechanical
tall scrub (> 1 70 cm) scrub was> 1 acre. At cutting needed. Hot
and short and/or least 1 patch of short fire needed
optimal scrub. or optimal scrub was immediately.
> 1 acre.
Too tall Entire polygon was No scrub < 1 70 cm tall Mechanical cutting
> 1 70 cm tall. was > 1 acre. needed in most of
the polygon. Hot fire
needed immediately.
62
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
Ii
_ i
I
I
I
I
II
I
Ii
IJ
affected lots were censused by SES for 51 hours between July 19, 1998 and
October 14, 1998 using FWS recommended methods set forth in Fitzpatrick et a/.
(1991 ). Where contiguous territories did not facilitate initiation of disputes between
families to define territory boundaries, occupancy of a habitat polygon area was
based on observed presence or absence of scrub-jays, in conjunction with an
assessment of the presence of habitat features suitable for use by scrub-jays. The
surveys were primarily completed within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
to ensure that management strategies recommended within this HCP would not
adversely impact existing territories and to provide accurate base data to estimate the
potential number of scrub-jay territories that the compensation areas can support
when restored to optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions.
4.1.2 Acreage of Privatelv-Owned Sebastian Highlands Potential Scrub-Jay Habitat
Lots
Pursuant to an informal agreement between the FWS and the Applicants, the
assessment of the level of anticipated incidental take for this HCP is primarily
habitat-based. It considers the habitat contained within the privately-owned
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots presently designated by the FWS as occupied or
potentially-occupied by scrub-jays. For purposes of this HCP, the average area of
each affected Sebastian Highlands residential lot is estimated to be one-quarter
acre. Therefore, the level of anticipated incidental take proposed under this HCP,
expressed in terms of habitat-areas, is calculated based on the total number of
affected lots multiplied by an average lot size of one-quarter acre.
Based on the existing lot data compiled by SES and presented in Table 3, 317
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots, comprising 79.3:1: acres, are presently recorded by
the City of Sebastian as containing potential scrub-jay habitat. Figure 2 shows the
spatial location of these specified lots (impact areas). These lots are located within
the overalllTP impact area covered under this HCP.
4.1.3 Acreaae of Existing (Occuoiedl Scrub-Jay Habitat on the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Comoensation Areas
Field surveys conducted in support of this HCP found that almost no habitat was
optimal for scrub-jays on the North Sebastian Conservation Area, Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area (34 lots in Unit 17), and Pelican Island Elementary SCho<?1
Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas. The majority of the scrub-jay habitat areas
that occur on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas have more than one habitat
feature that is suboptimal for use by scrub-jays. Scrub-jay habitat quality at Wabasso
Scrub Conservation Area is higher than the other compensation areas covered under
this HCP. This is a result of a wildfire that burned the northern oak scrub habitat
areas approximately 10 years ago and the implementation of a timber operation in
1998 within a 34.6:1: acre sand pine forest located in the southeastern area of the
site. This forest habitat type was not used by scrub-jays prior to timbering. The
63
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
Ii
_ J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
timber operation was completed as part of a mitigation plan. to compensate for the
take of one (1) Florida scrub-jay territory incidental to the County Road 512
improvements project (FWS Log No. 4-1-96-432). As clearly stated on Table 5 and
Figure 9, this 34.6:t acre parcel (Polygon 55) is not included as mitigation under this
Sebastian HCP. This is due to the fact that Indian River County already used this area
as compensatory mitigation for the take of Florida scrub-jays incidental to
implementation of the County Road 51 2 improvements project. Only 38:t acres of
potential scrub-jay habitat located on the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area is being
proposed as part of the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas proposed under this
HCP (see Table 5). This compensation area is identified as Polygon Nos. 48, 50, and
51 on Table 5 and Figure 9. Figure 9 shows Polygon 55 as occupied by Florida
scrub-jays for informational purposes only and is not intended to indicate inclusion as
a compensatory mitigation area.
The assessment of the extent of existing (occupied) scrub-jay habitat on the
compensation area was based on the presence of suitable scrub-jay habitat features
(Breininger et al 1995, 1996; Breininger and Oddy 1998), in conjunction with the
documented presence of scrub-jay territories, pursuant to the 1 998 scrub-jay census
conducted in support of this HCP. Using the habitat-based assessment procedure,
which is consistent with the methodology applied to quantify the amount of incidental
take proposed under this HCP, 194.1::!: acres of suitable, occupied scrub-jay habitat
were determined to occur within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas (see
Table 5).
4.1.4 Acreage of Unoccuoied. Restorable Scrub-Jay Habitat on the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Comoensation Areas
The acreage of unoccupied, restorable scrub-jay habitat occurring within the Scrub-
Jay Habitat Compensation Areas is based on a review of historical imagery dating
back to 1943, presence of restorable scrub-jay habitat features, and consideration of
the influence of matrix habitats to the demographic success in scrub-jays.
As presented in Table 5, 129.9:t acres of unoccupied, restorable scrub-jay habitat
was determined to occur within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
4.2 Estimated Amount or Extent of Take
Based on existing data collected from the City of Sebastian and a survey conducted
in the ITP impact area in the summer/fall 1998, issuance of the Sebastian HCP ITP
is anticipated to result in the taking of 79.3::!: acres (317 lots) of habitat currently
identified by the FWS as occupied and potentially occupied by scrub-jays. As a
result of implementation of scrub-jay habitat enhancement measures directed by
this HCP, take is also expected at some time in the future on 88.1 acres of
commercial property on Sebastian Airport and four (4) acres on the southern
64
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
boundary of the Pelican Island Elementary School. As noted above, these habitat
areas are presently unoccupied and unsuitable for use by scrub-jays.
Two scrub-jay clusters are presently documented within the affected habitat area.
These clusters, which are part of the south subpopulation, are composed of a total
of seven (7) scrub-jay families concentrated primarily within Units 10 and 1 7 of
Sebastian Highlands. Restoration and long-term management of the Unit 17
compensation areas, totaling 22:t acres of historically optimal scrub-jay habitat,
are proposed under this HCP. This conservation area adjoins and is within 1000 ft.
(305m) of five (5) scrub-jay families (Unit 17 cluster) that are potentially affected
by the proposed action. The proposed restoration of the subject Unit 17
compensation areas is expected, over time, to minimize impacts to the affected
Unit 17 scrub-jay cluster by maintaining suitable nesting and foraging habitat
conditions for use by these scrub-jays. Under present-day conditions, only a small
portion of the habitat areas used by the Unit 17 cluster would be classified as
optimal scrub-jay habitat.
To further minimize impacts to the affected scrub-jay clusters, restoration of the
Unit 17 compensation areas is of the highest priority: A recent prescribed fire
within the Pelican Island Elementary School scrub initiated the Applicants effort to
minimize adverse impacts of the proposed action to this local scrub-jay population.
An additional factor to be considered in quantifying the number of scrub-jay
families anticipated to be affected by the proposed action is that loss of habitat
within the Sebastian Highland lots is expected to occur incrementally, over time, as
the City of Sebastian issues residential home construction permits towards build-
out of the Sebastian Highlands subdivision. This further supports the need to
prioritize habitat restoration measures within the Unit 17 compensation areas,
Pelican Island Elementary School and Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation
Area.
Conservation measures to be implemented by the Applicants to mInimiZe and
mitigate potential impacts of the taking, are the restoration and long-term
management of optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat conditions within the combined
330.5::t acre Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas. The conservation strategies
to be employed are outlined in the Sebastian HCP operating conservation program
set forth below in Section 5.0 and are expected to result in a no net loss of scrub-
jay families.
4.3 Analysis of the Effect of the Take on the North Indian River County/South
Brevard County Metapopulation
A discussion of the Sebastian HCP study metapopulation of which the Sebastian HCP
study population is a part is presented above in Sections 2.1 and 3.2. It is also noted
in Section 2.1, that the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas proposed under this
HCP incorporate the best and largest scrub parcels remaining within the HCP Plan
65
I- -~----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Area. Therefore, the analysis of the effect of the proposed take and the
corresponding sufficiency of the mitigation must consider the existing landscape
constraints imposed on this HCP.
The study population (Sebastian north and south subpopulations) is presently
peripheral to the study metapopulation core located primarily in South Brevard County
and extending south into the Sebastian Buffer Reserve expansions located Indian
River County. Under present day conditions, extinction of both the north and south
study subpopulations is certain without habitat restoration to optimal habitat
conditions. Numerous studies conducted by Breininger et at. (1991, 1995, 1996a,
1996b, 1998a, 1998b, 1999) and others (Woolfenden 1974; Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1991; Schaub et at. 1992; Breininger et at. 1999) linking habitat
features habitat use patterns and demographic success have shown that scrub-jay
extinction risks are reduced in optimal habitat. Therefore, the proposed restoration of
324:t acres of predominantly poor quality scrub-jay habitat to optimal conditions and
the provision of a critical mesic flatwood habitat linkage on Sebastian Airport
properties is expected to enhance the persistence probability of this currently
endangered scrub-jay population. However, as reflected in the operating conservation
program (Section 5.0), restoration measures must be immediate and aggressive to
reduce the current rates of decline documented within this scrub-jay population.
Loss of the potential scrub-jay habitat identified within the ITP impact area, primarily
Unit 17, may reduce the ability to maintain a contiguous Atlantic coast population;
however the continuity of this population already appears unstable as a result of
severe habitat fragmentation and poor quality scrub-jay habitat conditions that
presently characterize the HCP Plan Area. The Sebastian north subpopulation will
continue to be small and vulnerable to extinction because of low population size
unless restoration strengthens the connection of this area to the Sebastian Buffer
Reserve, as proposed under this HCP. The proposed HCP provisions of restoring an
open landscape to facilitate dispersal between the north subpopulation and the
Sebastian Buffer reserve and optimizing habitat quality on 236:t acres on the
adjoining North Sebastian Conservation Area is expected to enhance the population
persistence probability of the north subpopulation, and correspondingly, its
contribution to the population size of the nearby study metapopulation.
The Sebastian south subpopulation is vulnerable to extinction, particularly without
implementation of the Sebastian HCP. Population persistence probability of the
south subpopulation will always be low because of the severe fragmentation that
now occurs for almost all of the Atlantic Coast scrub-jay population south of the
north subpopulation. Therefore, the potential loss of two (2) scrub-jay clusters from
the south subpopulation as a result of the proposed action is not expected to
adversely impact the viability of the study metapopulation. The core populations
critically important to the study metapopulation are located in south Brevard
County (Breininger and Oddy 1 998).
66
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
J
Restoration of the Unit 17 Pelican Island Elementary School/Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area, as recommended by the FWS as part of this HCP, should
serve to minimize geographic isolation of the southern subpopulation. This will be
accomplished by maintaining and enhancing the existing Unit 17 habitat linkage for
the occasional dispersal of scrub-jays between the north and south subpopulation,
and potentially, to the study metapopulation (FWS November 12, 1996
correspondence to Indian River County).
The proposed long-term management of optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions at the
Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas will serve to reduce cumulative effects of
the proposed action.
The vulnerability of the study population, especially the south subpopulation, to
extinction, particularly without implementation of the proposed HCP is based on the
following. Previous studies showed that dispersal tendencies by male Florida
scrub-jays are short [mean = 984' (300 meters)] and that both sexes seldom move
far during their lives in natural landscapes (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984,
1991). Dispersal distances are longer in fragmented landscapes, such as theHCP
Plan Area (Thaxton and Hingtgen 1996; Breininger 1999). However, males appear
to infrequently move among habitat fragments (Breininger 1999). The entire study
metapopulation does not meet a patchy metapopulation structure where patches
function as a single unit because many of the patches are not close enough for
frequent dispersal by males, especially in the study populations (Harrison and
Taylor 1987; Stith et al. 1996). Although, females might be the limiting factor in
the entire metapopulation because of differential survival between males and
females along the Atlantic Coast, males may become the limiting sex in many
habitat fragments, especially residential landscapes (Breininger 1999). One can
hypothesize that most habitat fragments not near other fragments will rarely be
recolonized if all males expire in those fragments. Variation in patch habitat quality
and size also prohibits the application of original metapopulation structure of
extinction and recolonization theory (Levins 1 969) to describe Florida scrub-jay
population dynamics.
In large natural landscapes, Florida scrub-jays generally retain their territories and
attract new replacement breeders following the death of their spouse (Woolfenden
and Fitzpatrick 1984; Breininger et al. 1996a). This appears to be true for most
study sites. However, in fragmented populations, females often move after th.e
death of their spouse until they find a mate in another fragment (Breininger 1999).
Typical source-and-sink theory does not always explain Florida scrub-jay dynamics
in fragmented systems (Breininger 1999). Florida scrub-jays from small fragments
that are sinks are temporarily sources of new breeders to larger fragments that can
be sinks until no more jays are in population sinks (Breininger 1999). Thaxton and
Hingtgen (1 996) reported that Florida scrub-jays nearly always moved from small
suburban patches of low demographic success into larger reserve areas and not
from large reserves into small habitat fragments'. Therefore, the type of
67
I!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie,
I
I:
II
__ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
metapopulation structure, where large reserves support many small reserves, may
not predict Florida scrub-jay population dynamics.
Another metapopulation structure (Harrison and Taylor 1997; Stith et al. 1996)
proposed is a nonequilibrium structure where patches are too small and too far
apart so that extinction is inevitable. This structure does not define dynamics of
South Brevard metapopulation core because occupied patches are close together
and there is an exchange of individuals. However, this metapopulation structure
may accurately define the structure of most subpopulations south of the Sebastian
study population.
Implementation of the conservation measures set forth under this Sebastian HCP
are expected to contribute, in the long-term, to the recovery of the fourth largest
scrub-jay population across the remaining range. Proposed HCP actions will also
serve to benefit other species of conservation concern residing within the Atlantic
Coastal Ridge scrub landscapes covered under this HCP.
4.4 Alternatives Considered
Three alternatives were considered by the Applicants to address the needs of the
proposed action. Each alternative considered the biological requirements of the scrub
habitat indicator species, the Florida scrub-jay, the legal mandates of the FWS, and
the concerns of the Applicants with regard to resolving private land use conflicts in
the Sebastian Highlands residential subdivision.
4.4. 1 Alternative 1: No Action Alternative
Under Alternative 1, the FWS would not issue the ITP to the Applicants, and the
Applicants would not implement proposed habitat management and restoration
actions on 330.5:t acres of publicly-owned lands for purposes of enhancing Florida
scrub-jay demographic success by optimizing habitat suitability and by facilitating
dispersal and recolonization of restored and uninhabited habitat.
Individual owners of the one-quarter acre lots located within the platted residential
areas of the Sebastian Highlands subdivision that are currently, or in the future,
designated by the FWS as potentially occupied by Florida scrub-jays would be
unduly encumbered by preparation of an individual HCP to construct a single-famil.Y
residential home or would risk exposure to a violation of Section 9 of the ESA if
they initiated construction without an ITP. The City of Sebastian would also risk
exposure to Section 9 violations if this local government issued clearing or building
permits for residential home construction that was subsequently determined to
have resulted in the "taking" of Florida scrub-jays. If the individual Sebastian
Highlands lot owners decided not to construct, then they would have great.
difficulty selling their lots at fair market value due to imposed ESA constraints to
development. Issuance of multiple individual HCPs' would result in piecemeal
68
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
mitigation by leaving small "hedgerows" of vegetation on each lot since the
individual lot owner likely could not afford to contribute funds for the purchase of
scrub within a FWS approved Florida scrub-jay mitigation area.
Preservation of small IIhedgerows" of vegetation on individual lots are not as
efficient, manageable, or viable for scrub-jay persistence as comprehensive
mitigation and management actions on larger, more contiguous tracts of habitat. If
mitigation funds were collected from individual Sebastian Highlands lot owners,
they would probably be directed into Brevard County since the FWS has not
identified an acceptable Florida scrub-jay mitigation area in Indian River County due
to the high-level of habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation presently
characterizing this area.
Potential environmental consequences of the No Action Alternative would be
relatively minimal the short-term because no additional scrub-vegetated lots would
be cleared. However, the benefits of protecting the existing scrub-jay families
within the severely fragmented Sebastian Highlands residential subdivision
landscape are expected to be short-term. This is due to continued degradation of
habitat quality due to the inability to adequately manage preserved habitat patches,
and to increased vulnerability of the scrub-jay population to road mortality and to
predation by species common to suburban environments, such as blue jays, fish
crows, boat-tailed grackles (Ouiscalus major), common grackles (0. quiscula),
raccoons, and house cats (Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Breininger 1999). Fitzpatrick et
al. (1991) reported that vehicular traffic through scrub-jay habitat significantly
increases the mortality rate within a population of scrub-jays. Scrub-jay survival
rates adjacent to highways were significantly lower (0.57) than that found in scrub-
jay territories lacking paved roads (0.79) (Fitzpatrick et al. 1991). Long after scrub-
jays have become habituated to major traffic thoroughfares, their low-altitude flight
profile makes them vulnerable to collisions with vehicles (Breininger unpubl. data;
Toland unpubl. data).
Management of optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions within the currently
fragmented scrub patches located within the residential lots of the vast Sebastian
Highlands subdivision through prescribed fire would be significantly constrained by
the proximity of the residential homes. Fire is essential to maintaining optimal
scrub-jay habitat conditions (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1991; Meyers 1990,
Schmalzer et al. 1994; Breininger et al. 1996b). The documented decline of Florid.a
scrub-jay populations is attributed to poor habitat quality resulting from disruption
of natural fire regimes (Breininger 1999; Breininger et al. 1995, 1996a, 1996b,
1998b, 1999; Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). Although
the application of mechanical cutting techniques can successfully reduce the height
of the scrub vegetation and create openings preferred by scrub-jays, mechanical
treatments have not been found to be a substitute for fire in the long-term
management of optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions (Schmalzer et al 1 994;
Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1991). Without fire management, the fragmented scrub
69
I
j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
project. Even as a stand alone project, the SSCA would have served to reduce the
extent of take and to enhance scrub-jay conservation efforts in the City of
Sebastian, thereby alleviating much of the conflict surrounding private development
in the platted Sebastian Highlands lots (FWS, February 7, 1995 correspondence to
Indian River County; September 11, 1996 Indian River County Memorandum). In
July 1996, the IRC Board approved the purchase of "Phase 1" of the SSCA project
lots. This consisted of 50 of the 56 lots owned by AGC (September 11, 1996
Indian River County Memorandum). In September 1996, the Indian River County
planning staff recommended that the IRC Board authorize purchase of "Phase II" of
the SSCA project comprising of 47 lots with 47 different owners.
The high quality scrub habitat contained within the Phase II of the SSCA project is
highly fragmented by a mosaic of occupied single-family houses and cleared, one-
quarter-acre lots with many different owners. The tax assessed value of the subject
one-quarter acre lots averaged $8,445.00 or $33,780.00 per acre (September 11,
1996 Indian River County Memorandum). An additional cost to Indian River County
for the Phase II SSCA project was a $52,658.96 water line utility assessment.
Total 50% cost share of the Phase II SSCA project, including appraisals and audits,
was $266,109.00 for 11.75 j: acres of highly fragmented scrub-jay habitat acre
(September 11, 1996 Indian River County Memorandum). This represents an
extremely expensive conservation acquisition effort.
Appropriate management of the fragmented, urban scrub using controlled burns
wbuld have been problematic due to liability and potential adverse effects of smoke
on nearby residents. The alternative, scrub management via mechanical strategies,
is an expensive management strategy, especially in a suburban setting, because it
is labor intensive and requires negotiating heavy equipment. In addition, the long-
term effects of mechanical management actions to the scrub plant community are
not fully understood and must be used carefully (Schmalzer et a/. 1,999). Even more
significant, per acre management costs for maintaining or restoring remnant scrub
in suburban areas, are comparatively more expensive than habitat management
prescriptions on large parcels of land in undeveloped scenarios.
In consideration of the multiple project constraints and limitations listed above, and
at the recommendation of the Indian River County Land Acquisition Advisory
Committee (LAAC), the IRC Board voted in September 1996 to reject the
acquisition of Phase II of the SSCA project. This decision halted all acquisitio.n
efforts by Indian River County of the Sebastian Highlands Unit 17 platted lots
comprising the SSCA (Indian River County, October 17, 1996 correspondence to
the FWS). At the subsequent urging of the FWS, Indian River County did complete
the purchase of a block of 34 contiguous lots in Unit 17. The FWS stated that the
"... 34 AGC lots, in combination with Pelican Elementary School scrub, may
provide enough suitable habitat to minimize the adverse effects of habitat
fragmentation due to losses in the remainder of Unit 17. These scrub parcels, if
properly managed, may be essential "stepping stones" for dispersal of scrub-jays
73
~
I,
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
from and to northern Indian River County..." (FWS, November 12,1996
correspondence to Indian River County). These 34 AGC lots, referred to herein as
the Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area were acquired by Indian River
County and are included in combination with the Pelican Island Elementary School
scrub as part of the proposed Sebastian HCP Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas located in Unit 17 of Sebastian Highlands.
Implementation of Alternative 3 may have served to increase population persistence
probability of the south subpopulation, however the persistence probability of this
subpopulation will always be low because of the extensive fragmentation that
presently characterizes this area. Appropriate management of optimal scrub-jay
habitat conditions within the fragmented scrub lots would have been extremely
difficult due to the multiple residential homes adjoining the SSCA project area.
Alternative 3 was determined to be infeasible due primarily to economic and habitat
management constraints imposed by present-day conditions.
74
1
1
I'
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5.0 SEBASTIAN HCP OPERATING CONSERVATION PROGRAM
The Sebastian HCP operating conservation program set forth herein provides
conservation measures to be implemented by the Applicants to minimize and
mitigate potential adverse impacts of the incidental take on occupied and potential
Florida scrub-jay habitat and associated listed species to the maximum extent
practicable. The biological goals and objectives for the Sebastian HCP operating
conservation program are as follows:
BIOLOGICAL GOALS
The biological goals defined below represent the overall guiding principles for the
Sebastian HCP operating conservation program.
1. Reduce extinction risk and increase population persistence probability of the
Sebastian HCP study population, composed of two (2) subpopulations, by
restoring and permanently managing optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat
conditions, as described in Breininger et al (1995, 1996b), in 324:1: acres of
Florida scrub-jay focal and matrix habitat identified as the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas and presently owned by the Applicants.
2. Enhance recovery potential of the North Indian River County/South Brevard
County metapopulation, the fourth largest Florida scrub-jay meta population
(Breininger and Oddy 1998) I by restoring and maintaining, in the long-term
the 6.5:t acre Sebastian Airport dispersal corridor tract as an open mesic
flatwood landscape linkage between the Sebastian HCP study population and
the study metapopulation clusters located on the St. Sebastian Buffer
Reserve. Enhance dispersal success by managing the adjoining 88.1 :t acres
in the interim prior to commercial development and by managing, in the long
term, a narrow hedgerow located between the golf course and the southern
runway to a maximum veget~tive height of about 6' (2m).
3. Protect the biological integrity and species diversity that is characteristic of
the Atlantic Coastal Ridge scrub ecosystem by returning the combined
330.5:t acre Sebastian HCP Scrub-Jay Habitat Conservation and Corridor
Compensation Areas to conditions representative of the historical landscape
and thereby optimal for native species of conservation concern adapted to
open landscapes subject to frequent fires. .
BIOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES
The biological objectives presented below represent specific measurable actions
that must be implemented to achieve the above stated biological goals.
75
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
D.
A.
Implement mechanical and restoration burning strategies, as set forth in
Section 5.3, immediately to initiate recovery of optimal Florida scrub-jay
habitat quality features within the' 330.5:!:: acre Sebastian HCP Scrub-Jay
Habitat Conservation and Corridor Compensation Areas.
Apply mechanical treatments to reduce the tree canopy, cover to less than
15% (1 to 2 trees per acre) and to eradicate the exotic pest plant, Brazilian
pepper. Use logging operations as the primary mechanical technique to thin
pine trees and to fell tree-sized (> 3.0 in. diameter at breast height (dbh))
scrub oaks and cabbage palms. Use the Cut Stump herbicidal control method
to remove Brazilian pepper for the targeted conservation sites.
Initiate an aggressive restoration burning program, within six (6) to eight (8)
weeks from completion of mechanical treatment on the initial conservation
site, or as soon thereafter as suitable weather conditions permit, to reduce
shrub height, consume vegetative debris left on the ground from applied
mechanical treatments, and initiate recovery of open areas.
B.
Implement a habitat management program that uses prescribed fire as the
primary management tool to maintain, in the long-term, optimal Florida
scrub-jay habitat quality features within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas. Integrate habitat management principles that favor maintenance of
the biological diversity that is characteristic of the Atlantic Coastal Ridge
scrub ecosystem, and thereby optimal for Florida scrub-jays, by promoting
variation in management unit size and location, fire frequency (based on
scrub-jay habitat quality structural criteria), fire intensity, fire patchiness, and
timing of burns (favoring natural season burns) (Schmalzer et at. 1999; Main
and Menges 1997; Breininger and Oddy 1998).
The presence of optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat features, as defined in
Breininger et at. (1995, 1996b) and described above in Section 2.4.1, will
generally be used by the Applicants to measure achievement of this biological
objective at the landscape scale at each of the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas.
C.
Establish a comprehensive monitoring program, referred to herein as the
Sebastian HCP Habitat Management Monitoring Program, that annually, for
the term of the ITP, ascertains the success of the applied mechanical and fire
management treatments in achieving the stated biological objectives. Use the
collected site-specific monitoring data, in conjunction with state-of-the-
science habitat management principles and resources to refine and improve
future management actions.
Explore the potential of establishing an inter-agency partnerships with the
FWS, FWC, and/or FDEP, and/or obtaining additional funding through grants,
76
1
1
I'
for acquisition of additional scrub habitat as presently proposed by the
Pelican Island Elementary School Eco-Troop. Additional funds could also be
applied to support implementation of a comprehensive colorbanding and
demographic study of the study population. Performance of this study would
serve to augment demographic studies currently being conducted in South
Brevard County to facilitate recovery of the North Indian River County/South
Brevard County meta population of which the study population is a part
(Breininger and Oddy 1 998). The Dynamac Corporation is performing the
South Brevard study with contract funds provided by the FWS Jacksonville,
Florida (Breininger and Oddy 1998).
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
5.1 Habitat Management Considerations
.~ j
The sedentary characteristic of Florida scrub-jays has a significant influence on their
large-scale population structure, and must be a consideration of any habitat protection
measure targeted towards protection of this species (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick
1 991). Because most scrub-jays become breeders within a few hundred meters of
their natal territory, they ensure that protected patches of suitable scrub routinely
pass among generations without requiring new colonization events (Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1984, 1991). Persistence of small subpopulations of scrub-jays is
enhanced if located within the normal dispersal radius, two (2) miles or less, of
neighboring scrub-jay subpopulations (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1 991; Fitzpatrick et
al. 1 994a). Therefore, the conservation and management of tracts of suitable scrub-
jay habitat located between large habitat patches, referred to as "stepping stone"
scrub, provide vital links to scrub-jay populations (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). It is
important that these intervening habitat patches are managed for optimal scrub-jay
habitat conditions as mortality associated with dispersal is high for scrub-jays moving
through small woodlands, urban areas, and open agricultural areas (Stith et al. 1996).
Clusters of small to intermediate-sized subpopulations may ,be the optimal
configuration of Florida scrub-jay metapopulations where the total area of conserved
habitat is limited or fragmented (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1991).
The above biological criteria were considered by the FWS in developing the scrub-jay
core habitat reserve design for the City of Sebastian (Toland 1996). This reserve
design essentially directed the acquisition and designation of the presently-owned
Sebastian HCP Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
Suitable scrub-jay habitat is not restricted to. scrub oak patches (Breininger et al.
1991, 1995, 1996b, 1998a; Duncun et al. 1995). Scrub-jays defend and use mesic
habitat types, such as open pine flatwoods and saw palmetto scrub, located near oak
scrub patches (Breininger et al. 1995, 1998a). Alteration and fragmentation of the
matrix habitat by development/agricultural activities disrupts fire patterns, alters prey
and predator composition, and removes habitat that may become optimal after fires
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Breininger et al. 1995; Breininger and Oddy 1998). Therefore,
management of optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions must consider the matrix habitat
77
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I_H]
in which the focal scrub patches are embedded (Breininger and Oddy 1998).
Management of the matrix habitat serves to benefit associated scrub species, such as
the gopher tortoise, Eastern indigo snake,' and wetland dependent species, including
the threatened Florida gopher frog (references in Breininger and Oddy 1998;
Schmalzer et a/. 1 999). Management of the depression marshes provides breeding
sites for amphibians which form a significant portion of the food chain; insuring an
important food source to Florida scrub-jays (Breininger and Oddy 1998; Schmalzer et
a/. 1 999).
Where natural fire processes have been restricted by anthropogenic barriers or
activities, the scrub oaks often reach a size that is essentially fire-resistant (Guerin
1988,1993; Schmalzer et a/. 1 994). Restoration of tall, unburned scrub to optimal
Florida scrub-jay habitat conditions usually can not be achieved by fire alone, as the
tree-sized scrub oaks are able to survive fire and resprout from trunks above ground
(Schmalzer et al. 1994). The objective to restore a low, open habitat structure would
not be accomplished as the overgrown scrub would regenerate as a forest structure
(Schmalzer et a/. 1994). Therefore, mechanical cutting of the tall fire-resistant scrub
oaks, followed by a prescribed fire, has been found to be the only reasonable method
of restoring severely degraded scrub communities (Schmalzer et a/. 1994). This
method has been used at both Oscar Scherer State Recreation Area (Smyth 1 991 )
and Kennedy Space Center (KSC) (Schmalzer et a/. 1994, 1999) for the purposes of
restoring suitable scrub-jay habitat conditions. Scrub-jays exhibit a dramatic
preference for recently burned or mechanically disturbed scrub, defending and
foraging in these patches unless the land management treatments affect all or most
of the defended territory (Fitzpatrick et al. 1 994a). Studies at KSC found that scrub-
jays actively use restored area for foraging, caching acorns, and even nesting within
18 months post-fire (Breininger et a/. 199Gb).
Although mechanical treatments are successful in reducing vegetation height and
creating openings in the scrub, they should be applied carefully to reduce the
potential for soil disturbances and a discontinuity of fuels (Breininger and Schmalzer
1 990). Mechanical treatments may reduce the post-treatment coverage by saw
palmetto if damage to the saw palmetto rhizomes is severe (Schmalzer et a/. 1 999).
As saw palmetto is the primary species for carrying fire in Atlantic Coastal Ridge
scrub landscapes, reductions in the coverage of this species can alter the ability to
successfully apply prescribe fire as a habitat management tool (Schmalzer et al.
1999) .
Fire is vital to and influences many natural community processes that can not be
replicated by mechanical treatments alone. Fire provides readily available nutrients to
new growth and surviving plant life through direct release of mineral elements as ash.
It regulates fuel loadings and production by the recycling of woody plant components
and consumption of leaf litter and humus layers. Scrub-jays prefer to forage in open
conditions without litter (Schmalzer et a/. 1994). Mechanical treatments in scrub
leave behind an unnatural amount of debris on the ground. Fire also affects the
78
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
I
I'
I
reproductive processes of many plant species, often stimulating seed release,
flowering, and vegetative growth. Most scrub researchers agree that, although
mechanical treatments are an important 'method for restoration of scrub that has
become fire-resistant due to overgrowth, scrub should be managed, in the long-term,
by prescribed fire (Fitzpatrick et aI, 1 991; Schmalzer et al. 1994, 1 999; Breininger et
al. 1996b).
Establishment of a fire regime for management of optimal habitat conditions for
scrub-jays must be based on site-specific factors due to variability in the community
dynamics of scrub habitat types (Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992; Schmalzer and Boyle
1997). Fitzpatrick et al. (1991) suggests that the fire-return interval for individual
patches of oak scrub is 10-20 years. This return interval is consistent with optimal
scrub height classes (Breininger et al. 1995, 1996b). Scrub height models have
been developed from data on scrub recovery after fire. These models predict that
oaks grow to 3.9' (1.2m) within 10 years after a fire, and that oaks grow taller
than 5.6' (1.7m) within 20 years of a fire' (Duncan et al. 1995). The response of
oak scrub to fire varies because of differences in soils, nutrients, water table, and
previous fire history (Abrahamson and Hartnett 1 990; Breininger and Schmalzer
1990; Myers 1990; Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992; Menges and Kohfeldt 1995;
Hawkes and Menges 1996). Research at KSC has found that scrub oaks can
occasionally grow to 3.9' (1.2m) within a few years (e.g., 3 years), especially in
areas previously unburned for > 20 years (Breininger unpubl. data; Schmalzer and
Boyle unpubl. data). Scrub can also become taller than optimal within 5 - 10 years
after fire (Breininger unpubl. data), therefore some scrubs may require shorter fire
intervals.
Florida scrub-jay territories include not only oak scrub habitat, but also the
surrounding matrix habitat types composed of mesic flatwoods and grassy areas
which are often wet (Breininger et al. 1991, 1995). Saw palmetto, gallberry holly,
and grasses (e.g., Aristida stricta, Spartina bakenl, which dominate mesic
flatwoods and marshes, are more flammable and accumulate fuel more rapidly than
scrub oak habitats (Abrahamson 1984; Abrahamson and Hartnett ,1990; Myers
1990; Schmalzer et al. 1991; Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992). Mesic flatwoods and
grassy areas have a fire-return interval of 1 - 10 years (FNAI 1990). Therefore,
long-term habitat management strategies will need to consider frequent fires for
matrix habitats surrounding oak scrub to maintain an open landscape structure
optimal for scrub-jays and to reduce the accumulation of fuels that lead to hazardous
fire ,events (Breininger et al. 1996b). Because site variability influences recovery
from fire, natural resource managers should use height, openings, pine cover, and
other structural features to assist in determining burning objectives for a particular
site.
Fitzpatrick et al. (1 991) suggested that a fire management program for Florida
scrub-jays is best if a rotation of prescribed burns occurs where each burn covers
only small portions of the reserve tract. Studies conducted at KSC confirm that
79
,- ---
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!I
I
frequent fires that do not burn all of a territory are essential for maintaining Florida
scrub-jay populations (Breininger et al. 199Gb). Single burns in scrub landscapes at
intervals longer than 5 years could result in extinction of Florida scrub-jay
populations (Breininger et al. 199Gb).
The presence of patches of tall oaks greater than 1 acre (0.4 hectare) in size had
negative impacts on demography (Breininger and Oddy 1998). Large (e.g., 1 acre)
or wide [> 328' (100 m)] patches of tall shrubs may interfere with the jay's visual
sentinel system, which is adapted for predator detection and territorial defense
(McGowan and Woolfenden 1989). A few small clumps of tall oaks will not
interfere with visibility and can serve as useful posts for sentinels.
Analyses of sequences of aerial photographs indicate that many scrub and grassy
areas have become forests and that most remaining scrub has lost openings among
the oaks (Duncan et al. 1999). The reduction in availability of openings has resulted
in the rigorous competition by Florida scrub-jays for areas with openings (Duncan et
al. 1995; Breininger et al. 1998b). Few openings remain in scrub 1 - 2 years after
fires (Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992). Scrub oaks became established in most
openings, and 20 years of prescribed burning that followed fire suppression has not
yet produced an a~undance of openings (Schmalzer et al. 1994; Duncan et al.
199G; Breininger et al. 1 998b). It may take many fires to establish the openings
that are critical for long-term Florida scrub-jay population persistence. Open sandy
areas are also believed to be important to other scrub plants and ~nimals (Campbell
and Christman 1982;. Hawkes and Menges 1996).
In the past, many prescribed fires have occurred in winter, which may partially
explain why natural openings have not returned. Winter fires do not reduce oak
cover as effectively as growing-season fires (Glitzenstein et al. 1995). Most
natural fires occurred during the growing season, and scrub is ada,pted to growing-
season fires (Robbins and Myers 1992). Single growing season fires have been
found not to result in openings that last longer than one (1) to two (2) years
(Breininger unpublished data). Many growing-season fires may be needed to
restore openings to scrub that was unburned for> 20 years.
Although there appear to be no plant species specially adapted to long-unburned
scrubby flatwoods, some xeric scrubs have species adapted to longer fire intervals
(Menges and Kohfeldt 1995). Some native scrubs, dominated by sand pine (Pinu.s
clausa) or rosemary (Ceratiola ericoides), need longer fire rotations (> 20 years)
and naturally occurred in locations less susceptible to fire (FNAI 1 990; Menges and
Kohfeldt 1995). To maintain species diversity, management of scrub and
flatwoods cannot include an arbitrary mixture of habitat patches of different ages
since the last fire. Florida scrub-jay populations probably cannot persist where tall
scrub (> 20 years since fire) is interspersed with short or optimal height scrub at
the territory scale (Breininger unpubl. data). Only the largest Florida scrub-jay
populations can persist for 50 years once most habitat becomes suboptimal
80
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(Breininger et al. 1996b). Most Florida scrub-jay populations have become small
and fragmented (Stith et al. 1996), such as the Sebastian HCP study population,
and will require site-specific attention by natural resource managers.
5.2 Potential Effects of Habitat Restoration and Management Treatments on Other
Species of Conservation Concern
Fire is the preferred management tool for restoration and the long-term maintenance
of scrub communities as optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat (Fitzpatrick et al. 1991;
Breininger et al. 1996b), as it prevents the succession of suitable low, open scrub
into an unsuitable closed canopy forest and reduces the potential for soils
disturbances and the creation of fuel discontinuities (Breininger et al. 1996b). Fire
generally has little adverse direct effect on scrub species as they have developed
adaptations to fire (Myers 1 990). Management of habitat conditions that are suitable
for scrub-jays are suitable for most other amphibians, reptiles, birds, and small
mammals occurring in the scrub (Schmalzer et al. 1994; references in Breininger and
Oddy 1998). No protected species are known to require unburned scrub or pinelands
(Schmalzer et al. 1 994).
No federally listed plants are documented to occur in the scrub-jay habitat types on
the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas (FWS 1999, FWS unpubl. data). As the
scrub ecosystem depends on periodic fires, most of the native scrub plant species will
benefit from reintroduction of a natural fire regime (Schmalzer et al. 1 994).
The potential of the proposed mechanical treatment to cause adverse impacts to
gopher tortoises and commensal species documented to occur on the Scrub-Jay
Habitat Compensation Areas is low. Wherever possible, the individual fire
management units delineated within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas will
use existing jeep trails and historic fire breaks as "hard" lines to con.trol the spread of
fire. Studies of the effects of forestry operations, such as timbering, have shown that
gopher tortoises have the ability to dig out from collapsed burrows (Joan Berish,
FGFWFC in Schmalzer et al. 1 994). Every effort will be made to avoid gopher tortoise
burrows during implementation of the recommended mechanical restoration activities.
5.3 Sebastian HCP Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Restoration and Management
Program (HCP Management Program)
The HCP Management Program identifies specific management activities to. be
undertaken by the Applicants to proceed towards achievement of the stated
biological goals and objectives of this HCP. The HCP Management Program consists
of two phases. Phase One represents the restoration of poor quality scrub-jay habitat
conditions using mechanical treatment and prescribed fire management strategies.
Phase Two consists of long-term management practices that focus on maintenance of
optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat conditions through the use of periodic prescribed fire.
81
I~-- - ~--~
, II
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:1
II
Prior to the extensive habitat fragmentation which now characterizes much of the
present-day landscape and functions as fire barriers, fires were ignited by lightning
primarily during the late spring and summer months and burned large expanses across
the landscape (Robbins and Myers 1992), The frequent lightning fires resulted in an
open landscape with few forests; conditions which were historically represented in
the scrub landscape at each of the Sebastian HCP Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas, As scrub requires fire to maintain its characteristic low, open habitat structure;
scrub restoration and management strategies must also depend on fire as the primary
management tool to perpetuate native scrub habitat conditions (Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1984, 1991; Schaub et al. 1992; Breininger et al. 1995, 1998a; Duncun
et al. 1995; Breininger and Oddy 1998; Breininger 1999).
As presented above, the long-term exclusion of fire from scrub communities results in
a habitat that essentially becomes difficult to burn (Schmalzer et al. 1 994, 1 999)
and/or control without prior mechanical treatment of the dense canopy stratum
(Breininger et al. 199Gb). Therefore, the use of aggressive management actions, such
as mechanical thinning of the pine canopy by logging activities using timber sales, will
be employed to expedite the restoration of optimal Florida scrub-jay habitat conditions
within the Sebastian HCP Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, However, this
treatment method must be careful not to result in excessive soils disturbance,
Excessive soils disturbance can result in reduced coverage by saw palmetto scrub
and, thereby, may reduce the ability to conduct future burns (Breininger and
Schmalzer 1990, Duncun et al 1999). Soils disturbances also provide recruitment
sites for exotic pest species, such as Brazilian pepper,
Timber management (sales) as a scrub-jay habitat restoration strategy involves the
reduction of tree densities to levels that are favorable for the Florida scrub-jay, e.g. an
average of one (1) to two (2) pines per acre (Breininger pers comm.). In the few areas
of the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas where large diameter scrub oaks occur,
the timber contractor will be directed to also cut these trees. Smaller diameter pines
left by the logging operation can be reduced by increasing fire frequencies in these
areas (Breininger pers. comm.). The use of increased fire frequencies during the
restoration burning period also has the positive effect of initiating the restoration of
openings in the scrub and reducing shrub height (Breininger et al. 199Gb),
Restoration of open spaces in the scrub habitat can also be achieved by allowing
downed trees to burn (Breininger et al. 199Gb). This use of this habitat management
technique may be restricted within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas due to
the potential' to create smoke problems along the urban interfaces of these sites,
primarily U.S. Highway 1, C.R. 510, and the internal thoroughfares of Sebastian
Highlands, It will be the responsibility of the prescribed burn manager for the
Sebastian HCP Management Program to determine the safety of using this
management technique to recover open spaces within the subject scrub restoration
areas.
82
1
1
1
1
1
1
I~
1
1
I~
11
I:
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
Whenever possible, prescribed fires will be conducted during the natural fire season,
late spring and summer, to mimic historic fire patterns (Breininger et a/199Gb; Adrian
and Farinetti 1995). Knowledge of the location of critical scrub-jay nesting sites and
the extent of each scrub-jay territory will enhance efforts to conduct prescribed burns
during these months while reducing the potential for occurrence of adverse impacts
to the resident scrub-jay population. As a measure to minimize adverse impacts of the
scrub restoration on scrub-jays, the Applicants will conduct field surveys prior to the
application of prescribed fires within a scrub-jay territory during the nesting season.
Prescribed fire frequency, following the initial burns, will be dictated by habitat quality
data collected as part of the site-specific Sebastian HCP Habitat Management
Monitoring Program (HCP Monitoring Program). The time between burns will be
limited by the availability ratio of dead to live fuels (Breininger et a/. 199Gb). Effective
fires appear to require that 25 % of the above ground biomass be composed of dead
fuels (F. Adrian pers. obs. in Breininger et a/. 199Gb). A minimum of 2~ years may
be required between burns within matrix flatwoods habitats characterized by a dense
saw palmetto cover (Breininger et a/. 199Gb). Oak scrub habitats exhibiting a sparse
cover of saw palmetto may require a minimum of 3-5 years between burns
(Breininger et a/. 199Gb).
Variability is an important ecological component that must be integrated into any fire
management program (Christensen 1985; Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992; Fernald 1989).
Regular prescribed burn management schedules place constraints on the habitat
managers and reduces habitat heterogeneity (The Nature Conservancy (TNC) 1 991 ;
Schmalzer et a/. 1 999). Flexibility in management schedules, as proposed herein,
allows the land manager to refine future burn units, treatments, and schedules based
on the effectiveness of previous burn prescriptions in achieving the management
goals (TNC 1991; Schmalzer et a/. 1999).
5.3.1 Identification of land Manager and Prescribed Burn Manager
The IRC Board hired a Conservation lands Manager on January 2G, 2000 (R. DeBlois
pers. comm.). It will be the responsibility of the Conservation lands Manager, in
conjunction with the County Environmental Planning Section, to coordinate
implementation of HCP Management Program and performance of the HCP
Monitoring Program.
The prescribed burning program for the Sebastian HCP Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas will be coordinated through and, conducted by, the State of
Florida Department of Forestry (OaF) in agreement with Indian River County (R.
DeBlois pers. comm.). The OaF will be responsible for preparing the actual burning
prescriptions for each management unit guided by the biological goals and objectives
of this operating conservation program and the specific restoration burning and fire
management objectives outlined below. The prescription must also consider the
83
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
1- ,
I-
I-
I
I
I
I
I,
II
J
vegetative type and fuel load, smoke management and site constraints, and proximity
to neighbors.
Indian River County will be responsible for coordinating with the OOF to notify nearby
public and private entities of the intent to burn before and after the burn permit is
issued.
Public notification is strongly recommended for all prescribed burns conducted on the
Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas. A short broadcast on local radio stations is
recommended to caution motorists on nearby thoroughfares, such as C.R. 510, U.S.
Highway 1, and Roseland Road, of the possibility' of smoke affecting visibility.
Additional efforts shall also be made to notify local community residents about the
burn. In addition, a brief educational bulletin should be circulated to nearby residents
informing them as to the importance of fire in maintaining suitable scrub habitat for
the Florida scrub jay and other scrub species of conservation concern.' Public
education will be critical for local support of the Sebastian HCP Management Program
that is centered on the ability to apply fire to the scrub landscapes within the Scrub-
Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
5.3.2 Phase One - Habitat Restoration Activities - Mechanical Treatments and
Restoration Burnina
Habitat management needs for the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are
defined on Tables 5 and 6. Review of this information shows that majority of the
potential scrub-jay habitat identified in the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
needs immediate pine thinning and the application of hot fires. The location of each
designated habitat pOlygon is provided on Figures 5, 7, and 9. Optimal scrub-jay
habitat conditions on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are currently limited
to a small xeric oak patch (Polygon 14) located in the North Sebas~ian Conservation
Area, the northern section of the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area (Polygon 50),
and a small xeric oak patch (Polygon 44) within the Pelican Island Elementary School
compensation area.
The Sebastian HCP study population is documented to be declining primarily because
of habitat loss and poor habitat quality of the remaining scrub fragments (Toland
unpubl. data). Based on numerous studies as cited above, aggressive restoration and
management can correct the poor habitat quality that has resulted from fi~e
suppression ,within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas. However, the
restoration process must be implemented immediately to reduce the current rate of
scrub-jay population decline.
5.3.2.1
MECHANICAL TREATMENTS
Initial management efforts towards restoration of optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions
on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas will employ two (2) mechanical
84
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11
_ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
management techniques. Table 7, Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Restoration Activities -
Mechanical Treatments, outlines the habitat polygons to be treated by mechanical
treatment methods, the initial implementation schedule, and a site priority ranking for
treatment initiation.
As discussed above in Section 4.2, Pelican Island Elementary School and Sebastian
Highlands Conservation Area sites (Unit 1 7 compensation areas) have received the
highest priority ranking as a measure to minimize the extent of take within the
surrounding ITP impact area by quickly providing suitable habitat for use by the
resident scrub-jay clusters potentially displaced by residential construction.
Restoration of the Sebastian Airport dispersal corridor has been ranked second to
encourage dispersal between the study population and scrub-jay clusters located on
the nearby St. Sebastian Buffer Reserve (Coraci Parcel). This priority ranking is
mirrored in the restoration burning implementation schedule provided below.
The mechanical treatments to be applied within each habitat polygon are specified on
Table 7 and include one or both of the following:
1 . Thinning of pine trees, slash pine and sand pine, and snags by logging
activities using timber sales, to reduce the total canopy cover to 1 to 2 trees
{live trees and snags} per acre. The total number of standing timber (live and
dead) shall not exceed a maximum of 1 to 2 units per acre. The standing
trees/snags will be maintained to provide resident scrub-jays with sentinel
perches and potential arboreal cache sites.
Where present, dense stands of cabbage palms and large diameter oaks will be
removed from the habitat polygon by the timber contractor so that the canopy
cover, considering all tree species in the canopy stratum, does not exceed the
above density criteria. The resulting canopy in the mesic flatwoods can be a
mixture of pine and cabbage palm not exceeding 1 to 2 trees per acre.
NOTE: To reduce the negative influence of the surrounding degraded habitat
structure on the quality of the habitat areas targeted for restoration on the
Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, it is recommended, although not
considered a regulatory requirement covered under this Hep, that the logging
operation extend into all upland habitat types occurring within the boundaries
of the 406:i: North Sebastian Conservation Area (Polygons 1 0, 11, and 21) an.d
the Sebastian Airport/Golf Course complex and the Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area (Polygon 54).
2. Removal of exotic and nuisance species. This directive is primarily targeted at
the Brazilian pepper that has colonized within the North Sebastian Conservation
Area along the disturbed edges of historically paved roads and jeep trails. The
height of the Brazilian pepper presents a potential curtain between contiguous
scrub-jay families.
85
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 7. Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Restoration Activities - Mechanical Treatments
Initial Implementation Schedule 1 and Priority Ranking (#)2
Polygon Acres Pine Thinning Needed Brazilian Pepper Removal
1 9.6 Immediate (3) N/R
4 6.7 Immediate (3) N/R
5 4.9 Immediate (3) N/R
6 17.1 Immediate (3) N/R
7 6.6 Immediate (3) N/R
8 6.5 Immediate (2) N/R
9 21 .4 Immediate (2) N/R
1 2 20.8 Immediate (3) N/R
13 6.0 Immediate (2) N/R
14 3.5 N/R N/R
15 10.2 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
17 2.8 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
19 16.2 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
22 8.0 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
24 21.3 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
26 5.1 Immediate (3) N/R
27 18.1 Immediate (3) N/R
30 4.6 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
31 9.0 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
33 0.9 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)3
35 26.5 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
36 8.7 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
37 25.4 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
38 4.3 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
39 6.3 Immediate (3) Immediate (1)
41 2.8 Immediate (1) N/R
42 1 .7 Immediate (1) N/R
43 1.5 Immediate (1) N/R
44 4.6 Immediate (1) N/R
45 2.5 Immediate (1) N/R
46 2.0 immediate (1) N/R
47 2.8 Immediate (1) N/R
48 5.2 Immediate (4) N/R
50 1 5.1 N/R N/R
51 17.7 Immediate (4) N/R
54 16.4 N/R N/R
55 34.6 N/R (C.R. 512 Mitigation Area) N/R
59 1 .1 Immediate (4) N/R
62 1 .6 Immediate (4) N/R
63 1 .4 Immediate (2) N/R
64 88.1 Immediate (2) N/R
1 . Schedule - Immediate = Within 1 year from issuance date of Sebastian Hep ITP
2. Priority ranking - (1) :::;: Highest Priority and (4) = Lowest Priority within recommended schedule
3. This disturbed area contains wild grapevine (Vitis spp.) that also needs to be removed
N/R - Specified treatment not required within this habitat polygon
86
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
-I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 11. Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Management Units
Pelican Island Elementary School
and
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area
0.2
I
o
0.2
0.4 Miles
I
N
c:::J Management units.
E
w
90
s
Figure 12. Florida Scrub..Jay Habitat Management Units
Wabasso Scrub Compensation Area
0.2
I
o
0.2
0.4 Miles
I
N
w
E
CJ Management units
s
91
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Restoration Burning
The restoration burning approach presented herein is aggressive as compared to the
general guidelines for managing Florida scrub-jay refuges provided in Fitzpatrick et al.
(1991). However, aggressive management is needed in the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas before there is further loss of additional scrub-jay families. The
MUs and proposed prescribed burn schedule are designed to insure that each scrub-
jay family documented to occur on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are
provided with an adequate amount of suitable cover, nesting sites, and foraging
habitat while the recently-burned scrub regenerates.
Prescribed fire will initially be used at increased frequencies and intensities to reduce
pine tree cover remaining after completion of the proposed logging operation, to
reduce shrub height, and to initiate recovery of patchy open spaces of bare sand and
sparse vegetation. The prescribed fires will, whenever practicable considering site and
safety constraints, be conducted during the natural fire season, late spring and
summer, to mimic historic fire patterns (Breininger et al 1996b; Adrian and Farinetti
1995). The schedule for implementation of prescribed fire within each MU, including
a site priority ranking and recommended fire intensity, is provided in Table 8.
Site-specific fire prescriptions required to achieve the stated prescribed fire
management objective will be prepared by the OaF as part of their agreement with
the Applicants. The OaF will also be responsible for identifying and addressing
constraints to conducting the prescribed burning operation on the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas and, with the assistance of the Applicants, for notifying the
affected public. In addition, mop up procedures conducted by the OaF will be
performed in a manner that minimizes site disturbances.
As set forth in Table 8, the prescribed fire program is scheduled tot;>e initiated within
MUs 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 approximately six (6) to eight (8) weeks following
completion of mechanical treatment activities within these MUs. The recommended
time lag between mechanical treatment and the prescribed fire allows for the drying
of slash to provide additional fuel to the fire and to promote "hot spots" for recovery
of open spaces. As discussed above, implementation of the mechanical and fire
restoration activities in these MUs, which are located within the primary ITP impact
area in Unit 17 of the Sebastian Highlands, serves to minimize the level of take
resulting from authorization of the proposed action.
Be advised that although Figure 7 shows MUs 10-1 5 as being currently occupied by
scrub-jays, these areas are rarely used due to the poor quality of the scrub habitat.
Each of the scrub-jay territories potentially affected by concurrent (or within a short
time interval) burning the subject Unit 17 MUs include suitable habitat areas located
outside of the subject MUs. These "off-site" habitat areas are sufficient to support
the affected scrub-jay groups while targeted burned habitat areas are regenerating. It
should be noted that the subject "off-site" areas are located within the Sebastian
92
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ij
Highlands Unit 17 ITP impact area. It is expected that habitat loss within the Unit 17
ITP impact area will occur incrementally, over a period of years, and not immediately.
This situation emphasizes the importance of and validates the reasoning for
immediately initiating restoration actions within the Unit 17 MUs, 10-15.
Although not specifically addressed in Table 8, all marsh habitats embedded within
the designated MUs shall be allowed to burn as part of the MU if appropriate
hydrologic conditions exist within the wetland(s) to prevent the occurrence of muck
fires. Freshwater depression marsh wetlands require frequent fire to limit invasion by
woody shrub species, to maintain the integrity of the herbaceous community, and to
reduce peat accumulation (Kushlan 1990). Therefore, the prescribed fire will serve to
reduce shrub recruitment and to enhance the ecological integrity of this native matrix
habitat type. The DOF will be responsible for determining the safety, from an
ecological and urban interface standpoint, of burning the marsh communities.
The primary objective of the restoration burning activities is to reestablish the
structural attributes of the historical scrub landscape for purposes of optimizing
habitat conditions for use by Florida scrub-jays and associated species of
conservation concern. To achieve this objective, hot restoration burns will be applied
to:
1.) consume small standing pines and slash left on the ground by mechanical
treatments;
2.) initiate the creation of openings in the scrub by allowing small piles of slash to
burn hot to promote exposure of patchy areas of mineral soils; and
3.) reduce height of standing shrub.
For purposes of this HCP Management Program, and as set forth in Table 8,
subsection Fire Intensity, the objectives of a "hot" restoration burn, which under this
plan will be applied to management units that have been mechanically treated as
described above, are defined as:
a.) 100% consumption the lighter fuels (grasses, litter, twigs, and small
stems (< 1 " diameter) - 1 and 10 hour timelag fuels);
b.) best possible (75% to 95%) consumption of brush fuels (shrub 1" to ~"
diameter - 1 00 hour timelag fuels); and
c.) best possible consumption of the heavy fuels (stems> 3" diameter).
Note: Most of the heavy fuels will be "pile-burned" in small, scattered
piles to favor creation of open patches of mineral soils.
Table 8 directs the restoration burning of three (3) MUs, 16, 17, and 18, at a fire
intensity described as "mosaic". This burn structure is also referred to as "patchy".
93
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1- ,
1
1
1
I
I
,j
I
1
1
Ii
1
For purposes of this HCP Management Program, the objectives of a "mosaic" burn,
which under this plan will be applied to the higher quality scrub and mesic flatwood
habitat patches, are generally defined as:
a.) 100% consumption the lighter fuels (grasses, litter, twigs, and small
stems (< 1 " diameter) - 1 and 10 hour timelag fuels);
b.) 50% to 75% consumption of brush fuels (shrub 1" to 3" diameter - 1 00
hour timelag fuels); and
c.) best possible consumption of the heavy fuels (stems> 3" diameter).
Note: Most of the heavy fuels will be "pile-burned" in small, scattered
piles to favor creation of open patches of mineral soils.
5.3.2.3
MINIMIZATION MEASURES
The following measures will be used in the field to reduce the potential for adverse
impacts to natural community structure resulting from implementation of the
recommended restoration treatments on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
1. Initiate habitat restoration treatments, mechanical and burning, within the Unit
17 conservation areas, Pelican Island Elementary School/Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area, to minimize the extent of take resulting from the
proposed action.
2. Use of a logging contractor experienced in tree removal for purposes of habitat
restoration. Strictly monitor soil disturbances resulting from logging action.
3. Use of existing jeep trails, historic fire breaks, and disturbed habitat areas as
primary ingress and egress routes for removal of the harvested pine logs from
each conservation site. Slash, twigs and small stems and branches (< 3"
diameter), from logging operations will be primarily spread on-site to provide
fuel to carry the prescribed fire. The larger slash, large stems and branches
(> 3" diameter), will be collected into randomly scattered small piles to
promote "hot spots" during the prescribed burn for purposes of exposing
patchy areas of mineral soil.
4. Use of rubber tired heavy equipment for all mechanical treatment activities
conducted on the site to minimize soil disturbance on the conservation sites.
5. Use of soft fire breaks, mowed lines in conjunction with foam or black lines, as
control lines, wherever feasible. The use of plowlines in undisturbed habitat
areas will be avoided if deemed safe by the OOF. If plowlines are needed, the.
OOF will back-blade these areas following implementation of the initial burn.
94
~-
Ii
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
1- ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6. Performance of field surveys within occupied scrub-jay territories during the
nesting season to locate active nests prior to the application of mechanical
and/or prescribed fire treatment. Protection of the nest from any kind of
management that may take place will be performed to prevent the take of
scrub-jays as a result of implementation of habitat restoration and management
actions.
5.3.3 Phase Two - Habitat Management Activities
Upon completion of the initial restoration management actions on the Scrub-Jay
Habitat Compensation Areas, prescribed fire will be the primary management tool
applied to maintain optimal scrub-jay habitat quality. Future burning needs and the
size and location of management units will be based on optimal Florida scrub-jay
habitat structural criteria, as defined herein, and not fire frequencies due to the
variation of natural community types to fire. The time between burns will also be
dictated by the availability of fuels required to carry a fire.
Long-term fire management activities shall promote the application of "mosaic"
burns, as generally described above, to increase habitat heterogeneity across the
scrub landscape. This will be accomplished by varying the size and location of
future management units, fire intensities, and timing of fires (Robbins and Myers
1992; Breininger and Oddy 1998; Schmalzer et al. 1999). To the extent practical,
no more than 33 % of the focal scrub oak habitat patches will be burned in anyone
fire to insure that suitable cover, nesting sites, and foraging habitat for use by
Florida scrub-jays are always available (Breininger et al. 1996b). The matrix
flatwood habitats will generally be placed on a fire interval to burn at least once
every three (3) years to maintain an open landscape. In order to restore optimal
landscape conditions for scrub-jays and reduce hazardous fuel loadings, it is likely
that one small fire will be needed at the North Sebastian Conservation Area and
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area on an annual basis. Future habitat management
actions will be refined and improved based on feedback from monitoring the effects
of the initial management actions, in conjunction with state-of-the science
knowledge and habitat management resources.
5.3.4 Schedule for Imolementation of Habitat Restoration and Management
Treatment Actions
The proposed schedule for implementation of the initial mechanical treatments is
provided in Table 7. All proposed mechanical treatments are scheduled for
implementation and completion within one (1) year from the date of issuance of the
Sebastian HCP ITP.
The proposed schedule for implementation of the habitat restoration phase of the
prescribed fire program is provided on Table 8. As noted on Table 8, restoration burns
will be implemented at the Unit 17 Pelican Island Elementary School and Sebastian
95
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
Highlands Scrub Conservation Area within six (6) to eight (8) weeks (or as soon as
weather permits) of completion of mechanical treatment of these sites. A total of
292.8:t acres is targeted for burning during the first year of the HCP Management
Program. The remainder, 353:t acres, is scheduled to be burned within two (2) to
four (4) years from the date of issuance of the Sebastian HCP ITP.
The proposed prescribed fire program is applied over the entire conservation sites to
maximize open landscape conditions optimal for scrub-jays and to reduce hazardous
fuel loadings within the conservation sites. It is also important to note that target
conditions for restoration of suitable scrub-jay landscape conditions on the Sebastian
Airport conservation properties are compatible and will improve and maintain
operational safety conditions within this area of the airport.
As discussed above, the prescribed fire rotation, season of burn, and design of future
MUs, following completion of the initial restoration burns, will be based on feedback
from the monitoring of the effects of the initial prescribed management actions in
achieving the HCP Biological Objectives stated above with regard to optimal Florida
scrub-jay habitat structure. General protocols for habitat assessment under this phase
of the prescribed fire program are provided in Section 5.3.3.
5.4 Sebastian HCP Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat Management Monitoring Program
(HCP Monitoring Program)
The Applicants will initiate a monitoring program, for the term of the ITP, to ascertain
the success of the HCP Management Program in progressing towards achievement of
the stated HCP Biological Goals and Objectives. The purpose of the monitoring
program will be to determine the distribution and status of the resident scrub-jay
population and to evaluate the response of the scrub and mesic communities to
applied mechanical and fire treatments. This information will be uS~,d to guide future
management actions that serve to enhance demographic success of the study
population. The habitat quality and demographic parameters to be measured under
this monitoring program, as well as the schedule for implementation and reporting,
are outlined below.
As set forth below in 5.4. 1 . 1, each annual monitoring report will include a compliance
monitoring section to demonstrate that the Applicants are progressing towards
successful restoration of the scrub-jay habitat. This will be monitored in accordanc~
with the mechanical treatment and prescribed fire implementation directives and
schedule set forth in Table 7 and Table 8 of the HCP Management Program.
96
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I~
I~ '
1
1
1-
I~
I
1
1
1
1
I
5.4. 1 Monitorina Parameters
5.4.1.1
HABITAT QUALITY STUDIES
1 . Monitoring Objective: Evaluate the level of success towards restoration
of optimal scrub-jay habitat structural attributes, as described in Breininger et
al. (1995, 1996b), within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
2. Survey Methodology: Using the habitat characterization methodology
followed under this HCP, as set forth in Section 4.1.1, the habitat quality
within each of the 64 habitat polygons established herein will be qualitatively
assessed using the Shrub Height Class and Minimum Mapping Unit criteria
set forth above in Table 6.
The number and configuration of the habitat polygons may be reduced in the
future to reflect the structural characteristics of the restored scrub-jay
habitat, e.g. the applied management activities should be resulting in
improvements in habitat quality at a "landscape scale".
3. Minimum Habitat Quality Data to be Reoorted: Survey dates and
individual responsible for conducting survey. Present the collected habitat
quality data in a tabular format similar to Table 5, Characteristics of Habitat
Polygons within Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, to facilitate
comparison with the baseline data presented herein. Define, at a minimum,
the following polygon attributes within the proposed table:
a. Polygon 1.0, acres, and habitat type (same as set forth in Table 5)
b. Shrub height class of each polygon using classification criteria set forth in
Table 6, as referenced above.
4. Comoliance Monitoring Reoorting: This purpose of this section of the
monitoring report is to document the habitat restoration/management actions
that have been completed for that monitoring year.
The compliance reporting set forth below shall be presented in a tabular format
to facilitate comparison to Tables 7 and 8 of this HCP.
a. Mechanical Treatments: Compliance information for specified mechanical
treatments provided for each polygon will include:
1 . Proposed implementation schedule (as provided on Table 7).
2. Type of mechanical restoration treatment(s) completed within each
habitat polygon for that monitoring year.
97
1-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
I
3. Date each mechanical treatment was initiated and completed.
4. Any comments
NOTE: The first annual monitoring report should show that pine
thinning within each of the habitat polygons set forth in Table 7 was
accomplished within the first year. Likewise, Brazilian pepper removal within
the designated habitat polygons should have been completed.
b.
Prescribed Fire Treatment: Compliance information for specified
prescribed fire treatment, initial restoration burning and subsequent habitat
management burning, for each prescribed fire management unit will include:
1. Proposed implementation schedule (as provided on Table 8).
2. Prescribed fire treatment completed within each management unit for
that monitoring year.
NOTE: The first annual monitoring report should show that
prescribed fire was applied within MUs 3, 7, 9, 10-15, and 19, as set
forth in Table 8.
3. Date prescribed fire treatment was initiated.
4. Any comments
A copy of the DOF fire prescriptions and post-burn summary report shall be
included in this section of the monitoring report. The Applicants will conduct
the post-burn evaluation immediately following the burn (TNC 1991). The
post-burn summary report will discuss, at a minimum, the: 1.) prescribed
burn operations including weather and fuel conditions at the time of the fire,
ignition patterns, and general observation about the fire and crew, 2.) effects
of the fire with regard to the fuel consumption objectives set forth above for
"hot" and "mosaic" burns, 3.) percent of the MU comprised of exposed
mineral soils, and 4.) extent to which objectives of the burn were
accomplished.
5.
Definition of Future Management Actions
A primary component of the monitoring report will be the definition of future
management actions that need to be accomplished to proceed towards
achievement of Biological Goals and Objectives of this HCP. This section of the
monitoring report will clearly outline actions to be completed for the next
monitoring year. Each proposed action will be substantiated based on feedback
98
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
from monitoring the effects of the initial management actions on habitat quality
and scrub-jay habitat use. State-of-the science knowledge and habitat
management resources will be integrated into future management strategies as
needed.
5.4.1.2
FLORIDA SCRUB-JAY TERRITORY STUDIES
1 . Monitoring Objective: Quantify the number of scrub-jay territories and
level of recruitment into restored habitat areas on the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas.
2. Surv~y Methodology: Using the survey protocol set forth in Fitzpatrick et
at. (1991), collect basic demographic data to obtain an estimated count of
the total number of scrub-jay territories on-site, the number of individuals
(adults and juvenal-plumaged) within each territory, and the approximate
boundaries of each territory. Each Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Area will
be surveyed for a minimum of three (3) consecutive days to delineate scrub-
jay territories and to collect demographic data during appropriate times of the
year.
3. Minimum Data to be Reoorted: Individual responsible for conducting survey.
Results of the survey, including number of scrub-jay territories, number of
individuals in each territory, survey date(s), time(s), and weather conditions.
Identify recruited scrub-jay territories and any nests that were
opportunistically found during performance of the survey.
5.4.1.3
HABITAT LOSS WITHIN ITP IMPACT AREA
1. Provide an accounting, Unit and Lot Number, of the Sebastian Highlands lots
developed within the authorized ITP impact area during the reporting period.
2. Provide development status of interim management properties owned by City
of Sebastian and School Board.
5.4.2 Schedule for Monitorina Imolementation Schedule and Reoorting
1 . Monitorina Imolementation: The monitoring program shall commence in
March 2001, contingent upon issuance of the Sebastian HCP ITP.
2. Monitoring Freauency: Habitat quality assessments shall be performed
annually during the time period mid-February and March, with completion by
March 30th of each monitoring year.
99
Demographic studies shall be performed twice annually, pre-nesting (mid-
February and March) and post-fledging (July).
3. Reoorting Schedule: Once annually by May 15th of each monitoring
year. Two (2) copies of the completed annual monitoring progress report
shall be provided to the FWS Contact Office - Vero Beach, Florida. The first
monitoring report will be due May 15, 2001, contingent upon issuance of
the Sebastian HCP ITP.
Reporting of the July 2000 (post-fledging) demographic data may be
included in the May 2001 monitoring report, if collected for the 2000 nesting
season. Reporting by May of each year allows for the land manager to make
needed corrections to habitat management actions during the natural fire
season.
5.5 Unforeseen/Extraordinary Circumstances
"Unforeseen circumstances" or "extraordinary circumstances", as defined in the
Endangered Species Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook (FWS and NMFS
1996), means "changes in circumstances surrounding an HCP that were not or
could not be anticipated by HCP participants and the Service, that result in a
substantial and adverse change in the status of a covered species". The Applicants
and the FWS acknowledge that even with the detailed provisions set forth above in
the Sebastian HCP operating conservation program for mitigating and minimizing
impacts to the covered species, unforeseen circumstances may arise during the
term of this HCP.
Under the terms and conditions of this HCP the Applicants are committed to work
with the FWS to address future unforeseen changes to the'!laximum extent
reasonably practicable. In accordance with the Department of Interior's and
Department of Commerce's "No Surprises" policy (50 C.F.R. Part ~ 17), the
Applicants acknowledge that the FWS shall not require the Applicants to commit
additional lands, additional funds, or additional restrictions on lands or other natural
resources beyond the level of mitigation proposed under this Sebastian HCP, as
long as the Applicants are adequately implementing the conservation actions of this
Sebastian HCP, as set forth herein. Therefore, under the terms and conditions of
this Sebastian HCP, the FWS and the Applicants agree that implementation qf
additional mitigation measures to address unforeseen changes must be as close as
possible to the terms of this HCP and must be limited to modifications in habitat
management treatments and/or schedules within the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas.
The proposed HCP Monitoring Program will serve to provide the information linkage
required to determine if an unforeseen change has occurred within the covered Florida
scrub-jay population and to define reasonable and appropriate habitat management
100
measures, if any, that may be implemented within the Scrub-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas to reduce the adverse affects of these changes to the Florida
scrub-jay.
5.6 Funding
Three primary funding sources have been identified by Indian River County to support
implementation of the proposed Sebastian HCP operating conservation program. The
first source is the proceeds collected from timber sales proposed to be implemented
on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas to initiate scrub-jay habitat restoration.
A second, and primary funding source, are funds from the Indian River County
Environmental Lands Acquisition bond program. These funds, in conjunction with
proceeds collected from the timber sales, will be used to complete all mechanical
treatments required to initiate restoration of optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions, as
outlined in Section 5.3.2.1. These funds will also be used to support performance of
restoration burning activities, e.g. establishment of fire breaks, as agreed upon by
Indian River County and the OOF.
Future management costs are expected to be minimal, limited to implementation of
rotational prescribed fires by the Applicants and the OOF and the control of Brazilian
pepper regrowth. The Environmental Lands Acquisition bond program and, a third
funding source, the Indian River Mitigation Fund Account for upland and wetland
restoration projects, will be used to support implementation of habitat management
actions on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, in the long term.
The HCP Monitoring Program will be performed internally by the Indian River County
Conservation Lands Manager and supporting staff.
Therefore, the funding sources, as identified above, will be used by ,the Applicants to
achieve stated Biological Goals and Objectives of the Sebastian HCP operating
conservation program.
101
LITERATURE CITED
ABRAHAMSON, W.G.1984. Post-Recovery of Florida lake Wales Ridge Vegetation.
Am. J. Bot. 71 :9-21. in: Fernald, R.T. 1989. Coastal Xeric Scrub Communities
of the Treasure Coast Region, Florida. Nongame Wildlife Technical Report No.
6. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, 113 pp.
ABRAHAMSON, W.G. and D.C. HARTNETT. 1990. Pine Flatwoods and Dry Prairies.
Pp. 103-149. in: R.L. Myers and J.J. Ewel (eds.). Ecosystems of Florida. Univ.
Cent. Florida Press, Orlando, Florida.
ADRIAN, F. and R. FARINETTI. 1995. Fire Management Plan. Merritt Island National
Wildlife Refuge. Titusville, Florida.
AUFFENBERG, W. and R. FRANZ. 1982. The Status and Distribution of the Gopher
Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus). Pages 95-126.
BERGEN, S. 1994. Characterization of Fragmentation in Florida Scrub Communities.
M.S. Thesis. Dept. Bio. ScL, Florida Institute of Tech., Melbourne, FL.71 pp.
BREININGER, D.R. and P.A. SCHMAlZER, 1990. Effects of Fire and Disturbance on
Plants and Animals in a Florida Oak/Palmetto Scrub. American Midland
Natural ist 123-64-74.
BREININGER, D.R., M.J. PROVANCHA, and R.B. SMITH. 1991. Mapping Florida
Scrub Jay Habitat for Purposes of land-Use Management. Photogrammetric
Engineering and Remote Sensing 51 :1467-1474.
BREININGER, D.R. 1992. Habitat Model for the Florida Scrub Jay on John F.
Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech. Memorandum No. 107543. NASA
Biomedical Operations and Res. Office, John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
95 pp.
BREININGER, D.R., V.L. lARSON, B.W. DUNCUN, R. B. SMITH, D. M. ODDY, AND
M.F. GOODCHilD. 1995. landscape Patterns of Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat U~e
and Demographic Success. Cons. Bio. 9(6):1442-1453.
BREININGER, D. R., V. L. lARSON, D. M. ODDY, R. B. SMITH AND M. J.
BARKASZI. 1996a. Florida Scrub-Jay Demography in Different landscapes.
Auk: 112:617-625.
102
I
I
I,
I
I
1
1
I'
1
I~
1
1
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
BREININGER, D.R., V.L. LARSON, R. SCHAUB, B.W. DUNCUN, P.A. SCHMALZER, D.
M. ODDY, R. B. SMITH, F. ADRIAN and H. HILL, JR. 1996b. A Conservation
Strategy for the Florida Scrub-Jay on John F. Kennedy Space Center/Merritt
Island National Wildlife Refuge: An Initial Scientific Basis for Recovery, NASA
Tech. Memorandum No. 111676. John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
BREININGER, D.R and D. M. ODDY. 1998. Biological Criteria for the Recovery of
Florida Scrub-Jay Populations on Public Lands in Brevard County. Final Report
to the Endangered Species Office. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Jacksonville,
FL. Dynamac Corporation. 54 pp.
BREININGER D. R., V. L. LARSON, B. W. DUNCAN, R. B. SMITH. 1998a. Linking
Habitat Suitability.to Demographic Success in Florida Scrub-Jays. Wildlife
Society Bulletin 26:118-128.
BREININGER D. R., V.L. LARSON, D. M. ODDY, R. B. SMITH. 1998b. How Does
Variation In Fire History Influence Florida Scrub-Jay Demographic Success?
In Press: Fire Effects on Rare And Endangered Species Conference.
International Association of Wildland Fire, Fairfield, Washington.
BREININGER, D.R. 1999. Florida Scrub-Jay Demography and Dispersal in a
Fragmented Landscape. The Auk 116(2):520-527, 1999.
BREININGER, D.R., M.A. BURGMAN, B.M. STITH. 1999. Influence of habitat quality,
catastrophes, and population size on extinction risk of the Florida scrub-jay.
Wildlife Society Bulletin 1999, 27(3) :810-822.
CAMPBELL, H.W. and S.P. CHRISTMAN. 1982. The herpetological Components of
Florida Sandhill and Sand Pine Scrub Associations. In: N.J~ Scott, Jr. (ed.)
Herpetological Communities. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife Research
Report No. 13.
CARROLL AND ASSOCIATES. 1996. Florida Scrub Jay Survey Management Plan
Sebastian Airport Site, Sebastian, Indian River County, FL. Prepared for City of
Sebastian. June 16, 1996.
CARROLL AND ASSOCIATES. 1997. Second Florida Scrub Jay Survey also Baselin.e
Survey as Part of a Management Plan Sebastian Airport Site, Sebastian, Indian
River County, FL. Prepared for City of Sebastian. July 10, 1997.
CHRISTENSEN, N.L. 1985. Shrublands of the Southeastern United States. p.441-
449. In: Schmalzer, P.A. and C.R. Hinkle. 1992. Species Composition and
Structure of Oak-Saw Palmetto Scrub Vegetation. Castanea 57(4):220-251.
103
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I~
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
Ii
i
I
I
I
COX, J. A. 1984. Distribution, Habitat, and Social Organization of the Florida Scrub
Jay, with a Discussion of the Evolution of Cooperative Breeding in New World
Jays. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ. of Florida, Gainesville, FL 223 pp.
COX, J. A. 1987. Status and Distribution of the Florida Scrub Jay. Fla. Ornithol.
Soc. Spec. Pub. no. 3, 110 pp.
DeGANGE, A.R., J.W. FITZPATRICK, J.N. LAYNE, and G.E. WOOLFENDEN. 1989.
Acorn Harvesting by Florida Scrub Jays. Ecology 70:348-356.
DUNCUN, B. W., D.R. BREININGER, P.A. SCHMALZER, and V.L. LARSON. 1995.
Validating a Florida Scrub Jay Habitat Suitability Model, Using Demography
Data on Kennedy Space Center, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote
Sensing 56:1361-1370 in: Breininger, D.R., V.L. Larson, R. Schaub, B.W.
Duncun, P.A. Schmalzer, D. M. Oddy, R. B. Smith, F. Adrian and H. Hill, Jr.
1996. A Conservation Strategy for the Florida Scrub-Jay on John F. Kennedy
Space Center/Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge: An Initial Scientific Basis
for Recovery NASA Tech. Memorandum No. 111676. John F. Kennedy Space
Center, Florida.
DUNCAN, B. A., S. BOYLE, D. R. BREININGER, AND P. A. SCHMALZER. 1999.
Coupling Past Management Practice and Historical Landscape Change on
John F. Kennedy Space Center. Landscape Ecology. In press.
FERNALD, E.A., E. D. PURDUM, J.R. ANDERSON, JR., P.A. KRAFFT. 1992. Atlas of
Florida. University Press of Florida.
FERNALD, R.T. 1989. Coastal Xeric Scrub Communities of the Treasure Coast
Region, Florida: A Summary of their Distribution and Ecologv., with Guidelines
for their Preservation and Management. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Comm. Nongame Wildlife Pgm. Tech. Rep. No.6. Tallahassee, FL. 113 pp.
FERNALD, R.T., and B.R. TOLAND. 1991. The Florida Scrub Jay. Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Comm. Informational Brochure.
FITZPATRICK, J.W., G.E. WOOLFENDEN, and M.T. KOPENY. 1991. Ecology and
Development-related Habitat Requirements of the Florida Scrub Jay
(Aphelocoma coerulescens coerulescens). Florida Game and Freshwater Fish
Comm. Nongame Wildlife Program Tech. Rep. No.8. Tallahassee, FL.
FITZPATRICK, J.W., R. BOWMAN, D.R. BREININGER, M.A. O'CONNELL, B. STITH,
J. THAXTON, B. TOLAND, and G.E. WOOLFENDEN. 1994a. Habitat
Conservation Plans for the Florida Scrub Jay: A Biological Framework.
Archbold Biological Research Station unpubl. tech. rep. 175 pp.
104
I
I
11
I
I
I
I
I~
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FITZPATRICK, J.W., B. PRANTY, and B. SMITH. 1994b. Florida Scrub Jay Statewide
Map. 1992-1993. Archbold Biological Station. 27 pp.
FLORIDA AFFINITY, INC. AND ECOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 1995. Management
Plan for the Wabasso Scrub Wabasso Area. Indian River County, Florida.
Prepared for the Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners.
September 27, 1995. 24 pp. and appendices.
FLORIDA AFFINITY, INC. AND ECOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 1996. Management
Plan for the Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area. Indian River County, Florida.
Prepared for the Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners.
April 29, 1996. 30 pp. and appendices.
FLORIDA AFFINITY, INC. AND ECOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 1998. Management
Plan for the North Sebastian Conservation Area. Indian River County, Florida.
Prepared for the Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners.
January 29, 1998. 31 pp. and appendices.
FLORIDA NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY AND DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL
RESOURCES. 1990. Guide to the Natural Communities of Florida. 111 pp.
GLlTZENSTEIN, J.S., W.J. PLATT, and D.R. STRENG. 1995. Effects of Fire Regimes
and habitat on Tree Dynamics in North Florida Longleaf Pine Savannas.
Ecological Monographs 65:442-476.
GUERIN, D.N. 1988. Oak Dome Establishment and Maintenance in a Longleaf Pine
Community in Ocala National Forest. Florida. M.S. Thesis. University of Florida,
Gainesville. 122p. in: Schmalzer, P.A., D.R. Breininger, F.W. Adrian, R.
Schaub, B.W. Duncun. 1994. Development and Implementation of a Scrub
Habitat Compensation Plan for Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech. Mem.
109202. 54 pp.
GUERIN, D.N. 1993. Oak Dome Clonal Structure and Fire Ecology in a Florida
Longleaf Pine Dominated Community. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club
120:107-114. In: Schmalzer, P.A., D.R. Breininger, F.W. Adrian, R. Schaub,
B. W. Duncun. 1994. Development and Implementation of a Scrub Habitat
Compensation Plan for Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech. Mem. 109202. 5:4-
pp.
HARRISON, S. AND A. D. TAYLOR. 1997. Empirical Evidence for Metapopulation
Dynamics. 1997. Pages 27-42 in: . A. Hanski and M. E. Gilpin (Eds.).
Metapopulation Biology, Ecology, Genetics, and Evolution. Academic Press,
San Diego, California.
105
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~
I~
I
I
I
I-
I_I
I
IJ
II
_J
HAWKES, C.V. and E.S. MENGES. 1995. Density and Seed Production of a Florida
Endemic, Polygonella basirama, in Relation to Time Since Fire and Open Sand.
American Midland Naturalist 133: 13'8-148.
KING, T., B.R. TOLAND, AND J. FEIERTAG. 1992. An Evaluation of Xeric Habitat
Reclamation at a Central Florida Phosphate Mine. Florida Game and Fresh
Water Fish Comm. Tech. Rep. to IMC Fertilizer, Inc. Bartow, FL.
KURZ, H. 1942. Florida Dunes and Scrub Vegetation and Geology. Florida Geol. Surv.
Bull. 23: 15-154.
KUSHLAN, J.A. 1990. Freshwater Marshes. in: R.L. Myers and J.J. Ewel (eds.).
Ecosystems of Florida. Univ. Cent. Florida Press, Orlando, Florida.
LAESSLE, A.M. 1942. The Plant Communities of the Welaka Area. University of
Florida. BioI. Sci. Ser. 4: 1-143.
LAESSLE, A.M. 1958. The Origin and Successional Relationship of Sandhill
Vegetation and sand Pine Scrub. Ecol. Monogr. 28:361-387.
LANDE, R. 1988. Genetics and Demography in Biological Conservation. Science
241: 1455-1460.
LEVINS, R. 1969. Some Demographic and Genetic Consequences of Environmental
Heterogeneity for Biological Control. Bulletin Entomology Society of America
15:237-240.
LOGAN, T.H. 1997. Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species and Species
of Special Concern Official Lists. 1 August 1997. Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission. 18 pp.
MAIN K.N. and E.S. MENGES. 1997. Archbold Biological Station: Station Fire
Management Plan. Land Management Publication 97-1. Archbold biological
Station. Lake Placid, FL. 103 pp.
McGOWAN, K.J., and G.E. WOOLFENDEN. 1989. A Sentinel System in the Florida
Scrub Jay. Animal Behav. 37: 1000-1006.
McGOWAN, K.J., and G.E. WOOLFENDEN. 1990. Contributions to Fledgling Feeding
in the Florida Scrub Jay. J. Anim. Ecol. 59: 691-707.
I
I
I
MENGES, E.S. and N. KOHFELDT. 1995. Life History Strategies of Florida Scrub
Plants in Relation to Fire. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 122:282-297.
106
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I'
I
'1
I
I
I
I
I
MOLER, P.E. and R. FRANZ. 1987. Wildlife Values of Small, Isolated Wetlands in the
Southeastern Coastal Plain. pp. 234-238. in: Odom R.R., K.A. Riddleburger,
and J.C. Ozier (eds) Proceedings 'of the Third Southeastern Nongame and
Endangered Wildlife Symposium. Georgia Department of Natural Resources,
Athens, GA.
MUMME, R.L. 1993. Do Helpers Increase Reproductive Success? An Experimental
Analysis in the Florida Scrub Jay? Behav. Eco!' and Sociobiol. 31: 319-328.
MYERS, R.L. 1990. Scrub and High Pine. pp. 150-193 in R.L. Myers and J.J. Ewel
, (eds.). Ecosystems of Florida. Univ. Cent. Florida Press, Orlando, Florida.
PETERSON, A.T. 1990. Evolutionary relationships of the Aohelocoma Jays. Ph.D.
Dissertation. Univ. Chicago. Chicago, IL.
ROBBINS, L.E. AND R.L. MYERS. 1992. Seasonal Effects of Prescribed Burning in
Florida: a Review. Miscellaneous Publication No.8 Tall Timbers Research, Inc.
Tallahassee, Florida. 96 pp.
SCHAUB, R., R.L. MUMME, and G.E. WOOLFENDEN. 1992. Predation on the Eggs
and Nestlings of Florida Scrub Jays. Auk. 109: 585-593.
SCHMALZER, P.A. and C.R. HINKLE. 1991. Dynamics of Vegetation and soils of
Oak/Saw Palmetto Scrub after Fire: Observations from Permanent Transects.
NASA Technical Memorandum 103817. Kennedy Space Center, Florida. 146
pp.
SCHMALZER, P.A. and C.R. HINKLE. 1992. Recovery of Oak-Saw Palmetto Scrub
after Fire. Castanea 53: 158-173.
SCHMALZER, P.A., D.R. BREININGER, F.W. ADRIAN, R. SCHAUB, B.W. DUNCUN.
1994. Development and Implementation of a Scrub Habitat Compensation Plan
for Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech. Mem. 109202. 54 pp.
SCHMALZER, P.A., S.R. BOYLE, and H.M. SWAIN. 1999. Scrub Ecosystems of
Brevard County, Florida: A Regional Characterization. Biological Sciences
62(1): 13-47.
SIMBERLOFF, D. 1988. The Contribution of Population and Community Biology to
Conservation Science. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 19: 473-511.
107
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I:
I-
I-
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
SMITH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVIGES. 1996. Proposed County Road 512 Corridor
Improvements Project - Phase 2 - Indian River County, Florida Biological
Assessment and Mitigation Plan for the Incidental Take of the Threatened
Florida Scrub Jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens coerulescens) Wabasso Scrub
Conse"rvation Area Scrub Habitat Restoration and Management Plan.
Prepared for Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners.
January 24, 1996.
STALLCUP, J.A., AND G.E. WOOLFENDEN. 1978. Family Status and Contribution
to Breeding by Florida Scrub Jays. Anim. Behav. 26: 1144-1156.
STITH, B.M., J. W. FITZPATRICK, G.E. WOOLFENDEN, and, B. PRANTY. 1996.
Classification and Conservation of Metapopulations: A Case Study of the
Florida Scrub Jay. Pages 187-216 in: D.R. McCullough(ed.) Metapopulations
and Wildlife Conservation. Island press, Ca.
SYMTH, J.E. 1991. Returning Pyric Communities to Suitable Habitat for Florida Scrub
Jays at Oscar Scherer State Recreation Area. Abstract in the Florida Scrub Jay
Workshop, May 23-24, Ormond Beach, Florida. Department of Natural
resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, District 4 Administration. in:
Schmalzer, P.A., D.R. Breininger, F.W. Adrian, R. Schaub, B.W. Duncun. 1994.
Development and Implementation of a Scrub Habitat Compensation Plan for
Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech. Mem. 109202. 54 pp.
SWAIN, H. M, P.A. SCHMALZER, D.R. BREININGER, K.V. ROOT, S.A. BERGEN, S. R.
BOYLE, S. MacCAFFREE. 1995. Appendix B. Biological Consultants Report. in:
Scrub Conservation and Development Plan. Brevard County. Submitted to
Natural Resources Management Division, Brevard County, Florida. Florida
Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL.
THAXTON, J. E. AND T. M. HINGTGEN. 1996. Effects of Suburbanization and
Habitat Fragmentation on Florida Scrub-Jay Dispersal. Florida Field Naturalist
24: 25-37.
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY. 1991. Fire Management Manual. Fire Management
and Research Program. Tallahassee.
TOLAND, B.R. 1991; Nest Site Characteristics of a Florida Scrub Jay Population in
Indian River County. Proc. Florida Scrub Jay Workshop. May 23, 1991,
Ormond Beach, FL (abstract).
TOLAND, B.R. 1993. The Distribution of Florida Scrub Jays in Martin, St. Lucie,
Indian River, And Southern Brevard Counties. Final rep. to Archbold
Biological Research Station and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Tech. Rep.
22 pp.
108
I.
I
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
11
I
I
I
II
I
III
II
I
I
I
TOLAND, B.A. 1996. The Status of the Florida Scrub-Jay and a City of Sebastian
Habitat Conservation Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Unpub. tech. rep.
6 pp.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AND NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE.
1996. Endangered Species Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. 1999. South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. Distribution of Federally-Listed Plants in
Southeast Florida. Unpublished data.
WETTSTEIN, C.A., C.V. NOBLE, and J.D. SLABAUGH. 1987. Soil SUNey of Indian
River County, Florida. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service.
WOOLFENDEN, G.E. 1974. Nesting and Survival in a Population of Florida Scrub
Jays. Living Bird 12: 25-49.
WOOLFENDEN, G.E. 1975. Florida Scrub Jay Helpers at the Nest. Auk 92:1-15.
WOOLFENDEN, G.E. 1978. Growth and Survival of Young Florida Scrub Jays.
Wilson Bull. 90: 1-18.
WOOLFENDEN, G.E., AND J.W. FITZPATRICK. 1977. Dominance in the Florida
Scrub Jay. Condor 79: 1-12.
WOOLFENDEN, G.E., AND J.W. FITZPATRICK. 1978. The Inheritance of Territory
in Group-Breeding Birds. BioScience 28: 104-108.
WOOLFENDEN, G.E., and J.W. FITZPATRICK. 1984. The Florida Scrub Jay:
Demography of a Cooperative-Breeding Bird. 406 pp. Monogr. Pop. BioI. No.
20. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N.J.
WOOLFENDEN, G.E., AND J.W. FITZPATRICK. 1986. Sexual Asymmetries in the
Life History of the Florida scrub jay. pp. 87-107 in: Rubenstein, D.I., and R.
W. Wrangham (eds.). Ecological Aspects of Social Evolution: Birds and
Mammals. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N.J.
WOOLFENDEN, G.E., AND J.W. FITZPATRICK. 1990. Florida Scrub Jays: A
Synopsis After 18 Years of Study. pp. 241-266 in: Stacey, P.B., and W.B.
Koenig (eds.). Cooperative Breeding in Birds: Long-Term Studies of Ecology
and Behavior. Cambridge Univ. Press. Cambridge.
109
I
I
I
I
II
I~ i
I
I
I~ !
I:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
WOOLFENDEN, G.E.', AND J.W. FITZPATRICK. 1991. Florida Scrub Jay
Ecology and Conservation. Pp. 542-565 in: Perrins, C.M., and J.D.
Lebreton, and G.J.M. Hitons (eds.): Bird Population Studies: Relevance
to Conservation and Management. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.
110
LIST OF PREPARERS
1.) Lisa H. Smith, President/Ecologist
Smith Environmental Services
1 290 Pine Island Road
Merritt Island, FL 32952
Voice: (321) 455-2242
FAX: (321) 455-2920
e-mail:ses@gnc.net
2.) David R. Breininger, Senior Ecologist
413 Tortoise View Circle
Satellite Beach, FL 32937
e-mail scrub@digital.net
3.) Brian Toland, Field Biologist
4545 River Mist Drive
Melbourne, Florida 32935
111
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDICES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
r' --
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
MINUTES ATTACHED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1999 - 9:00 A.M.
County Commission Chambers
County Administration Building
1840 25th Street, VeTO Beach, Florida 32960
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Kenneth R. Macht, Chainnan (District 3) James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Fran B. ^dam~, Vice C1taixman (District I)
Caroline D.GillD (Dislrict 5) Charles P. Vinlnac. C.OUllty Attorney
Ruth M. Stanbridge (District 2)
John W. Tippin (Di:llricl4) Jean';)' K. Darton, Clerk to the Board
9:00 a.m. 1.
CALL :I'O ORDER
BACKUP PAGES
2. INYOCATION Rev. Joe Rrooks
Twentieth Ave. Church of God
3. PLEDGE OF ALLf:GI^~CE Charles P. Vitunac
4. ADDITIONS.to the.AGENDA/EMERGENCV ITEMS
, .
None.
Co.... .. '41... ... ....... .... 1...1..1 I. ... I. I.... I.. I ..... I I. I.. I .......1
-1-
I
I
I
I
I
I'
Ie,
I' :
I~
I~
I~ i
I,
I~
I
I
I
I
Ii
II
Hl.
11.
~
c.
PITRLIC NOTIr.E ITEMS
None
BACKUP PAGES
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR '8 MA TTF:RS
None
DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A. Community Development
Board Approval of the Sebastian Area-Wide Scrub Jay
Habitat Conservation Plan
{memorandum dated November 9, 1999).....,...................209.211
8. Emergen~y Services
1. Approval of Resolution Adopting the Tndian River
County Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS)
(memorandum dated November 5,1999)..............212.218
2. Authori:lation to Submit an Emergency Management
Preparedness and Assistance (EMPA) Competitive
Grant Application for Wildfire Mitigation
(memorandum dated No,,'ember 8, 1999)..............219-222
3. Approval of Ground Space Lease with Flonda Power
& Light Company
(memorandum dated November 9, 1999)..............223-233
4. Conceptual Approval for Emergency Services to Seek
an PM Radio License (Channel 213A) for Emergency
Broadcasts During Crisis Events in Cooperation with
the School District and Funding Authorization for
Phase I which includes an FCC Interference Study and
Engineering Expenses from the Tower Lease R~V(;IlUe
Account
(memorandum dated November 9, 1999)..............234-237
-6-
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I-
I
~ 1
I:
I
I
I
I
11
IJ
I
I
I
I
Pelican Island Natural Wildlife Reserve and Jungle Trail, and the Archie
Wildlife Reserve. He presented the Indian River Land Trust Land COilS ation Analysis
(CLERK'S NOTE: COpy OF ANALYSIS IS ON FILE WITH E BACKUP FOR
TODA V'S MEETTNG.) and reconmlended that 4 properties ta priority: (1) Blue Cypress
Creek and Padgett Branch, (2) Fellsmere East link Conn 'ng St. Sebastian River projc,~t
d:;''''
with lands to the south, (3) lands that link Fellsmer ast and Blue Cypress 9t~,se:1j~~~
area, and (4) the unprotected part of the St. S astian River. He ~~~d th I :,"c not
1~~r~~tt:'ln" , ~'~"~'..,
specific parcels but priority areas. lIe also commended the foll~,Jrig conti~~, :',,,:' .". ';,,~~1-r:
( 1) Orchid Island coastal slr.ll1d lIDd arilimc hammock, (2) sili aI o,~!lJlli" coast~l.!,~ TH i'
(3) Indian River Blueways Pr . ct, and (4) preparation and f ~ ',-.. tatian of a Green.,.:;
expressed the
",
. ance the
,~!p'
Infrastructure Plan creatin a connected system of ecological
Land Trust's continuo conunitment to help the County co~erve Ian
quality of life in Clian River County. ,.'
"'i~:i~.
.,.~.!@..
.".11"
':.'fr-
o ACTION REQUIRED OR TA.KE~.",i;(
;Hr
'~,M~'fI:'
jii~'"
:.~i!!-~
.W'
~~'" '.' . : ~;:;; ,
I ""rl!ll:'
.r ~~~ii:
'i~bip."iim i~:;
'fi""..
'..
.~ I::
I nl,l~
'}..1i:
...ti'
r~~pr
NOVEMBER 16, 1999
-27-
never intended that anyone involved receive anything less than full value for their propelty.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECO~"'DED by Commissioner Stanbridgc, the
Board unanimously directed staff to add the item to
the agenda for the Land Acquisition Advisory
Committee meeting scheduled tor Novembe ':ltf
1999, and approved the Sebastian Area-Wide b- ,di~'
Jay Habitat Conservation Plan and authori I staffi:~jll'
, , ffif'
to transmit it to the Fish and Wildlife Servicdt
in conjunction with an Incidental Take"i'
,jJl!~111
application, as recommended by staff,"
JR;
PLAN IS ON FILE IN n"!.:~,c1FFICE .
"',I' .
THE CLERK. T<? .~~~. BOA~~;' .
.tHlIl" jL
;;" n~
pt' "Ir.~/
... ,;rillt
'~!\., "l1f'
. TREASURE
NOVEMBER 16, 1999
-33-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I-
I"
I
1
I,
I
I:
I
I
IJ
01/14100 03:06 FAX 5810149
Cll/HR/PROCuREM~!
l4J02
RESOLUTION NO. R-OO-05
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO
APPLY FOR SEBASTIAN AREA-WIDE FLORIDA SCRUB-JAY
INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMiT; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT;
PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WBEf<,EAS, the City of Sebastian, in concert with Indian River County, has
worked for years in alleviating the concerns of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as to the
effects of development in the Sebastian Highlands on the viability of the Florida scrub-jay;
and
WHEREAS, on October 27, 1999, the City Council gave conceptual approval to
the Habitat Conservation Plan negotiated with the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service for
issuance of a pennit removing restrictions on the "scrub-jay lots" in the Highlands; and
WHEREAS, the application for this incidental take pennit is nearing finalization;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNell. OF THE
CITY OF SEBASTIAN, as follows:
Section .1.
AUmORIZATlON.
The City Manager or his designee is
hereby authorized to execute, 'on behalf of the City as a coapplicant with Indian River
County, the application and any other necessary documents to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service for an incidental take permit in accordance with the Sebastian Area-Wide Florida
Scrub-Jay Habitat Conservation Plan.
Section 2.
CONFLICfS.
All resolutions or parts of resolutions in
conflict herewith are hereby repealed
01"14/00 03: 06 FAX 5810149
CM/HR/PROCliREMNT
14103
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I~
I~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Section 3.
EFFECTIVE DATE.
This resolution shall take effect
immediately upon its adoption.
A motion to adopt the foregoing Resolution was made by Councilmember
'71/1j~ . The motion was seconded by CounciImember ,~
and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Mayor Chuck Neuberger
CounciImember Joe Barczyk
Councilmember Walter Barnes
CounciJmember Ben A. Bishop
Councilmemher Edward J. Majcher, Jr.
The Mayor thereupon declared this Resolution duly passed and adopted this 12th
day of January, 2000.
CITY OF SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA
By:
ATTEST:
~/J1 C'~
Kat . O"Halloran, CMCJ AAE
City Clerk.
Approved as to form and legality for
reliance by the City of Sebastian only:
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
- :-
10
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
I
IJ
I
Ii
I
Resolution No. 2000 - 05
A RESOLUTION OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
EST AB LISHING AN OUTDOOR ENVIRONMENT ALCLASSROOM ON THE PELICAN ISLAND
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE, AND ACKNOWLEDGING A COMMITMENTOF THE BOARD
TO CONSERVE AND ALLOW THE MANAGEMENT OF SCRUB HABITAT AND FLORIDA
SCRUB JAYS ON SCHOOL BOARD PROPERTY AT PELICAN ISLAND ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL.
WHEREAS, Pelican Island Elementary School (SCHOOL); has established "The Aloa Lorton Nature
Trail", a living classroom, on twelve acres of Pristine Coastal Xeric Scrub (REAL PROPERTY) found on
the 32 acre school grounds.
WHEREAS, School has been nationally recognized by The Nature Conservancy and the Anheuser-Busch
AdvenJure Parksfor El1Vronmental Excellence. The SCHOOL received first place in the "Last Great Places
on Earth" Award The award recognized the ECO Troop's(an organization of students in the fourth and
fiflh grades at SCHOOL); work to protect the diversity of life on earth. A monetary gift of $10,000 was
given to the school to further its efforts. The school has also received thefol/owing grants: "Coastal Xeric
Scrub - A School Yard Environmental Interdisciplinary Study for K- I 2" from the Florida Game and Fresh
Water Fish Commission to develop curriculum that would assist students and teachers to understand: the
alJributes of the Coastal Xeric Scrub, the biodiversity of the area, the responsibilities of citizens regarding
conservation oflimited resources, and the pre-historic and historic influences on this area. "Nature Studies"
from the Indian River Education Foundation to develop nature studies for the nature trail. "Project Legacy"
from the Learn and Serve America to support students serving as stewards to conserve and protect this
ecosystem.
WHEREAS, School intends to use the REAL PROPERTY to protect endangered and threatened animals,
. plants, and habitat of the Coastal Xeric Scrub Ecosystem and educate the citizens on their role in conserving
Qnd protecting one of the last great places on earth. '
WHEREAS, REAL PROPERTY is identified in Appendix A
WHEREAS, School provides an integrated curriculum approach based on the Florida Sunshine State
Standards as follows:
Standards for Science, Strand G "How Living Things Interact with Their El1Vironment,
Benchmark I. The students understand the competitive, interdependent, cyclic nature of living
things in the environment
Benchmark 2. The student understands the consequences of using limited natural resources.
Also Social Studies Standard Strand C. "Government and the Citizen (Civics and Government) ",
Benchmark 2. The student understands the role of the citizen in American Democracy.
and Social Studies Standard Strand B. "People, Places and Environments (Geography) ",
Benchmark 2. The student understands the interactions of People and the Physical Environment.
II
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.
1-.'
I.'
I
1
1
1
1
I
I
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA THAT:
1. The above recitals are ratified in their entirety.
2. The School Board of Indian River County, Florida, hereby, grants a license for the REAL
PROPERTY identified in appendix A to SCHOOL solely for the use as an outdoor classroom for the
purposes described in this Resolution forthe dLration of the life of the SCHOOL; provided, however,
the following conditions are met: (i) the County of Indian River shall maintain and manage the
REAL PROPERTY in Appendix A and (ii) the license shall be modified or terminated at the time
that the School Board of Indian River County and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service detennine that
the REAL PROPERTY described in Appendix A provides no benefit to the Florida Scrub Jay
pursuant to the Endangered Species Act.
THE RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Board member ~\"" \~.r\
the motion was seconded by Board member \)". ,,~ ~ ~""'1 ,and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows: .
Board Chainnan Herhert L. Bailey
Board member Dorothv Talbert
Board member Wesley Davis
~
k.-
"W~
Board member
Charles G. Searcy
~
~
Board member
this
Craig McCarney
The Chainnan thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted
/Y day of December, 1999.
Attest: .
SCHOOL BOARD OF INDIAN
RIVER CO TV, FLORIDA
By ~
hairman Herbert Bailey
~-
. ":1;".....'\:\ _' ,,~"
1:4~c;.u."'"," ...'s.Q\:....~,
I
I
I,
I
I
I
Ii
I~
I
I~
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I:
I
I
APPENDIX A
The property is approximately 12 acres on the east side of the Pelican Island Elementary School site to be identified
specifically by a survey provided by Indian River County on approval of the resolution by the Indian River County
School Board
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~ i
!
11
1-
1-;
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
"
ORDINANCE NO. 0-99-37
.AJ.~ ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING CODE OF ORDINANCES
SECTION 42-48 CONTROL OF OPEN BURNING; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Sebastian Code contains strict limitations upon open burning to ensure
the protection of the citizenry; and
WHEREAS, there are occasions, such as controlled bums for fire prevention or environmental
habitat management. or live fire training for firefighters, that the public purpose is best served by allowing
government -controlled open fires;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
Section I.
That the Code of Ordinances, City of Sebastian, Florida is hereby amended by
adding a subsection, to be numbered 42-48(b)(3). which said subsection shall read as follows:
Sec. 42-48. Control of open burning.
(b) (3) Qpen bu~ shall be allowed by Q:ovemmental agencies when
necessa1Y to accomplish a police-power ~urposer upon 1\Pproval by the Ci1y
Council In the event that an emer~ency exists that does not 12rovide time to
obtain Council approval such as a fire-prevention emer~ency necessitatina a
controlled burnT the approval may be granted by the CiW Manager.
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I-
I-
I
I'
I~ j
I~
I
I
I_J
I
I
I
I
..
Section 2.
CONFLICT. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict here",ith
are hereby repealed.
Section 3.
SEVERABll..ITY. In the event a court of competent julisdiction shall hold or
detennine that a.ny part of this Ordinance is invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of the Ordinance
shall not be affected and it shall be presumed that the City Council of the City of Sebastian did not intend
to ena.ct such invalid or unconstitutional provision. It shall further be assumed that the City Council
'Would ha.ve enacted the remainder of this Ordinance without said invalid Or unconstitutional provision,
thereby causing said remainder to remain in full force and effect.
Section 4.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect following its adoption by
the City Council.
The foregoing Ordinance was moved for adoption by councilmember,~.//.;t..e...... . The
motion was seconded by Councilmember
tL1)rAd
and, upon being put to a vote, the vote
was as follows:
Mayor Chuc~ Neuberger
Councilmember Ioe Barczyk
Councilmember Walter Barnes
Councilmember Ben A. Bishop
Councilmember Edward 1. Majcher, Jr.
-......
..
The Mayor thereupon declared this Ordinance duly passed and adopted this 15t
day of December, 1999.
CITY OF SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA
......."...........,
-.. -
.. .... .. ..
i .~ST7'~
- ...... --
~ '-": .:. - . "
:: --... '"'.....
~ :;::, .,.,.,
,. _ w
........ .. '-..
By:
--
Approved as to form and legality for
reliance by the City of Sebastian only:
Rich Stringer, City Att
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. APPENDIX B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I;
I~
I'
1_ i
I~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
United States Departnlent of the Interior
FISH ..\..'\D \\lLDLIFE SER\ leE
6620 SOllthp,?im Dri\'e, SOllth
Slli~e :110
]acksomille. Hodda 3:!21&-0912
February 7, 1995
Mr. Kenneth R. Macht, Chainnan
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Me. Macht:
In 1994, Indian River County voted to develop a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). Critical
to the success of an HCP is preserving and maintaining as much of the remaining scrub in
Indian River County as possible. Some of the most critical areas for protection are contained
in approximately 155 platted lots in Unit 17 of the Sebastian Highlands. Until some
protection is afforded these lots, all of the estimated 2,000 platted lots throughout the
Sebastian Highlands will be subject to scrutiny under the Endangered Species Act for
compliance with Section 9.
At a recent Land Acquisition Commission (LAC) meeting, the LAC recommended the
purchase of the 65-acre Sebastian Industrial Site scrub. While the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service commends the County for proceeding with scrub habitat acquisition, we feel a bener
use of these limited funds would be to acquire as many of the single family lots as quickly as
possible. Acquisition of these lots would significantly improve the chance of implementing a
successful HCP and would reduce the controversy surrounding Florida scrub. jay protection
in Indian River County.
Therefore, the Service recommends that a main core of approximately 120 scrub lots
neighboring the protected Indian River County School Board scrub site at Pelican Island
Elementary School, be highest priority for scrub acquisition during the HCP process. This
would he.lp create support for the HCP and reduce listed species conflicts. The approved
HCP and subsequent Section lO(a)(l)(B) pennit issuance woulqfacilitate the release of all
remaining planed lots in the City of Sebastian. The successfully negotiated transfer of these .
120 lots in the HCP would virtually assure public support of the complete HCP.
The Sebastian Industrial Site scrub is under no immediate threat of development, and any
proposed impacts to scrub habitat on that site prior to completion of the County HCP would
require and individual HCP.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~ I
I'
. ,
I.,
I,
I"
I
I
I
I
I
I
For these reasons the Service urges Indian River County, in the best interests of the County
HCP, to immediately acquire the 120-Iot core scrub habitat adjacent to Pelican Island
Elementary School.
~
David J. WeSle~
State Administrator
1
1
1 V () {. '- f./-HH<..r.vc;
-
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDuM
1
TO:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
1
Robert M. Xeatl g, C
Community Develope t Oi
Roland M. DeBlO~P
Chief, Environmental Planning
1
FROM :
DATE:
September 11, 1996
1
SUBJECT: PROPOSED PURCHASE OF 47 INDIVIDUAL LOTS WITHIN THE
SEBASTIAN HIGHI...ANDS SCRUB LAAC PROJECT ("PHASE II.")
1
It 1s requested that the information herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its
regular meeting of September 17, 1996.
1
stlMMNU'
1
Staff recOCllllends that the Bo&rd of County CoaIIIi..ion.r. purch...
(with bond tund.) 47 individ1laUy owned lot., a. . .econd ph... of
acquisition wi.thin the S.b....ti.n Highlands Scrub project. Th.
purcha.. contr.ct. (alr..dy .xecuted by tb. ..ller.) .re '~mm&rized
.. follow.:
1
Purchaeer :
1-
!!ll!! :
CO.t-ShAre:
l'ot.l Price:
1-
Other Ooet.:
1
CouI*n380Dd8
Bxpe iturel
1
AcreaQe I.
Indi.an Riv.r COunty Board ot COunty
COmmi..i.onerl / Plorida CoaIIIuniti.. Tru.t
(Indian Riv.r County will hold title)
41 Individual Lot Owner. (... .ttach&d li.t)
Plorida Communitie. Trult (50\)
(include. .har. of acquilition co.t.)
HI,'lltS
$396,900 (averag. :$~ per lot)
· +$30,000 (apprai..l, .nviron. audit, title
in.urance, management plan)
· $52,658.96 (Otiliti.. w.t.r line ....._nt. applying
to 33 of the 47 lotI)
:$266,109 (not including initi.l m&nagement co.t.)
47 Lot. (:1/4 .cre eacb, :11.75 .crel)
Pr1Dcipd OOnditioa1
· Clo.ing .ubject to County COaImiuion and PCT Governing Body approval
of purch... contract. and project plan, including management pl.n.
1
.
Staff is recOlllllendill9 that tile County pay the rec.ntly .....eed
Utiliti.. w.ter line ....._t f_. with bon<1 fund., .1 part of
.cqui.ition co.t..
1
LMC a.c
Bad.atioa:
· Th. County Land Acqui..ition Advi.ory COmmitt.. (LAAC),
.t it. -.tinq on Auqult .28, 1996, yoted 14 to 1 to
recc:.a.n4 that the Board DOt apprg". ~ purcM..
contract., uint.ininq i.t. po. it ion that the ovenll
project ahould not be .cquired beeau.. ot &ftticip&ted
a&naqement ditticultie., .ine. the property ie located
within an active, dev.loping aubdi"iaion.
I
1
I'
I
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots
Page 2
I
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
I
The subject Sebastian Highlands Scrub property was approved in
early 1995 as a Flor'Ida Communities Trust (FCT) 50\ cost-share
project. In 1995, the Sebastian Highlands Scrub project was ranked
14th out of 19 projects on the LAAC site acquisition list. The
project is currently ranked 13th out of 15 sites. The City of
Sebastian has expressed support of the overall project because the
project will alleviate conflicts within the City concerning
endangered species protection vs. private development rights.
The initial overall Sebastian Highlands Scrub project consisted of
.:180 lots. At a public hearing on July 16, 1996, the Board of
County Commissioners approved the purchase of "Phase I" of the
project by agreeing to buy 50 of 56 lots owned by Atlantic Gulf
Communities (AGe). At that meeting, with acknowledgement.from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the B~ard eliminated from the
overall project the northern group of 26 lots, which were
determined by the FWS to be no longer crucial to the success of the
project.
In its application for state cost-share funding, the County chose
to be the lead agency for pre-acquisition tasks and negotiations.
During the past year, the county's acquisition consultant, in
coordination wi th county staff, has conducted pre-acqulsi tion tasks
and negotiations. Since the owners of the herein described lots
within the project have accepted and executed purchase contracts,
appraisal results for those lots have recently been released.
-Advertised Public Meeting
This public hearing has been advertised +30 days in advance to
fulfill a State statute requirement that the County hold a public
meeting after having provided at least 30 days advertised public
notice to formally consider approving and exercising its purchase
contracts for the Sebastian Highlands Scrub Phase II lots.
The State requirement that the Board hold a public meeting to
consider exercising its option after having provided 30 days
advertised notice of the meeting applies because the County chose
to keep its appraisal of the subject lots confidential until the
sellers executed a binding contract. Once that contract had been
signed, the appraisal was released and has been available to the
public during the 30 day period prior to the' advertised public
meeting. Besides meeting State statute requirements, the hearing
on the subject lots will serve to meet a Land Acquisition Guide
requirement that the County hold a public hearing prior to
purchasing any property with land acquisition bond funds.
I
I
I
I
I~ j
I~
I,
I.
IJ
1-
1
-Site Characteristics
I
The subject 47 undeveloped lots consist of xeric oak scrub in Unit
17 of the Sebastian Highlands. All of these lots are located in the
project core area in the vicinity of the Pelican Island Elementary
School. .
I
These 47 lots, combined with 4 lots already owned by the City of
Sebastian and 16 AGe lots being purchased near the school
(totalling 67 lots out of 116 identified for acquisition in the
school area), are an essential element of this core area.
I
I
-Ownership Characteristics
Currently, the subject 47 lots are owned by 41 individuals (see
attached). The tax assessed value of each of these lots range from
$6,600 to $11,830 depending on the size and accessibility of the
lot.
II
I
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots
Page 3
I
I
-Acquisition Co.t-Share , Property Manaqement
Two issues which are important to LAAC staff with respect to all
proposed purchases are obtaining cost share assistance in property
acquisition and addressing management cost..
I
- Cost-Share
I
In 1994, Indian River County su~itted an application to the FCT,
which was subsequently approved for 50\ cost-share funding,
including 50\ of pre-acquisition expenditures (e.g., environmental
audit, appraisals).
- Utilities Water Line A..e....nt
I
I
The Board of County Commissioners, at a public hearing on August
27, 1996, approved Phase I of the Utilities water line assessment
project for the Sebastian Highlands. Of the 47 lots proposed herein
for acquisition, 33 are subject to the Phase I Utilities
asseSSment. The COmbined total of the assessment for the 33
affected lots is $52,658.96. On a per lot basis, the Utilities
assessment averages !17\ of the appraised value.
Although the signed purchase contracts indicate that each seller is
responsible for providing clear title to their property, most of
the contracts were signed by the sellers prior to notice of the
Utilities assessaents, and those owners who have contacted staff
have expressed dismay at the prospect of having to pay the
assessments prior to closing.
IC
I~
I
-. M&nageHnt Cos ts
Management cost is always an issue with environmental lands
acquisition. The FCT program, which is highly competitive state-
wide, awards points for projects based on the provision of
resource-based public access and use facilities. In order to
qualify for FCT cost-share funding, the County obligated itself in
its FCT application to provide limited access and resource-based
facilities on the overall project property.
Specifically, conditions of the Conceptual Approval Agreement
include County provision of nature trails,., a picnic area,
information kiosk, gazebo, and limited parking. Management of scrub
habitat is also a described management plan condition for the
project.
"A number of initial site improvements, including fencing and
resource management,. can be paid for with bond referendum funds as
part of the property acquisition. I.provellients such as liaited
parking will need to be funded by a source other than referendum
monies. Potential funding sources include park development grants,
county mitigation funds, and tree removal violation funds. .
Ic
I
1-
I
I
I
Relating to long term Ilanagement, the property will be incorporated
into the countY-Wide park system and Danaged by the County Parks
Division In coordination with county environ.ental planning staff.
Volunteer groups will be asked to assIst the County with certain
aspects of property management such as nature trail up-keep and
Utter patrol.
The County haa executed an interlocal agreement with the City of
Sebastian regarding City aS8istance in policing the property. In
all other respects, however, the County will be responsible for
property aanagement.
I
I
Ij
1
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots
Page 4
1
1
county staff have opted to have a management plan for the project
(see attached) drafted by the county's acquisition/lII4nagement
consultants, an option which is specified in the County's contract
with FloridAffinity, Inc. Page 25 of the draft plan summarizes
estimated management and development costs of the overall Sebastian
Highlands Scrub project.
Please note that the draft plan for the total acqui8ition project
vas previously reviewed by the Board when the Board reviewed the
AGe lots purchase. Thi. plan i. in the proce.. of being lI04ified to
account for the eliaination of the northern group of lot., and aay
be subject to further change depending on the County'. success in
negotiating purchases of additional Iota within the project.
1
1
1
-Appraisal
In accordance with County Land Acquisition Guide and rCT
procedures, an independent appraisal was obtained to determine an
approved appraised value of the lots. Because the value of the
individual lots did not exceed $500,000, only one appraisal was
required to satisfy state and county procedural requirements.
The appraisal firm selected was Armfield' Wagner. The appraisal
was subsequently certified by a review appraiser (Boyle Appraisal
Service), as required by the FCT.
The appraised value for the combined 47 lots is summarized aa
follows.
1
I--J
1-
SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS SCRUB - 47 LOTS
1
APPJtAISD
VALID
$396,900
, DIVBRl3II<3
MIA
APP!lOYED APPR. 'nLOZ
Armfield , Wagner
$396,900
1-
1-
The negotiated purchase price of $396,900 is 100' of the approved
appraised value. Given the nature of the project and the fact that
these appraised values reflect environmental permitting
constraints, whereby in some cases the appraised value is less than
tax assessed value, staff felt it was appropriate to make offers at
the full appraised value. (The appraised value-s of the individual
lots are summarized in an attachment to this memorandum.)
1
-Contract
I
In coming to terms with FCT and county staff on the negotiated
purchase price (subject to County Commission and FCT approval),
each seller has executed a standard FCT purchase contract with
minor modifications. For ease of reference, rather than attaching
each individual contract, attached is a copy of the contract that
has been executed by each of the 41 sellers.
I
I
.Pro1ect Plan
To satisfy the FCT Conceptual Approval Agreement for cost-share
funding, the County is required to submit a "project plan". In
addition to an executed purchase agreement and approved management
plan, a "project plan" includes:
I
Statement of total cost
I
I
I
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots
Page 5
I
Statement of award amount requested from FCT
I
Statement that the project plan is consistent with
local comprehensive plan
I
Evidence that conditions imposed as part of the
Conceptual Approval Agreement are satisfied
Affidavit that there is no existing or pending violation
of any local, state, regional or federal laws or
regulations on the project site
As confirmed by the Sebastian City Planner, the Sebastian Highlands
Scrub lots purchase as proposed is consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan. Documents of the project plan listed above _
aside from Board approval of the purchase agreeDent and ~gement
plan - can be handled administratively, and have been provided to
FCT by county staff contingent upon Board approval of the
acquisition.
1
1
I'
ANALYSIS
.Water Line Assessments
I~
1-
· Coordination' Compatibility of Projects
Both the Utilities water line extension project and the Sebastian
Highlands Scrub acquisition project are iaportant from an
environmental standpoint, and are not incompatible. The water line
project extends needed service to lots within the Sebastian
Highlands as an improvement to residential potable water quality,
and will ultimately promote the County's objective. of conserving
ground water quality and quantity in the area. The scrub
acquisition project will protect environmentally important habitat
and primary aquifer recharge areas, as well as provide passive
recreation, open space, and environmental education.
I. :
I~
County Planning Division and Utilities Department staff have
coordinated on the two projects to determine how each project
affects the other. Staff came to two main conclusions. The first
was that, after review of the waterline project design, there is
no opportunity to modify any water line segment within the scrub
acquisition project, due to the need to service residences in the.
area. The second conclusion was that the waterline assessments
would affect lots within the scrub acquisition project, regardless
of the timing of the assessment or scrub acquisition.
· Alternatives
1-
1
1
There are a number of alternatives relating to the recent Utilities
water line assessment, as it affects lots within the Sebastian
Highlands Scrub acquisition project. One alternative is for the
County not to proceed with the project acquisition. This
alternative, however, would leave the lot owners to fend for
themselves regarding payment of assessment fees on top of trying to
obtain federal peI'1lllts to build in cOllpl1ance with the federal
Endangered Species Act. Moreover, it would derail .ffort. to
conserve environaentally important scrub habitat, and development
of a Habitat Conservation Plan that the County is working in
cooperation with the City of Sebastian.
Another alternative is for the County to advise the sellers that
they are obligated to pay the assessment as a condition of closing.
However ~ since the assessment equals approxill4tely 17' of the
appraised value, the sellers will likely balk and not sell to the
County.
1
1
1
1-
I
.
1
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots
Page 6
1
1
A third alternative is for the County to pay the assessments with
bond funds as a cost of acquisition. Because the water line
assessments were recently approved - as the Board is considering
purchase of the Sebastian Highlands Scrub lots - the County has an
opportunity to pay the assessments with bond funds as part of
acquisition costs. If the Utilities assessment project occurred
after the County had already purchased the lot., the County would
still need to pay the assessment., but could not use bond funds
because it would not be an acquisition cost. In such a scenario,
the County would have to find another funding source, such as the
general fund.
It is staff's position that the most appropriate alternative is for
the County to pay the water line assessments - for these ~d other
lots acquired by the County within the scrub acquisition project -
with bond funds, as an acquisition cost.
If the County decides to pay the Utilities assessments, it is
appropriate and equitable that the County extend assessment payment
to other affected lots within the overall acquisition project,
including 13 of the 50 AGe lots the County has approved to purchase
as Phase Iof the project. The Utilities assessment for the 13
affected AGe lots totals $20,229.99.
1
1
1
1
I
-Multiple Benefit.
I~
- Environmental Education
I;
As with most of the County's proposed acquisitions, the Sebastian
Highlands Scrub purchase will enhance education in the County.
With this property, the educational function will consist of nature
trails and educational displays for the site. Also, the
Environmental Learning Center has expressed an interest in using
the property as a "satellite" location for xeric scrub educational
excursions. County staff will coordinate with the School Board,
particularly with SChool Board staff at the Pelican Island
Elementary School, concerning school use and access to the
property.
1-1
I
Comprehensive Plan Acquisition Co..i~ent
Conservation Policy 6.2 of the County Comprehensive Plan commits
the County to acquire a minimum of SO acres of xeric scrub for
conservation purpo.... Although this minimua acreage has already
been acquired, the Sebastian Highlands Scrub project contributes to
this policy by conserving xeric oak scrub. The project also
furthers obj.ctives in the City and County comprehensive plans
relating to open space, aquifer primary recharge area protection,
and rare species conservation.
-
I
I
1
RECOMMENDATION:
I
Staff reco_ends that the Board of County C~ss1oner8 approve the
purchase contracts for the 41 individual lots as Phase II of the
Sebastian Highlands Scrub acquisition project. Staff also
recOllllllends that the Board approve County payment, as a cost of land
acquisition, of applicable Utilities water line assessments
(including affected AGe lots) with bond funda. In addition, staff
recoaaends that the Board approve exercise of the purchase
contract., and authorize staff to proceed with closing on the lots,
including submittal of a Project Plan Ulendment to the FCT to
fulfill requirements of the FCT cost-share Conceptual Approval
Agreement.
1
I
I
I
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots
Page 7
I
I
ATTACHMENTS:
I
oGeneral map of the lota
oAppraiaed valuea of the 47 individual lote
oSample Purcha.. COntract
oOraft management plan (already approved by the Board, eubject to modification)
I
APPROVED:
FOR: q - 1/ - 9 6
BY, 1 r~ .rl"''1
.... .... C& "'''011&4
A4rnin.
I.lgII
c;.,d-,.l
O.Ol
AI~ 1104 gr.
I
I
\rl \laaC:\MbI\lpq2. bc:c:
I~ 1
I.
I,
1_)
I,
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I~
Ie
I";
- ,
I-
I
1-;
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I.J
It".I.'ol.I.I.' I ~ ...;.
. - - .. . . . -I. . . -,. . . . . .1. ....
c::r:IT.HIT:tl. · ,.. '101' , '~"I. . " . T -. I
-,-- ~r-- r-- . ~ -. ~
-' =- ,..:.=.. ~ II . .\".1. II . .1.. .. . . 01. ~
:: :: ~ : '''rI'IT '':1' 01. o. O'"J ~ I
-:. .. . I....... ...... .........
::::1!: ~~ ~ I 'j,l. ,1", .1.1.'.',"r.I./.",.\o N
t. .. -u -._
'-'; ';- '-; ~ r-;- ... 1 ~
:: :: t-; -. _ ~ . _. .
~j- r.f..l · ~ ;:;;;- ~I: :. : :'. o. . .
-. ~ ~ "
~ ~. . . r-;-~ ."/_
I . 'I' . It '1,1. 0 . '~ II
, I ~ . , . . . ~.... .
,.- r- .....: ,.;..~..:.., " o. ~. . ~
. . , L-~ . ~ ... . .
1--- .....;.1=- f-- , ". '. '.
' .. · I- ..;.... . , . . 11 . . 4..
. . ,.. ~ ~ :- o-..~... . ,.t PI'y 0 '. ~
.. .. ....;.... t, '- . .
1--- .- :>>,. .' - \..1:' a.J E ~ II '
-=.::... -=-- ...:. 3';- ". '"~ III 0 . "i'
...;.~~;.. ... ~ ~-;(.\' ' 01' "L' . ~OJ ". .
~~~... ~~~!~. '-~~..I. o. ~~r :..'
i....:.~ ~~...:. I--~" .." ........~ ~ l
. -" . ..:-. ,.... Y""_~" . ~
- --....;,;... \ .... "'W"I:w'..... I
.. . . - '. 'Ia t-i.,.... .
. ~ . r-' -.~.. r-:t:-t "7 . ., . +r foo-.:t-;-. -:-~ . . " . I
. . .. . ~ ~ L...I:...J ""- ~ -:- ".Y'"" - ....1~
. . . . .!...... ...!....!..... ,.-..- --' g ~ ""'"' . ...../':. "1- I 'j:"i.
t~ ~ -=- ~..-: - I -~.- .. . ... . . ... f_,- ...L.
--=-.:.". . ~ .. -=- ""':"~ t-;". 11.' II ,. L"'"; ~ r__
- 0( ;;, r;.. "';-~ t--. ,.,. - "." _ _ ,. "
. .I.I~- .I.~.Y-t:{ ~ ....:~ . r- '" ...:"' .
I. souw.c . ~ ' ./,\. .... ...: ~ ~-=-
I~ ~' . .. - - . . ~~
- .\. 'si.;\- . ~ . . '. . .
· -.. . .... . ... ?'! 1,1, I~ T. 1. -; ~ ~:;::
~ ~ ... ... - - tJ..~..
). . .:... ., · o. T T r' r ' '";- r-:-':-
~~-'~ -p ~ )l: Il~"J;.._..~-IWii" .! -+ ~~.
1; . ., . _ :
::c\' . . ?"~ Pelican ~Ian .. '.-. I .. -+:: i- i
eemen~ . .. ~ -'"'~1. ~ r-:.. ..:.... ~~
... 'e>~ .." ;,\,' t ~~ . 0 .. ~ --:.. t-=- _I--
) -. ~L. . ~"1: ~.~.l ~ -..;. l~ -77- i
~ - G. '.. . ~. - .. .1.. .I.!. r_ ~" o.
\:J - ~ ..* 0 . 1-.......... . _ ';; L-.-
... ", .. ~. . rl.'. .,.1.
" . - " - ... .. - ~..' -. ,. , . ," -1-'- I
. L . . . - ---"" _ _'0
. .,.~ .. -
- --, ... · ~ ;- ,. . . oL::J.I. .j.
".-. . . . .. !: I' 0 '1 'I" '0" . I' I
.:!'~ ~ .. I r-;.. .!-.. ..'
' ... ...~ ~ f-. ./.'.1.1. ,I.
.. r:1\, .. . . "JI'""7" -;- (, . , . Uaj'" "
: t;j - - '- - ,-
. - Subject Properties
1"'.
~
I
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Strwt, VITO Buuh, Florida 32960
I
I
October 17, 1996
COp
~
I
Telephone: (407) 567.8000
I
I
Mike J~nnings
South Florida Ecosystem Office
u.s. Fish & Wildlife Service
P.O. Box 2676
Vero Beach, FL 32961-2676
Re: Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots Mitigation Alternative
Dear Mike:
I
I am writing as a follow-up to our meeting on October 4, 1996, at which we
discussed alternatives to mitigate development of +450 Sebastian Highlands scrub
lots under the purview of the federal Endangered-Species Act, relating to the
protection of Florida scrub jay habitat.
I
I
Status of Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots Acquisition
I
As you are aware, the Board of County Commissioners, at a public hearing on
September 17, 1996, voted not to proceed with County/State acquisition of 49
individually owned scrub lots in Sebastian Highlands Unit 17. These lots were
being considered as "Phase II" of a county scrub acquisition project or iginally
cons.isting of +180 scrub lots in the vicinity of Pelican Island Elementary
School. The Board's decision not to buy the Sebastian Highlands scrub lots was
based largely on perceived difficulties of scrub management within an active
residential subdivision.
I.
Although the Board's decision was specific to the 49 lots under consideration at
the time, it is clear to county staff that the entire scrub lot acquisition
project was affected by the decision. The County's option agreement to buy 50
Atlantic Gulf Communities (AGC) lots ("Phase I") has expJred, and AGC's
representativp h~~ indicated that AGe is not willinQ to renew th~ option or SQ~
just ~A Qf tho ~O lots that are clustered northwest of P~lican Island El~m~ntary
Conse entl, the County is not proceeding to bu an scrub lots in
Sebastian High1an s. \. .
~> A&,C. c..M"jut its Mh'Pl
Q.~te.'" tl\IS (.cttv- ~~ wr\tt"oU\.
..:. -eo ~...,( "p.y,,-
Although the Board is not proceeding with the scrub lots purchase, it recently
approved the purchase of two relatively large tracts in north Sebastian: the +76
acre "AGC Industrial Tract," and the +312 acre "St. Sebastian PUD" property.
These two contiguous tracts, located east of the Sebastian Municipal Airport and
golf course; contain approximately +40 acres of occupied scrub jay territory as
well as =50 acres of overgrown xeric oak and sand pine scrub with potential for
scrub jay habitat restoration.
North Sebastian Conservation Area
I.
I.
I
I
I
The City of Sebastian has requested that the County allow for a potential future
extension of Gibson Street through the North Sebastian Conservation Area in
existing and future right-Of-way (ROW). Assuming that this 'road would be
I
1
I
I
.-
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
I.
I.
I.;
I,
I,'
1
1
1
I
I
I
constructed in the alignment of the existing ROW, it is estimated that +3 acres
of scrub jay habitat would be impacted by the road project.
Wabasso Scrub Addition
Within the next few months, the County Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (LAAC)
will be considering the purchase of a northern addition to the 111 acre Wabasso
Scrub Conservation Area that was bought by the County in October, 1995. This
northern addition has been proposed by the owner of Park Place, the development
in which the property is located, and consists of approximately 5 acres of xeric
oak scrub habitat (within 1/2 mile of the Sebastian Highlands Unit 17 scrub
lots) .
If the County proceeds to buy this addition, it will expand the +25 acres of
occupied scrub jay territory and +32 acres of unoccupied habitat being restored
in the existing Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area.
Mitigation Proposal
County staff is requesting that the u.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) consider
the following proposal to serve as mitigation for the planned Gibson Street
extension and for release of the +450 privately owned 1/4 acre scrub lots in the
Sebastian Highlands that have been identified by the FWS to be scrub jay habitat:
.
County purchase and management of +40 acres of occupied
scrub jay habitat and restoration of +50 acres of scrub
on the St. Sebastian PUD and AGe -Industrial Tract
properties ("North Sebastian Conservation Area").
.
County purchase and management of +5 acres of scrub at
the south end of Park Place Development, as an addition
to the +57 acres of scrub habitat now under County
management in the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area.
If this proposal is generally acceptable to the FWS, county staff will schedule
an item before the Board of County Commissioners for authorization to proceed
with drafting a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) based on the proposed mitigation.
I look forward to. your response. If you have any questions or wish to discuss
this matter, please contact me at 567-8000, ext 258.
~&c-
Roland M. DeBlois, AICP
Chief, Environmental Planning
cc:
Robert Keating
Bob Massarelli
Board of County Commissioners
\rl\laac\sebh1mit.alt
2
I
I
I
I
I
1-;
I
I
I:"
I
I:
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
United States DepartInent of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
P.O. BOX 2676
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32961.2676
November 12. 1996
Mr. Roland DeBlois
Indian River County
Environmental Planning and Code Enforcement Section
1840 25th Street
Vera Beach, FL 32960
Dear l\.1r. DeBlois
Thank you for your October 17, 1996 letter regarding Indian River County's alternative Florida
scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulesce~ coerulescens) mitigation proposal that addresses adverse
affects anticipated from continued housing construction in Sebastian Highlands. The Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) has considered your proposal in context with scrub jay population data
for northern Indian River County, conservation strategies attempted previously, and recent
discussions my staff and the County have had regarding the failure of Indian River County to
pursue scrub acquisitions in Sebastian Highlands.
Before we discuss your current proposal, we would like to review previous efforts to resolve the
controversy surrounding habitat alterations in Sebastian Highlands and conservation of scrub
jays. After reviewing the rather lengthy tile associated with this project, we understand that in
the late 1980s the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (GFC) eXl'ressed concern
over housing construction impacts on Sebastian's scrub jay populations. Beginning in 1991, the
FWS and GFC began consulting with the City of Sebastian regarding scrub jay conservation.
By the time an exhaustive scrub jay survey had been completed in 1991,35 families were known
to occur within the city limits of Sebastian. A general lack of enforcement and willingness to
implement conservation strategies led to a decline in the number of scrub jay families, such that,
by 1993 only 27 rem~ined in Sebastian.
By June 1992. both the FWS and City agreed that development and implementation of a habitat.
conservation plan (-conservation plan) and the issuance of an incidental take permitfor scrub jays
':Vas'the only ~bl~ option that would provide for continued housing construction and scrub jay
. . '". .....
~ cdO$er:vation. Unfor:tlinately, continuing delays in conservation plan development have resulted
'in de~lines in scrub jays. As of early 1996, only 20 families existed in and around Sebastian.
D~ng ~e..frve years we h~ve contempl~ted the fate of scrub jays and lot owners in ~ebastian
Highland's; we have lost 15 scrub jay families or 43 percent of the population in northern Indian
River County.
'.. ~ ...,.....:
. '--/::-Q.i'.'~~~- .:o~'~TI.,r. ....::':'..-c- .000"l.....,c.,"'ICf"'.."l''V'..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l-
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
While considering your current proposal, we often referenced the outline for the County-wide
conservation plan and it's more recent. but short lived predecessor, the site specific Sebastian
Highlands conservation plan. Though different in scope. both conservation plans were intended
to relieve the County and Sebastian Highland lot owners of their responsibilities to avoid take of
the threatened scrub jay, by providing '"mitigation:' Mitigation in both conservation plans
included conservation and management of scrub oak habitat. Unfortunately, it has never been
clear which conserved and managed lands were being proposed for mitigation in either of the two
conservation plans. However. there seems to have been a general consensus among the FWS and
County that acquisition of the St. Sebastian PUD, AGC Industrial Tract, Wabasso Scrub, and
Sebastian Highlands Unit 17 lots would provide a substantial portion of the mitigation that would
ultimately be needed during development of a County-wide conservation plan. Your current
proposal now requests FWS approval of a mitigation strategy that does not include lots in Unit
17 of Sebastian Highlands.
For comparative purposes, we have summarized the approximate acreages of scrub jay habitat
(and families) adversely affected and protected under the previous conservation plans and the
current mitigation proposal.
· Previous Conservation Plan
Proposed Adverse Affects = Alteration of 216 scrub lots in Units 3, 5, 10, and 17 in
Sebastian Highlands or about 47 acres of scrub jay habitat. Four families of jays are
known to currently reside within these Units. A total of 47 acres and four scrub jay
families would be affected.
Proposed Miti~ation = 119 lots in Unit 17 (about 30 acres) plus about 20 acres of
managed school board property. Contiguous tracts known as the St. Sebastian PUD and
AGe Industrial Tract contain about 40 acres of occupied habitat and about 50 acres of
unoccupied scrub habitat. The remaining uncommitted occupied and unoccupied habitat
",ithin the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area (about 25 acres). Management plans were
also proposed for other public lands containing scrub jays, including the Sebastian golf
course, airport, and Sebastian elementary school. At total of sixteen families of jays
reside in these areas. A total of 115 acres of occupied habitat. 50 acres of Unoccupied
habitat. and 16 scrub Jay tamilies wouid benetit from this proposal.
· The Current Mitigation Proposal
Proposed Adverse Affects = Alteration of 185 scrub lots in Units 3, 5, and 10 in
Sebastian Highlands (about 47 acres), development of 148 lots in Unit 17 (about 37
acres), road construction impacts to about 3 acres of occupied scrub habitat. Eight
families reside in these areas. About 87 acres of occupied habitat and eight scrub jay
families would be affected by this proposal.
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
Ie'
I
I,
1- j
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
Proposed Miti~ation = Contiguous tracts known as the St. Sebastian PUD and AGC
Industrial Tract contain about 40 acres of occupied habitat and about 50 acres of
unoccupied scrub habitat. The remaining uncommitted occupied and unoccupied habitat
within the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area (about 25 acres). An additional 5 acres of
scrub (presumably unoccupied) is proposed to be acquired and added to the Wabasso
Scrub tract. Five families are known to occupy these lands. About 80 acres of occupied
habitat and 50 acres of unoccupied habitat, and five scrub jay families would be protected
under this proposal.
By comparison. implementation of the previous conservation plan would have resulted in
alteration of about 47 acres of habitat while 115 acres of occupied habitat would have been
conserved and managed. Only four additional families would have been lost while 16 would
have been protected. The County's current mitigation proposal would adversely affect 84 acres
and protect and manage about 80 acres. <':;even famili.es w(:~ld be lost while only five families
would be protected.
Though neither plan provides extreme benefits to scrub habitat beyond that currently available,
. the proposed mitigation plan results in substantial additional losses of scrub habitat and scrub
jays. Based on these estimates, the current mitigation proposal provides long-term protection for
only five scrub jay families as well as for those families that may eventually occupy publicly
held scrub that is currently overgrown and unoccupied. In short, the current proposal could
result in an additional loss of 65 percent of the remaining scrub jays in northern Indian River
County. Added to losses since 1991, the proposal and past adverse affects would result in an 80
percent loss of scrub jays.
On October 4. 1996 FWS staff met with you to discuss ramifications of the County's recent
decision to terminate acquisition of scrub habitat in Sebastian Highlands. According to our
meeting notes. it was suggested that the County pursue any and all possible acquisition and
management options available to offset the additional adverse affects that housing construction in
Unit 17 will have on Florida scrub jays. Although your letter indicates the Coiintywill not
pursue the 34 AGC lots in Unit 17, subsequent conversations with you suggest acquisition may
still be sought. We support this effort and believe the 34 AGe lots, in combination with Pelican
Elementary School scrub, may provide enough suitahle habitat to minimize the adverse affects of
habitat fragmentadon aue to losses 111 the remainder of Unit 17. These scrub parcels, if properly
managed, may be essential "stepping stones" for the dispersal of scrub jays from and to northern
Indian River County.
After reviewing the County's current proposal, we found that acquisition of five acres of scrub
has been added to the mitigation measures proposed during development of earlier conservation
plans. Other possible actions that could benefit scrub jays, but were not addressed in the current
proposal include:
· Development of individual scrub management plans for the airport, Sebastian golf course,
3
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I-
I,
1-
1-,
I-
I
I
I
I
I
and Sebastian and Pelican Island elementary schools, including perpetual conservation
easements where appropriate.
· Cooperatively develop scrub management plan for recently purchased State lands in
Indian River County.
· Identification of additional scrub habitat within the airport property that could ,be
conserved and managed for scrub jays.
· Acquire the 34 AGC lots and develop a scrub management plan for this area.
· Cost-sharing with the state to conserve and manage other scrub parcels in the County.
In summary, we believe the County's proposal falls short of providing adequate protection and
management of scrub habitat in northern Indian River County. We do not believe the County
has outlined all measures that have previously been suggested or explored all other possible
scrub conservation alternatives. Therefore, as proposed, the current mitigation plan would not
provide components essential for the development of an acceptable conservation plan.
If you would like to discuss revisions to the County's proposal and any alternative mitigation
strategies that may be appropriate please contact Mike Jennings at 562-3909.
Sincerely,
J~r.: ~
~>Craig Johnson
Supervisor, South Florida Ecosystem Office
cc:
Robert Massarelli, City of Sebastian, Fi..
4
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
I,
I,
I-
I:
I-
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
School District of Indian River County
"A CommUNTIY Partnership Toward Educational Excellence"
Dr. Roger Dearing. Superintendent
Roland DeBlois
Environmental & Code Enforcement
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
October 2, 1997
Dear Roland,
During the Discussion agenda September 23, 1997, the school board
indicated they will accept for review and action a proposed Habitat
Conservation Plan that will affect the District, Sebastian and Pelican
Island Elementary sites.
This allowance for review by the board should not be interp~eted as an
agreement in any form, for a positive or negative vote when the board
takes official action on the issue. .
This board indication for review of the Habitat Conservation Plan is to
support the commission staff in proceeding with plan development.
Sincerely,
of Facilities
c: Dr. Roger Dearing, Superintendent
Wes Davis, School Board Member
Dorothy Talbert
District 1
Charles G. Searcy
Dfab1ct 2
Wesley Davis
District 5
Herbert Ba1lcy
Dfatrict 4
Gary Unc\sey
District 3
"It Takes a Community to Raise a Child1"
1990 25th Street. Vao Beach. f10Iida 32960 - Telepbooe: 561-564-3000 fSuncom Number:-257-1011f Fax: 561-569-0424
Equal Opportlmity Educator and Employtt
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I:
I
Ii
'..-\
\
iJ' ,')t
~. ......
/J' . -- '<.'
1n.'1~\ ~
.:-~ ~ !o.'t-~
OJ:- PEU(;IIl ,,>
,;,'J
c,
I
-,
r.
City of Sebastian \S~~_
1225 MAIN STREET 0 SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 3 -
TELEPHONE (561) 589-5330 0 FAX (561) 589-557
October 9, 1997
Mr. Roland DeBlois
Community Development
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Re: Resolution No. R-97-63 - Supporting in Concept, the Indian River County Habitat
Conservation Plan - Subject to Final Approval
Dear Mr. DeBlois:
Enclosed please find a copy of Resolution No. R-97-63 adopted by the Sebastian City Council at its October
8,1997 Regular Meeting.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
~'-~Jn. t)l/tU~
KatbrynM. O'Halloran, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
KOHlsam
cc: City Manager, Thomas Frame
Director of Community Development, Robert Massarelli
1
1
1
1
1
1
I:
1
1
I
I
I-
I-
I
I:
1
I
I
I
/1:.
RESOLUTION NO. R-97-63
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, SUPPORTING, IN CONCEPT, THE
CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF SCRUB JAY HABITAT ON
CITY OWNED PROPERTY, AS PART OF A SEBASTIAN AREA-WIDE
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN BEING DEVELOPED BY INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY TO MITIGATE SCRUB JAY HABITAT IMPACTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRIV A TEL Y OWNED
SCRUB LOTS IN SEBASTIAN HIGffi.ANDS SUBDIVISION;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service is charged with the protection and regulation of habitat associated with federally listed rare
or threatened species; and
WHEREAS, In 1987, the Florida Scrub Jay was listed as a threatened species by the
Federal Government; and
WHEREAS, The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified approximately 475 platted
lots in Sebastian Highlands Subdivision that contain important Florida Scrub Jay habitat and are
subject to regulation under the Endangered Species Act; and
WHEREAS, In accordance \\1th the Endangered Species Act, impacts to the habitat of
Federally endangered or threatened species. can only be pennitted in association with a Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, whereby any habitat
impacts proposed under an HCP are sufficiently off-set by mitigation; and .,.
WHEREAS, In October, 1996. Indian River County proposed to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service that the Service conceptual agree to accept, as mitigation for release of the
approximate 475 Sebastian Highlands scrub lots for private development, the County's
commitment to conserve and manage Scrub Jay habitat on lands acquired by the County under its
Environmental Lands Program; and
WHEREAS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service staff responded to Indian River County's
proposal by indicating an additional need that the City of Sebastian agree to conserve scrub habitat
on existing City owned property, if the County's HCP to release the scrub lots is to be approved;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
SECTION 1. RECITALS RATIFICATION: The above recitals are ratified in their
entirety.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX C,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
IJ
THE INSTITUTE FOR REGIONAL CONSERVATION
22601 S.W. 152 AVENUE
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33170
Phone: (305) 248-0038
Fu: (305) 245-9797
May 6, 1996
Roland DeBlois
Chief of Environmental Planning and Code Enforcement
Indian River County
1840 25th Street.
Vero Beach. FL. 32960
Dear Mr. DeBlois:
Enclosed are the belated plant lists for the sites George Gann and I visited during our status survey for
Po~~-go'o smollii. Please note that they were compiled during short visits and are therefore somewhat
incomplete. We were fortunate to see a bald eagle at the Sebastian PUD/ AGC Industrial Tract Scrub.
Unfortunately, no P. smallii was found in Indian River County, although we did find it S1. Lucie County.
We do believe that it could be found that far north so keep an eye out for it. To distinguish it from P.
nana you must use seed size. The seeds of P. smallii are 1.2 - 1.4 mm long while those of P. nana are 0.6-
0.8 mm long.
We greatly appreciate your help \lith the survey
Sincerely, ~_
~.~
./ ~--L--
Keith Bradley
Research Associate
1"hc Institute for Regional Consc:rvation is a proje.."1 of tile Kuja 8ni Racard1 Group, Inc., a non-prolit cons.:rvation organization which has
bo:cn registered with the Internal Revmue Service as a ~rrt tax-exanpt organization under IRS code SOI(c:).' sinc:e 1984.
I
I
I:
I
I
I
I-
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
Ii
Preliminary Vascular Plant Checklist:
Wabasso Scrub Site
Prepared by:
George Gann and Keith Bradley
Institute for Regional Conservation
2260l.W. 152 Ave.
Miami, FL. 33170
Compiled: Febuary 2, 1996
This list was prepared during a briehisit on November 21, 1995. Since this visit was short, many species have
been overlooked and thus this inventory should not be considered complete. Nomenclature generally follows
Kartesz, John T. 1994. A svnommized checklist of the vascular Dlants of North America.
x = Plant not native to central Florida
FDA = Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services
SCIENTIFIC NAME
COM:MON NAME
CONSERVATION STATUS
FERNS & FERN ALLIES
BLECHNACEAE
Blechnum serrulatul1l
Swamp fern
SELAGINELLACEAE
Selaginel/a arenicola
Sand spikemoss
Threatened (FDA)
GYMNOSPEIU,IS
PINACEAE
Pinus c/ausa
Pinus el/iottii
Sand pine
Slash pine
MONOCOTS
ARECACEAE
Serenoa repens
Saw palmetto
COMMELINACEAE
Commelina erecta
Day flower
CYFERACEAE
x Cyperus esculentus
Cyperus liglilaris
Cyperus polystachyos var. texensis
x Cyperus rotundus
Rh,vnchospora megalocarpa
Yellow nutsedge
. Nutsedge
DIOSCOREACEAE
x Dioscorea bulbiftra
Air-potato
II
II
POACEAE
1"-
I
I
Andropogon glomeratus var. pumilus
Aristida beyrichiana
(Aristida stricta of authors, in part)
Aristida gyrans
Aristida spiciformis
Eragrostis el/iottii
Panicum hemitomum
x Panicum maximum
x Rh.vnche(wrum repens
Spartina bakeri
Broom-sedge
Wiregrass
I
Corkscrew threewan
BouJebrush threeawn
Elliott'slovegrass
Maidencane
Guineagrass
Natalgrass
Sand cordgrass
I
I
I
DICOTS
ANACARDIACEAE
Rhus copal/ina
x Schinus terebinthifolius
Southern sumac
Brazilian-pepper
I
AN"NONACEAE
Asimina reliculata
Pawpaw
I
APIACEAE
Eryngium baldwinii
I
AQUlFOLIACEAE
!lex glabra
Gallbeny
I
ASTERACEAE
Baccharis halimifolia
Balduina angustifolia
Carphephorus corymbosus
Chrysopsis scabrella
Euthamia tenuifolia
Liatris tenuifolia
r erbesina virginica vac. virginica
Goldenaster
Flat -topped-goldenrod
Blazing-star
Frostweed
Groundsel tree
Yellow buttons
I
I
I
I,
CACfACEAE
Opuntia humifusa var. ammophila
Prickly pear
CARYOPHYLLACEAE
Stipulicida setacea var. setacea
CHRYSOBALANCEAE
Licania michauxii
Gopher-apple
I
CIST ACEAE
Helianthemu,,; noshii
Lechea cemua
Nodding pinweed
I
EMPETRACEAE
Ceratiola ericoides
Rosenwy
I
ERICACEAE
Befaria racemosa
Gaylussacia dUl1losa
Lyonia fruticosa
TarfIower
Dwarf huckleberry
Staggerbush
Inj
Ii
Threatened (FDA)
1
1
1
L.vonia lucida
J/onotropa unijlora
(= Mono/ropa brit/onii)
~ .accinium myrsinites
Fetterbush
Indian-pipe
Shiny blueberry
1
FABACEAE
x Crotalaria spectabi/is
Galactia elliottii
x Indigofera hirsuta
x Macroptilium lathyroides
Hairy indigo
1
1
FAGACEAE
Quercus geminata
Quercus minima
Quercus myrtifolia
Sand live oak
Dwarf live oak
Myrtle oak
1
HYPERICACEAE
If.\pericum h....pericoides
St. Andrew's-cross
1-
HYPOXIDACEAE
Hypoxis juncea
Yellow-star -grass
1
LAMIACEAE
Conradina grandijlora
Piloblephis rigid a
Large-flowered-rosemary Endangered (FDA)
Pennyroyal
1
LOGANIACEAE
x PoZvpremum procumbens
Rustweed
I
MELIACEAE
x Xlelia azedarach
Chinaberry
I
MYRlCACEAE
J(yrica cerifera
Wax-myrtle
I
MYRT ACEAE
x Maleleuca quinquenervia
Cajeput
I
OLEACEAE
Ximenia americana
Hog-plum
I
POLYGALACEAE
PO~y'gala nana
Wild batchelor's button
I
POL YONACEAE
Polygonella ci/iata
Wireweed
1
SCROPHULARlACEAE
Seymeria pectinala
I
VITACEAE
Vilis rotundifolia
Vilis shuttleworthii
Southern fox grape
Calusa grape
I
~~--~---~~fW;-~'-'-~:-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.1
I
I
I
IJ
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Preliminary Vascular Plant Checklist:
Sebastian Highlands
Prepared by: George Gann and Keith Bradley
Institute for Regional Conservation
22601.W. 152 Ave.
Miami, FL. 33170
Compiled: Febuazy 2, 1996
This list was prepared during a brief visit on November 21, 1995. Since this visit was short, many common and
rare species have been overlooked and thus this inventory should not be considered complete. Nomenclature
generally follows Kartesz, John T. 1994. A S','Oonvmized checklist of the vascular olants of North America.
x = Plant not native to central Florida
u = Plant of uncertain oath;!)'
FDA = Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
SCIENTIFIC NAME
COtvtMON NAME
CONSERVATION STATUS
FERNS & FERN ALLIES
DENNST AEDTlACEAE
Pteridiu11I aquiliniu1II var. pseudoeaudatu11I
Bracken
SELAGINELLACEAE
Selaginella arenieola
Sand spike-moss
Threatened (FDA)
GYMNOSPERMS
PINACEAE
Pinus clausa
Pinus elliottii
Sand pine
Slash pine
MONOCOTS
ARECACEAE
Serenoa repens
Saw palmetto
BRO!l.-1ELlACEAE
Tillandsia recun'ata
Ball-moss
CYPERACEAE.
Bulbostylis eilialifolia
Bulboslylis warei
Cyperus noshii
Rhynehospora 1IIegalocarpa
Hair sedge
ERIOCAULACEAE
Eriocaulon ravenel/ii
Pipewort
POACEAE
,~--
1
1
Andropogon virginicus var. glaucus
(wetland variant)
Aristida beyrichiana
(.4. stricta of authors, in part)
Aristida gyrans
Dichanthelium ensifolium
Dichanthelium portoricense
u Panicum repens Torpedo-grass
x Paspalum notatum Bahiagrass
x Rhyncheletrum repens Natalgrass
u Sporobolusjacquemontii Dropseed
(Synon)m = S. pyramidalis VaT. jacquemontii)
1
Broom-sedge
Wiregrass
Corkscrew threeawn
1
I
1
XYRIDACEAE
Xyris caroliniana
u Xyris jupicai
YelIow-eyed-grass
YelIow-eyed-grass
I
DICOTS
1
ANACARDrACEAE
x Schinus terebinthifo/ius
Brazilian-pepper
1-
ANNONACEAE
Asimina reticulata
Pa\\paw
1
APIACEAE
Eryngium baldwinii
ASTERACEAE
Balduina angustifo/ia
Chrysopsis scabrella
Eupatorium capillifo/ium
Eupatorium leptophyl/ul1l
Euthamia tenuifolia
Hieraceum megacephalum
Liatris tenuifolia
Pityopsis graminifolia
Solidago odora var. chapmanii
I
Yellow buttons
Goldenaster
Dog-fennel
I
1
Hawkweed
Blazing-star
Silk-grass
Cbampan's goldenrod
I
CACTACEAE
Opuntia humifusa var. amJ//ophila
CARYOPHYLLACEAE
Stipulicida setacea var. setacea
1
CHRYSOBALANACEAE
Licania michauxii
Gopher-apple
1
crST ACEAE
Helianthemul1l nash;;
Lechea cernua
Nodding pinweed
1
EMPETRACEAE
Ceratiola ericoides
Rosemary
1
1
Threatened (FDA)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I"
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
Ij
1-
III
Preliminary Vascular Plant Checklist:
Sebastian PUD/AGC Industrial Tract Scrub
Prepared by: George Gann and Keith Bradley
Institute for Regional ConseI"\'CItion
2260l.W. 152 Ave.
Miami, FL. 33170
Compiled: Febuary 2, 1996
This list was prepared during a brief visit on November 21, 1995. Since this visit "'CIS short, many common and
rare species have been overlooked and thus this inventory should not be considered complete. Nomenclature
generally follows Kartesz, John T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular Dlants of North America.
x = Plant not native to central Florida
FDA = Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
FERNS & FERN ALLIES
POL YPODIACEAE
Phlebodium aureum
Golden polypody
SELAGINELLACEAE
Selaginella arenicola
Sand spike-moss
Threatened (FDA)
GYMNOSPERMS
PINACEAE
Pinus c1ausa
Pinus el/iottii
Sand pine
Slash pine
MONOCOTS
ALISMA T ACEAE
Sagittaria lancifolia
ARECACEAE
Sabol palmetto
Serenoa repens
Cabbage palm
Saw palmetto
BROMELIACEAE
Ti/landsia recurvata
Ballmoss
CYPERACEAE
Bulbostylis ciliatifolia
Cladium jamaicensis
u Fimbristylis cymosa ssp. spathacea
Rhynchospora megalocarpa
Hair sedge
Saw-grass
Hurricane sedge
IRIDACEAE
SiS)-Tinchium solstitiale
Blue-eyed-grass