Mosquito Lagoon 

Aquatic Preserve

Management Plan • August 2009 - July 2019

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas

This publication funded in

part through a grant agreement

from the Florida Department of

Environmental Protection, Florida

Coastal Management Program

by a grant provided by the Office

of Ocean and Coastal Resource

Management under the Coastal

Zone Management Act of 1972,

as amended, National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administration

Award No. NA06NOS4190129-

CZ709, NA06NOS4190129-CZ726,

and NA07NOS4190071-CZ823.

The views, statements, finding,

conclusions, and recommendations

expressed herein are those of the

author(s) and do not necessarily

reflect the views of the State of

Florida, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration,

or any of its sub-agencies.

August 2009 - July 2019

Mosquito Lagoon 

Aquatic Preserve

Management Plan • August 2009 - July 2019

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

3783 North Indian River Drive • Cocoa, FL 32926 • (321) 634-6148

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas

3900 Commonwealth Blvd., MS #235

Tallahassee, FL 32399 • floridacoasts.org

Mission Statement

The mission of the Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas in relation to

Florida’s 41 Aquatic Preserves, three National Estuarine Research Reserves,

National Marine Sanctuary, and Coral Reef Conservation Program is to protect

Florida’s coastal and aquatic resources.

Long-term goals of the Aquatic Preserve Program

• Protect and enhance the ecological integrity of the aquatic preserves.

• Restore areas to their natural condition.

• Encourage sustainable use and foster active stewardship by engaging local

communities in the protection of aquatic preserves.

• Improve management effectiveness through a process based on sound

science, consistent evaluation, and continual reassessment.

Recreational fishing and boating are two popular activities that allow the public to enjoy the beauty and 

bounty of Florida’s coastal resources found within the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve.

Cover photo: White ibis (Eudocimus albus) amongst healthy mollusk reef habitat 

and emergent red mangroves.

Title page photo: The preserve offers an abundance of prey items for horseshoe 

crabs (Limulus polyphemus) as can be evidenced by the size of this female’s 

molted exoskeleton.

Executive Summary

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan

Lead Agency Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas

Common Name of Property Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Location Volusia County, Florida

Acreage Total 4,740 acres (1,918 hectares)

Acreage Breakdown According to Florida Natural Areas Inventory Natural Community Types

FNAI Natural Communities Acreage according to GIS

Consolidated Substrate unknown

Unconsolidated Substrate unknown

Mollusk Reef unknown

Algal Bed unknown

Seagrass Bed 51 acres

Tidal Marsh & Tidal Swamp 1240 acres (combined total acreage)

Composite Substrate unknown

Total acreage 3,500 acres of acres (1,416 hectares) submerged lands, 4,740 acres (1,918

hectares) including islands

Management Agency Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s

Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas

Designation Aquatic Preserve

Unique Features The Mosquito Lagoon is one of the most diverse and productive estuaries

in North America. The preserve’s extensive oyster reefs and clam beds

are economically important to the region. The habitat in and surrounding

Mosquito Lagoon supports 12 federally endangered or threatened species

(see Appendix B.4.1) and numerous nationally registered cultural resource

sites, including Turtle Mound.

Archeological/Historical The adjacent barrier island and uplands are rich with pre-Columbian

archaeological sites. The most well known historical site near the Mosquito

Lagoon Aquatic Preserve is Turtle Mound, which is the largest shell midden

on the east coast of Florida.

Management Needs

Ecosystem

Science

The preserve fosters strong working partnerships with multiple agencies

and researchers, and assists with equipment and staff as needed to support

research projects and monitoring programs. These research and monitoring

programs provide invaluable information on the status of issues involving

the natural resources, and form the basis for making sound resource

management decisions.

Resource

Management

Continue to support the multiagency restoration efforts of rotary-ditched and

impounded wetlands in the Mosquito Lagoon. Increase monitoring efforts

to support the ongoing project. Develop a seagrass prop scar restoration

plan to repair damaged submerged aquatic vegetation to protect this

economically vital resource.

Education

& Outreach

Expand the Island Enhancement Project to islands in the preserve to

encourage responsible recreational users to participate in the stewardship

of the preserve’s natural resources.

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan

Public Use Rapid population growth is expected to continue in coastal areas of Florida.

Information and data contained within this Plan is intended to assist preserve

managers, working closely with other state entities and local governments,

to make decisions that will assure a balance between sustainable resource

protection and waterway management.

Public Involvement The Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve formed an advisory committee

consisting of a variety of stakeholders to provide guidance throughout

the development of this management plan. In addition to the five advisory

committee meetings, two public meetings were held to capture the

public’s concerns and input. The plan was presented to the Acquisition

and Restoration Council and the Governor and Cabinet at public hearings

for approval.

CAMA / BTIITF Approval

CAMA approval date: March 13, 2009 BTIITF approval date: August 11, 2009

Comments:

	 	 	

Table of Contents

Part One / Basis for Management

Chapter One / Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 / Management Plan Purpose and Scope............................................................................................... 2	 	

1.2 / Public Involvement ...............................................................................................................................4

Chapter Two / Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s

Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas .......................................................................................... 5	 	

	 2.1 / Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................5

	 2.2 / Management Authority......................................................................................................................... 6

	 2.3 / Statutory Authority................................................................................................................................6

	 2.4 / Administrative Rules.............................................................................................................................7

Chapter Three / The Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve .......................................................................... 9

3.1 / Description of Representative Ecosystem Region .............................................................................. 9

	 	 Historical Background............................................................................................................................... 9	 	

	 	 General Description ...............................................................................................................................12

	 	 Resource Description .............................................................................................................................15

	 	 Values ......................................................................................................................................................41	 	

	 	 Citizen Support Organization .................................................................................................................. 43

	 	 Adjacent Public Land and Designated Resources ................................................................................ 43

	 	 Surrounding Land Use ............................................................................................................................44

Part Two / Management Programs

Chapter Four / Management Programs ...................................................................................................... 47

4.1 / The Ecosystem Science Management Program .............................................................................. 47

	 	 Background of Ecosystem Science at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ............................................. 47

	 	 Current Status of Ecosystem Science at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ........................................... 48

4.2 / Resource Management Program.......................................................................................................56

	 	 Background of Resource Management at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ....................................... 56

	 	 Current Status of Resource Management at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ........................................ 58

4.3 / The Education and Outreach Program.............................................................................................. 60

	 	 Background of Education and Outreach at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve.......................................... 60

	 	 Current Status of Education and Outreach at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve....................................... 62

4.4 / The Public Use Management Program ............................................................................................. 64

	 	 Background of Public Use at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ............................................................... 64

	 	 Current Status of Public Use at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ............................................................. 65

Chapter Five / Issues.....................................................................................................................................71

5.1 / Introduction to Issue Based Management ........................................................................................ 71

5.2 / Issues..................................................................................................................................................72

	 	 Issue I: Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity ................................................... 72	 	

	 	 Issue II: Water and Watershed ............................................................................................................... 75

	 	 Issue III: Sustainable Public Use ........................................................................................................... 78

	 	 Issue IV: Environmental Incidence Assessment and Response ........................................................... 81

Part Three / Additional Plans

Chapter Six / Administrative Plan ............................................................................................................... 83

Chapter Seven / Facilities Plan .................................................................................................................... 85

Maps

Map 1 / Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas System ................................................................................ 2

Map 2 / Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Site .................................................................................. 3, 10

Map 3 / Previous Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Boundaries............................................................ 11 

Map 4 / Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Location .............................................................................. 14

Map 5 / Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Relative to Indian River ........................................................ 15

Map 6 / Aquaculture Zones within Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ................................................... 19

Map 7 / Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Drainage Basin and Water Conveyence Canals .................. 20

Map 8 / Location of Wastewater Outfalls in the Mosquito Lagoon ............................................................ 21

Map 9 / Natural Communities within Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ................................................. 25

Map 10 / Public Access Points within and near Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve .............................. 40

Map 11 / Managed Areas Adjacent to Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ............................................. 43

Map 12 / Land Use Surrounding Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve ...................................................... 45

Map 13 / Water Quality Stations, Monitored by Volusia County .......................................................................... 51 	 	 	

Tables

Table 1 / Description of the 82 South Volusia Shellfish Harvesting Area .................................................. 17

Table 2 / Summary of Natural Communities on Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve .............................. 24

Table 3 / Water Quality Parameters Collected by Volusia County Environmental Health Laboratory ...... 50

Table 4 / The total number and percent of watercraft observed during the 2002 – 2003 study for each

	 	 watercraft/ activity classification category ............................................................................................. 69 	 	 	

Figures

Figure 1 / State Structure for Managing Aquatic Preserves ......................................................................... 7 	 	 	

Appendices

	 	 	

Appendix A / Legal Documents ...................................................................................................................88

A.1 / Aquatic Preserve Resolution ............................................................................................................. 88

A.2 / Florida Statutes .................................................................................................................................89

A.3 / Florida Administrative Code .............................................................................................................. 89 	 	 	

Appendix B / Resource Data ....................................................................................................................... 90

B.1 / Acronym List .....................................................................................................................................90

B.2 / Glossary of Terms .............................................................................................................................91	 	

B.3 / References .........................................................................................................................................97

B.4 / Species Lists ...................................................................................................................................103

	 	 Native Species ..................................................................................................................................103

	 	 Invasive Non-Native Species ............................................................................................................ 120

	 	 	 Problem Species ...............................................................................................................................120

B.5 / Summary of Florida Natural Areas Inventory Descriptions ............................................................ 120 	 	 	

Appendix C / Public Involvement ..............................................................................................................123

C.1 / Advisory Committee .......................................................................................................................123	 	

	 	 List of members and their affiliations ................................................................................................... 123

	 	 Florida Administrative Weekly Postings................................................................................................. 123	 	

	 	 Meeting Summaries .............................................................................................................................125

C.2 / Public Scoping Meeting ..................................................................................................................136

	 	 Florida Administrative Weekly Posting ..................................................................................................136

 Advertisement Flyer ..............................................................................................................................137

 Summary of the Public Scoping Meeting.............................................................................................. 138

C.3 / Formal Public Meeting ....................................................................................................................142

	 	 Florida Administrative Weekly Posting...................................................................................................142

 Advertisement Flyer ..............................................................................................................................143

 Summary of the Formal Public Meeting ................................................................................................ 144 	 	 	

Appendix D / Goals, Objectives, and Strategies ..................................................................................... 156

D.1 / Current Goals, Objectives, and Strategies Table ........................................................................... 156

D.2 / Budget Table....................................................................................................................................157

D.3 / Budget Summary Table ...................................................................................................................168

1

Part One

Basis for Management

Chapter One

Introduction

The Florida aquatic preserves are administered on behalf of the state by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA) as part of a network

that includes 41 aquatic preserves, 3 National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERRs), a National Marine

Sanctuary, the Coral Reef Conservation Program and the Florida Oceans and Coastal Council. This provides for a system of significant protections to ensure that our most popular and ecologically important

underwater ecosystems are cared for in perpetuity. Each of these special places is managed with strategies based on local resources, issues and conditions.

Our expansive coastline and wealth of aquatic resources have defined Florida as a subtropical oasis, attracting millions of residents and visitors, and the businesses that serve them. Florida’s submerged lands

play important roles in maintaining good water quality, hosting a diversity of wildlife and habitats (including economically and ecologically valuable nursery areas), and supporting a treasured quality of life for

all. In the 1960s, it became apparent that the ecosystems that had attracted so many people to Florida

could not support rapid growth without science-based resource protection and management. To this

end, state legislators provided extra protection for certain exceptional aquatic areas by designating them

as aquatic preserves.

Title to submerged lands not conveyed to private landowners is held by the Board of Trustees of the

Internal Improvement Trust Fund (the Trustees). The Governor and Cabinet, sitting as the Trustees, act as

guardians for the people of the State of Florida (§253.03, Florida Statutes [F.S.]) and regulate the use of

these public lands. Through statute, the Trustees have the authority to adopt rules related to the management of sovereignty submerged lands (Florida Aquatic Preserve Act of 1975, §258.36, F.S.). A higher

layer of protection is afforded to aquatic preserves including areas of sovereignty lands that have been

The first Public Scoping Meeting for Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan was held 

in August 2007.
2

“set aside forever as aquatic preserves or sanctuaries for the benefit of future generations” due to “exceptional biological, aesthetic, and scientific value” (Florida Aquatic Preserve Act of 1975, §258.36, F.S.).

This tradition of concern and protection of these exceptional areas continues, and now includes: the

Rookery Bay NERR in Southwest Florida, designated in 1978; the Apalachicola NERR in Northwest

Florida, designated in 1979; and the Guana Tolomato Matanzas NERR in Northeast Florida, designated

in 1999. In addition, the Florida Oceans and Coastal Council was created in 2005 to develop Florida’s

ocean and coastal research priorities, and establish a statewide ocean research plan. The group also

coordinates public and private ocean research for more effective coastal management. This dedication

to the conservation of coastal and ocean resources is an investment in Florida’s future. 

1.1 / Management Plan Purpose and Scope

With increasing development, recreation and economic pressures, our aquatic resources have the

potential to be significantly impacted, either directly or indirectly. These potential impacts to resources

can reduce the health and viability of the ecosystems that contain them, requiring active management to

ensure the long-term health of the entire network. Effective management plans for the aquatic preserves

are essential to address this goal and each site’s own set of unique challenges. The purpose of these

plans is to incorporate, evaluate and prioritize all relevant information about the site into a cohesive manPolk

Collier

Marion

Lake

Levy

Osceola

Taylor

Bay

Miami-Dade

Palm Beach

Hendry

Volusia

Broward

Dixie

Leon

Walton

Clay Gulf

Orange

Lee

Liberty

Pasco

Alachua

Jackson

Highlands

Brevard

Glades

Baker

Citrus

Okaloosa

Hardee

Santa Rosa

Duval

Martin

DeSoto

Madison

Hillsborough

Monroe

Sumter

Nassau

Wakulla

Putnam

Flagler

Calhoun

Suwannee

Holmes

St. Lucie

Lafayette

Hamilton

Charlotte

Gadsden

Franklin

Hernando

Union

Seminole

Manatee

Columbia

Escambia

Jefferson

Sarasota

Okeechobee

St. Johns

Washington

Gilchrist

Indian River

Bradford

Pinellas

Coupon Bight

Lignumvitae Key

Biscayne Bay

Biscayne Bay -

Cape Florida

to Monroe

County Line Cape Romano -

Ten Thousand Islands

Rookery Bay

Estero Bay

Pine

Island

Sound

Matlacha Pass

Cape Haze

Lemon Bay

Gasparilla Sound -

Charlotte Harbor

Loxahatchee

River - Lake

Worth Creek

Jensen Beach

to Jupiter Inlet

Indian River -

Vero Beach

to Fort Pierce

Indian River -

Malabar to

Vero Beach

Banana River

North Fork,

St. Lucie

Mosquito

Lagoon

Tomoka

Marsh

Pellicer Creek

Guana River Marsh

Nassau River -

St. Johns

River Marshes

Fort Clinch

Terra Ceia

Cockroach

Bay

Wekiva

River

Oklawaha

River

Rainbow

Springs

Pinellas

County

Boca Ciega

Bay

St. Martins

Marsh

Big Bend

Seagrasses

Alligator

Harbor

Lake

Jackson

Apalachicola

Bay

St.

Joseph

Bay

St. Andrews

Rocky

Bayou

Yellow River

Marsh

Fort Pickens

Gulf of Mexico

Atlantic Ocean

Georgia

Alabama

0 25 50 100 150

Miles

±

Aquatic Preserves

National Estuarine Research Reserves

Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

Coral Reef Conservation Program

Rookery Bay

Guana - Tolomato - Matanzas

Apalachicola

April 2008

0 5 25 0 100 150

Kilometers

Map 1 / Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas System 
3

agement strategy, allowing for appropriate access to the managed areas while protecting the long-term

health of the ecosystems and their resources.

The mandate for developing aquatic preserve management plans is outlined in Section 18-20.013 and

Subsection 18-18.013(2) of the Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). Management plan development and

review begins with the collection of resource information from historical data, research and monitoring,

and includes input from individual CAMA managers and staff, area stakeholders, and members of the

general public. The statistical data, public comment, and cooperating agency information is then used to

identify management issues and threats affecting the present and future integrity of the site, its boundaries, and adjacent areas. This information is used in the development and review of the management

plan, which is examined for consistency with the statutory authority and intent of the Aquatic Preserve

Program. Each management plan is evaluated periodically and revised as necessary to allow for strategic improvements. Intended to be used by site managers and other agencies or private groups involved

New Smyrna

Beach

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve 0 0.5 1 2

Miles

£¤1

Gulf of Mexico

Atlantic

Ocean

April 2008 ±

Cedar

Island

Volusia

County

Edgewater

Bottle

Island

0 0.5 1 2

Kilometers

Map 2 / Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Site
4

with maintaining the natural integrity of these resources, the plan includes scientific information about the

existing conditions of the site and the management strategies developed to respond to those conditions.

To aid in the analysis and development of the management strategies for the site plans, four comprehensive management programs are identified. In each of these management programs, relevant information

about the specific sites is described in an effort to create a comprehensive management plan. It is expected that the specific needs or issues are unique and vary at each location, but the four management

programs will remain constant. These management programs are:

• Ecosystem Science

• Resource Management

• Education and Outreach

• Public Use

In addition, unique local and regional issues are identified, and goals, objectives and strategies are established to address these issues. Finally, the program and facility needs required to meet these goals as

identified. These components are all key elements in an effective coastal management program and for

achieving the mission of the sites.

1.2 / Public Involvement

CAMA recognizes the importance of stakeholder participation and encourages their involvement in the

management plan development process. CAMA meets the requirements of the Sunshine Law (§286.011,

F.S.) which mandates:

• meetings of public boards or commissions must be open to the public;

• reasonable notice of such meetings must be given; and

• minutes of the meetings must be recorded.

Several key steps were taken during Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan development. First, staff organized an advisory committee comprised of key stakeholders, neighbors and interested citizens. Next, Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve staff advertised and conducted a public meeting

in September 2007 to listen and discuss concerns and issues affecting each of the sites. This input was

used in the development of a draft management plan that was reviewed by CAMA staff and the advisory

committee. After the initial reviews, the staff advertised and conducted, in conjunction with the advisory

committee, an additional public meeting in June 2008 and a total of five advisory committee meetings to

engage the stakeholders in the development of the final draft of the management plan. During the planning process, a Mosquito Lagoon Working Group and public use subcommittee were formed to assist

in the implementation of the management plan. For additional information about the advisory committee

and the public meetings refer to Appendix C - Public Involvement.
5

Chapter Two

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s 

Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas

2.1 / Introduction

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) protects, conserves and manages Florida’s

natural resources and enforces the state’s environmental laws. The DEP is the lead agency in state government for environmental management and stewardship and commands one of the broadest charges

of all the state agencies, protecting Florida’s air, water and land. The DEP is divided into three primary

areas: Regulatory Programs, Land and Recreation, and Planning and Management. Florida’s environmental priorities include restoring America’s Everglades; improving air quality; restoring and protecting

the water quality in our springs, lakes, rivers and coastal waters; conserving environmentally-sensitive

lands; and providing citizens and visitors with recreational opportunities, now and in the future.

The Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA) is the unit within the DEP that manages more

than four million acres of submerged lands and select coastal uplands. This includes 41 aquatic preserves, 3 National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERRs), the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

and the Coral Reef Conservation Program. The three NERRs, the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

and the Coral Reef Conservation Program are managed in cooperation with the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

CAMA manages sites in Florida for the conservation and protection of natural and historical resources

and resource-based public use that is compatible with the conservation and protection of these lands.

CAMA is a strong supporter of the NERR system and its approach to coastal ecosystem management.

The State of Florida has three designated NERR sites, each encompassing at least one aquatic preserve

within its boundaries. Rookery Bay NERR includes Rookery Bay Aquatic Preserve and Cape Romano - Ten

Thousand Islands Aquatic Preserve; Apalachicola NERR includes Apalachicola Bay Aquatic Preserve; and

Guana Tolomato Matanzas NERR includes Guana River Marsh Aquatic Preserve and Pellicer Creek Aquatic

Preserve. These aquatic preserves provide discrete areas designated for additional protection beyond that

of the surrounding NERR and may afford a foundation for additional protective zoning in the future.

Each of the Florida NERR managers serves as a regional manager overseeing multiple other aquatic preserves in their region. This management structure advances CAMA’s ability to manage its sites as part of

the larger statewide system.

Crabs are an important part of the food web in the Mosquito Lagoon. They construct their burrows on sandy 

and muddy intertidal areas near salt marshes and along the shorelines in the preserve.
6

2.2 / Management Authority

Established by law, aquatic preserves are submerged lands of exceptional beauty that are to be maintained in their natural or existing conditions. The intent was to forever set aside submerged lands with

exceptional biological, aesthetic, and scientific values as sanctuaries, called aquatic preserves, for the

benefit of future generations.

The laws supporting aquatic preserve management are the direct result of the public’s awareness of and

interest in protecting Florida’s aquatic environment. The extensive dredge and fill activities that occurred

in the late 1960s spawned this widespread public concern. In 1966, the Board of Trustees of the Internal

Improvement Trust Fund (the Trustees) created the first aquatic preserve, Estero Bay, in Lee County.

In 1967, the Florida Legislature passed the Randall Act (Chapter 67-393, Laws of Florida), which established procedures regulating previously unrestricted dredge and fill activities on state-owned submerged

lands. That same year, the Legislature provided the statutory authority (§253.03, Florida Statutes [F.S.]) for

the Trustees to exercise proprietary control over state-owned lands. Also in 1967, government focus on protecting Florida’s productive water bodies from degradation due to development led the Trustees to establish a moratorium on the sale of submerged lands to private interests. An Interagency Advisory Committee

was created to develop strategies for the protection and management of state-owned submerged lands.

In 1968, the Florida Constitution was revised to declare in Article II, Section 7, the state’s policy of

conserving and protecting natural resources and areas of scenic beauty. That constitutional provision

also established the authority for the Legislature to enact measures for the abatement of air and water

pollution. Later that same year, the Interagency Advisory Committee issued a report recommending the

establishment of 26 aquatic preserves.

The Trustees acted on this recommendation in 1969 by establishing 16 aquatic preserves and adopting

a resolution for a statewide system of such preserves. In 1975 the state Legislature passed the Florida

Aquatic Preserve Act of 1975 (Act) that was enacted as Chapter 75-172, Laws of Florida, and later became Chapter 258, Part II, F.S. This Act codified the already existing aquatic preserves and established

standards and criteria for activities within those preserves. Additional aquatic preserves were individually

adopted at subsequent times up through 1989.

In 1980, the Trustees adopted the first aquatic preserve rule, Chapter 18-18, Florida Administrative Code

(F.A.C.), for the administration of the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve. All other aquatic preserves are administered under Chapter 18-20, F.A.C., which was originally adopted in 1981. These rules apply standards

and criteria for activities in the aquatic preserves, such as dredging, filling, building docks and other structures that are stricter than those of Chapter 18-21, F.A.C., which apply to all sovereignty lands in the state.

This plan is in compliance with the Conceptual State Lands Management Plan, adopted March 17, 1981

by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund and represents balanced public utilization, specific agency statutory authority, and other legislative or executive constraints. The Conceptual

State Lands Management Plan also provides essential guidance concerning the management of sovereignty lands and aquatic preserves and their important resources, including unique natural features,

seagrasses, endangered species, and archaeological and historical resources.

Through delegation of authority from the Trustees, the DEP and CAMA have proprietary authority to

manage the sovereignty lands, the water column, spoil islands (which are merely deposits of sovereignty

lands), and some of the natural islands and select coastal uplands to which the Trustees hold title.

Enforcement of state statutes and rules relating to criminal violations and non-criminal infractions rests

with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Marine Patrol, DEP law enforcement, and

local law enforcement agencies. Enforcement of administrative remedies rests with CAMA, the DEP Districts, and Water Management Districts.

2.3 / Statutory Authority

The fundamental laws providing management authority for the aquatic preserves are contained in

Chapters 258 and 253, F.S. These statutes establish the proprietary role of the Governor and Cabinet,

sitting as the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, as Trustees over all sovereignty lands. In addition, these statutes empower the Trustees to adopt and enforce rules and regulations

for managing all sovereignty lands, including aquatic preserves. The Florida Aquatic Preserve Act was

enacted by the Florida Legislature in 1975 and is codified in Chapter 258, F.S.

The legislative intent for establishing aquatic preserves is stated in Section 258.36, F.S.: “It is the intent of

the Legislature that the state-owned submerged lands in areas which have exceptional biological, aesthetic, and scientific value, as hereinafter described, be set aside forever as aquatic preserves or sanctuaries
7

for the benefit of future generations.” This statement, along with the other applicable laws, provides a foundation for the management of aquatic preserves. Management will emphasize the preservation of natural

conditions and will include lands that are specifically authorized for inclusion as part of an aquatic preserve.

Management responsibilities for aquatic preserves may be fulfilled directly by the Trustees or by staff

of the DEP through delegation of authority. Other governmental bodies may also participate in the

management of aquatic preserves under appropriate instruments of authority issued by the Trustees.

CAMA staff serves as the primary managers who implement provisions of the management plans

and rules applicable to the aquatic preserves. CAMA does not “regulate” the lands per se; rather,

that is done primarily by the DEP Districts (in addition to the Water Management Districts) which

grant regulatory permits. The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services through

delegated authority from the Trustees, may issue proprietary authorizations for marine aquaculture

within the aquatic preserves and regulates all aquacultural activities as authorized by Chapter 597,

Florida Aquaculture Policy Act, F.S. Staff evaluates proposed uses or activities in the aquatic preserve and assesses the

possible impacts on the

natural resources. Project reviews are primarily

evaluated in accordance

with the criteria in the

Act, Chapter 18-20,

F.A.C., and this management plan.

CAMA staff comments,

along with comments

of other agencies

and the public are

submitted to the

appropriate permitting

staff for consideration

in their issuance of any

delegated authorizations

in aquatic preserves

or in developing

recommendations

to be presented to

the Trustees. This

mechanism provides a

basis for the Trustees to

evaluate public interest

and the merits of any

project while also considering potential environmental impacts to the aquatic preserves. Any activity

located on sovereignty lands requires a letter of consent, a lease, an easement, or other approval from

the Trustees.

Many provisions of the Florida Statutes that empower non-CAMA programs within DEP or other agencies

may be important to the management of CAMA sites. For example, Chapter 403, F.S., authorizes rules

concerning the designation of “Outstanding Florida Waters” (OFWs), a program that provides aquatic

preserves with additional regulatory protection. Chapter 379, F.S., regulates saltwater fisheries, and

provides enforcement authority and powers for law enforcement officers. Additionally, it provides similar powers relating to wildlife conservation and management. The sheer number of statutes that affect

aquatic preserve management prevents an exhaustive list of all such laws from being provided here.

2.4 / Administrative Rules

Chapters 18-18, 18-20 and 18-21, F.A.C., are the three administrative rules directly applicable to the

uses allowed in aquatic preserves specifically and sovereignty lands generally. These rules are intended to be cumulative, meaning that Chapter 18-21, F.A.C., should be read together with Chapter 18-18,

F.A.C., or Chapter 18-20, F.A.C., to determine what activities are permissible within an aquatic preserve. If Chapter 18-18, F.A.C., or Chapter 18-20, F.A.C., are silent on an issue, Chapter 18-21, F.A.C.,

will control; if a conflict is perceived between the rules, the stricter standards of Chapter 18-18, F.A.C.,

Figure 1 / State structure for managing aquatic preserves.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SECRETARY

Law

Enforcement

Deputy

Secretary

Regulatory 

Programs

Siting Coordinator

Waste 

Management

Water 

Res. Mgmt.

Air

Res. Mgmt.

Labs

Regulatory

Districts

Deputy

Secretary

Land & 

Recreation

Chief 

of Staff

Office of 

Ombudsman

Communications

Deputy

Secretary

Planning &

Management

Strategic 

Planning

Administrative

Services

Intergovernmental

Programs

Legislative

Affairs

National Estuarine

Research Reserve

Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

Coral Reef

Conservation Program

Florida Oceans &

Coastal Council

Aquatic Preserves

Greenways

& Trails

State

Lands

Cabinet

Affairs

Recreation

& Parks

Coastal & Aquatic 

Managed Areas

Geology
8

or Chapter 18-20, F.A.C., supersede those of Chapter 18-21, F.A.C. Because Chapter 18-21, F.A.C.

concerns all sovereignty lands, it is logical to discuss its provisions first.

Originally codified in 1982, Chapter 18-21, F.A.C., is meant “to aid in fulfilling the trust and fiduciary

responsibilities of the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund for the administration,

management and disposition of sovereignty lands; to insure maximum benefit and use of sovereignty

lands for all the citizens of Florida; to manage, protect and enhance sovereignty lands so that the public

may continue to enjoy traditional uses including, but not limited to, navigation, fishing and swimming; to

manage and provide maximum protection for all sovereignty lands, especially those important to public

drinking water supply, shellfish harvesting, public recreation, and fish and wildlife propagation and management; to insure that all public and private activities on sovereignty lands which generate revenues

or exclude traditional public uses provide just compensation for such privileges; and to aid in the implementation of the State Lands Management Plan.”

To that end, Chapter 18-21, F.A.C., contains provisions on general management policies, forms of authorization for activities on sovereignty lands, and fees applicable for those activities. “Activity,” in the context

of the rule, includes “construction of docks, piers, boat ramps, boardwalks, mooring pilings, dredging of

channels, filling, removal of logs, sand, silt, clay, gravel or shell, and the removal or planting of vegetation” (Rule 18-21.003, F.A.C.). To be authorized on sovereignty lands, activities must be not contrary to

the public interest (Rule 18-21.004, F.A.C.).

Chapter 18-21, F.A.C., also sets policies on aquaculture, geophysical testing (using gravity, shock wave

and other geological techniques to obtain data on oil, gas or other mineral resources), and special

events related to boat shows and boat displays. Of particular importance to CAMA site management, it

additionally addresses spoil islands, preventing their development in most cases.

Chapters 18-18 and 18-20, F.A.C., apply standards and criteria for activities in the aquatic preserves that are

stricter than those of Chapter 18-21, F.A.C. Chapter 18-18, F.A.C., is specific to the Biscayne Bay Aquatic

Preserve and is more extensively described in that site’s management plan. Chapter 18-20, F.A.C., is applicable to all other aquatic preserves. It further restricts the type of activities for which authorizations may

be granted for use of sovereignty lands and requires that structures that are authorized be limited to those

necessary to conduct water dependent activities. Moreover, for certain activities to be authorized, “it must

be demonstrated that no other reasonable alternative exists which would allow the proposed activity to be

constructed or undertaken outside the preserve” (Paragraph 18-20.004(1)(g), F.A.C.).

Chapter 18-20, F.A.C., expands on the definition of “public interest” by outlining a balancing test that is

to be used to determine whether benefits exceed costs in the evaluation of requests for sale, lease, or

transfer of interest of sovereignty lands within an aquatic preserve. The rule also provides for the analysis of the cumulative impacts of a request in the context of prior, existing, and pending uses within the

aquatic preserve, including both direct and indirect effects.

Chapter 18-20, F.A.C., directs management plans and resource inventories to be developed for every

aquatic preserve. Further, the rule provides provisions specific to certain aquatic preserves and indicates

the means by which the Trustees can establish new or expand existing aquatic preserves.

As with statutes, aquatic preserve management relies on the application of many other DEP and outside agency rules. Perhaps most notably, Chapter 62-302, F.A.C., concerns the classification of surface

waters, including criteria for OFW, a designation that provides for the state’s highest level of protection

for water quality. All aquatic preserves contain OFW designations. No activity may be permitted within an

OFW that degrades ambient water quality unless the activity is determined to be in the public interest.

Once again, the list of other administrative rules that do not directly address CAMA’s responsibilities but

do affect CAMA sites is so long as to be impractical to create within the context of this management plan.
9

Chapter Three

The Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

3.1 / Description of Representative Ecosystem Region

3.1.1 / Historical Background

For some 10,000 years before European settlers arrived, indigenous people of Florida inhabited this

east central coastal region. Until the early 20th century, the east central Florida coastline was strewn with

ancient mounds of clam and oyster shells that testified to the presence of these natives. Timucuan Indian

artifacts surrounding the Mosquito Lagoon and the MLAP indicate this aquatic feature was a food source

of even greater importance to early inhabitants than to today’s residents. Most mounds have been

destroyed and the shell used for roadways and building fill. Shellfish harvesting, fishing and huntinggame species were important consumptive uses from the time of indigenous occupation into the early

1900s. The MLAP and surrounding waters were the main travel corridor for early settlers.

Several large sugar plantations were established during early European and Afro-American settlement,

but later abandoned. As settlements grew, commercial uses such as the harvest of seafood and

transport of goods by steamboat became more important. Resettlement began in earnest after the Civil

War. The town of New Smyrna Beach was incorporated in 1887, with a population of 150 people. The

Florida East Coast Railroad spurred development and seasonal tourism to areas like St. Augustine and

New Smyrna Beach. Mosquito Lagoon was named appropriately based on the Lagoon’s location in the

historic Mosquito County and the abundance of mosquitoes.

According to Grant Gilmore’s research on historic fisheries, fishing in the 1870’s was predominantly for

family use (Gilmore, 1977). Gilmore reviewed anecdotal information regarding Mosquito Lagoon and found

records such as, “waters abound in fish.., and mullet are remarkably abundant.” Low commercial export

numbers during that period support those reports of sustenance fishing, compared to the commercial

importance of the area later in history. Mosquito Lagoon catches for export in 1879 consisted of “150 green

turtles, 300-400 mullet roes and a few barrels of salt mullet.” (Provancha, Hall & Oddy, 1992).

A great egret (Ardea alba) overlooks the preserve from its lofty vantage point.
10

Areas just north of the MLAP such as Mosquito Inlet, now called Ponce de Leon Inlet, have major

historical significance. For instance, Mosquito Inlet was featured in National Geographic Magazine in

1932 as a wildlife viewing destination. According to the author of the article,

“The inlet and the waters and sand bars back of it, are wonderful places for sea birds. At low tide

hundreds of brown pelicans and black skimmers may be seen resting on sand bars and mud

flats, together with gulls, terns, herons, and shore birds. A federal game reserve was set aside in

approximately 1925 specifically for brown pelicans in the Mosquito Lagoon” (Shiras, 1932).

Historically, Mosquito Lagoon’s only opening to the Atlantic Ocean was at Ponce de Leon Inlet, to the

northeast. The current southern opening at the southwest end of the Mosquito Lagoon (the original

Haulover Canal) was manually excavated in the 1850s during the Seminole Wars (Hanna & Hanna,

1950). The existing, and larger, 1.2 mile (1.9 km) long canal connecting the IRL to Mosquito Lagoon was

created in 1887 and improved in 1930 and 1959 as part of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW).

New Smyrna

Beach

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve 0 0.5 1 2

Miles

£¤1

Gulf of Mexico

Atlantic

Ocean

April 2008 ±

Cedar

Island

Volusia

County

Edgewater

Bottle

Island

0 0.5 1 2

Kilometers

Map 2 / Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Site
11

Today, the AIWW channel is a busy travel corridor and provides important economic support to the region.

All southbound AIWW vessel traffic must pass through Mosquito Lagoon and Haulover Canal to reach the

IRL. During spring and fall, large transient yachts and vessels greater than 25 feet (7.6 m) in length pass

by the western boundary of the MLAP while traveling the AIWW to points south and north (Tyson, 2001).

Titusville Marina transient dock records were inventoried as a component of a 1998 AIWW boating activity

study concerning the Haulover Canal. Researchers learned that of 282 slip rental receipts from April 1998,

the origin of transient vessel operators passing through Haulover Canal represented 24 states and 5 foreign

countries. Florida residents represented 36.5% of vessel operator origin in these data (Tyson, 2001).

During the 1960s and 1970s, the Florida Legislature recognized the importance of preserving the

Mosquito Lagoon and adjacent barrier island (Florida Aquatic Preserve Act of 1975, §258.36, F.S.). MLAP

was first designated in 1970 for the purpose of maintaining Mosquito Lagoon in essentially a natural

condition. The first MLAP management plan was adopted July 9, 1991. 

Historically, aquatic preserve boundaries were designated based primarily on water quality. Many

cities discharged wastewater with only primary treatment during the 1960s through the 1970s. This

practice resulted in poor water quality surrounding many population centers. Other consideration was

given to the habitat function, economic value of resources and beauty of areas proposed for inclusion

as aquatic preserves. Commercial interests and private inholdings within proposed preserves were

also given consideration as dredge and fill were still not heavily regulated. These designations were

established prior to the common usage of geographic information systems (GIS) for mapping. For ease

of reference, boundaries were chosen where there were landmarks, bridges, ditches or city boundaries

that were already established.

Today, it is recognized that

sometimes these boundaries

do not make ecological sense

due to previous mapping

constraints or because

conditions have changed.

Historical Boundaries 

of the MLAP

The original MLAP

boundaries included 28

miles (45 km) of Mosquito

Lagoon, stretching from

the southern city limits of

New Smyrna Beach to the

southern terminus of the

basin in Brevard County and

encompassed approximately

39,000 acres (158 km2

).

During the 1960s and again in

1980, much of the submerged

bottom was conveyed to the

United States of America

for development of the U.S.

space program at Cape

Canaveral and the expansion

of CNS. Since most of the

originally designated MLAP

is now under the ownership

and management of the

federal government, the

primary focus of the present

management plan will

concern that part of the MLAP

under the ownership and

management of the State

of Florida.

Volusia

County

Brevard

County

Current Boundary

Original Boundary

Canaveral National Seashore

0 2 4 6 1

Miles

0 2 4 6 1

Kilometers

± March 2009

Haulover Canal

Map 3 / Previous Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Boundaries
12

On July 31, 1962 the state dedicated, “ ... to the exclusive use of the United States all of the land, beach,

and water areas ... for so long a period of time as the same may be used or required by the United

States for the Manned Lunar Landing Program.” This dedication included the southern part of Mosquito

Lagoon, the northern end of Merritt Island, and the northern end of the Banana River (Board of Trustees,

1962). A modification to this dedication in 1967 provided for “an additional use of the property as a

National Wildlife Refuge” (Board of Trustees, 1967). In 1965, another portion of Mosquito Lagoon and

north IRL was dedicated. This dedication was for the area north of the old Haulover Canal down to the

approximate southern city limits of Oak Hill. It included the barrier island, Mosquito Lagoon, the eastern

portion of the northern Indian River Lagoon and some uplands. Another dedication in 1980 included the

submerged bottom in Mosquito Lagoon

from its southern reaches north to about

1/2 mile (0.8 km) south of the southern city

limits of Edgewater. 

Stipulations were added to the original

dedications, including but not limited

to security areas and uses necessary

for National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA), with a secondary

use as a wildlife refuge or for public

park and recreation purposes upon a

determination by NASA. The 1980s deed

“is for the express purpose of inclusion

in the CNS to manage the lands for

wilderness/preservation purposes...In the

event that any development proposals are

contemplated which may be contrary to

these objectives, concurrence of the said

Board of Trustees shall be required” (Board

of Trustees, 1986).

3.1.2 / General Description

International/National/State/Regional

Significance

As a component of the IRL complex,

Mosquito Lagoon is designated an Estuary

of National Significance by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (Indian

River Lagoon National Estuary Program,

1996). It was designated by the Florida

Legislature as an aquatic preserve in 1970,

included in the Aquatic Preserves Act of

1975 passed by the Florida Legislature,

and designated as an Outstanding Florida

Water in 1979 (Rule 62-302.700 (9), F.A.C.).

The Florida Department of Environmental

Protection (DEP) affords the highest level of

protection to these waters. In addition, areas

within the MLAP are also classified as: Class

II, Shellfish Harvesting waterbodies (approved

for shellfish propagation or harvesting).

The MLAP is a component of one of the most diverse estuaries in North America, providing habitat for

nine federally-protected species while simultaneously supporting multi-million dollar recreational and

commercial fisheries (United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 2006). The extensive oyster reefs and

clam beds of the MLAP are economically important to the region. There are more than 1,240 acres (5.02

km2) of saltmarsh located within the MLAP. The habitat in and surrounding Mosquito Lagoon potentially

supports 12 federally-designated endangered or threatened species (Appendix B.4.1) and numerous

nationally-registered cultural resource sites, including Turtle Mound, which is the largest shell midden on

the east coast of Florida. (For further detail, see Section 3.1.3, Archaeological and Historical Resources.)

The Mosquito Lagoon is the backdrop for shuttles launched 

from the Kennedy Space Station (photo: NASA).
13

Estuarine communities such as the MLAP are characterized by both high productivity and high

biodiversity (Provancha et al., 1992). In fact, estuaries are among the most productive ecosystems on

earth (Bertness, 1999). The high primary productivity of estuaries reflects their nutrient-rich conditions

and the presence of many primary producers (Walters et al., 2001). The green plants (seagrasses,

emergent vegetation and mangroves), micro- and macroalgae, fungi and cyanobacteria gather up

nutrients from mud, oxygen and solar energy, generating detritus which nourishes hundreds of species

in the salt marsh. Detritus is composed of non-living particulate organic material including the bodies of

dead organisms and fecal material colonized by decomposer microorganisms. Only a small fraction of

plant tissue is eaten by herbivores while it is living, the larger percentage ends up in the water column

and settling to the bottom, becoming detritus (Whitney, Means & Rudloe, 2004). The detrital food chain,

together with plankton, are the major components of the estuarine food chain. The estuarine ecosystem

is an important spawning and nursery habitat for many species of fish and invertebrates. Approximately

72% of commercial and 74% of sport species of fishes and invertebrates must spend all or part of their

lives in or associated with an estuarine system (Durako, Murphy & Haddad, 1988). Wildlife, fishes and

water birds benefit from productive estuaries.

Factors that threaten biodiversity in estuaries are generally the same as those that affect biodiversity in

terrestrial systems: overexploitation, physical alteration of habitat areas and exotic species introductions.

Many of the current threats to aquatic species originate on land. Siltation, nutrient loading, air and

water pollution, human population growth and wasteful resource consumption all contribute to habitat

degradation, which inevitably leads to loss of species from an ecosystem and thus, a loss of biodiversity

(Smithsonian Marine Station, 2007c).

The MLAP is unique among the inland waters of the Atlantic Coast of Florida and a feeling of relative

isolation is attainable just a short distance from nearby boat ramps. Generally, kayaks or shallow draft

vessels smaller than 16 feet in length are the boats of choice for this system. Once outside the AIWW,

local knowledge of water depths and channels of the Lagoon system is essential. Elevated landmarks

are difficult to see at times, and it is easy to become disorientated among the winding turns and deadend waterways.

The barrier island running along the eastern side of the MLAP contains the City of New Smyrna Beach,

Bethune Beach and the CNS and includes 24 miles (38.6 km) of remote, undeveloped beach along the

Atlantic seaboard. The CNS consists of a coastline that includes one of the world’s foremost sea turtlenesting beaches. Playalinda Beach and Apollo Beach, both within the CNS, are managed by the National

Park Service (NPS) and are important attractions to tourists, birders, commercial and recreational

fishermen. Mosquito Lagoon, MLAP and CNS are the nearest natural coastal areas to three major

urban areas, offering opportunities to enjoy the true tranquility of nature. The Orlando area (population

1.8 million, 2003 census), Daytona Beach (population 497,000, 2003 census) and Brevard County

(population 534,359, 2006 census) each lie within 60 miles (96.6 km) of the MLAP. The importance of

protecting the unspoiled nature of the MLAP in the middle of this bustling environment is increased when

you consider that stress reduction can be a key benefit of wilderness recreation (Davis, 2004). The MLAP

and surrounding waters have been long recognized as important places for fishing and water sports by

residents of central Florida and tourists alike.

The waters of Mosquito Lagoon that are managed as the MLAP lie immediately north of the CNS and

Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge (MINWR). In contrast to the highly developed southern reaches of

the IRL, the protected public areas of the MLAP and CNS offer more than 20 miles of estuarine shoreline

views interrupted only occasionally by man-made structures. The western shoreline near the City of

Edgewater is also characterized by low-density development, with no high rise buildings in view from

the interior of the MLAP. Oak Hill, to the south of the MLAP, is lined with fish camps, a vestige of by-gone

eras. In the waters of the MLAP, visitors find mangroves towering above narrow tidal creek waterways,

bordered by oyster bars reaching out into the shallow waters and brimming with marine life of every

description. Conversely, the eastern barrier island, within the City of New Smyrna Beach, provides a

horizon interrupted by towering residential high-rises along the beach and riverfront. To some this seems

out of place so near to the tranquility of the lagoon.

Location/Boundaries

The Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve (MLAP) is located in east-central Florida, in southern Volusia

County, south of Ponce de Leon Inlet (Map 4 /Location map). It is 50 miles (80.5 km) northeast of

Orlando. The MLAP is part of the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) system, a long, wide, shallow estuarine

lagoon bounded on the west by the Florida mainland, and on the east by a chain of barrier islands. The
14

MLAP sub-basin covers 111.4 mi2 (288.5 km2) and extends from Ponce de Leon Inlet to the north, to an

area just south of the Haulover Canal (White, 1970). Mosquito Lagoon is connected to the northern tip

of the IRL via the manmade Haulover Canal. Adjacent to the MLAP are two incorporated municipalities:

New Smyrna Beach and Edgewater. The MLAP is accessible from the east by State Route A1A in New

Smyrna Beach and from the west off U.S. Highway 1. Vessels traveling in the Atlantic Intracoastal

Waterway (AIWW) will encounter the MLAP just south of the George Musson Bridge (State Road 44

Causeway), starting near channel marker 50 and extending south to the Canaveral National Seashore

(CNS) boundary at North Government Cut.

New Smyrna

Beach

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Canaveral National Seashore

£¤1

§ ̈¦95

Volusia

County

0 1 2 4

Miles

0 2 4 1

Kilometers ±

Gulf of Mexico

Atlantic

Ocean

March 2009

Ponce de Leon Inlet

Oak Hill

Edgewater

New Smyrna Beach

Map 4 / Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Location
15

The MLAP is the northernmost sub-basin of the IRL system and is a bar-built type of estuary occupying 59

mi2 (152.8 km2) (Clapp, 1987). The IRL system stretches 156 miles (251 km) from Ponce de Leon Inlet at

the northern end, to Jupiter Inlet at the southern end and, covers a full 40% of the length of Florida’s Atlantic

Coast. Despite its name, the Indian River is not a river but is a lagoon or a shallow estuarine water body.

Lagoons are estuaries characterized by restricted outlets to the sea, limiting the mixing of oceanic saltwater

with terrestrially derived freshwater from rivers, streams and rainwater runoff. Three distinct bodies of water

comprise the IRL system: the Indian River Lagoon, the Banana River Lagoon and Mosquito Lagoon.

3.1.3 / Resource Description

Surrounding Population Data

and Future Projected Changes

The State of Florida has one of

the longest coastlines (8,436

miles/132,567 km) in the United

States. Over 75% of the state’s

population resides in coastal

communities. Volusia County

is the 11th most populous

county in Florida with a 19.6%

growth in population from

1990-2000 (http://edr.state.

fl.us/county%20profiles/volusia.

pdf). Volusia County’s total

population in 2006 was 505,700,

with a projected increase of 2.2%

during 2007 (Michael, 2007).

New Smyrna Beach population

in 2000 was 20,048. Estimates in

2007 indicate the population has

increased to just under 23,000

with another projected 2.03%

increase by the year 2012. Based

on the 2000 census survey

data, the U.S. Census Bureau

estimated the 2005 population of

the city of Edgewater at 21,132,

a 13.2% increase in population in

five years.

Rapid population growth and

development in coastal regions

of, Florida, and the resultant

impacts on natural resources,

are cause for concern. Loss of

habitat has affected many species

including those of economic

and recreational importance.

Shortages in groundwater

supply, caused by expanding

infrastructure developments,

are stressing natural systems

throughout the region. Stormwater

runoff and associated nutrient

discharges into Mosquito

Lagoon negatively affect local

water quality. These subjects

are discussed throughout this

plan, but are more specifically

addressed in Chapter 5, Issue II.

Brevard

St. Lucie

Osceola

Okeechobee

Indian River

Martin

Volusia

Orange

Glades

Highlands

Seminole

±

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

0 1 5 0 20 30

Miles

Mosquito

Lagoon

Banana

River

Lagoon

March 2009

0 1 5 0 20 30

Kilometers

u

Indian

River

Lagoon

Haulover

Canal

Map 5 / Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Relative to Indian River
16

Topography and Geomorphology

Over the millennia, the Mosquito Lagoon basin, like the rest of peninsular Florida, has alternately been

covered by seawater and exposed as dry land. This has created areas where marine and terrestrial

sediments have been deposited in alternating layers. The barrier island complex, including the Mosquito

Lagoon sub-basin, has been formed over an estimated 240,000 years and is the result of multiple

changes in sea level (Fernald & Patton, 1984).

The east coast of Florida is formed mainly by eroded relict dune lines and broad marine terraces, as

well as the present barrier islands. Behind the barrier islands, is a lagoon system. Following many land

forming processes, flat plains emerged as flatlands when the sea level subsided. The lowest terrace

in the Mosquito Lagoon watershed is called the Silver Bluff Terrace. As the sea level receded, dune

ridges, including the Atlantic Coastal Ridge, formed on this terrace (Schnable & Goodell, 1968). The

Mosquito Lagoon sub-basin of 111 mi2 (288.5 km2

) extends from Ponce de Leon Inlet in the north to

the southernmost extent south of the Haulover Canal (White, 1970). The Mosquito Lagoon drainage

basin is bordered by the Atlantic Coastal Ridge, which lies to the west and averages 25 feet (7.6 m)

above mean sea level and the Atlantic Beach Ridge (barrier islands) on the east (Walters, Roman,

Stiner & Weeks, 2001).

Mosquito Lagoon was formed by a small number of physiographic features (terrain, geologic structure

and age). A pronounced physical feature of the barrier island system is Cape Canaveral. Cape Canaveral

is described by Stauble (1988), and Walters, et al. (2001) as a cuspate sandy foreland similar to Cape

Hatteras in North Carolina, both of which developed where offshore currents meet. The Mosquito

Lagoon barrier islands were created, in part, by this cuspate foreland of Cape Canaveral. To the north,

the flood tide delta of Ponce de Leon Inlet and a now-closed second inlet that was located near Bethune

Beach influenced the physical geography of Mosquito Lagoon (Stauble, 1988). According to Mehta and

Brooks (1973), there have been at least five separate inlets opening directly into the lagoon during the

past 6,000 to 7,000 years, the most recent of which was in the vicinity of Turtle Mound more than 1,500

years ago. The current barrier islands associated with Mosquito Lagoon have only a single dune ridge

averaging 12 feet (3.7 m) in height (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1994). The 24 miles (38.6 km) of CNS

has a stable dune system vegetated with coastal strand species. Several public parking areas and other

CNS facilities are located along northern and southern portions of the narrow barrier island. The barrier

island north of the CNS is developed with a network of roads and commercial, single family and high

rise residential units. Sections of this dune are considered more vulnerable to erosion due to pressures

associated with coastal development.

The Atlantic Coastal Ridge (mainland) is characterized as a sandy ridge, dominated by the DaytonaSatellite-Astatula soil series. This series consists of sandy, siliceous, hyperthermic, uncoated families

of soils with predominantly marine origins. The barrier island is dominated by soils of the Palm BeachPaola-Canaveral series. These soils are carbonitic, hyperthermic families of soils dominated by marine

sands and shell fragments (Schmalzer & Hinkle, 1990).

Hydrology and Watershed

MLAP, located within the Mosquito Lagoon estuary, encompasses 3,500 acres (14.2 km2

) of

submerged aquatic lands and overlying water column. As an estuary, the salinity varies and is

generally lower than adjoining marine waters. The amount of fresh water entering an estuary by any

route is affected by rainfall, infiltration, evapotranspiration, watershed size and human alterations of the

landscape (Fernald & Patton, 1984).

Because of the 9 mile (14.5 m) distance between Ponce de Leon Inlet and the northern extent of the

MLAP, water movement within the MLAP is characterized by minimal currents, minimal water level

changes and low tidal flushing. Water level changes within the MLAP are thus normally forced by: 1)

wind speed and direction, and to a lesser extent by 2) rainfall, 3) local tide effects and 4) barometric

pressure (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1994; Paulic, Xueqing, Auilo, Sawistoski, Bess & Pluchino,

2006). Tidal flushing and currents within the MLAP are restricted by the numerous islands, shoals and

constricting channels that characterize the area. The mean tidal range at Ponce de Leon inlet is 2.3

feet (0.7 m), but average water depths of 4 feet (1.3 meters) throughout the Mosquito Lagoon limit

water exchange and flushing within the MLAP. Woodward and Clyde (1994) determined that under

certain conditions there may be no mass flow of water or flushing in this segment of the IRL. Due to

the limited tidal exchange with the Atlantic Ocean and the generally sluggish circulation patterns,

Mosquito Lagoon is particularly susceptible to influxes of pollutants and the detrimental effects of

those pollutants (Paulic et al., 2006).
17

Water Quality Classifications

The surface waters of the MLAP were designated as Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW) in 1979 (Rule 62-

302.700 (9) F.A.C.). This is a state designation implementing a provision of the federal Clean Water Act,

intended to afford the highest level of protection to existing high quality waters. The OFW designation

is for “special protection due to their natural attributes” (Section 403.061, F.S.). Designated waters are

to be preserved in a non-degraded state and protected in perpetuity for the benefit of the public. No

degradation of water quality, other than that allowed in Rule 62-4.232(2) is to be authorized. Most OFWs

are associated with managed areas in the state or federal park system, such as aquatic preserves,

national seashores or wildlife refuges.

A large section of the Mosquito Lagoon is designated as Class II Shellfish Propagation and Harvesting

Area (Refer to Table 1, Description of the 82 South Volusia shellfish harvesting area). The Florida

Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS) manages and classifies shellfish areas and

establishes regulations implementing the National Shellfish Sanitation Program standards concerning

shellfish harvesting. Most of these standards are based on water quality pertaining to public health

concerns. Daily status of the harvesting areas can be accessed at www.shellfish.floridaaquaculture.com/

seas/seas_statusmap.htm. The MLAP is considered a highly productive system with both wild clam and

oyster harvesting. On most days, people can be observed harvesting shellfish while wading in shallows

of the lagoon.

There are a small number of active aquaculture and/or oyster leases in the southern Mosquito Lagoon

within CNS boundaries and the MLAP. The MLAP currently has three lease sites within its boundaries that

total 34 acres (0.14 km2

) of submerged lands dedicated to aquaculture. Location and suitability for new

lease sites is determined by DACS staff, with a review of proposals by the MLAP manager. The following

map and Table 1 describe the shellfish harvesting areas within the MLAP. 

Description of the 82 South Volusia Shellfish Harvesting Area

Shellfish Area 2-Digit # & Name: 82 South Volusia

Map Number(s): 82

County(s): Volusia

Brief description of extents: All waters of the Mosquito Lagoon north of ICWW marker 29 located

west of Three Cabbage Island and south of the State Road 44 bridge in New Smyrna Beach.

Types of shellfish present: Clam, Oyster

Current classification effective on: August 9 , 2000

Description of Management for Closures and Acres

• 8201 South Volusia approved: Closed during emergency conditions, including hurricanes, tropical storms, sewage discharges, red tides, and illnesses. 7,859 acres.

• 8212 South Volusia conditionally approved Zone 1: Closed when two-day cumulative rainfall

measured at the Edgewater Wastewater Treatment Plant exceeds 1.15 inches. 1,794 acres.

• 8222 South Volusia conditionally approved Zone 2: Closed when two-day cumulative rainfall

measured at the Edgewater Wastewater Treatment Plant exceeds 4.03 inches. 6,186 acres.

• 8206 South Volusia conditionally restricted: Closed when two-day cumulative rainfall measured

at the Edgewater Wastewater Treatment Plant exceeds 5.36 inches. 1,008 acres.

• South Volusia prohibited: 1,342 acres.

Table obtained from DACS website: www.floridaaquaculture.com/seas_sums/82_southvol.htm

Table 1 / Description of the 82 South Volusia Shellfish Harvesting Area

Surface Water and Drainage Patterns

Mosquito Lagoon receives freshwater inputs from precipitation, surface runoff, groundwater seepage,

a few tributaries, man-made canals and wastewater treatment plants. Surface runoff is the predominant

fresh water drainage input into Mosquito Lagoon. Few natural streams contribute fresh water to the

system (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1994). Sheetflow and groundwater seepage are also important

hydrological contributors to the IRL system. The average groundwater seepage rate for Mosquito Lagoon
18

over a 24-year study was found to be high at 1251 milliliters per meter squared per hour (Belanger, Heck

& Andrews, 1997). This rate indicates there is significant groundwater input into the lagoon. Several

manmade drainage ditches extend the natural watershed to the west and there are a few natural creeks

that discharge into the lagoon. There are two large culverted canals in the City of Edgewater that drain

into Mosquito Lagoon: the Gabordy Canal (10th Street) and the 18th Street Canal.

Compared to the other more densely-developed areas of the IRL system, Mosquito Lagoon’s drainage

basin is small. Total watershed for the Mosquito Lagoon is 79,422 acres (327 km2

). The surface drainage

basin consists of 42,000 acres (168 km2) and is located entirely within Brevard and Volusia counties

extending from Ponce de Leon Inlet to the southernmost extent of the Mosquito Lagoon (Provancha et

al., 1992; Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1994). The drainage basin is the total land area draining into the

body of water, whereas the watershed includes both the land area and the water body.

Two point-source wastewater discharges operate under permits from the Florida Department of

Environmental Protection (DEP) in the Mosquito Lagoon Basin, with a total maximum design flow of

6.5 million gallons per day (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1994). The City of Edgewater disposes of

treated wastewater by discharge to Mosquito Lagoon and through a reclaimed water treatment system

for public access irrigation. The Utilities Commission of New Smyrna Beach disposes of 65% of its

treated wastewater via reuse irrigation, with the remaining effluent disposed of through outfall piping into

the IRL (Utilities Commission of New Smyrna Beach, 2007). As water reuse systems expand to greater

capacities, the volume of excess flows to the IRL might be expected to decrease.

While city sewer infrastructure is available for households in most of the municipalities around Mosquito

Lagoon, approximately one third of the area surrounding the MLAP is dependent upon septic systems, also

known as on-site sewage treatment and disposal systems. The widespread use of septic systems in the

Mosquito Lagoon region can affect water quality, in particular when older systems are not properly maintained

or fall into disrepair and leach nutrients and bacteria into the surrounding water bodies. The leaching of septic

systems can introduce phosphorus, nitrogen and fecal coliform bacteria into the lagoon system.

Groundwater and Wells

There are three basic units of the hydrogeologic framework underlying Florida and the IRL system: the

Floridan Aquifer, the intermediate aquifer and the surficial aquifer. The Floridan Aquifer is a system of

limestone and dolomite beds and is the main source of potable water in Volusia County (Phelps, 1990).

Shellfish harvesting is a well-known historical use of the Mosquito Lagoon. Today recreational and 

commercial users can be seen harvesting the mollusks as evidenced by this oyster harvester.
19

The top of the Floridan Aquifer, under northern Mosquito Lagoon, is found at -23 meters in reference to

mean sea level (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1994).

The two largest municipalities adjacent to the MLAP boundaries are New Smyrna Beach and

Edgewater. The raw water supply for the Utilities Commission of New Smyrna Beach is derived from 19

deep wells obtaining groundwater from the Floridan Aquifer (Phelps, 1990). Groundwater for the city of

Edgewater is also drawn from the Floridan Aquifer from two well fields comprised of ten wells (City of

Edgewater, 2007).

Surface Water Quality and Monitoring 

Water quality monitoring is necessary to determine that water bodies meet public health standards, will

support fisheries and maintain standards to meet their specific designations such as OFW and Shellfish

Propagation and Harvesting (Class II Waters). Besides providing a general summary of the condition

New Smyrna

Beach

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Conditionally Approved Shellfish Harvesting Zone

Conditionally Restricted Shellfish Harvesting Zone

Prohibited Shellfish Harvesting Zone

0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Miles

April 2008 ±

0 0 0.25 .5 1 1.5

Kilometers

Map 6 / Aquaculture Zones within Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve
20

of water quality, monitoring can identify seasonal, as well as shorter and longer-term trends, specific

pollution sources or events, freshwater inflows and pollutant loadings, and is essential for State Total

Maximum Daily Load determinations.

Mosquito Lagoon Basin

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Primary Canals

Secondary Canals

Ponce de Leon Inlet

0 0.5 1 2 3

Miles

March 2009 ±

0 1 0.5 2 3

Kilometers

Gabordy Canal

18th Street Canal

New Smyrna Beach

Edgewater

Volusia County

Map 7 / Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Drainage Basin and Water Conveyence Canals
21

Parameters, such as water temperature, are measured to gauge the effect of the solubility of oxygen,

the rate of photosynthesis, and the metabolic rates of numerous aquatic organisms. Dissolved oxygen

is essential for the survival of fish and other aquatic organisms and indicates the amount of oxygen

dissolved in a body of water. Turbidity provides a measure of water clarity, as it is affected by the amount

of suspended solids in the water column. Suspended solids range from clay, silt, topsoils and plankton

to industrial and agricultural wastes and sewage. Turbidity increases when suspended solids are carried

into water bodies by wind, rain and runoff. These sediments can severely limit the amount of sunlight

penetrating the water column, thus affecting seagrasses. Salinity values specify the total concentration

of salts in the water. Salinity values fluctuate according to volumes of seawater entering through inlets

and freshwater inputs from tributaries, rain, stormwater and groundwater seepage. Long-term analysis

of each water quality parameter helps to establish a clear picture of the status and trends in water quality

within the MLAP.

!(

!(

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

Volusia

County

#* Domestic Wastewater Facilities

#* Industrial Wastewater Facilities

!( Wastewater Outfall

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

0 0.5 1 2

Miles

Edgewater

April 2008 ±

0 1 0.5 2

Kilometers

Map 8 / Location of Wastewater Outfalls in the Mosquito Lagoon
22

See Section 4.2.2 for more information on the Volusia County Environmental Health Laboratory that

collects water quality data in the MLAP, and Section 4.2.1 for information on the historical water quality

data set.

Historic Hydrologic Alterations

Since humans first inhabited Florida, manmade alterations have occurred throughout the region to

provide crops, dispose of waste, aid navigation, drain floodwaters, raise land elevations with fill for

building construction, mosquito control, provide access to the barrier islands and stabilize tidal inlets.

These projects have substantially changed the topography and physical features of the lagoon, including

infiltration, runoff, shallow-aquifer storage and land drainage capacities (Walters et al., 2001). Long-term

efforts throughout the Mosquito Lagoon basin by Volusia County and St. Johns River Water Management

District to reconnect mosquito impoundments with culverts or removing dikes to allow tidal exchange

have almost been completed. Progress on restoring natural functions to dragline-ditched wetlands is

underway.

Major human-induced changes that have historically altered the hydrology of the Mosquito Lagoon

include:

1. the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW);

2. Haulover Canal constructed in the 1850s, which connected Mosquito Lagoon to the northern IRL;

3. mosquito impoundments, which isolated large tracts of wetlands from the lagoon;

4. residential navigation canals and drainage canals;

5. causeways; and

6. lands created by dredge and fill activities.

Hydrologic Restoration Projects

The New Smyrna Beach City Marina has a stormwater retrofit project underway to install a baffle box

that will capture runoff from three existing outfalls servicing a 20 acre (0.08 km2

) basin discharging to

the Mosquito Lagoon (Paulic et al., 2006). The City of Edgewater has identified the need for retrofit

improvement projects for the Gabordy Canal and 18th Street Canal to reduce impacts caused by

these canals as they discharge into the Mosquito Lagoon and the Intracoastal Waterway (Professional

Engineering Consultants, 2007).

It is anticipated that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) will soon dredge muck material from the

AIWW as part of its channel maintenance program. During a 1989 survey, very little muck sediment was

found in the Mosquito Lagoon except between New Smyrna Beach and Oak Hill (Trefry et al., 1990). The

AIWW, in the vicinity of the MLAP has been maintenance dredged in several different events during the

last several years. The section of the AIWW including the Haulover Canal and the AIWW for about five

miles north was completed in 2001. This dredged material was placed in an upland Dredged Material

Management Area located in Scottsmoor/Mims area. The section of the AIWW from the State Road 44

Bridge in New Smyrna to about 17 miles south in southern Edgewater was maintenance-dredged in

2005. The dredged material was placed in an upland Dredged Material Management Area located on the

Gabordy Canal in Edgewater (D. Roach, personal communication, June 2, 2008).

Mosquito Lagoon contains approximately 20,000 acres (80.9 km2

) of salt marsh wetlands including

over 6,750 acres (27.3 km2) that were impounded to control salt-marsh mosquito populations (Steward,

Brockmeyer, Gostel, Sime, & Van Arman, 2003). The restoration of approximately 1,300 acres (5.3 km2)

of dragline-impacted wetlands throughout Mosquito Lagoon is an ongoing project in partnership with the

St. Johns River Water Management District, Volusia County Mosquito Control, CNS, MINWR and the East

Central Florida Aquatic Preserves. The C-8 impoundment is the first permitted project located within the

MLAP to be restored to historic marsh elevations. The University of Central Florida is currently collecting

data on the re-vegetation of the restored marshes by utilizing plant species such as glasswort, saltwort

and mangroves.

Climate

Climate plays a critical role in natural community structure and composition within the Mosquito

Lagoon. The east central Florida area falls in the middle of the biogeographic transitional zone from
23

warm temperate to sub-tropical (Taylor, 1993). The distribution of many tropical species is limited by

temperature. Due to its central location in the state, cyclic climatic fluctuations can affect the floral

and faunal compositions of Mosquito Lagoon through changes in salinity regimes, temperatures or

catastrophic events such as hurricanes. Rainfall and temperature extremes in this shallow system directly

modify salinity levels. For example, global weather events such as La Niña and El Niño can also rapidly

change the salinity regime of this semi-closed estuarine system. In summer and fall months, tropical

depressions, tropical storms and hurricanes can impact the MLAP. During the past decade several strong

hurricanes have struck the east coast of Florida, including, in 1999, hurricanes Dennis, Floyd and Irene,

and in 2004, hurricanes Francis and Jeanne. These storms can cause wave related erosion, flooding and

increased runoff. Decreases in salinity level from fresh water runoff can cause seagrass declines. High

winds and waves associated with storms increase water turbidity by re-suspending bottom sediments

impacting living resources.

The year-round climate of east central Florida and Mosquito Lagoon is characterized as moderate.

Average summertime temperatures may range between 91 degrees Fahrenheit (32 degrees Celsius)

and 72 degrees Fahrenheit (22 degrees Celsius). Average winter temperatures may range between

70 degrees Fahrenheit (21 degrees Celsius) and 48 degrees Fahrenheit (8 degrees Celsius) (Weather

Underground, 2007).

The 10-year freeze line in Florida is located south of the MLAP (Walters et al., 2001). Since the time

weather has been recorded in Florida (1890), at least one extreme cold event has been recorded

per decade with the exception of the 1920s (National Weather Service, 2007). In east central Florida,

extended cold events affecting the flora and fauna have been reported approximately once a decade

with statewide freezes occurring in 1835, 1895, 1958, 1966, 1977, 1984 and 1989, resulting in impacts to

the biota and economy of Florida (National Weather Service, 2007).

Low temperature events can have drastic impacts on aquatic organisms (Taylor, 1993). Abrupt

temperature changes producing frost or freezing temperatures often result in the cold stress and death

of manatees (Trichechus manatus), fish species, sting rays, sea turtles, mangroves and seagrasses

The Mosquito Lagoon has approximately 1,300 acres (5.3 km2) of altered wetland habitats due to 

rotary ditch practices for mosquito control purposes.
24

(Gilmore, Bullock & Berry, 1978, Provancha, Scmalzer & Hall, 1986). In particular, three freeze events

during the winters of 1984 -1985 and 1989 -1990 caused extensive damage to crops, fish and animal

populations in east central Florida and killed most mangroves in the MLAP basin.

Minimum and maximum water temperatures ranging from 39 degrees Fahrenheit (4 degrees Celsius) to 93

degrees Fahrenheit (34 degrees Celsius) have been recorded in Mosquito Lagoon. Alternatively, extremely

high water temperatures suppress dissolved oxygen levels and accelerate the rate at which sediments

become anoxic (lack oxygen) or anaerobic (related to chemical processes that occur with little oxygen)

(Windsor, 1988). This, in turn, kills many organisms, especially sessile invertebrates (animals that have

limited mobility such as sea squirts) and submerged aquatic vegetation (L. Walters, unpublished data).

Temperature also affects salinity levels. In the southern sections of Mosquito Lagoon, recent summer

salinities have reached 55 parts per thousand for extended periods of time (Walters et al., 2001).

Due to the low elevations of the marsh systems (100 year flood plain) of the MLAP, predicted trends,

including global warming or increasing ocean water levels (R.E. Brockmeyer, personal communication,

2007), would influence the habitat structure and species distribution in the lagoon. New inlet formations

could also lead to changes within the system. These potential events could flood low marsh habitat and

shellfish beds causing more open water habitat, drastically changing species composition. The potential

effects on surrounding developed areas in low lying barrier islands could substantially alter the manmade landscape.

Natural Communities

The natural community classification system used in the current MLAP management plan was developed

by the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) and the Florida Department of Natural Resources (DNR,

now DEP). The natural community types are defined by a variety of factors, such as vegetation structure

and composition, hydrology, fire regime, topography and soil type. The community types are named

for the most characteristic biological or physical feature (FNAI & DNR, 1990). FNAI also assigns global

(G) and state (S) ranks to each natural community and species that FNAI tracks. These ranks reflect

the status of the natural community or species worldwide (G) and in Florida (S). The most imperiled

communities are assigned lowest numerical ranks (e.g., G1 represents the most imperiled natural

communities worldwide, S1 represents the most imperiled natural communities in Florida). Appendix B.6

provides an explanation of the FNAI community types and the ranking system.

FNAI Natural Community Type # Acres % of Area Federal

Rank

State

Rank Comments

Consolidated Substrate Unknown Unknown G3 S5

Unconsolidated Substrate Unknown Unknown G3 S3

Mollusk Reef Unknown Unknown G2 S1

Algal Bed Unknown Unknown G2 S2

Seagrass Bed 51 1.1 G4 S4

Tidal Marsh 1240 26.2 G3 S3 Calculation combined with

tidal swamp

Tidal Swamp 1240 26.2 G3 S3 Calculation combined with

tidal marsh

Composite Substrate Unknown Unknown G3 S3

Table 2 / Summary of Natural Communities on Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Consolidated Substrate - (synonyms: hard bottom, coquina bottom). Consolidated substrates are

mineral-based natural communities generally characterized as expansive, relatively open areas of

subtidal (areas submerged most of the time), intertidal (transitional zone bounded by high tide line and

low tide line), and supratidal zones (above the mean high tide and mean wrack line) which lack dense

populations of sessile plant and animal species. Consolidated substrates are solidified rock or shell

conglomerates and include coquina, limerock or relic mollusk reef materials. These communities may

be sparsely inhabited by sessile, planktonic, epifaunal and pelagic plants and animals but house few

infaunal organisms (i.e., animals living within the substrate). Consolidated substrates are important in

that they form the foundation for the development of other marine and estuarine natural communities

when environmental conditions become appropriate.

Unconsolidated Substrate - (synonyms: sand bottom, sand bar, mud flat, tidal flat). Unconsolidated

substrates are important in that they form the foundation for the development of other marine and
25

estuarine natural communities when environmental conditions become appropriate. Mosquito Lagoon’s

unconsolidated substrate supports salt marshes, seagrasses and mollusk beds and other communities

that are rich in estuarine invertebrates. While these areas can be relatively barren, the densities of

infaunal organisms in subtidal zones can reach the tens of thousands per square meter, making these

areas important feeding grounds for many bottom-feeding fish.

The hard clam (Mercenaria mercenaria) can be found throughout Mosquito Lagoon and has

historically had the highest economic value of any fishery species in the IRL. The statewide

commercial catch of wild-harvested hard clams, between 1987 – 2001, was 13.5 million pounds with a

dollar value of over $98.9 million. This ranks the hard clam first in commercial value within the IRL, and

ninth in pounds of commercially important fishery species harvested (Smithsonian Marine Station Fort

Pierce, 2007b). The IRL had large larval clam sets during the early 1980s. Within the next two years,

commercial fishing pressures on these wild clam populations may have reduced the species’ ability

to recover. Naturally occurring and disruptive conditions such as reductions in food supply, disease,

Volusia

County

New Smyrna

Beach

Edgewater

Bottle

Island

Cedar

Island

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Habitats

Urban

Agricultural

Shrub and Brushland

Mixed Upland Nonforested

Upland Hardwood Forest

Mixed Coniferous / Hardwood

Streams and Waterways

Bays, Estuaries, and Salt Lakes

Mangrove Swamps

Mixed Wetland Hardwoods

Cabbage Palm Hammock

Freshwater Marshes

Saltwater Marshes

Mixed Scrub-Shrub Wetland

Beaches

Spoil Areas

April 2008 ±

0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Miles

0 0 0.25 .5 1 1.5

Kilometers

Map 9 / Natural Communities within Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve
26

lowered salinities caused by excessive stormwater from major storms and hurricanes or elevated

salinities caused by drought conditions may have taken their toll as well.

Disturbances directly affecting unconsolidated substrates within MLAP may result from unmanaged

anchorages, sunken/abandoned boats and propeller scarring from boats in shallow waters. In addition,

runoff from roads, stormwater discharges and leachate from septic tanks may all contribute to sediment

contamination. Significant amounts of these compounds in the sediments may kill infaunal organisms,

eliminating a major food source for a variety of fish, birds and other organisms.

Mollusk Reef – (synonyms: oyster bar,

oyster reef, mussel reef). Mollusk reefs are

faunal-based natural communities typically

characterized as expansive concentrations

of sessile mollusks/bivalves occurring in

intertidal and subtidal zones. In Florida, the

most developed mollusk reefs are generally

restricted to estuarine areas dominated by

the American or Eastern oyster (Crassostrea

virginica), typically found growing in clusters

attached to hard bottom (consolidated

substrates), while hard clams are generally

found burrowed into soft bottoms

(unconsolidated sediments).

Mollusk reefs are a dominant community in

the Mosquito Lagoon. The MLAP has large

expanses of mollusk reefs along its shorelines

and surrounding islands. The American oyster

is a recreationally and commercially important

species that occupies bottom substrates in

brackish and saltwater environments.

Mollusk reefs occupy a unique position

among estuarine invertebrates and have

been an important human food source since

prehistoric times as evidenced by numerous

shell middens found throughout the Mosquito

Lagoon. Mollusk reefs present a dynamic

community within estuarine ecology, providing

refuges, nursery grounds and feeding areas

for a myriad of other estuarine organisms.

Mollusks are filter feeders, filtering up to 100

gallons of water a day. During this process

they can accumulate toxins from polluted

waters and harmful algal blooms. Sources

of these pollutants can be from considerably

distant areas, but are often more damaging

when nearby (runoff, stormwater inputs and sewage). Substrate degradation and erosion can also

negatively impact mollusk reef formations and occurs when silts, sludge and dredge spoils cover and

bury the mollusk reefs. Declining mollusk reef populations can be expected in coastal waters that are

being dredged or are receiving chemicals mixed with rainwater flowing off the land or from drainage of

untreated residential or industrial sewage systems. 

Natural predators impacting mollusk reefs within the MLAP include stone crabs (Minippe mercenaria),

blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus), oyster drills (Thais haemastoma), sheepshead (Archosargus

probatocephalus), black drum (Pogonias cromis) and other fishes and invertebrates.

Algal Bed - (synonyms: algal mats, periphyton mats). Estuarine algal beds are floral-based natural

communities characterized as large populations of macro- or micro-algae. The dominant algal species

include red, green, blue-green and brown algae. This community may occur in subtidal, intertidal and

supratidal zones on soft and hard bottom substrates. Vascular plants (e.g., seagrasses) may occur

in algal beds associated with soft bottoms. Sessile animals (describes marine animals with limited

mobility) associated with algal beds will vary based on bottom type. Harmful algal blooms (Pyrodinium 

The preserve provides ample opportunities for the public 

to enjoy nature.
27

bahamense and Karenia brevis) and cyanobacteria (blue green algae) have been reported in the

Mosquito Lagoon. More information on recent algal bloom occurrences or monitoring efforts can be

found in Chapter 4.1.2, Fecal Coliform and Dinoflagellate Monitoring.

Seagrass Bed – (synonyms: submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), seagrasses). The FNAI definition of

seagrass bed (Appendices B6) describes expansive stands of submerged vascular flowering plants occurring

primarily in subtidal zones. Seagrasses are not true grasses. Unlike algae and seaweed, seagrasses are

angiosperms (flowering plants). Turtle grass

(Thallassia testudinum) and the paddle-shaped

grasses (Halophila species) are not present in

the MLAP; the MLAP is beyond the northern limit

of these species’ range. SAV species found in

the Mosquito Lagoon include manatee grass

(Syringodium filiforme), shoal grass (Halodule 

wrightii) and widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima).

Together, seagrasses and their epiphytes serve as

important food sources as well as nursery areas

to a myriad of species. Often, numerous species

of epiphytic algae, egg casings and invertebrates

attach to the seagrass leaf blades.

Seagrass beds occur most frequently on

unconsolidated substrates of marl, muck or

sand, although they may also occur on other

unconsolidated substrates or consolidated

substrates. The blanket of leaf blades and

rhizomes (root system) holds sediment

particles in place and reduces the waveenergy on the bottom to promote settling of

suspended particulates. The settled particles

become stabilized by the dense rhizomes of

the seagrasses. Thus, marine and estuarine

seagrass beds are generally areas of soil

accumulation. Other factors affecting the

establishment and growth of seagrass beds

include water temperature, salinity, waveenergy, tidal activity and available light.

Seagrasses occur most frequently in areas

with moderate currents, as opposed to little or

no currents. Seagrasses require some active

current or flushing, so the terminal ends of

narrow tidal creeks are generally devoid of

SAV cover. Although marine and estuarine

seagrass beds are most commonly submerged

in shallow subtidal zones, they may be exposed

for brief periods of time during low tides.

One of the more important factors influencing

the seagrass community is the amount of solar

radiation/sunlight reaching the plants. In general,

water must not be turbid or muddy as this

restricts photosynthesis, adequate light must

reach the plant. In Mosquito Lagoon, the elevated

levels of suspended solids may be impacting

SAV by restricting the amount of light that is reaching the seagrass. When light penetration and circulation

are good, seagrasses can regenerate and recover from periodic hurricane or freeze events.

Seagrass beds are extremely vulnerable to human impacts. Many seagrass beds have been destroyed

by dredging or filling activities while others have been impacted by pollutant discharges from wastewater

treatment plants, industrial discharges or other sources. Seagrasses may also be severely impacted by oil

spills. Low concentrations of oils and greases are known to significantly affect the photosynthetic capability

of seagrasses.

Shallow flats of sand, shell-hash, or mud provide important mating habitat for horseshoe crabs (photo: Marine 

Discovery Center).

Immature yellow-crowned night heron (Nyctanassa violacea)

foraging in healthy mollusk reef habitat.
28

Seagrasses are susceptible to scarring from boat propellers, anchors and trawls. While seagrasses will

recolonize areas when water quality is good and disturbances are removed, revegetation of scarred

areas may require many years. Construction of traditional wooden boat docks through seagrass areas

may result in a “halo” effect (area devoid of seagrass) around the dock as the result of shading by

the dock or boats moored at the dock. Newer technologies, such as light penetrating, grated material

have shown promise in reducing shading

effects. Boat traffic to and from the dock

may contribute to the halo effect as well.

Seagrass beds and their associated fish and

invertebrate communities, which typically

grow along the shoreline in a linear fashion,

can be fragmented by dock construction

and formation of halos. This fragmentation

inhibits vegetative (spread through shoot

growth) recolonization by seagrasses.

According to the St. Johns River Water

Management District (SJRWMD) Surface

Water Improvement and Management

Plan, 2002 Update, findings from the 1999

resource assessment revealed that the

Mosquito Lagoon segment, consisting

primarily of the MLAP, represented the

greatest loss of coverage since 1943, a 94%

loss (Steward et al., 2003). Approximately 51

acres (0,21 km2

) of seagrass remains within

the MLAP. Despite dramatic losses of historic

seagrass coverage in the MLAP, Mosquito

Lagoon overall has one of the more

extensive seagrass coverages in the IRL

system. Please refer to the monitoring results

section in 4.1.2, Current Status of Ecosystem

Science for more detailed information. 

Tidal Marsh - (synonyms: saltmarsh, coastal

wetlands, tidal wetlands). Tidal marshes are

floral based natural communities generally

characterized as expanses of grasses, rushes

and sedges along coastlines of low wave

energy and river mouths. They are most

abundant and most extensive in Florida

north of the normal freeze line, being largely

displaced by and interspersed among tidal

swamps below this line. Attributable to

Mosquito Lagoon’s proximity to this freeze

line, MLAP supports approximately 1,240

acres (5.02 km2) of tidal marsh and tidal

swamp combined. Estimated acreage for the

MLAP was combined due to the interspersed

community composition making verification

by ground-truthing surveys necessary. Black

needlerush (Juncus roemerianus) and smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) are the dominant species

which usually form dense, uniform stands. The stands may be arranged in well-defined zones according

to tide levels or may grade subtly over a broad area, with elevation as the primary determining factor.

Tidal fluctuation is the most important ecological factor in tidal marsh communities, cycling nutrients and

allowing marine and estuarine fauna access to the marsh. This exchange helps to make tidal marshes

one of the most biologically productive natural communities in the world. A myriad of invertebrates and

fishes, including most of the commercially and recreationally important species such as shrimp (Panaeus 

spp.), blue crab, oysters, sharks (Carcharhinus spp.), grouper (Epinephelus spp.), snapper (Lutjanus 

spp.) and mullet (Mugil spp.), also use tidal marshes throughout part or all of their life-cycles. 

Oysters are subject to many population pressures, one of which 

is attacks from natural predators like these snails.

Ruddy turnstone feeding on mudflats that support rich 

invertebrate diversity.
29

Tidal Swamps - (synonyms: mangrove forest, mangrove swamp). Tidal swamps are floral-based

natural communities characterized as dense, low forests occurring along relatively flat, intertidal and

supratidal shorelines of low wave energy along north and central Florida. The dominant plants of

tidal swamp natural communities in Florida are red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle), black mangrove

(Avicennia germinans), white mangrove

(Laguncularia racemosa) and buttonwood

(Conocarpus erectus). Generally in

south Florida these four species can be

distributed by elevation or zones defined

by varying water levels, with red mangrove

occupying the lowest zone, black

mangrove the intermediate zone and white

mangrove and buttonwood the highest

zone. In the MLAP, zonation of mangrove

species is rare in part because sections

of Mosquito Lagoon are microtidal.

Buttonwoods are the species generally

found at slightly higher elevations.

The prop roots of red mangroves, the

extensive pneumatophores (aerial roots)

of black mangroves and the dense root

mats of the white mangrove serve to

entrap sediments and recycle nutrients

from upland areas and from tidal import.

This process serves in “island formation”

and is a part of the successional process

involved in land formation in north and

central Florida. These root structures

also provide substrate for the attachment

of and shelter for numerous marine and

estuarine organisms. 

Temperature, salinity, tidal fluctuation,

substrate and wave energy are five

physical factors influencing the size and extent of tidal swamps. Red mangroves require an annual

average water temperature above 66 degrees Fahrenheit (19 degrees Celsius) to survive. They do not

tolerate temperatures below freezing or temperatures which fluctuate widely over the course of a year.

Saltwater is a key element in reducing competition from other plants and allowing mangroves to flourish.

In addition, mangroves have adapted to the saltwater environment by either excluding or excreting salt

from plant tissues. Mangroves can survive in fresh water but are usually not found in large stands under

such conditions in nature because they succumb to competition. Tidal swamps are closely associated

with and often grade into seagrass beds, unconsolidated substrates, tidal marshes, shell mounds,

coastal berms, maritime hammocks and other coastal communities. Seagrass beds and unconsolidated

substrates are usually found in the subtidal regions surrounding tidal swamps.

The tidal swamp communities are very productive systems because they function as nursery grounds

for most of the state’s commercially and recreationally important fishes and shellfish. These natural

communities are also the breeding grounds for substantial populations of wading birds, shorebirds and

other animals. The continuous shedding of mangrove leaves and other plant components produce as

much as 80% of the total organic material available in the aquatic food web. Additionally, tidal swamps

help protect other inland communities by absorbing the brunt of tropical storms and hurricanes. Tidal

swamps within the MLAP continue to be areas of environmental concern because many acres were

destroyed through diking and flooding, ditching for mosquito control, and dredging and filling activities.

Composite Substrate - Composite substrates consist of a combination of natural communities such

as “beds” of algae and seagrasses or areas with small patches of consolidated and unconsolidated

bottom with or without sessile floral and faunal populations. Composite substrates may be dominated

by any combination of marine and estuarine sessile flora or fauna or mineral substrate type. Typical

combinations of plants, animals and substrates representing composite substrates include soft and

stony corals with sponges on a hard bottom such as coquina outcrops; psammophytic (grows in

sand or sandy soil) algae and seagrasses scattered over a sand bottom; and patch reefs throughout a

Early fall is marked by red mangrove trees loaded with 

propagules (seeds) which will travel along the estuary to 

establish new mangroves.
30

coralline algal bottom. Any of the remaining natural communities can grade into composite substrate

communities. Although composite substrates can occur in any marine or estuarine area in Florida,

some combinations are common while others are extremely rare. Combinations of consolidated and

unconsolidated substrate components offer the greatest opportunity for diversity, and should be

high priority areas for protection. Management requirements are negligible, providing the composite

community is adequately protected. Protection efforts will vary slightly based on components of the

composite substrate community. Generally,

degradation of physical and chemical water

quality parameters should be prevented,

as well as mechanical disturbance from

anchoring, dredging, trawling and similar

activities. Several common activities within the

Mosquito Lagoon that can alter the natural

diversity of estuaries include aquaculture,

vessel beaching and blowouts from boat jets

or propellers.

Native Species

East central Florida consists of diverse

ecosystems, including beach dunes,

pine flatwoods, estuaries, freshwater and

tidal marshes and tidal swamps. These

ecosystems provide clean air, drinking water,

stable soils, flood protection, recreation

and beauty. Within each ecosystem, native

plants are critical sources of food, shelter and

breeding areas for wildlife. Many species have

evolved depending on specific native plants

or habitats. Surrounding natural upland and

marsh communities buffer and contribute

to the overall health and biodiversity of the

estuarine systems.

The many small animals and insects of the

saltmarsh support the larger migrant and

resident species. Among the most important

species in the food chain is the fiddler crab.

The most common fiddler crab species

occurring in MLAP are the Atlantic sand fiddler

crab (Uca pugilator) and mud fiddler crabs

(Uca pugnax). The presence of hundreds of

fiddler crabs in colonies is an indication of a

healthy ecosystem. Fiddler crabs are keystone

species. They not only prosper in a marsh

system that is healthy, they provide many

services. Fiddler crabs depend on intertidal

zones of salt marshes, marsh edges and tidal

creeks. Their burrows aerate the soil freeing

nutrients, they break up algae carpeting the

surface and bury organic matter that fertilizes

the soils. They are important prey items for

fish, birds, raccoons (Procyon lotor) and other

animals (Whitney et al., 2004). They can also

serve as an indicator species of the detrimental effects of insecticides. Fiddler crabs are commercially

and recreationally exploited as bait for recreational fishing. Many areas of the IRL have lost most of their

fiddler crab populations due to a variety of causes. The fiddler crab population was negatively impacted

when wetlands were impounded and drag-line ditched within Mosquito Lagoon including the MLAP

boundaries. Ongoing wetland restoration efforts involving multi-agency partners may improve shoreline

and high marsh habitat for fiddler crabs. Monitoring prior to the restoration and post restoration will

provide valuable insight into the values added to the entire food web through restoration efforts,

Bobcats (Felis rufus) may occasionally be seen prowling the 

uplands around the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve.

Fiddler crabs serve an important role in the ecology of salt marshes and serve as an environmental indicator as they are sensitive 

to environmental contaminants, especially insecticides.
31

A commercially important invertebrate found

in the IRL is the blue crab. Blue crabs, like

other swimming crabs, have adapted a

last pair of walking legs into paddle-like

swimmerets. Blue crabs also have three

pairs of walking legs, and a powerful set of

chelae/claws. Blue crabs are considered

estuary dependent because they reproduce

there. Blue crabs migrate within the estuary

and use different regions depending on

season and salinity level.

Snail species are one of the predominant

predator species in the mollusk reefs and

emergent plant communities. Several

types of snails, such as whelks (Busycon 

spp.), moon snails (Polinices duplicates)

and oyster drills, prey on all sizes of

commercially important bivalves/mollusks.

One type of snail that commonly preys on

mollusks in the estuary is the oyster drill.

These drills are small carnivorous snails that

inhabit the shallow waters of the Mosquito

Lagoon. Oyster drills are very effective

hunters which feed mainly on bivalves

but can also penetrate the defenses of

barnacles, periwinkles and when times get

tough even other snails.

The neotropical killifish, formerly known

as the mangrove rivulus (Kryptolebias

marmoratus) reaches a length of

approximately two inches (4.9 cm) and is

widely distributed but locally rare within

coastal south and central Florida. In eastern

Florida, this species prefers unimpounded,

high marsh habitats inside the burrows of

the great land crab (Cardisoma guanhumi).

Within the IRL, the neotropic killifish prefers

the high marsh above the intertidal zone,

which floods seasonally, after very high

tides or by heavy rainfall. Habitat alteration

has affected the species throughout the

state, especially on the east coast where the

destruction of mangroves and impounding

of high marsh for mosquito control has

altered and fragmented suitable habitat. 

Important game fish species include

red drum, spotted sea trout (Cynoscion 

nebulosus), snook (Centropomus spp.) and

ladyfish (Elops saurus). Mosquito Lagoon

is touted as a world famous red drum

fishing habitat by recreational fishermen.

Red drum inhabit estuarine, nearshore and

offshore waters, depending on age and

size. Typically, juveniles utilize estuaries as

nursery grounds for several years until they

attain 30 inches (73.5 cm) in length. They

then migrate to nearshore and offshore

coastal waters to join spawning adults.

Mosquito Lagoon and other parts of the IRL

Redfish are one of the most sought after catches in the preserve 

for both commercial and recreational anglers (photo: Doug 

Adams, FWC-FMRI).

An Atlantic bottlenose dolphin frolicking in a boat wake 

(photo: NASA).

The preserve offers prime feeding habitat for sea turtles 

(photo: NASA).
32

are exceptions to the migratory rule, potentially due to higher salinity levels or behavioral adaptations.

Red drum eggs require a sufficiently dense medium (higher salinity) for buoyancy. Dr. Grant Gilmore

and other scientists believe that there is a resident red drum population in the Mosquito Lagoon (Levine,

2008). In the MLAP, on some night-time excursions, you can hear the drumming of spawning redfish from

above the surface of the water.

Recent studies indicate that there is a resident population of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncates)

utilizing the Mosquito Lagoon region. “Analyses of dolphin ranges amongst or between three study regions

were based on...photo-identification data collected between 1996 – 2003... There was virtually no overlap in

range between the dolphins sighted in these three areas. It thus appears that these dolphins may represent

separate subpopulation units within the IRL system” (Mazzoil, McCulloch & Defran, 2005).

Listed Species

Listed species are those which are listed by the FNAI, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and the

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS) as endangered, threatened or of

special concern. Listed species includes any species that are determined to be in danger of extinction

or likely to become extinct within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its

range based upon the best scientific and commercial data available. States and/or federal agencies

provide special protection and conservation measures to promote recovery of a listed species. A major

distinction between the federal and Florida Endangered Species Acts (ESA) is that federal authorizations

and intent (ESA, Section 2(a)), include provisions providing a means to conserve the ecosystems upon

which listed species depend (conserve is defined under the ESA, as all measures and procedures

needed to delist a species).

Twenty-eight plant and 65 vertebrate species listed as endangered, threatened, species of special

concern, or FNAI–designated, potentially inhabit the MLAP or surrounding areas (See Appendix B-3,

species list). These species may spend some portion of their time in the uplands, beaches, islands,

waters or associated wetlands of Mosquito Lagoon (Epstein & Blihovde, 2002). Specific management

strategies for listed species preservation are addressed in Chapters 3 and 4 of this plan. All MLAP

management actions are in compliance with the federal recovery plans for these species and, when

necessary, in accordance with all permitting and agency consultation requirements.

Florida has more threatened and endangered native species than any state except California and

Hawaii. Rapid human population growth in Florida increasingly stresses species that are dependent

on coastal habitats. Listed species can become threatened due to habitat destruction, over-utilization,

disease or natural or manmade factors. Species such as the state and federally-endangered green sea

turtle (Chelonia mydas) and Atlantic saltmarsh snake (Nerodia clarkia taeniata) found within Mosquito

Lagoon have been impacted by habitat destruction and alteration, as well as other man made impacts.

Loss of seagrass and algal beds affect food supplies for juvenile green sea turtles. In addition to sea

turtles foraging in the lagoon, three sea turtle species nest on the adjacent CNS ocean beaches and

surrounding municipal beaches.

Atlantic salt marsh snake literature is limited. The reason cited by FWS for the current species status

is that extensive drainage and development within the coastal zone has reduced the available habitat

of this species. Continued filling of coastal wetlands will further limit the range of this already restricted

reptile. Additionally, creating impoundments in marshlands for mosquito control may eliminate habitat

by changing water salinity. There is also a concern that habitat disturbance within these regions may

have broken down natural isolating mechanisms between the Atlantic salt marsh snake and the adjacent

freshwater snake (Nerodia fasciata pictiventris). This breakdown may be responsible for hybridization

between these species (FWS, 1993). The snake is difficult to detect in saltmarshes making state or

federal regulatory protection of individuals and the occupied habitat difficult. Currently, Florida Institute of

Technology scientists are conducting research on range and taxonomic status of the snake within CNS

(J. Stiner, personal communication, January 14, 2009).

Loss of breeding and feeding habitat to urban development of saltmarsh and freshwater wetlands

has stressed recovering colonial waterbird species: wood stork (Mycteria americana), little blue

heron (Egretta caerulea), reddish egret (Egretta rufescens), snowy egret (Egretta thula) and white ibis

(Eudocimus albus). Current recreation on and around islands and shoals in the MLAP and surrounding

areas continue to negatively impact waterbird colonies.

The American oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus) is a large, conspicuous shorebird with a bright red beak

found in coastal salt marshes and sand beaches. One of the few birds to specialize on bivalve mollusks living
33

in saltwater, this species is completely restricted to marine/estuarine habitats. The species feeds mostly by

sight, preying upon oysters, clams and mussels but it also probes for marine worms and other food items in

the intertidal zone. Although the oystercatcher inhabits coastal areas where human encroachment, habitat

loss and destruction are threats, this species adapts well to spoil islands and is often the most common

breeder in such locations. It is believed that

there is a resident nesting population of

American oystercatchers within the MLAP

and CNS but further study is warranted.

American oystercatchers nest on sandy

dunes, salt marsh islands and spoil islands,

building nests well above the high tide mark.

Future population success will depend on its

coexistence with humans in salt marsh and

dune areas and possibly on the mitigation of

factors affecting potential increases in sea level

(Nol & Humphrey, 1994). The U.S. Shorebird

Conservation Plan designates the American

oystercatcher as a “Species of High Concern,”

due to low relative abundance, threats on

breeding grounds, threats on non-breeding

grounds and rather restricted non-breeding

distribution. The American oystercatcher is

listed as a Species of Special Concern in

Florida (Audubon Watch List, 2007). 

The Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus 

latirostris) experiences low natural adult

mortality, although the species population

is impacted by man-made alterations to

estuarine and freshwater systems and by

fast moving boat traffic in the waters where

the species breeds, sleeps and feeds. The

Mosquito Lagoon serves as a travel corridor

and supports a resident population during

most seasons. A study conducted in 1998

in Haulover Canal just south of the MLAP

documented larger manatee aggregations

in the canal during spring months (158

manatees) than winter months (32

manatees) (Tyson, 2001). This is consistent

with aerial surveys of the region performed

during the same year. South of the MLAP

in Brevard County, a two day synoptic

survey count during March in MINWR, North

Banana River Sanctuary, documented a

record count of 700 manatees (Florida Fish

and Wildlife Conservation Commission,

1998). It also is a relatively short distance

from two warm water aggregation sites

(Florida Power and Light Cape Canaveral

Power Plant and Reliant Energy Power

Plant, Frontenac) from which manatee

forage during warm spells in winter. One

well-known aggregation and viewing area

is located within the MLAP at Mary McLeod

Bethune Beach Park. Although survival and

reproduction rates are adequate in a small portion of its range, survivability studies indicate a cause for

concern for the species population in the Atlantic region of Florida. Approximately 50% of Florida’s total

manatee population remains static or is experiencing decline (FWS, 2001). Declining water clarity and

seagrass beds in the MLAP are of concern when considering support of the manatee population.

Manatees can be seen eating, sunbathing and resting throughout 

the preserve (photo: NASA).

Rare in most of Florida, roseate spoonbills (Platalea ajaja) are 

commonly seen roosting and feeding in the preserve (photo: 

Marine Discovery Center).
34

Invasive Non-native Species

Introduction of non-native species in Florida was accelerated with the arrival of Europeans, sailors and

early settlers (Austin, 1978). They brought with them animals, fruits, vegetables and landscape plants

from around the world. Exotic species are, by definition, organisms that have moved beyond their natural

geographical range either via human induced, accidental or purposeful introductions. Invasive species

are known to have a negative impact on the ecosystem of a particular habitat or another species. Global

commerce has provided increased opportunities for biotic invasions (Jacoby, Walters, Baker & Blyler,

2003). Some of these foreign invaders come to our shores as seeds adrift in the ocean. Additionally,

cargo ship bilges introduce invasive marine species. New invasive species are still arriving today. News

stories frequently shock the Florida public with tales of imported venomous snakes arriving in potted

plants at department stores or monitor lizards (Varanus niloticus) becoming established on Sanibel

Island. Florida is second only to Hawaii in the number of established invasive species (Simberloff, 1994).

The threats invasive species pose to biodiversity and natural ecosystem function translate directly into

negative economic consequences. The costs for control measures and economic losses due to crop

failure, forest loss and effects on fisheries have been well documented (Jacoby et al., 2003).

It is hardly a coincidence that the two states with the most severe non-native species problems are

Florida and Hawaii. Florida fulfills both of the criteria for invasion described by Simberloff (1994): 1)

habitats created and disturbed by humans and 2) islands. The Florida peninsula forms an island habitat.

Much of the state consists of a patchwork of habitats resulting from human activities such as agriculture,

water management, dredging and filling and residential development. Due to the lack of naturally limiting

predators, unoccupied niches or where an introduced species outcompetes native species, invasive

plants are dominating ecosystems in many areas of Florida (Haller & Sutton, 1975).

The South Florida Restoration Science Forum website (www.sofia.usgs.gov/sfrsf), states that preventing

invasion or establishment of noxious species is more cost-effective than post-establishment control.

The most effective means of prevention would be prohibitions on import and sale of invasive species.

Prohibition would have effects on commerce and trade and likely would be detrimental to the economy.

An impending threat is the further development of global free trade (Yu, 1996).

Terrestrial Animal Species

Black rats (Rattus rattus) are established on wetlands and on islands within the MLAP and can be

detrimental to recreational campers, native bird species and other ground or arboreal nesters. Armadillos

occasionally are found on islands within the Mosquito Lagoon; however, they have not caused extensive

damage to native habitats.

Two species of fire ants are found in Florida. Most notorious is Solenopsis invicta, the red imported fire

ant (RIFA), followed by the much less common S. geminata, the tropical or native fire ant. RIFA was first

introduced from Brazil into either Mobile, Alabama or Pensacola, Florida between 1933 and 1945. Since

the introduction of RIFA, it has become a major agricultural and urban pest throughout the southeastern

states. In addition, fire ants cause both medical and environmental harm. Opportunistic feeding on

young tender plants by RIFA occurs throughout the year and can cause significant damage not only to

soybean crops but citrus, corn, okra, bean, cabbage, cucumber, eggplant, potato, sweet potato, peanut,

sorghum and sunflower. Monetary losses occur when RIFA interfere with the root system of the plant,

mechanically disable combine operation or feed on the young growth of plants to reduce stands (Stimac

& Alves, 1994). The human toll from RIFA stings is an important public health concern. Stings may

produce a swelling leading to anaphylactic shock (Collins & Scheffrahn, 2001).

RIFA have been reported to reduce ground-nesting populations of rodents and birds. In certain

instances, RIFA may completely eliminate ground-nesting species from a given area. Because there is a

10 to 20 year lag before reductions in bird populations are observed, it has been suggested that actual

effects of RIFA on animal populations may be underestimated (Mount, 1981). The cost associated with

the control of RIFA is significant. State and federal agencies have spent more than $250 million in order

to control or eradicate this fire ant.

Aquatic Species

An invasion of a non-native species has been classified as “the second most important threat to native

species, behind habitat destruction” (Ecological Society of America, 2009). Introductions of nonnative marine invertebrates and seaweeds to coastal habitats in the United States have increased one

hundred-fold in the last 200 years (Jacoby et al., 2003). Introduction of non-native species are both

deliberate and accidental.
35

Ships transport living organisms across oceans and between coastlines, from fouling organisms on their

hulls to species living in ballast water (Jacoby et al., 2003). Saltwater species from four communities are

generally spread from ballast waters: plankton, nekton, fouling organisms and benthic organisms. Other

potential activities that may cause the spread of non-native organisms are the movement of navigation

buoys, marine floats, dry docks, drilling, treasure hunting platforms and seaplanes. Disposal of dredge

spoil, beach nourishment materials and equipment may also be responsible for transporting non-native

species (Jacoby et al., 2003). The MLAP is several miles from an international port facility (Port Canaveral),

but could be impacted by vessels or

commercial traffic traveling the AIWW

channel, utilizing nearby marinas or vectors

transported through Ponce de Leon Inlet.

Florida is second only to California in

the number of non-native fish species.

Twenty-one non-native species of fish have

been documented in east central Florida,

however the majority of these are primarily

fresh water species. Fish species such as

tilapia (Tilapia spp.) are able to breed and

survive in both fresh and brackish systems

and are known to be established in the

IRL. Historically, non-native fish species

were introduced through the commercial

fish farm industry accidental release and

aquarium release, while bait bucket and

stocking were minor contributors.

In the IRL, a number of invertebrate species

have invaded in recent years. For example,

the Australian spotted jellyfish (Phyllorhiza 

punctata) was first documented in the

summer of 2001 (Smithsonian Marine

Station at Fort Peirce, 2001). This species is

known for its voracious ability to consume

zooplankton, including fish larvae. Other

IRL invaders include crabs (Scylla serrata 

and Charybdis hellerii). It is not known if

reproductive populations of either of these

crabs are still present in the lagoon.

The charru mussel (Mytella charruana)

now appears to be established within the

Mosquito Lagoon (The Nature Conservancy,

2006). Although first observed in 2004

(Boudreaux, Stiner & Walters, 2006), as of

April 2007, charru mussel numbers were

declining where they previously occurred in

Mosquito Lagoon. Focused efforts to collect

specimens had yielded only about 600

animals since the species was discovered

in the region (Smithsonian Marine Station,

2007a). The first report of the charru mussel

on the east coast of Florida occurred in

1986, in Jacksonville. Large numbers of

mussels fouled intake pipes of a power

plant on the St. Johns River. A nearby port with Venezuelan tanker traffic was implicated as the agent that

transported the non-native species. The population subsequently died off. The species may compete with

important native oyster populations already in decline (Boudreaux et al., 2006). Another non-native invasive

bivalve is the Asian green mussel (Perna viridis). This species is pervasive in parts of upper Tampa Bay

and is present in high numbers in Jacksonville. As of March 2008, less than 12 individuals of Asian green

mussel have been found in CNS waters but new observations were reported in northern Mosquito Lagoon

in late 2008 (L. Walters, personal communication, December 2008).

The invasive green mussel (Perna viridis) has been found in the 

Mosquito Lagoon within the boundaries of Canaveral National 

Seashore (photo: Buck Albert, USGS).

Preserve staff clips small, exotic invasive Australian pines as 

the first step to permanent removal.
36

Plant Species

Non-native plants, imported and cultivated by Native American cultures even before European settlement

(Ryerson, 1967), now threaten the state’s remaining natural areas and state lands. Of the 4,012 plant

species now growing without cultivation in Florida, 29% are non-native (Wunderlin as cited in Langeland

& Stocker, 2000). When these naturalized non-native plants spread extensively into natural areas and

dominate by displacing native plants and by disrupting natural processes such as fire or water flow, they

are called invasive (Langeland & Stocker, 2000). Human disturbance of soils in native habitats allows

invasive species to out-compete successional native species. The spread of invasive plant species was

exacerbated by the fact that successful non-native plants that survived heat, propagated successfully,

grew without pest infestations or fertilizer were shared amongst early settlers. Brazilian pepper trees

were introduced in South Florida in the late 1800s as an ornamental landscape plant. Australian pines

were introduced for use as windbreaks around citrus groves and crops (Marine Resource Council of East

Central Florida, 1998).

The Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council

maintains the list of species considered

to be most invasive or potentially most

invasive in Florida. Category I plants on

this list are considered to be non-native

invasive plants that are currently disrupting

native plant communities in certain areas

or throughout the state. Category II plants

have the potential to disrupt native plant

communities. A copy of the list of Florida’s

invasive plants can be obtained at the

University of Florida/Institute of Food and

Agricultural Science, Center for Aquatic

and Invasive Plants (352-392-9614) or on

the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council web

site (www.fleppc.org). CNS and MINWR

are aggressively treating Brazilian pepper

and a number of other non-native invasive

plant species to the south of the MLAP (J.

Stiner, personal communication, January

14, 2009). Coordination of future efforts

between CNS, MINWR and MLAP would

enhance removal efforts.

Brazilian pepper and Australian pine are the most problematic invasive plant species on shorelines,

within impoundment and dragline ditch berms and on natural and spoil islands of the MLAP. Both

species are at the northern extent of their range and severe invasive plant densities seen further south

within the IRL are not currently observed in MLAP. This is also due to local government non-native

invasive control efforts. The Volusia County Mosquito Control (VCMC) removes and maintains Brazilian

pepper and other invasive plants through physical and chemical methods. These plants are not directly

related to mosquito control but are often closely associated with mosquito production sites. Lead tree

(Leucaena luecocephala) and carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides) are among other invasive nonnative species that may be increasing in coverage in natural areas of east central Florida.

Native Nuisance or Problem Species

Problem species are defined as native species whose habits create specific management problems or

concerns. Raccoons (Procyon lotor) are problem species particularly in public parks, recreational islands

and in developed areas along the shorelines of the MLAP where they scavenge for food. They can be a

problem to wildlife when populations become over abundant due to lack of predators and other population

dynamics. Raccoon over-population can be detrimental through predation of nesting birds, diamondback

terrapin turtles (Malaclemys terrapin), sea turtle eggs on the beach and other native species.

Mosquitoes and other biting flies can be a concern for visitors to the MLAP as well as residents

surrounding the area. There are approximately 42 species of mosquitoes in Volusia County of which 5

species are associated with salt marshes. These species are the land crab hole mosquito (Deinocerites

cancer), Culex nigripalpus, often associated with West Nile virus, brackish water mosquito (Anopheles 

The dragline ditching process produced sediment spoil piles that 

are prone to invasion by exotic plant species like Brazilian pepper.
37

atropos), black saltmarsh mosquito (Ochlerotatus taeniorhynchus), and golden saltmarsh mosquito

(Ochlerotatus sollicitans). The latter two mosquito species listed are the dominant mosquito species in

the MLAP. Female adults lay eggs on exposed mud flats where they can remain for extended periods

until submerged by rain or high tide, when they develop into larvae and eventually adults.

Organized mosquito control in Volusia County started in the late 1920s and 1930s. The focus of this

work was hand-ditching mosquito production sites in the salt marshes. Methods used in the past

played a major role in alteration of natural salt marsh habitats and their function. The primary focus

of mosquito control in the county is the

same now as it was in the past, reduce

mosquito production in salt marshes by

creating pathways for native fish to prey on

immature mosquitoes (i.e. rotary ditching).

This mosquito control method can often

eliminate mosquito production completely

from a site for years. If this technique is not

appropriate to reduce or alter a mosquito

production site, larviciding is the next best

method to control immature mosquitoes.

The method of last resort for mosquito

control is the adulticide, a spray to control

adult mosquitoes. Treating for adult

mosquitoes is only done in the adjacent

upland residential areas, not in the salt

marshes. A combination of all of the above

control techniques are used regularly in

and around the MLAP.

The Volusia County Mosquito Control

(VCMC) is active in restoration of salt

marshes that have been spoiled upon or

impounded with berms; thereby reducing

their ability to perform natural marsh

functions. Mosquito Control has two

amphibious trackhoes that are used to

level spoil areas back to natural marsh

elevation. Several restoration projects have

been successfully completed in CNS and

Tomoka Marsh Aquatic Preserve. These

leveling projects are partnerships with the

SJRWMD, VCMC, CNS and MLAP.

Archaeological and Historical Resources

Volusia County contains many historic landmarks, including 14 sites listed on the National Register of

Historic Places (Florida Office of Cultural and Historic Programs, 2007). Please refer to the website found

at www/Volusia.com/history/natives to view the self-guided tour of Volusia County’s prehistoric past.

There are several cultural resource sites surrounding the MLAP which contain artifacts from indigenous

people of Florida reflecting human habitation from 2000 B.C. to early 20th century Florida settlements.

Prehistoric sites: 

The North Lagoon Archaeological District lists the following six prehistoric sites: Shipyard Island, Turtle

Mound, Saltworks, Ross Hammock Midden and Mound and Cat Hammock. Archaeological surveys

conducted on CNS and MINWR properties revealed 140 historic archaeological sites all in close

proximity to the MLAP (J. Stiner, personal communication, 2007). Seminole Rest at Oak Hill was added

to the National Register in 1997. It is one of the few remaining sites from the poorly understood St. Johns

I Period (500 B.C. to 800 A.D.) in this part of Florida. It also contains components dating as far back as

the Orange Period (2000-500 B.C.).

Two shell middens are most notable. Turtle Mound is the largest shell midden in the nation located

in CNS. It has been estimated that the two-acre site contains over 35,000 cubic yards (26,759 m3

) of

Early settlers utilized native Eastern red cedar trees (Juniperus virginiana) for building materials, turpentine and the pencil industry.
38

oyster shell or 1.5 million bushels of oysters (Lelis, 2007). The mound extends over 600 feet (182.9

m) along the Indian River shoreline and currently measures over 35 feet (10.7 m) in height. Visible for

miles offshore, the mound has been used as a navigational landmark since the early days of Spanish

exploration. In 1605, Alvaro Mexia documented the Timucuan Indians of Surruque who launched their

dugout canoes at the base of the mound. A second site in CNS is Castle Windy, the first coastal midden

in Florida verified with radiocarbon dating. This site was developed around 1200 A.D. and continued to

be used until 1500 A.D. The late St. Johns period inhabitants at Castle Windy were the same population

who lived at Turtle Mound (Ste. Claire, 2007).

Turtle Mound is also unique botanically. Eliane Norman

of Stetson University conducted a botanical survey in

1976 and recorded eight species of sub-tropical plants

at their northernmost known location, although freezes

in the 1980’s have eliminated some of these plants

(Norman, 1976).

Spruce Creek Mound is located in Spruce Creek State

Park and is one of the most impressive prehistoric earthen

works in Florida. The Spruce Creek Mound is situated on

the banks of the blackwater stream that is a tributary to the

Mosquito Lagoon. Human skeletons and status artifacts

have been recovered from the mound. The huge earthen

mound with its long ramp and causeway leading from the

banks of the creek served as a ceremonial, social and

political center for the hundreds of late St. Johns people

that inhabited the lower Spruce Creek basin. The site was

being actively used when Europeans arrived in the early

1500s (Ste. Claire, 2007).

Old Fort Mound, in the city of New Smyrna Beach, is

mostly known for its “old fort” ruins, a misnomer for the

massive, intact coquina stone foundations of an early 19th

century structure that existed on-site, it is the enormous

shell mound on which the “Old Fort” foundation rests that

is of great antiquity” (Ste. Claire, 2007). Pottery and shards

uncovered during the excavations indicate that the site was

first occupied around 500 A.D. and continued to be used

well into the late St. Johns period, around 1500 A.D. (Ste.

Claire, 2007).

Historic sites:

The area’s first great plantation was started in 1768 by a Scotsman, Dr. Andrew Turnbull. The plantation

was a 60,000-acre (24,280 hectares) land grant reaching from New Smyrna to Cape Canaveral. This

plantation failed in 1778. Later plantation owners succeeded until the Seminole Indian War of 1835 when

sugar plantations were burned or destroyed. Volusia, Brevard and Indian River counties were originally

part of a much larger region along the central Florida Atlantic coastline known as Mosquito County. The

1830 census of Mosquito County counted only 733 residents, mostly slaves. The 1840 census stated

that the only whites were soldiers stationed at New Smyrna and Fort Pierce. Neither census included the

local Indian population.

Recent archaeological investigations and archival surveys have uncovered exciting evidence on the Elliot

Plantation just south of Oak Hill. Contemporary with the Turnbull enterprise, it dated from approximately

1767-1779. The 2,200 acre (890.3 hectares) Elliot Plantation was the southernmost British plantation in

east Florida, the terminus to the Kings Road and site of Florida’s oldest still-standing sugar-processing

facility (J. Stiner, personal communication, January 14, 2009).

African-American heritage: 

The MLAP is historically important to African-American heritage because of its proximity to the

historic location of the pioneering settlement known as Freemanville, located just north of Mosquito

Lagoon in the modern day city of Port Orange. Freemanville was an 1866 settlement of former slaves.

Spruce Creek Mound is one of the 

most impressive earthen works in Florida 

(photo: “The Tomb of the Weroans”, 

drawing by John White, C. 1585).
39

Another more recent important African-American heritage historical site, the Harry T. Moore House, is

located in Mims, Florida, just southwest of the MLAP. Harry T. Moore is a nationally significant AfricanAmerican historical figure credited with being the first civil rights activist of the modern civil rights era,

who settled in Mims, Brevard County. He founded the first branch of the National Association for the

Advancement of Colored People in Brevard

County. In 1945, he founded the Florida

Progressive Voters League. A December 25,

1951 bomb attack killed Moore and his wife.

Harry T. Moore is considered to be the first

martyr in the modern civil rights movement.

Clifton Colored School, dating to the late

1890’s was one of the first schools in Brevard

County for African-American students. The

remains of the school were located several

years ago north of Haulover Canal not far from

the banks of Mosquito Lagoon.

Modern sites:

The southern extent of Mosquito Lagoon

and surrounding region is culturally and

economically significant as it is owned and comanaged by the United States government as

Kennedy Space Center, MINWR and CNS. Many

historic space program events have taken place

since the 1960s, when humans first embarked

on manned space flight. The achievements

and events of today will be a part of tomorrow’s

historic record of the U.S. space program.

The Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve is part of the Florida Circumnavigational Saltwater Paddling Trail. 

Kayakers can access this trail from Menard-May Park in Edgewater.

Helpful Hints for a Great Visit

Information to make any visit to the MLAP

more enjoyable. Mosquitoes can be very

bothersome but here are some tips. The

saltmarsh mosquito may bite at any time of

day but is most active during the warmest

part of the day. The black saltmarsh mosquito

bites mainly in the cooler hours of the

morning and dusk. Remember, mosquitoes

are attracted to dark colors, wear lightcolored long sleeved shirts, long pants and a

hat if you plan to be out at times or in areas

frequented by mosquitoes. Avoiding shade

during the warm part of the day can help

too. Carry plenty of mosquito and no-seeum repellent, just in case. There are new

fish-friendly products on the market. Other

safety gear might include watershoes in case

you have to get out of a boat in oyster reef

habitat. Refer to Section 3.1.3 – Resource

Description, Nuisance or Problem Species for

more information.
40

Other Associated Visitor Resources

The MLAP is surrounded by scenic vistas and offers visitors numerous opportunities to view wildlife

up close. Several municipal and county parks located along the eastern and western shorelines of the

Mosquito Lagoon provide access to abundant natural resources. Visitors to the MLAP can almost be

guaranteed to see turtles, manatees, dolphins and a wide variety of bird life.

The MLAP is part of the Florida Circumnavigation Saltwater Paddling Trail Segment 22, also known

as the Space Coast Saltwater Paddling Trail. This paddling trail was designated by DEP’s Office of

Greenways and Trails. A map with the paddling trail can be accessed at www.volusia.org/parks/trails.

htm. Paddlers can reach the MLAP and the trail at various locations both beachside and on the mainland

(see Map 10). Indian River Lagoon Park in New Smyrna Beach and Mary McLeod Bethune Park in

Bethune Beach provide entry points to the paddling trail from the east. The city of Edgewater on the

western shoreline has Kennedy Point Park, Menard-May Park and Veterans Park which also provide

access to the paddling trail. 

!( Marinas

!( Boat Ramps

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

£¤1

§ ̈¦95

Volusia

County

Kennedy

Memorial

Park

Menard

May Park

Hiles

Ave

Ramp

North

Causeway

Boat Ramp

The Boat

Club Marina

Smyrna

Yacht

Club

Sea Harvest

Marina

Causeway

Marina

Seafarer Marine Inc.

Riverview Hotel

and Restaurant

Veterans

Park

0 0.5 1 2

Miles

0 1 2 0.5

Kilometers

April 2008 ±

Map 10 / Public Access Points within and near the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve
41

Mosquito Lagoon and its islands provide great yearround feeding habitats for numerous wading birds. It

also supports rookeries for several species of colonial

nesting birds and migratory species. The MLAP is

flanked on its northern and southern borders by four

Great Florida Birding Trail sites. These sites provide

birders with great locations to view various species

that utilize different habitat types characterizing the

area. These birding trails include Smyrna Dunes

Park to the north of the MLAP and several sites to the

south including: Riverbreeze Park, CNS and several

sites at MINWR bordering the Mosquito Lagoon.

3.1.4 / Values

Florida’s economic well-being is firmly linked to its

marine resources. Statewide coastal communities,

such as the 16 cities within Volusia County,

increasingly must learn how to sustain economic

viability while maintaining and restoring the

environmental integrity of coastal resources. Rapid

coastal population growth, a concurrent increase in

recreational boating and other water-related activities

and declining quality of natural environments all

contribute to this challenge.

With more than one million registered recreational

boats in Florida as well as 300,000 visiting vessels

annually, 2,200 marinas, 8,400 miles (13,520 km) of

shoreline, 7,000 lakes, and 51,000 miles (82,076.6

km) of rivers and streams, the state ranks first in the

nation in boating activity.

The importance of marine interests and marine

industries in Volusia County is reflected by 28 boat

launch ramps, several major marinas (including Halifax

Harbor Marina, the first Clean Marina on Florida’s east

coast), boatyards and boat manufacturing facilities

such as Boston Whaler, Triton, Edgewater and Parker

Boats. Approximately 80 recreational fishing guides

also provide a major year-round economic impact in the

area. This industry, and therefore all related commerce,

is boosted by advertisements about “world famous”

redfish and seatrout fishing in Mosquito Lagoon.

For decades during the 20th century, coastal development

in Florida routinely resulted in damage or destruction

to vast regions of natural wildlife habitat, compromising

the viability of key populations of marine species found

throughout Florida’s natural food chains. Degradation

of aquatic habitat around the state can pose future

economic impacts to the state. Florida’s fishermen

harvested more than 90 million pounds of seafood in

2005, with a dockside value of $165 million. In Volusia

County, Mosquito Lagoon has historically supported

large populations of oysters and clams, as is evidenced

by countless large Native American shell middens

(shellfish mounds) and later profitable commercial

fisheries in both clams and oysters. Mosquito Lagoon,

together with the IRL, has demonstrated to be valuable

nursery habitat for countless marine species of significant

ecological and economic importance to Florida’s

Great egrets are commonly found year round along the 

shorelines of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve.

Commercial fishing is an economically important 

historic use of the Mosquito Lagoon.
42

commercial and recreational fisheries, including shrimp, redfish, seatrout and grouper. The previously listed

goliath grouper has recently seen dramatic increases in stock within local lagoon systems.

Mosquito Lagoon supports 160 species of fishes within 56 fish families and remains one of the state’s

most ecologically functional waterbodies, despite historic alterations and increasing local human

population growth. The economic

importance of the waterbody as both

a nursery and feeding habitat for

commercial species is important for the

future especially during downturns in

the economy. Volusia County seafood

landings, at 1.7 million pounds (7711.1

metric tons), ranks 18th in importance for

Florida. Examples of values for Volusia

County offshore and inshore commercial

seafood harvests for the period of 1987

through 2001 by commercial product:

the hard clam, more than $3.3 million,

brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus), more

than $3.6 million, white shrimp (Penaeus 

setiferus) more than $4.4 million and blue

crab more than $5.1 million (Smithsonian

Marine Station, 2007b). (Appendix E.2

contains detailed reports and information

on commercial markets.) FWC maintains

records on harvests throughout Florida

(see the 2006 Annual Landings Summary

(FWC, 2007) at www.research.myfwc.com/

features/view_article.asp?id=19224).

Protection of irreplaceable coastal

environments, such as MLAP, assures

continued economic growth of both

commercial and recreational fishing

industries through protection of fishery

nursery areas important to shrimp, crabs,

sea turtles and a variety of economically

important fish species including sea trout

and red drum. Recent increases in numbers

of previously declining species, such as the

goliath grouper, clearly demonstrate that

protected areas, such as aquatic preserves,

successfully serve important biological and

economic purposes.

Recognition by environmentally-aware

citizens of dangers inherent in humaninduced chronic environmental damage

can contribute to establishment of

protected areas for wildlife, including

parks, sanctuaries and aquatic preserves such as the MLAP. In Florida, as the local and statewide human

population continues to explode in the 21st century, the establishment and maintenance of protected

areas for wildlife continues to grow in importance.

Competing uses of coastal resources have increased the number of user conflicts. In the past three

years, the loss of public waterway access for recreational boaters because of rapid increases in sales

of waterfront property and marine-related businesses has increased waterfront property values, but is

concurrently threatening the stability and growth of boating-related marine industries. Public marinas

have been privatized as condominium developments displace moored vessels. There is a growing

need to foster compatible and equitable community economic development and resource management

strategies, and the Volusia County Department of Economic Development is making great strides in that

direction (Volusia County, 2007).

Fish painting at Goby Fest, the annual nature festival held by our 

citizen support group to raise awareness about the state parks and 

aquatic preserves in East Central Florida.
43

The existence of the MLAP helps buffer against negative environmental impacts that might result

from coastal development. This preserve and others around Florida can help provide a much-needed

“buffer zone” within which environmental compromise is far less likely to occur than in unprotected

marine environments.

3.1.5 / Citizen Support Organization 

The Coastal Preserves Alliance of East Central Florida (CPA) works to protect and restore natural areas

that provide important habitat for endangered species and serve as the watershed of the IRL. This

citizen support organization was formed in 2003, to support the St. Sebastian River Buffer Preserve,

Indian River Lagoon Preserve State Park, Indian River - Malabar to Vero Beach Aquatic Preserve,

Banana River Aquatic Preserve and MLAP, most of which are managed by DEP’s Office of Coastal and

Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA). Since the inception of CPA, the DEP reorganized both the Division of

Recreation and Parks and CAMA.

The upland areas previously

established as buffer preserves

under management by CAMA

were transferred to the state

park system and designated as

preserve state parks. The St.

Sebastian River Buffer Preserve

was renamed the St. Sebastian

River Preserve State Park

(SSRPSP) and has continued to

be supported by the CPA. The

CPA is composed of neighbors,

private business owners, artists,

stakeholders and government

partners providing funds for

research and management

efforts through fund-raising

activities. CPA also serves as

a means to accept donations

of funds or equipment from

individuals, corporations or

community organizations desiring

to contribute to the restoration

or management of public lands

or waters. In addition, the CPA

is a source of volunteers and

grant funding for all the preserves

it supports. Since 2004, the

East Central Florida Aquatic

Preserves (ECFAP) office has

directly benefited from the receipt

of $1,550 dollars for resource

monitoring, volunteer activities

and purchase of native plants for

restoration of spoil islands.

3.1.6 / Adjacent Public Lands and 

Designated Resources

Federal public lands lay

immediately to the south of the

MLAP. These formerly stateowned lands and submerged

lands were conveyed or

dedicated to the United States

of America during the 1960s

New Smyrna

Beach

April 2008 ±

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge

Canaveral National Seashore

Turnbull Hammock Conservation Area

0 2 4 8

Miles

0 4 2 8

Kilometers

Map 11 / Managed Areas Adjacent to the Mosquito Lagoon 

Aquatic Preserve
44

and later in 1980. CNS and MINWR work closely together to manage the contiguous and overlapping

ecosystems located to the south of the MLAP. While the missions of the NPS and FWS are not identical,

they are compatible. 

MINWR was established in 1963. Approximately 65% of Mosquito Lagoon falls within the boundaries of

Kennedy Space Center and is managed as part of the MINWR. The protected scrub lands and mostly

tidal wetlands of MINWR provide important key habitat for several endangered species. The MINWR

mission statement is: “To protect, enhance, and manage wetlands and uplands for biodiversity and for

the benefit of all species native to MINWR; provide feeding, resting, and wintering habitat for waterfowl

and other migratory birds; protect and manage threatened and endangered species and their habitats;

and provide opportunities for compatible public recreation and environmental education.” This mission

is consistent with CAMA’s mission. Approximately 34,345 acres (13,899 hectares) of this area are jointly

managed with the NPS where CNS is responsible for management of cultural resources.

The CNS manages approximately 17% of Mosquito Lagoon and maintains a number of facilities

to accommodate approximately 1.5 million visitors per year. There is a visitor information center

in the Northeast District of CNS,

approximately 5 miles (8 km) from

the MLAP. Playalinda and Apollo

beaches provide an opportunity

for the public to experience an

uncrowded, undeveloped beachfront.

Several parking areas with comfort

stations and chemical toilets are

maintained. Other popular attractions

and activities at CNS include Eldora

House, Turtle Mound, walking trails,

campgrounds on some of the small

barrier islands (accessible only via

boat), fishing and horseback riding

during the winter months. Fellers

House Field Station is located directly

south of the historic Eldora House on

the lagoon. It is used and maintained

by CNS and the Biology Department

at the University of Central Florida

and other visiting institutions.

University faculty and their students

conduct monitoring, research studies

and restoration that benefits CNS and

the ecosystem.

Maintenance and operation of the AIWW federal channel is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps

of Engineers (ACOE) and the Florida Inland Navigation District. The AIWW forms the northwestern

boundary of the MLAP for a distance of 3 miles (3.8 km). It then extends south forming the western

boundary of the CNS for about 8 miles (12.9 km). Further south the AIWW enters CNS and extends

another 10 miles (16.1 km) until exiting through Haulover Canal. The AIWW was dredged to its present

size of 125 feet wide (38.1 m) by 12 feet deep (3.7 m) in 1952. Future maintenance dredging of the

AIWW is scheduled for 2009 (D. Roach, personal communication, October 19, 2007). Dredging and the

environmental monitoring of the dredging activity will be overseen by the ACOE and the Florida Inland

Navigation District. Dredged material from the next AIWW dredging, the central portion of Mosquito

Lagoon, will be pumped to an upland dredged material management site in Oak Hill.

3.1.7 / Surrounding Land Use 

As described in the previous sections, a large segment of land and water south of the MLAP is federallyowned and managed conservation land. This area includes the CNS, MINWR and Kennedy Space

Center. Kennedy Space Center and Canaveral Air Force Base continue to develop large tracts of land on

the federal property for support of the national space program and private science- and space-related

enterprises. These federal conservation lands have acted as buffers from coastal development for the

areas south of the MLAP.

High density development is evidence of exponential population growth 

in coastal Volusia County.
45

In contrast, urban development and land-use patterns immediately upland surround the MLAP

boundary. Over time, agricultural and other rural land uses have given way to residential and

commercial land uses on the mainland and the barrier island surrounding MLAP. Within the city

of Edgewater, the predominant zoning is low density residential which allows a maximum of four

units per acre while the city of New Smyrna has both low density residential and medium density

residential zoning allowing a maximum of five dwelling units per acre and eight dwelling units per acre

respectively. North and east of MLAP a series of high-rise condominium developments are present

(primarily along the oceanfront) which can impact vistas of the MLAP. There are numerous singlefamily residences and several

multi-family residences along the

eastern and western shores of the

MLAP. All upland development

adjacent to MLAP must comply

with specific development

regulations set by Volusia County.

These special criteria (Class II

Overlay Zone) include retention

of native vegetation, shoreline

setbacks and requirements for

stormwater management.

There are a few exceptions to

the urban development found

surrounding the MLAP. A 190

acre (76.9 hectare) parcel of

wetlands and upland shoreline

just outside the northeastern

boundary of the MLAP has been

designated for conservation

as the IRL Preserve Park. This

parcel of land is managed by the

city of New Smyrna Beach and

the Marine Discovery Center, a

nonprofit corporation dedicated

to education and preservation of

local coastal resources. The park

contains old Florida hammock

with native vegetation and several

walking trails. Two acres (0.008

hectare) are developed with a

covered pavilion, restrooms and

limited parking. There is a fishing

dock and canoe/kayak launch

that overlooks Brown’s Bay and

the MLAP.

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Conservation / Forestry

Agriculture / Rural Residential

Residential

Mobile / Manufactured Homes

Right of Way

Mixed Use

General Commercial

Marine Oriented Commercial

Light Industrial

Heavy Industrial

Waterfront Industrial

Public Use

Planned Unit Development (PUD)

Rural PUD

Residential PUD

Mixed PUD

Commercial PUD

Industrial PUD

No Data

New Smyrna

Beach

Cedar

Island

April 2008 ±

0 1 2 4

Miles

0 2 4 1

Kilometers

Map 12 / Land Use Surrounding the Mosquito Lagoon 

Aquatic Preserve

47

Part Two

Management Programs

Chapter Four

CAMA’s Management Programs

TThe work performed by the Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA) is divided into

components called management programs. In this management plan all site operational activities are

explained within the following four management programs: Ecosystem Science, Resource Management,

Education and Outreach, and Public Use.

4.1 / The Ecosystem Science Management Program

The Ecosystem Science Management Program supports science-based management by providing

resource mapping, modeling, monitoring, research and scientific oversight. The primary focus of this

program is to support an integrated approach (research, education and stewardship) for adaptive

management of each site’s unique natural and cultural resources. CAMA ensures that, when applicable,

consistent techniques are used across sites to strengthen the State of Florida’s ability to assess the

relative condition of coastal resources. This enables decision-makers to more effectively prioritize

restoration and resource protection goals. In addition, by using the scientific method to create baseline

conditions of aquatic habitats, the Ecosystem Science Management Program allows for objective

analyses of the changes occurring in the state’s natural and cultural resources.

4.1.1 / Background of Ecosystem Science at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve 

\There is a very large and committed group of partners and agencies that conduct extensive monitoring,

modeling and research in the Mosquito Lagoon. These include the St. Johns River Water Management

District (SJRWMD), Volusia County Environmental Health Laboratory (VCEHL), Dynamac, Florida

The Mosquito Lagoon Working Group monitoring seagrass coverage.
48

Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS), Florida Department of Health, Canaveral

National Seashore (CNS), the University of Central Florida (UCF) and numerous other groups.

The Ecosystem Science Management Program within the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve (MLAP)

is geared to assist various partner agencies and/or university researchers with ongoing research and

monitoring efforts. The East Central Florida Aquatic Preserves (ECFAP) office manages three aquatic

preserves spanning a distance of more than 100 miles from Volusia County to Indian River County. It is

challenging to maintain a regular research or monitoring presence within these three aquatic preserves

because of their sizes, distances and the logistics between them. Therefore, CAMA fosters strong

working partnerships with multiple agencies and researchers, and assists with equipment and staff as

needed to complete research projects and monitoring efforts. These joint efforts include conducting

seagrass surveys (SJRWMD), monitoring juvenile fish abundance and distribution (Fish and Wildlife

Research Institute), assisting with oyster reef restoration (UCF and The Nature Conservancy), and

monitoring birds, vegetation, and invertebrate species-recovery in restored marshes (SJRWMD, UCF,

and the Volusia County Mosquito Control).

Historically, an MLAP team inventoried natural resources for land use planning by Volusia County

(Refer to section 4.2.1. for information on early resource management efforts). Resource inventories

characterizing each habitat type were used to develop Resource Protection Areas (RPA) designations.

More recently, a substantial amount of the monitoring and research conducted in the Mosquito Lagoon

occurs just south of the MLAP boundary in the vicinity of CNS. Numerous studies are currently underway

and others have historically been conducted within the Mosquito Lagoon area managed by the CNS.

The nature of the northern Mosquito Lagoon with its convoluted, winding waterways, extremely shallow

waters, and large number of impounded areas makes it difficult and at times impossible to access a

large portion of the MLAP. The southern portion of the Mosquito Lagoon has substantially more open

water and access points than the northern portion where the MLAP is located. Southern and middle

portions of the Mosquito Lagoon also have more land-based facilities for on-site support along its

shorelines, for instance CNS has the Fellers House Field Station. The Fellers House Field Station is

located on the barrier island at CNS and is used by visiting researchers, professors, and students from

UCF and other agencies and institutions. Accessibility and open water habitat may be reasons that a

majority of existing research has taken place just south of the MLAP boundary. More detailed information

on individual studies can be found in Section 4.1.2.

Water quality data-sets are available online that include both historical and current data for Mosquito

Lagoon. All Mosquito Lagoon water quality data collected by the Indian River Lagoon (IRL)-Water Quality

Monitoring Network (WQMN) is accessible on STORET at www.epa.gov/storet/ and at the VCEHL web

page at www.volusiahealth.net/lab/wqdata.htm. Historic Water Quality Index values (1994-2004) for

individual water quality stations compiled by the VCEHL can also be obtained at the same web address.

It will be possible to access more information concerning Volusia County’s water quality data and water

resources by visiting the Volusia County Water Atlas webpage (www.volusia.wateratlas.usf.edu/).

4.1.2 / Current Status of Ecosystem Science at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Florida continues to undergo tremendous growth and the resulting developmental pressure is

anticipated to negatively affect estuarine habitats such as MLAP. Major management concerns within

MLAP include:

1. impact to seagrass beds and oyster reefs from increased public use of the waterways;

2. changes in water quality and sediment loads from increased development pressures and land use

changes;

3. loss of habitat functionality; and

4. need for protecting and maintaining species diversity.

Effective resource monitoring programs are essential to help recognize and document changes and

trends occurring over time. Current research and monitoring programs provide invaluable information

on the status of issues involving our natural resources and form the basis for making sound resource

management decisions. Measures and protocols are in place to ensure that all MLAP management

actions are in compliance with the federal recovery plans for these species and are in accordance with

all permitting and agency consultation requirements.

Current Ecosystem Science Programs within MLAP, as well as plans for future research, are discussed in

the following sections.
49

Diamondback Terrapin Turtle Monitoring

Diamondback terrapin turtle monitoring will be implemented as a new program within the MLAP

concurrent with the ongoing terrapin turtle research being conducted in both the Indian River and

Banana River aquatic preserves. All work is conducted under authorization of the Florida Fish and

Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) permit number WX08174. “The diamondback terrapin is the

only turtle in the world known to be entirely restricted to estuarine habitats” (Dunson & Mazotti, 1989).

The terrapin turtle is an indicator species

that uses the water column, seagrass beds,

islands, and the intertidal zone of the estuary.

Little is known about diamondback terrapin

populations in the MLAP. A few individuals

have been reported by animal rehabilitation

facilities, and by both commercial and

recreational fishermen. Abundance and

distribution studies are needed within MLAP

to determine population dynamics for this rare

species. Areas preferentially used by terrapins

for feeding and nesting need to be identified

in order to preserve these zones for this

species into the future.

Monitoring will be accomplished via

opportunistic sightings, recovery of

specimens from rehabilitators and commercial

fishermen and planned biannual captures.

Both cast-netting and modified crab pots will

be utilized for planned in-water captures. The

objectives of ECFAP’s monitoring effort are to

obtain distribution, survivability and genetic

data for this indicator species. Terrapin

monitoring will be performed by MLAP staff

with assistance from commercial fishermen

and volunteers.

Colonial Water Bird Monitoring and Management

Bird monitoring surveys involve identifying the locations, species and number of aquatic birds utilizing

MLAP for nesting and roosting. During nesting season (February-August), occasional nesting and roosting

surveys will be conducted by boat or kayak to document the individual species of water birds within MLAP.

Assistance from volunteers or local Florida Audubon chapters will be solicited for boat surveys.

Aerial surveys are performed at least annually, quarterly surveys are optimum. Aerial surveys, rather

than boat surveys, better identify the number of nests or individuals using colonies. Aerial surveys

are performed with the assistance of Volusia County Mosquito Control equipment and staff, Florida

Audubon, volunteers, and potentially through future grant funding. Future research may include nesting

success and other data.

The purpose of surveying for waterbird activity is to document avian presence and distribution within

the Mosquito Lagoon estuary. These surveys will identify essential wading bird, waterfowl and shorebird

nesting and roosting habitats. By identifying important habitat types and areas, wildlife officials can

provide protection or manage public use around these sites and plan for restoration of appropriate native

habitats, as needed. Staff strives to eventually provide adequate vegetation structure for use by roosting

and nesting wading birds in the MLAP.

Water Quality Monitoring

Water quality monitoring within the MLAP is conducted by VCEHL. Monthly sampling under the

SJRWMD’s IRL-WQMN program is done by VCEHL at station ML11. The VCEHL also does quarterly

sampling at other sites in the MLAP. Several water quality parameters are collected (Table 3). The list of

parameters for the two sampling programs differ somewhat (no bacterial sampling under IRL WQMN

but total organic carbon, dissolved organic carbon, dissolved ammonium and photosynthetically active

radiation are included). The county and the SJRWMD water quality monitoring programs have been

ongoing since 1989. Sampling selected sites once a month and/or quarterly provides a distinct snapResiding in the salt marshes, mangroves and tidal creeks, the 

diamondback terrapin is the only North American turtle that 

lives exclusively in brackish water environments.
50

shot picture of water quality within the

MLAP for that specific period in time.

Alternative techniques for monitoring

water quality are undertaken by MLAP

staff in the St. Sebastian River by use

of dataloggers that allow continuous,

24-hour in-situ monitoring, providing

a bi-hourly picture of water quality.

A similar, continuous, in-situ water

quality monitoring program for the

MLAP would provide a more detailed

picture of the status and trends of

this water body, but currently logistics

and budgetary constraints make

this option improbable. Additionally,

sediments sampling could provide a

more thorough picture of the Mosquito

Lagoon and surrounding environments.

Sediment sampling was recently

completed for the southern Mosquito

Lagoon as part of a study performed

by Florida Institute of Technology for

the SJRWMD (Trefry et al., 2007). There

are plans to extend this work into the

northern Mosquito Lagoon in 2009 to

try to identify sources of suspended

solids and turbidity into the system.

Data collected by VCEHL and SJRWMD

provide a good picture of water quality

within the Mosquito Lagoon, so there

is no need for the MLAP to duplicate

monitoring efforts. The VCEHL and SJRWMD surface water monitoring programs are committed

to continue identifying and documenting the conditions and trends in water quality and to provide

information necessary to establish priorities for the cleanup and restoration of the waterways within the

Mosquito Lagoon (Volusia County Environmental Health Laboratory, 2007b; Steward et al., 2003). Refer

to Map 13 Water Quality Monitoring to view water quality monitoring stations sampled by the VCEHL.

Data collected by the VCEHL from 1994-2004 indicate that the 10-year water quality index average

for stations in the Mosquito Lagoon (ML01 through ML12) was rated as good. Mosquito Lagoon is

considered a pristine habitat with good to fair water quality correlated with low urbanization and a

minimal amount of agricultural discharges and other point sources of pollution (Sigua, Steward &

Tweedale, 2000; Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 1996). Peaks in turbidity, chlorophyll a,

and total phosphorus have been documented in the area between Edgewater and Oak Hill (WoodwardThe islands within the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve are 

used by numerous bird species for its valuable foraging and 

roosting habitats (photo: Marine Discovery Center).

Physical Parameter Unit Chemical Parameter Unit

water temperature degrees Celsius Color CPU

pH pH units Turbidity NTU

Dissolved Oxygen mg/liter Total Suspended Solids mg/l

Conductivity umhos/cm Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/l

Salinity parts per thousand Nitrate/Nitrite-Nitrogen mg/l

Secchi Depth meters Total Nitrogen mg/l

Depth of collection meters Total Phosphorus mg/l

Depth at sample site meters Ortho-Phosphate mg/l

Air temperature degrees Celsius Chlorophyll a, b, c ug/l

Wind direction degrees Pheophytin a ug/l

Wind velocity miles per hour Fecal Coliform CFU

Cloud cover percent Enterococcus 24 CFU

Note: CPU = chloroplatinate units; mg/l = milligrams per liter, CFU = colony forming units.

Table 3 / Physical and Chemical Water Quality Parameters Collected by the Volusia County Environmental 

Health Laboratory (2007a)
51

Clyde Consultants, 1994). With the exception of total kjeldahl nitrogen (0.7 to 1.4 mg/L), values of

measured water quality parameters in Mosquito Lagoon were generally near the more favorable end of

the range of values reported for the entire IRL complex (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1994).

The average dissolved oxygen value for Mosquito Lagoon in 2000 was 6.47 mg/L (Sigua et al., 2000),

well within the state standard of 4.0 mg/l or greater for estuarine waters. Turbidity, in recent years, has

been reported as an important factor limiting light availability in the water column. Higher turbidity

causes waters to appear muddy or clouded to the average observer making it difficult to see the bottom.

Mosquito Lagoon’s 10-year average turbidity has been reported to be more than six nephelometric

turbidity units, higher than most other Indian River Lagoon areas (Steward et al., 2003). Turbidity in this

case was apparently strongly influenced by total suspended solids.

The SJRWMD reports that the sites in the Mosquito Lagoon at Oak Hill and farther north all had good

and improving water quality, due to decreasing concentrations of phosphorus and chlorophyll a (Winkler

& Ceric, 2006). The water quality index for the northern portion of the IRL (Mosquito Lagoon sites) was

New Smyrna

Beach

A! Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

A!

A!

A!

A!

A!

A!

ML12

ML11

ML10

ML09

ML08

ML07

Volusia

County

Edgewater

April 2008 ±

0 0.5 1 2

Miles

0 0.5 1 2

Kilometers

Map 13 / Stations Monitored by Volusia County for Water Quality in the Mosquito Lagoon 

Aquatic Preserve
52

rated “good” based on sampling performed in 2001 and 2002 (National Estuary Program, 2007). This

index used National Coastal Assessment data based on five component indicators; dissolved nitrogen

and phosphorus, chlorophyll a, water clarity and dissolved oxygen. Regardless of generally good reports

in terms of overall water quality, the northern part of Mosquito Lagoon (WBID 2924B) has recently been

listed as potentially impaired for nutrients (elevated chlorophyll a) (Paulic et al., 2006).

Seagrass Monitoring

Seagrass monitoring within the Mosquito Lagoon is conducted by the SJRWMD and Dynamac through

bi-annual seagrass surveys using permanent underwater transects and by examination of aerial

photography. Seagrass beds (acreage, depth of the edge of seagrass bed, sunlight penetration to 1.7

m target depth) are the primary indicators used to measure estuary health throughout the entire IRL

basin (Steward et al., 2003). SJRWMD has defined specific seagrass coverage targets as indicators of

the health of the waters (Virstein, Carter, Morris & Steward, 2000). The primary goal for the SJRWMD

seagrass monitoring program is to return the number of acres of seagrass to historic (1943) levels based

on aerial photographs from that period. 

The SJRWMD and research network partners have divided Mosquito Lagoon into three segments for

research, analysis and management. MLAP is located in the northernmost segment, referred to as

segment ML-1. Segment ML-1 runs from Ponce de Leon Inlet south to Government Cut, the southern

boundary of MLAP. A resource assessment conducted by the IRL-Surface Water Improvement and

Managment Program found a 94% loss of seagrass acreage in segment ML-1 since 1943, the greatest

loss of any Mosquito Lagoon segment (Steward et al., 2003). Seagrass survey data from the 1990s

shows a steady decline in seagrass coverage with 2003 coverage ranked as “poor.”

Ongoing research conducted by the SJRWMD is designed to assist in understanding why the northern

Mosquito Lagoon has poor seagrass coverage when compared to 1943 data. Physical factors such as

light limitations, strong current velocities and suspended sediment particles may be factors. Human

impacts have caused extreme physical changes to this unique estuarine system. SJRWMD scientists

theorize that other factors, such as hydrodynamics causing loss of suitable substrate, may play a role

(Steward et al., 2003). Further investigations by the SJRWMD and partners are underway to determine

whether suspect factors such as strong currents, unstable sediments and/or light limitations are indeed

affecting seagrass abundance in the northern Mosquito Lagoon. Despite losses of seagrass beds in the

northern Mosquito Lagoon segment, the 2001 FWC study showed fish densities south of the Ponce De

Leon Inlet to be high (Paperno, Mille & Kadison, 2001).

An example of the aerial photographs used to monitor seagrass coverage and the effects of propeller 

damage on otherwise healthy seagrass beds (photo: Doug Adams, FWC-FWRI).
53

Fecal Coliform and Dinoflagellate Monitoring

DACS/Division of Aquaculture conducts routine monitoring for fecal coliform and other parameters

such as toxic dinoflagellate abundance in Class II shellfish harvesting waters within the MLAP. Mosquito

Lagoon has had several red tide and harmful algal bloom events that led to the closure of shellfish

harvesting areas due to the large concentration of phytoplankton cells and/or toxins in the water, most

recently in the fall-winter of 2007. Harvesting of shellfish is prohibited in an area when concentrations of

red tide organisms reach 5,000 cells per quart (Bronson, 2002).

Florida’s red tide is formed by a dense concentration (bloom) of a single-celled, plant-like marine organism

(phytoplankton) that produces toxins. It can make the water appear reddish-brown or green and can kill fish

and cause breathing problems in people. Pyrodinium bahamense and Karenia brevis are two phytoplankton

species associated with red tides and harmful

algal blooms in the Mosquito Lagoon.

Pyrodinium bahamense has been associated

with the production of saxitoxin within

the IRL (Landsberg et al., 2006). Paralytic

Shellfish Poisoning is caused by saxitoxins,

and affects humans through consumption

of shellfish that have filtered significant

quantities of Pyrodinium bahamense.

Toxin produced by the dinoflagellate

will concentrate within shellfish tissues,

particularly during harmful algal bloom

events. Meanwhile Karenia brevis is

associated with the production of brevetoxins

and Neurotoxic Shellfish Poisoning.

Brevetoxins can also affect humans as the

toxins become airborne in sea spray and

cause eye irritation and respiratory problems.

DACS monitors these parameters closely in

order to determine if any shellfish closures

are necessary due to elevated fecal coliform

or toxic dinoflagellate counts. Shellfish

meats are rigorously tested for the presence

of the toxin which may require several weeks

to clear after the dinoflagellate is no longer

present in a harvest area (Bronson, 2002).

DACS closely monitors shellfish harvesting

areas and closes harvests if necessary to

ensure that shellfish harvested in Florida

waters are free of harmful bacteria and safe

for human consumption.

Monitoring Marsh Restoration Projects 

The SJRWMD and the Volusia County

Mosquito Control partner and cost share

in the restoration of wetlands originally

impounded or ditched for mosquito

control throughout the Mosquito Lagoon

basin. Monitoring the resulting success of

vegetation and species recruitment to these

restored marsh habitats and surrounding

waters is an important component of the

project. The agencies have contracted monitoring studies conducted by UCF that report on the revegetation of the restored marshes by plant species such as glasswort (Salicornia depressa), saltwort

(Salicornia bigelovii), and red, black and white mangroves as well as the presence of fiddler crabs (Uca 

spp.). MLAP staff presently support monitoring efforts including juvenile fish studies and will assist in

future revegetation studies as staffing levels allow. The MLAP program will seek funding and assistance

of partners to expand monitoring of vegetation and fiddler crab abundance in recently restored wetlands.

Very productive oyster reefs can be found along the shorelines 

and islands throughout the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve.

Volusia County Mosquito Control operates an amphibious 

bucket loader at work restoring impacted wetlands to natural 

marsh elevations.
54

Oyster Reef Monitoring and Restoration 

The Nature Conservancy and UCF have

several staff and researchers involved in

oyster reef monitoring and restoration efforts

throughout the Mosquito Lagoon. Various

studies are currently underway to determine

the factors affecting existing oyster reefs,

oyster recruitment and restoration success.

Oysters are a keystone species in coastal

ecosystems such as the IRL. Their

current status and trends are important

parameters to monitor, especially in light

of recent reports indicating significant

decreases in the extent of oyster reefs

due to physical disturbance by boat

wakes within the Mosquito Lagoon

(Grizzle, Adams & Walters, 2002; Wall,

Walters, Grizzle & Sacks, 2005). Because

oysters filter large volumes of water

daily, they have long been recognized

as valuable components of estuaries by

helping to improve water quality. Their

extensive reef formations help stabilize

shorelines, bottom habitats, sediments,

and provide refuge and essential intertidal

habitat for wildlife (shrimp, crabs, other

invertebrates, red fish, seatrout, and

wading birds).

Mapping of existing oyster reefs within

the southern to middle portions of the

Mosquito Lagoon (Canaveral National

Seashore) is currently underway. This

mapping effort stops very near the

southern boundary of MLAP. A need to

extend many of the ongoing research

efforts has been identified in the “resource

inventory and assessment strategies”

under Issue 1 in Chapter 5.

Fisheries-Independent 

Monitoring Program

The Fisheries Independent Monitoring

Program in the Mosquito Lagoon is

conducted by the Florida Marine Research

Institute, Indian River Field Laboratory, in

association with SJRWMD, Volusia County

Mosquito Control, and MLAP staff. Twenty

stratified-random sampling sites are

sampled each month. A 21-meter center

bag-seine is used to collect juvenile,

small adult fish and macrocrustaceans.

Standard length measurements are taken

from up to 20 individuals per fish species,

the remaining individuals are counted

to determine species abundance. Water

quality parameters, including salinity,

temperature, dissolved oxygen and pH are

collected at each sampling site.

Staff from the Florida Marine Research Institute using a 

21-meter seine to sample for fish in the preserve 

(photo: Doug Adams, FWC-FWRI).

One of the most popular animals to view in Mosquito Lagoon 

Aquatic Preserve is the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin seen 

cruising beside the channel.

The bighead searobin (Prinotus tribulus) measured as part of 

the Fisheries Independent Monitoring Program by the Florida 

Marine Research Institute (photo: Doug Adams, FWC-FWRI).
55

Goals of this monitoring effort are: 1) to obtain an accurate, quantitative sample of juvenile and small

adult fishes which utilize shallow-water habitats; and 2) to estimate relative abundance of small fishes

and macrocrustaceans that use shallow water regions of the estuary (Florida Marine Research Institute,

2007). MLAP staff have assisted the Florida Marine Research Institute with personnel during their

monthly surveys throughout the Mosquito Lagoon since 2007.

Critical Analysis of Wild Dolphin Health

Scientists from Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution (HBOI) and the National Ocean Service, along

with other marine mammal experts, conducted a 5-year comprehensive assessment of the health of

wild dolphins in the IRL and in Charleston, S.C from 2003 to 2008. In 2008, HBOI reapplied for permits

to continue with these studies in the IRL. The main goal of the project was to identify serious health

threats to wild dolphins, such as pollutants, so that effective management plans could be designed. Wild

captures of dolphins have been conducted in the southern end of the Mosquito Lagoon, and a wide

range of measurements and diagnostic tests were performed to obtain a comprehensive examination

of each animal’s health. The project was prompted by concerns raised during HBOI’s ongoing photoidentification study of IRL dolphins. More than 30% of the 500 dolphins studied through 2003 had

unexplained skin disorders and tumors (Bossart, 2007). Researchers have investigated the deaths

of numerous IRL dolphins and found evidence of a variety of diseases such as hepatitis, meningitis,

pneumonia, and central nervous system disorders, including some caused by fungi and protozoa. Some

of these afflictions have never before been seen in dolphins.

Dr. Gregory Bossart, director of HBOI’s Division of Marine Mammal Research and Conservation, and

project leader, agrees, “We not only are going to learn about the health of the dolphins, we’re also going

to learn about the health of the environment, which directly impacts humans” (Bossart, 2007). The IRLCharleston project was approved by special permit from the National Marine Fisheries Service after a

rigorous review. Marine mammals act as sentinels for oceans and for human health. As such diseases

emerge and the effects of global climate change are better understood, some investigators are raising

concerns about deteriorating aquatic ecosystems. In turn, these warnings can help experts characterize

and manage the effects these trends pose to the oceans, other water bodies and on human health.

Doing so is especially important since much of the present emerging disease data suggest that complex

interactions occur among anthropogenic toxins, immunologic and genetic factors and infectious

organisms in the marine mammals that share coastal environments with humans.

Resource Inventory and Assessment of Islands and Submerged Lands 

The Mosquito Lagoon Advisory Committee has identified the need for an updated resource inventory

documenting the status of all species and habitat types present in the MLAP. Resource inventories are

imperative to understand the current status and trends of the natural resources found within the MLAP in

order to develop and implement successful resource management and protection efforts.

Recommended inventories include information on submerged aquatic vegetation, emergent vegetation

(mangroves, marsh grasses and other shoreline vegetation), important roosting and nesting areas for

wading birds and other designated species and their habitats. Abundance and distribution of invasive

non-native species, such as the charru mussel need to be documented and studied with the purpose

of identifying their effect on the native biological communities within the MLAP. Please see the Issues

Section, Chapter 5, to review future action plans.

Other research and monitoring efforts underway in the Mosquito Lagoon include the CNS and National

Park Service’s (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring Program. This program aims to establish natural resource

inventory and monitoring as a standard practice throughout the national park system. Completed or in

progress are inventories of fish, birds, vascular plants, amphibians and reptiles, small mammals, bats

and evidence of Chytrid fungus in frogs. A partial list of vital signs to be monitoried include marine water

quality, groundwater dynamics, coastal shoreline change, saltmarsh elevation, invasive non-native

plants, shorebirds, fisheries take, amphibians and plant communities. Additionally, the U.S. Geological

Service has a water-stage recorder at Haulover Canal which monitors gauge height, discharge,

precipitation, wind speed and direction, specific conductivity and water temperature.

Other long term studies underway in the Mosquito Lagoon by the Fish and Wildlife Research Institute in

cooperation with Dynamac, include acoustic tagging and monitoring of several commercially important

species (e.g. red drum, spotted sea trout and bull sharks (Carcharhinus leucas)). Tracking acoustic-tagged

fish is a tool that provides biologists with information on movement patterns and habitat preferences.
56

4.2 / The Resource Management Program

The Resource Management Program addresses how CAMA manages the MLAP and its resources.

The primary concept of MLAP resource management projects and activities are guided by CAMA’s

mission statement: “To protect Florida’s coastal and aquatic resources.” CAMA’s marine protected area

managers accomplish resource management by physically conducting management activities on the

resources for which they have direct management responsibility, and through science and partnering

influence the activities of others within and adjacent to their managed areas. CAMA works to ensure that

the most current, effective and efficient restoration techniques are used consistently within our sites,

throughout our program, and when possible, throughout the state. The strongly integrated Ecosystem

Science, Education and Outreach and Public Use Programs, provide guidance and support to the

Resource Management Program. The MLAP collaborates with other managing entities by reviewing

various protected area management plans. This section explains the history and current status of our

resource management efforts.

4.2.1 / Background of Resource Management at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Resource management in the MLAP has focused on partnering with Volusia County and other local

government entities to encourage comprehensive plans consistent with Florida Administrative

Code (F.A.C.) Chapter 18-20 and CAMA’s mission. Since the program’s establishment in 1970, the

MLAP team has enhanced its ability to achieve conservation goals through outreach efforts with law

enforcement and local citizens. The resource management program within the MLAP focuses on

maintaining the MLAP in “essentially natural or existing condition so that their aesthetic, biological and

scientific values may endure for the enjoyment of future generations” (F.A.C. 18-20). It is essential to

manage the MLAP’s resources in a manner that supports both habitat integrity and species diversity

while encouraging sustainable public use. The local community and the general public rely on

resource managers to maintain the MLAP for continued enjoyment and recreation such as swimming,

boating, fishing and clamming.

Fishing is enjoyed by the young and the young at heart throughout the Mosquito Lagoon 

(photo: Captain Jeff Dorobiala).
57

Early Department of Natural Resources (DNR, now DEP) management efforts concentrated on

the classification of management areas and writing the original MLAP management plan. Specific

management areas were delineated by the DNR for the MLAP, identifying boundaries, descriptions

and allowable uses for each area based on bathymetry, seagrass or bivalve coverage, and dock

structures or other infrastructure present within the area. The resulting classifications reflected the

designated zoning and land uses of adjacent uplands. This allowed consistent uses that aligned

with habitat values and RPA designations for state-owned submerged lands. Characteristics were

determined for each area within the MLAP and included: the bathymetry, seagrass and/or mollusk

coverage and dock structures or other infrastructure within the area. These same RPA designations

are used today to assist those entities responsible for permitting development or dredging activities

within the MLAP.

From 1970 through the late 1990s, DNR staff were responsible for reviewing permit applications and

aquaculture leases within MLAP boundaries. During this period, aquaculture leases could be authorized

within the CNS boundaries (B. Poole, personal communication, 2008). In 1996 the NPS determined that

issuance of aquaculture leases within CNS waters was not compatible with NPS policies and guidelines.

It is important to note that prior to 1980 the MLAP boundary encompassed waters down to the City of

Oak Hill that now lie within CNS. For a few years, from about 1986 – 1989, CNS assumed administrative

responsibility for oyster leases within its boundaries. In 1989, responsibility for management of these

leases was reassigned to DACS through Chapter 253.68(2)(a) Florida Statutes and 18-20.003(31-33)

Florida Administrative Code.

Other resource management efforts taken by partners during the mid 1990s included education signage

to address concerns of manatee/human interaction problems at a park in Bethune Beach. The Save the

Manatee Club requested that enforcement measures be taken to reduce human contact with manatees

at this aggregation site and requested investigation of unauthorized structures in the manatee basin.

From 1970-1995, the ECFAP office

focused efforts among three aquatic

preserves in the IRL including the

Mosquito Lagoon. In 1995 the ECFAP

office was given the responsibility

to jointly manage a large tract of

land at the St. Sebastian River

Buffer Preserve (now known as the

St. Sebastian River Preserve State

Park (SSRPSP)) located on the St.

Sebastian River. This new acquisition

required most of the staff’s time, thus

very little work was conducted in the

MLAP for a 10-year period. In 2004,

the management responsibilities for

almost all the state’s buffer preserves,

including the St. Sebastian River

Buffer Preserve, were transferred to

DEP’s Division of Recreation and

Parks. The local CAMA program

reverted exclusively to management

of submerged lands and islands.

During reorganization, several staffing

positions, buildings and equipment were transferred to the Division of Recreation and Parks. In the past

three years the program has been retooling to focus on management of submerged resources.

Following the reorganization of CAMA and the renewed focus of CAMA’s programs on submerged

lands the ECFAP has expanded its programs from a previously narrow focus on the region around

the St. Sebastian River to currently include the Indian River – Malibar to Vero Beach Aquatic Preserve,

the Banana River Aquatic Preserve, and the MLAP. Until recently, most resource management efforts

involved coordinating with partner agencies and groups conducting research, monitoring, or habitat

restoration, and assisting partners with grant-match or permitting requirements as needed. Through

2008, the MLAP ecosystem science efforts were focused on providing manpower to assist partners

with resource monitoring efforts and introducing two new projects to the MLAP, annual aerial bird

surveys and island enhancement events.

The natural resources within the preserve can be found in close 

proximity to developed shorelines.
58

4.2.2 / Current Status of Resource Management at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Strategic Approach to Management with Minimal Staffing 

From the 2007-2009 fiscal years, the ECFAP program had two full time employees and two temporary

positions tasked with the management responsibility for a geographic area spanning 107 linear miles

of coastline, creating logistical challenges for resource management. ECFAP experiences high turnover

of temporary positions. Two positions remained unfilled from summer through December 2007 due to

potential budget holdbacks resulting in hiring freezes. For these reasons, the ECFAP’s management

strategy for the MLAP has been to work closely with partners that have similar and overlapping

jurisdiction or complementary management

responsibilities. These partners include the

Volusia County Environmental Management

Office, Volusia County Mosquito Control, CNS,

Marine Discovery Center and the SJRWMD.

Please refer to Chapters 6 and 7 for further

facilities and staffing information.

Starting in 2007, the ECFAP program significantly

increased efforts to improve the existing

understanding of the status of aquatic resources

and ecosystems in the MLAP. This represented

the continued implementation of a five-year

strategy of expanding efforts to all the aquatic

preserves under ECFAP management. The

advisory committee for the MLAP Management

Plan has assisted with the renewal and

expansion of partnerships.

ECFAP and the Mosquito Lagoon Working

Group have identified the need to understand

the current status of MLAP natural resources and

what pressures may be negatively affecting them.

Public comments were received recommending

assessment of potential affects of restoration

on possible submerged historic or prehistoric

sites. In the Issues section of this plan, priority

issues have been defined and resources and

partner agencies identified to help resolve these

concerns. This network of city, county, state, and

federal agencies and partners serve as points of

contact to coordinate management strategies.

This team approach allows all participants

to maximize the effectiveness of limited

programmatic resources, resulting in benefits

for the overall MLAP resource management

program. By tapping into and incorporating

the vast knowledge and experience that these

partner agencies possess, management goals

are accomplished for all partners in the Mosquito

Lagoon region, while saving time and money.

Marsh Restoration 

The SJRWMD and the Volusia County Mosquito Control are partnering in the rehabilitation of impacted

coastal wetlands, particularly wetlands originally impounded or dragline ditched for mosquito control

throughout the Mosquito Lagoon and other systems. These agencies have been involved in marsh

restoration efforts for the past several years working from south to north in the Mosquito Lagoon basin.

In 2008 they reached several impoundments and dragline ditches needing restoration within the MLAP.

The C-8 impoundment on the southern boundary of the MLAP is currently being restored to historic

marsh elevations.

Several studies have determined that upon restoration and reconnection to surrounding marshes, these

impacted coastal wetlands are able to rapidly recruit native vegetation and the number of fish species

Staff performs cut-stump treatment with herbicide on recruiting Australian pines to remove this invasive tree that causes 

erosion of island shorelines.
59

that use the restored habitat will significantly and quickly increase. As tidal exchange was restored to one

impounded area in the IRL, the cover of salt tolerant plants increased 1,056% in less than three years

(Brockmeyer, Rey, Virnstein, Gilmore & Earnest, 1997). Habitat use by fish after an impounded wetland was

reconnected showed an increase to 40 fish species from the nine species present before reconnection

of the wetlands to the lagoon (Poulakis, Shenker & Taylor, 2002). Ongoing research has lead to the

development of methods for reconnecting and managing impounded wetlands that allow a large degree of

ecological recovery and sustainability while still providing for mosquito control (Steward et al., 2003).

Oyster Reef Restoration Efforts

Restoration efforts currently underway within the Mosquito Lagoon (inside CNS boundaries) involve the

placement of artificial mats with attached oyster shells, near existing oyster reefs and/or impacted areas, that

serve as recruitment sites for oysters. The oyster mats provide suitable recruitment habitat for settlement

of oyster larvae. Within six months of deployment, restored reefs had approximately half the number of live

oysters as reference reefs (L. Walters, personal communication, 2008). The goal of restoring oyster reefs

within the Mosquito Lagoon is to reduce the loss of existing oyster reefs and increase species diversity by

providing essential habitat for numerous other estuarine inhabitants that would normally utilize this resource.

In previous studies, a total of 105 different species of macroorganisms were documented utilizing oyster reefs

in Mosquito Lagoon (Boudreaux et al., 2006). Similar studies in locations other than the IRL, indicate that as

many as 300 different species have been found associated with similar oyster reefs (Wells, 1961).

Several organizations are providing funding to continue this work and plans include expanding oyster

restoration efforts in areas within the MLAP. Permits for potential temporary impacts to resources are being

obtained through federal and state agencies.

Seagrass Restoration Efforts

Propeller scar studies were conducted as part of a Master’s thesis by Katie Grablow for UCF. Research also

served to document areas with intense seagrass scarring throughout the Mosquito Lagoon. During aerial

surveys, Grablow identified “four main areas with intense scarring, three of which were within the Pole-Troll

Zone boundaries” (Grablow, 2008). These findings suggest that improved enforcement of the Pole-Troll

Zone boundaries and/or additional educational signage is necessary to reduce the occurrence of damage

to seagrass beds. Scheidt concluded increased law enforcement of these areas was needed (Scheidt &

Garreau, 2007). Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge (MINWR) has established two Pole-Troll Zones in the

middle portion (Tiger Shoals) of Mosquito Lagoon to protect vulnerable seagrass beds. CNS is considering

establishment of additional zones farther north in the shallow areas southwest of Shipyard Island.

Propeller scar studies were conducted using artificially created scarring in the Mosquito Lagoon to assess

the recovery time of four types of seagrass scars based on different restoration efforts. Glablow described

each type of seagrass propeller scar depending on severity. Glablow also used different restoration

methods such as planting, filling, and planting and filling of scar trenches (Grablow, 2008). Type I (most

severe) and Type II scarring received transplantation treatment. After a year of monitoring, none of the

areas receiving restoration treatment proved as successful as natural recovery in untreated scarring.

Seagrass transplantation and filling of scarring was unsuccessful at the conclusion of the study. There was

complete mortality of seagrass in all scars receiving transplants after two months. Recovery of impacted

shoal grass (Halodule wrightii) beds was due to recolonization of shoal grass from the dense adjacent

seagrass beds. Type IV (least severe) scars completely recovered naturally within a year unlike any of

the other scar types and restoration treatments. Grablow’s recommendations are to concentrate effort on

preventing seagrass destruction rather than expending resources on restoration (Grablow, 2008).

Additional Impacts to Submerged Resources

Wastewater discharges and their effects on water quality and natural resources are of particular concern

to the general public and MLAP staff. Two local wastewater treatment facilities, the Edgewater and New

Smyrna Beach wastewater treatment plants, have permitted wet-weather overflow discharges of treated

wastewater into the Mosquito Lagoon and MLAP. Additionally, the Mosquito Lagoon region has a large

number of homes and businesses with septic systems or on-site sewage treatment and disposal systems.

The areas surrounding the Mosquito Lagoon basin are characterized by soils and high water tables not

recommended for septic systems. Many are older septic systems, increasing the possibility of pollutants

seeping into the MLAP and impacting water quality. Two researchers from Florida Institute of Technology,

Drs. Zarillo and Belanger are currently developing a hydrologic model of Mosquito Lagoon that will assess

effects of septic systems on lagoon water quality.
60

4.3 / The Education and Outreach Program

The Education and Outreach Program components are essential management tools used to increase

public awareness and promote informed stewardship by local communities. Education programs

include on- and off-site education activities, training, and workshops. These activities include: field based

restoration events for students and teachers; the development and distribution of media; the distribution

of information at local events; the recruitment and management of volunteers; and training workshops for

local citizens and decision-makers. The design and implementation of education programs incorporates

the strategic targeting of select audiences. These audiences include all ages and walks of life. These

efforts by the Education and Outreach Program allow the MLAP to build and maintain relationships and

convey knowledge to the community, invaluable components to successful management.

4.3.1 / Background of Education and Outreach at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

The primary outreach programs established under management of the ECFAP office have been the

Island Enhancement Program (IEP), regular presentations to local elected officials, governing boards and

committees, an annual regulatory based workshop, three half-day summer camps at the Environmental

Field Station (EFS), regular EFS visitation by the general public, and the annual Goby Fest.

The IEP includes four components:

1. Volunteer island enhancement workdays

2. Eagle Scout projects

3. Adopt-A-Spoil Island project

4. Colonial waterbird monitoring and management.

The ECFAP office modeled their IEP after a program initiated by the Southeast Florida Aquatic Preserves

office and under the advisement of the Spoil Island Working Group. During the winter 2006-2007 season,

these two offices shared staff and equipment while developing the four components of the IEP.

Volunteer participation is essential for the success of the island restoration activities such as the 

revegetation of heavily used islands by planting native species.
61

In 2005 and 2006, the ECFAP IEP was expanded beyond the Indian River-Malabar to Vero Beach Aquatic

Preserve, to include work in the Sebastian area as well as the Banana River Aquatic Preserve. In Fiscal

Year 2006, ECFAP received full-time funding for a position to coordinate the IEP. In June 2007, the ECFAP

office acquired a second boat through DEP surplus for transporting plants and volunteers. In 2008, the

office acquired a 12-passenger platform style planning-hull vessel through a donation, allowing them

to better facilitate transport of volunteers and equipment. During the 2007-2008 winter season, the IEP

expanded to islands in MLAP.

In the MLAP, the IEP coordinates with the Volusia County Natural Resources staff and the Marine

Discovery Center at New Smyrna Beach. Partnerships will also be sought with various non-profit groups

such as the Keep Volusia Beautiful program.

Volunteer Island Enhancement Workdays

Seven workdays per “enhancement season” are

coordinated by ECFAP staff during the fall and

winter months, one of which coincides with the

International Annual Coastal Cleanup. A variety

of activities may take place during a typical

enhancement workday: non-native vegetation

removal, native vegetation plantings, shoreline

restoration and stabilization, trash cleanup and

construction and maintenance of public facilities

(grills, picnic tables and docks). Both CAMA and

the Florida Inland Navigation District provide

funding for these activities. Volunteer groups

that participate include neighbors of the MLAP,

commercial businesses, high school groups,

church groups, non-profits, and other government

partners.

Eagle Scout Program

This component facilitates and encourages the

youth-oriented leadership and responsibility of Boy

Scouts. In order to earn the Eagle Scout rank, a

Boy Scout must fulfill requirements in the areas of

leadership, service and outdoor skills. The Spoil

Island Program provides an ideal opportunity

for Boy Scouts to take a leading role in the

enhancement of the spoil islands, helping them to

meet the requirements for the Eagle Scout rank.

Adopt-A-Spoil Island Program

This program provides groups in the community

the opportunity to initiate scheduled maintenance

of one or more adopted islands. Maintenance

consists of removing debris and litter four times

a year and may include habitat restoration projects or public access improvements. One cleanup date

coincides with the annual International Annual Coastal Cleanup held each September.

Colonial Waterbird Monitoring and Management

The ECFAP team regularly monitors the larger waterbird nesting and roosting colonies within two of three

aquatic preserves during nesting season. Nesting season normally starts in early December for great

blue herons (Ardea herodias) and cormorants (Phalacrocorax auritus) , then peaks during spring and

ends in early October. Current efforts are concentrated in Brevard County and Indian River County on

the ten largest colonies, including the largest brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) colony on the east

coast of Florida in the Banana River Aquatic Preserve, large wood stork (Mycteria americana) colonies

Volunteers lovingly plant red and black mangrove seedlings 

to restore eroded island shorelines. 
62

in Grant and Wabasso and a mixed colony (over 2,000 nests) including white ibis and roseate spoonbill

located in the northern IRL. An annual aerial survey has been conducted since 2006 in Brevard and

Indian River counties in cooperation with Florida Audubon.

The colonial waterbird monitoring program has served to document several poaching incidents on

islands in the Banana River Aquatic Preserve and the IRL. To help educate the public about this issue

the ECFAP cooperates with FWC by maintaining educational signage targeting recreational boaters

and duck hunters recreating in the vicinity of larger nesting colony islands. The public has responded

positively to educational and law enforcement efforts and a decrease in disturbance has been observed

on some nesting colony islands. ECFAP staff also coordinated with hunting organizations to educate

hunters about local nesting conflicts

with hunting. These groups responded

very positively to help resolve any

potential conflicts. During late 2007 and

early 2008, few additional poaching

incidents have been documented since

educational posting of islands started.

Efforts are underway by FWC to provide

special protective designations for

important nesting colonies. On islands

serving as bird rookeries, cleanups and

habitat restoration projects focus on

planting native tree species to provide

nesting structure. Restoration events

are scheduled annually at times when it

will not disturb nesting behavior. 

The ECFAP office located in Cocoa

is also known as the Brevard County

Environmental Field Station/City Point

Community Church. This historic, 123

year-old building and its environmental

education exhibits are open to the

public from Monday to Friday, 8:00

a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Two-hundred twenty-seven visitors toured the facility during fiscal year 2006-2007.

Additionally, three half-day camps for children are held during summer in coordination with Brevard

County Natural Resources Management Office.

Other education and outreach programs undertaken by the ECFAP office are public workshops held

annually concerning resource management or regulatory topics of concern to the citizens or businesses

surrounding the aquatic preserves. In 2005, ECFAP sponsored a multi-agency workshop for marina

owners to explain emergency permitting requirements following the active and destructive 2004

hurricane season. Those individuals who were rebuilding their businesses were able to ask questions

and to fill out permit applications during the Emergency Permitting Workshop with the help of federal

and state permitting staff. A multi-agency and marine industry Anchoring and Mooring Workshop was

held in 2006 in response to citizens’ questions about permitting individual mooring buoys or mooring

fields. In 2007, in response to illegal killing of protected bird species in the IRL, the ECFAP team and

Florida Audubon co-hosted a workshop for the IRL law enforcement community about federal and

state resource protection laws. Law enforcement agents, deputies, and officers attended from Volusia,

Brevard, St. Johns and Indian River counties.

4.3.2 / Current Status of Education and Outreach at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Several of the outreach programs mentioned above are currently being established within the MLAP. For

instance, during spring 2008 two of the six IEP workdays were scheduled in the MLAP. Staff is recruiting

a volunteer network interested in removing non-native vegetation, planting native vegetation, restoring

and stabilizing shorelines, and participating in trash cleanups on the islands within the MLAP.

The ECFAP plans to assist partners by recruiting volunteers and providing logistical support to help with

oyster restoration efforts spearheaded by The Nature Conservancy and UCF. The office has coordinated

volunteers from IEP workdays to participate in the construction of oyster mats in coordination with The

Nature Conservancy for placement in Mosquito Lagoon to recruit and form new oyster reefs. 

Staff co-hosts half-day summer camp at the Environmental Field 

Station where students learn about the IRL estuary. 
63

Educating the public about nesting birds utilizing the islands in the MLAP is an important component

of the colonial waterbird monitoring program. The staff, in partnership with the East Volusia Mosquito

Control District and Florida Audubon, is coordinating an annual aerial survey to identify and monitor

existing waterbird nesting and roosting colonies. Volunteers are needed to regularly inspect islands

and replace educational signage informing recreational users they are on or near a large active nesting

colony island.

The Eagle Scout program will be initiated once the Volusia County Island Management Plan is

completed. Staff is coordinating with Volusia County to determine which islands could benefit from

enhancement or restoration projects through the Eagle Scout program. Scouts may be able to

assist with installation of universal signage clearly indicating island designations such as education,

conservation and recreation.

Staff annually conducts various educational and outreach events, including Goby Fest held in spring

at SSRPSP and several half-day summer camps held at the Environmental Field Station. These

events feature information about each of the MLAP programs and serve to educate the public about

the uniqueness of the aquatic preserves found right in their own backyards. The MLAP staff plans to

participate in the annual FishStock Festival and Tournament held on Memorial Day weekend at Riverside

Volunteers help in the restoration of oyster reefs in the Mosquito Lagoon by attaching oyster shells to mesh 

mats that will encourage the growth of new, healthy reefs.
64

Park in New Smyrna Beach. This tournament provides a great opportunity to interact with the local and

visiting fishing community and their families. Another outreach venue that targets anglers and fishing

guides using the MLAP is Coastal Angler Magazine.

The staff has a partnership with the Marine Discovery Center, a non-profit educational group, to educate

the local community on the protection and conservation of the natural resources found within the MLAP.

Staff also coordinates with United Waterfowlers-Florida to address permitting and resource management

goals within the MLAP.

The staff, working with partner agencies, has identified the goal of reinitiating the bi-annual State of the

Mosquito Lagoon Conference. As in the past, this popular conference brings together a large group

of scientists, resource managers and the general public to discuss the current monitoring, restoration

and research efforts underway throughout the Mosquito Lagoon estuary. It also provides a pertinent

venue to discuss research results, the status of the Mosquito Lagoon ecosystem as a whole and identify

some of the future research and management needs that must be addressed to ensure the protection

of this unique ecosystem. When the conference was originally initiated by CNS and MINWR in 1989,

the primary goal was for researchers working in Mosquito Lagoon to gather in an informal atmosphere

to describe current activities, share recent findings and identify possible collaborative efforts (J. Stiner,

personal communication, January 14, 2009). The staff looks forward to meeting with the other managers

in the Mosquito Lagoon to discuss the focus and format of future conferences.

4.4 / The Public Use Management Program

The Public Use Management Program addresses the management of public use conditions and

opportunities at the preserve. The components of this program focus on facilitating recreational

opportunities within the site’s boundaries which are compatible with resource management objectives.

The goal for public access management in CAMA managed areas is to “promote and manage public use

of our preserves and reserves that are consistent with the research, education, and stewardship mission

of CAMA.”

While access by the general public has always been a priority, the conservation of aquatic preserves

and other marine protected areas is the primary management concern for CAMA. CAMA strives to fulfill

the goal outlined under F.A.C. Chapter 18-20, “To preserve, protect, and enhance these exceptional

areas of submerged lands by reasonable regulation of human activity within the preserves through the

development and implementation of a comprehensive management program.” For implementation

of comprehensive management, it is essential for staff to analyze existing public uses and define

management strategies that balance these activities where compatible in a manner that protects natural,

cultural, and aesthetic resources. This requires gathering existing information on use, needs, and

opportunities as well as a thorough consideration of the existing and potential impacts to critical upland,

wetland and submerged habitats. This includes the coordination of visitor program planning with social

science research. One of CAMA’s critical management challenges during the next 10 years is obtaining

funding and staff to adequately assess public use while balancing anticipated increases in public use

with the need to ensure preservation of site resources.

Corresponding agency challenges and responsibilities rest with the FWC Boating and Waterways law

enforcement program. Public comment during the planning process identified funding of enforcement as

very important, “spend money on protection of resources,” “not enough presence on the water”; were

common remarks. The following section explains the history and current status of our public use efforts.

4.4.1 / Background of Public Use at Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Historically, public use of Mosquito Lagoon has mainly been consumptive. Shellfish harvesting, fishing,

and hunting game species were important consumptive uses from the beginnings of indigenous human

occupation into the early 1900s. Lagoon waters were also the main travel corridor for early settlers. As

settlements grew, commercial uses of the lagoon became more important for harvest of seafood and

transport of goods.

During the last century, commercial fishing and agriculture became the economic base of the

surrounding small communities, along with some seasonal tourism, especially in New Smyrna Beach.

Important commercially-harvested marine species included shellfish, shrimp, and mullet. Commercial

fishing continued as an important industry and component of the local economy until 1995 when the

citizens of Florida passed a constitutional amendment banning the use of gill nets for commercial fishing.

Commercial harvest of shrimp for food and bait, blue crab and cast-netting for mullet continue after the

net ban; however, some harvest levels are greatly reduced.
65

Statewide there were decreases in landings, numbers of fishermen and dockside value of fisheries

after the net ban was in place. The impact on communities adjacent to the Mosquito Lagoon heavily

dependent on local commercial fishing activities was much greater. Evidence of this was seen in the

closure of local commercial fish houses (e.g. Oak Hill, Mims, Titusville, Cocoa, Port Canaveral) that were

not experienced throughout the rest of the state (Adams, Jacob & Smith, 2000).

Recreational fishing became a popular pastime for early visitors to Florida and continues as a popular

recreational activity. Recreational shrimping, primarily a night time activity, has been a long tradition

among central Floridians. Central Mosquito Lagoon is the most popular harvest area in the region. Other

consumptive uses include hunting. Historically, hunting use consisted mostly of waterfowl hunting by

residents with local knowledge of the shallow tidal creek systems of the MLAP. In recent years, breeched

impounded marshes and managed marshes within MINWR receive more extensive waterfowl hunting use

than areas in the MLAP.

In the past, impacts of nonconsumptive uses were limited due to small population size of the

surrounding communities and lack of access points. Local residents and visitors primarily engaged in

nonconsumptive activities, such as swimming, boating, canoeing, nature watching, and waterskiing.

4.4.2 / Current Status of Public Use at 

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Access Points

Three public waterfront parks are located

east of U.S. Highway 1 along Riverside Drive,

in the city of Edgewater, adjacent to the

MLAP. Two of these parks have boat ramps:

1) Kennedy Point Memorial Park has boat

launching facilities including four paved

ramps and parking; 2) Menard-May Park, a

short distance south of Kennedy Memorial,

has a shallow dirt ramp suitable for Class

A (less than 16 feet) trailerable watercraft,

canoes, and kayaks. Menard-May Park also

offers the public a riverfront playground,

pavilion, restrooms, sandy beach, native

plants, mangrove habitat, and two fishing/

observation piers. 3) Veterans Park, just south

of Menard-May Park, has a parking area and

a fishing/observation pier that jets directly

onto Mosquito Lagoon.

Additional public boat and kayak launches are available around the Mosquito Lagoon outside MLAP

boundaries. Public access ramps on the eastern side of Mosquito Lagoon are listed from north to south:

Hiles boat ramp in New Smyrna Beach, Bethune Beach and two at the CNS. Shipyard Island ramp is

located inside the CNS north entrance, accessible via Route A1A. This ramp has limited parking. There is

a canoe/kayak launch site along the Eldora Loop Road at Parking Area #7. There is also a small unpaved

ramp at Parking Area #5 (end of road) in the north end of CNS. A small vessel ramp is accessible from

the south entrance of CNS at Eddy Creek across from Playalinda Beach (off State Road 402).

Along the western shore of the Mosquito Lagoon there are three boat ramps, besides Menard May Park

and Kennedy Point Memorial Park, in Edgewater and River Breeze Park in Oak Hill. Three launches are

located inside MINWR, two dirt ramps along the central, mainland side of Mosquito Lagoon (off of State

Road 3) and another developed launch, Baer’s Cove, located along Haulover Canal (off State Road 3).

In addition, boats can enter the MLAP from the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW) that runs along the

western MLAP boundary. There are no existing public mooring fields or traditional anchorages within the

boundaries of the MLAP.

Current Commercial Public Uses (Consumptive)

There are several commercially-important aquatic species that spend at least a portion of their life cycle

in the Mosquito Lagoon and are a significant source of revenue for the area. These include the hard

clam, American oyster , brown shrimp, pink shrimp, white shrimp, and blue crab. The importance of the

system as a nursery for commercially-important species can not be overemphasized.

The backwaters of the Mosquito Lagoon historically supported 

game bird activities (photo: NASA).
66

Commercial inshore and offshore harvest data for Volusia County:

2006 Annual Volusia County Landings (FWC, 2007)

•	 Blue crab landings totaled 374,654 pounds (169,940 kg)

•	 White shrimp offshore landing totaled 92,395 pounds (41,910 kg)

•	 Hard clams landings totaled 25,993 pounds (11,790 kg)

•	 Eastern or American oyster a total of 1,972 pounds (894 kg)

•	 Brown shrimp landings totaled 22,927 pounds (10,400 kg)

•	 Spiny lobster offshore landing were 3,633 pounds (1,648 kg)

One of the most important commercial species in the Mosquito Lagoon is very dependent on

consistent salinity levels and good water quality. The hard clam, common in sandy bottoms

throughout the IRL, is farmed commercially from Indian River County northward to Volusia County

including the MLAP. The hard clam had the greatest commercial value of any fishery species in the IRL

for many years but catches have declined dramatically in recent years. This region accounted for 10.5

million pounds (4,762,720 kg) of the commercially harvested hard clams valued at over $70.3 million.

Much of this revenue is generated from wild stock harvest in the Mosquito Lagoon. Volusia County

made up 4.5% of this region’s catch, valued at over $3.3 million for the period of 1987 through 2001

(Smithsonian Marine Station, 2007b).

As a consequence of more consistent salinity levels, increases in wild hard clam harvest totals for

Volusia County have continued while other IRL county harvests have declined. Annual 2006 landings

for hard clams in Volusia County alone totaled 25,993 pounds (11,790 kg) versus 15,312 pounds

(6,945 kg) in Brevard County (FWC, 2007). While increased harvest is positive, monitoring efforts are

important to ensure that clam bed populations are sustainable at current harvest levels. Hard clams

also account for a large percent of the total aquaculture production (farm production) in Florida,

behind only tropical fish and aquatic plants.

Future commercial exploitation of other species such as whelks or snails (for the production of buttons),

or the harvest of horseshoe crabs or other undeveloped markets should be brought to the attention of

CAMA and monitored for adverse affects to local resources.

Kennedy Point Memorial Park in Edgewater offers four paved boat ramps and parking.
67

Current Recreational Public Uses (Consumptive)

Recreational and charter fishing along with shellfish harvesting are the most popular consumptive uses

in Mosquito Lagoon according to the Resource Use Characterization Study of Mosquito Lagoon within

the boundaries of the MINWR (Holloway-Adkins, Scheidt, Reyier, Lowers & Epstein, 2005). Results

from aerial watercraft use survey conducted from June 2006 until May 2007 showed a sharp decrease

in commercial clamming; however, the

authors learned water quality closures

due to heavy rainfall may account for

differences (Scheidt & Garreau, 2007).

One of the underestimated consumptive

use groups is the recreational shrimpers,

not captured during the recent boating

study conducted during daytime hours. On

moonlit nights during the winter, flotillas

of shrimpers and their lanterns can be

seen harvesting shrimp on the waters of

Mosquito Lagoon. This is a common sight

throughout much of Mosquito Lagoon with

a large portion of these activities centered

around Oak Hill near Riverbreeze Park and

Haulover Canal.

During the 2007 watercraft usage study,

researchers found a strong statistical

relationship existed between the number

of watercraft trailers at boat launch ramps

and the number of trailerable watercraft

observed on Mosquito Lagoon during

aerial surveys (Scheidt & Garreau, 2007).

Increasing population size, awareness

of the MLAP, increased number of ramps

and improved access to backwaters

using shallow-draft watercraft have all

contributed to increased recreational

fishing. A conclusion from the use

characterization study was that MINWR

infrastructure (boat ramp facilities) were

the limiting factor behind the number of

watercraft using lower Mosquito Lagoon

(Holloway-Adkins et al., 2005). Researchers

noted during 2006 – 2007 surveys that

“the greatest number of watercraft were

observed in the northern portion of CNS”

which was not surveyed in 2002 studies

(Scheidt & Garreau, 2007). This region is

bounded by urbanized areas to the east

and west, unlike other portions of the CNS

and wildlife refuge study area (bordering

the MLAP). This condition results in high

watercraft densities, especially within

the AIWW and Shipyard Channel. CNS

is expected to be an area where visitor

impacts to sensitive seagrass beds, oyster reefs, and wildlife is most severe (Scheidt & Garreau, 2007).

Mosquito Lagoon is one of the most important recreational fishing destinations in inland waters on

the east coast of Florida. Numerous fishing guides bring clientele to the area for shallow-water sports

fishing. Recreational fishing contributes heavily to the local economy. Mosquito Lagoon is an important

recreational destination for residents of the Orlando area and surrounding counties. Researchers found

that 52% of people traveled distances of 51-100 miles to use the Mosquito Lagoon within the boundaries

of MINWR and CNS (Holloway-Adkins et al., 2005). There are a total of 42 fish camps, hotels, and

Some of the fish that call the Mosquito Lagoon home include 

ladyfish, American shad, sheepshead, and Spanish mackeral 

(photo: Doug Adams, FWC-FWRI).

The feisty blue crab fends off a curious onlooker (photo: Marine 

Discovery Center).
68

campgrounds surrounding Mosquito Lagoon within 15 miles of the MLAP. There are 48 bait and fishing

related businesses in the vicinity of the Mosquito Lagoon. Popularity of fishing tournaments on inland

waters is increasing. Despite the obvious benefits of educational opportunities afforded by these events,

resource impacts may be associated with these tournaments. Based on study findings, researchers

concluded that the peak in boat traffic associated with special events such as fishing tournaments can

certainly become a heavy resource impact (Holloway-Adkins et al., 2005). Coordination and management

of the number and frequency of planned tournament events could minimize potential impacts.

Fishing data from creel surveys conducted during the 2002 through 2003 Resource Use Characterization

Study of Mosquito Lagoon showed recreational anglers normally targeted redfish, spotted sea trout

and/or black drum. Nearly 59% of all anglers fished for redfish and spotted sea trout (Holloway-Adkins

et al., 2005). A later boat-ramp exit study saw similar results with the overwhelming majority of anglers

targeting those two species (Scheidt & Garreau, 2007). Over 53% of the charter groups targeted redfish

exclusively. Anglers targeting redfish were successful 32.4% of the time. Anglers targeting spotted sea

trout were successful 68.9% of the time while anglers targeting black drum were successful 45.1% of the

time (Holloway-Adkins et al., 2005).

Current Recreational Public Uses (Nonconsumptive)

Current popular nonconsumptive uses include: boating, sun bathing, wading, sight-seeing, nature viewing,

picnicking, and limited camping. Recreational boating and use of personal watercraft has increased

dramatically in recent years in the MLAP near the city of Edgewater. Kayaking has become very popular in

the last ten years. Kayaks are great for travel through the shallow bottoms and narrow creeks. Visitors are

served by several kayak rental and ecotourism operators working in the vicinity of the MLAP.

Rental of motor boats and personal watercraft is available near the preserve. High speed recreational

sports such as water skiing, and tubing are popular on weekends in channels through this shallow

system. High-speed use is primarily focused in Government Cut, Shipyard Channel and the AIWW. A

study of historical aerial photographs taken between 1943 and 2000, found an increasing number of

dead margins (mounds of disarticulated shells) rising up sharply from the seaward sides of intertidal

Eastern oyster reefs in major boating channels (e.g. Government Cut, Shipyard Channel) in Mosquito

Lagoon (Wall et al., 2005). Some oyster reefs along the AIWW migrated away from the channel as

much as 50 meters and consisted primarily of piles of sun-dried shells (Grizzle et al., 2002). In Mosquito

Many locals and visitors to the Mosquito Lagoon enjoy casting a fishing line right off the shoreline.
69

Lagoon, low oyster survival was positively correlated with high sediment loads and high silt/clay levels in

the sediments (Wall et al., 2005). High speed corridors within the MLAP are characterized by oyster bars

with dead margins. Consideration of techniques for minimizing impacts to these important resources

requires consideration. Restoration of habitat is an important tool, but minimizing future impacts is vital.

MINWR and CNS Boating and Resource Use Characterization Study (2005) and Identification of 

Watercraft Use Patterns in Canaveral National Seashore (2007)

A brief summary of findings from two studies of southern and central Mosquito Lagoon are found

below. Although data were not collected within the MLAP itself, these data from the Mosquito Lagoon

and nearby areas are applicable and likely give insight into user opinion, public use levels, patterns,

and harvest success in the MLAP itself. Both areas share the AIWW channel, consequently those boats

traveling to distance destinations travel through MLAP, CNS and MINWR waters. However, consideration

should be given to the fact that the MLAP is closer to population centers, is less regulated than CNS

and MINWR waters, and areas such as Shipyard Channel experience a higher level of high-speed

recreational activity such as water skiing and personal watercraft use than the study area.

A study was conducted to document boat-use patterns from January 2002 through February 2003

within the boundaries of MINWR and CNS, located immediately south of MLAP. To improve resource

management strategies, the MINWR and CNS were seeking quantification of potential impacts to natural

resources and wildlife, data on harvest quantity, fish measurements, fish type as well as travel areas.

A later study extending further north to the boundary of the MLAP was conducted during June 2006

through May 2007. Aerial flight surveys were conducted from January 2002 through February 2003.

During a 14-month period, 108 flight surveys were completed.

Creel Surveys

Creel intercept surveys were conducted during a one-year period from January 2002 to January 2003 at

two boat ramps located within MINWR. Boaters in the sport-fishing activity group made up 87.5% of the

interviews. During the weekdays, commercial and charter fishing activity increased while sport fishing

activity decreased nearly 30%. The typical boater was male between 41 and 55 years old with an average

length of stay of 5 hours and 18 minutes. The average fishing party size was 2.2 persons.

Both studies determined that the average boat size was approximately 16 feet and four inches. Creel

and aerial flight survey discrepancies revealed that 538 commercial clammers observed in the northern

survey limits during the aerial surveys were not seen at the refuge boat ramps. It was concluded that

many clammers are utilizing boat ramps other than those in the MINWR (Holloway-Adkins, Scheidt,

Reyier, Lowers, & Epstein, 2005). Some of those commercial users may be traveling south from ramps in

Oak Hill or the MLAP.

Watercraft/ Activity Total Percent Watercraft Observed

Fishing Boat 5586 79.28

Clammer Boat 538 7.64

Crabber Boat 17 0.24

Shrimp / Dipnetter 0.27

Canoe 208 2.95

Kayak 307 4.36

Duck Hunter 5 0.07

Water Ski Boat 0.01

Personal Water Craft 9 0.13

Sailboat 202 2.87

Yacht/Cruiser 107 1.52

Camping 0.16

Other 36 0.51

TOTAL 7046 100.00

Table 4 / The total number and percent of watercraft observed during the 2002 – 2003 study for each 

watercraft/activity classification category
70

Future Public Use

Rapid population growth rates of coastal areas in Florida are expected to continue. Over the lifetime

of this plan, decisions vital to the balance between sustainable resource protection and waterway

management will need to be made by MLAP managers working closely with other state entities and local

governments. In addition, a public-use subcommittee of the Mosquito Lagoon Working Group has been

formed to assist staff in identifying concerns or resource management alternatives.

Mooring fields, live-aboards or anchorages pose few problems in the MLAP at present. With the ongoing

trend of converting existing marinas to private use and the subsequent decrease in availability of wet

slips, the movement of vessels into open water anchorages may increase. This could result in areas

within MLAP such as Government Cut becoming unauthorized mooring fields. This trend could have

additional impacts to MLAP and adjacent waters due to the lack of marine sanitation device pumpout

facilities, emergency clean-up capabilities and increased potential for derelict vessels.

It is beneficial for staff to stay actively engaged in the local planning processes when new marine

facilities such as boat ramps, marinas, mooring fields and similar siting decisions are being considered

by local government and municipalities. MLAP staff involvement early in planning processes for marine

siting can aid local government by providing expertise in permitting requirements and result in less

environmental impact to the MLAP. Efforts should be made to accommodate the small shallow-draft

vessels historically used to access much of the MLAP area. However, providing increased public access

or additional dredging through new marine facility siting may result in additional impacts to water quality

and the valued habitats and resources found in the preserve. Facilities providing boater access, such as

boat ramps and marinas, are portals to MLAP and their impacts to the preserve and its resources should

be considered by local government and permitting agencies in the planning and permit review process

for any new or expanded facilities.

Nonconsumptive uses that could cause conflicts in the future include water based signage and

advertising, commercial vending, movie production involving high speed activity or explosives,

waterbased air strips or boat races and ecotour operators competing with the public for limited resources

such as camping areas or boat launch sites. Existing state and FWC regulations may prohibit activities

such as private advertising signs posted on or near the water (F.S. 327.40, 68D-23.101 F.A.C). Regulation

of activities that can result in conflict or loss of enjoyment of other users should be considered.

Potential future uses should be considered when planning waterway management. In the MLAP these

future uses may include expansion of fishing (commercial and recreational), boating, and ecotourism

and may also include a variety of new enterprises ranging from consumptive uses to the provision

of various goods and services. Some of these future uses may not be consistent with the goals and

objectives of MLAP and may impact the resources that MLAP was established to protect. Proactive

planning, including setting aside areas within the MLAP where some categories of use are restricted or

prohibited, may lessen future conflicts. out and emergency cleanup facilities are unavailable. An increase

of anchored out vessels that sink during severe weather has augmented throughout the years. The

number of derelict vessels requiring removal has increased, along with the costs to natural resources

due to spills, contaminants, and debris. The numbers of ghost crab pots (no identifying marks/permits)

have also been greater than in previous years. The Ponce de Leon Inlet and Port District has been

designated as the local agency in Volusia County to address marine environmental hazards such as

derelict vessels. In cooperation with the FWC, the Ponce de Leon Inlet and Port District initiates a grant

proposal and contracting process for removal of the illegally abandoned vessels.
71

Chapter Five

Issues

5.1 / Introduction to Issue-Based Management

The hallmark of Florida’s Aquatic Preserve Program is that each site’s management efforts are in direct

response to, and designed for unique local and regional issues. Aquatic preserve staff use the Ecosystem

Science, Resource Management and Education and Outreach strategies to address these issues. This

integrated approach provides a management method through which the goals, objectives and strategies

associated with each issue have a greater chance of being accomplished. For instance, an aquatic preserve

may address declines in water clarity by monitoring levels of turbidity and chlorophyll (Ecosystem Science

- research), planting eroded shorelines with marsh vegetation (Resource Management - habitat restoration),

and creating a display or program on ways of preventing water quality degradation (Education and Outreach).

Partnering with local stakeholders is essential to expand the capabilities of the local aquatic preserve office, to

increase public awareness and to foster a more diverse set of solutions to a particular issue.

Issue-based management is a means through which stakeholders may become involved with an aquatic

preserve in addressing an issue. Each issue is addressed through goals, objectives and strategies. Goals

are broad statements of aspiration necessary to advance the mission of the organization. Objectives

are specific statements of expected results that contribute to the associated goal within the timeframe of

the management plan. Strategies are tools by which the associated objectives will be met. Performance

measures are metrics used to assess progress towards reaching each objective and its associated

strategies. Performance measures must be tracked on a regular cycle to ensure that the management

plan objectives are being achieved. In some cases strategies may need to be adapted to increase their

efficiency or to respond to new challenges and opportunities. Appendix D contains a summary table of all

the goals, objectives and strategies associated with each issue.

To be successful, the strategies identified in this plan will be accomplished in partnership with

local citizens, city, county, state, and federal officials, college and university students and faculty,

nongovernmental organizations, and the business community. Full implementation of the strategies

identified in this management plan is dependent upon administrative support and funding for

reassigning or otherwise acquiring staff, volunteers, contract services, equipment, training, and supplies.

Management will seek additional administrative staffing support to process contracts and grants to

expand its ability to pursue outside funding and process contracts for services.

Habitat restoration within the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve (photo: Volusia County Mosquito Control). 
72

Issue I / Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity

Habitats within the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve (MLAP) primarily consist of shallow water

communities. These communities comprise some of the most diverse and productive ecosystems in

the IRL. Major ecological communities present include tidal wetlands, mudflats, oyster reefs, seagrass

beds, and islands.

While many of these communities within and adjacent to MLAP continue to be highly diverse and

productive, they have suffered impacts as the result of growth and development in the region. These

impacts threaten long-term sustainability of MLAP’s natural resources. As described in other chapters of this

plan, there have been losses to wetlands and seagrass acreage, impacts to oyster reef extent and function,

and an influx of non-native, invasive

plants and animals. In addition, there is

the potential for additional losses of these

habitats in the future from incompatible

landuse practices and public use.

Significant habitat restoration efforts are

underway and additional opportunities

to conserve and restore species diversity

within MLAP. In the last two decades

several thousand acres of impounded

coastal wetlands, originally altered

to control mosquitoes, have been

reconnected to the IRL basin. Research

and monitoring studies have determined

that upon reconnection to the surrounding

marsh these impacted coastal wetlands

are able to rapidly recruit native vegetation

and exhibit significant increases in the

number of fish species. For example,

as tidal exchange was restored to one

impounded area in the IRL, the cover of

salt-tolerant plants increased by 1,056%

in less than three years (Brockmeyer et

al., 1997). After an impounded wetland

was reconnected fish population diversity

increased from nine fish species to 40 fish

species (Poulakis et al., 2002). Ongoing

research has led to the refinement of

methods for reconnecting and managing

impounded wetlands that allow for habitat

restoration while providing effective

mosquito control (Steward et al., 2003).

Cycles in climate patterns, and associated temperature extremes, have a significant influence on

the relative composition of mangrove forests and saltmarsh habitats within MLAP. At present, the red

mangrove component in the northern portion of the Mosquito Lagoon has experienced an increase in

abundance in an area historically dominated by more cold-tolerant black mangroves. Adding to the

complications associated with setting future restoration targets is uncertainty of the importance of climate

change on patterns of species composition within MLAP.

Seagrass habitat within MLAP has suffered substantial loss over the past 60 years. Recent studies

indicate that the area with the least seagrass coverage in the Mosquito Lagoon, and with the greatest

loss since 1943, is the northern portion of the Lagoon (Mosquito Lagoon Segment 1), which includes

MLAP (Steward et al., 2003). This study reported that 1999 seagrass coverage totaled 51 acres, which

represents a 94% loss since 1943. Further investigations are underway to determine whether factors

such as strong currents, unstable sediments, light limitations or other variables are affecting seagrass

abundance in the northern Mosquito Lagoon.

Issue I / Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Native railroad vine flowers (Ipomoea pes-caprae) offer bright purple 

accents to the typical green backdrop of East Central Florida’s 

coastal vegetation.
73

Oysters are an example of a keystone species in coastal ecosystems such as the Mosquito Lagoon.

Oysters function as filter feeders, helping to improve water quality. Oyster reefs help stabilize shorelines,

bottom habitats and sediments and they provide refuge and essential intertidal habitat for juvenile

fisheries and other wildlife (e.g., shrimp, crabs, red fish, sea trout and wading birds). Oyster populations

are significantly stressed by factors such as siltation, disease and altered water quality. There is a

need to determine the relative importance of these factors to prioritize efforts to conserve this valuable

resource. Current research indicates

significant decreases in live oyster reefs

are occurring within the Mosquito Lagoon

due to physical disturbances by boat

wakes (Grizzle et al., 2002; Wall et al.,

2005). The expansion of oyster habitat

restoration efforts into MLAP is currently

being initiated and, dependent on its

success, will be supported in the future.

Listed species are those species with

populations that have declined enough

for scientists to determine that the species

is in danger of extinction or likely to

become extinct within the foreseeable

future. Among the many listed species

found in MLAP, federally-designated

endangered species include the Florida

manatee, green sea turtle, wood stork

and Atlantic saltmarsh snake. The

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation

Commission and federal agencies

provide special conservation measures to

promote recovery of a listed species. Staff

will ensure that management strategies

are compatible with local, state or federal

species management and recovery plans.

Invasive plants and animals are

threatening ecosystems in many areas

of Florida (Haller & Sutton, 1975). These

species may outcompete native species

because they may have been removed

from naturally evolved population controls

(e.g., predators, parasites and disease),

or they may be more efficient at exploiting

disturbed habitats. Invasive species

can have a dramatic effect on species

composition, habitat stability and function.

These changes may be equally damaging

to natural communities as well as local

recreational and commercial interests.

Goal 1 / Conserve and restore natural community function, productivity and species diversity in MLAP.

Objective 1.1 / Determine the status and trends of key natural communities and species.

Integrated Strategies:

1.1.1 / Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports and data on MLAP into the

Volusia County Water Atlas (VCWA) (Education and Outreach). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Entry of new research studies, reports and data into the VCWA.

Issue I / Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Brown pelican with young chicks (photo: Marine Discovery Center).
74

1.1.2 / Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference including publication of

abstracts from this Meeting (Education and Outreach). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. The biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference (including publication of

abstracts) occurs.

1.1.3 / Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline conditions for key natural

communities and species and identify research and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats

and prioritize new monitoring initiatives. Convene a working group, if appropriate (Ecosystem

Science). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Reports completed that assess the status and trends of key natural

communities and species. 2. A prioritized list of monitoring and research gaps to address community

and species condition is developed.

1.1.4 / Use and build on existing

monitoring efforts to facilitate and

support long-term monitoring efforts

to track trends and locations of key

natural communities and species

in MLAP (Ecosystem Science). FY

2010-2011, recurring. 

Performance Measures: 1. A

comprehensive (GIS based) species

and habitat inventory for MLAP is

developed and updated annually as

information becomes available.

Objective 1.2 / Develop and implement

conservation and restoration

projects for key natural

communities and species based

on the best available scientific

data and information.

Integrated Strategies:

1.2.1 / Support present conservation

and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP (Resource

Management). FY 2009-2010,

recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Acres

of dragline ditches excavated for

mosquito control and impounded

marshes restored by Volusia

County Mosquito Control and St.

Johns River Water Management

District. 2. An island management plan is developed and implemented in coordination with Volusia

County Environmental Management. 3. Numbers of exotic species removal projects initiated and

exotic species removed, and the number of acres of habitats restored from these activities 4. Acres of

oyster reef restoration completed.

1.2.2 / Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including invasive species management)

and develop new plans as required. Convene a working group, if appropriate (Resource

Management). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. A prioritized plan for habitat and resource restoration and conservation

strategies for key estuarine habitats is developed. 2. A standardized protocol for monitoring the

success of habitat restoration is developed and implemented.

Issue I / Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity _____________________________________________________________________________________________

The accumulation of dead oyster shells along this shoreline is worsened by disturbances such as large boat wakes.
75

Issue II / Water and Watershed

While water quality within and adjacent to MLAP has been found to be “good” (Sigua et al., 2000;

DEP, 1996), declining water quality trends resulting from incompatible development occurring in the

watershed is a concern. Alterations in the quality, quantity and timing of freshwater and associated

pollutant inputs threaten the sustainability of natural resources found within MLAP. MLAP is especially

vulnerable because it has few natural freshwater tributaries and maintains higher than average salinity

compared to the rest of the IRL.

In the past, numerous drainage systems were constructed throughout the IRL watershed. Much of

this development predated present-day stormwater treatment requirements and as a consequence

stormwater, with its associated pollutants and volumes of freshwater, reach the estuary with little or no

pre-treatment. Cumulative impacts of past and present human activities present a significant challenge to

conserving the viability of these coastal resources. Promoting best management practices for retrofitting

older developments and planning new developments, educating homeowners and making certain

accurate resource information is provided to regulatory personnel are important activities for sustaining

the natural resources of MLAP.

In addition to dramatic watershed changes, shoreline and benthic communities have also been directly

impacted. In many areas of MLAP seawalls, docks and rip-rap have replaced natural mangroves,

seagrasses and oyster habitats along the shorefront. Natural shorelines help stabilize the sediments,

dissipate wave action, filter stormwater runoff and provide quality intertidal habitat for numerous birds

and aquatic organisms. It is important to promote appropriate set-backs for buildings and natural

“living” shoreline stabilization options to regulatory staff, local governments and riparian land owners in

order to restore these lost habitat functions. In recent years, the impacts of stormwater discharges and

incompatible development practices have been recognized and many local governments have taken

action to address these impacts.

Issue II / Water and Watershed _____________________________________________________________________________________________ _

Residential and commercial development along the shorelines of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve can 

negatively impact water quality.
76

Goal 2 / Maintain and improve water and sediment quality within and adjacent to MLAP.

Objective 2.1 / Determine status and trends of water and sediment quality within and adjacent to MLAP.

Integrated Strategies:

2.1.1 / Compile existing water and

sediment quality data, including

meta data, and included these in

the VCWA (Ecosystem Science).

FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1.

Amount of water and sediment

quality monitoring data and

metadata that is compiled and

included in the VCWA.

2.1.2 / Analyze and assess compiled

data to identify status, trends

and information gaps. Convene

a working group, if appropriate

(Ecosystem Science). FY 2009-

2010, recurring.

Performance Measure: 1. Reports

completed that assess the status

and trends of water and sediment

quality. 2. A prioritized list of

monitoring and research needs

to address water and sediment

quality is developed.

2.1.3 / Use or build on existing

monitoring efforts to address

information gaps and to

implement a long-term onitoring

program to support status and

trend assessment of water

and sediment quality in MLAP

(Ecosystem Science). FY 2009-

2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Continuation of essential water and sediment quality monitoring efforts. 2.

Data gaps in the monitoring program are addressed. 3. Existing projects such as the Volusia County

Environmental Health Laboratory (VCEHL) water quality monitoring program are continued. 

Objective 2.2 / Coordinate with regulatory programs, local government and land owners to reduce

the impacts from development in the watershed.

Integrated Strategies:

2.2.1 / Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment within MLAP’s watershed

(Resource Management). FY2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Number of water quality improvement projects and programs. 2. Acreage

Issue II / Water and Watershed _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Island enhancement partners volunteer to plant mangroves and 

buttonwoods along the shoreline.
77

of expanded centralized sewer services to mainland areas where potential septic tank contamination

has been identified. 3. Promote the reduction and ultimate elimination of wet-weather discharges from

the New Smyrna Beach and Edgewater’s Waste Water Treatment Plant.

2.2.2 / Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of the shoreline and watershed of

MLAP (Resource Management). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Development of a GIS-based inventory of all known stormwater outflow and

point source discharges into MLAP. 2. Successful implementation of regional water quality improvement

or management programs. 3. Miles of living shorelines used for shoreline stabilization/erosion control

projects. 4. Increased use of water quality and stormwater best management practices (BMPs) and their

incorporation in local regulations and ordinances.

2.2.3 / Prioritize, develop and implement water

quality improvement education programs

within MLAP (Education Outreach). F 009-

2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Number of

MLAP staff initiated or co-sponsored

education programs targeting the

watershed’s stakeholders on the topic of

pollution load reduction goals and BMP’s.

2. The creation of a citizens adopt-a-drain

outfall monitoring program.

2.2.4 / Provide review and comment on permit

applications for activities on lands within

or in the watershed of MLAP (Resource

Management). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Permit

applications reviewed with comments

submitted to regulatory and planning staff.

2. Area in compliance with Volusia County

Class II overlay zone protection and

shoreline setbacks for new development

around MLAP.

2.2.5 / Review and provide recommendations for local government comprehensive growth

management plans and Land development rules and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint

source pollutants and address potential impacts of climate change (Resource Management). FY

2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. The number of rules and ordinances to reduce nonpoint sources

pollutants or addressing climate change that are incorporated into comprehensive growth

management plans and local rules and ordinances.

2.2.6 / Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed (Resource Management). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. A GIS-based priority list of privately-owned in-holdings within MLAP or its

watershed is developed. 2. Acres of lands acquired in the IRL Blueway Project by state, regional and

conservation organizations throughout the watershed.

Issue II / Water and Watershed _____________________________________________________________________________________________

During Island Enhancement Project events young volunteers 

collect mangrove propagules (seeds) in buckets alongside adult 

volunteers removing bags full of trash collected from the islands.
78

Issue III / Sustainable Public Use

Mosquito Lagoon is a popular destination for many recreational fishermen, boaters, kayakers, birders

and a host of other user groups. Mosquito Lagoon also supports several commercial uses including

commercial fishing (finfish and shellfish), fishing guides and several ecotourism operations. MLAP

was designated in 1970 for the primary purpose of preserving the biological resources in the area and

maintaining these resources in an essentially natural condition for the benefit of future generations

(Florida Department of Natural Resources [DNR], 1991).

When considering the importance of public use on MLAP into the future, it is important to take into

account the location of the preserve in proximity to three major, growing metropolitan areas. MLAP and

the Canaveral National Seashore are the closest natural estuarine areas offering local citizens from these

three metropolitan areas, and tourists, opportunities to enjoy the tranquility of nature within close driving

distances. The Orlando area (1.8 million census data, 2003), Daytona vicinity (497,000 census data,

2003) and Brevard County (534,359 census data, 2006) are within 90 miles or less of MLAP.

The main public use within MLAP is water-dependent recreation activities: boating, commercial and

recreational fishing, camping, sunbathing, nature-watching, swimming, clamming and oyster harvesting.

Water-dependent public uses are classified as either consumptive or non-consumptive for purposes

of this plan. Consumptive use is defined as harvesting an animal or substrate for human use and

subsequently removing it from the ecosystem. Non-consumptive uses are passive uses, such as bird

watching. Boats, kayaks and shallow-drafted vessels are the principal means of access to the estuarine

resources within MLAP.

Perceived areas of concern identified at public scoping meetings for future management of MLAP

include: 1) degradation of oyster reefs near channels linked to the impact of boat wakes; 2) high-speed

recreational boating such as water skiing or personal watercraft; and 3) potential overharvesting by

Issue III / Sustainable Public Use _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Lucky anglers can fish big catches from the Mosquito Lagoon such as this red fish (photo: Captain Jeff Dorobiala).
79

recreational fishing and wild shellfish harvesting. Providing management objectives and strategies that

address recreational use of islands is also an important need identified at these scoping meetings to be

addressed in this plan.

Projected commercial uses within MLAP include: 1) increased or expanded harvesting of resources

by commercial fishing and shellfish harvesting; 2) increased or expanded commercial tourism such

as fishing guides or ecotourism potentially resulting in crowding and conflicts at access points or

disturbance to wildlife; and 3) increases in nontraditional uses such as vendors, crew rowing sculls, kite

sailing and parasailing businesses. Proactive assessment and management of these activities is essential

to ensure that they do not damage the sustainability of MLAP natural resources or impinge on the

activities of traditional stakeholder groups.

By examining existing public use and natural resource patterns and trends MLAP staff can proactively

identify potential conflicts and work with stakeholders to prioritize strategies to sustain a healthy

ecosystem for the benefit of Florida residents and visitors. Ecological services derived from healthy

ecosystems include aesthetics, water, food, carbon storage, storm buffers and pollution abatement

that sustain human life and support social and economic prosperity (Turner et al., 2007). Raising

public awareness for the valuable services that a healthy MLAP provides is a priority objective to build

stakeholder support to conserve and restore this important natural resource.

Goal 3 / Encourage user experiences and public recreation opportunities consistent with natural

resources conservation.

Objective 3.1 / Educate visitors, local residents and users about MLAP.

Integrated Strategies:

3.1.1 / Provide kiosks, signage,

brochures or similar informational

materials to inform the public

and user groups about the value

of the resources of MLAP and

efforts to conserve and restore

these resources (Education

and Outreach). FY 2010-2011, 

recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Signs

and kiosks are installed that identify

islands and their designations

as Passive Recreation, Active

Recreation or Conservation. 2.

Numbers of educational signage

posted on islands used as

rookeries or roosting areas to

educate the public. 3. Number and

types of informational brochures

distributed and presentations

provided that describe efforts to

conserve and restore MLAP natural

resources and the ecological

goods and services provided by

healthy ecosystems.

3.1.2 / Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively identify potential resource/public

use conflicts and, working with key stakeholders, develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to

the natural resources (Resource Management). FY 2010-2011, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Number of user surveys developed and conducted. 2. Reports produced to

Issue III / Sustainable Public Use _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Partnerships with existing organizations (i.e. Marine Discovery Center) are 

essential to provide outreach to the public (photo: Marine Discovery Center).
80

summarize existing and new user survey results from fisheries data, boat ramp and aerial studies and

integrated into MLAP outreach and resource management programs. 3. Annual completion of an updated

map that summarizes existing data on public access facilities and usage areas within MLAP. 4. A GIS

based analysis of public use trends and patterns is compared to habitat maps to assess potential conflicts.

5. Number of stakeholder workshops hosted. 6. Numbers and area of Critical Wildlife Areas adopted or

other conservation strategies implemented for the conservation of sensitive species or habitats.

Objective 3.2 / Inform local residents and visitors about MLAP and actions they can take to conserve

and restore the resources found there.

Integrated Strategies:

3.2.1 / Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors, ecotourism groups, fishing

guides and boat charter services and other user groups (Education and Outreach). FY 2009-

2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Number and types of educational materials distributed and

presentations given summarizing current conditions of the resources in MLAP and highlighting

ongoing resource management programs implemented to conserve resources. 2. Number of

presentations and outreach activities targeting various user groups.

3.2.2 / Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within MLAP to promote stewardship of resources

(Education and Outreach). FY2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Numbers of MLAP volunteer hours.

3.2.3 / Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural resource conservation (Resource

Management and Education and (Outreach). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Assist with law enforcement investigations and notify the appropriate

entities about natural resource and user issues within MLAP. 2. Provide information on the

application of state, federal, and DEP statutes involving conservation of natural resources to the

public and law enforcement agencies.

Issue III / Sustainable Public Use _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Law enforcement officers work patrol the waters of the Mosquito Lagoon (photo: FWC).
81

Issue IV / Environmental Incident Assessment and Response 

The IRL, Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) Update, (Indian River Lagoon

National Estuary Program, 2008) identified several types of major environmental incidents with potential

to significantly affect the natural resources of the IRL. These incidents include hurricanes, frosts or

freezes, the arrival of new aquatic invasive exotic species, pollutant spills and other events that may

have widespread impacts. While pollutant spills, fish kills, marine mammal strandings and certain other

categories of environmental incidents do have organized assessment and response strategies, many

types of incidents do not. MLAP staff will support efforts to improve assessment and response strategies

for major environmental incidents.

Invasion of non-indigenous species is classified as

one of the five most critical environmental issues

presently facing life in aquatic habitats (National

Research Council, 1995). Non-native marine species

are generally introduced into new environments

from a ship’s ballast waters, from releases from

home aquaria, from the relocation of buoys, dry

docks or marine platforms, or through industrial

cooling system intakes and discharges. Invasions

of exotic species (Australian jellyfish, Asian green

mussel, charru mussel and the pink barnacle

(Megabalanus coccopoma)), have all been reported

in the Mosquito Lagoon. Other biotic threats to the

native organisms of the lagoon include red tide

events, harmful algal blooms (Pyridinium bahamense

and Karenia brevis) and cyanobacteria. MLAP is

susceptible to these threats in part because it is

very near to the Ponce Inlet, many marinas and the

Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW). The AIWW

is Florida’s east coast commercial and recreational

boating corridor used by local, out-of-state and

international boaters.

MLAP is bordered by several municipalities, a

causeway, wastewater treatment facilities and

industrial areas and is heavily used by powerboats,

including powered sailing yachts passing through

the AIWW. These variables increase the likelihood

of accidents that require emergency action. The IRL

CCMP, states that most pollutant spills (oil, hazardous

chemicals and wastewater) have established emergency response and assessment protocols in place, in

addition to a “hot line”. Volusia County has trained Environmental Emergency Response and Hazardous

Materials teams (Hazmat), and has established emergency plans, particularly for pollution-related events.

The following are existing incident response plans for the Mosquito Lagoon region:

1. Volusia County Emergency Response Plan and 2007 Disaster Preparedness Guide (Volusia County

Emergency Management);

2. Emergency Response to Sea Turtle Cold Stun Events (NASA/Dynamac Corp/Florida Fish and Wildlife

Conservation Commission);

3. IRL CCMP, Environmental Incident Assessment and Response Action Plan (IRL National Estuarine

Program);

4. Implementation Guidance for Immediate Responses to Petroleum Product Releases (Florida

Department of Environmental Protection’s, Bureau of Emergency Response); and

5. Marine Safety Detachment (U.S. Coast Guard) in conjunction with the National Response Center have

established protocols and online vessel reports to notify the agency of emergency incidents such as

oil spills operating under the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan.

Issue IV / Environmental Incident Assessment and Response _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Golden silk weaver spider (Nephila clavipes) spins its web 

(photo: NASA).
82

The following are existing incident monitoring studies for the IRL region:

1. Preliminary strategic plan for algal toxins and aquatic animal health; and

2. Health-related water quality testing to determine the status of aquaculture harvesting areas (Florida

Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services).

The East Central Florida Aquatic

Preserve field office has developed a

hurricane response plan which stages

equipment (boats, cameras, GPS units)

in locations that allow rapid access

to the lagoon to assess post-storm

conditions, such as grounded vessels,

erosion of causeways and wayward

debris (broken docks and other freefloating marine hazards). The primary

focus of this issue is to ensure that

MLAP staff is fully integrated into existing

emergency response and assessment

plans and gaps can be proactively

identified in existing protocols and

procedures.

Goal 4 / Integrate MLAP into strategies

to assess and respond to environmental

incidents within MLAP.

Objective 4.1 / Identify existing

assessment and response programs,

gaps in these programs and strategies

to address these gaps.

Integrated Strategies:

4.1.1/ Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for MLAP and identify classes of

incidents not addressed by these programs (Education and Outreach). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. An inventory of response services, support agencies and equipment

available within the Mosquito Lagoon basin is created and maintained. 2. A listing of appropriate

contacts and procedures for marine-related emergency response is created and maintained.

4.1.2 / Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of incidents not addressed by existing

programs (Resource Management). FY 2009-2010, recurring.

Performance Measures: 1. Strategies are developed for monitoring, reporting and response protocols

to address incidents that may not be incorporated into existing programs (marine invasive species,

algal blooms, chemical spills and climate change).

Issue IV / Environmental Incident Assessment and Response _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Immature white ibis feeding in the intertidal zone of the Mosquito Lagoon 

Aquatic Preserve.
83

Part Six

Additional Plans 

Chapter Six

Administrative Plans

The mission of the East Central Florida Aquatic Preserves (ECFAP) is to effectively implement the

management plans for three aquatic preserves under the charge of the Office of Coastal and Aquatic

Managed Areas (CAMA). These three aquatic preserves are located within three adjacent counties and

together total approximately 63,000 acres (255 km2) of sovereign submerged lands extending over a

distance of 107 miles (172.2 km).

Through a community-based program, the field office strives to:

1. implement CAMA’s programs consistent with all Florida Department of Environmental Protection

(DEP) regulations, policies and procedures;

2. accurately provide fiscal tracking;

3. manage contracts and grants; and

4. provide all pertinent information to the CAMA Central Office in Tallahassee.

As of fiscal year (FY) 2007-2008 the ECFAP staff includes two full time equivalent (FTE) (permanent)

positions and two other personal services (OPS) positions. The two FTE positions include an

Environmental Specialist II, serving as the aquatic preserve manager, and an Environmental Specialist I,

overseeing the water quality and other monitoring programs. In fiscal year (FY) 2007 - 2008, two statefunded OPS positions were allocated. These OPS positions include one administrative position and a

field/data management position responsible for data management, volunteer coordination and the Island

Enhancement Program (IEP).

Kayaking is a perfect way to visit and enjoy the plentiful natural resources found in the Mosquito Lagoon 

Aquatic Preserve.
84

Three additional part-time, temporary, grant-funded OPS positions have supported specific projects

intermittently during the last two years. One team member managed two large federal habitat restoration

grants and contracts, the second a mangrove restoration project, and the third assisted with the

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve (MLAP) Management Plan.

In order to accomplish the goals set out in this plan the MLAP field office must maintain a minimum of

four positions. To attract and retain qualified and dedicated staff, the OPS positions should be upgraded

to FTE status. Having adequate staff is crucial to the success of the program. Maintaining sufficient

support staff in the CAMA Central Office to assist with grant management is also crucial to allow the

aquatic preserves to take timely action on issues as they arise.

The ECFAP program maintains a program-wide planning horizon of 5-10 years. CAMA has developed

a three year budget and strategic work plan that addresses ongoing staffing needs by program area, a

capital equipment replacement schedule and facility and program needs. Both the work plan and budget

are revised on an annual basis. Equitable and dependable distribution of funding among the field offices

is necessary to sustain CAMA programs. Successful implementation of the strategies identified in this

management plan will depend on consistent and appropriate level of funding to maintain staff.

To accomplish proper management of three preserves, ECFAP staff relies on partners. The ECFAP has a

citizen support organization, the Coastal Preserves Alliance of East Central Florida (CPA) that assists staff

and coordinates volunteers for various events. In addition to a volunteer citizen support organization, a

group was formed from members of the MLAP Management Plan Advisory Committee. The Mosquito

Lagoon Working Group consists of partners that share management responsibilities and similar

management goals for Mosquito Lagoon. These partners include private individuals and organizations,

non-profits, and governmental agencies. A network approach incorporates the vast knowledge and

experience that these partners possess, maximizing the effectiveness of limited programmatic resources

to benefit the implementation of strategies identified within this plan. To carry out planned activities,

staff is supplemented by regular partnership-based volunteer efforts. Successful implementation of the

strategies identified in this plan depends on the dedication of working group members.
85

Chapter Seven

Facilities Plans

Facilities 

During fall 2004, extensive hurricane damage forced East Central Florida Aquatic Preserves (ECFAP)

staff to relocate from existing office facilities at Sebastian Inlet State Park to temporary housing at the

Marine Resources Council’s Lagoon House, Palm Bay, for one year. Because of the 107 mile distance

spanning the three different preserves, Staff now use two facilities to accomplish the implementation

of the aquatic preserve programs, a centralized field office in Cocoa and a southern modular office/lab

facility in Fellsmere to implement the water quality monitoring and other programs in southern Brevard

County, and Indian River County.

ECFAP is the sole tenant of the Brevard County Environmental Field Station, historically known as City

Point Church, Cocoa. Staff partners with the Brevard County Natural Resources Management office to

provide opportunities for environmental education by hosting several summer camps, environmental

displays, and public visitation to the nationally-registered historic building. The building consists of a

123-year old, 1,200 square foot, one room design. ECFAP and Brevard County partnered on a historic

preservation grant, awarded in fiscal year 2007-2008, to stabilize the structure. Brevard County supports

the ECFAP program by providing the use of the building in return for the cost of utilities. A portable 21

square foot (2 m2) shed on the property is used for field supply storage.

The southern office/lab facility is a 476 square foot (44 m2) modular building constructed in 1997 at the

St. Sebastian River Preserve State Park (SSRPSP) in Fellsmere and has been occupied by ECFAP staff

since summer 2008. The state park has agreed to the use of a shared wet laboratory for calibrating water

quality monitoring equipment located at the new SSRPSP Visitors Center. In the interim, partners at the

St. Johns River Water Management District Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program had provided

office and lab space for the water quality monitoring staff from fall 2005 to spring 2008.

Equipment Storage and Nursery 

A 21 square foot (2 m2) chemical storage shed with cement pad and apron was constructed in 2006,

near the modular office at the SSRPSP. This structure with apron was designed to meet federal standards

to retain potential chemical spills associated with herbicides. A second larger storage building was

constructed in summer 2008 at the park to store materials and equipment for the Island Enhancement

Vessels are essential in the restoration of islands along the preserve, helping to take supplies to the 

islands and remove trash and debris.
86

Program (IEP). Two uncovered boat storage compounds are used by ECFAP. One gated compound,

suitable for storage of two boats, is located at the Brevard County Sheriff’s East Precinct office on Merritt

Island, five miles from the Cocoa office; another gated equipment compound is located at the SSRPSP

property. One vehicle is stored at each office. The ECFAP hurricane plan, updated annually, ensures that

all vehicles and vessels will be relocated to the mainland on high ground to allow post-storm access.

A native plant nursery for the Shoreline Revegetation Project and IEP was rebuilt during 2008 at the

southern entrance to the SSRPSP in Indian River County. This nursery, manned by volunteers, will save

costs by growing and staging mangroves and other plants for both projects.

Vehicles and Vessels

The motor vehicles and vessels currently necessary to achieve the goals of the ECFAP have been

acquired or are in the process of being donated. As part of the program’s strategic planning cycle,

the condition of all vehicles and vessels in the program are evaluated annually. The need to replace

equipment is expected during the next ten years. CAMA is considering establishing a replacementschedule policy based on vehicle mileage similar to other bureaus and divisions in DEP. Fuel and

maintenance costs are expected to increase with fuel costs and vessel and vehicle aging.

Vehicles

• 2007 Ford F-150, crew cab, 4x4 pickup with topper – Acquired in 2007 for ECFAP to transport up

to four staff or volunteers, heavy equipment and/or towing boats. Used to support all programs, longdistance travel, training and coordination meetings. New condition.

• 2001 Dodge Ram extended cab 4x4 with diamond plate tool box and kayak rack – Acquired in

December 2006 from DEP’s Division of Law Enforcement for the water quality program and for towing

boats to the three aquatic preserves. The Dodge has over 110, 000 miles (177,028 km), is becoming

increasingly costly to maintain and gets low gas mileage. This is the primary vehicle used for travel

between offices, aquatic preserves, meetings and events. A replacement four-wheel drive vehicle

will be needed in the near future to maintain efficient office operations. Fair to good condition - The

automatic transmission replaced in 2007 is only in fair condition. Maintenance costs during early 2008

exceeded $2,500.

Vessels 

• Two - 2005 kayaks – low cost logistics, primary transportation for the water quality and bird

monitoring programs and to navigate shallow or narrow waters. Good condition.

• Two - jon boats – One14-foot (4.3 m) with 25 horsepower outboard and one16-foot (4.9 m) with

18 horsepower outboard. One vessel and outboard was donated in 2007 by a volunteer and the

other obtained through a non-profit in 2008 for support of the Shoreline Revegetation Project and

transporting equipment in narrow shallow waters in Mosquito Lagoon. Good condition.

• 18’ (5.5 m) 2000 Parker with 2000 115 hp 2-stroke Mercury – Purchased for implementation of all

ECFAP programs. Good overall condition.

• 19’ (5.8 m) 1997 Wahoo with 150 hp, 4-stroke Mercury – June 2007 transfer from Southeast Florida

Aquatic Preserves. Transportation for volunteers and equipment (Island Enhancement Program and

monitoring projects). Fair condition.

• New 24’ (7.3 m) Windsorcraft platform boat – recently acquired through a SJRWMD regulatory

public interest donation during 2008 for use in restoration events. A Florida Inland Navigation District

grant was awarded for a new 115 hp Yamaha outboard to power the vessel. This vessel would

considerably improve the logistics and safety of transporting volunteers and equipment to IEP

restoration events. Good condition.

Furniture & Office Equipment

Replacement of office furniture and other equipment such as cabinets, desks, and phones needs to

occur as necessary. ECFAP has been gradually building its computer base to provide each position with

a desktop computer or laptop. Upgrading at least one computer per year continuously is anticipated to

maintain updated technology and to ensure that the office staff maintains the ability to operate. Annual

inventories are conducted and restocking of all needed items will remain an ongoing task.
87

Lists of Appendices

Appendix A / Legal Documents ...................................................................................................................88

A.1 / Aquatic Preserve Resolution ............................................................................................................. 88

A.2 / Florida Statutes .................................................................................................................................89

A.3 / Florida Administrative Code .............................................................................................................. 89

	 	 	

Appendix B / Resource Data ....................................................................................................................... 90

B.1 / Acronym List .....................................................................................................................................90

B.2 / Glossary of Terms .............................................................................................................................91	 	

B.3 / References .........................................................................................................................................97

B.4 / Species Lists ...................................................................................................................................103

	 	 Native Species ..................................................................................................................................103

	 	 Invasive Non-Native Species ............................................................................................................ 120

	 	 	 Problem Species ...............................................................................................................................120

B.5 / Summary of Florida Natural Areas Inventory Descriptions ............................................................ 120

	 	 	

Appendix C / Public Involvement ..............................................................................................................123

C.1 / Advisory Committee .......................................................................................................................123	 	

	 	 List of members and their affiliations ................................................................................................... 123

	 	 Florida Administrative Weekly Postings................................................................................................. 123	 	

	 	 Meeting Summaries .............................................................................................................................125

C.2 / Public Scoping Meeting ..................................................................................................................136

	 	 Florida Administrative Weekly Posting ..................................................................................................136

 Advertisement Flyer ..............................................................................................................................137

 Summary of the Public Scoping Meeting ............................................................................................. 138

C.3 / Formal Public Meeting ....................................................................................................................142

	 	 Florida Administrative Weekly Posting ..................................................................................................142

 Advertisement Flyer ..............................................................................................................................143

 Summary of the Formal Public Meeting ............................................................................................... 144

	 	 	

Appendix D / Goals, Objectives, and Strategies ..................................................................................... 156

D.1 / Current Goals, Objectives, and Strategies Table ........................................................................... 156

D.2 / Budget Table....................................................................................................................................157

D.3 / Budget Summary Table ...................................................................................................................168
88

A.1 / Aquatic Preserve Resolution

WHEREAS, the State of Florida, by virtue of its sovereignty, is the owner of the beds of all navigable waters,

salt and fresh, lying within its territory, with certain minor exceptions, and is also the owner of certain other

lands derived from various sources; and

WHEREAS, title to these sovereignty and certain other lands has been vested by the Florida Legislature in the

State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, to be held, protected and managed

for the long-range benefit of the people of Florida; and

WHEREAS, the State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, as a part of its

overall management program for Florida’s state-owned lands, does desire to insure the perpetual protection,

preservation and public enjoyment of certain specific areas of exceptional quality and value by setting aside

forever these certain areas as aquatic preserves or sanctuaries; and

WHEREAS, the ad hoc Florida Inter-Agency Advisory Committee on Submerged Land Management has

selected through careful study and deliberation a number of specific areas of state—owned land having

exceptional biological, aesthetic and scientific value, and has recommended to the State of Florida Board

of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund that these selected areas be officially recognized and

established as the initial elements of a statewide system of aquatic preserves for Florida;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement

Trust Fund:

THAT it does hereby establish a statewide system of aquatic preserves as a means of protecting and

preserving in perpetuity certain specially selected areas of state-owned land: and

THAT specifically described, individual areas of state-owned land may from time to time be established as

aquatic preserves and included in the statewide system of aquatic preserves by separate resolution of the

State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund; and

THAT the statewide system of aquatic preserves and all individual aquatic preserves established thereunder

shall be administered and managed, either by the said State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal

Improvement Trust Fund or its designee as may be specifically provided for in the establishing resolution for

each individual aquatic preserve, in accordance with the following management policies and criteria:

(1) An aquatic preserve is intended to set aside an exceptional area of state-owned land and its associated

waters for preservation essentially in their natural or existing condition by reasonable regulation of all human

activity which might have an effect on the area.

(2) An aquatic preserve shall include only lands or water bottoms owned by the State of Florida, and such

private lands or water bottoms as may be specifically authorized for inclusion by appropriate instrument from

the owner. Any included lands or water bottoms to which a private ownership claim might subsequently be

proved shall upon adjudication of private ownership be automatically excluded from the preserve, although

such exclusion shall not preclude the State from attempting to negotiate an arrangement with the owner by

which such lands or water bottoms might be again included within the preserve.

(3) No alteration of physical conditions within an aquatic preserve shall be permitted except: (a) minimum

dredging and spoiling for authorized public navigation projects, or (b) other approved activity designed to

enhance the quality or utility of the preserve itself. It is inherent in the concept of the aquatic preserve that,

other than as contemplated above, there be: no dredging and filling to create land, no drilling of oil wells or

excavation for shell or minerals, and no erection of structures on stilts or otherwise unless associated with

authorized activity, within the confines of a preserve - to the extent these activities can be lawfully prevented.

(4) Specifically, there shall be no bulkhead lines set within an aquatic preserve. When the boundary of

a preserve is intended to be the line of mean high water along a particular shoreline, any bulkhead line

subsequently set for that shoreline will also be at the line of mean high water.

(5) All human activity within an aquatic preserve shall be subject to reasonable rules and regulations

promulgated and enforced by the State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund

and/or any other specifically designated managing agency Such rules and regulations shall not interfere

unduly with lawful and traditional public uses of the area, such as fishing (both sport and commercial),

hunting, boating, swimming and the like.

(6) Neither the establishment nor the management of an aquatic preserve shall infringe upon the lawful and

traditional riparian rights o private property owners adjacent to a preserve. In furtherance of these rights,
89

reasonable improvement for ingress and egress, mosquito control, shore protection and similar purposes

may be permitted by the State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund and other

jurisdictional agencies, after review and formal concurrence by any specifically designated managing agency

for the preserve in question.

(7) Other uses of an aquatic preserve, or human activity within a preserve, although not originally

contemplated, may be permitted by the State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal improvement Trust

Fund and other jurisdictional agencies, but only after a formal finding of compatibility made by the said

Trustees on the advice of any specifically designated managing agency for the preserve in question.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Trustees for and on behalf of the State of Florida Board of Trustees of the

Internal Improvement Trust Fund have hereunto subscribed their names and have caused the official seal of

said State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal

Improvement Trust Fund to be hereunto affixed, in the City of Tallahassee, Florida, on this the 24th day of

November A. D. 1969.

	 CLAUDE R. KIRK, JR, Governor	 TOM ADAMS, Secretary of State

	 EARL FAIRCLOTH, Attorney General	 FRED O. DICKINSON, JR., Comptroller

	 BROWARD WILLIAMS, Treasurer	 FLOYD T. CHRISTIAN, Commissioner of Education

	 DOYLE CONNER, Commissioner of Agriculture

As and Constituting the State of Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund.

A.2 / Florida Statutes (F.S.)

All the statutes can be found according to number at www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes

• Florida Statutes, Chapter 253: State Lands

• Florida Statutes, Chapter 258: State Parks and Preserves

Part II (Aquatic Preserves)

• Florida Statutes, Chapter 370: Saltwater Fisheries

• Florida Statutes, Chapter 372: Wildlife

• Florida Statutes, Chapter 403: Environmental Control

(Statute authorizing the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to create 

Outstanding Florida Waters is at 403.061(27))

A.3 / Florida Administrative Codes (F.A.C.)

• Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 18-20: Florida Aquatic Preserves

www.dep.state.fl.us/legal/Rules/shared/18-20.pdf

• Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 18-21: Sovereignty Submerged Lands Management

www.dep.state.fl.us/legal/Rules/shared/18-21.pdf

• Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 62-302: Surface Water Quality Standards 

(Rule designating Outstanding Florida Waters is at 62-302.700)

www.dep.state.fl.us/legal/Rules/shared/62-302/62-302.pdf
90

B.1 / Acronym List

Acronym Definition

ACOE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

AIWW Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway

BTIITF Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund

CAMA Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas

CNS Canaveral National Seashore

CPA Coastal Preserves Alliance

CSO Citizen Support Organization

DACS Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

DEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection

DNR Florida Department of Natural Resources

ECFAP East Central Florida Aquatic Preserves

ESA Endangered Species Act

F.A.C. Florida Administrative Code

FNAI Florida Natural Areas Inventory

F.S. Florida Statutes

FTE Full-Time Equivalent

FWC Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

FWRI Fish and Wildlife Research Institute

FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

HBOI Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute

IEP Island Enhancement Program

IRL Indian River Lagoon

MINWR Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge

MLAP Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NERR National Estuarine Research Reserve

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service

NPS National Park Service

OFW Outstanding Florida Waters

OPS Other Personal Services

ppt parts per thousand

RIFA red imported fire ant

RPA Resource Protection Areas

SAV submerged aquatic vegetation

SJRWMD St. Johns River Water Management District

SSRPSP St. Sebastian River Preserve State Park

UCF University of Central Florida

VCEHL Volusia County Environmental Health Laboratory

VCMC Volusia County Mosquito Control

VCWA Volusia County Water Atlas

WQMN Water Quality Monitoring Network
91

B.2 / Glossary

adaptive management – an continual process of planning, monitoring, research, evaluation and adjusting

management to meet pre-defined goals.

algal bloom – an explosive increase in the density of phytoplankton (microscopic, single-celled plants)

within an area.

alternative – a reasonable way to fix the identified problem or satisfy the stated need; a choice between things.

anaerobic – growing or occurring in the absence of molecular oxygen.

anoxic – lacking or not involving or requiring oxygen.

aquaculture – the cultivation of aquatic animals and plants, especially fish, shellfish and seaweed, in natural or

controlled marine or freshwater environments; underwater agriculture.

aquatic – growing in, living in or dependent upon water; living in or near water; plants adapted for a partially or

completely submerged life.

aquifer – permeable underground rock strata that holds water.

anthropogenic – caused or produced by humans: anthropogenic air pollution.

atmospheric pressure (barometric pressure) – the downward force exerted by the weight of the

overlying atmosphere.

attenuate – to weaken or reduce in force, intensity, effect, quantity or value.

benthos – organisms that dwell on the unconsolidated bottoms of marine and freshwater systems (worms

and zooplankton).

biodiversity – the existence of a wide variety of species of plants, animals and microorganisms in a natural

community or habitat or of communities within a particular environment; genetic variation within a species.

biogeography – the science that studies the geographic distribution of organisms; the study of the

geographical distributions of organisms, their habitats and the historical and biological factors which

produced them.

biological integrity – biotic composition, structure and function at the genetic, organism and community

levels consistent with natural conditions and the biological processes that shape genomes, organisms and

communities.

biological or natural diversity (also biodiversity) – the abundance, variety, and genetic constitution of

animals and plants in nature; the total variety of life and its processes, including the variety of living organisms

and the genetic differences between them and the communities and ecosystems in which they occur.

biota – all the organisms living in a particular region, including plants, animals and microorganisms.

biotic community – biological community or association, ecological community; an assemblage of species

living in a prescribed area or physical habitat; a group of interacting species coexisting in a particular habitat.

bivalve – any mollusk, as the oyster, clam, scallop or mussel of the class Bivalvia, having two shells hinged

together, a soft body and lamellate gills.

breeding habitat – habitat used by migratory birds or other animals during the breeding season.

brood – to incubate eggs.

buffer – to protect a system from change by external factors; anything that reduces an impact.

buffer zones – protective land borders around critical habitats or water bodies that reduce runoff and non-point

source pollution loading; areas created or sustained to lessen the negative effects of land development on

animals, plants and their habitats.

carrying capacity (K) – the size of the population that can be sustained by a given environment; the maximum

population of a given organism that a particular environment can sustain.

codify – to arrange laws and rules systematically.

community – a grouping of populations of different organisms found living together in a particular environment.

community type – a particular assemblage of plants and animals, named for the characteristic plants.

conjunction – a joining together; combination.

conservation – the management of natural resources to prevent loss or waste; the planned management

of natural resources; the retention of natural balance, diversity and evolutionary change in the

environment; preservation.

conservation easement – a legal agreement between a landowner and a land trust (a private, nonprofit

conservation organization) or government agency that permanently limits a property’s uses in order to protect

its conservation values.
92

convective – to transfer (heat or a fluid) by convection.

cultural resource – evidence of historic or prehistoric human activity, such as buildings, artifacts,

archaeological sites, documents, oral or written history. Cultural resources include historical, archaeological

and/or architecturally significant resources.

cuspate – having a cusp or shaped like a cusp.

cuspate foreland – a large, triangular area of coastal deposition that is dominated by many shingle ridges and

is often terminated on the landward side by poorly-drained terrain.

cyanobacteria – the blue-green bacteria or chloroxybacteria. Both groups obtain their food by photosynthesis

in a manner very similar to that of green plants and true algae, producing oxygen in the process. They occur in

all aquatic habitats.

database – a collection of data arranged for ease and speed of analysis and retrieval, usually computerized; a

mass of data in a computer, arranged for rapid expansion, updating and retrieval.

dechloriniation – to remove the chlorine from (a substance, as water); to dechlorinate tap water for use in

an aquarium.

degradation – breakdown into smaller or simpler parts; reduction of complexity.

derelict – deserted by the owner; abandoned.

detritus – non-living particulate organic material. It includes the bodies of dead organisms colonized by

microorganisms which decompose the material. Together with plankton are components of the estuarine

food chain.

dinoflagelalte – any of numerous one-celled organisms found mostly in the ocean, usually having two flagella

of unequal length and often an armorlike covering of cellulose. Dinoflagellates are one of the main components

of plankton. They include bioluminescent forms and forms that produce red tide.

dispersal – the movement of organisms away from a location, such as point of origin.

dissemination – scattering or spreading, as of infections agents, seeds or spores; distribution.

diversity – a measure of the number of species and their relative abundance in a community.

dragline – an excavating machine in which the bucket is attached by cables and operates by being drawn

toward the machine.

drainage basin – the total land area that drains into a body of water.

dredge – an apparatus for scooping up mud, for deepening channels.

easement – an agreement by which a landowner gives up or sells one of the rights on his/her property. For

example, a landowner may donate a right-of-way across his/her property to allow access; a right that one may

have in another’s land.

ecological integrity – the integration of biological integrity, natural biological diversity and environmental

health; the replication of natural conditions.

ecology – the branch of science that studies the distribution and abundance of organisms and the relationship

between organisms and their environment; the study of the inter-relationships between living organisms and

their environment.

ecosystem – a biological community together with its environment, functioning as a unit; a community of

organisms and their physical environment interacting as an ecological unit.

ecosystem approach – a way of looking at socio-economic and environmental information based on

ecosystem boundaries, rather than town, city or county boundaries.

ecosystem-based management – an approach to making decisions based on the characteristics of the

ecosystem in which a person or thing belongs. This concept takes into consideration interactions between the

plants, animals and physical characteristics of the environment when making decisions about land use or living

resource issues.

ecotourism – travel to an area of ecological, geographical or natural history interest, with an emphasis on

avoiding bringing additional pressures upon the region and concern to ensure that both local human culture

and the environment are enhanced rather than damaged.

El Niño – a weakening of the equatorial current, allowing warm water to accumulate off the South American

Pacific coast.

emergent – an aquatic plant having most of the vegetative parts above water; a tree which reaches above the

level of the surrounding canopy.

endangered species – an animal or plant species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion

of its range.

endemic – native to and restricted to a particular geographical region.
93

environment – the complex of climatic, geologic, hydrologic, soils and biotic factors acting upon organisms.

environmental health – abiotic composition, structure, and functioning of the environment consistent with

natural conditions, including the natural abiotic processes that shape the environment.

ephemeral – short-lived or of brief duration.

epifauna – the animal life inhabiting a sediment surface or water surface.

epiphyte – a plant that uses another plant, typically a tree, for its physical support but which does not draw

nourishment from it.

estuary – semi-enclosed coastal water, open to the sea, having a high fresh-water drainage and with marked

cyclical fluctuations in salinity; usually the mouth of a river.

evapotranspiration – the combined processes of evaporation, sublimation and transpiration of the water from

the earth’s surface into the atmosphere; the total amount of water transferred from the earth to the atmosphere.

extinction – the disappearance of a species from a given habitat; dying out, usually global, of a species for

any reason.

extirpation – extermination of the population of a given species from an area; the removal, elimination or

disappearance of a species or subspecies from a part of its range.

fauna – the animal life of a given region, habitat or geological stratus.

federally listed species – a species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended,

either as endangered, threatened or species at risk.

federally threatened species – any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the

foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

flora – the plant life of a given region, habitat or geological stratum.

fouling organisms – an assemblage of organisms growing on the surface of floating or submerged man-made

objects, that increases resistance to water flow or otherwise interferes with the desired operation of the structure.

fragmentation – the act of breaking up.

geographic information system (GIS) – computer system supporting the collection, storage, manipulation

and query of spatially referred data, typically including an interface for displaying geographical maps.

habitat – the living place of an organism or community, characterized by its physical or biotic properties.

habitat conservation - the protection of an animal or plant’s habitat to ensure that the use of that habitat by the

animal or plant is not altered or reduced.

habitat degradation – the process of transitioning from a higher quality to a lower quality wildlife habitat.

habitat fragmentation – breaking up of a specific habitat into smaller unconnected areas. A habitat area that is

too small may not provide enough space to maintain a breeding population of the species in question.

harmful algal bloom – (HAB) a dense concentration (bloom) of a single-celled, plant like marine organism

(phytoplankton) that produces toxins which are detrimental to plants and animals. An algal bloom can still

kill fish and other aquatic life by decreasing sunlight available to the water and by using up all of the available

oxygen in the water. A harmful algal bloom specifically produces harmful toxins.

herbicide – a chemical agent used to kill plants or inhibit plant growth.

heterogeneous – having a non-uniform structure or composition.

homogeneous – similar throughout; or uniform structure or composition.

hydric – pertaining to water; wet.

hydrogeologic – the science dealing with the occurrence and distribution of underground water.

hydrology – the scientific studies of the properties, distribution and effects of water in the atmosphere, on the

earth’s surface and in soil and rocks, emphasizing the study of bodies of surface water on land and how they

change with time.

hypoxic – oxygen-deficient.

immunologic- the branch of science dealing with the components of the immune system, immunity from

disease, the immune response and immunologic techniques of analysis.

indicator species – a species, the presence or absence of which is indicative of a particular habitat, community

or set of environmental conditions.

indigenous – native to a particular area; used of an organism or species occurring naturally in an environment

or region.

infauna – the animal life within a sediment; epifauna.
94

insolation – exposure to solar radiation.

intertidal zone – the shore zone between the highest and lowest tides; littoral.

introduction – a plant or animal moved from one place to another by man.

invasive exotic species – non-native species which have been introduced into an ecosystem and, because of

their aggressive growth habits and lack of natural predators, displace native species.

keystone species – a species whose presence and role within an ecosystem has a disproportionate effect

on other organisms within the system. A keystone species is often a dominant predator whose removal

allows a prey population to explode and often decreases overall diversity. Other kinds of keystone species

are those, such as coral or beavers, that significantly alter the habitat around them and thus affect large

numbers of other organisms.

La Niña – similar to El Niño in the Atlantic; a strengthening of the equatorial countercurrent, warm surface

waters flow eastwards to overlie the cold waters of the Peru Current.

larvicide – an agent for killing larvae; an insecticide designed to kill larval pests

limiting factor – any environmental factor or group of related factors which exist at suboptimal level and

thereby prevent an organism from reaching its full biotic potential.

limnetic – lakes or other bodies of standing fresh water; open water of a lake away from the bottom.

listed species – a species, subspecies or distinct population segment that has been added to the federal list of

endangered and threatened wildlife and plants.

lithification – to change sediment to stone or rock.

littoral – the intertidal zone of the seashore; sometimes used to refer to both the intertidal zone of the seashore

and the adjacent continental shelf to a depth of about 200 m.

load – the total amount of material carried by a stream or river.

loam – a fertile soil that is made up of organic matter mixed with clay, sand and silt.

local community – the area or locality in which a group of people resides and shares the same government.

management alternative – a set of objectives and the strategies needed to accomplish each objective.

mandate – an order or command; the will of constituents expressed to their representative, legislature, etc.

marginal habitat – a habitat with low species diversity due to adverse physical or other conditions.

mesic – pertaining to conditions of moderate moisture or water supply; used of organisms occupying

moist habitats.

mesohaline – brackish water having a salinity between 3 and 10 ppt, or sea water having a salinity between 30

and 34 parts per thousand (ppt).

midden – a refuse heap; used especially in archeology.

mitigation – actions taken to compensate for the negative effects of a particular project or action. Wetland

mitigation usually takes the form of restoration or enhancement of a previously damaged wetland or creation of

a new wetland.

monitoring – measurement of environmental characteristics over an extended period of time to determine

status or trends in some aspect of environmental quality.

muck – highly decomposed plant material typically darker and with higher mineral content than peat.

native – the plant and animal species, habitats or communities that originated in a particular region or area or

those that have established in a particular region or area without human influence.

native plant – a plant that has grown in the region since the last glaciation and occurred before

European settlement.

nekton – those actively swimming pelagic organisms able to move independently of water currents; typically

with in the size range 20 mm-20 m.

nephelometric – an instrument for studying the density of suspended particles in a liquid by measuring the

degree to which the suspension scatters light.

neurotoxic – a toxin that damages or destroys nerve tissue.

niche – the ecological role of a species in a community; micro habitat in the sense of the physical space

occupied by a species.

non-point source pollution – nutrients or toxic substances that enter water from dispersed and

uncontrolled sites.

nekton – marine species that swim freely.
95

oligohaline – brackish water having a salinity between 0.5 and 3.0 ppt, or sea water having a salinity between

17 and 30 ppt.

organochlorine insecticide – type of pesticide; are very persistent and not easily biodegradable.

Example: DDT.

paralytic – pertaining to or of the nature of paralysis.

pelagic – of or pertaining to the open seas or oceans. Living or growing at or near the surface of the ocean, far

from land.

pesticide – a chemical agent that kills insects and other animal pests.

physiography – physical geography is one of the two major subfields of geography; focuses on understanding

the processes and patterns in the natural environment, as opposed to the built environment which is the

domain of human geography.

phytoplankton – are microscopic, single-celled plants that live in the sea.

plankton – organisms that drift passively or swim modestly; organisms that are unable to maintain their

position or distribution independent of the movement of water or air masses.

planktonic – of/or relating to plankton.

pollution – the contamination of a natural ecosystem.

population – a group of organisms of one species, occupying a defined area and usually isolated to some

degree from other similar groups.

population monitoring – assessments of the characteristics of populations to ascertain their status and

establish trends related to their abundance, condition, distribution or other characteristics.

potable water – water that is palatable and safe for human consumption, in which any toxic substances,

pathogenic organisms and factors have been reduced to safe or acceptable levels; drinkable.

psammophyte – a plant growing or moving in unconsolidated sand.

refugium – an isolated habitat that retains the environmental conditions that were once widespread.

reintroduction – the process of relocating a plant or animal species to a location where it historically occurred.

restoration – management actions that return a vegetative community or ecosystem to its original, natural

condition or to something close to its natural state.

rhizomes – a horizontal, usually underground stem that often sends out roots and shoots from its nodes. Also

called rootstalk, rootstock.

riparian – pertaining to, living or situated on the banks of rivers and streams.

ruderal – pertaining to or living amongst rubbish or debris or inhabiting disturbed sites.

runoff – water from rain, melted snow or agricultural or landscape irrigation that flows over the land surface into

a water body.

salinity – a measure of the total concentration of dissolved salts in seawater.

sediment – material derived from preexisting rock deposited at or near the Earth’s surface.

seine – a large fishing net weighted along the bottom.

sessile – non-motile; permanently attached at the base.

sheet-wash – a process in which a thin, mobile sheet of water flows over the surface of a hill-slope and may

transport unconsolidated material on the surface.

spat – a young oyster or oysters.

spawn – the eggs of certain aquatic organisms; the act of producing such eggs or egg masses.

species – a group of organisms, minerals or other entities formally recognized as distinct from other

groups; the basic unit of biological classification; a distinctive kind of plant or animal having distinguishable

characteristics that can interbreed and produce viable young; a category of biological classification.

species abundance – the relative distribution of the number of individuals of each species in a community.

species of concern – an informal term referring to a species that might be in need of conservation action. This

may range from a need for periodic monitoring of populations and threats to the species and its habitat or to

the necessity for listing as threatened or endangered.

species diversity – either the absolute number of species or a measure of both the number of species and

their relative abundance.

stakeholder – any person or organization who has an interest in the actions discussed or is affected by the

resulting outcomes of a project or action.
96

stopover habitat – habitat used during bird migration for rest and feeding.

subtidal – environment which lies below the mean low water level.

submerged aquatic vegetation – seagrasses.

succession – a natural sequence of changes in plant species and community structure over time, leading to a

hypothesized stable climax community.

supratidal – the zone on the shore above mean high tide level.

surficial – relating to, or occurring on or near the surface of the earth.

surficial aquifer – shallow beds of shells and sand that lie less than 100 feet (30.5 m) underground. They are

separated from the Floridan aquifer by a confining bed of soil.

synoptic – affording or taking a general view of the principal parts of a subject.

take – to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect or attempt to collect or to engage

in any such conduct.

threatened species – an animal or plant species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future

throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

transect – a line or narrow belt used to survey the distributions of organisms across a given area.

transverse – situated across; crosswise.

trawl – a large net dragged along the bottom of a fishing bank.

turbid – cloudy; opaque with suspended matter.

unfragmented habitat – large blocks of unbroken habitat of a particular type.

upland – dry soils; elevations above mean high water other than wetlands; land or an area of land lying above

the level where water flows or where flooding occurs.

vector – any agency responsible for the introduction or dispersal of an animal or plant species.

vegetation – plant life or cover in an area; also used as a general term for plant life.

vegetation type – a plant community with distinguishable characteristics.

viable population – a population that will continue to occur in the area for the foreseeable future. In population

modeling, minimum viable population (MVP) is the smallest number of individuals that are needed to maintain a

species population in the long term; having the capacity to live, grow, germinate or develop.

vestigal – degenerate or imperfectly developed; used of structure or function that have become diminished or

reduced during the course of evolution.

vestige – a trace, mark or sign, especially of something that has passed away. A degenerate part, more fully

developed in an earlier stage.

water column – the vertical column of water in a sea or lake extending from the surface to the bottom.

watershed - the geographic area within which water drains into a particular river, stream or body of water. A

watershed includes both the land and the body of water into which the land drains.

wetlands – The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s definition of wetlands states that “Wetlands are lands

transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the

land is covered by shallow water”; an area of low lying land, submerged or inundated periodically by fresh or

saline water.

wildlife – the mix of living organisms; includes plants and animals.

wildlife diversity – a measure of the number and relative abundance of wildlife species in an area.

wildlife management – the practice of manipulating wildlife populations, either directly through regulating the

numbers, ages and sex ratios harvested or indirectly by providing favorable habitat conditions and alleviating

limiting factors.

xeric – dry or desert-like conditions; having very little moisture; tolerating or adapted to dry conditions.

zooplankton – plankton that consists of animals, including the corals, rotifers, sea anemones, jellyfish, small

crustaceans and fish larvae.
97

B.3 / References

Adams, C., Jacob, S., & Smith, S. (2000). What happened after the net ban? Food and Resource

Economics Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural

Sciences, University of Florida, FE123, pp.10.

Apogee Research, Inc., & Resource Economics Consultants, Inc. (1996). Economic assessment and 

analysis of the Indian River Lagoon; natural resource valuation of the Lagoon. Report submitted

to the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program, Finance and Implementation Task Force,

Melbourne, FL.

Audubon WatchList. (2007). American oystercatcher. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://

audubon2.org/watchlist/viewSpecies.jsp?id=9.

Austin, D. F. (1978). Exotic plants and their effects in southeastern Florida. Environmental Conservation, 5 

(1), 25-34.

Belanger, T., Heck, H., & Andrews, M. (1997). Groundwater flow characteristics of the Mosquito 

Lagoon, Florida. (Draft) (National Park Service Project No. CANA-N-027.000). Melbourne: Florida

Institute of Technology.

Bertness, M.D. (1999). The ecology of Atlantic shorelines. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates. pp. 417.

Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the State of Florida. (1962). Dedication to the

United States of America for governmental purposes by the trustees of the internal improvement fund

of the State of Florida, 31 July 1962. Deed no. 23151.

Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the State of Florida. (1967). Dedication to the

United States of America for governmental purposes by the trustees of the internal improvement fund

of the State of Florida, 8 March 1967. Deed no. 23151 (Modification).

Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida. (1986). Dedication to the

United States of America, 13 January 1986. Deed no. 26106-A.

Bossart, G.D. (2007). Emerging diseases in marine mammals: from dolphins to manatees. Microbe,

2, 544-549.

Boudreaux, M. L., Stiner, J. L., & Walters, L. (2006). Biodiversity of sessile and motile macrofauna on 

intertidal oyster reefs in the Mosquito Lagoon, Florida. Journal of Shellfish Research, 25(3), 1079-1089.

Brockmeyer, R. E. Jr., Rey, J. R., Virnstein, R. W., Gilmore, R. G., & Earnest, L. (1997). Rehabilitation of

impounded estuarine wetlands by hydrologic reconnection of the Indian River Lagoon, Florida (USA).

Wetlands Ecology and Management, 4, 93-109.

Bronson, C.H. (2002). Red tide regulations. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,

technical bulletin, number 2, pp. 4.

Brooks, H. K. (1982). Guide to the physiographic divisions of Florida. Gainesville: University of Florida,

Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Florida Cooperative Extension Service.

City of Edgewater, FL. (2007). Water report 2006. Retrieved August 29, 2007, from http://www.

cityofedgewater.org/envionment/2006waterreport.pdf.

Clapp, D. (1987). Overview of physiographic and surface drainage features. In Steward, J. S. , & Van

Arman, J. A. (Eds.), Indian River Lagoon joint reconnaissance report (pp. 1-27). Palatka, & Miami, FL:

St. Johns River Water Management District, & South Florida Water Management District.

Collins, L., & Scheffrahn R. (2001). Red imported fire ant. Retrieved November 8, 2007 from University of

Florida; http://creatures.ifas.ufl.edu/urban/ants/red_imported_fire_ants.htm.

Davis, J. (2004). Psychological benefits of nature experiences: An outline of research and theory. 

Retrieved October 30, 2007, from www.johndavis.com/ep/benfits.htm.

Department of Natural Resources. (1991). Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve management plan. Bureau

of Submerged Lands and Preserves, Division of State Lands.

Dunson, W. A., & Mazotti, F. J. (1989). Salinity as a limiting factor in the distribution of reptiles in Florida Bay:

A theory for the estuarine origin of marine snakes and turtles. Bulletin of Marine Science, 44, 229-244.

Durako, M.J., Murphy, M.D., & Haddad, K.D. (1988). Assessment of fisheries habitat: Northeast Florida

(Florida Marine Research Publications, No. 45). Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of

Marine Resources. pp. 51.

Ecological Society of America. (2009). Invasion. Retrieved February 26, 2009, from http://www.esa.org/

education/edupdfs/invasion.pdf.

Epstein, M. & Blihovde, B. (2006). Listed Species of the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge.

Unpublished Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Titusville, FL.
98

Fernald, E. A., & Patton, D. J. (1984). Water resources atlas of Florida. Tallahassee: Florida State University.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection. (1996). 1996 Water Quality Assessment for the State of

Florida: 305 (b) Report. FDEP, Tallahassee, FL, pp. 220.

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. (1998). Manatee aerial survey database. Florida

Marine Research Institute. http://www.floridamarine.org/features/view_article.asp?id=15246

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. (2007). 2006 annual landings summary. Marine 

Fisheries Information System. Retrieved on October 25, 2007, from http://research.myfwc.com/

features/view_article.asp?id=19224

Florida Marine Research Institute. (2007). Fisheries independent monitoring. Retrieved August 29, 2007,

from www.floridamarine.org/features/view_article.asp?id=20074.

Florida Natural Areas Inventory, & Florida Department of Natural Resources. (1990). Guide to the natural 

communities of Florida. Florida Natural Areas Inventory, & Florida Department of Natural Resources.

pp. 120. Retrieved February 26, 2009, from http://www.fnai.org/PDF/Natural_Communities_Guide.pdf.

Florida Office of Cultural and Historical Programs. (2007). Preservation markers. Retrieved July 5, 2007,

from http://www.flheritage.com.

Gilmore, R.G. (1977). Fishes of the Indian River Lagoon and adjacent waters, FL. Bulletin of the Florida

State Museum, 22(3), 101-147.

Gilmore, R.G., Bullock, L.H., & Berry, F.H. (1978). Hypothermal mortality in marine fishes of south-central 

Florida January, 1977. Northeast Gulf Science 2, 77-97.

Glatzel, K. A. (1986). Water budget for the Indian River Lagoon: an overview of use effects. Master’s

thesis, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL.

Grablow, K.R. (2008). Recovery and restoration of the seagrass Halodule wrightii after boat propeller scar 

damage in a pole-troll zone in Mosquito Lagoon, Florida. Master thesis, University of Central Florida,

2008. Masters Abstracts International.

Grizzle, R. E., Adams, J. R., & Walters, L. J. (2002). Historical changes in intertidal oyster (Crassostrea 

virginica) reefs in a Florida lagoon potentially related to boating activities. Journal of Shellfish Research, 

21(2), 749-756.

Gulf Engineers & Consultants. (2003). An economic analysis of the District’s waterways in Volusia County 

(Final report, GEC Project No. 22805105B). Submitted to the Florida Inland Navigation District, Jupiter, FL.

Haller, W. T., & Sutton, D. L. (1975). Community structure and competition between Hydrilla and

Vallisneria. Hyacinth Control Journal, 13, 48-50.

Hanna, A.J., & Hanna, K.A. (1950). Florida’s golden sands. Bobbs-Merrill Company, Indianapolis,

pp. 429.

Holloway-Adkins, K.G., Scheidt, D.M., Reyier, E.A., Lowers, R.H., & Epstein, M.B. (2005). Resource use 

characterization study of Mosquito Lagoon within the boundaries of the Merritt Island National Wildlife 

Refuge. Final Report: Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge (USFWS Agreement no. 1448-40181-01-H016). pp. 190.

Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program. (1996). Indian River Lagoon comprehensive conservation 

and management plan. Melbourne, FL: A.W. Adams, J.D. Ainsley, D.S. Busby, R.A. Day, K.A. Recore

and T.B. Rice. pp. 350.

Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program. (2008). Indian River Lagoon comprehensive conservation 

and management plan update 2008. Palm Bay, FL: Indian River Lagoon Estuary Program. pp. 138.

Jacoby J., Walters, L., Baker S., & Blyler, K. (2003). A primer on invasive species in coastal and marine

waters (SGEB 60). Retrieved on October 7, 2007, from Florida Sea Grant College Program website:

http://solutionsforyourlife.ufl.edu/environment/invasive_species.html.

Johnson, D. R., & Funicelli, N. A. (1991). Spawning of the red drum in Mosquito Lagoon, east-central

Florida. Estuaries, 14, 74-79.

Landsberg, J. H., Hall, S., Johannessen, J. N., White, K., Conrad, S. M, Abbott, J. P, et al. (2006).

Saxitoxin puffer fish poisoning in the United States, with the first report of Pyrodinium bahamense as

the putative toxin source. Environmental Health Perspectives, 114(10), 1502-1507.

Langeland, K. A., & Stocker, R. K. (2000). Control of non-native plants in natural areas of Florida

(SP242, 1-34). Retrieved October 9, 2007, from University of Florida, Extension Institute of Food and

Agricultural Sciences website: http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/wg209.

Lefebvre, L.W., & Powell, J.A. (1990). Manatee grazing impacts on seagrasses in Hobe Sound and

Jupiter Sound in southeast Florida during the winter of 1988-1989. Final report prepared for the Marine

Mammal Commission in fulfillment of contract T62239152.
99

Lelis, L. (2007). UCF Professor, Team Help Restore Mosquito Lagoon Oyster Reefs. (April 30, 2007).

Orlando Sentinel.

Levine, T. (2008). Landlocked redfish of Mosquito Lagoon. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from http://www.

floridasportsman.com/regions/ec/060256/1index.html.

Mailander, J.L. (1990). Climate of the Kennedy Space Center and vicinity. NASA technical memorandum

#103498, pp. 1-42.

Marine Resource Council of East Central Florida. (1998). A field manual for invasive plant removal and 

mangrove restoration. Melbourne, FL.

Mazzoil, M., Mcculloch, S., & Defran. R.H. (2005). Observations on the site fidelity of bottlenose

dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in the Indian River Lagoon, Florida. Florida Scientist: Vol. 68, No. 4

pp. 217–226.

Mehta, A. J., & Brooks, H. K. (1973). Mosquito Lagoon barrier beach study. Paper presented at the 16th

annual meeting of the Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association.

Mendonca, M.T., & Ehrhart L.M. (1982). Activity, population size and structure of immature Chelonia 

mydas and Caretta caretta in Mosquito Lagoon, Florida. Copeia 1, 161-167.

Michael, R. (2007). Volusia County, Florida. A summary review of the area’s economy for 2006. Retrieved

October 9, 2007, from http://floridabusiness.org/06%20economic%20report.pdf.

Mount, R.H. (1981). The red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) as a

possible serious predator on some southeastern vertebrates: direct observations and subjective

impressions. Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science, 52: 71-78.

Myers, R.L., & Ewel, J.J. (1990). Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando,

FL, 765 pp.

National Estuary Program. (2007). Southeast National Estuary Program coastal condition, Indian River 

Lagoon National Estuary Program (CCR, Chapter 4, 212-222). Retrieved June 8, 2007, from http://www.

epa.gov/owow/oceans/nepccr/index.html.

National Research Council. (1995). Understanding marine biodiversity. National Academy Press.

Washington, D.C.

National Weather Service. (2007). Florida weather history - access center. Retrieved November 4, 2007,

from http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mlb/whirl/history.html.

Nol, E., & Humphrey R.C. (1994). American oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus), the birds of North

America online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from

the birds of North America online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/082doi:bna.82.

Norman, Eliane. (1976). An analysis of the vegetation at Turtle Mound. Florida Scientist, 39, no. 1 pp.

North Brevard Business Directory. (2007). The life of Harriette Vyda (Simms) Moore. Retrieved July 30,

2007, from NBBD website: http://www.nbbd.com/godo/moore/bioHarriette.html.

North Brevard Business Directory. (2007). The life of Harry Tyson Moore. Retrieved July 30, 2007, from

NBBD website: http://www.nbbd.com/godo/moore/bioHarry.html.

Paperno, R., Mille, K. J., & Kadison, E. (2001). Patterns in species composition of fish and selected

invertebrate assemblages in estuarine subregions near Ponce de Leon Inlet, Florida. Estuarine, Coastal 

and Shelf Science, 52, 117-130.

Paulic, M., Xueqing, G., Auilo, J., Sawistoski, M., Bess, B., & Pluchino, E. (2006). Water quality status 

report, Indian River Lagoon (pp. 25-145). Tallahassee: Florida Department of Environmental Protection,

Division of Water Resource Management.

Phelps, G. (1990). Geology, hydrology and water quality of the surficial aquifer system in Volusia County,

FL. Water resources investigation report. U.S. Geological Survey. pp. 90-4069.

Pitts, P. A. (1989). Upwind return flow in a coastal lagoon: seasonal-scale barotrophic transport.

Estuaries, 12, 92-97.

Poss, S.G., Aguirre, W., Crochet, N., Nates, S., Hard, S.D., & O’Connell, A.M. (2000). Nonindigenous 

species in the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem. University of Southern Mississippi, Gulf Coast Research

Laboratory Museum.

Poulakis, G. R., Shenker, J. M., & Taylor, S. (2002). Habitat use by fishes after tidal reconnection of

an impounded estuarine wetland in the Indian River Lagoon, Florida (USA). Wetlands Ecology and 

Management, 10, 51-69.

Professional Engineering Consultants. (2007). City of Edgewater stormwater master plan and capital 

improvements. Professional Engineering Consultants, City of Edgewater, FL and St. Johns River Water

Management District, pp. 1-43.
100

Provancha, J. (1997). Annual report for sea turtle netting in Mosquito Lagoon. NMFS 215 Permit #942,

FL Permit #114.

Provancha, J. A., Hall, C. R., & Oddy, D. M. (1992). Mosquito Lagoon environmental resources 

inventory. (Technical memorandum no. 107548). Washington, DC: National Aeronautics &

Space Administration.

Provancha, J.A., Mota, M.J., Holloway,-Adkins, K.G., Reyier, E.A. Lowers, R.H., Scheidt, D.M., & Epstein,

M. (2005). Mosquito Lagoon sea turtle cold stun event of January 2003, Kennedy Space Center/Merritt

Island National Wildlife Refuge, Florida. Florida Scientist, 68, (2) 114-121.

Provancha, J.A., Scmalzer, P.A., & Hall C.R. (1986). Effects of the December 1983 and January 1985

freezing air temperatures on select aquatic piokilotherms and plant species of Merritt Island. Florida 

Scientist, 49(4), 199-212.

Rao, D. (1987). Surface water hydrology. In J. S. Steward, & J. A. Van Arman (Eds.), Indian River Lagoon 

joint reconnaissance report (pp. 1-90). Palatka & Miami, FL. St. Johns River Water Management

District, & South Florida Water Management District.

Ryerson, K. A. (1967). The history of plant exploration and introduction in the United States Department

of Agriculture. (pp. 1-19). In international symposium on plant introductions, 1966. Tegucigalpa.

Escuela Agricola Panamericana, Honduras.

Scheidt D.M., & Garreau, C.M. (2007). Identification of watercraft use patterns in Canaveral National 

Seashore. PMIS project # 1021131, activity # CANA -00049.

Schmalzer, P.A., & Hinkle, C.R. (1990). Geology, geohydrology and soils of Kennedy Space Center: a 

review. NASA technical memorandum #103813, pp.1-46.

Schnable, J. E., & Goodell, A. G. (1968). Pleistocene-recent stratigraphy, evolution and development of

the Apalachicola coast. Florida special paper #112. Geological Society of America.

Schroeder, B.A., Ehrhart, L.M.Guzman, J.L., Owen, R.D., & Redfoot, W.E. (1990). Cold stunning of

marine turtles in the Indian River Lagoon system, Florida. December 1989. In Richardson, T.H., J.I.

Richardson, & M. Donelly (compilers). Proceeding of the tenth annual workshop on sea turtle biology 

and conservation. NOAA technical memorandum, NMFS-SEFC-278, pp. 67-69.

Shiras, G. (1932). Wildlife of the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, a field naturalist’s photographic record of

nearly half a century of fruitful exploration. The National Geographic Magazine, Volume LXII, September

1932, Washington, D.C.

Sigua, G. C., Steward, J. S., & Tweedale, W. A. (1996). Indian River Lagoon water quality monitoring 

network: proposed modifications. Technical memorandum 12, Palatka, FL. St. Johns River Water

Management District, Department of Water Resources.

Sigua, G. C., Steward, J. S., & Tweedale, W. A. (2000). Water-quality monitoring and biological

integrity assessment in the Indian River Lagoon, Florida: status, trends, and loadings (1988-1994).

Environmental Management, 25, 199-209.

Simberloff, D. (1986). Introduced insects: a biogeographical and systematic perspective. In H. A.

Mooney, & J.A. Drake (eds.), Ecology of Biological Invasions of North America and Hawaii (pp. 3-26).

New York: Springer-Verlag.

Simberloff, D. (1994). Why is Florida being invaded? An assessment of invasive non-indigenous species 

in Florida’s public lands, Florida. Technical report no. TSS-94-100. Tallahassee. Florida Department of

Environmental Protection.

Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce. (2001). Australian spotted jellyfish makes its first appearance

in the IRL. Retrieved February 25, 2009 from http://www.sms.si.edu/IRLSpec/IRL_news.htm.

Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce. (2007a). Indian River Lagoon field guide, biodiversity in the

IRL. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://www.sms.si.edu/IRLFieldGuide/IRLBiodiv.htm.

Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce. (2007b). Indian River Lagoon species inventory home

page, Mercenaria mercenaria. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.sms.si.edu/irlspec/

mercen_mercen.htm.

Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce. (2007c). Indian River Lagoon species inventory home

page, Mytella charruana. Retrieved October 7, 2007, from http://www.sms.si.edu/irlspec/Mytella_

charruana.htm.

Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce. (2007d). Indian River Lagoon species inventory home page.

Retrieved October 7, 2007, from http://www.sms.si.edu/IRLFieldGuide/Callin_sapidu.htm.

Stauble, D. K. (1988). The geomorphology, geologic history, sediments, and inlet formation of the Indian

River Lagoon system. (D. Barile, Ed.). (Vol.1, unpublished). Melbourne, FL: The Marine Resource

Council of East Central Florida.
101

Ste.Claire, D. (2007). True natives, the prehistory of Volusia County. Retrieved July 5, 2007, from http://

Volusia.com/history/natives.

Steward, J., Brockmeyer, R., Gostel, P., Sime, P., & Van Arman, J. (2003). Indian River Lagoon surface 

water improvement and management (SWIM) plan, March 2002 update. Palatka, & Miami, FL. St. Johns

River Water Management District, & South Florida Water Management District.

Stimac, J., & Alves, S.B. (1994). Pest management in the subtropics: biological control, a Florida 

perspective. D. Rosen, F.D. Bennett, & J.L. Capinera, (Eds.) pp. 353-380. Intercept Limited, Andover,

Hants SP101 YG, UK.

The Nature Conservancy. (2006). Invasive mussel alert, Mytella charruana, found in Indian River Lagoon.

Retrieved November 12, 2007, from http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu.alert/alrtmyte.pdf.

Taylor, S. (1993). Notes on the impact of the December 1989 freeze on local populations of Rivulus 

Marmoratus in Florida, with additional distribution records in the state. Florida Scientist, 56(3), 129-134.

Trefry, J., Metz, S., Trocine, R., Iricanin, N., Burnside, D., Chen, N., & et al. (1990). Design and operation

of a muck sediment survey, Indian River Lagoon. Special publication no. SJ 90-SP3. Final report to St.

Johns River Water Management District, Palatka, FL.

Trefry, J.H., Trocine, R.P., & Woodall, D.W. (2007). Composition and sources of suspended matter in the

Indian River Lagoon, Florida. Oceanographic Sciences, 70 (4), 363-382.

Turner, W.R., Brandon, K., Brooks, T.M., Constanza, R., Da Fonseca, G.A.B., & Portela, R. (2007). Global

conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. BioScience, 57 (10), 868-873.

Tyson, S. (2001). Haulover Canal boater activity and compliance study including a summary of manatee 

activity. (Final report - grant no. 1448-40181-97-G-100). Submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

Jacksonville, FL.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2006). Occupational wage data for major U.S. metropolitan areas. U.S.

Department of Labor, Retrieved October 9, 2007, from http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_fl.htm.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (2006). United States Department of the Interior, Merritt Island National 

Wildlife Refuge draft comprehensive conservation plan and environmental assessment, Southwest

Region, Atlanta, GA.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (2001). Technical/agency draft, Florida manatee recovery plan, (Trichechus 

manatus latirostris), third revision. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlanta, GA. 138pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (1993). Atlantic salt marsh snake recovery plan. Atlanta, GA. 19 pg. 

U. S. National Park Service. (1997). General management plan, Canaveral National Seashore, Titusville, FL.

Utilities Commission of New Smyrna Beach. (2007). Wastewater. Retrieved June 6, 2007, from http://

www.ucnsb.net/water/wastewater.aspx.

Virstein, R. W., Carter, E. W., Morris, L. J., & Steward, J. S. (2000). Seagrass targets for Mosquito Lagoon.

Presented at the second biennial Mosquito Lagoon conference, Titusville, FL.

Volusia County, Florida. (2007). On the economic scene, Monday – September 24, 2007. Retrieved

October 9, 2007, from Volusia County Department of Economic Development website: http://

floridabusiness.org/scene/fax292.htm.

Volusia County Environmental Health Laboratory. (2007a). Introduction to the Volusia County 

Environmental Health Lab (VCEHL) Surface Water Program. Retrieved June 7, 2007, from http://

volusiahealth.net/lab/wq_introduction.html.

Volusia County Environmental Health Laboratory. (2007b). Water quality index. Retrieved June 6, 2007,

from http://volusiahealth.net/lab.wqwaterqualityindex.htm.

Wall, L., M., Walters, J. L., Grizzle, R. E., & Sacks, P. E. (2005). Recreational boating activity and its

impact on the recruitment and survival of the oyster Crassostrea virginica on intertidal reefs in Mosquito

Lagoon, Florida. Journal of Shellfish Research, 24(4), 965-973.

Walters, L., Roman, A., Stiner, J., & Weeks, D. (2001). Water resources management plan, Canaveral 

National Seashore. Retrieved June 8, 2007, from U. S. National Park Service website: http://www.

nature.nps.gov/water/management_plans/cana_final_screen.pdf.

Weather Underground, Inc. (2007). History for Daytona Beach, FL by date. Retrieved November 11, 2007,

from http://printer.wunderground.com/history/airport/KDAB.html.

Wells, H. W. (1961). The fauna of oyster reefs with special reference to the salinity factor. Ecological 

Monographs, 60, 449-469.

White, W. A. (1970). The geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula; Florida Bureau of Geology. Geological 

Bulletin, 51, 1-164.
102

Whitney, E.N., Means, D.B., & Rudloe, A. (2004). Priceless Florida: natural ecosystems and native 

species. Pineapple Press, Inc. Sarasota, FL, pp. 424.

Windsor, J.G. (1988). A review of water quality and sediment chemistry with an historical perspective in 

the Indian River Lagoon monograph. D.A. Barile (ed). Unpublished report. Marine Resources Council

of East Central Florida. Melbourne, FL.

Winkler, S., & Ceric, A. (2006). 2004 status and trends in water quality at selected sites in the St. Johns 

River Water Management District. Technical publication no. SJ2006-6, pp. 50-54. Palatka, FL. St. Johns

River Water Management District.

Witherington, B.E., & Ehrhart, L.M. (1989). Hypothermic stunning and mortality of marine turtles in the 

Indian River Lagoon system, Florida. Copeia, 3, 696.

Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Consultants. (1994). Status and trends: summary of the Indian River 

Lagoon. Final technical report, project no. 92F274C. Melbourne, FL: Indian River Lagoon National

Estuary Program.

Yu, D.W. (1996). New factor in free trade: reply to Jenkins. Conservation Biology, 10 (1), 303-304.

References for Glossary of Terms

Allaby, M. (Ed.). (2005). Oxford dictionary of ecology (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Lincoln, R. J., Boxshall, G. A., & Clark, P. F. (1995). A dictionary of ecology, evolution and systematics.

New York: University of Cambridge.

Hine, R. S., & Martin, E. (Eds.). (2004). Oxford dictionary of biology (5th ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford

University Press.

Neufeldt, V., & Sparks, A. N. (1990). Webster’s new world dictionary (3rd ed.). Cleveland, OH: Webster’s

New World Dictionaries.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Program. (2005). Endangered species glossary.

Retrieved November 1, 2007 from http://www.fws.gov/endangered/glossary.html.

References for Species List

Allaby, M. (Ed.). (2005). Oxford dictionary of ecology (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Florida Natural Areas Inventory, & Florida Department of Natural Resources. (1990). Guide to the natural 

communities of Florida. Author.

Lincoln, R. J., Boxshall, G. A., & Clark, P. F. (2003). A dictionary of ecology, evolution and systematics.

New York: Cambridge University Press.

Muller, J. W., Hardin, E. D., Jackson, D. R., Gatewood, S. E., & Caire, N. (1989). Summary report on 

the vascular plants, animals and plant communities endemic to Florida (Technical Report No. 7).

Tallahassee: Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Nongame Wildlife Program. 113 pp.

Neufeldt, V., & Sparks, A. N. (1990). Webster’s new world dictionary (3rd Ed.). Cleveland, OH: Webster’s

New World Dictionaries.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Program. (2005). Endangered species glossary. Retrieved

November 1, 2007 from http://www.fws.gov/endangered/glossary.html.
103

B.4 / Resource Inventories

B.4.1 / Native Species Within and Adjacent to the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Plants

Class Liliopsida (Grass-like flowering plants)

Subclass Arecidae

Order Arecales

Saw palmetto Serenoa repens 

Subclass Caryophyllidae

Order Caryophyllales

Beach chaff-flower Alternanthera maritima 

Glasswort Salicornia spp. 

Prickly-pear cactus Opuntia humifusa 

Prickly-pear cactus Opuntia stricta 

Samphfire Blutaparon vermiculare 

Sea purslane Sesuvium portulacastrum 

Yellow joyweed Alternanthera flavescens 

Subclass Commelinidae

Order Cyperales

Bitter panic grass Panicum amarum 

Muhly grass Muhlenbergia capillaris 

Saltgrass Distichlis spicata

Saltmeadow cordgrass Spartina patens 

Seashore dropseed Sporobolus virginicus 

Seashore paspalum Paspalum vaginatum 

Smooth Cordgrass Spartina alterniflora

Subclass Liliidae

Order Liliales

Black needle rush Juncus roemerianus

Celestial Lily Nemastylis floridana E

Florida Beargrass Nolina atopocarpa T

Spanish bayonet Yucca aloifolia 

Spider lily Hymenocallis latifolia 

Order Orchidales

Giant Orchid Pteroglossaspis ecristata T

Many-flowered Grass-pink Calopogon multiflorus E

Yellow Fringeless Orchid Platanthera integra E

Subclass Alismatidae

Order Najadales

Manatee grass Syringodium filiforme

Shoal grass Halodule wrightii

Wigeongrass Ruppia maritima

Class Magnoliopsida (Woody flowering plants)

Subclass Asteridae

Order Asterales

Beach elder Iva imbricata 

Blanket flower Gaillardia pulchella 

Coastal ragweed Ambrosia hispida 

Dune sunflower Helianthus debilis 

Sea oxeye daisy Borrichia spp. 
104

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Order Gentianales

Devil’s potato Echites umbellata 

Florida Spiny-pod Matelea floridana E

Golden creeper Ernodia littoralis 

Seaside gentian Eustoma exaltatum 

Wild allamanda Pentalinon luteum 

Order Lamiales

Atlantic Coast Florida Lantana Lantana depressa var. floridana E

Beach verbena Glandularia maritima 

Black mangrove Avicennia germinans

Coastal Vervain Glandularia maritima E

Dotted horsemint Monarda punctata 

Large-flowered Rosemary Conradina grandiflora T

Tropical sage Salvia coccinea 

Order Scrophulariales

Florida privet Forestiera segregata 

Order Solanales

Beach morning glory Ipomoea imperati 

Railroad vine Ipomoea pes-caprae 

Standing cypress Ipomopsis rubra 

Subclass Caryophyllidae

Order Caryophyllales

Glasswort Salicornia depressa

Saltwort Salicornia bigelovii

Simpson’s Prickly Apple Harrisia simpsonii E

Subclass Dilleniidae

Order Violales

Corkystem passionflower Passiflora suberosa 

Nodding Pinweed Lechea cernua T

Pine pinweed Lechea divaricata E

Purple passionflower Passiflora incarnata 

Subclass Magnoliidae

Order Magnoliales

Rugel’s Pawpaw Deeringothamnus rugelii E E

Subclass Rosidae

Order Euphorbiales

Beach croton Croton punctatus 

Dune spurge Chamaesyce spp. 

Sand dune spurge Chamaesyce cumulicola E

Order Fabales

Beach bean Canavalia rosea 

Coral bean Erythrina herbacea 

Necklace pod Sophora tomentosa 

Partridge pea Chamaecrista spp. 

Sand Butterfly Pea Centrosema arenicola E

Order Myrtales

Buttonwood Conocarpus erectus

Seaside evening primrose Oenothera humifusa 

Simpson stopper Myrcianthes frangrans 

White mangrove Laguncularia racemosa

Order Rhizophorales

Red mangrove Rhizophora mangle
105

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Order Rosales

Bay cedar Suriana maritima 

Gopher apple Licania michauxii 

Green cocoplum Chrysobalanus icaco 

Order Sapindales

Varnish leaf Dodonaea viscosa 

Birds

Order Anseriformes (Geese, Ducks)

American Black Duck Anas rubripes

American Wigeon Anas americana

Black Scoter Melanitta nigra

Black Vulture Coragyps altratus 

Blue-winged Teal Anas discors

Brant Branta bernicla 

Bufflehead Bucephala albeola 

Canada Goose Branta canadensis

Canvasback Aythya valisineria

Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula

Eurasian Wigeon Anas penelope

Fulvous Whistling-Duck Dendrocygna bicolor

Gadwall Anas strepera 

Greater Scaup Aythya marila 

Green-winged Teal Anas crecca

Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus

Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis

Mallard Anas Platyrynchos

Mottled Duck Anas fulvigula

Northern Pintail Anas acuta

Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata

Oldsquaw Clangula hyemalis

Redhead Aythya americana

Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator

Ring-necked Duck Aythya collaris

Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis

Snow Goose Chen caerulescens

Surf Scoter Melanitta perspicillata

White-winged Scoter Melanitta fusca

Wood Duck Aix sponsa

Order Apodiformes (Swift)

Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica

Order Caprimulgiformes (Goatsuckers)

Chuck-will’s-widow Caprimulgus carolinensis

Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor 

Whip-poor-will Caprimulgus vociferus

Order Charadriiformes (Plovers, Sandpipers, Gulls, Terns)

American Avocet Recurvirostra americana 

American oystercatcher Haematopus palliatus SSC

American Woodcock Scolopax minor 

Black Skimmer Rhynchops niger SSC

Black Tern Chlidonias niger

Black-bellied Plover Charadrius thoracicus 
106

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Black-legged Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla 

Black-necked Stilt Himantopus mexicanus

Bonaparte’s Gull Larus philadelphia 

Bridled Tern Sterna anaethetus 

Caspian Tern Sterna caspia

Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago

Common Tern Sterna hirundo 

Dunlin Calidris alpina 

Forster’s Tern Sterna forsteri 

Great Black-backed Gull Larus marinus 

Greater Yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca 

Gull-billed Tern Sterna nilotica 

Herring Gull Larus argentatus

Killdeer Charadrius vociferus 

Laughing Gull Larus atricilla 

Least Sandpiper Calidris minutilla

Least Tern Sterna antillarum T E

Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes 

Long-billed Curlew Numenius americanus

Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa 

Northern Phalarope Lobipes lobatus

Parasitic Jaeger Stercorarius parasiticus 

Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos 

Piping Plover Charadrius melodus T T

Pomarine Jaeger Stercorarius pomarinus 

Red Knot Calidris canutus 

Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis 

Roseate Tern Sterna dougallii T T

Royal Tern Sterna maxima 

Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres

Sanderling Calidris alba 

Sandwich Tern Sterna sandvicensis 

Semipalmated Plover Charadrius semipalmatus 

Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla 

Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus 

Solitary Sandpiper Tringa solitaria 

Sooty Tern Sterna fuscata 

Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularia 

Stilt Sandpiper Calidris himantipus 

Upland Sandpiper Bartramia longicauda 

Wilson’s Phalarope Phalaropus tricolor 

Western Sandpiper Calidris mauri 

Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus

White-rumped Sandpiper Calidris fuscicollis 

Wilson’s Plover Charadrius wilsonia

Willet Catoptrophorus semipalmatus 

Order Ciconiiformes (Heron, Egret, Ibis, Spoonbill)

American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosa

Black-crowned Night-Heron Nycticorax nycticorax

Cattle Egret Ardea ibis

Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus

Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias

Great Egret Ardea alba
107

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Greater Flamingo Phoenicopterus ruber

Green Heron Butorides virescens

Least Bittern Ixobrychus exilis

Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea SSC

Reddish Egret Egretta rufescens SSC

Roseate Spoonbill Platalea ajaja SSC

Snowy Egret Egretta thula SSC

Tri-colored Heron Egretta tricolor SSC

Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura

White Ibis Eudocimus albus SSC

Wood Stork Mycteria americana E E

Yellow-crowned Night-Heron Nycticorax violaceus

Order Columbiformes (Doves)

Common Ground-Dove Columbina passerina 

Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura

Rock Dove Columba livia

Order Coraciiformes (Kingfisher)

Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon

Order Cuculiformes (Cuckoos, Ani)

Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus

Smooth-billed Ani Crotophaga ani

Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus

Order Falconiformes (Hawks, Falcons, Osprey, Vultures

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus T

Broad-winged Hawk Buteo platypterus

Cooper’s Hawk Accipiter cooperii

Merlin Falco columbarius

Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus 

Osprey Pandion haliaetus SSC

Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus E

Red-shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus

Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis

Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus

Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni

Swallow-tailed Kite Elanoides forficatus

Order Galliformes (Quail, Turkey)

American Kestrel Falco sparverius

Northern Bobwhite Colinus virginianus

Wild Turkey Melagris gallopavo 

Order Gaviiformes (Loon)

Common Loon Gavia immer

Red-throated Loon Gavia stellata

Order Gruiformes ( Limpkins, Rails, Gallinule, Coot)

American Coot Fulica americana

Black Rail Laterallus jamaicensis

Clapper Rail Rallus longirostris 

Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus

King Rail Rallus elegans

Limpkin Aramus guarauna SSC

Florida Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis pratensis T

Sora Porzana carolina

Virginia Rail Rallus limicola
108

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Order Passeriformes (Sparrow)

Lincoln’s Sparrow Melospiza lincolnii

Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens

Alder Flycatcher Empidonax alnorum 

American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 

American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla

American Robin Turdus migratorius

Bachman’s Sparrow Aimophila aestivalis

Bank Swallow Riparia riparia

Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica

Bay-breasted Warbler Dendroica castanea 

Black-and-white Warbler Mniotilta varia

Blackburnian Warbler Dendroica fusca

Blackpoll Warbler Dendroica striata

Black-throated Blue Warbler Dendroica caerulescens

Black-throated Green Warbler Dendroica virens 

Black-whiskered Vireo Vireo altiloquus

Blue Grosbeak Guiraca caerulea 

Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata

Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea

Blue-winged Warbler Vermivora pinus

Boat-tailed Grackle Quiscalus major 

Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus 

Brown Thrasher Toxostoma rufum

Brown-headed Cowbird Molothrus ater 

Cape May Warbler Dendroica tigrina

Carolina Wren Thryothoorus ludovicianus

Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum

Chestnut-sided Warbler Dendroica pensylvanica 

Chipping Sparrow Spizella passerina

Cliff Swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonota

Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula 

Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas 

Connecticut Warbler Oporornis agilis

Dickcissel Spiza americana 

Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus

Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna 

Eastern Phoebe Sayornis phoebe

European Starling Sturnus vulgaris 

Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla

Fish Crow Corvus ossifragus

Florida Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor paludicola

Florida Scrub-jay Aphelocoma coerulescens T

Fox sparrow Passerella iliaca

Golden-winged Warbler Vermivora chrysoptera 

Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum 

Gray Catbird Dumetella carolinensis

Gray Kingbird Tyrannus dominicensis

Gray-cheeked Thrush Catharus minimus 

Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus

Henslow’s Sparrow Ammodramus henslowii

Hermit Thrush Catharus guttatus
109

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Hooded Warbler Wilsonia citrina

House Sparrow Passer domesticus 

House Wren Troglodytes aedon

Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 

Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus

Lark Sparrow Chondestes grammacus

Least Flycatcher Empidonax minimus

Lincoln’s Sparrow Melospiza lincolnii

Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus

Louisiana Waterthrush Seiurus motacilla

Magnolia Warbler Dendroica magnolia

Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris 

Nashville Warbler Vermivora ruficapilla

Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 

Northern Mockingbird Mimus polyglottos

Northern Oriole Icterus galbula

Northern Parula Parula americana

Northern Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis

Northern Waterthrush Seiurus noveboracensis

Orange-crowned Warbler Vermivora celata 

Orchard Oriole Icterus spurius 

Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapillus

Painted Bunting Passerina ciris 

Palm Warbler Dendroica palmarum

Pine Siskin Carduelis pinus 

Pine Warbler Dendroica pinus

Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor

Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea

Purple Martin Progne subis

Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus

Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus 

Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 

Ruby-crowned Kinglet Regulus calendula

Rufous-sided Towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus

Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus

Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis 

Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea

Seaside Sparrow Ammodramus maritimus 

Sedge Wren Cistothorus platensis 

Solitary Vireo Vireo solitarius 

Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia 

Summer Tanager Piranga rubra

Swainson’s Thrush Catharus ustulatus

Swainson’s Warbler Limnothlypis swainsonii 

Swamp Sparrow Melospiza georgiana 

Tennessee Warbler Vermivora peregrina

Tree Swallow Trachycineta bicolor 

Tufted Titmouse Baeolophus bicolor

Veery Catharus fuscescens

Vesper Sparrow Pooecetes gramineus

Water Pipit Anthus spinoletta

Western Kingbird Tyrannus verticalis 
110

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

White-eyed Vireo Vireo griseus

White-throated Sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis 

Wilson’s Warbler Wilsonia pusilla

Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina

Worm-eating Warbler Helmitheros vermivorum

Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia

Yellow-breasted Chat Icteria virens

Yellow-rumped Warbler Dendroica coronata 

Yellow-throated Vireo Vireo flavifrons

Yellow-throated Warbler Dendroica dominica 

Order Pelecaniformes (Pelican, Gannet, Cormorant)

American White Pelican Pelecanus erythrorhynchos

Anhinga Anhinga anhinga

Brown Pelican Pelecanus occidentalis SSC E

Double-crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus

Magnificent Frigatebird Fregata magnificens

Northern Gannet Morus bassanus

Order Piciformes (Woodpeckers)

Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens

Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus

Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus

Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus 

Red-bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus

Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus 

Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius 

Order Podicipediformes (Grebe)

Horned Grebe Podiceps auritus

Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps

Order Procellariiformes (Shearwater, Storm-petrel)

Audubon’s Shearwater Puffinus lherminieri

Greater Shearwater Puffinus gravis

Wilson’s Storm-Petrel Oceanites oceanicus

Order Strigiformes (Owls)

Barred Owl Strix varia

Common Barn Owl Tyto alba

Eastern Screech-Owl Otus asio

Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus

Short-eared Owl Asio flammeus

Order Trochiliformes (Hummingbird)

Ruby-throated Hummingbird Archilochus colubris

Mammals

Order Carnivora

Florida Long-tailed Weasel Mustela frenata peninsulae

Florida panther Puma concolor coryi E E

Order Cetacea

Atlantic Bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus

Order Rodentia

Florida mouse Podomys floridanus SSC

Round-tailed Muskrat Neofiber alleni

Southeastern Beach Mouse Peromyscus polionotus niveiventris T T
111

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Order Sirenia

West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus E E

Amphibians

Order Anura

Gopher Frog Rana capito SSC

Fishes

Class Chondrichthyes (Cartilaginous fishes)

Order Carcharhiniformes (sharks)

Family Carcharhinidae

Blacktip shark Carcharhinus limbatus

Bull shark Carcharhinus leucas

Lemon shark Negaprion brevirostris

Sandbar shark Carcharhinus plumbeus

Family Sphyrnidae

Scalloped hammerhead Sphyrna lewini

Order Pristiformes(Sawfish)

Family Pristidae

Smalltooth sawfish Pristis pectinata E

Order Rajiformes (Rays)

Family Dasyatidae

Atlantic stingray Dasyatis sabina

Bluntnose stingray Dasyatis sayi

Southern stingray Dasyatis americana

Smooth butterfly ray Gymnura micrura

Family Myliobatidae

Cownose ray Rhinoptera bonasus

Spotted eagle ray Aetobatus narinari

Class Actinopterygii (Ray-finned fishes)

Order Acipenseriformes (Sturgeon)

Family Acipenseridae

Atlantic Sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus SSC SSC

Order Anguilliformes (Eels)

Family Anguillidae

American eel Anguilla rostrata

Family Ophichthidae

Shrimp eel Ophichthus gomesi

Speckled worm eel Myrophis punctatus

Order Atheriniformes (Silversides)

Family Aplocheilidae

Mangrove rivulus Rivulus marmoratus SSC

Family Atherinidae

Inland silverside Menidia beryllina

Rough silverside Membras martinica

Tidewater silverside Menidia peninsulae

Family Belonidae

Atlantic needlefish Strongylura marina

Redfin needlefish Strongylura notata

Timucu Strongylura timucu

Family Cyprinodontidae

Bluefin killifish Lucania goodei
112

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Flagfish Jordanella floridae

Golden topminnow Fundulus chrysotus

Goldspotted killifish Floridichthys carpio

Gulf killifish Fundulus grandis

Longnose killifish Fundulus similis

Marsh killifish Fundulus confluentus

Mummichog Fundulus heteroclitus

Rainwater killifish Lucania parva

Seminole killifish Fundulus seminolis

Sheepshead minnow Cyprinodon variegatus

Family Hemiramphidae

Halfbeak Hyporhamphus unifasciatus

Family Poeciliidae

Least killifish Heterandria formosa

Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis

Sailfin molly Poecilia latipinna

Order Aulopiformes (Grinners)

Family Synodontidae

Inshore lizardfish Synodus foetens

Order Batrachoidiformes (Toadfish)

Family Batrachoididae

Oyster toadfish Opsanus tau

Order Clupeiformes (Herring, Anchovies)

Family Clupeidae

Atlantic thread herring Opisthonema oglinum

Atlantic menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus

Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum

Scaled sardine Harengula jaguana

Yellowfin menhaden Brevoortia smithi

Family Engraulidae

Bay anchovy Anchoa mitchilli

Cuban anchovy Anchoa cubana

Longnose anchovy Anchoa nasuta

Striped anchovy Anchoa hepsetus

Order Cypriniformes (Minnows)

Family Catostomidae

Lake chubsucker Erimyzon sucetta

Family Cyprinidae

Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas

Order Elopiformes (Tarpons, Tenpounders, Ladyfish)

Family Albulidae

Bonefish Albula vulpes

Family Elopidae

Ladyfish Elops saurus

Tarpon Megalops atlanticus

Order Gadiformes (Cod)

Family Ophidiidae

Striped cusk-eel Ophidion marginatum

Order Gasterosteiformes (Seahorse, Pipefish)

Family Syngnathidae

Chain pipefish Syngnathus louisianae

Dwarf seahorse Hippocampus zosterae
113

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Gulf pipefish Syngnathus scovelli

Lined seahorse Hippocampus erectus

Order Gobiesociformes (Clingfishes)

Family Gobiesocidae

Skilletfish Gobiesox strumosus

Order Perciformes (Perch)

Family Blenniidae

Crested blenny Hypleurochilus geminatus

Florida blenny Chasmodes saburrae

Family Carangidae

Atlantic bumper Chloroscombrus chrysurus

Atlantic moonfish Selene setapinnis

Blue runner Caranx cyrsos

Crevalle jack Caranx hippos

Florida pompano Trachinotus carolinus

Horse-eye jock Caranx latus

Leatherjacket Oligoplites saurus

Lookdown Selene vomer

Permit Trachinotus falcatus

Family Centrarchidae

Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus

Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus

Dollar sunfish Lepomis marginatus

Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides

Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus

Spotted sunfish Lepomis punctatus

Warmouth Lepomis gulosus

Family Centroponidae

Common snook Centropomus undecimalis

Family Cichlida

Blackchin Tilapia Sarotherodon melanotheron 

Family Echeneidae

Sharksucker Echeneis naucrates

Whitefin sharksucker Echeneis neucratoides

Family Elecotridae

Fat sleeper Dormitator maculatus

Family Ephippidae

Atlantic spadefish Chaetodipterus faber

Family Gobiidae

Clown goby Microgobius gulosus

Code goby Gobiosoma robustum

Darter goby Gobionellus boleosoma

Emerald goby Gobionellus smaragdus

Frillifin goby Bathygobius soporator

Green goby Microgobius thalassinus

Highfin goby Gobionellus oceanicus

Lyre goby Evarthodus lyricus

Naked goby Gobiosoma bosci

Violet goby Gobioides broussoneti

Family Gerreidae

Irish pompano Diapterus auratus

Silver jenny Eucinostomus gula
114

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Striped mojarra Diapterus plumieri

Spotfin mojarra Eucinostomus argenteus

Family Haemulidae

French grunt Haemulon flavolineatum

Pigfish Orthopristis chrysoptera

Family Lobotidae

Tripletail Lobotes surinamensis

Family Lutjanidae

Gray snapper Lutjanus griseus

Family Mugilidae

Mountain mullet Agonostomus monticola

Striped mullet Mugil cephalus

White mullet Mugil curema

Family Pomatomidae

Bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix

Family: Rajidae

Clearnose skate Raja eglanteria

Family Scaridae

Emerald parrotfish Nicholsina usta

Family Sciaenidae

Atlantic croaker Micropogonias undulatus

Black drum Pogonias cromis

Red drum Sciaenops ocellata

Silver perch Bairdiella chrysoura

Southern kingfish Menticirrhus americanus

Spot Leiostomus xanthurus

Spotted seatrout Cynoscion nebulosus

Weakfish Cynoscion regalis

Family Scombridae

Spanish mackerel Scomberomorus maculatus

Family Serranidae

Gray Grouper Mycteroperca microlepis

Rock sea bass Cetropristis philadelphica

Family Sparidae

Pinfish Lagodon rhomboides

Sheepshead Archosargus probatocephalus

Family Sphyraenidae

Great barracuda Sphyraena barracuda

Northern sennet Sphyraena borealis

Family Trichiuridae

Atlantic cutlassfish Trichiurus lepturus

Family Uranoscopidae

Southern stargazer Astroscopus y-graccum

Order Pleuronectiformes (Flatfish)

Family Bothidae

Bay whiff Citharichthys spilopterus

Fringed flounder Etropus crossotus

Gulf flounder Paralichthys albigutta

Southern flounder Paralichthys lethostigma

Family Cynoglossidae

Blackcheek tonguefish Symphurus plagiusa

Family Soleidae
115

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Hogchoker Trinectes maculatus

Lined sole Achirus lineatus

Order Scorpaeniformes (“Mail-cheeked” fishes)

Family Scorpaenidae

Barbfish Scorpaena brasiliensis

Family Triglidae

Bighead searobin Prionotus tribulus

Leopard searobin Prionotus scitulus

Order Siluriformes (Catfish)

Family Ariidae

Hardhead catfish Arius felis

Gafftopsail catfish Bagre marinas

Family Ictaluridae

Yellow bullhead Ictalurus natalis

Order Tetraodontiformes (Boxfishes, Pufferfishes, Filefishes)

Family Balistidae

Orange filefish Aluterus schoepfi

Planehead filefish Monacanthus hispidus

Family Tetraodontidae

Bandtail puffer Sphoeroides spengleri

Checkered puffer Sphoeroides testudineus

Southern puffer Sphoeroides nephelus

Striped burrfish Chilomycterus schoepfi

Insects

Tropical fire ant (native) Solenopsis geminata

Land crab hole mosquito Deinocerites cancer

St. Louis encephalitis Culex nigripalpus 

Brackish water mosquito Anopheles atropos

Black Saltmarsh mosquito Ochlerotatus taeniorhynchus

Golden Saltmarsh mosquito Ochlerotatus sollicitans 

Mollusks and Crustaceans

Phylum Arthropoda (Insects, Arachnids, Crustaceans)

Class Malacostraca (Crustaceans)

Atlantic mud crab Panopeus herbstii

Atlantic sand fiddler crab Uca pugilator

Bigclaw snapping shrimp Alpheus heterochaelis

Blue crab Callinectes sapidus

Broad-backed mud crab Eurytium limosum

Brown shrimp Penaeus aztecus

Common mantis shrimp Squilla empusa

Doubtful spider crab Libnia dubia

Grass shrimp Palaemonetes vulgaris

Great land crab Cardisoma guanhumi

Green porcelain crab Petrolisthes armatus

Harris’s mud crab Rhithropanopeus harrisii

Longnosed spider crab Libinia dubia

Mud fiddler crab Uca pugnax rapax

Narrow mud crab Hexapanopeus angustifrons

Oyster pea crab Pinnotheres ostreum

Pentagon crab Heterocrypta granulate
116

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Pink shrimp Penaeus duorarum

Say’s mud crab Neopanope sayi

Spiny Lobster Panulirus argus

Stone crab Menippe mercenaria

Striped hermit crab Clibanarius vittatus

White shrimp Penaeus setiferus

Class Maxillopoda (Barnacles, Copepods)

Ivory barnacle Balanus eburneus

Purple striped barnacle Balanus amphitrite

Class Merostomata (Horseshoe crabs, Eurypterids)

Horseshoe crab Limulus polyphemus

Phylum Mollusca (Mollusks)

Class Bivalvia (Scallops, Clams, Oysters, Mussels)

Blood ark Anadara ovalis

Charru mussel Mytella charruana

Coquina shells Donax variabilis

Eastern oyster Crassostrea virginica recruits

Flat mud crab Eurypanopeus depressus

Hard shelled clam Mercenaria mercenaria

Jacknife clam Tagelus divisus

Jingle shell Anomia simplex

Mahogany date mussel Lithophaga bisulcata

Pen shell Atrina rigida

Ribbed mussel Geukensia demissa

Scorched mussel Brachidonetes exuctus

Striated wood paddock Martesia cuneiformis

Tranverse ark Anadara transversa

Tulip mussel Modiolus americans

Class Gastropoda (Snails)

Atlantic moon snail Polinices duplicates

Atlantic oyster drill Urosalpinx cinerea

Atlantic slipper shell Crepidula fornicata

Awl miniature cerith Cerithiopsis emersoni

Banded tulip Fasciolaria hunteria

Convex slipper shell Crepidula convexa

Crown conch Melongena corona

Eastern slipper shell Crepidula astrasolea

Florida cerith Cerithium atratum

Florida horse conch Pleuroploca gigantean

Florida rock snail Thais haemastoma floridana

Green’s miniature cerith Cerithiopsis greeni

Keyhole limpet Diodora cayensis

Lemon drop sea slug Doriopsilla pharpa

Lightening whelk Busycon contrarium

Marsh periwinkle Littorina irrorata

Mottled dog whelk Nassarius vibex

Oyster mosquito Boonea impressa

Pear whelk Busycon spiratum

Plicate mangelia Pyrgocythara plicosa

Salle’s auger snail Terebra salleana

Sooty sea hare Aplysia brasiliana

Thick-lipped drill Eupleura caudata

True tulip Fasciolaria mlipa
117

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Other Invertebrates

Phylum Annelida (Segmented worms)

Feather duster worm Sabella spp.

Green oyster worm Phyllodoce fragilis

Oyster mud worm Pal vdora websteri

Tube worms Hydroides spp.

Phylum Bryozoa (Moss animals)

Common bryozoan Bugula neritina

Lacy bryozoan Hippoporina verrilli

Lacy crust bryozoan Conopeum spp.

Spaghetti bryozoan Zoobotryon verticillatum

Vittaticella contei

Watersipora subovoidea

Phylum Chordata

Subphylum Urochordata (Sea squirts, Tunicates)

Black tunicate Botrylloides nigrum

Encrusting ascidian Perophora viridis

Goldenstar tunicate Botrylloides schlosseri

Rough sea squirt Styela plicata

Royal tunicate Botryllus planus

Sea grape Mogula manhattensis

Tunicate Didemnum sp.

Phylum Cnidaria ( Corals, Sea anemones, Jellyfish)

Sea anemone Aiptasia pallida

Striped anemone Haliplanella luciae

Cannonball jellyfish Stomolophus meleagris

Moon jelly Aurelia aurita

Portuguese Man O’ War Physalia physalis

Upside-down jelly Cassiopeia xamachana

Phylum Ctenophora (Comb jellies)

Comb jelly Mnemiopsis leidyi

Phylum Echinodermata (Starfish, Brittle stars, Sea urchin, Sand dollars)

Brooding brittle star Axiognathus squamatus

Reticulated brittle star Ophionereis reticulata

Phylum Porifera (Sponges)

Black volcano sponge Halichondria melandocia

Boring sponge Cliona spp.

Sun sponge Hymeniacidon heliophila

Phytoplankton

blue-green algae Calothrix sp.

blue-green algae Digenia sp.

blue-green algae Cyanobacterium sp.

blue-green algae Oscilatoria sp.

blue-green algae Synechococcus elongatus

brown algae Dictyota sp.

diatoms Asterionellopis glacialis

diatoms Bacillaria paxilifera

diatoms Bellerochea sp.

diatoms Cerataulina pelagica

diatoms Chaetoceros sp.

diatoms Chaetoceros aequatorialis

diatoms Chaetoceros curvisetus
118

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

diatoms Chaetoceros decipiens

diatoms Chaetoceros diversus

diatoms Chaetoceros lorenzianus

diatoms Chaetoceros minimus

diatoms Chaetoceros simplex

diatoms Chaetoceros subtilis

diatoms Chaetoceros wighamii

diatoms Corethron

diatoms Coscinodiscus granii

diatoms Coscinodiscus sp.

diatoms Dactyiisolen fragilissimus

diatoms Ditylum brightwellii

diatoms Grammatophora marina

diatoms Guinardia delicatula

diatoms Guinardia sp.

diatoms Guinardia striata

diatoms Hermiaulus sinensis

diatoms Leptocylindrus danicus

diatoms Licmophora gracillis

diatoms Lithodesmium sp.

diatoms Navicula sp.

diatoms Nitzchia sp.

diatoms Nitzschia closterium

diatoms Odontella aurita

diatoms Odontella mobiliensis

diatoms Odontella regia

diatoms Paralia sulcata

diatoms Pleurosigma/Gyrosigma

diatoms Pseudo-nitzschia

diatoms Pseudosolenia calcar-avis

diatoms Rhizosolenia imbricata

diatoms Rhizosolenia setigera

diatoms Skeletonema costatum

diatoms Skeletonema menzellii

diatoms Stictocyclus stictodiscus

diatoms Thalassionema nitzschiodes

dinoflagellates Akashiwo sanguinea

dinoflagellates Amphidinium operculatum

dinoflagellates Ceratium fusus

dinoflagellates Ceratium hircus

dinoflagellates Coolia monotis

dinoflagellates Dinophysis sp.

dinoflagellates Dinophysis caudata var. acutiformis

dinoflagellates Gambierdiscus toxicus

dinoflagellates Gonyaulax polygramma

dinoflagellates Gonyaulax scrippsae

dinoflagellates Gonyaulax spinifera

dinoflagellates Gymnodinium sp.

dinoflagellates Gyrodinium estuariale

dinoflagellates Gyrodinium instriatum

dinoflagellates Gyrodinium spirale

dinoflagellates Heterocapsa niei

dinoflagellates Karenia brevis
119

Common Name Species Name State

Status

Federal

Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

dinoflagellates Katodinium glaucum

dinoflagellates Oxyphysis oxytoxoides

dinoflagellates Oxytoxum scolopax

dinoflagellates Pheopolykrikos hartmannii

dinoflagellates Polykrikos schwartzii

dinoflagellates Prorocentrum balticum

dinoflagellates Prorocentrum emarginatum

dinoflagellates Prorocentrum gracile

dinoflagellates Prorocentrum micans

dinoflagellates Prorocentrum minimum

dinoflagellates Protoperidinium depressum

dinoflagellates Protoperidinium pellucidium

dinoflagellates Pyrodinium bahamense var. bahamense

dinoflagellates Pyrophacus horologium

dinoflagellates Pyrophacus steinii

dinoflagellates Scrippsiella trochoidea

euglena Euglena sp.

green algae Avrainvillea sp.

green algae Batophora sp.

green algae Bryopsis sp.

green algae Caulerpa sp.

green algae Cladophora sp.

green algae Halimeda sp.

green algae Nannochloris c.f.

green algae Oscillatoria sp.

green algae Rhipocephalus sp.

green algae Ulva sp.

red algae Acanthophora sp.

red algae Agardiella sp.

red algae Chondria sp.

red algae Gracilaria sp.

reg algae Laurencia sp.

zooflagellate Hernesinum adriaticum

Reptiles

Class Reptilia (Reptiles)

Order Crocodilia (Crocodiles, Alligators)

American alligator Alligator mississipiensis SSC SAT

Order Squamata (Lizards, Snakes)

Atlantic salt marsh snake Nerodia clarkii taeniata T T

Eastern indigo snake Drymarchon corais couperi T T

Florida banded water snake Nerodia fasciata pictiventris 

Order Testudines (Turtles, Tortoises, and Terrapins)

Diamondback Terrapin Malaclemys terrapin tequesta

Gopher Tortoise Gopherus polyphemus SSC

Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas E E

Hawksbill Sea Turtle Eretmochelys imbricata E E

Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle Lepidochelys kempii E E

Leatherback Dermochelys coriacea E E

Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta T T
120

B.4.2 / Invasive Non-native Species List 

Common Name Species Name State Status Federal Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Plants

Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius

Australian pine Casuarina equisetifolia

Birds

Scarlet ibis Eudocimus ruber

Mammals

Feral pig Sus scrofa

Insects

Red imported fire ant (RIFA) Solenopsis invicta

Mollusks & Crustaceans

Asian Green Mussel Perna viridis

Charru mussel Mytella charruana

Indo-Pacific swimming crab Charybdis hellerii

Serrated swimming crab Scylla serrata

Other Invertebrates

Australian Spotted Jellyfish Phyllorhiza punctata

Reptiles

Cuban treefrog Osteopilus septentrionalis

Brown anole Anolis sagrei 

B.4.3 / Problem Species List 

Common Name Species Name State Status Federal Status

Legend: T = Threatened • E = Endangered • SSC = Species of Special Concern

Mammals

Black rats Rattus rattus

Racoons Procyon lotor

B.5 / Florida Natural Areas Inventory Descriptions

Eighty-one Natural Communities are classified by the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI). A Natural

Community is defined as a distinct and reoccurring assemblage of populations of plants, animals, fungi

and microorganisms naturally associated with each other and their physical environment. The levels of this

classification become increasingly more complex and finely subdivided. At all levels, however, there are

overlaps between types because of overlapping species distributions and intergrading physical conditions.

At the broadest level, the natural communities are grouped into seven natural community categories based on

hydrology and vegetation. A second level of the hierarchy splits the natural community categories into natural

community groups. The third level of the classification, natural community types, is the level at which natural

communities are named and described. Natural communities are characterized and defined by a combination

of physiognomy, vegetation structure and composition, topography, land form, substrate, soil moisture

condition, climate and fire. They are named for their most characteristic biological or physical feature.

Levels of Natural Communities

	 • 	CATEGORIES – based on hydrology and vegetation

	 • 	Groups – defined by landform, substrate, and vegetation

	 • 	Types – characterized and defined by a combination of physiognomy, vegetation structure and

	 	 composition, topography, land form, substrate, soil moisture condition, climate, and fire

Natural Community Categories

	 1. Terrestrial Natural Communities - upland habitats dominated by plants which are not adapted to 	 	

	 	 anaerobic soil conditions imposed by saturation or inundation for more than 10% of the growing season.
121

	 2. Palustrine Natural Communities - freshwater wetlands dominated by plants adapted to anaerobic

	 	 substrate conditions imposed by substrate saturation or inundation during 10% or more of the

	 	 growing season.

	 3. Lacustrine Natural Communities - nonflowing wetlands of natural depressions lacking persistent

	 	 emergent vegetation except around the perimeter.

	 4. Riverine Natural Communities - natural, flowing waters from their source to the downstream limits 	 	

	 	 of tidal influence, and bounded by channel banks.

	 5. Subterranean Natural Communities occur below ground surface.

	 6. Estuarine Natural Communities - subtidal, intertidal, and supratidal zones of coastal water bodies,	 	

	 	 usually partially enclosed by land but with a connection to the open sea, within which seawater is

	 	 significantly diluted with freshwater inflow from the land.

	 7. Marine Natural Communities – occur in subtidal, intertidal, and supratidal zones of the sea,

	 	 landward to the point at which seawater becomes significantly diluted with freshwater inflow from

	 	 the land.

Descriptions of the Natural Community Types found in Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Marine and Estuarine 

Mineral Based - communities which occur in subtidal, intertidal and supratidal zones.

Consolidated Substrate - characterized as expansive, relatively open areas of subtidal, intertidal and

supratidal zones which lack dense populations of sessile plant and animal species. Composition is solidified

rock or shell conglomerates and includes coquina, limerock or relic reef materials.

Unconsolidated Substrate - characterized as expansive, relatively open areas of subtidal, intertidal and

supratidal zones which lack dense populations of sessile plant and animal species. Unconsolidated substrates

are unsolidified material and include coralgal, marl, mud, mud/sand, sand or shell. This community may support

a large population of infaunal organisms as well as a variety of transient planktonic and pelagic organisms.

Faunal Based - communities which occur in subtidal zones.

Mollusk Reef - characterized as expansive concentrations of sessile mollusks occurring in intertidal and

subtidal zones to a depth of 40 feet. In Florida, the most developed mollusk reefs are generally restricted to

estuarine areas and are dominated by the American oyster.

Floral Based - communities which occur in intertidal and supratidal zones.

Algal Bed - characterized as large populations of non-drift macro or micro algae.

Seagrass Bed -characterized as expansive stands of vascular plants. This community occurs in subtidal (rarely

intertidal) zones, in clear, coastal waters where wave energy is moderate. Seagrasses are not true grasses.

Tidal Marsh - characterized as expanses of grasses, rushes and sedges along coastlines of low wave energy

and river mouths. They are most abundant and most extensive in Florida north of the normal freeze line, being

largely displaced by and interspersed among tidal swamps below this line.

Tidal Swamp - characterized as dense, low forests occurring along relatively flat, intertidal and supratidal

shorelines of low wave energy along the southern Florida coast.

Composite Substrate

Composite Substrate – consist of a combination of natural communities such as “beds” of algae and

seagrasses or areas with small patches of consolidated and unconsolidated bottom with or without sessile

floral and faunal populations. Composite substrates may be dominated by any combination of marine

and estuarine sessile flora or fauna or mineral substrate type. Typical combinations of plants, animals and

substrates representing composite substrates include soft and stony corals with sponges on a hard bottom

such as a limerock outcrop; psammophytic algae and seagrasses scattered over a sand bottom; and patch

reefs throughout a coralgal bottom.

Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Natural Communities Rankings

Below are the relative ranks of the natural communities. FNAI uses several criteria to determine the relative

rarity and threat to each community type; these are translated or summarized into a global and a state rank,

the G and S ranks, respectively. Most G ranks for natural communities are temporary pending comparison and

coordination with other states using this methodology to classify and rank vegetation types (contact FNAI for

the most recent natural community ranks). A few natural communities and several plant communities occur

only or mostly in Florida and can be considered endemic to Florida (Muller, Hardin, Jackson, Gatewood &

Caire, 1989). The only opportunity for protection of these communities is in Florida and they should be given

special consideration in Florida’s protection efforts.
122

Marine and Estuarine

Mineral Based

G3 S3 Consolidated Substrate

G5 S5 Unconsolidated Substrate

Faunal Based

G2 S1 Coral Reef

G3 S3 Mollusk Reef

G2 S1 Octocoral Bed

G2 S2 Sponge Bed

G1 S1 Worm Reef

Floral Based

G3 S2 Algal Bed

G2 S2 Seagrass Bed

G4 S4 Tidal Marsh

G3 S3 Tidal Swamp

Composite Substrate

G3 S3 Composite Substrate

*G3 S2 Coastal Interdunal Swale

*G3 S3 Mesic Hammock

Definition of Global (G) element ranks:

G1 - Critically imperiled globally because of extreme rarity (5 or fewer occurrences or very little

	 	 	 remaining area, e.g., <2,000 acres) or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable

	 	 	 to extinction;

G2 - Imperiled globally because of rarity (6-20 occurrences or very little remaining area, e.g., <10,000

	 	 	 acres) or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extinction throughout its range;

G3 - Either very rare and local throughout its range or found locally (even abundantly at some of its

	 	 	 locations) in a restricted range or because of other factors making it vulnerable to extinction

	 	 	 throughout its range, 21 to 100 occurrences;

G4 - Apparently secure globally, though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the

	 	 	 periphery;

G5 - Demonstrably secure globally, though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the

	 	 	 periphery;

G? - uncertain Global rank.

Definition of State (S) element ranks:

S1 - Critically imperiled in state because of extreme rarity (5 or fewer occurrences or very little

	 	 	 remaining area) or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extinction;

S2 - Imperiled in state because of rarity (6-20 occurrences or little remaining area) or because of some

	 	 	 factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extinction throughout it range;

S3 = Rare or uncommon in

	 	 	 state (on the order of 21 to 100 occurrences);

S4 - Apparently secure in state, although it may be rare in some parts of its state range;

S5 - Demonstrably secure in state and essentially ineradicable under present conditions;

S? - uncertain State rank.
123

C.1 / Advisory Committee

The following Appendixes contain information about who serves on the Advisory Committee, when meetings

were held, copies of the public advertisements for those meetings, and summary of each meeting (as required

by Ch. 259.032(10), F.S.)

C.1.1 / List of Members and their Affiliations

Name Affiliation

Anne Birch The Nature Conservancy

Fielding Cooley Marine Discovery Center, Inc., Executive Director

Bob Day SJRWMD

Capt. Jeff Dorobiala Commercial fishing guide

Jack Hayman Volusia County Commission

Capt. Budd Neviaser Coastal Conservation Association; Florida Guides Association;

Halifax Sport Fishing Club

Jonas Stewart Volusia County Mosquito Control Director

John Stiner Canaveral National Seashore

Dr. Linda Walters UCF

Officer Audrey Warren Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

Kelly Young Volusia County Environmental Lab

Georgia K. Zern Manatee Protection Program Manager;

Marine Mammal Stranding Coordinator

C.1.2 / Florida Administrative Weekly (F.A.W.) Postings

July 19, 2007 Advisory Committee Meeting FAW Notice

Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 33, Number 25, June 22, 2007 

Section VI - Notices of Meetings, Workshops and Public Hearings, p. 2830

The Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, as staff

to the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, announces a public meeting to which all

persons are invited.

Date & Time: July 19, 2007, 6:30 p.m.

Place: Mary DeWees Park, 178 North Gaines Street, Oak Hill, FL 32759

General subject matter to be considered: The purpose is for members of the Advisory Committee to

discuss the revision of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan.

A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting Mayra Ashton at (321)634-6148.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special

accommodations to participate in this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days before

the workshop/meeting by contacting Mayra Ashton at (321)634-6148. If you are hearing or speech impaired,

please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1(800) 955-8771 (TDD) or 1(800) 955-8770 (Voice).

September 20, 2007 Advisory Committee Meeting FAW Notice

Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 33, Number 34, August 24, 2007 

Section VI - Notices of Meetings, Workshops and Public Hearings, p. 3950

The Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, as staff

to the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, announces a public meeting to which all

persons are invited.

Date & Time: Thursday, September 20, 2007, 1:00 p.m.

Place: Edgewater Public Library, 103 Indian River Blvd., Edgewater, FL 32132

General subject matter to be considered: The purpose is for members of the Advisory Committee to

discuss the revision of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan.

A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting Dianne Bradley at (321)634-6148.
124

Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special

accommodations to participate in this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days before

the workshop/meeting by contacting Dianne Bradley at (321)634-6148. If you are hearing or speech impaired,

please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1(800)955-8771 (TDD) or 1(800)955-8770 (Voice).

December 11, 2007 Advisory Committee Meeting FAW Notice

Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 33, Number 46, November 16, 2007 

Section VI - Notices of Meetings, Workshops and Public Hearings, p. 5451

The Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, acting as

staff to the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund announces a public meeting to which

all persons are invited.

Date & Time: Tuesday, December 11, 2007, 1:00 p.m.

Place: Oak Hill City Hall, 234 South U.S. 1, Oak Hill, FL 32759

General subject matter to be considered: The purpose is for members of the Advisory Committee to

discuss the revision of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan.

A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting: Aquatic Preserve Manager, Sharon Tyson at (321)

634-6148.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special

accommodations to participate in this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days

before the workshop/meeting by contacting: Aquatic Preserve Manager, Sharon Tyson at (321)634-6148. If

you are hearing or speech impaired, please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1(800)955-

8771 (TDD) or 1(800)955-8770 (Voice).

January 7, 2009 Advisory Committee Meeting FAW Notice

Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 34, Number 51, December 19, 2008 

Section VI - Notices of Meetings, Workshops and Public Hearings, p. 8707

The Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, acting as

staff to the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund announces a public meeting to which

all persons are invited.

Date & Time: Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 3:00 p.m. – 5:30 p.m.

Place: Edgewater Public Library, 103 W. Indian River Blvd., Edgewater, FL 32132

General Subject Matter to be Considered: The purpose is for the members of the Advisory Committee to

discuss the revision of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan.

A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting: Eileen Szuchy at (321) 634-6148.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special

accommodations to participate in this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days before

the workshop/meeting by contacting: Eileen Szuchy at (321)634-6148. If you are hearing or speech impaired,

please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1(800)955-8771 (TDD) or 1(800)955-8770 (Voice).

March 4, 2009 Advisory Committee Meeting FAW Notice

Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 35, Number 5, February, 2009

Section VI - Notices of Meetings, Workshops and Public Hearings, p. 620

The Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, acting

as staff to the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund announces a workshop to which all

persons are invited.

Date & Time: Wednesday, March 4, 2009, 2:30 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.

Place: Edgewater Public Library, 103 W. Indian River Blvd., Edgewater, FL 32132

General Subject Matter to be Considered: The purpose is for the members of the Advisory Committee to

discuss the revision of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan.

A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting: Eileen Szuchy at (321)634-6148.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special

accommodations to participate in this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days

before the workshop/meeting by contacting: Eileen Szuchy at (321)634-6148. If you are hearing or speech

impaired, please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1(800)955-8771 (TDD)

or 1(800)955-8770 (Voice).
125

C.1.3 / Meeting Summaries

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas Public Meeting

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Advisory Committee Briefing

Thursday, July 19, 2007 at 6:30 p.m.

Mary De Wees Park, 178 North Gaines Street, Oak Hill, FL 32759

Attendance

Name Affiliation AC Member

Anne Birch Nature Conservancy Yes

Fielding Cooley Marine Discovery Center Yes

Robert Day SJRWMD Yes

Jonas Stewart Volusia Mosquito Control Yes

John Stiner Canaveral National Seashore Yes

Audrey Warren FWC Yes

Georgia Zern Volusia Environmental Management Yes

Ron Brockmeyer SJRWMD No

Jim Gray CCA No

Sharon Gray CCA No

Meeting Summary

The meeting opened with a brief introduction by Ellen McCarron, Assistant Director of the Office of Coastal

and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA). Ellen introduced the East Central Florida Aquatic Preserves (ECFAP)

staff. The Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Manager, Sharon Tyson, gave a presentation about the current

state of the Aquatic Preserve. Ron Brockmeyer, St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD)

presented an overview of an ongoing marsh restoration project being accomplished through a partnership

with the CAMA and Volusia County Mosquito Control District.

Karen Bareford, CAMA Planning Manager, provided a summary of the management plan review process

and the proposed Committee calendar with key meeting dates. The Sunshine Law and how it applies to

this Committee was reviewed. The meeting was turned over to Advisory Committee members to provide an

opportunity for discussion among members, and receive input on concerns for the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic

Preserve. The group reached consensus that the scope of review for issues related to the management plan

revision should include the entire Mosquito Lagoon watershed.

Opportunity for public comment followed discussion among the Committee members.

Advisory Committee Comments

Robert “Bob” Day – SJRWMD, National Estuary Program

• Suggested, and the Committee agreed, that it may be beneficial to have people identify favorite spots for

fishing, clamming, and active recreation by placing dots on a map at the Public Scoping Meeting

• Exponential growth in the Oak Hill and Edgewater area is affecting natural resources within the Aquatic Preserve

(AP) because environmental degradation outside the boundaries has direct impacts within the Preserve.

• Committee should recommend that cities consider addressing their actions that may have a direct effect on

the AP

• Stressed the importance of including information in the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management

Plan (Plan) about the management plans of other entities also responsible for management efforts

in Mosquito Lagoon (many of these plans are currently being revised, including: the Comprehensive

Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP), Indian River Lagoon Surface Water Improvement and

Management SWIM, Canaveral National Seashore, The Nature Conservancy, Volusia County Spoil Island

Plan, Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND), and Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge. (MINWR))

• Public health concerns over effects of recent outbreak in Mosquito Lagoon of Saxitoxin (Pyrodinium

bahamense) related to shellfish closures

• Request that Department of Agriculture, aquaculture, (DACs) participate in the planning process
126

• Suggested that Bureau of Invasive Plant Management (BIPM) should give preference for exotic removal

grant projects within Aquatic Preserves

• Stressed the need to get an idea of current public uses of the MLAP using resource mapping techniques

• Will provide to the Committee the Mosquito Lagoon issues identified at the “SJRWMD New Smyrna Beach

Listening Session public meeting” to capture any missed issues

• We/the Plan need(s) to identify land acquisition projects to include into AP boundaries

Georgia Zern – (Volusia County)

• In response to discussion of planning efforts in the Lagoon, progress was reported on Volusia County’s Island

Management Planning process. Currently, planning consists of surveying public use, vegetation and species.

• Identified need for consistency of the Volusia Island Plan with the Plan, specifically designations for each

island, (conservation, recreation and education) similar to the 1991 FIND plan that ECFAP uses as a template

• Conservation of important resource areas with regulatory signage, such as bird colonies

• Need more clean-ups of abandoned crab pot, hazards to boating and wildlife

• Need invasive exotic species surveys (Brazilian pepper, green mussels)

• Contributing to the discussion on resource mapping techniques and ranking priorities for restoration, a

suggestion was offered on a technique Volusia County uses for restoration plans. They rank areas using a

matrix leading to a list of sites to be restored

Fielding Cooley – (Marine Discovery Center) 

• Who manages State-owned parcels north of AP boundaries?

• Need for education about areas that are to be conserved. Involve and coordinate with the non-profit

organizations • and the public

• Survey public use of resources

• When questions arose about ownership and management of areas surrounding the AP, provided information

that • Marine Discovery Center managing a parcel NE of the Aquatic Preserve boundary (near Brown’s Bay)

John Stiner – (The National Park Service, Canaveral National Seashore)

• During discussions on resource mapping, suggested the need to create base maps for areas or zones with

important resources, heavy use or critical areas

• The seashore has restricted uses for sensitive areas or resources and suggests same for the Mosquito

Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

• More resource inventories and public use surveys are needed

• Suggested developing a kayak/canoe trail that connects local areas/parks/conservation areas

Jonas Stewart – (Volusia County Mosquito Control)

• Request information from the public on favorite places at the Public Scoping Meeting.

• Asked Ron Brockmeyer about coverage area for contract aerial boater activity survey (Dynamac Corp.).

Produce a needed Base Map

• State-owned Islands upland exotics, whose management jurisdiction?

• Research BIPM grant availability for exotic control through dike removal.

• Department of Environmental Protection may fund dike removal as an exotic removal technique

• Define resource-based wetland restoration priorities for MLAP and arrange in order of priority.

• Volusia Mosquito Control needs a wish list of restoration projects to be accomplished.

• Mosquito production problems in the Aquatic Preserve – WPA hand ditches & spoil islands are breeding areas

• More discussion regarding prioritization, provide a matrix for restoration priorities. Use numeric values for

habitats (exotics, oysters)

• Tomoka AP Plan identified a need for a restoration project that connected wetland zones
127

• Plan should recognize necessity of mosquito control for public health.

• Added to the discussion on benefits of a suggested change allowing extra points to be awarded during

grant proposal review for BIPM projects in Aquatic Preserves

• Clarifying the County’s role in restoration, Volusia County Mosquito Control is required to perform

restoration in conjunction with mosquito control

Officer Audrey Warren – (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission)

• Offered first hand knowledge of islands and resources being used and impacted by recreational users. Will

provide locations.

• The last oyster harvest was one of the largest in years and economically beneficial.

Anne Birch – (The Nature Conservancy, Indian River Lagoon LCA Program)

• The overall approach to the MLAP management plan should be to map resources and give

recommendations for uses with the protection of natural resources as the backbone of the plan

• Damage to oyster bar habitat by boat wakes has been demonstrated by scientific research

• Need to increase level of enforcement

• Document heavy recreational use, low enforcement level

• Coordinate local law enforcement with all agencies available

• Request increased funding of enforcement on the water and permit compliance

• Increase funding for AP program, need more staff to run programs

• Current and historic oyster mapping needed in MLAP

• We need information about historical and current recreational boating use that could be used as a baseline

for the future

• Coordination of AP staff with regulatory (permitting agencies) needs improvement

• Coordinate early on impacts during development planning

• Regulatory permitting issues: need “public alert system” for timely public comment

• Identify land acquisition: inside and outside AP boundaries into watershed

• Climate/water level changes – how to plan, coordinate with entities

• Address changes through adaptive management planning

• Coordinate and provide consistency with other plans and programs

• Acquisition under Florida Forever project – needs designated land managers

• Land acquisition is a key component to protect watershed

• Need coordination between all other plans and agencies that are working within the Mosquito Lagoon

• Suggested a centralized database is needed on issues and data collected in the Mosquito Lagoon

Other Comments

Ron Brockmeyer – (SJRWMD, Division of Environmental Science)

• Atlantic Saltmarsh Snake and other listed species need management plans

• Grant funding is available through the following source, FWC Wildlife Legacy Program

• Private inholdings within the MLAP. Purchase with Blueways funds?

• Studies or data are available: Mapped oyster reefs north of the Ponce Inlet up to Guana Tolomato Matanzas

contract complete in September 2007, Submerged aquatic vegetation is mapped by SJRWMD every other year

in the ML area. Bathymetry mapping is difficult because of depths in the AP. Little data.

Public Comments

Jim Gray - (Coastal Conservation Association) 

-Outstanding job tonight. Need to protect important fishing areas
128

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Advisory Committee Meeting

Thursday, September 20, 2007 at 1:00 p.m.

Edgewater Public Library, 103 Indian River Blvd, Edgewater, FL 32132

Attendance

Name Affiliation AC Member

Anne Birch TNC Yes

Robert Day SJRWMD Yes

John Stiner CANA - NPS Yes

Kelli Mcgee Volusia Cty. Yes

Georgia K. Zern Volusia Cty. Yes

Ron Brockmeyer SJRWMD adjunct staff

Meeting Summary

The meeting started with brief introductions of everyone in attendance. The agenda for this meeting was

reviewed by Sharon Tyson, Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve manager. The Advisory Committee voted early

in the meeting to include adjunct staff to assist with the management plan. The Advisory Committee welcomed

Ron Brockmeyer, who was in attendance, as adjunct staff. The Advisory Committee had previously requested

individuals with special expertise be included in this and all future meetings to contribute information and

scientific insight regarding the Mosquito Lagoon and its resources.

A summary of comments from the previous Advisory Committee meeting held July 19, 2007 was discussed,

followed by a review of comments received from the general public at the Public Scoping meeting, August 14,

2007.

On this occasion, the Advisory Committee met to discuss issues of concern for the future management of the

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve and the steps that will be taken to address them. The Advisory Committee

strived to incorporate concerns and comments provided by the general public and fellow committee members

at the two previous meetings mentioned above. A summary of the discussion provided by attendees at this

meeting follows below.

Advisory Committee Comments

• A letter was sent to express that the timeframe allotted for the development of a management plan for the

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve and other Coastal Aquatic Managed Area sites is unrealistic. This view 

was expressed to the Director of the Office of Aquatic Managed Areas, Stephanie Bailenson. 

• Gerald Ward’s verbal comments at the Public Scoping meeting should be included in the meeting summary

posted on the Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas website. Previously, only written comments were

included in the meeting summary. 

• Aquatic Preserve staff and the committee discussed potential issue categories and suggested four broad

areas under which issues could be developed.

1. Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity

2. Water and Watershed

3. Public Use and Sustainability

4. Environmental Incidence Assessment and Response

The group then discussed several topics and developed strategies under the four broad categories listed above.

Discussions on loss of natural community function and species diversity lead to the development of several

objectives and strategies that must be included in the management plan.

An overall goal developed by the committee: Conserve and enhance the function and integrity of the

natural community.
129

Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity

One strategy that needs to be implemented to address these issues is to identify any existing gaps in

knowledge and/or natural resource data collected within the Mosquito Lagoon.

For each species under the species management section

1. Need to identify baseline information

2. Summary of status

3. Integrate endangered species recovery plans into the management

4. Monitor species status after the integration of recovery plan is put into practice

• Canaveral National Seashore Comprehensive plan has a list of species with management needs within the

Mosquito Lagoon.

• Need to include the Atlantic salt marsh snake and the manatee as two topics to work on under the species

management section within the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve management plan.

• Seagrass management/restoration has been identified at a lower priority due to environmental factors

placing seagrass at the edge of its range within the Northern Mosquito Lagoon/Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic

Preserve.

• Colonial waterbird and shorebird management (nesting and roosting status) were identified as two

important topics to include in the management plan.

• Identified the need (if possible) to combine the monitoring of different species (seagrass/oyster reefs/bird

surveys/seagrass scarring) via aerial surveys. Several different aerial surveys are regularly conducted

by different agencies but only for one particular resource at a time. Can any of these aerial surveys be

integrated?

• Integrate aerial monitoring strategies and resource mapping between agencies.

• Canaveral National Seashore is schedule to map oysters in 2009.

Public Use and Sustainability

To assist Aquatic Preserve staff in accomplishing listed goals, discussions included listing existing available

data from different agencies.

• Canaveral National Seashore contracted public use surveys for the southern section the Mosquito Lagoon.

The information on usage was obtained from boat ramp surveys.

• There is also boating activity information (boating/fishing/clamming/skiing) available from Dynamac through

aerial and boat surveys conducted throughout the Mosquito Lagoon.

• Volusia County conducted a boating activity study in 1995-1996 for the Manatee Protection Plan process

that provides information on boat ramp activity and facilities.

• This information can be useful in determining carrying capacity for the area based on usage patterns.

• Identified the need to incorporate sustainable public use within the Aquatic Preserve.

Water and Watershed

Discussions included some information on background issues and what strategies need to be included in the

management plan.

Topics identified for development within the management plan.

1. the effect of population growth on water quality

2. the effect of stormwater on water quality

3. the effect of point and non point sources on water quality

Other strategies and issues identified within the topic of water and watershed include:

• Concern with overflow of treated wastewater into the Aquatic Preserve via outfall pipes from wastewater

treatment plants in the area.

• DEP wastewater program may want to educate the public on issues related to wastewater treatment plants

and the chlorination of treated wastewater for use as reclaimed water.

• Need to research the health department for status on septic tanks and seepage issues in the Mosquito Lagoon

area. Identify all studies or surveys dealing with septic systems conducted throughout Volusia County.
130

• In the past the Aquatic Preserve worked with Volusia County to establish buffer areas and setback

requirements for septic systems located within the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve.

• Volusia County presently has buffer requirements such as vegetation for the “overlay zone”.

• Need to compile and characterize the status of shorelines (armored versus natural) throughout the

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve as part watershed development issues.

Environmental Incidence Assessment and Response

• Identified the need to develop protocols for environmental incident assessment and response within the Aquatic

Preserve. Special emphasis on fish kills, hurricanes, cold-stun events, and contaminant spills.

• Incorporate Volusia County’s existing emergency response plan.

Educational Strategies

The committee developed various educational strategies to include under different issue categories.

• Need to reinitiate the biannual “State of the Mosquito Lagoon”. Plan and host this scientific meeting with

partner agencies, researchers and educational institutions. Use this opportunity to exchange current

knowledge and management strategies between managers, researchers and the public.

• Need to bridge the gap between citizen education and meetings that are targeted at researchers and

managers.

• Target education for the general public and for the scientific community in separate ways.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Office of Coastal Aquatic Managed Areas

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Advisory Committee Meeting

Tuesday, December 11, 2007, 1:00 p.m.

Oak Hill City Hall, 234 South U.S. 1, Oak Hill, FL 32759

Attendance

Name Affiliation AC Member

Robert Day SJRWMD Yes

Ron Brockmeyer SJRWMD adjunct staff

Anne Birch The Nature Conservancy Yes

Michelle Peters-Snyder The Nature Conservancy No

Georgia K. Zern Volusia County Yes

Lyn Hoffmann

(for Fielding Cooley) Marine Discovery Center Stand-in

Linda Wenz No

Henry Wenz Mid Coast FlyFishers No

Capt. Budd Nevasier Coastal Conservation Association &

Florida Guides Association Yes

Mike Shirley FDEP/GTMNERR No

Jonas Stewart Volusia County Mosquito Control Yes

Audrey Warren FWC Yes

Kelli McGee Volusia Cty. Environmental

Management Yes

Sharon Tyson FDEP-CAMA

Mayra Ashton FDEP-CAMA
131

Meeting Summary

The Advisory Committee (AC) meeting started with brief introductions of everyone in attendance. Two new AC

members were in attendance. After receiving complaints from individual AC members, a poll of members revealed

most only had time to skim through or review Chapter 5 of the plan. The AC proceeded to discuss Chapter 5,

Environmental Incident and Emergency Response Issue and integrated strategies of the management plan. The

AC helped to extensively streamline and further develop the objectives and strategies under issues three and four.

The AC spent some time commenting on issues one and two. When the Issues review was complete, the AC

expressed the desire to have more time to comment on all other chapters in the existing draft. They also proposed

changes to the current schedule that will allow them another opportunity to review suggested edits to the Issues

Section. A proposed amended calendar was reviewed.

The AC voted unanimously to extend the management planning process to include more time for comments

on the first draft plan and supports delaying the second draft plan until April 4, 2008. A final date of February 15,

2008, was chosen to receive comments from the committee on the first draft of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic

Preserve Management plan. The AC expressed that by extending the deadline they would be able to complete

a comprehensive review of the plan and provide thorough comments to the Aquatic Preserve team. Additionally,

this would allow staff sufficient time to incorporate comments and changes into the management plan. The AC

plans to provide a very active role in review of draft revisions.

The AC also stated concerns that another meeting might be necessary to provide further input of the 2nd

draft of the management plan before the 2nd public meeting is held. This possibility will be considered as the

writing and review process continues. The meeting concluded following the AC request to receive a Word

document of the 1st draft of the management plan so they can incorporate comments directly into the text. To

ensure better local advertisement of the second public meeting Volusia County members offered assistance of

their public information office. Several committee members volunteered to write articles and advertise the next

public meeting in local newspapers and venues.

Advisory Committee Comments

Issue 1 / Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity

• Under goal one/objective one. Summarize the current status of key natural communities or indicator

species within the AP. Indicator species should be changed to key species and key species should be

identified and listed within the plan.

• Under goal one/objective two/ Ecosystem Science. Need to address NOAA trust species and resources

directly. This is necessary to help tap into research and monitoring monies for these specific species.

• Need to address listed species such as the Atlantic Salt Marsh Snake in a specific objective and develop

integrated strategies. (Connie Kesler from FWC has completed studies on Shipyard Island).

• Need to address sea level rise and its the impacts to the environment and resources in issue 1. Proposed

objective: Facilitate research addressing the impacts to the environment and resources caused by sea level

rise.

Issue 2 / Water and Watershed

• Goal two/objective one. Should change objective to read; assess and evaluate pollutant loadings from

onsite sewage disposal systems to the Mosquito Lagoon AP.

• Goal two/objective two/Resource management. Eliminate reference to Halifax Indian River task force (no

longer exists) and substitute with Volusia County Estuarine Restoration Program.

• Goal two/objective three. Need to provide a map of water conveyance canals that carry water into the

MLAP system. Gary Cook and/or Aden Fontaine from Volusia County were mentioned as appropriate

people to contact for this information.

• Goal two/objective three/partnering. This strategy should read, collaborate with Volusia County Resource

Management and municipal and city governments to minimize the effects of stormwater discharges within

the watershed. Need to include local jurisdictions into the present strategy.

Issue 3 / Sustainable Public Use.

• The main concern expressed was the need to reinforce that sustainable public use must include public

recreation that complements resource management. Need to work this statement into the introduction of

this section.
132

• Need to address specific commercial uses within the AP that do not fall under consumptive use

(such as concessions on islands, boat-based food and alcohol vendors, commercial signage on the

waterway, etc).

• New commercially harvested species such as a new industry of harvesting crown conch within the

Mosquito Lagoon. The conch is being harvested for its shell as a source of revenue in response to the

closure of aquaculture harvesting due to harmful algal blooms.

• Confirmed marine collection permits (FWC) would need to be obtained to harvest the marine specimens.

• Add to strategies: areas of concern for management of public use include high speed recreational boating

impacting resources and causing conflict of use with fishermen and sightseers (add) and manatees and

other species.

• Under objective one/goal one. Obtain (add) and evaluate existing public use data for the MLAP.

• Under objective one/goal one/ecosystem science. Use public use data to identify areas subject to heavy

recreational use.

• Goal one/objective two. (add) Identify and integrate existing recreational plans from partner agencies.

Remove severely impact sensitive natural resources since severely is subjective in this context.

• Goal one/objective two/resource management. Explore traffic calming techniques. Encourage reduction of

boat speeds such as interpretative signs or trails on the waterway next to sensitive resources.

• Committee suggested signs should be kept at a minimum unless regulatory or conservation issues are

present. Only consider signage in critical resource areas. Signs add to marine debris.

• Design a map or trails for the MLAP and/or a map with island numbers and designations for all the islands

within the ML. FIND would be the source of funding for navigation maps for the AP.

• Designing electronic maps and GPS charts of the MLAP should be a CAMA wide strategy.

• Goal one/objective three/Ecosystem Science. (add bird and other species) to; Assist partner agencies in

monitoring fish stock health and aquaculture resources to ensure fishing and harvesting pressure is not

affecting the populations.

Issue 4 / Environmental Incident Assessment and Response

• The main concern for the Advisory Committee was to streamline the strategies and refocus language to

emphasis coordination of efforts remain with other agencies with well established emergency response

protocols. Just establish protocols in areas that may have gaps, for example algae blooms, and new

marine exotic invasive species.

• Set up teams or committees for each type of incident, gap analysis (protocols), establish protocols where

needed, identify phone contacts, establish outreach to public.

• Committee identified the need to establish a universal symbol to be used as a standardized website link

accessible at multiple agencies. This link would list the same hotline numbers for each agency in charge of

specific environmental incident assessment and response issues.

• Need to identify environmental incident assessment and response issues that are not addressed by other

agency emergency response personnel.

• Need to identify agencies that are charged with responding to each type of environmental incident and

assessment response. As an education strategy, create and distribute a list of contact people and numbers

for a quick and coordinated response to an environmental incident or emergency.

• Must identify in what specific instances AP staff and its resources can be of assistance to an event. The AP

does and should not intend to be the central point of contact for environmental incident and assessment

response. Education coordination should be the AP’s main role.

• The AP needs to concentrate on education and outreach aimed towards local users within the ML.

Need to list what agencies and resources are available to deal with environmental incident and

assessment response.

• As an education strategy the AP can handout boat cards with a list of the agencies, contact persons and

numbers for specific instances requiring environmental incident and assessment response within the

Mosquito Lagoon.

• Identified the need for a public information officer for the Mosquito Lagoon area. The public

information officer coordinates all environmental incident and assessment responses and is the

media liaison.
133

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Office of Coastal Aquatic Managed Areas

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Advisory Committee Meeting

Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 3:00 p.m.

Edgewater Public Library, 103 Indian River Blvd, Edgewater, FL 32132

Attendance

Name Affiliation AC Member

Anne Birch TNC Yes

Troy Rice SJRWMD/IRLNEP No

Audrey Warren FWC Yes

Lyn A Hoffmann Marine Discovery Center Yes

Kelly Young Volusia County Env. Health Lab No

Ron Brockmeyer SJRWMD Yes

Robert Day SJRWMD/IRLNEP Yes

Jack Hayman Volusia County Yes

John Stiner Canaveral National Seashore Yes

Budd Nevasier FGA/CCA Yes

Ted Wyka Mid Coast Chapter Coastal

Conservation

Yes

Mike Shirley FDEP-CAMA No

Fielding Cooley Marine Discovery Center Yes

Sharon Tyson FDEP-CAMA No

Eileen Szuchy FDEP-CAMA No

Mayra Ashton FDEP-CAMA No

The meeting started with an introduction of Advisory Committee (AC) members and interested parties present. 

The Aquatic Preserve manager continued with agenda items and gave a brief description of budget reduction

issues that have affected the office. In particular some of the key challenges for Aquatic Preserve staff include

limited personnel, equipment and funding to support programs throughout the 107 mile distance covered by

the three Aquatic Preserves managed by the office.

The meeting continued with a schedule of proposed dates for deliverables. Aquatic Preserve staff requested

all comments from AC members be completed by January 23, 2009 for staff to incorporate into the 4th and

final draft of the management plan to be handed to CAMA-Tallahassee February 28, 2009. The final draft of the

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan (MLAPMP) would then be ready for the Acquisition and

Restoration Council (ARC) review in March 2009.

AC members requested to have these dates extended since they need more time to provide substantial

comments especially for Chapter 5 Issues. After discussing dates for extending deliverables the AC requested

comments be due to aquatic preserve staff January 30th, 2009 for Chapters 1-4 and requested another

meeting be scheduled for February 12th to concentrate solely on rewriting Chapter 5 Issues. At this meeting

AP, staff would provide AC members with a new draft incorporating all of the comments previously received for

Chapters 1-4. The draft for Chapter 5, Issues needs to be reviewed by AC members by March 27th. The final

draft of the management plan would be due to CAMA-Tallahassee on April 10th for it to be ready for ARC review

in May 2009. Mike Shirley suggested that a formal written request be prepared for CAMA director stating AC

concerns and requesting an extension of deadlines for the final version of the MLAPMP. This letter should be

accompanied by the current draft of Chapters 1-4 and 6-7 which have substantial information and are already

completed. Please review tables below to view the “old” and the “new” proposed schedules.

Schedule Proposed by AP Staff

Date Deliverable Responsible Party

Jan. 23 All comments for Chapters 1-7 due to AP staff Advisory Committee

Feb. 28 4TH draft of MLAP Management Plan due to

CAMA-Tallahassee office

AP staff

April Final version ready for ARC review AP staff and CAMA-Tallahassee
134

New Schedule Proposed by Advisory Committee

Date Deliverable Responsible Party

Jan. 30 All comments for Chapters 1-4 due to AP staff Advisory Committee

Feb. 12 Additional AC meeting to refine and finalize Chapter 5 Advisory Committee/ AP staff

Feb. 12 Draft with all comments incorporated for Chapters 1-4 due

to AC

AP staff

March 27 Draft of Chapter 5 incorporating all comments due to AC AP staff

April 3 Final review of Chapter 5 and comments received by AC

members

Advisory Committee

April 10 Final draft due to CAMA-Tallahassee AP staff

June Final version ready for ARC review AP staff and CAMA-Tallahassee

Next item on the agenda discussed was to change or keep the name of the Mosquito Lagoon Working

Group (MLWG). The MLWG refers to members of the AC and any interested public that will act as a guidance

committee following completion of AC duties. This working group will help implement strategies and goals of

the MLAPMP, partners and stakeholders. The general consensus was to keep the name as the MLWG.

Discussion continued on the Plan’s definitions for restoration goals for habitats. AC members indicated

that we should aim to prevent any further degradation of water quality or habitat and should strive to

maintain the present day or recent conditions. No degradation of resources based on rule. Need to identify

most healthy habitats found currently and restore impacted or stressed habitats up to that state. Need to

work with experts in each habitat area that indicate what level is practical to conserve and restore. There

is no golden baseline but need to do more than what had been done in the past. Need to get baseline

conditions for habitats and produce maps. Several restoration efforts are now monitoring structure and

function of restored ecosystems and obtaining important recovery data. Marsh restoration work has

resulted in a clearly measurable reduction of exotic plants (high in exotics before restoration with no

exotics after work completed).

Another concern was to include the yearly cost estimates for each goal and strategy in Chapter 5. It may

be a disservice to partners that are asking for more funds than what is currently allocated in the plan.

Some AC members expressed it was not practical to include cost estimates for projects the AP is not

directly involved with while other members indicated they could help with some cost estimates associated

with strategies they are working on. The final determination was that the current issues and strategies need

to be streamlined and well defined first before delving into cost estimates. Another approach suggested

by AC members was that the AP should only concern themselves with costs associated with the AP staff

and its resources and pull out those strategies and costs done entirely by partners. The budget table

should have two columns one with costs for the AP and another with unknown costs for the partners. The

AP should not have to breakdown costs for partners involved in a particular strategy. One request was that

the language of responsible partners be changed to potential partners or lead partners when it comes to

describing the goals and strategies in Chapter 5.

The AC was asked to help prioritize the top ten strategies or objectives by January 30th and this should

help with defining and finalizing them at the next meeting in February. AC members suggested that broad

categories be used and immediate to long term goals be established.

AC requested that the use of MLAP, AP or Preserve be standardized throughout the plan to one name when

referring to the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve. The addition of an executive summary or narrative at

the beginning of the plan with MLAP statistics was deemed necessary to add to the plan. The executive

summary should include the most important aspects of the management plan and as of the date of the plan

what the priorities are.

AC members tried to define criteria to use for prioritizing goals and strategies particularly since different

groups have different priorities. The AC discussed that the different perspectives are in fact important in this

process particularly because of the diverse issues and concerns affecting the Mosquito Lagoon.

Meeting was adjourned with AC members awaiting a new schedule for completing reviews and comments

for the draft of the MLAPMP.
135

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Office of Coastal Aquatic Managed Areas

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Advisory Committee Meeting

Wednesday, March 4, 2009, 2:30 p.m.

Edgewater Public Library, 103 Indian River Blvd, Edgewater, FL 32132

Attendance

Name Affiliation AC Member

Anne Birch The Nature Conservancy Yes

Ron Brockmeyer SJRWMD Yes

Robert Day SJRWMD Yes

Fielding Cooley Marine Discovery Center Yes

Jonas Stewart Volusia County Mosquito Control Yes

Audrey Warren FWC Yes

Kelly Young Volusia County Surface Water

Specialist Yes

Georgia K. Zern Volusia County Yes

David Biega ECFAP Vounteer No

Gerald M. Ward, P.E. Marine Industries Assoc. of the

Treasure Coast & FESCEO No

John S. Yeend Consulting Engineer No

Meeting Summary

Mike Shirley opened the meeting with a capsulation of the status of EFCAP and describing the hiring

strategy for the future ESII and ESI. The focus of the meeting was for the Advisory Committee to review and

provide comments on Chapter 5 of the Mosquito Lagoon Management Plan. Two versions of Chapter 5 were

distributed: One labeled “Submitted to the Advisory Committee” and the other labeled “Adjusted Format”. The

Advisory Committee preferred the format where the performance measures are linked to the listed objectives

(the adjusted format). However, the committee chose to focus on the submitted format, because the members

were familiar with its contents, and decide at the end of the meeting which format would be optimal to use.

Details of changes will be reflected in the draft that is slated to be sent to the AC on Monday, March 09, 2009.

Advisory Committee Comments

G. Zern: the abundance and frequency of acronyms should be eliminated.

K. Young: described the attributes of the Volusia County Water Atlas (VCWA) – it’s not just about water.

Several Members: identified how the VCWA is a valuable resource and CAMA should have an electronic link

to it.

J. Stewart: emphasized that it is important to keep in mind that the readers are the stakeholders. Be sure that

a complete bibliography is included with the plan.

R. Brockmeyer: asked how much water quality monitoring is done in the Aquatic Preserve.

K. Young: Volusia County has three water quality monitoring sites.

G. Zern: announced the May 28th “Living Shoreline Workshop”.

Public Comments

Gerald Ward requested that for broader capability to access documents that electronic files are saved in

older MS formats not MSX. The MLAP is one of the most non-urban APs and deserves the highest protection.

Eliminate acronyms and abbreviations and shorten Chapter 5 so that is relevant to the stakeholder. There

is too much beating up the boating public. Make the document short and specific. This plan should be a

repository of information and a living document. There should be a description of references specific to

Volusia and Brevard counties, the CNS, and the Refuge. Workshops should continue to be a part of the

process The Volusia County Water Atlas is a “jump start”. Education, outreach and physical alteration (e.g.

dredging) would be positive actions. A frequency of reporting needs to be mandated. AP staff does not

need to be involved in the “nuts and bolts’, but should bring items/issues to the attention of higher level

government. The process for navigational aid, markers has been established.
136

C.2 / Public Scoping Meeting

The following Appendixes contain information about the Public Scoping Meeting(s) which was held in order to

obtain input from the public as what they thought the issues in Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve were. There

are copies of the public advertisements for those meetings, a list of attendees, a summary of the meeting(s) (as

required by Ch. 259.032(10), F.S.), and a copy of the written comments received.

C.2.1 / F.A.W. Posting

August 14, 2007 Public Scoping Meeting FAW Notice

Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 33, Number 27, July 6, 2007 

Section VI - Notices of Meetings, Workshops and Public Hearings, p. 3042

The Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, acting as

staff to the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund announces a public meeting to which

all persons are invited.

Date & Time: Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 6:30 p.m.

Place: New Smyrna Beach Regional Library, 1001 S. Dixie Freeway, New Smyrna Beach, FL 32168

General subject matter to be considered: To inform the public on the management plan review process

and to solicit input on issues they are interested in seeing addressed in the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic

Preserve management plan. The Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Advisory Committee meeting will be

participating.

A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting Mayra Ashton at (321)634-6148.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special

accommodations to participate in this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days

before the workshop/meeting by contacting Mayra Ashton at (321)634-6148. If you are hearing or speech

impaired, please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1(800)955-8771 (TDD) or 1(800)955-

8770 (Voice).
137

C.2.2 / Advertisement Flyer 
138

C.2.3 / Public Scoping Meeting 

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Public Scoping Meeting

August 14, 2007, New Smyrna Beach Public Library

Attendance

Name Affiliation

K. Rawley

Matthew Msvery Mid Coast Fly Fishers

Jeff Dorobiala Reel Shallow Charters

Linda Wenz Mid Coast Fly Fishers

Hank Wenz Mid Coast Fly Fishers

Ted Wyka CCA

Seth Greenstine JC Pont

Mike Mann Fat Fish Guide Service

Mike Thomas City of Edgewater

Gerald Ward MIATC FES CEQ

Troy Rice IRC National Estuary SJRWMD Program

John Stine Canaveral NW

Jay Lovett Lovett Enterprises, Inc

Jerry Fanolla Boat Max USA

Robert Day SJRWMD IRC Program

Audrey Warren FWC

Fielding Cooley MDC

Georgia Kern Volusie Co.

Michael Savedow Edgewater River Guide

Randy Clark United Water Fowlers

Marle Johusa News International

Bill Browning FL Dep. Of AG

Tony Kozlosk Guide Mosquito Lagoon

Paul Sacks UCF Biology and SCPS, WSHS

Linda Walters UCF 

Virginia Schow

John Tarr Guide / LEO

Kevin Willeke FL Council Yacht Clubs

Kelli McGee Volusie Co. Env’l Mgt

John Frazier Fishing Guide

Diane Yeaton Marine Discovery

Danny Olliala Canaveral Fly Fishing

Randall Brett

Bill Greening Vol. Co. Mosquito Committee

Joe Porcelli Trail Spotted

Brian Clancy

John Winn John Winn the Traveling Fisherman
139

Meeting Summary

Introduction - On August 14, 2007 the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve conducted a public meeting to

address the following objectives:

1. Review purpose of and process for reviewing the site management plan.

2. Receive public input regarding the perceived issues and concerns for the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic

Preserve.

This was the first public meeting related to the review of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve’s management

plan. A second meeting will be planned to review the draft management plan once it is created.

The meeting followed the agenda below:

• Official Welcome and introduction to meeting

• Overview Presentations: Described the management area’s boundaries, available management resources,

current projects, and other background information to assist participant’s formulation of input.

• Public Comment and Stakeholder Feedback: An opportunity was provided for written and verbal

comments to the Preserve staff and committee members at four “kiosks.” (Public Use, Outreach and

Education, Ecosystem Science, and Resource Management).

• Kiosk Reports: Staff provides a verbal summary of the comments they received at their kiosk.

• Public Comment: Participants who signed a “speakers list” were given three minutes to make a public

statement to the full assembly. Only written comments were included in this meeting summary.

The workshop was designed to encourage dialogue between business owners, governmental representatives,

recreational users and the committee teams at kiosks on specific issues. The meeting provided a forum for

general comments and observations. 

Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas Background - The Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s

Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA) is responsible for the management of Florida’s 41

Aquatic Preserves, 3 National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERR), 1 National Marine Sanctuary, and the

Coral Reef Conservation Program. These protected areas comprise more than 4 million acres of the most

valuable submerged lands and select coastal uplands in Florida. CAMA is currently in the process of revising

its site management plans, including the plan for the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve. These plans will

provide a critical management framework for the sites, setting priorities and guiding implementation for the

next ten years.

This document includes both written comments received at the workshops and by email/postal mail during the

comment period. It also includes a summary of the reports made by the staff at the end of the kiosk period. This

summary is not meant to be a detailed description of the proceedings, but a record of the major themes and

comments received. Only written comments were included in this meeting summary.

Summary of comments

Below is an overall summary of the comments received by the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Persevere during the

public meeting process:

• The importance of managing and, where possible, improving water quality, especially in terms of impacts

from stormwater and aging septic systems adjacent to the Aquatic Preserve.

• Further integrate the community into the management of the Aquatic Preserve. Need to enhance

coordination between the varying government agencies to improve management of the Aquatic Preserve.

• Increase the Aquatic Preserve’s efforts in the areas of educational outreach and public engagement in

resource management activities.

• Increase understanding of current and future public use of the Aquatic Preserve. The importance of

maintaining and enhancing public access to the Aquatic Preserve.

• Protection zones essential for seagrass protection. Public use deteriorating resources. Increase

enforcement.

Written comments received on comment cards at meeting

Comments from the Resource Management Kiosk

It would be very beneficial if there was an easy way for people in the area to report management issues,

so that managers are more aware of issues. I would also like to see existing management plans enforced

before stringent plans are put into action. Comment provided by Anonymous.
140

How can we include rest of Mosquito Lagoon area (into the Aquatic Preserve boundaries) up to South

Causeway? Comment provided by Diane Yeaton.

Concerned about quality of water and land for the marine life and birds who live there. Boating, fishing,

etc can leave human residue. Our marine life habitats should be protected for the enjoyment of the future

generations. Comment provided by Virginia Schow.

We need to increase restoration work on mangrove and oyster beds. Comment provided by Anonymous.

I don’t want anyone telling me that I can’t go anyplace or fishing anytime. Comment provided by John- The 

Traveling Fisherman.

Restoration work needs to be explained to public users. This is both education and outreach, but also

important to success of restoration projects. Comment provided by Paul Sacks.

Improve water quality (oyster beds), lessen run off from homes and streets. Comment provided by 

Anonymous. 

1. Old septic systems on Saxon Blvd should be connected to sewer. 2. Canal on Saxon Blvd is silted – no

water movement. 3. Runoff on Hiles Blvd to boat ramp needs to be stopped. 4. Keep all boat access.

Comment provided by Brian Clancy.

Science based management and science based restoration are critical to the success and survival of the

Lagoon. Comment provided by Anonymous.

Main concern (about water quality) would be the downstream runoff from residential and commercial

properties and the effects. Comment provided by Matthew McNew.

It seems that oyster reef mapping and other resources should be mapped over larger areas, with

coordination of other agencies. It would eliminate the gaps in coverage. Comment provided by Paul Sacks.

Water Quality Improvement/ Remove old septic systems/ fresh water run off/ improve oyster beds. Comment 

provided by Anonymous.

Edgewater sewer treatment plant dumps treated sewage into the river. This sewage has floated into my back

yard many days. Comment provided by Capt. Joe Porcelli.

Run off into the lagoon affects the quality of the water and marine life. We need to be careful about inland

creeks, etc, that bad things don’t creep into the fragile ecosystem of the lagoon. Comment provided by Amy 

Dahan, Director, Heathcote Botanical Gardens, by Virginia Schow.

I would like to see the researchers work more with professionals (guides and local fisherman) and local

residents when conducting studies on whether various conditions are improving or worsening. This would

give them more information on which to base their findings on. Comment provided by Anonymous. 

Old septic systems affect Canaveral Seashore. What effect do lawn chemicals washing into the water along

Riverside Drive have on the ecosystem? Fishkills (water-quality related) in canals in Merrit Island Wildlife

Refuge. Comment provided by Seth Greenstine.

Comments from the Education and Outreach Kiosk

We sorely need more education and outreach to preserve and protect this magnificent body of water- before

its too late. Comment provided by Anonymous.

Education and outreach needs to address all uses of the lagoon and should include best practices for

management based on science. Should be addressed toward boaters and fishermen, etc. Comment 

provided by Paul Sacks.

Education and outreach should both promote the unique beauty and importance of the lagoon and best

management practices for all to enjoy Comment provided by Anonymous.

(Education is) Essential to the future of our Lagoon! Children are the environmentalist of the future. If they

are unaware of issues about the lagoon they will be uncaring. We need to educate stewards of the lagoon

for future generations. Comment provided by Virginia Schow.

Comments from the Public Use Kiosk.

More and more recreational boaters are using our lagoon every day and a lot of people need more education

on abusing our waters such as running through grass beds leaving prop scars, throwing trash in the water and

not properly handling undersize fish. If we can control some of this, the future of the lagoon will be in a “natural

condition” as it is today for future generations to enjoy. Comment provided Capt. Jeff Dorobiala..

Public use is important, but restrictions must be honestly and adequately explained to enhance acceptance.

There also needs to be more enforcement of regulations. Comments provided by Paul Sacks.

I enjoy kayaking and canoeing all of the area around New Smyrna Beach Port Orange, Oak Hill. I especially

enjoy the public access ramps in Oak Hill and surrounding area. I would like to see more camping and
141

hiking in the area like the Turtle Mound for hiking and the camp grounds in Oak Hill nearby the State

(Preserve). Comments provided by Randall Brett.

I have only been on the Mosquito Lagoon in a boat. I enjoyed seeing the birds and other animals and

the peaceful time on the water. It is also a wonderful place to bring guests to see our (Aquatic) Preserve.

Comment provided by Virginia Schow.

Keep Boating Access. Comment provided by Anonymous.

Concerns with continued access 1. boating 2. fishing. Comment provided by Ted Wyka.

Preserve Access. Comment provided by Brian Clancy

Public use needs to be monitored and its effects reported, so that detrimental usage can be reduced

through education. The public needs to be more informed of how their use impacts the area and what they

can do to minimize the impact. If needed, certain limitations may need to be utilized. (i.e., pollution zones).

Comment provided by Anonymous.

Monitor public usage to determine how it is deteriorating quality of resources. Comment provided by Anonymous.

My main concern would be limiting boating by (creating) pole and troll zones and the impact on recreational

fishing. Comment provided by Matthew McNerny. 

I don’t want anyone telling me I can go fishing any where any place. Comment provided by John- The 

Traveling Fisherman.

I want (waterfowl) hunting to continue here. Comment provided by Matt Clark.

I want to insure that the historic use of duck hunting continues in this area. Comment provided by Randy Clark. 

The seagrass beds are critical. Restoration needed. Pole zones are essential. How long until seagrass

regrows, then remove pole zones? Kayakers should have their own areas (motor free zones). Many

weekend boaters with large outboards have NO RESPECT for the seagrass beds; they put their motors

down and use them as anchors. I am not sure why I came to this public scoping meeting. I was interested in

the decision making process. I was concerned that the Lagoon was to become motor free. This estuary is a

treasure that I value and respect. I plan on living and fishing another 50 years in it. If there are to be off limit

areas until they recover, I am fine with it. I just did not want things to change overnight- and would regret not

bearing witness and possibly a voice. Comment provided by Seth Greenstine.

Written comments submitted during comment period

These are written comments received within the comment period, which ended on August 21st.

From: wenzh@bellsouth.net • Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 10:28 AM

To: Mosquito Lagoon • Subject: Public Scoping Meeting Comments

Attn: Michael Shirley, Ecosystem Science, Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Because pollution in storm-water runoff, the main contributor to declining water quality in all of Florida’s

water resources, is difficult to detect, public awareness and concern is almost nonexistent. Yet it is an ever

increasing threat to both humans and wildlife.

Because waterways like the Indian River and the Mosquito Lagoon draw an enormous number of fishing

enthusiasts, publishing the source, types and amount of pollution from storm-water runoff after each period

of heavy rain would go a long way in achieving public awareness and concern. Fishing magazines would be

an effective conveyor.

The main culprits in water pollution are pesticides, herbicides and fertilizer. The Department of

Environmental Protection is fully aware of this pollution problem. So why hasn’t the Department located

and identified all major storm-water sources, and scheduled staff and trained volunteers to monitor these

sources when runoffs occur?

For example, the City of Deltona in Volusia County has a storm-water runoff system in place that will result

in millions of gallons of polluted runoff into Lake Monroe (part of the St. Johns River) during inundating

rain periods. This system has no filtering system to address the three main culprits (pesticides, herbicides,

and fertilizer). The City of DeBary will do the same in the near future. There must be hundreds of systems

in place throughout Florida without any monitoring or filtering system. And, this is not by accident. Having

been on the Deltona Comprehensive Plan Committee which was dominated by developer related interests,

this omission was not by accident.

So, the question is when is the Department of Environmental Protection going to grow a backbone and

require monitoring and filters?

Hank Wenz, 658 Whitemarsh Avenue, Deltona, FL 3225

(386) 574-7083, Wenzh@bellsouth.net
142

C.3 / Formal Public Meeting

The following Appendixes contain information about the Formal Public Meeting(s) which was held in order to

obtain input from the public about the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Draft Management Plan. There are

copies of the public advertisements for those meetings, a list of attendees, a summary of the meeting(s) (as

required by Ch. 259.032(10), F.S.), and a copy of the written comments received.

C.3.1 / F.A.W. Posting

June 4, 2008 Formal Public Meeting FAW Notice

Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 34, Number 17, April 25, 2008

Section VI - Notices of Meetings, Workshops and Public Hearings, p. 2237

The Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, acting as

staff to the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund announces a public meeting to which

all persons are invited.

Date & Time: Wednesday, June 4, 2008, 6:30 p.m.

Place: New Smyrna Beach Regional Library, 1001 S. Dixie Freeway, New Smyrna Beach, FL 32168

General Subject Matter to be Considered: The purpose is to receive public comment on the draft

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan. The Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Advisory

Committee will be participating.

A copy of the draft plan will be available for viewing starting May 2, 2008, at www.dep.state.fl.us/coastal.

A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting: Jessica Bruckler at (321)634-6148.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special

accommodations to participate in this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days

before the workshop/meeting by contacting: Jessica Bruckler at (321)634-6148. If you are hearing or speech

impaired, please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1(800)955-8771 (TDD) or 1(800)955-

8770 (Voice).
143

C.3.2 / Advertisement Flyer

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Public

Meeting

Wednesday, June 4, 2008, 6:30 pm

New Smyrna Beach Regional Library

1001 S. Dixie Freeway

New Smyrna Beach, FL 32168

Florida Department of Environmental Protection • Office of Coastal & Aquatic Managed Areas

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s Office of 

Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA) is responsible for 

the management of Florida’s 41 Aquatic Preserves, three National

Estuarine Research Reserves (NERR), one National Marine Sanctuary,

and the Coral Reef Conservation Program. These protected areas 

comprise more than 4 million acres of the most valuable submerged 

lands and select coastal uplands in Florida. CAMA is updating 

these management plans, and is currently working on the Mosquito

Lagoon Aquatic Preserve plan. This site will hold a public meeting to

receive input on the draft plan. The information from the meeting will

be compiled and presented to CAMA by a facilitator.

For more information, please contact Jessica Bruckler, (321) 634-

6148 / Jessica.Bruckler@dep.state.fl.us or visit our website at www.

aquaticpreserves.org. Written comments are welcome and can be 

submitted by fax: (850) 245-2110, Attn: Mosquito Lagoon; or email 

Mosquito.Lagoon@dep.state.fl.us.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 

any person requiring special accommodations to participate in 

this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days 

before the workshop/meeting by contacting Jessica Bruckler at

(321) 634-6148 or Jessica.Bruckler@dep.state.fl.us. If you are hearing 

or speech impaired, please contact the agency using the Florida 

Relay Service, (800) 955-8771 (TDD) or (800) 955-8770 (Voice).

This publication funded in part through a grant agreement from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida

Coastal Management Program by a grant provided by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management under the 

Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Award No. 

NA06NOS4190129-CZ709, NA06NOS4190129-CZ726, and NA07NOS4190071-CZ823. The views, statements, finding, conclusions,

and recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida,

NOAA, or any of its subagencies. May, 2008.
144

C.3.3 / Summary of the Formal Public Meeting

Name Affiliation AC Member

Rich Adamovic Coastal Conservation Association; Halifax Sport Fishing Club No

W. V. Alderman No

Tina Benefield No

Robert Bullard Ahimsa Technic, Inc. No

Bob Campbell No

Linda Campbell No

Buck Carr No

Fielding Cooley Marine Discovery Center Yes

Kelly Cuculianski News Journal No

Robert Day SJRWMD Yes

Gail Domroski Southeast Volusia Audubon No

Rosemarie Gore League of Women Voters in Volusia County No

Gary Haddle No

Neil Harrington No

Jack Hayman Volusia County Council No

Dave Herbster DEP No

Lynn Hoffman, Ph. D Marine Discovery Center Yes

Rachelle Leblanc No

Kelli McGee Volusia County, Natural Resources No

Dale McGinnis Florida Tech No

Dot Moore Archaeology No

George Myers DEP No

Capt. Bud Neviaser Coastal Conservation Association; Florida Guides Association; Halifax Sport Fishing Club

Yes

David Ray Marine Industry Association Central Florida No

Troy Rice IRL National Estuary Program, SJRWMD No

Alfred Rodriguez ACI Dredging No

Sandra Rodriguez ACI Dredging No

J. Sachs No

K. Shepard No

Sally Spencer No

Jonas Stewart Volusia Mosquito Control Yes

Mike Thomas Mayor for City of Edgewater No

Joel Timyan No

Audrey Warren FWC Yes

Ted Wyka Coastal Conservation Association, Mid Coast Chapter No

Georgia Zern Volusia Environmental Management Yes

Meeting Summary

Introduction

On June 4, 2008 the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve conducted a public meeting to address the following

objectives:

1. Present current draft of Site Management Plan, with a focus on issues and objectives.

2. Receive feedback from the public on the current draft management plan.
145

This was the second public meeting related to the drafting of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan.

The meeting followed the agenda below:

• Official Welcome and Introduction

• Overview Presentation: Described the management area’s boundaries, available management resources,

current projects, and proposed issues and management actions.

• Public Comment and Stakeholder Feedback: An opportunity was provided for the public to provide written

and verbal comments to Aquatic Preserve staff and Advisory Committee members at four “kiosks” organized according to the issues identified in the draft plan (Water and Watershed, Loss of Natural Community

Function and Species Diversity, Environmental Incidence and Assessment Response, and Sustainable

Public Use).

• Kiosk Reports: Staff provided a verbal summary of the comments they received at their kiosk.

• Public Comment: Participants were given three minutes to make a public statement to the full assembly.

Only written comments were included in this meeting summary.

The meeting was designed to encourage dialogue between all interested parties including local citizens, business owners, governmental representatives, recreational users and the Aquatic Preserve staff and Advisory

Committee. The meeting provided a forum for general comments and observations on the current draft of the

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan. The public was invited to provide comments at four

kiosks that identified the specific issues and goals in the current draft of the management plan.

Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas Background - The Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s

Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA) is responsible for the management of Florida’s 41

aquatic preserves, 3 National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERRs), 1 National Marine Sanctuary, and the

Coral Reef Conservation Program. These protected areas comprise more than 4 million acres of the most

valuable submerged lands and select coastal uplands in Florida. CAMA is currently in the process of revising its site management plans, including the plan for the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve. These plans will

provide a critical management framework for the sites, setting priorities and guiding implementation for the

next 10 years.

This Document - This document includes both written comments received at the meeting and by email/postal

mail during the comment period. It also includes a summary of the reports made by the staff at the end of the

kiosk period. This summary is not meant to be a detailed description of the proceedings, but a record of the

major themes and comments received. Only written comments were included in this meeting summary.

Summary of Comments

Below is an overall summary of the comments received by the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve during the

public meeting process:

• Overall, the public acknowledged the efforts of the Aquatic Preserve staff and the Advisory Committee to

create a comprehensive management plan for the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve. The public recognized many of the same management issues that were identified in the plan and provided ideas and

actions to improve the plan.

• The public supports the planning efforts and wants to directly participate in the process. Six individuals

signed up to become members of the Public Use Advisory Subcommittee and four additional individuals

signed up to be members of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Advisory Committee.

• Comments received from the Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity section identified

the need to protect the historic and cultural resources found in the Preserve and promote restoration efforts

that enhance habitat quality and water quality.

• The proactive component of the Environmental Incidence Assessment and Response section should be

increased and the importance of partnering with other agencies was also identified.

• The Water and Watershed section should consider the need to retrofit older storm water systems and a

specific strategy to capture data on destruction of oyster reefs by boat wakes.

• Issues and solutions related to human impacts and invasive species should be included in the Sustainable

Public Use section.

Written Comments Received on Comment Cards at the Meeting

Comments from the Loss of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity Kiosk:

Will prehistoric and historical archaeology sites be considered prior to any ground (under and above water)

disturbance related to restoration efforts? There are many undocumented sites that are not obvious to untrained personnel, some sites may have components that are currently inundated; some may have portions

now underwater, at the shoreline and on the uplands near the water. Comment provided by Dot Moore
146

Perform species tissue sampling from fish and filter feeders in the area to determine what they are taking in.

Restore manmade canals in our area to original depths to provide manatee habitat and enhance natural fishing and therefore enhance water quality. Comment provided by Al & Sandra Rodriguez

Objective I.B.1 & I.B.1.1 Both read like governement-ese. Translation please.

I.B.1.2 thru I.B.1.8 are solid, hands-on objectives. I hope you succeed with each one. They are all potential

“trophies” for CAMA and “wins” for the environment. Comment provided by Dave Herbster

Kiosk Comments Summarized on the Flipchart:

• Need to address historic and cultural resources.

• Re-examine writing of objective I.B.1 and strategy I.B.1.1 (improve readability).

• Canal water quality and sediment quality influences natural communities in the Aquatic Preserve.

• Understanding impact of restoration on water quality and fish.

Comments from the Environmental Incidence Assessment and Response Kiosk:

Potential partnering with other federal agencies eg. Air Force, Navy, Wildlife, State, County, municipal HAZMAT

responders. Comment provided by Jack Hayman

This one needs a proactive component. As written, non-incidence assessment and response is reactive. But

in most cases- whether fish kills or green mussels or spotted jelly fish- when we find “incidents” in the lagoon,

the horse has left the barn. Important focus on keeping “incidents” out (whether by awareness raising or some

other means) rather than to address them after they’re entrenched. Comment provided by Dave Herbster

Can one use 911 cell # to report incident? An Volusia Cty. The 911 call goes to SO’s comm. dept for dispatch

to proper agency. Comment provided by Jack Hayman, Volusia County Council, District 3

This sounds like a huge enterprise. Unclear where you will start on Day 1 and what can be reasonably accomplished in your time frame! Would be most interested in commitment from various levels of governmentFederal-State-County-City-Local interest groups. Who can be counted on? Where should $ be put for highest

accomplishment? Comment provided by Anonymous

Interested in becoming a partner with you in reporting incidence and promoting public awareness. Comment

provided by Al & Sandra Rodriguez

Kiosk Comments Summarized on the Flipchart:

• Sounds like a HUGE enterprise. How to complete in time frame? What commitment levels from all responsible parties? Who will deliver greatest accomplishment?

• Use 911? Does Volusia County Sherriff’s office know how to dispatch correctly?

• Needs a proactive component. Reactive response may be too late. A focus needs to be on keeping “incidents” out. (i.e. green mussels, spotted jellyfish).

• Air force, Navy, Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission, State, County, Municipal, etc. as other potential

HAZMAT responders.

Comments from the Water and Watershed Kiosk:

Who does water quality studies in MLAP and do you accept volunteers? Comment provided by Buck Carr

One thing this one should be getting at is specifically retrofit older storm water systems that discharge directly

to the preserve and connected waters. Current storm water regulations are tight and getting tighter. But the old

systems provide little to no protection. So identify key systems that need retrofitting, then help identify funding

to fix them. Comment provided by Dave Herbster

Need to review section 2008- 1972 Clean Water Act study from 1978-1982. Comment provided by R R Bullard, P.E.

How was the boundary of the aquatic preserve determined? Comment provided by Joel Timyan

Would like to see a specific strategy to capture data on boat wake destruction of oyster beds. That

naturally filter and clean water. Need newspaper articles on this every year supported by data. Comment

provided by Anonymous
147

Kiosk Comments Summarized on the Flipchart:

• Need to retrofit older storm water systems that discharge directly to the Preserve.

• Need specific strategy to capture data on destruction of oyster reefs by boat wakes.

• Need to review section 208 study from the Clean Water Act (1979-1982).

• Who does water quality studies in the lagoon?

Comments from the Sustainable Public Use Kiosk:

Would like a better connection between all those who educate the public on sustainable lagoon use. Sometimes seems like a large educational overlap concerning some species like turtles and manatees but very little

on less engaging species but equally important to lagoon sustainability. Comment provided by Anonymous

I think you are trying to get at four things here: measure public use of the preserve, measure what levels of

use are sustainable, compare 1&2, and manage accordingly. If I understand this one, then consider a “plaidspear” re-write like my attempt above. If I don’t understand, then a rewrite might be still be a good idea (to

make it understandable). Comment provided by Dave Herbster

If you could get a grant to manage invasive plants and get them knocked back, then annual maintenance and

monitoring thereafter would be less effort. Comment provided by Anonymous

Acquire recreational fish data from MRFSS program from FWRI, and link to SJRWMD website. Comment provided by Gary Haddle

The public needs more of the fine wildlife officers that we seldom see. With overcrowding and poaching not to

mention marine violations, our waters need more enforcement. The FWC should spend more money on our

resources. Comment provided by Anonymous

Cultural resources (prehistoric and historic) should be considered when determining the permitted public use

of areas in the lagoon (island and uplands along both shorelines). Some spoil islands may have been created

by depositing spoil on top of small natural islands. Comment provided by Dot Moore

MLAP borders on the NSB City Mosquito Lagoon Preserve Park. The public will increase its access to that

area as a result of that new park. Kayaking, Trails, Fishing, Etc. monitoring of that potential impact could be

worth collecting. Comment provided by Fielding Cooley

Mosquito Lagoon southern portion has infestation of Brazilian pepper on all islands and shoreline. Comment

provided by Anonymous

Kiosk Comments Summarized on the Flipchart:

• Recommend collection of human use impacts to MLAP from access through Mosquito Lagoon Preserve Park.

• Southern ML has in infestation of exotic Brazilian pepper on all shorelines and islands.

• Get grant to manage invasive plants, once knocked back, maintenance and monitoring will be easier.

• Get fisheries data from FloridaWildlife Research Institute Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey

(MRFSS) and link to SJRWMD webpage.

• Need more wildlife enforcement officers, FWC should spend more money on our resources.

• Consider cultural resources, historic sites- when permitting public use of some areassome spoil islands

may top over natural historic islands.

• Better coordination between education providers- increase education on lesser-known species in addition

to manatee and turtles.

Written Comments Submitted during Comment Period

These are written comments received within the comment period, which ended on June 11, 2008.

From: Absolute Engineering Group [mailto:absenggroup@yahoo.com]

Subject: Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan - Random Comments, Suggestions and Opinions

1. A compelling and credible definition of “sustainable recreational and commercial uses” needs to be promulgated and subject to the scrutiny of the concerned citizenry. Personally, after 35 years in the business, my

conclusion is that the term is an oxymoron, defying definition.

2. About one-half of the Aquatic Preserve is in Brevard County. The draft plan presented at the public forum on

4 JUNE in NSB made no mention of Brevard County.
148

3. Speaking of Brevard County, one could opine that the environmental/ecological conditions in the Brevard

Co. portion of the Preserve are superior to those in the Volusia portion, which give rise to some other points:

3.1. Has anyone at any time promulgated a quantitative definition of what constitutes a “pristine” environmental/ecological condition for the Preserve?

3.2. Assuming such a definition might be reasonably developed by the scientific community and, subsequently, “politicized” in the court of public opinion, would not the over-riding goal of the Preserve’s Management Plan be the restoration of “pristiness”?

3.3. If “pristiness” is not the goal, then what is? Prevention of further degradation? If so, what are the degraded quantitative ecological/environmental standards? Are these standards the current conditions, conditions

a decade or two ago, or those expected some date in the future?

4. Ecologically, the characterization of the Lagoon should be understood quantitatively in terms of “attritional”

degradation (or “accretional” enhancement) and “episodic” degradation. The two degradations are related

ecologically and that relationship must be quantitatively characterized for proper incorporation in a defensible

management plan.

5. The management plan should be adopted by FAC rule making. The Mosquito Lagoon deserves nothing less.

Robert R. Bullard, P. E.

Absolute Engineering Group, div. of Ahimsa Technic, Inc.

Office Location and Parcel Mailing Address: 440 Western Road (via Lakeshore Dr., off SR 415, Samsula) New

Smyrna Beach, FL 32168

Correspondence Mailing Address: P. O. Box 291278, Port Orange, FL 32129-1278

(ph) 386.428.7361 (fx) 386.427.2198

From: Gerald M. Ward [mailto:wardgm@gate.net]

Subject: Chapter 18-20 FAC - mosquito lagoon aquatic preserve plan update (not/IAW 120 F.S.) - Volusia &

Brevard counties, Florida

Mr. Shirley & Ms Tyson

I have tried by telephone to reach you both, but, find that you are out-of-communications.

This evening’s FDEP second so-called public meeting in new Smyrna beach unfortunately conflicts with too

many other meetings, so marine industries association of treasure coast, inc (MIATC). Does not have folk

available to attend in person. Given that this trustees preserve is the first of many within the Indian River Lagoon (Ponce de Leon inlet to Jupiter inlet) to suffer an attempt at revision of what should have been a simple

routine process the MIATC has great concern over both the content and process being accomplished by the

office of coastal & aquatic managed areas.

Since the meeting format and process utilized by the FDEP for 2006-2008 has been extremely restrictive to the

public views we expect to reserve most of our input to the ultimate chapter 120 Florida statutes administrative

law process. We do note that the eight page handout of so-called goals & objectives for this evening’s meeting grossly deviate from chapter 258 Florida statutes and its implementing rules contained within 18-20 Florida

administrative code.

We also note that you (like some other of these proceedings) think that an extremely short one week is all the

time the public needs to comment on untold pages of material not really related to the required “management

plan”. At least 30 days comment period is hereby requested instead of one week.

Like on other so-called plans, the association will issue more formal responses in due course.

Gerald M. Ward, P.E.

Marine industries association of the treasure coast, inc. - legislative committee

P.O. Box 1639, Stuart, Florida 34995; P.O. Box 10441, Riviera Beach, Florida 33419

561/863-1215, 561/863-1216 fax, 0803mosquitonlagoonap

From: HEYJUDESMATE@aol.com [mailto:HEYJUDESMATE@aol.com]

Subject: Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan

In the early 1970’s I worked with the Florida Department of Pollution Control and assisted Dr. Provost of the

Florida Department of Natural Resources Entomological Center and the Volusia Mosquito Control District to

establish the mosquito control plan for the Mosquito Lagoon, which included a series of small canals dredged

to drain and flush the interior pools of water on the islands within the lagoon.

I was also the Chief of Environmental Permitting and Director of the Division of State Land Management for the

Internal Improvement Trust Fund when Joel Kuperberg and Jay Landers were the Directors of the TIITF, and
149

Research Coordinator for the Coastal Zone Plan which was responsible for the designation of the Coral Reef

Sanctuary in the Florida Keys.

Later in my career with the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation as Assistant Secretary under DERSecretary Jay Landers, I was on the state and federal team that was responsible for designation of that area of

the of the Mosquito Lagoon known as the Canaveral National Seashore. I am now retired and live in Oak Hill,

Florida, fishing regularly in the Mosquito Lagoon and further south in the Indian River Lagoon.

My main concern with the Mosquito Lagoon Management Plan is that the drainage canals (mosquito dragline

canals) into the interior islands which harbor mosquito breeding pools formed by wave berms of sea grass

and sand have not been maintained over the past 35 years as designed by Dr. Provost. The mosquito drainage canals should be restored as the canals have established black and red mangroves along the canal

banks and act as breeding and feeding habitat for many species of aquatic animals, including mullet and

shrimp, which I have personally observed.

Quick Facts about Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Location: Brevard and Volusia counties

Acreage: 23,000 acres of sovereign submerged lands, of which 20,000 is part of Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge

Contact: Sharon Tyson, Aquatic Preserve Manager, 3783 North Indian River Drive, Cocoa, FL 32926, 321-634-6148

High Marsh Restoration - Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, St. John’s River Water Management District,

Volusia County Mosquito Control District, and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission are partnering on ongoing marsh restoration activities. The high marsh restoration project involves re-establishing marsh

elevations to historic levels allowing recruitment of native vegetation and species such as fiddler crabs. The

aquatic preserve staff has agreed to assist with resource monitoring of existing conditions of impoundments

and mosquito control ditches and document post-restoration effects.

The high marsh area which has been ditched should be left alone as many aquatic plants and animals have

established an ecosystem similar to those found in the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve and contrary to Dr.

Provost’s plan for mosquito control.., however the High Marsh Restoration project within the diked impounded

areas should proceed as planned, removing the dikes and opening the impounded areas to the Mosquito

Lagoon and northern parts of the Halifax River.

• This aquatic preserve represents one of the state’s most pristine waterbodies.

• The northern Mosquito Lagoon supports 160 species and 56 families of fish.

• The fish within the estuarine system form a species-rich assemblage important to commercial

and recreational fisheries,

• Salinity levels in the Mosquito Lagoon are comparable to ocean levels (32-34 ppt) allowing several

fish species to spawn in the lagoon that would normally spawn in the ocean.

• The Mosquito Lagoon supports the northernmost extent of red and black mangrove habitat, low

marsh and high marsh habitats, extensive oyster bars, and tidal flats.

While the Non-native Species section mentioned several alien pests, there are also native pest species that

Canaveral National Seashore (CANA) must contend with. Two of those are the mosquito and raccoon. It is

notable that Volusia County was once named Mosquito County, before an attempt was made to attract tourists

to the area. The two most common and bothersome mosquito species found here are the salt marsh mosquito

(Adeas sollicitans), also known as the “salt marsh terror”, and black salt marsh mosquito (Aedes taeniorhynchus). Female adults lay eggs on exposed mud flats, where they can remain for extended periods until submerged by rain or high tides, when they develop into aquatic larvae and eventually adults. Unlike freshwater

mosquitoes, these two species are adapted to saltwater; the larvae can excrete excess salt through the anal

gills. The saltmarsh mosquito may bite at any time, but is most active during the warmest parts of the day. The

black saltmarsh mosquito bites mainly in the cooler hours of the morning and dusk. Remember mosquitoes

are attracted to dark colors, so it is advisable to wear light-colored long-sleeved shirts and long pants if you

plan to be out in times or areas frequented by mosquitoes.

When CANA was created, both NASA (which owns the southern two-thirds of the park) and the State of Florida

(which transferred the northern portion of the park to the National Park Service) stipulated that CANA must

cooperate with the local mosquito control districts. In addition, on former state lands, existing ditches dug for

mosquito control are to be maintained. Under these agreements, the park has sought to utilize control methods that cause the least amount of damage to the environment. Two very different approaches are being used.

The first is chemical control.

Breeding areas are closely monitored by the mosquito control districts. When large amounts of mosquito

larvae are observed, a larvacide is applied at those locations. Rather than kill the larvae, the larvicide retards

development and prevents them from entering the adult stage. It is thought that the larvicide is very specific

and has little impact on other organisms. Several thousand acres of the park have been treated in this manner.
150

The other approach involves a combination of physical and biological control. Before the park was created,

much of Mosquito Lagoon was ditched and impounded for mosquito control. The impoundments were

created by constructing earthen walls or dikes around marsh areas. These were then flooded, eliminating

the exposed mud needed by female saltmarsh mosquitoes to lay their eggs. While effective for mosquito

control, this had a devastating ecological effect. It isolated valuable salt marshes that formerly provided significant amounts of food to the lagoon, served as critical nursery areas for many species of fish, and acted

as a filtration system for lagoon waters. Today CANA is working with the state and county to reconnect

impounded areas by breaching or completely removing the dikes.

Another technique called rotary ditching, addresses the mosquito control ditches, some of which date from

the 1920’s. Over time, many ditches became clogged and would collect water during rainy periods, actually

increasing mosquito breeding habitat. To correct this, a special rubbertired machine is being used to reopen

the ends of the mosquito control ditches.

Thank you for considering my suggestions for management of the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve.

James W. (Buck) Carr former Assistant Secretary of the DER (1974-76)

From: John Gamble [mailto:jgamble@co.volusia.fl.us]

Subject: Attn: Mosquito Lagoon

I have reviewed your objectives titled Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Issue-based Management and offer

the following comments:

1. Most if not all of these goals are reflected in other programs like TMDLs, MS4 NPDES and the IRL National

Estuary Program.

2. Like the TMDL program, science should provide the information we make decisions based on.

Are not sea grass beds expanding in Mosquito Lagoon as reported by SJRWMD? Are there specific water

quality parameters that are trying to be reached?

3. Under II.B.2.5: there is a reference to fertilizers and pesticides. Fertilizers are an acknowledged and verified

problem in urban areas. What are the verified pesticide issues in Mosquito Lagoon? This wording about pesticides is routinely thrown out in such documents with no validity what so ever. I have been following the TMDL

process in Florida for some years and have never heard of a water body that is impaired by pesticides. In fact,

in freshwater systems, pesticides are used to restore habitat and improve water bodies.

4. The major issue for local governments at this time is funding. To help Volusia County and cities work on

these objectives, will the Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve be providing grants or other type of funding?

5. Is it clear that sea grass bed decline in the north end of the lagoon is a results of pollution or possibly the

turbidity caused by boat traffic? Do we have any science here?

6. I would encourage Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve staff to really evaluate the science and make a solid

case to the taxpayers with a prioritized list of the largest current threats and develop a plan to work on those.

The shotgun approach needs to be focused if you’re really trying to do something.

John C. Gamble

Special Projects Manager, Volusia County Public Works

123 W. Indiana Ave., DeLand, FL 32720-4262, 386-736-5965 X5527, jgamble@co.volusia.fl.us

From: David Ray [mailto:dray@miacf.org]

Subject: Meeting last night

Sharon

It was great meeting you last night. Your doing an unbelievable job with such limited resources. If I can help,

please let me know. Thanks for you efforts.

David Ray

From: Zajicek, Paul [mailto:zajicep@doacs.state.fl.us]

Subject: Draft Mosquito Lagoon AP Plan Comments

Dear Ms. Tyson:

To follow are comments from the Division relative to the draft Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management

Plan dated May 2, 2008. Overall, we are impressed by the scope and indepth analysis provided in the draft

plan. Clearly you and your staff have invested considerable time and energy in producing a quality document.

Our comments focus upon the recognition afforded aquaculture by the Legislature in Florida law and especially in respect to the authorized use of sovereign submerged lands. Please note that the propriety authorizations
151

alluded to on draft page 7 include aquaculture. We specifically request that the management plan include both

recognition of aquaculture as an authorized use and that the Legislature has declared aquacultural activities

as being in the public interest.

“The Legislature declares that aquaculture shall be recognized as a practicable resource management alternative to produce marine aquaculture products, to protect and conserve natural resources, to reduce competition for natural stocks, and to augment and restore natural populations. Therefore, for the purpose of this

section, the Legislature declares that aquaculture is in the public interest.” (253.68(2)(a)).

“...aquaculture is in the public interest and aquaculture leases may be authorized in aquatic preserves...

”(258.42(1)(b))

“It is the intent of the Legislature to enhance the growth of aquaculture in this state, while protecting Florida’s

environment.” (597.0021(1)).

We are concerned with certain statements in the draft text. Language on draft page 63, within a brief paragraph that describes aquaculture leasing, implies that no new aquaculture leases may be authorized. As

provided in law and rule, the Division responds to application by local government or individuals that are interested in an aquaculture lease and so cannot predict when such applications maybe received. Authorization to

act upon lease applications remains a responsibility of state government. Language on draft page 98 implies

that shellfish aquaculture is a consumptive use. We respectfully disagree and have cited Florida law that recognizes the value of shellfish aquaculture to Florida’s natural resources and natural resource management.

Cultured shellfish are a significant sink for nutrients and the non-consumptive, sustainable production of shellfish is well recognized in the scientific literature as well as by the environmental community.

The Division is vitally interested in continuing a constructive relationship with the Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas program. We believe that clean coastal water, productive estuaries, and aquaculture are compatible and mutually beneficial goals and activities. We hope that you agree and will respond favorably to our

comments.

Thank you,

Paul Zajicek, Biological Administrator

Charles H. Bronson, Commissioner of Agriculture

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Aquaculture

1203 Governors Square Blvd, Fifth Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32301, Telephone: 850-488-4033, Fax: 850-410-0893

Website: http://www.FloridaAquaculture.com

From: Margaret Lasi [mailto:mlasi@sjrwmd.com]

Subject: Comments on the draft Mosq. Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Plan

Hello Sharon & Myra

I got notice of the June 4 Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Management Planning meeting.

Unfortunately I will not be able to attend, but I thought you would be interested in my comments pertaining to

the water quality monitoring section of the draft report.

Please see the two-page pdf document attached (pages 56 and 57 of the draft MLAP Management Plan). Also

attached is a graphic I obtained from FDEP’s website to illustrate one of the points made in my comments.

Text additions are indicated by blue vertical carets, deletions show up as red cross-out lines, and comments

are indicated by yellow comment balloons. Parking or clicking on the carets and comment balloons will display their contents.

I hope you find my comments helpful. If you have any questions, please feel free to call.

Regards,

Margie
152
153
154
155
156

D.1 / Current Goals, Objectives and Strategies Table

The following table is a summary of the issues, goals, objectives and strategies identified in Chapter 5.

The “Management Program” column identifies which Management Program each strategy falls within.

The “Implementation Date” column identifies the fiscal year when the strategy was, or will be, initiated.

The “Project Initiation” column indicates if this is an activity that is already underway, currently under initial

development, or will occur in the future. The “Length of Initiative” column indicates how long it is expected

to complete the strategy, and the “Estimated Yearly Cost” column identifies the anticipated expenses

associated with the strategy.

Goals, Objectives & Integrated Strategies Management Program Implementation

Date (Planned) Length ofInitiative

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Project Initiation Legend: C = Currently Underway D = Under Initial Development F = Future Implementation

Issue 1: Los of Natural Community Function and Species Diversity

Goal 1: Conserve and restore natural community function, productivity and species diversity in MLAP.

Objective 1.1: Determine status and trends of key natural communities and species.

1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research

studies, reports and data on MLAP into the Volusia County

Water Atlas.

Education

& Outreach 2009-2010 Recurring -$800

1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon

Conference including publication of abstracts from this meeting

Education

& Outreach 2009-2010 Recurring $500

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on

baseline conditions for key natural communities and species

and identify research and monitoring information gaps, prioritize

threats and prioritize new monitoring initiatives.

Ecosystem

Science 2009-2010 Recurring $2,000

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate

and support long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and

locations of key natural communities and species in MLAP.

Ecosystem

Science 2010-2011 Recurring $2,000

Objective 1.2: Develop and implement conservation and restoration projects for key natural communities and species based on

the best available scientific data and information.

1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs

and projects within MLAP.

Resource

Management 2009-2010 Recurring $600

1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies

(including invasive species management) and develop new plans

as required.

Resource

Management 2009-2010 Recurring $600

Issue 2: Water and Watershed

Goal 2: Maintain and improve water and sediment quality within and adjacent to MLAP.

Objective 2.1: Determine status and trends of water and sediment quality within and adjacent to MLAP.

2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including

meta data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas .

Ecosystem

Science 2009-2010 Recurring $800

2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status,

trends and information gaps.

Ecosystem

Science 2009-2010 Recurring $800

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address

information gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring

program to support status and trend assessment of water and

sediment quality in MLAP.

Ecosystem

Science 2009-2010 Recurring $2,000

Objective 2.2: Coordinate with regulatory programs, local government and land owners to reduce the impacts from development

in the watershed.

2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage

treatment within MLAP’s watershed. 

Resource

Management 2009-2010 Recurring $800

2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering

capacity of the shoreline and watershed of MLAP.

Resource

Management 2009-2010 Recurring $800

2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality

improvement education programs within MLAP.

Education and

Outreach 2009-2010 Recurring $800

2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for

activities on lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 

Resource

Management 2009-2010 Recurring $500

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local

government comprehensive growth management plans and

land development rules and ordnances to enhance abatement

of nonpoint source pollutants and address potential impacts of

climate change.

Resource

Management 2009-2010 Recurring $250

2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. Resource

Management 2009-2010 Recurring $250
157

Goals, Objectives & Integrated Strategies Management Program Implementation

Date (Planned) Length ofInitiative

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Project Initiation Legend: C = Currently Underway D = Under Initial Development F = Future Implementation

Issue 3: Sustainable Public Use

Goal 3: Encourage user experiences and public recreation opportunities consistent with natural resources conservation.

Objective 3.1: Educate visitors, local residents and users about the MLAP.

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar

informational materials to inform the public and user groups

about the value of the resources of MLAP and efforts to

conserve and restore these resources.

Education

& Outreach 2010-2011 Recurring $800

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to

proactively identify potential resource/public use conflicts and,

working with key stakeholders, develop conservation strategies

to minimize damage to the natural resources.

Resource

Management 2010-2011 Recurring $2,500

Objective 3.2: Inform local residents and visitors about LAP and actions they can take to conserve and restore the resources found there.

3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents,

visitors, ecotourism groups, fishing guides and boat charter

services and other user groups.

Education

& Outreach 2009-2010 Recurring $800

3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP

to promote stewardship of resources. 

Education

& Outreach 2009-2010 Recurring $1,500

3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in

natural resource conservation. 

Resource

Management 2009-2010 Recurring $600

Issue 4: Environmenal Incident Assessment and Response

Goal 4: Integrate MLAP into strategies to assess and respond to environmental incidents within MLAP.

Objective 4.1: Identify existing assessment and response programs, gaps in these programs and strategies to address these gaps. 

4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response

programs for MLAP and identify classes of incidents not

addressed by these programs.

Education

& Outreach 2009-2010 Recurring $250

4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for

categories of incidents not addressed by existing programs.

Resource

Management 2009-2010 Recurring $350

D.2 / Budget Table

The following table provides a cost estimate for conducting the management activities identified in this plan. The

data is organized by year and Management Program with subtotals for each program and year. The following

represents the actual budgetary needs for managing the resources of the aquatic preserve. This budget was

developed using data from the Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA) and other cooperating

entities, and is based on actual costs for management activities, equipment purchases and maintenance,

and for development of fixed capital facilities. The budget below exceeds the funds CAMA has been receiving

through the state appropriations process, but is consistent with the direction necessary to achieve the goals and

objectives identified in the Goals, Objectives and Strategies Table in Appendix D.1. Budget categories identified

correlate with the CAMA Management Program Areas.

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

2009-2010 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline

conditions for key natural communities and species and identify research

and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new

monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $5,600
158

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $4,750

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors,

ecotourism groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other

user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents

4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs

for MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these

programs.

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $4,650

$15,000 2009-2010 Total $15,000

2010-2011 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline

conditions for key natural communities and species and identify research

and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new

monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Natural Community Function

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate and support

long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and locations of key natural

communities and species in MLAP.

2010-2011 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600
159

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively

identify potential resource/public use conflicts and, working with key

stakeholders, develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to the

natural resources.

2010-2011 $2,500

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar informational materials

to inform the public and user groups about the value of the resources of

MLAP and efforts to conserve and restore these resources.

2010-2011 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors, ecotourism

groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents 4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for

MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these programs.

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

$20,300 2010-2011 Total $20,300

2011-2012 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline

conditions for key natural communities and species and identify research

and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new

monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Natural Community Function

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate and support

long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and locations of key natural

communities and species in MLAP.

2010-2011 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600
160

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively

identify potential resource/public use conflicts and, working with key

stakeholders, develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to the

natural resources.

2010-2011 $2,500

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar informational materials

to inform the public and user groups about the value of the resources of

MLAP and efforts to conserve and restore these resources.

2010-2011 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors,

ecotourism groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other

user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents

4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for

MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these programs. 

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

$20,300 2011-2012 Total $20,300

2012-2013 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline conditions

for key natural communities and species and identify research and monitoring

information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Natural Community Function

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate and support

long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and locations of key natural

communities and species in MLAP.

2010-2011 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600
161

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively

identify potential resource/public use conflicts and, working with key

stakeholders, develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to the

natural resources.

2010-2011 $2,500

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar informational materials

to inform the public and user groups about the value of the resources of

MLAP and efforts to conserve and restore these resources.

2010-2011 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors, ecotourism

groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents

4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for

MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these programs. 

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

$20,300 2012-2013 Total $20,300

2013-2014 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline

conditions for key natural communities and species and identify research

and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new

monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Natural Community Function

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate and support

long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and locations of key natural

communities and species in MLAP.

2010-2011 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600
162

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively

identify potential resource/public use conflicts and, working with key

stakeholders, develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to the

natural resources.

2010-2011 $2,500

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar informational materials

to inform the public and user groups about the value of the resources of

MLAP and efforts to conserve and restore these resources.

2010-2011 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors, ecotourism

groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents

4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for

MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these programs. 

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

$20,300 2013-2014 Total $20,300

2014-2015 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline

conditions for key natural communities and species and identify research

and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new

monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Natural Community Function

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate and support

long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and locations of key natural

communities and species in MLAP.

2010-2011 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600
163

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively identify

potential resource/public use conflicts and, working with key stakeholders,

develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to the natural resources.

2010-2011 $2,500

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar informational materials

to inform the public and user groups about the value of the resources of

MLAP and efforts to conserve and restore these resources.

2010-2011 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors, ecotourism

groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents

4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for

MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these programs. 

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

$20,300 2014-2015 Total $20,300

2015-2016 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline

conditions for key natural communities and species and identify research

and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new

monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Natural Community Function

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate and support

long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and locations of key natural

communities and species in MLAP.

2010-2011 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600
164

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively identify

potential resource/public use conflicts and, working with key stakeholders,

develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to the natural resources.

2010-2011 $2,500

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar informational materials

to inform the public and user groups about the value of the resources of

MLAP and efforts to conserve and restore these resources.

2010-2011 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors, ecotourism

groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents

4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for

MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these programs. 

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

$20,300 2015-2016 Total $20,300

2016-2017 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline

conditions for key natural communities and species and identify research

and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new

monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Natural Community Function

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate and support

long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and locations of key natural

communities and species in MLAP.

2010-2011 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600
165

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively identify

potential resource/public use conflicts and, working with key stakeholders,

develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to the natural resources.

2010-2011 $2,500

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar informational materials

to inform the public and user groups about the value of the resources of

MLAP and efforts to conserve and restore these resources.

2010-2011 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors, ecotourism

groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents

4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for

MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these programs. 

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

$20,300 2016-2017 Total $20,300

2017-2018 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline

conditions for key natural communities and species and identify research

and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new

monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Natural Community Function

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate and support

long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and locations of key natural

communities and species in MLAP.

2010-2011 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600
166

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively

identify potential resource/public use conflicts and, working with key

stakeholders, develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to the

natural resources.

2010-2011 $2,500

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar informational materials

to inform the public and user groups about the value of the resources of

MLAP and efforts to conserve and restore these resources.

2010-2011 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors,

ecotourism groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other

user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents 4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for

MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these programs.

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

$20,300 2017-2018 Total $20,300

2018-2019 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science

Natural Community Function

1.1.3: Analyze and assess assembled data into a report on baseline

conditions for key natural communities and species and identify research

and monitoring information gaps, prioritize threats and prioritize new

monitoring initiatives.

2009-2010 $2,000

Natural Community Function

1.1.4: Use and build on existing monitoring efforts to facilitate and support

long-term monitoring efforts to track trends and locations of key natural

communities and species in MLAP.

2010-2011 $2,000

Water and Watershed 2.1.1: Compile existing water and sediment quality data, including meta

data, and included these in the Volusia County Water Atlas . 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.1.2: Analyze and assess compiled data to identify status, trends and

information gaps.

2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed

2.1.3: Use or build on existing monitoring efforts to address information

gaps and to implement a long-term monitoring program to support status

and trend assessment of water and sediment quality in MLAP.

2009-2010 $2,000

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600
167

Issue Strategy Project

Initiation

Estimated

Yearly Cost

Resource Management

Natural Community Function 1.2.1: Support present conservation and restoration programs and

projects within MLAP. 2009-2010 $600

Natural Community Function 1.2.2: Assess existing conservation and restoration strategies (including

invasive species management) and develop new plans as required. 2009-2010 $600

Water and Watershed 2.2.1: Support projects to enhance stormwater and sewage treatment

within MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.2: Support projects to restore stormwater pollution filtering capacity of

the shoreline and watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Water and Watershed 2.2.4: Provide review and comment on permit applications for activities on

lands within or in the watershed of MLAP. 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed

2.2.5: Review and provide recommendations for local government

comprehensive growth management plans and land development rules

and ordnances to enhance abatement of nonpoint source pollutants and

address potential impacts of climate change.

2009-2010 $250

Water and Watershed 2.2.6: Support land acquisition efforts in MLAP’s watershed. 2009-2010 $250

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.2: Examine public use patterns and trends within MLAP to proactively

identify potential resource/public use conflicts and, working with key

stakeholders, develop conservation strategies to minimize damage to the

natural resources.

2010-2011 $2,500

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.3: Support and assist the law enforcement community in natural

resource conservation. 2009-2010 $600

Environmental Incidents 4.1.2: Develop assessment and response strategies for categories of

incidents not addressed by existing programs.

2009-2010 $350

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach

Natural Community Function 1.1.1: Collect and compile existing and on-going research studies, reports

and data on MLAP into the Volusia County Water Atlas. 2009-2010 $800

Natural Community Function 1.1.2: Co-host and/or sponsor the biennial Mosquito Lagoon Conference

including publication of abstracts from this meeting 2009-2010 $500

Water and Watershed 2.2.3: Prioritize, develop and implement water quality improvement

education programs within MLAP. 2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.1.1: Provide kiosks, signage, brochures or similar informational

materials to inform the public and user groups about the value of the

resources of MLAP and efforts to conserve and restore these resources. 

2010-2011 $800

Sustainable Public Use

3.2.1: Compile and develop outreach materials for residents, visitors,

ecotourism groups, fishing guides and boat charter services and other

user groups.

2009-2010 $800

Sustainable Public Use 3.2.2: Provide hands-on volunteer opportunities within the MLAP to

promote stewardship of resources. 2009-2010 $1,500

Environmental Incidents

4.1.1: Identify/inventory existing rapid assessment response programs for

MLAP and identify classes of incidents not addressed by these programs. 

2009-2010 $250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

$20,300 2018-2019 Total $20,300
168

D.3 / Budget Summary Table 

The following table provides a summary of cost estimates for conducting the management activities identified

in this plan.

2009-2010 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $5,600

Resource Management Subtotal $4,750

Education & Outreach Subtotal $4,650

2009-2010 Total $15,000

2010-2011 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

2010-2011 Total $20,300

2011-2012 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

2011-2012 Total $20,300

2012-2013 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

2012-2013 Total $20,300

2013-20141 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

2013-2014 Total $20,300

2014-2015 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

2014-2015 Total $20,300

2015-2016 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

2015-2016 Total $20,300

2016-2017 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

2016-2017 Total $20,300

2017-2018 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

2017-2018 Total $20,300

2018-2019 Cost Estimate

Ecosystem Science Subtotal $7,600

Resource Management Subtotal $7,250

Education & Outreach Subtotal $5,450

20186-2019 Total $20,300

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

Management Plan • August 2009 - July 2019

Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve

3783 North Indian River Drive

Cocoa, FL 32926

(321) 634-6148

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas

3900 Commonwealth Blvd., MS #235

Tallahassee, FL 32399 • floridacoasts.org