Appendixes, Glossary, Selected References,

Preparers and Consultants, and Index

459 

APPENDIX A: LEGISLATION 

PUBLIC LAW 93-440, AN ACT TO ESTABLISH BIG CYPRESS NATIONAL PRESERVE, AS AMENDED 

BY PUBLIC LAW 100-301, THE BIG CYPRESS NATIONAL PRESERVE ADDITION ACT

Note: All underlined sections are from the 1988 Addition Act

An Act to establish the Big Cypress National Preserve in the State of Florida, and for other purposes. (88 

Stat. 1255) (P.L. 93-440) 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress 

assembled, That (a) in order to assure the preservation, conservation, and protection of the natural, scenic, 

hydrologic, floral and faunal, and recreational values of the Big Cypress Watershed in the State of Florida 

and to provide for the enhancement and public enjoyment thereof, the Big Cypress National Preserve is 

hereby established. 

(b) The Big Cypress National Preserve (hereafter referred to as the "preserve") shall comprise the area 

generally depicted on the map entitled "Big Cypress National Preserve", dated November 1971 and 

numbered BC-91,001, which shall be on file and available for public inspection in the Offices of the 

National Park Service, Department of the Interior, Washington, District of Columbia, and shall be filed 

with appropriate offices of Collier, Monroe, and Dade Counties in the State of Florida. The Secretary of the 

Interior (hereafter referred to as the "Secretary") shall, as soon as practicable, publish a detailed description 

of the boundaries of the preserve in the Federal Register which shall include not more than five hundred 

and seventy thousand acres of land and water. 

(c) The Secretary is authorized to acquire by donation, purchase with donated or appropriated funds, 

transfer from any other Federal agency, or exchange, any lands, waters, or interests therein which are 

located within the boundaries of the preserve or the Addition: Provided, That any lands owned or acquired 

by the State of Florida, or any of its subdivisions, in the preserve may be acquired by donation only and, 

any land acquired by the State of Florida, or any of its subdivisions, in the Addition shall be acquired in 

accordance with subsection (d): Provided further, That no Federal funds shall be appropriated until the 

Governor of Florida executes an agreement on behalf of the State which (i) provides for the transfer to the 

United States of all lands within the preserve previously owned or acquired by the State and (ii) provides 

for the donation to the United States of all lands acquired by the State within the preserve pursuant to the 

provision of "the Big Cypress Conservation Act of 1973" (Chapter 73-131 of the Florida Statutes) or 

provides for the donation to the United States of any remaining moneys appropriated pursuant to such Act 

for the purchase of lands within the preserve. No improved property, as defined by this Act, nor oil and gas 

rights, shall be acquired without the consent of the owner unless the Secretary, in his judgment, determines 

that such property is subject to, or threatened with, uses which are, or would be, detrimental to the purposes 

of the preserve. The Secretary may, if he determines that the acquisition of any other subsurface estate is 

not needed for the purposes of the preserve and the Addition, exclude such interest in acquiring any lands 

within the preserve and the Addition. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 301 of the Uniform 

Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1894, 1904) the 

Secretary (i) may evaluate any offer to sell land within the preserve or the Addition by any landowner and 

may, in his discretion, accept any offer not in excess of $10,000 without an appraisal and (ii) may direct an 

appraisal to be made of any unimproved property within the preserve or the Addition without notice to the 

owner or owners thereof. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any federally owned lands within the 

preserve or the Addition shall, with the concurrence of the head of the administering agency, be transferred 

to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary for the purposes of this Act, without transfer of funds. 

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to interfere with the right of the State of Florida to acquire such 

property rights as may be necessary for Interstate 75.
APPENDIXES

460 

(d) (1) The aggregate cost to the United States of acquiring lands within the Addition may not exceed 

80 percent of the total cost of such lands.

(2) Except as provided in paragraph (3), if the State of Florida transfers to the Secretary lands within the 

Addition, the Secretary shall pay to or reimburse the State of Florida (out of funds appropriated for such 

purpose) an amount equal to 80 percent of the total costs to the State of Florida of acquiring such lands.

(3) The amount described in paragraph (1) shall be reduced by an amount equal to 20 percent of the 

amount of the total cost incurred by the Secretary in acquiring lands in the Addition other than from the 

State of Florida. 

(4) For purposes of this subsection, the term 'total cost' means that amount of the total acquisition costs 

(including the value of exchanged or donated lands) less the amount of the costs incurred by the Federal 

Highway Administration and the Florida Department of Transportation, including severance damages paid 

to private property owners as a result of the construction of Interstate 75.

SEC. 2. (a) In recognition of the efforts of the State of Florida in the preservation of the area, through 

the enactment of chapter 73-131 of the Florida statutes, "The Big Cypress Conservation Act of 1973", the 

Secretary is directed to proceed as expeditiously as possible to acquire the lands and interests in lands 

necessary to achieve the purposes of this Act. 

(b) Within one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit, in writing, to 

the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs and to the Committees on Appropriations of the United 

States Congress a detailed plan which shall indicate: 

(i) the lands and areas which he deems essential to the protection and public enjoyment of this preserve. 

(ii) the lands which he has previously acquired by purchase, donation, exchange or transfer for 

administration for the purpose of this preserve, and 

(iii) the annual acquisition program (including the level of funding) which he recommends for the 

ensuing five fiscal years. 

(c) It is the express intent of the Congress that the Secretary should substantially complete the land 

acquisition program contemplated by this Act within six years after the date of its enactment. 

 SEC. 3. (a) The owner of an improved property on the date of its acquisition by the Secretary may, as a 

condition of such acquisition, retain for himself and his heirs and assigns a right of use and occupancy of 

the improved property for a definite term of not more than twenty-five years or, in lieu thereof, for a term 

ending at the death of the owner or the death of his spouse, whichever is later. The owner shall elect the 

term to be reserved. Unless this property is wholly or partially donated to the United States, the Secretary 

shall pay the owner the fair market value of the property on the date of acquisition less the fair market 

value, on that date, of the right retained by the owner. A right retained pursuant to this section shall be 

subject to termination by the Secretary upon his determination that it is being exercised in a manner 

inconsistent with the purposes of this Act, which shall include the exercise of such right in violation of any 

applicable State or local laws and ordinances, and it shall terminate by operation of law upon the 

Secretary's notifying the holder of the right of such determination and tendering to him an amount equal to 

the fair market value of that portion of the right which remains unexpired. 

 (b) As used in this Act, the term "improved property" means: 
Appendix A: Legislation 

461 

(i) a detached, one family dwelling, construction of which was begun before November 23,1971, with 

respect to the preserve and January 1, 1986, with respect to the Addition which is used for noncommercial 

residential purposes, together with not to exceed three acres of land on which the dwelling is situated and 

such additional lands as the Secretary deems reasonably necessary for access thereto, such land being in the 

same ownership as the dwelling, and together with any structures accessory to the dwelling which are 

situated on such lands and 

(ii) any other building, construction of which was begun before November 23, 1971, with respect to the 

preserve and January 1, 1986, with respect to the Addition which was constructed and is used in accordance 

with all applicable State and local laws and ordinances, together with as much of the land on which the 

building is situated, such land being in the same ownership as the building, as the Secretary shall designate 

to be reasonably necessary for the continued enjoyment and use of the building in the same manner and to 

the same extent as existed in November 23, 1971, or January 1, 1986, as the case may be, together with any 

structures accessory to the building which are situated on the lands so designated. In making such 

designation the Secretary shall take into account the manner of use in which the building, accessory 

structures, and lands were customarily enjoyed prior to November 23, 1971 or January 1, 1986, as the case 

may be. 

(c) Whenever an owner of property elects to retain a right of use and occupancy as provided in this 

section, such owner shall be deemed to have waived any benefits or rights accruing under sections 203, 

204, 205, and 206 of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 

1970 (84 Stat. 1894), and for the purposes of such sections such owner shall not be considered a displaced 

person as defined in section 101(6) of such Act. 

SEC. 4. (a) The area within the boundaries depicted on the map referred to in section 1 shall be known 

as the Big Cypress National Preserve. Such lands shall be administered by the Secretary as a unit of the 

National Park System in a manner which will assure their natural and ecological integrity in perpetuity in 

accordance with the provisions of this Act and with the provisions of the Act of August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 

535; 16 U.S.C. 1-4), as amended and supplemented. 

(b) In administering the preserve, the Secretary shall develop and publish in the Federal Register such 

rules and regulations as he deems necessary and appropriate to limit or control the use of Federal lands and 

waters with respect to: 

 (1) motorized vehicles, 

 

 (2) exploration for and extraction of oil, gas, and other minerals, 

 

 (3) grazing, 

 

 (4) draining or constructing of works or structures which alter the natural water courses, 

 

 (5) agriculture, 

 

 (6) hunting, fishing, and trapping, 

 

 (7) new construction of any kind, and 

 

 (8) such other uses as the Secretary determines must be limited or controlled in order to carry out the 

purposes of this Act: Provided, That the Secretary shall consult and cooperate with the Secretary of 

Transportation to assure that necessary transportation facilities shall be located within existing or 

reasonably expanded rights-of-way and constructed within the reserve in a manner consistent with the 

purposes of this Act. 
APPENDIXES

462 

 SEC. 5. The Secretary shall permit hunting, fishing, and trapping on lands and waters under his 

jurisdiction within the preserve and the Addition in accordance with the applicable laws of the United 

States and the State of Florida, except that he may designate zones where and periods when no hunting, 

fishing, trapping, or entry may be permitted for reasons of public safety, administration, floral and faunal 

protection and management, or public use and enjoyment. Except in emergencies, any regulations 

prescribing such restrictions relating to hunting, fishing, or trapping shall be put into effect only after 

consultation with the appropriate State agency having jurisdiction over hunting, fishing, and trapping 

activities. Notwithstanding this section or any other provision of this Act, members of the Miccosukee 

Tribe of Indians of Florida and members of the Seminole Tribe of Florida shall be permitted, subject to 

reasonable regulations established by the Secretary, to continue their usual and customary use and 

occupancy of Federal or federally acquired lands and waters within the preserve and the Addition, 

including hunting, fishing, and trapping on a subsistence basis and traditional tribal ceremonials. 

SEC. 6. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, before entering into any contract for the provision 

of revenue producing visitor services, 

(i) the Secretary shall offer those members of the Miccosukee and Seminole Indian Tribes who, on 

January 1, 1972 (January 1, 1985, in the case of the Addition), were engaged in the provision of similar 

services, a right of first refusal to continue providing such services within the preserve and the Addition

subject to such terms and conditions as he may deem appropriate, and 

(ii) before entering into any contract or agreement to provide new revenue-producing visitor services 

within the preserve or within the Addition, the Secretary shall offer to the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of 

Florida and the Seminole Tribe of Florida the right of first refusal to provide such services, the right to be 

open for a period of ninety days. Should both tribes respond with proposals that satisfy the terms and 

conditions established by the Secretary, the Secretary may allow the Tribes an additional period of ninety 

days in which to enter into an inter-Tribal cooperative agreement to provide such visitor services, but if 

neither tribe responds with proposals that satisfy the terms and conditions established by the Secretary, then 

the Secretary shall provide such visitor services in accordance with the Act of October 9, 1965 (79 Stat. 

969, 16 U.S.C. 20). No such agreement may be assigned or otherwise transferred without the consent of the 

Secretary. 

SEC. 7. Within five years from the date of the enactment of this Act with respect to the preserve and 

five years from the date of the enactment of the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition Act with respect to 

the Addition, the Secretary shall review the area within the preserve or the area within the Addition (as the 

case may be) and shall report to the President, in accordance with section 3 (c) and (d) of the Wilderness 

Act (78 Stat. 891; 16 U.S.C. 1132 (c) and (d)), his recommendations as to the suitability or nonsuitability of 

any area within the preserve or the area within the Addition (as the case may be) for preservation as 

wilderness, and any designation of any such areas as a wilderness shall be accomplished in accordance with 

said subsections of the Wilderness Act. 

SEC. 8. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as 

may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act, but not to exceed $116,000,000 for the acquisition 

of lands and interests in lands and not to exceed $900,000 for development. Any funds donated to the 

United States by the State of Florida pursuant to chapter 73-131 of the Florida statutes shall be used solely 

for the acquisition of lands and interests in land within the preserve. 

 (b) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated from the Land and Water Conservation Fund not to 

exceed $49,500 000 for the acquisition of lands within the Addition. There is hereby authorized to be 

appropriated such sums as may be necessary for development in the Addition. 

Approved October 11,1974. 
Appendix A: Legislation 

463 

(The following are completely new sections added from Addition Legislation) 

SEC. 9. (a) In order to --

(1) achieve the purposes of the first section of this Act;

(2) complete the preserve in conjunction with the planned construction of Interstate Highway 75; and

(3) insure appropriately managed use and access to the Big Cypress Watershed in the State of Florida, 

the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition is established.

(b) The Big Cypress National Preserve Addition (referred to in this Act as the 'Addition') shall comprise 

approximately 146,000 acres as generally depicted on the map entitled Big Cypress National Preserve 

Addition, dated April, 1987, and numbered 176-91000C, which shall be on file and available for public 

inspection in the Office of the National Park Service, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., and 

shall be filed with appropriate offices of Collier County in the State of Florida. The Secretary shall, as soon 

as practicable, publish a detailed description of the boundaries of the Addition in the Federal Register.

(c) The area within the boundaries depicted on the map referred to in subsection (b) shall be known as 

the 'Big Cypress National Preserve Addition' and shall be managed in accordance with section 4.

(d) For purposes of administering the Addition and notwithstanding section 2(c), it is the express intent 

of the Congress that the Secretary should substantially complete the land acquisition program contemplated 

with respect to the Addition in not more than five years after the date of the enactment of this paragraph.

SEC. 10. The Secretary and other involved Federal agencies shall cooperate with the State of Florida to 

establish recreational access points and roads, rest and recreation areas, wildlife protection, hunting, 

fishing, frogging, and other traditional opportunities in conjunction with the creation of the Addition and in 

the construction of Interstate Highway 75. Three of such access points shall be located within the preserve 

(including the Addition).

SEC. 11. Not later than two years after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall 

submit to the Congress a detailed report on, and further plan for, the preserve and Addition including --

(1) the status of the existing preserve, the effectiveness of past regulation and management of the 

preserve, and recommendations for future management of the preserve and the Addition;

(2) a summary of the public's use of the preserve and the status of the access points developed pursuant 

to section 10;

(3) the need for involvement of other State and Federal agencies in the management and expansion of 

the preserve and Addition;

(4) the status of land acquisition; and 

(5) a determination, made in conjunction with the State of Florida, of the adequacy of the number, 

location, and design of the recreational access points on 1-75/Alligator Alley for access to the Big Cypress 

National Preserve, including the Addition.

The determination required by paragraph (5) shall incorporate the results of any related studies of the State 

of Florida Department of Transportation and other Florida State agencies. Any recommendation for 
APPENDIXES

464 

significant changes in the approved recreational access points, including any proposed additions, shall be 

accompanied by an assessment of the environmental impact of such changes.

SEC. 12. (a) Within nine months from the date of the enactment of the Big Cypress National Preserve 

Addition Act, the Secretary shall promulgate, subject to the requirements of subsections (b)-(e) of this 

section, such rules and regulations governing the exploration for and development and production of nonFederal interests in oil and gas located within the boundaries of the Big Cypress National Preserve and the 

Addition, including but not limited to access on, across, or through all lands within the boundaries of the 

Big Cypress National Preserve and the Addition for the purpose of conducting such exploration or 

development and production, as are necessary and appropriate to provide reasonable use and enjoyment of 

privately owned oil and gas interests, and consistent with the purposes for which the Big Cypress National 

Preserve and the Addition were established. Rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the authority of 

this section may be made by appropriate amendment to or in substitution of the rules and regulations 

respecting non-Federal oil and gas rights (currently codified at 36 CFR 9.30, et seq. (1986)).

(b) Any rule or regulation promulgated by the Secretary under subsection (a) of this section shall 

provide that --

(1) exploration or development and production activities may not be undertaken, except pursuant to a 

permit issued by the National Park Service authorizing such activities or access; and

(2) final action by the National Park Service with respect to any application for a permit authorizing 

such activities shall occur within 90 days from the date such an application is submitted unless --

(A) the National Park Service and the applicant agree that such final action shall occur within a shorter 

or longer period of time; or

(B) the National Park Service determines that an additional period of time is required to ensure that the 

National Park Service has, in reviewing the application, complied with other applicable law, Executive 

orders and regulations; or

(C) the National Park Service, within 30 days from the date of submission of such application, notifies 

the applicant that such application does not contain all information reasonably necessary to allow the 

National Park Service to consider such application and requests that such additional information be 

provided. After receipt of such notification to the applicant, the applicant shall supply any reasonably 

necessary additional information and shall advise the National Park Service that the applicant believes that 

the application contains all reasonably necessary information and is therefore complete, whereupon the 

National Park Service may --

(i) within 30 days of receipt of such notice from the applicant to the National Park Service 

determine that the application does not contain all reasonably necessary additional information and, 

on that basis, deny the application; or

(ii) review the application and take final action within 60 days from the date that the applicant 

provides notification to the National Park Service that its application is complete.

(c) Such activities shall be permitted to occur if such activities conform to requirements established by 

the National Park Service under authority of law.

(d) In establishing standards governing the conduct of exploration or development and production 

activities within the boundaries of the Big Cypress National Preserve or the Addition, the Secretary shall 

take into consideration oil and gas exploration and development and production practices used in similar 

habitats or ecosystems within the Big Cypress National Preserve or the Addition at the time of 
Appendix A: Legislation 

465 

promulgation of the rules and regulations under subsection (a) or at the time of the submission of the 

application seeking authorization for such activities, as appropriate.

(e) Prior to the promulgation of rules or regulations under this section, the Secretary is authorized, 

consistent with the purposes of which the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition was established, to enter 

into interim agreements with owners of non-Federal oil and gas interests governing the conduct of oil and 

gas exploration, development or production activities within the boundaries of the Addition, which

agreements shall be superseded by the rules and regulations promulgated by the Secretary when applicable: 

Provided, That such agreement shall be consistent with the requirements of subsections (b)-(d) of this 

section and may be altered by the terms of rules and regulations subsequently promulgated by the 

Secretary: Provided further, That this provision shall not be construed to enlarge or diminish the authority 

of the Secretary to establish rules and regulations applicable to the conduct of exploration or development 

and production activities within the Big Cypress National Preserve or the Addition.

(f) There is hereby authorized to be established a Minerals Management Office within the Office of the 

Superintendent of the Big Cypress National Preserve, for the purpose of ensuring, consistent with the 

purposes for which the Big Cypress National Preserve was established, timely consideration of and final 

action on applications for the exploration or development and production of non-Federal oil and gas rights

located beneath the surface of lands within the boundaries of the Big Cypress National Preserve and the 

Addition.

 (g) There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the 

activities set forth in this section.

Legislative History. 

House Report No. 93-502 (Comm. on Interior and Insular Affairs). 

Senate Report No. 9-1128 (Comm. on Interior and Insular Affairs). 

Congressional Record: 

Vol. 119 (1973): Oct 3, considered and passed House. 

Vol. 120 (1974); Sept 9, considered and passed Senate, amended. 

 Sept. 24, House concurred in Senate amendments with amendments. 

 Oct 1, Senate concurred in House amendments to Senate amendments. 
466 
467

Appendix B: Wilderness Eligibility Determination

APPENDIX B: WILDERNESS ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION
Appendixes

468
469

Appendix B: Wilderness Eligibility Determination
Appendixes

470
471

Appendix B: Wilderness Eligibility Determination
Appendixes

472
473

Appendix B: Wilderness Eligibility Determination
Appendixes

474
475

Appendix B: Wilderness Eligibility Determination
Appendixes

476
477

Appendix B: Wilderness Eligibility Determination
Appendixes

478
479

Appendix B: Wilderness Eligibility Determination
Appendixes

480
481

APPENDIX C: CONSULTATION LETTERS
Appendixes

482
483

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

484
485

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

486
487

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

488
489

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

490
491

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

492
493

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

494
495

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

496
497

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

498
499

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

500
501

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

502
503

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

504
505

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

506
507

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

508
509

Appendix C: Consultation Letters

“More Protection, Less Process” 

www.dep.state.fl.us 

Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection 

Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building 

3900 Commonwealth Boulevard 

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 

Charlie Crist 

Governor

Jeff Kottkamp

Lt. Governor 

Michael W. Sole 

Secretary

September 29, 2009 

Mr. Pedro Ramos, Park Superintendent 

Big Cypress National Preserve 

33100 Tamiami Trail East 

Ochopee, FL 34141 

RE: National Park Service – Big Cypress National Preserve – Addition 

 Draft General Management Plan/Wilderness Study/Off-Road Vehicle 

 Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement – Collier County, Florida 

 SAI # FL200907154851C 

Dear Superintendent Ramos: 

The Florida State Clearinghouse, pursuant to Presidential Executive Order 12372, 

Gubernatorial Executive Order 95-359, the Coastal Zone Management Act (16, U.S.C. §§ 

1451-1464, as amended), and the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. Ch. 55), 

has coordinated a review of the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition Draft General 

Management Plan/Wilderness Study/Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan/Environmental 

Impact Statement (the Draft Plan/EIS). 

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) is designated the 

state’s lead coastal management agency by Section 380.22, Florida Statutes (F.S.), to 

implement and enforce the Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1451, et seq.). The 

Department has reviewed the Draft Plan/EIS under the provisions of 15 C.F.R. § 930 

Subpart C, and hereby notifies the National Park Service (NPS) that the Draft Plan/EIS 

is inconsistent with the Department’s statutory authorities under Chapters 253, 259 and 

373, F.S. The bases for the Department’s objections are set forth below, following a 

summary of comments received from other state and regional agencies. The comment 

letters from those agencies are attached and incorporated in this letter by reference. 

SUMMARY OF STATE AGENCY COMMENTS

The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ Division of Forestry

notes that designation of large areas of wilderness in the Big Cypress National Preserve 

could significantly increase the risk of severe, damaging wildfires due to the accumulation of fuels. Natural wildfires will not be adequate to control fuels in the wilderness 

areas, because the historic natural conditions by which fires started and propagated no 
Appendixes

510

Mr. Pedro Ramos 

September 29, 2009 

Page 2 of 9 

longer exist, and the current landscape is fragmented by transportation corridors and 

developed areas. The inability to fight wildfires through the use of mechanized 

equipment in designated Wilderness areas will increase the risk that wildfires will 

contribute significant amounts of smoke on transportation corridors and in urban and 

rural areas, causing road closures and potential for damage to adjacent properties. The 

designation of any area as Wilderness must allow prescribed fire management that 

approximates historical fire regimes. The fire management program should reduce and 

maintain fuel loads, and allow the suppression of wildfires that threaten the public and 

surrounding resources through the use of mechanized equipment, if necessary. Such a 

prescribed fire program would enhance wilderness values and prevent their 

degradation from destructive wildfires. 

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) advises that it cannot 

support the Preferred Alternative, but finds that Alternative B has many of the elements 

its staff could strongly support if modified as recommended in the attached comment 

letter. Staff adamantly opposes designation of Wilderness areas in the Addition, as well 

as the establishment of Primitive Backcountry management zones. 

FWC staff states that the Congressional acts establishing the Big Cypress National 

Preserve and Addition distinguished and set apart these public lands from typical 

national parks and recognized the importance of local cultural values and traditional 

recreational uses including fishing, hunting, trapping and associated vehicular access. 

The acts sought to integrate these values and uses in a unique management partnership 

between the federal government and the State of Florida. FWC staff believes the 

proposed Wilderness and Primitive Backcountry designations would result in 

restrictions on public access that would be inconsistent with these Congressional acts. 

Moreover, FWC staff believes the Wilderness designation would not be appropriate in 

these locations due to existing trails, historic patterns of use, and the difficulty in 

managing natural resources and public access. 

The FWC recommends that the Wilderness designation be eliminated and the Primitive 

Backcountry management zones be changed to Backcountry Recreation management 

zones. FWC also recommends that the NPS utilize the existing roads and trails to 

provide a more comprehensive trail system for pedestrian access and other multiple 

uses. The FWC supports Alternative B’s approach for issuing ORV permits for public 

access in Addition lands, as opposed to the Preferred Alternative’s phased-in approach. 

In addition, FWC requests that the Record of Decision recognize FWC as an equal 

partner in the decision-making process for management of the Off-Road Vehicle (ORV) 

trail system. 
511

Appendix C: Consultation Letters

Mr. Pedro Ramos 

September 29, 2009 

Page 3 of 9 

The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) recommends that the draft 

management plan be strengthened by a stronger focus on protection of the Addition’s 

less-disturbed areas and restoration of surface hydrology. The agency indicates support 

for an alternative that designates the area south of Interstate-75 as Wilderness, with an 

appropriate buffer along the interstate highway and which includes specific authority to 

conduct fire management and invasive plant management utilizing mechanized 

equipment, if necessary. DCA recommends that the primary trail system south of I-75 be 

limited to trails that avoid key habitats and wetlands and minimize fragmentation of 

habitat. The agency also recommends that the trails south of I-75 be closed to recreational 

ORV use and thoroughly evaluated to ensure normal hydrologic flow. 

The DCA notes that the Draft Plan/EIS did not contain sufficient information to confirm 

that ORV trails will be managed in a manner that does not impair Preserve resources. 

The agency therefore strongly recommends that a hydrologic study of the Addition be 

conducted to evaluate sheetflow impacts caused by the use of ORV trails. DCA also 

recommends adding enforcement measures to the plan for non-compliance with the 

Preserve’s regulations on ORV use. It also urges completion of the panther behavior 

studies recommended in the 2000 and 2007 Biological Opinions issued by the U. S. Fish 

& Wildlife Service for the Preserve’s ORV management plan. The agency encourages 

an appropriate evaluation of the discharge of approximately 60 million gallons of water 

from the Preserve via the S. R. 29 Canal into Chokoloskee Bay. 

The DCA states that it will conditionally concur with the NPS' federal consistency 

determination if Wilderness designations in the Addition contain specific language 

authorizing the Park Superintendent to work with other federal, state and local agencies 

to prevent the spread of exotic plants, to use prescribed fire as a management tool for 

restoring and maintaining native plant communities, and to allow suppression and 

containment of wildfires that threaten adjacent natural or built areas by any means 

deemed appropriate, including mechanized equipment. Further, the final Management 

Plan must evaluate potential effects that ORV trail usage, maintenance and modifications 

will have on restoration benefits and surface hydrology associated with Comprehensive 

Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) projects within and adjoining the Addition. 

South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) staff emphasizes the importance 

of hydrology and proper management of the water resources within, abutting and 

adjacent to the Addition lands in all decisions related to implementation of the General 

Management Plan. Staff recommends that the comments and concerns provided 

previously by the DEP, SFWMD, Miccosukee Tribe of Indians and Seminole Tribe of 

Florida be included and addressed in the adopted General Management Plan and final 

EIS. The SFWMD also suggests a number of updates and edits to the document 

regarding the Commercial Services Plan, potential limits of the manatee habitat/use 

areas, and amended Biological Opinion. The document should address the effects of 
Appendixes

512

Mr. Pedro Ramos 

September 29, 2009 

Page 4 of 9 

management plan implementation on the S.R. 29 (Barron River) Borrow Canal, 

Everglades City well field, and adjacent CERP projects. 

Based on the information provided, the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council 

(SWFRPC) finds the Draft Plan/EIS “Regionally Significant and Inconsistent”1 with its 

Strategic Regional Policy Plan due to its magnitude and impacts on regional resources. 

Staff states that the alternatives analyses are incorrect in that they overestimate the 

public benefits and underestimate the adverse environmental impacts of the Preferred 

Alternative, and underestimate the benefits of Alternative F to the natural environment. 

In its comment letter, the SWFRPC provides a summary of the alternatives, identifying 

both beneficial and adverse effects. Staff finds that Alternative F best supports the 

regional Goals, Strategies, and Actions of the Strategic Regional Policy Plan, while 

providing more Wilderness area with fewer long-term adverse impacts to the region's 

hydrology, plants and wildlife. The SWFRPC finds that the Preferred Alternative − as 

currently presented − will not provide acceptable benefit levels to the region and will 

not enhance the health, safety and welfare of the region’s population and habitats. The 

Preferred Alternative is, therefore, inconsistent with several Goals, Strategies, and 

Actions of the Strategic Regional Policy Plan’s Natural Resources Element. 

The Florida Department of State (DOS) has determined that the Draft Plan/EIS 

adequately addresses cultural and historical resources and concurs with the NPS’s 

choice of the Preferred Alternative, but also agrees with the NPS’s finding that 

implementation of the Preferred Alternative could adversely impact cultural resources. 

The DOS therefore concurs with the NPS that cultural resource (archaeological and 

other) surveys/investigations must be conducted in advance of ground-disturbing or 

other development activities that could adversely affect cultural and historical 

resources. The resulting surveys/investigations should be forwarded to the DOS for 

review and comment. 

OBJECTIONS, COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Department commends the NPS for its thorough evaluation of Addition lands and 

attempt to balance resource protection with a variety of public uses, including off-road 

vehicles (ORV). Even so, however, the Draft Plan/EIS failed to adequately address the 

following issues with regard to the Addition lands: 

1. Control of invasive exotic species; 

2. Fire ecology (including suppression, maintenance and control); and 

3. Design of ORV trails to avoid hydrologic impacts. 

 

1

 Use of the term “inconsistent” in this paragraph is an artifact of the Strategic Regional Policy Plan and 

not indicative of a CZMA consistency determination. The SWFRPC is not a state agency authorized to 

submit a CZMA consistency determination under the Florida Coastal Management Program. 
513

Appendix C: Consultation Letters

Mr. Pedro Ramos 

September 29, 2009 

Page 5 of 9 

Exotic Species and Fire Ecology

The Draft Plan/EIS contemplates several alternatives that would involve designation of 

thousands of acres as Wilderness areas. The Department is concerned that current 

management practices in federal wilderness areas prohibit the use of mechanized fire 

suppression and invasive species control and maintenance. Because the fire-dependent 

ecosystems of this area cross several state-owned conservation lands and invasive 

species do not respect artificial boundaries, the prohibition on mechanized management 

would threaten the natural resources of areas owned by the Board of Trustees of the 

Internal Improvement Trust Fund (BOT), as well as those lands in the immediate 

vicinity targeted for acquisition under the Florida Forever Program (see attached map). 

Section 380.055, F.S., contemplates eventual transfer of all of the state-owned lands in 

the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition to the federal government. The transfer has 

not been completed, and some of the lands are still titled to the BOT. In addition, most 

of the instruments conveying lands from the BOT to the federal government contain the 

following reverter clause: 

In the event the United States of America ceases to use the land for purposes of 

conservation and protection of the natural resources and scenic beauty of the Big 

Cypress Areas, as set forth in the Big Cypress Conservation Act of 1973 and 

Public Law 93-440 approved October 11, 1974, title to said land shall automatically revert to the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund. 

The BOT therefore retains authority over lands that are not yet transferred to the federal 

government, as well as a possible reverter in the lands previously conveyed. While the 

Draft Plan/EIS does encompass the purposes of conservation and resource protection, 

some aspects of the proposed management plan could result in harm to the natural 

resources contained in these lands. 

Section 253.034(1), F.S., states that “[l]ands acquired pursuant to chapter 259 shall be 

managed to serve the public interest by protecting and conserving land, air, water, and 

the state’s natural resources. [The] lands shall be managed . . . to ensure the survival of 

plant and animal species and the conservation of finite and renewable natural resources.” 

Section 253.034(5)(b), F.S., provides that management goals must include measurable 

objectives for habitat restoration and improvement, hydrological preservation and 

restoration, sustainable forest management, and imperiled species habitat maintenance, 

enhancement and restoration, all of which require appropriate prescribed fire as a 

management tool. Finally, Section 259.032(10)(e), F.S., requires management plans to 

contain key management activities necessary to achieve “restoring habitat, protecting 

threatened and endangered species, controlling the spread of nonnative plants and 

animals, performing prescribed fire activities, and other appropriate resource management.” Inadequate management activities on federal lands that lie adjacent to stateowned lands could result in harm to resources on state conservation lands and impact 

state land managers’ ability to implement meaningful control tools. 
Appendixes

514

Mr. Pedro Ramos 

September 29, 2009 

Page 6 of 9 

Recommendation/Condition: 

Our review of the 1964 Wilderness Act and the Draft Plan/EIS has found that fire 

suppression and exotic species control are allowed in areas designated as Wilderness, 

except that mechanized control is prohibited in those designated areas. To ensure that 

adjacent natural and built areas are adequately protected from unconfined fires and the 

spread of exotics, any Wilderness designations in the Addition approved by Congress 

should contain specific language that allows the Park Superintendent of the Big Cypress 

National Preserve to work with other federal, state and local agencies to prevent the 

spread of exotic plants into and out of the Addition and to use prescribed fire as a 

management tool for restoring and maintaining native plant communities. In addition, 

any Wilderness designation should allow the Park Superintendent to suppress and 

contain fires that threaten adjacent natural or built areas by any means deemed 

appropriate − including mechanized equipment − in coordination with other federal, 

state and local agencies. 

Hydrologic Impacts of ORV Trails

In both Alternative B and the Preferred Alternative, the NPS proposes the designation 

of up to 140 miles of primary ORV trails in the Addition lands. The Department and 

other state agencies have requested reports on current ORV use in the Preserve, but no 

reports or other data have been provided. 

The Department concurs with the proposal for 140 miles of ORV trails in the Addition, 

but recommends that a three-year deadline be established for the issuance of the 700 

permits described in the Draft Plan/EIS. 

An analysis of ORV use under the Preferred Alternative states that improvements to 

existing trails and development of new ORV trails will create barriers to surface water 

flows due to raised trail treads, trail heads and general ORV use. Culverts and other 

best management practices must be used to avoid or reduce hydrologic impacts. The 

development or improvement of trails and the construction and operation of water 

control structures must obtain review and approval under Chapters 373 and 403, F.S. 

Recommendation/Condition

Ongoing south Florida ecosystem restoration projects include several proposals for 

the restoration of surface water flows in the region, including the Big Cypress/L-28 

Interceptor Modifications and the Seminole Tribe Big Cypress Water Conservation Plan, 

designed to reestablish sheet flow and restore the more natural water flows from the Big 

Cypress Reservation and into the Big Cypress National Preserve. The final Plan/EIS 

must evaluate the potential effects that ORV trail development will have on restoration 
515

Appendix C: Consultation Letters

Mr. Pedro Ramos 

September 29, 2009 

Page 7 of 9 

benefits expected from these projects. The selected plan should detail the proposed 

activities to facilitate the Department’s determination of anticipated adverse impacts to 

south Florida ecosystem restoration projects identified under 373.470, F.S., and whether 

the proposed activities comply with the requirements of Chapters 373 and 403, F.S. 

In addition to the foregoing, the Department has several other concerns that should be 

addressed in the final plan and prior to the commencement of any activity that would 

require the issuance or renewal of a state license under Chapters 373 and 403, F.S. Final 

agency action on an application (i.e., issuance or renewal of a license) for any activity 

regulated by the Department shall constitute the state’s final determination on whether 

an activity is consistent with the federally approved Florida Coastal Management Program. See Sections 373.428 and 380.23, F.S. The Department has the following 

additional concerns: 

A. Paragraph 2 of the Department’s letter dated August 27, 2001, identified several 

important issues, including the designation of waters and wetlands as “special 

waters” − a category of Outstanding Florida Waters that prohibits dredge-andfill activities not clearly in the public interest. Public access features that involve 

adverse impacts to wetlands should be avoided. A copy of the 2001 letter is 

available upon request. 

B. The Florida Scenic Trail traverses the northeast portion of the Addition land and 

the portion of the Preserve that begins south of I-75. The maps for Alternative B 

and the Preferred Alternative depict some overlap between ORV and other trails. 

Potential conflicts should be evaluated and explained in the final Plan/EIS . 

C. Typically, in draft federal actions related to projects or plans of this importance, 

the NPS consults with the FWC and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding 

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The Department was unable to find in 

Appendix C any letters or comments from either agency addressing compliance 

with the Endangered Species Act. 

Proposed Alternative

While the Department, DCA and FWC stand ready to defend their respective objections 

and comments herein, the agencies have reached general consensus on the acceptability 

of the following modifications: 

The designation of 85,000 acres as Wilderness, where ORV use is prohibited, denies 

reasonable public access to areas open to hunting and other recreational activities. 

To more closely meet the needs of various user groups, the agencies recommend 

that the area north of I-75 and the western strip of Addition lands (along S.R. 29) 

proposed for Wilderness designation under the Preferred Alternative be removed 
Appendixes

516

Mr. Pedro Ramos 

September 29, 2009 

Page 8 of 9 

from that proposed designation and placed in a Backcountry Recreation management zone. The dominant goals of that management zone are the preservation of 

natural and cultural resources, restoration of degraded resources, and continuation 

of natural processes, while allowing compatible recreational uses supported by 

roads and trails. 

In addition, the agencies propose that a half-mile buffer designated Backcountry 

Recreation be added to the south side of I-75 to accommodate the maintenance of 

current and future roadway infrastructure, and that a half-mile buffer – also 

designated Backcountry Recreation – be added to each side of the L-28 Interceptor 

Canal south of I-75 to the boundary of the Addition to accommodate current and 

future canal access, maintenance and restoration. 

Conditional Concurrence

In accordance with 15 C.F.R. § 930.4, the Draft Plan/EIS will be consistent with the 

enforceable policies of the Florida Coastal Management Program and the Department 

will concur with the NPS’ determination that the Draft Plan/EIS is consistent with the 

previously cited provisions of state law (in Chapters 253, 259 and 373, F.S.), if and only 

if the following conditions are satisfied: 

I. Any Wilderness designation in the Addition must include specific language that 

directs the Park Superintendent of Big Cypress National Preserve to work with 

other federal, state and local agencies to eradicate exotic plants and animals and 

prevent their spread into and out of the Addition; to use prescribed fire as a 

management tool for restoring and maintaining native plant communities; and to 

conduct necessary law enforcement activities. Any Wilderness designation must 

also include language directing the Park Superintendent to use the most effective 

and timely methods for conducting these critical management activities, including the use of mechanized equipment. In addition, any Wilderness designation 

must allow the Park Superintendent and cooperating agencies to suppress and 

contain fires that threaten adjacent natural or built areas using the most effective 

and timely methods, including the use of mechanized equipment. 

II. The final Plan/EIS must evaluate the potential effects that recreational development activities, including ORV trail modifications, will have on the surface 

hydrology of the area and the anticipated benefits of the South Florida ecosystem 

restoration projects identified in § 373.470, F.S. The selected alternative must 

provide details regarding proposed trail development and improvement 

activities, so the Department can determine whether the activities will adversely 

impact South Florida ecosystem restoration projects and whether the activities 

may be eligible for licensing under Chapters 373 and 403, F.S. The Department’s 

evaluation of the trail development or improvement activities during its review 
517

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

518

TO: Lauren Milligan 

FROM: Greg Knecht 

DATE: September 18, 2009 

SUBJECT: National Park Service – Big Cypress National Preserve Addition – 

Draft General Management Plan/Wilderness Study/Off-Road 

Vehicle Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement – 

Collier County, Florida SAI # FL09-4851 

Background 

The National Park Service has prepared a draft General Management Plan, 

Wilderness Study, Off-Road Vehicle (ORV) Management Plan and 

Environmental Impact Statement, which will be the basis for managing the 

Addition land over the next 15 to 20 years. The draft plan includes detailed 

maps and narrative text that describe the four alternatives, including: 

• The no-action alternative, which would result in a continuation of the 

existing management in the Addition. The Addition would remain closed 

to public recreational motorized use and motorized hunting. No 

wilderness would be proposed for designation. 

• Alternative B, which would enable visitor participation in a wide variety 

of outdoor recreational experiences. Approximately 48,919 acres of land 

would be proposed for wilderness designation, and up to 140 miles of 

sustainable ORV trails would be designated and phased in as part of the 

conceptual primary ORV trail network. Secondary ORV trails, as defined 

in the plan, could be designated in any of the backcountry recreation 

areas, comprising approximately 94,817 acres, or 65 percent, of the 

Addition. 

• The preferred alternative, which would provide diverse frontcountry and 

backcountry recreational opportunities, enhance day use and interpretive 

opportunities along road corridors, and enhance recreational 

opportunities with new facilities and services. Approximately 85,862 acres 

of land would be proposed for wilderness designation, and up to 140 

miles of sustainable ORV trails would be designated and phased in as part 

of the conceptual primary ORV trail network. Secondary ORV trails, as 

Memorandum

Florida Department of

Environmental Protection
519

Appendix C: Consultation Letters

Ms. Lauren Milligan 

September 18, 2009 

Page 2 

defined in the plan, could be designated only in the ORV trail corridors 

and other backcountry recreation areas, comprising approximately 52,431 

acres, or 36 percent, of the Addition. 

• Alternative F, which would emphasize resource preservation, 

restoration and research while providing recreational opportunities with 

limited facilities and support. This alternative would maximize the 

amount of land proposed for wilderness designation, about 111,601 acres, 

or 76 percent of the Addition. No ORV use would be available under this 

alternative. 

Recommendation 

We commend the Park Service for its thorough evaluation and attempt to 

balance the need for resource protection while allowing for a variety of uses, 

including off-road vehicles. However, we have identified three specific areas 

that require attention by the Service. First, we believe that the preferred 

alternative, which proposes wilderness designation of over 85,000 acres, of which 

off-road vehicle use is precluded, is excessive and removes areas that are open to 

hunting and other recreation activities from reasonable access. 

The Department, in an effort to more closely meet the needs of all the various 

user groups, recommends that the area north of I -75 and the western addition 

lands (adjacent to hwy 29) proposed for wilderness designation under the 

Preferred Alternative be removed and placed in a Back Country Recreation 

Management Zone. The dominant goal of this management zone is the 

preservation of natural and cultural resources, restoration of degraded resources, 

and continuation of natural processes, while still allowing for compatible 

recreational uses supported by roads and trails. 

We concur with the wilderness designation of the land south of I-75 as proposed 

in the Preferred Alternative, but with the recommendation of including a onehalf mile buffer from I-75 in order to accommodate maintenance of current and 

future roadway infrastructure. 

Second, it is our understanding from a review of the 1964 Wilderness Act and the 

Draft General Management Plan for the Addition land that fire suppression and 

exotic species management are allowed in areas designated as wilderness. To 

ensure that adjacent natural and built areas are adequately protected from 

unconfined fires and the spread of exotics, we ask that any proposed wilderness 

designation in the Addition that is approved by Congress contain specific 

language that allows the Superintendent of the Big Cypress National Preserve to 
Appendixes

520

Ms. Lauren Milligan 

September 18, 2009 

Page 3 

work with other federal, state and local agencies to prevent the spread of exotic 

plants into and out of the Addition and to use prescribed fire as a management 

tool for restoring and maintaining native plant communities. Additionally, the 

wilderness designation should allow the Superintendent of the Big Cypress 

National Preserve to suppress fires, by any means deemed appropriate, that 

threaten adjacent natural or built areas in coordination with other federal, state 

and local agencies. 

Third, we concur with the proposal for 140 miles of ORV trails and recommend 

that a three-year deadline be established for the issuance of the 700 permits.. . 

Additionally, as addressed in number 4 below the Department needs to be 

consulted in the design and construction of the proposed ORV trails to ensure 

that any effect to water resources are acceptable under the Department’s 

permitting authority. 

Specific Comments 

In addition to the comments above, we have several specific comments that 

would need to be addressed as part of the selected plan and/or prior to any 

proposed activities that would require the issuance or renewal of a state license 

in accordance with Chapters 373 and 403 Florida Statutes (F.S.). In accordance 

with Subsection 373.428 and 380.23, F.S., final agency action on an application 

(i.e. issuance or renewal of a license) for any activity regulated by the 

Department, shall constitute the State’s final determination as to whether an 

activity is consistent with the federally approved Florida Coastal Zone 

Management Program. 

1. Paragraph 2 of the Department’s August 27, 2001 letter identifies several 

important issues, including the designation of waters and wetlands as “special 

waters,” a category of Outstanding Florida Waters that prohibits dredge and fill 

activities not clearly in the public interest. Access features that involve adverse 

impacts to wetlands should be avoided. 

2. The Florida Scenic Trail traverses the Northeast portion of the Addition 

land and the Preserve beginning south of I-75. A review of the map of 

Alternative B and the Preferred Alternative appears to have overlap with ORV 

and other trails. Potential conflicts should be evaluated and explained in the 

final document. 

3. ORV use is contemplated in Alternative B and the Preferred Alternative. 

Our previous comment letter requested a report on the monitoring results of 
521

Appendix C: Consultation Letters

Ms. Lauren Milligan 

September 18, 2009 

Page 4 

current ORV use in the Preserve and potential future use to be analyzed to 

determine possible effects on the Addition. 

4. An analysis of ORV use under the Preferred Alternative states that 

development, including improvements to existing trails and up to 140 miles of 

ORV trails will create barriers to surface water flow due to raised trail treads and 

ORV use. Culverts and other best management practices are to be used to reduce 

these impacts, but long-term, moderate to severe localized impacts are expected 

to occur. Information concerning the construction of trails and construction and 

operation of water control structures that will have or have the potential to 

adversely affect water resources of the state shall require appropriate review and 

approval under Chapter 373 and/or 403 F.S. 

5. Ongoing south Florida ecosystem restoration projects include several 

proposals for restoration of surface water flows in the region, including the Big 

Cypress/L-28 Interceptor Modifications and the Seminole Tribe Big Cypress 

Water Conservation Plan that are designed to reestablish sheet flow and restore 

the more natural water flows from the Big Cypress Reservation and into the Big 

Cypress National Preserve. The document should evaluate the potential affects 

that the ORV trail development will have on the restoration benefits expected 

from these projects. Proposed activities should be further detailed as part of any 

selected plan in order to facilitate the Department’s determination as to whether 

any adverse affects to south Florida ecosystem restoration projects identified 

under 373.470 F.S. are anticipated and whether the proposed activities are 

licensable under Chapter 373 and 403, F.S. 

6. Typically, in draft federal actions related to projects or plans of this 

importance, there is consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under 

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and related consultation with the 

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. We did not find any letters 

from either agency addressing compliance with the Act in Appendix C. 
Appendixes

522
523

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

524
525

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

526
527

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

528
529

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

530
531

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

532
533

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

534
535

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

536
537

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

538
539

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

540
541

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

542
543

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

544
545

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

546
547

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

548
549

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

550
551

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

552
553

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

554
555

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

556
557

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

558
559

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

560
561

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

562
563

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

564
565

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
Appendixes

566
567

Appendix C: Consultation Letters
568 

APPENDIX D: FLOODPLAINS STATEMENT OF FINDINGS 
Appendix D: Floodplains Statement of Findings 

569 

INTRODUCTION

In accordance with Executive Order 11988, “Floodplain Management” and National Park 

Service (NPS) guidelines for implementing the order, the National Park Service has reviewed 

the flood hazards in the Big Cypress National Preserve — Addition (Addition) and has 

prepared this “Statement of Findings” (SOF). 

In examining the Addition lands, the structures at the following two sites were identified as 

being within a regulatory 100-year floodplain: 

1) Carnestown site (southeast corner of S.R. 29 and U.S. 41/Tamiami Trail in 

Carnestown, FL)

Two structures: Collier County Sheriff District 7 substation and the Everglades 

Chamber of Commerce information center (known as “Everglades Welcome Center”) 

2) Copeland site (east side S.R. 29 in Copeland, FL)

One structure: NPS fire operations center 

There are no other occupied structures within a regulatory floodplain at these sites that 

warrant inclusion in this flood hazard assessment. The 91-meter communication tower owned 

by Crown Castle adjacent to the other two structures at the Carnestown site is an example of a 

site facility that is not included in the hazard assessment. 

This “Statement of Findings” focuses on evaluating the flood hazards for the three 

aforementioned structures in the 100-year floodplain. As a part of the effort to develop a 

general management plan (GMP) for the Addition, the “Statement of Findings” describes the 

flood hazard, alternatives, and possible mitigation measures for the continued use of this area. 

Additional detail regarding the Addition lands and resources, future actions to be taken in the 

area, and environmental impacts may be found in the Draft General Management Plan / 

Wilderness Study / Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement 

(GMP/EIS). 

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITES AND USES 

Carnestown Site

The Everglades Area Chamber of Commerce, the Collier County Sheriff’s Office, and Crown 

Castle International, Inc. lease land owned by the National Park Service in the southeast 

quadrant of the intersection of S.R. 29 and U.S. 41. The federal acquisition of this land was 

prompted by the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-301). 

The National Park Service began administering these Addition lands in 1996. 

Currently, there are two occupied, one-story, structures on the site: the Everglades Chamber 

of Commerce visitor information center (the first structure on the site in 1966) and the Collier 
APPENDIXES

570 

County sheriff’s substation. These structures existed on this site prior to National Park Service 

management. The communication tower with a repeater building and an aboveground fuel 

tank for sheriff operations are nearby on the site. Much of the remaining land at this site has 

been developed with impervious paved surfaces for ingress and egress and parking, and some 

is mowed lawn groundcover. Both of the occupied structures, which are about 7 to 8 feet 

above mean sea level, are immediately west of the Barron River Canal. The surrounding plant 

communities beyond the manicured landscape portions of the site (and primarily south of the 

site and west of S.R. 29) consist mainly of mangrove forest. The site sits at the upper reach of 

a mangrove estuary off Chokoloskee Bay. 

Although the onsite facilities are leased, managed, and operated by external entities, the land 

is owned by the federal government and is part of the planning area covered in the General 

Management Plan for the Addition. All of these facilities provide support services to the 

Preserve and its visitors, and they operate seven days per week. For example, the Everglades 

Chamber of Commerce facility provides orientation, visitor information, souvenirs, limited 

supplies, and a restroom facility. The District 7 sheriff substation (and the adjacent tower) 

provide emergency and communication services for the Preserve and its visitors. 

Copeland Site

The National Park Service uses a former single-family residence at this site (on the east side 

of both S.R. 29 and the Barron River Canal) as a fire operations center. This structure was on 

the site prior to NPS management of this land, which began in 1996. The site development 

consists of a two-story house, an old swimming pool basin, a pump house, and a borrow pit. 

Material excavated from the borrow pit appears to have been used to raise the building pad 

prior to house construction. Although the house sits slightly higher than the elevation of the 

surrounding terrain, the entire structure is within the 100-year floodplain. 

The remaining developed areas around the house, pump house, and pool consist of mowed 

lawn and a pervious driveway and parking area. The driveway crosses the Barron River 

Canal, connecting the site to S.R. 29. Beyond the developed area of the site, the generally flat 

terrain is vegetated with cleared prairie, scrub-shrub, seasonal wetlands, and hardwood 

hammock. Another private residence exists approximately 100 yards north of the site, and an 

NPS Preserve employee housing unit exists about 200 yards to the south. The NPS fire 

operations center at the Copeland site accommodates year-round use, involving unit fire 

management employees and prescribed fire employees. 

GENERAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THE NATURE OF FLOODING AND 

FLOODPLAIN PROCESSES IN THE AREA 

Carnestown Site

The flooding that occurs in the vicinity of the Carnestown site is mainly characterized and 

driven by rising waters in the adjacent mangrove estuaries and canals during wet seasons, 

storms, or hurricanes. The rising waters in the canals and mangrove estuaries can result from 
Appendix D: Floodplains Statement of Findings 

571 

long durations of heavy precipitation and from storm surges from the Gulf of Mexico 

associated with hurricanes and tropical storms. Flooding at the site and its vicinity would 

occur when the rising water and/or storm surge overtops the banks of canals and natural 

waterways around the site. During the south Florida wet season, some ponding also occurs in 

low-lying areas and swales around the site due to the flat terrain and drainage constraints of 

the site. The only documented flooding of this site occurred after Hurricane Donna in 1960 

when canal banks were overtopped in vicinity of the site. At that time, there were no 

structures on the site. Since 1960 (and since site development) the site has only flooded once 

— during Hurricane Andrew in 1992. However, the two structures on this site did not flood at 

that time. In fact, Everglades City (located closer to the Gulf to the south) staged its 

emergency management system equipment at this site to avoid higher water levels in the city. 

The National Park Service has not identified any records or physical indications that any other 

flooding has occurred at this site in the past. 

Copeland Site

The flooding that occurs in the vicinity of the Copeland site is primarily characterized by 

areas of seasonal wetlands and other low-lying areas becoming inundated during the south 

Florida wet season. Ponding and soil saturation in these nearby wetland areas is typically 

only seasonal in nature. In a very severe flood, it is possible for flood water to overtop the 

banks of the Barron River Canal that parallels S.R. 29 along the west side of this site. 

However, the NPS has no records or physical proof that flooding has occurred at the structure 

site, even during notable storms or hurricanes. This may be because of local hydrology of the 

site and the fact that the structure sits on a raised foundation. 

JUSTIFICATION FOR USE OF THE FLOODPLAIN

Description of Preferred Alternative and Why Facilities Would Be Retained in the 

Floodplain 

Under the preferred alternative in the general management plan, the fire operations center at 

Copeland, and the Sheriff’s substation and Everglades Chamber of Commerce visitor center at 

Carnestown would be retained in their existing locations. The reasoning behind retaining 

these three structures in their existing locations in the 100-year floodplain is based on the 

following reasons: 

 The structures at both sites were stable and usable when the National Park Service 

took over management and ownership of these sites/land. 

 The National Park Service has no records of past structural flooding at either of these 

sites. 

 The Chamber of Commerce and Sheriff’s Office facilities at the Carnestown site were 

fully operational before and after the NPS took over management of this land. 

 The visitor services and emergency services provided at this site by the Everglades 

Chamber of Commerce visitor center and the Collier County Sheriff’s Office 
APPENDIXES

572 

substation continue to support the Preserve and its visitors and serve as an effective 

complement to NPS operations and services. 

 The structure (house) at the Copeland site has become fully operational and has been 

an effective location for the NPS fire operations center. 

 Relocating the facilities and services at both sites may be infeasible and very costly, 

from both a financial cost perspective and from a level/quality of service perspective. 

 Both of the sites are already on disturbed ground. Moving the facilities would likely 

result in adverse impacts and the loss of other natural resource values in the area. 

 The Carnestown site is served by sewer and water from the Everglades City utility 

system, which avoids the need for individual septic and well systems and the resource 

impacts they would bring. 

 Both sites have direct access to major highways in the area that provide quick 

evacuation routes to higher, inland areas (S.R. 29 to the north and U.S. 41 and 

Interstate 75 to the east and west). 

DESCRIPTION OF SITE-SPECIFIC FLOOD RISK

Carnestown Site

The potential for storm surges associated with hurricanes and tropical storms is the primary 

flood risk for the structures at the Carnestown site. Strong storm surges from the southwest 

have the potential to raise water levels in the canals and mangrove estuary branches near the 

site. High seasonal rainfall could also contribute to the rising waters in the adjacent canals and 

estuary. If the canal banks are overtopped, the structures at the site might be flooded from 

several directions because canals more or less surround the area around the intersection of 

S.R. 29 and U.S. 41. However, although some ponding occurs in low-lying areas around the 

site during the wet season and some probable overtopped canal banks near the site may have 

occurred during storms in 1960 and in the 1990s, the National Park Service has not identified 

any records or physical indications that structural flooding has occurred at this site in the past. 

The timing and duration of potential flooding at the Carnestown site structures may vary 

depending on the source of flooding (i.e., storm surge or high seasonal rainfall). At the 

Carnestown site, flooding caused by storm surges is the most likely scenario, and flooding 

could occur over a short period of time if a hurricane or tropical storm nears the area at the 

right trajectory. Since this type of flooding would result from rising water in the Barron River 

Canal, other adjacent canals, and the nearby estuary, the flooding could occur in a matter of 

hours. Thus, the available time for advanced warning and evacuation would be somewhat 

limited because of the rapid approach of storm surges. However, with effective hurricane 

forecasting and early evacuation orders, structure occupants should be provided with enough 

advanced notice to avoid the flood risk (many hours to several days). Typically, Collier 

County evacuation orders are issued for areas south of U.S. 41 in response to storm surge 

threats. 
Appendix D: Floodplains Statement of Findings 

573 

If the flooding is a result of high seasonal rainfall, it could take weeks or perhaps months to 

occur. This type of flooding at the Carnestown site would allow a substantial amount of time 

for advanced warning to structure occupants (days or weeks). The flood duration in this case 

would also have a long duration because of fully saturated soils, flat terrain, and slow rate of 

recession. 

Because of the very subtle variations of landscape elevation in this area, there are very few 

issues related to erosion, sediment deposition, and channel changes that would result from 

flooding. Notable hydrologic changes from geomorphic and erosion processes in this area are 

primarily only measureable at the scale of geologic time. There could be some sediment and 

debris deposition at this site as a result of storm surge, but the typical seasonal inundation at 

the Carnestown site would lack the energy to produce detectable erosion or channelization. 

Copeland Site

Only during periods of extreme high water could the elevated building foundation and 

structure be flooded. Floodwater in an extreme event could originate from rising water in 

surrounding lowlands from high seasonal rainfall or from overtopped banks in the adjacent 

Barron River Canal from extreme storm surges from the southwest. If rising water from very 

high seasonal rainfall occurs, the flow direction at the Copeland site would generally be 

towards the south-southwest and into the adjacent canal. If the flooding results from 

overtopped banks, the direction may be reversed. However, although ponding in nearby 

wetlands and low areas during the wet season is not uncommon, the National Park Service has 

identified no records or physical indication that the structure has been flooded in the past. 

The timing and duration of potential flooding at the Copeland site structure would vary 

depending on the source/type of flooding. If the flooding is a result of high seasonal rainfall, it 

could take weeks or perhaps months to occur. This type of flooding at the Copeland site 

would allow a substantial amount of time for advanced warning to structure occupants (days 

or weeks). The flood duration in this case would also have a long duration due to fully 

saturated soils, flat terrain, and slow rate of recession. 

If the flooding at the Copeland site structure results from a strong hurricane or tropical storm, 

the timing would be shortened considerably. Because this type of flooding would result from 

a storm surge and rising water in the Barron River Canal, the flooding could occur in a matter 

of hours. Thus, the available time for advanced warning and evacuation would be more 

limited because of the rapid approach of storm surges. However, forecasted hurricane 

warnings and early evacuation notices/orders should provide structure occupants with flood 

awareness hours to days in advance of the risk. 

Because of the very subtle variations of landscape elevation in this area, there are very few 

issues related to erosion, sediment deposition, and channel changes that would result from 

flooding. Notable hydrologic changes from geomorphic and erosion processes in this area are 

primarily only measureable at the scale of geologic time. There could be some sediment and 

debris deposition at this site as a result of storm surge, but the typical seasonal inundation at 

the Copeland site would lack the energy to produce detectable erosion or channelization. 
APPENDIXES

574 

FLOOD MITIGATION MEASURES

The highest level of flood mitigation for both the Carnestown site and the Copeland site 

would be to relocate the facilities and/or services out of the floodplain. This option is not 

currently feasible and has several costs associated with it. Thus, this option has not been 

chosen by the National Park Service. If or when the structures reach their usable lifespan, or if 

a future flood results in severe damage, then the National Park Service should assess 

possibilities for relocating the facilities. 

The continued use of the Carnestown and Copeland sites for the various facilities and services 

would necessitate the development (and future implementation) of evacuation plans for both 

sites. Given the proximity of these sites to flooding risks, the early, prompt, and safe 

evacuation of people from the sites is the primary flood mitigation measure available to the 

National Park Service. This plan would include strategies that ensure proper storm 

monitoring, emergency communication methods, effective evacuation routes, and timely 

emergency evacuation notification for staff and visitors at both sites. 

Because both sites are located at or near the intersection of two major highways in the area 

(S.R. 29 and U.S. 41), multiple evacuation routes are available to staff or visitors at these 

sites. Depending on storm trajectory or flooding dynamics, evacuees could seek higher 

ground by driving north along S.R. 29, with the option of heading east or west on Interstate 

75. Evacuees could also exit the area to the east or west via U.S. 41. The most ideal and safest 

evacuation route would be determined by local emergency management system authorities 

during the time of the storm. 

The plan would be developed in concert with the protocol and strategy of the existing Collier 

County emergency management system and the National Weather Service. This Collier 

County emergency management system is already well developed and has proven to be very 

successful at providing people in the area with advanced warning of potential floods. During 

past floods, this emergency management system has given warning well in advance of storm 

activity, leaving ample time for evacuation. Also, since the Collier County Sheriff’s Office 

substation is at the Carnestown site, the collaboration and communication between the 

National Park Service and the Collier County emergency management system should be 

rather seamless and efficient. This would also benefit the Copeland site, since the Collier 

County Sheriff’s Office substation at Carnestown is only 3 miles south of the Copeland site. 

Once the plan is developed, all Preserve staff, Everglades Chamber of Commerce staff, and 

Collier County Sheriff’s Office staff would be informed of the plan’s details and their 

respective implementation responsibilities. Staff at all facilities would also be informed on 

how to appropriately disseminate evacuation information to visitors who may be at any of the 

facilities when a flood occurs. 
Appendix D: Floodplains Statement of Findings 

575 

SUMMARY

The National Park Service has determined that there is no practicable alternative to 

maintaining the use of the fire operations center at the Copeland site and continuing to allow 

the use of the structures at the Carnestown site for Everglades Chamber of Commerce and 

Collier County Sheriff’s Office services. This determination is primarily based on: (1) the low 

risk and minimal safety concerns related to potential flooding at these sites, and (2) the 

notable costs and impacts that would be incurred by moving and/or constructing these 

facilities in new locations outside the floodplain. 

The primary flood mitigation measure for both sites is to develop an evacuation plan for all 

facilities at these sites and keep all NPS staff, Chamber of Commerce staff, and Sheriff’s 

Office staff informed of the plan. Although the sites are within or near areas subject to 

flooding, there would be ample time to warn staff and visitors using the facilities to evacuate 

the area. If a flood occurs, visitors and staff could evacuate to higher ground via S.R. 29, U.S. 

41, and/or Interstate 75. The location of the Collier County Sheriff’s Office substation on the 

Carnestown site, only 3 miles south of the Copeland site, would benefit the emergency 

communication for both sites and would help ensure early and safe evacuation. 

Sources

Nobles, John, Division Chief, Fire and Aviation, Big Cypress National Preserve, National 

Park Service. 2010. Personal Communication. 

Clark, Ron, Division Chief, Resource Management, Big Cypress National Preserve, National 

Park Service. 2010. Personal Communication. 

Bartalino, Dennis, Facility Manager, Big Cypress National Preserve, National Park Service. 

2010. Personal Communication. 

Sobczak, Bob, Hydrologist, Big Cypress National Preserve, National Park Service. January 

2002. “Hydrology of the Addition Lands — Big Cypress National Preserve” (draft). 
576 

GLOSSARY 

TERMS RELEVANT TO TRAILS 

Primary Trail: An ORV trail that starts from 

a designated access point and is a principal 

ORV route. 

Secondary Trail: A short ORV trail that 

branches off a primary trail and provides 

access to a specific destination. 

TERMS RELEVANT TO WILDERNESS 

Wilderness: Areas protected by provisions 

of the Wilderness Act of 1964. These areas 

are characterized by a lack of human interference in natural processes; generally, there 

are no roads, structures, or installations, and 

the use of motorized equipment is not 

allowed. General references to the term 

wilderness can include the categories of 

eligible, marine, wilderness study, 

designated, potential, proposed, and 

recommended wilderness. Potential 

wilderness may be a subset of any of these 

five categories. 

Eligible Wilderness: Eligible wilderness are 

lands determined by the National Park 

Service to be eligible for inclusion in the 

national wilderness preservation system 

because the lands meet wilderness criteria as 

identified in the Wilderness Act. 

Marine Wilderness: Like wilderness, these 

designated marine wilderness areas are 

characterized by a lack of human interference in natural processes, and there are 

generally no roads, structures, or installations. The use of motorized boating is 

permitted in these areas according to the 

provisions of the Wilderness Act. 

Wilderness Study: A study of areas eligible 

for wilderness designation. The study 

typically evaluates lands and waters against 

the criteria outlined in the Wilderness Act of 

1964. The findings of a wilderness study are 

forwarded to the director of the National 

Park Service, and sometimes are incorporated into a general management plan. 

Designated Wilderness: Designated 

wilderness are federal lands designated by 

Congress as a wilderness area and a 

component of the National Wilderness 

Preservation System. The National Park 

Service is required to manage these lands 

according to the Wilderness Act of 1964. 

Potential Wilderness: Lands that are surrounded by or adjacent to lands proposed 

for wilderness designation but that do not 

themselves qualify for immediate designation due to temporary nonconforming or 

incompatible conditions can be deemed 

“potential wilderness.” If so authorized by 

Congress, these potential wilderness areas 

will become designated wilderness upon the 

secretary’s determination, published in the 

Federal Register, that they have finally met 

the qualifications for designation by the 

cessation or termination of the 

nonconforming use. 

Proposed Wilderness: Proposed wilderness 

is an area that has been studied by the 

National Park Service that has been submitted as a proposal for designation by a 

park or region to the director of the National 

Park Service but has not been approved by 

the Department of the Interior. 

Recommended Wilderness: Recommended wilderness is an area that has been 

studied and proposed by the National Park 

Service, recommended for wilderness 

designation by the secretary to the president, 

and then transmitted by the president to 

Congress. Once approved by the secretary, 

the area can be considered recommended 

wilderness for management purposes. 
577 

SELECTED REFERENCES 

Ackerman, Bruce B. 

1982 "Cougar Predation and Ecological 

Energetics in Southern Utah." M.S. 

thesis, Utah State University, Logan, 

Utah. Copy available at NPS 

headquarters. 

Anderson Economic Group 

2004 Fiscal Stability Analysis for Collier 

County Florida. Accessed September 

2004 at http://www.enaplesflorida. 

com/CollierFiscStability_090804.pdf.

Andrews, K. M. and J. W. Gibbons 

2005 “How Do Highways Influence Snake 

Movement: Behavioral Responses to 

Roads and Vehicles.” Copeia 2005: 

772-782. 

Ashton, R. E., and P. S. Ashton 

1981 Handbook of Reptiles and Amphibians 

of Florida. Windward Publishing, 

Inc.; Miami, Florida.

Babis, W. A. 

1949 “Notes on the Food of the Indigo 

Snake.” Copeia 1949 (2):147. 

Beardsley, G. 

1995 Affidavit of Gary Beardsley to the U.S. 

District Court for the Middle District 

of Florida, Fort Myers Division. The 

Florida Biodiversity Project, et al., 

Plaintiffs, v. Kennedy, et al., 

Defendants, Case No. 95-50-CIVFTM-24D. 

Beckwith, S. L. 

1965 "Management." In The White-tailed 

Deer in Florida, by R. F. Harlow and F. 

K. Jones. Florida Game and Fresh 

Water Fish Commission, Technical 

Bulletin 9. Tallahassee. 

Beissinger, S. R., and J. E. Takekawa 

1983 “Habitat Use and Dispersal by Snail 

Kites in Florida during Drought 

Conditions.” Florida Field 

Naturalist 11:89-106.

Belden, Robert C., William B. Frankenberger, 

and David H. Austin 

1985 "A Simulated Harvest Study of Feral 

Hogs in Florida." Prepared for the 

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish 

Commission, Tallahassee, FL. 

Bengston, J. L. 

1983 “Estimating Food Consumption of 

Free-ranging Manatees in Florida.” J. 

Wildl. Manage. 47:1186-1192.

Bent, A. C. 

1926 “Life Histories of North American 

Marsh birds. U.S. National Museum 

Bulletin, #135; Washington, D.C. 

Bogert, C. M., and R. B. Cowles 

1947 “Results of the Archbold Expeditions. 

No. 58. Moisture Loss in Relation to 

Habitat Selection in some Floridian 

Reptiles.” American Museum 

Novitates 1358:1-55.

Bolt, M. R. 

2006 “The Eastern Indigo Snake 

(Drymarchon couperi): What We 

Know, What We Think, and What 

We Need.” Powerpoint presentation 

for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Vero Beach Field Office. 
SELECTED REFERENCES

578 

Breininger, D. R., M. L. Legare, and R. B. 

Smith 

2004 “Edge Effects and Population Viability 

of Eastern Indigo Snakes in Florida. 

Pgs. 299-311 in H. R. Akcakaya, M. 

Burgman, O. Kindvall, P. SjorgrenGulve, J. Hatfield, and M. McCarthy, 

editors. Species Conservation and 

Management: Case Studies. Oxford 

University Press: New York, New 

York. 

Brown, L. H., and D. Amadon 

1976 Eagles, Hawks, and Falcons of the 

World. McGraw-Hill Book 

Company; New York.

Burch, Jim. 

2003 “Fire Management and Resource 

Management at Big Cypress National 

Preserve.” Published in the proceedings of the 2003 George Wright 

Society Conference, pages 305-309. 

Carr, A. E., Jr. 

1940 “A Contribution to the Herpetology of 

Florida.” University of Florida 

Publications, Biological Science 

Series: Volume III, No. 1.

Clark, W. S., and B. K. Wheeler 

1987 A Field Guide to Hawks of North 

America. Houghton Mifflin 

Company; Boston.

Collier County Comprehensive Planning 

Department 

2008 Collier County, Permanent Populations 

and Projections. Accessed June 2008 at 

http://www.colliergov.net/Index. 

aspx?page=1581. 

Cone, W. C. and J. V. Hall 

1970 “Wood Ibis Found Nesting on 

Okefenokee Refuge.” Chat 35:14.

Cook, F. A. 

1954 “Snakes of Mississippi.” Mississippi 

Game and Fish Commission; Jackson, 

Mississippi.

Davis, J. H. 

1943 “The Natural Features of Southern 

Florida.” Florida Geological Survey 

Bulletin, #25. Tallahassee, FL. 

Diemer, J. E., and D. W. Speake 

1981 “The Status of the Eastern Indigo 

Snake in Georgia.” Pages 52-61 in R. 

Odum and J. Guthrie, eds. Proceedings 

of the Nongame and Endangered 

Wildlife Symposium, Georgia 

Department of Natural Resources, 

Game and Fish Division, Technical 

Bulletin WL 5.

1983 “The Distribution of the Eastern 

Indigo Snake, Drymarchon corais 

couperi, in Georgia.” Journal of 

Herpetology 17(3):256-264.

Dodd, C.K., Jr. and W.J. Barichivich 

2007 “Movements of Large Snakes 

(Drymarchon, Masticophis) in 

North-central Florida.” Florida 

Scientist 70: 83-94. 

Duellman, W. E., and A. Schwartz 

1958 “Amphibians and Reptiles of Southern 

Florida.” Bulletin Florida State 

Museum, Biological Science 3:181-

324.

Dusi, J. L. and R. T. Dusi 

1968 “Evidence for the Breeding of the 

Wood Stork in Alabama, 1968.” 

Alabama Birds16: 14-16.

Duever, M. J., J. E. Carlson, and L. A. Riopelle 

1981 “Off Road Vehicles and Their Impacts 

in the Big Cypress National Preserve.” 

U.S. Department of the Interior, 

National Park Service, Big Cypress 

National Preserve. T-614. National 

Audubon Society, Ecosystem 

Research Unit. 
Selected References 

579 

Duever, M. J., J. E. Carlson, J. F. Meeder, L. C. 

Duever, L. H. Gunderson, L. Riopelle, T. R. 

Alexander, R. L. Myers, and D. P. Spangler 

1986a The Big Cypress National Preserve.

New York, NY: National Audubon 

Society. 

Duever, M. J., L. A. Riopelle, and J. M. 

McCollom 

1986b “Long Term Recovery of 

Experimental Off-Road Vehicle 

Impacts and Abandoned Old Trails in 

the Big Cypress National Preserve.” 

U.S. Department of the Interior, 

National Park Service, Big Cypress 

National Preserve. SFRC-86/09. 

National Audubon Society, Ecosystem 

Research Unit. 

 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2005 Midwest Airspace Enhancement 

(MASE) Environmental Assessment.” 

Volume 2. Appendix H. “Noise and Its 

Effect on People.” 

Florida Department of Agriculture and 

Consumer Services. 

2003 “Notes on Florida’s Endangered and 

Threatened Plants”, 4th edition 2003. 

Produced by the Division of Plant 

Industry. 

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation 

Commission (FFWCC) 

2006a “Panther Mortality and Vehicle Injury 

List” (Excel file dated March 16, 2006). 

2006b "Investigator’s Annual Report, 2006: 

White-tailed Deer and Feral Hog 

Survey.” Prepared by Joe Bozzo. 

2006c “Florida’s Endangered Species, 

Threatened Species, and Species of 

Special Concern”. June 2006. 

2006d "2006 Big Cypress Addition Lands 

Deer Surveys.” Report prepared by Joe 

Bozzo. 

2007a “2006-2007 Big Cypress Addition 

Lands Turkey Surveys.” Report 

prepared by Joe Bozzo. 

2007b “Raw Data from the 2007 Big Cypress 

Addition Lands Deer Surveys.” 

Provided by Rebecca Mihalco. 

2008 “Annual Report on the Research and 

Management of Florida Panthers: 

2007-2008” by Joe McBride. Fish and 

Wildlife Research Institute & Division 

of Habitat and Species Conservation, 

Naples, FL. 

Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida 

Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 

2009 “Manatee Synoptic Surveys.” Accessed 

2/2009 at http://research.myfwc. com/ 

features/view_article.asp?id=15246 

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish 

Commission 

1959 "An Evaluation of White-tailed Deer 

Habitat in Florida," by Richard F. 

Harlow. Technical Bulletin 5. 

Tallahassee. 

1988 "Big Cypress National Preserve, Deer 

and Hog Annual Report, 1987-88," by 

J. L. Schortemeyer and J. W. 

McCown. Tallahassee. 

Florida Gulf Coast University: Regional 

Economic Research Institute 

2008 Southwest Florida Regional Economic 

Indicators. Accessed October 2008 at

http://www.floridaedo.com/pdf_ 

folder/Regional_EIR_Oct2008.pdf. 

Florida International University: Metro 

Newspaper 

2008 The Facts about South Florida Housing 

Trends. Accessed August 2008 at 

http://metropolitan.fiu.edu/ 

downloads/MetroNewsletter_ 

August08.pdf. 

Florida Natural Areas Inventory 

2006 “Florida Natural Areas Inventory 

Tracking List for Collier County.” 

Accessed June 2006. 
SELECTED REFERENCES

580 

Florida Panther Interagency Committee 

1989 "Status Report: Mercury 

Contamination in Florida Panthers." 

Technical Subcommittee. Gainesville, 

FL. 

Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business 

Research 

2007 Florida County Population Projections.

Accessed April 2007 at 

http://www.bebr.ufl.edu/category/ 

florida-counties/collier. 

Frye, O.E., Jr. 

1954 “Aspects of the Ecology of the 

Bobwhite Quail in Charlotte County.” 

Unpub. Federal Aid report, Project W31-R, Florida Game and Fresh Water 

Fish Commission. 338 pp. 

Gunderson, L., L. L. Loope, and W. R. 

Maynard. 

1982 “An Inventory of Plant Communities 

of the Turner River Area, Big Cypress 

National Preserve, Florida.” National 

Park Service, South Florida Research 

Center, Everglades National Park. 

Gunter, G. 

1941 “ Occurrence of the Manatee in the 

United States, with Records from 

Texas.” Journal of Mammalogy 22: 60-

64. 

Haltom, W. L. 

1931 “Alabama Reptiles.” Alabama 

Geological Survey and Natural 

History Museum, Paper No. 11:1-

145.

Hartman, D.S. 

1974 “Distribution, Status and 

Conservation of the Manatee in the 

United States.” National Technical 

Information Service. PB81-140725; 

Springfield, Virginia. 

1979 “Ecology and Behavior of the Manatee 

(Trichechus manatus) in Florida.” 

Special Publication, American Society 

of Mammalogists 5:1-153. 

Hendry, V. G. 

1989 “Guidelines for Preparation of 

Biological Assessments and 

Evaluations for Red-cockaded 

Woodpecker.” Atlanta, GA: U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service. 

Howell, A. H. 

1932 Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann; 

New York, New York. 

Humphrey, S.R. (Ed.) 

1992 Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida. 

Volume I. Mammals. University Press 

of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Hyslop, N. L. 

2007 “Movements, Habitat Use, and 

Survival of the Threatened Eastern 

Indigo Snake (Drymarchon corais 

couperi) in Georgia.” Unpublished 

Ph.D. dissertation. 

Hyslop, N. L., M. Meyers, and R. J. Cooper 

2006 “Movements, Survival, and Habitat 

Use of the Threatened Eastern 

Indigo Snake (Drymarchon corais 

couperi) in Southeastern Georgia.” 

Final report of GDNR.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

2007 “Contribution of Working Groups I, II 

and III to the Fourth Assessment 

Report of the Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change.” Core 

Writing Team, R. K. Pachauri and A. 

Reisinger (eds.). Geneva, Switzerland. 

pp 104. 
Selected References 

581 

Jackson, J. A. 

1983 “Morphological and Behavioral 

Development of Post-fledging Redcockaded Woodpeckers.” Pp. 30-37 in 

Red-cockaded Woodpecker Symposium 

II Proceedings (D. A. Wood, ed.). 

Florida Game and Fish Water Fish 

Commission. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service and U.S. Forest Service.

1994 “Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides 

borealis).” The Birds of North America, 

Number 85. A. Poole and F. Gill, 

editors. The Academy of Natural 

Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; 

American Ornithologists’ Union, 

Washington, D.C., USA. 

Janis, M. W. and J. D. Clark. 

1999 “Final Report to the Big Cypress 

National Preserve, National Park 

Service: The Effects of Recreational 

Deer and Hog Hunting on the 

Behavior of Florida Panthers.” A M.S. 

thesis for the University of Tennessee, 

Knoxville, Tennessee. 

Jansen, D. and Brooks 

1996 “Red-cockaded Woodpecker Survey 

Report for Big Cypress National 

Preserve. “ 

Johnson, M. K. and R. C. Belden 

1984 “Differentiating Mountain Lion and 

Bobcat Scats.” Journal of Wildlife 

Management 48(1): 239-244. 

Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, J. Comiskey, 

D. Jansen, D. Jennings, J. Kasbohm, F. 

Mazzotti, R. McBride, L. Richardson, and K. 

Root 

2006 “How Much Is Enough? Landscapescale Conservation for the Florida 

Panther.” Biological Conservation 130 

(2006): 118-133. 

Keegan, H. L. 

1944 “Indigo Snakes Feeding upon 

Poisonous Snakes.” Copeia 1944 

(1):59. 

Kochman, H. I. 

1978 “Eastern Indigo Snake, Drymarchon 

corais couperi.” Pages 68-69 in R.W. 

McDiarmid, ed. Rare and Endangered 

Biota of Florida. University Presses of 

Florida; Gainesville, Florida.

Kuntz, G. C. 

1977 “Endangered Species: Florida 

Indigo.” Florida Naturalist:15-19. 

Kushlan, J. A., and F. J. Mazzotti 

1989 “Historic and Present Distribution of 

the American Crocodile in Florida.” 

Journal of Herpetology 23(1):1-7.

Labisky, R. F. and C. C. Hurd, M. K. Oli, R. S. 

Barwick 

2003 “Foods of White-Tailed Deer in the 

Florida Everglades: The Significance 

of Crinum.” Southeastern Naturalist 2

(2), 261-270. 

Lang, J. W. 

1975 “The Florida Crocodile: Will It 

Survive?” Chicago (Field) Museum of 

Natural History Bulletin 46(8):4-9.

Lawler, H. E. 

1977 “The Status of Drymarchon corais 

couperi (Holbrook), the Eastern 

Indigo Snake, in the Southeastern 

U.S.A.” Herpetological Review 8(3):76-

79. 

Layne, J. N., and T. M. Steiner 

1996 “Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon 

corais couperi): Summary of Research 

Conducted on Archbold Biological 

Station.” Report prepared under 

Order 43910-6-0134 to the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service; Jackson, 

Mississippi.

L`ding, H. P. 

1922 “A Preliminary Catalog of Alabama 

Reptiles and Amphibians.”Alabama 

Geological Survey and Natural 

History Museum, Paper No. 5:1-59. 
SELECTED REFERENCES

582 

League For The Hard of Hearing 

2005 “Facts on Noise. Noise Levels in our 

Environment Fact Sheet.” Accessed at 

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/eviron

ment.html 

Lefebvre, L. W., T. J. O. Shea, G. B. Rathbun, 

and R. C. Best 

1989 “Distribution, Status, and 

Biogeography of the West Indian 

Manatee.” Pages 567-610 in C. A. 

Wood, ed. Biogeography of the West 

Indies. Sandhill Crane Press; 

Gainesville, Florida. 

Lennartz, M. R., H. A. Knight, J. P. McClure, 

and V. A. Rudis 

1983 “Status of Red-cockaded Woodpecker 

Nesting Habitat in the South.” Pages 

13–19. in D. A. Wood, editor. Redcockaded Woodpecker Symposium II. 

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish 

Commission, Tallahassee, Florida, 

USA. 

Liudahl, K., D. J. Belz, L. Carey, R. W. Drew, S. 

Fisher, and R. Pate. 

1998 Soil Survey of the Collier County Area, 

Florida. Natural Resources 

Conservation Services, USDA. 152 pp.; 

67 maps. 

Logan, T. J., A. C. Eller, Jr., R. Morrell, D. 

Ruffner, and J. Sewell 

1993 Florida Panther Habitat Preservation 

Plan — South Florida Population. 

Prepared for the Florida Panther 

Interagency Committee 

Long, Robert W. 

1974 "The Vegetation of Southern Florida." 

Florida Science 37:33-45. 

Lowery, J. H., Jr. 

1974 The Mammals of Louisiana and Its 

Adjacent Waters. Louisiana University 

Press. 

Marine Mammal Commission [MMC] 

1992 Annual report to Congress, 1991. 

Marine Mammal Commission; 

Washington, D.C.

Mazzotti, F. J. 

1983 “The Ecology of Crocodylus acutus in 

Florida.” Ph.D. dissertation, 

Pennsylvania State University.

McBride, R. 

1985 "Population Status of the Florida 

Panther in Everglades National Park 

and Big Cypress National Preserve." 

Prepared for the National Park 

Service. On file at Big Cypress 

National Preserve. 

2000 “Current Panther Distribution and 

Habitat Use: A Review of Field Notes, 

Fall 1999 – Winter 2000.” Report to 

the Florida Panther Subteam of 

MERIT, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

2003 “The Documented Panther 

Population (dpp) and Its Current 

Distribution from July 1, 2002, to June 

30, 2003.” Report prepared for the 

Florida Fish and Wildlife 

Conservation Commission, September 

11, 2003. 

Mihalco, Rebecca 

2007 Personal communication with 

Fisheries and Wildlife Biologist 

Rebecca Mihalco, Big Cypress Field 

Office, Florida Fish and Wildlife 

Conservation Commission, on June 18 

and July 12, 2007. 

Moler, P. E. 

1985a “Distribution of the Eastern Indigo 

Snake, Drymarchon corais couperi,” in

Florida. Herpetological Review

16(2):37-38.
Selected References 

583 

1985b “Home Range and Seasonal Activity of 

the Eastern Indigo Snake, 

Drymarchon corais couperi,” in 

Northern Florida.” Final performance 

report, Study E-1-06, III-A-5. Florida 

Game and Fresh Water Fish 

Commission; Tallahassee, Florida.

1992 “American Crocodile,” pages 83-89; 

“Eastern Indigo Snake,” pages 181-186 

in P.E. Moler ed. Rare and Endangered 

Biota of Florida, Volume III, 

Amphibians and Reptiles. University 

Press of Florida; Gainesville, Florida. 

Naples Daily News 

2007 “Population of Exotic Pythons 

Explodes in Preserves.” Jeremy Cox, 

January 21, 2007. 

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/20

07/jan/21/population_exotic_pythons

_explodes_preserves/ 

2008 Economic Growth Slows Dramatically 

in Southwest Florida. Accessed 

September 25, 2008, at 

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/ 

2008/sep/25/economic-growth-slowsdramatically-sw-florida/

 

National Ocean Economics Program 

2007 Coastal Economy Market Data: Collier 

County. Accessed December 2007 at 

http://noep.mbari.org/Market/coastal/

coastalEcon.asp.

National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Department 

of the Interior 

1953 "A Survey of the Effects of Fire in 

Everglades National Park," by William 

Robertson. On file at Everglades 

National Park, Homestead, FL. 

1981 “Distribution and Habitat of the Redcockaded Woodpecker in Big Cypress 

National Preserve,” by G. A. Patterson 

and W. B. Robertson. Report T-613. 

South Florida Research Center, 

Homestead, FL. 

1990 I-75 Recreational Access Plan and 

Environmental Assessment: Big Cypress 

National Preserve.

1991 General Management Plan and Final 

Environmental Impact Statement: Big 

Cypress National Preserve. Prepared 

by the Denver Service Center, Denver, 

Colorado. 

1993 Procedural Manual 77-2: Floodplain 

Management.

1996 Water Resources Management Plan: Big 

Cypress National Preserve.

2000a Strategic Plan for Big Cypress National 

Preserve, Fiscal Years 2001–2005. 

2000b Final Recreational Off-road Vehicle 

Management Plan and Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement: Big 

Cypress National Preserve. 

2002 Draft report on “Hydrology of the 

Addition Lands: Big Cypress National 

Preserve.” 

2003 Tamiami Trail Welcome Center 

Environmental Assessment: Big Cypress 

National Preserve. Prepared by GEC 

Associates, Inc.

2005 Fire Management Plan and 

Environmental Assessment: Big Cypress 

National Preserve. 

2006a “Annual Summary Report of Exotic 

Plant Management Projects, Fiscal 

Year 2006.” Prepared by exotic plant 

management staff. September 2006. 

2006b “Criteria for Off-Road Vehicle and 

Hunting Access within Big Cypress 

National Preserve in Response to 

Surface Water Levels.” Copy available 

at Preserve headquarters. 

2006c Draft Exotic Plant Management Plan 

and Environmental Impact Statement: 

South Florida and Caribbean Parks. 

Prepared by the Environmental 

Quality Division, Denver, Colorado. 

2006d Management Policies 2006. 

Washington, D. C. 

2008 NPS Director’s Order #18, “Wildland 

Fire Management” 

2009 Commercial Services Plan 

n.d. Resource Management Plan: Big 

Cypress National Preserve. 

 
SELECTED REFERENCES

584 

National Research Council, Commission on 

Geosciences, Environment and Resources 

1992 “Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems: 

Science, Technology, and Public 

Policy.” Committee on Restoration of 

Aquatic Ecosystems: Science, 

Technology, and Public Policy. Water 

Science and Technology Board. 

National Academy Press. Washington, 

D.C. 

NatureServe 

2009 NatureServe Explorer: An Online 

Encyclopedia of Life [web 

application]. Version 7.1. 

NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. 

http://www.natureserve.org/ explorer 

(accessed February 24, 2010). 

Nesbitt, S. A., A. E. Jerald, and B. A. Harris 

1983 "Red-cockaded Woodpecker Summer 

Range Sizes in Southwest Florida." In 

Red-cockaded Woodpecker Symposium 

II Proceedings, edited by Don Woods. 

Tallahassee: Florida Game and Fresh 

Water Fish Commission. 

Oberholser, H. C. 

1938 “The Bird Life of Louisiana.” 

Louisiana Department of 

Conservation, Bulletin 28. 

Oberholser, H. C. and E. B. Kincaid, Jr. 

1974 The Bird Life of Texas. University of 

Texas Press; Austin, Texas. 

Ogden, J. C. 

1978b “American Crocodile.” Pages 21-22. in 

R. W. McDiarmid ed. Rare and 

Endangered Biota of Florida, Volume 3: 

Amphibians and Reptiles. University 

Presses of Florida; Gainesville, 

Florida.

Pernas, A. J. 

1999 Personal communication with 

Resource Management Specialist A.J. 

Pernas. Ochopee, FL: Big Cypress 

National Preserve. 

Pernas, A. J., D. Weeks, and C. Bates 

1995 “Dye trace field study — Ochopee 

Prairie.” Unpublished data from the 

Ochopee Prairie Monitoring Program. 

On file at Big Cypress National 

Preserve, Ochopee, FL. 

Powell, J. A. 

1965 “The Florida Wild Turkey.” Florida 

Game and Fresh Water Fish 

Commission. Tech. Bull. 8. 

Rodgers, J. A., Jr., A. S. Wenner, and S. T. 

Schwiker 

1988 “The Use and Function of Green Nest 

Material by Wood Storks.“ Wilson 

Bulletin, 100(3); 411-423. 

Roelke, M. E., E. R. Jacobson, G. V. Kollias, 

and D. Forrester 

1985 "Annual Performance Report: 

Veterinary Medical Studies on Florida 

Panthers." Report to the Florida Game 

and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 

Tallahassee. 

Ross, C. A., and W.E. Magnusson 

1989 “Living Crocodilians.” Pages 58-75 in 

C.A. Ross, ed. Crocodiles and 

Alligators, Facts On File, Inc.; New 

York, New York.

Schortemeyer, J. L., L. L. Hamilton, R. E. 

Johnson, and D. R. Progulske 

1985 "Everglades Hog Study XVI — 

Dispersal and Survival of Resident and 

Stocked Wild Hogs in the Everglades." 

Prepared for the Florida Game and 

Fresh Water Fish Commission, 

Tallahassee. 

Schulze, Steve 

2007 Personal communication with 

Biological Technician (Wildlife) Steve 

Schulze, Big Cypress National 

Preserve, on June 29, 2007. 
Selected References 

585 

Smith, C. R. 

1987 “Ecology of Juvenile and Gravid 

Eastern Indigo Snakes in North 

Florida.” Unpublished M.S. thesis, 

Auburn University; Auburn, 

Alabama.

Smith, K. N. 

1993 Manatee Habitat and Human-related 

Threats to Seagrass in Florida: A 

Review. “Department of 

Environmental Protection, Division of 

Marine Resources; Tallahassee, 

Florida. 

Sobczak, R. V. and A. J. Pernas 

2000 “Increased Off-Road Vehicle Impacts 

as a Result of Longer Flooding 

Duration in Big Cypress National 

Preserve.” Draft. Ochopee, FL: Big 

Cypress National Preserve. 

South Florida Water Management District 

(SFWMD). 

1992 Surface Water Improvement and 

Management Plan for the Everglades.

Planning Document – March 13, 1992. 

 

Speake, D. W. 

1993 “Indigo Snake Recovery Plan 

Revision. Final report to the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service; Jacksonville, 

Florida.

Speake, D. W., J. A. McGlincy, and T. R. 

Colvin 

1978 “Ecology and Management of the 

Eastern Indigo Snake in Georgia: A 

Progress Report.” Pages 64-73 in R. R. 

Odum and L. Landers, eds. 

Proceedings of Rare and Endangered 

Wildlife Symposium, Georgia 

Department of Natural Resources, 

Game and Fish Division, Technical 

Bulletin WL 4.

Steiner, T. M., O. L. Bass, Jr., and J. A. Kushlan 

1983 “Status of the Eastern Indigo Snake in 

Southern Florida National Parks and 

Vicinity.” South Florida Research 

Center Report SFRC-83/01, 

Everglades National Park; 

Homestead, Florida.

Sykes, P. W., Jr. 

1979 “Status of the Everglade Kite in 

Florida.”1968-1978. Wilson Bulletin 

91:495-511.

Sykes, P. W., Jr., J. A. Rodgers, Jr., and R. E. 

Bennetts 

1995 “Snail Kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis)” in 

A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. The Birds of 

North America, Number 171. The 

Academy of Natural Sciences, 

Philadelphia, and the American 

Ornithologists Union; Washington, 

D. C.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

1999 Central and Southern Florida Project 

Comprehensive Review Study: Final 

Integrated Feasibility Report and 

Programmatic Environmental Impact 

Statement. Jacksonville, FL: 

Jacksonville District and South Florida 

Water Management District. 

U.S. Census Bureau. 

2005 Population Finder. N.d. Accessed 

November 2005. www.census.gov 

U.S. Department of Transportation. Federal 

Highway Administration. 

1995 Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and 

Abatement Policy and Guidance. Office 

of Environment and Planning, Noise 

and Air Quality Branch. Washington, 

D.C. 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1980 “Regulatory Analysis for the Noise 

Emission Regulations for Motorcycles 

and Motorcycle Exhaust Systems.” 

December. EPA 550/9-80-217. 
SELECTED REFERENCES

586 

U. S. General Accounting Office 

1995 “Report to the Honorable Bruce F. 

Vento, House of Representatives. 

FEDERAL LANDS: Information on the 

Use and Impact of Off-Highway 

Vehicles. August 1995. GAO/RCED95-209. 

U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture 

1980 Fire in South Florida Ecosystems, by 

Dale Wade, John Ewel, and Ronald 

Hofstetter. General Technical Report 

SE-17. Southeastern Forest 

Experiment Station, Asheville, NC. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. 

Department of the Interior 

1987 Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi) 

Revised Recovery Plan. Prepared by the 

Florida Panther Interagency 

Committee. Atlanta. 

1990 Habitat Management Guidelines for the 

Wood Stork in the Southeast Region. 

Prepared by John C. Odgen, Wildlife 

Research, Everglades National Park 

for the USFWS Southeast Region. 

1996 Florida Manatee Recovery Plan. 

1998 Endangered Species Consultation 

Handbook, Procedures for Conducting 

Consultation and Conference Activities 

Under Section 7 of the Endangered 

Species Act. 

1999 Multi-Species Recovery Plan for South 

Florida. Atlanta, GA. 

2000 “Biological Opinion.” Big Cypress 

National Preserve 2000 Recreational 

Off-road Vehicle Management Plan.

2005 “West Indian Manatee (Trichechus 

manatus).” Southeast Region. 

Alabama Ecological Services Field 

Office. Background Information. 

http://www.fws.gov/daphne/manatee/

index-manatee.html 

2006 USFWS Threatened and Endangered 

Species System (TESS) Accessed at 

http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/ 

StateListingAndOccurrence.jsp?state=

FL 

2007 “Reclassification of the American 

Crocodile Distinct Population 

Segment in Florida from 

Endangered to Threatened.” 

Federal Register 72(53):13027-13041. 

10 March 2007. 

2008 Florida Panther Recovery Plan (Puma 

concolor coryi), Third Revision. U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlanta, 

Georgia. 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 

1993 “Annual Report to the Biological 

Resources Division on the Radio 

Telemetry of Manatees in Puerto 

Rico.” Sirenia Project; Gainesville, 

Florida. 

2004 “Inventory of Freshwater Fish Species 

within Big Cypress National Preserve: 

The Basis for a Long-term Sampling 

Program.” Fact Sheet 2004-3131, 

November 2004. 

University of Idaho, Park Studies Unit 

2007a Big Cypress National Preserve ORV 

Permit Holder/Camp Owner Study.

Accessed spring, 2007 at http://psu. 

uidaho.edu/vsp.profile.htm?ID=0231 

2007b Big Cypress National Preserve Visitor 

Study. Accessed spring 2007 at 

http://psu.uidaho.edu/vsp.profile. 

htm?ID=0229. 

Wayne, A. T. 

1910 “Birds of South Carolina.” 

Contributions to the Charleston 

Museum, No.1. 

Welch, R. and M. Madden 

1998 “Off-Road Vehicle Trail Database for 

Big Cypress National Preserve. Final 

Research Report.” Athens, GA: The 

University of Georgia, Center for 

Remote Sensing and Mapping Science. 

Welch, R., M. Madden, and R. F. Doren 

1999 Mapping the Everglades. 

Photogrammetric Engineering and 

Remote Sensing 65(2):155-61. 
Selected References 

587 

Williams, Byron K., Robert C. Szaro, and Carl 

D. Shapiro 

2007 “Adaptive management: The U.S. 

Department of the Interior Technical 

Guide.” Washington, D.C.: 

Department of the Interior. 
588 

PREPARERS AND CONSULTANTS 

PLANNING TEAM MEMBERS 

National Park Service, 

Big Cypress National Preserve 

Pedro Ramos, Superintendent and former 

Deputy Superintendent 

J. D. Lee, Deputy Superintendent and former 

Chief Ranger 

Damon Doumlele, Environmental Protection 

Specialist 

Ron Clark, Chief of Resource Management 

Bob DeGross, Chief of Interpretation 

Edward Clark, Chief Ranger 

Dennis Bartalino, Chief of Maintenance 

Christine Clark, Management Assistant 

Jim Burch, Botanist 

Steve Schulze, Wildlife Technician 

Robert Sobczak, Hydrologist 

Ryan Levins, former North District Ranger 

John Nobles, Fire Management Officer 

John Adams, Roads and Trails Technician 

John Donahue, former Superintendent 

Karen Gustin, former Superintendent 

Carol Clark, former Deputy Superintendent 

and former Acting Superintendent 

Sandy Snell-Dobert, former Chief of 

Interpretation 

Jimi Sadle, former Biological Science 

Technician (Exotic Plants) 

Scott Pardue, former Acting Deputy 

Superintendent 

National Park Service, 

Washington D.C. Office 

Rick Potts, former Chief, Wilderness 

Stewardship and Recreation 

Management Division 

Gary Oye, Chief, Wilderness Stewardship and 

Recreation Management Division 

National Park Service, 

Southeast Regional Office 

Rich Sussman, former Chief of Park Planning 

and Environmental Compliance 

Mark Kinzer, Environmental Protection 

Specialist, Wilderness Coordinator 

Tim Bemisderfer, Landscape Architect 

Jami Hammond, Environmental Coordinator 

PREPARERS 

National Park Service, Denver Service 

Center 

Pat Kenney, Branch Chief and former Project 

Manager (through September 2008); 

Overall responsibility for preparation of 

the plan. B.S., Zoology; 20 years with the 

National Park Service. 

Patrick Malone, Project Manager (October 

2008 to present) and former Natural 

Resource Specialist. Overall responsibility 

for preparation of the plan; responsible for 

writing the descriptions of natural 

resources and assessing impacts on these 

topics. B.S., Natural Resources and 

Environmental Management; M.P.A., 

Environmental Policy Analysis; 5 years 

with the National Park Service; 9 years 

with state and local government; 2 years 

with a nonprofit land trust. 

Don Wojcik, Natural Resource Specialist. 

Responsible for writing portions of the 

descriptions of natural resources and 

assessing impacts on these topics. B.S., 

Civil & Environmental Engineering; 

M.P.A., Natural Resource Management 

and Environmental Policy; 1 year with the 

National Park Service; 10 years with local 

government open space programs; 5 years 

with nonprofit and academic environmental law and policy organizations; 2 

years with local civil engineering 

department. 
Preparers and Consultants 

589 

Thomas A. Thomas, Cultural Resource 

Specialist. Responsible for writing cultural 

resources affected environment and 

cultural resources impact analysis sections. 

Ph.D. in History; 19 years with the 

National Park Service. 

Ian Shanklin, Landscape Architect. 

Responsible for writing the visitor use and 

experience affected environment. B.L.A., 

Landscape Architecture; 9 years with 

National Park Service. 

Andrew Coburn, Community Planner. 

Responsible for writing the environmental 

consequences for visitor use and 

experience. B.A. Economics; B.S. Business 

Administration; Master of Urban and 

Regional Planning, Land Use and 

Environmental Planning and M.P.A; 3 

years with the National Park Service. 

Sarah Bodo, Community Planner. Responsible 

for developing cost estimates and writing 

the NPS operations sections. B.S., 

Commerce; Master of Urban and Regional 

Planning; 4 years with the National Park 

Service. 

CONSULTANTS 

Pia Franzese and Casey Cornwell, Dornbusch 

and Associates. 

Kerri Cahill, Technical Specialist, User 

Capacity, NPS Denver Service Center. 

Greg Cody, Technical Specialist, Cultural 

Resource Compliance, NPS Denver 

Service Center. 

Dave Kreger, former Technical Specialist, 

Natural Resource Compliance, NPS 

Denver Service Center. 

Kevin Noon, Water Resources Division, 

Natural Resource Program Center, NPS 

Gary Smillie, Water Resources Division, 

Natural Resource Program Center, NPS 

Paul Wharry, Technical Specialist, Natural 

Resource Compliance, NPS Denver 

Service Center. 

PUBLICATION SERVICES 

James Corbett, Visual Information Specialist, 

NPS Denver Service Center 

Christy Fischer, Writer-Editor, NPS Denver 

Service Center
590 

INDEX 

access point(s), 20, 33, 34, 40, 67, 73, 75, 76, 79, 

81, 82, 86, 87, 92, 96, 98, 103, 104, 108–110, 

112, 125, 133–136, 144, 203, 209, 210, 257, 265, 

289, 290, 292, 295, 296, 298, 301, 304, 305, 307, 

308, 311, 313, 315, 319, 322, 328–330, 332, 

334–337, 339, 342, 345, 346, 348, 349, 352, 354, 

356, 360, 363, 368–371, 373, 375, 376, 377, 381, 

382, 386, 389, 390, 394, 402, 404, 408–411, 413, 

416, 417, 426, 428, 436–438, 440, 451 

adaptive management, 29, 63, 93, 94, 97, 99, 107, 

109, 110, 111, 113, 125, 216, 257, 258, 435, 446, 

453 

air quality, 22, 52, 447 

airboat, 100, 174, 235, 275, 281, 318, 358, 393, 

400 

all-terrain vehicle(s), 54, 219 

American crocodile, 48, 49, 142, 177, 194, 195, 

280–282, 317–319, 358–360, 400, 401, 424, 435, 

436 

American Indian(s), 21, 22, 25, 40, 41, 54, 55, 65, 

126, 421, 426–428, 430–432, 440, 449 

ATV, 214 

Bear Island Grade, 8, 73, 79, 82, 87, 136, 204, 

211, 262, 267, 299, 301, 304, 305, 307, 308, 311, 

322, 328, 340, 342, 345, 346, 348, 349, 352, 363, 

368, 381, 382, 386, 389, 390, 394, 402, 404, 409, 

410, 415 

bicycling, 8, 38, 56, 68–70, 75, 81, 86, 87, 133, 

134, 136, 144, 209, 210, 212, 237, 245, 256, 289, 

328, 366, 369, 409 

bicyclists, 237, 289, 298, 300, 328, 366, 367, 369, 

410 

Bundschu Grade, 211 

camping, 8, 32, 38, 54, 68, 69, 80, 82, 86, 97, 108, 

116, 128, 132, 133, 136, 203, 208–210, 212, 216, 

220, 233, 234, 238, 246, 247, 258, 263, 271, 

287–290, 292, 296, 301, 306, 326, 327, 329, 332, 

336, 337, 340, 342, 345–349, 363, 366–370, 373, 

378, 387, 408–411, 414, 435, 450, 451, 452 

campsites, 68, 69, 93, 104, 116, 123, 209, 246, 

368, 435, 450, 451 

Carnestown, 8, 58, 73, 76, 79, 82, 88, 92, 135, 

137, 204, 262, 266, 328, 330, 369, 371, 377, 382, 

406, 410 

climate change, 28, 29, 128, 437, 450 

Copeland, 8, 73, 79, 82, 88, 137, 179, 204, 238, 

262, 266, 377 

crocodile, See American crocodile 

cultural landscape(s), 21, 54, 123, 126, 428 

cultural resource(s), 15, 20–24, 28, 33, 35, 38, 40, 

43, 54, 56, 64, 67–69, 91, 95, 97, 98, 109, 121, 

126–128, 160, 200, 236, 237, 241, 244, 245, 257, 

260, 294, 423, 432, 448, 449, 450 

Deep Lake, 7, 8, 73, 79, 82, 88, 137, 167, 178, 

205–207, 236, 238, 262, 267, 296, 298, 299, 301, 

304, 305, 307, 308, 311, 322, 327, 328, 334, 337, 

339, 340, 342, 345, 346, 348, 349, 352, 363, 368, 

369, 374, 377, 378, 381, 382, 386, 389, 390, 394, 

402, 404, 409, 410, 415 

Eastern indigo snake, 49, 142, 177, 195–197, 

282–284, 319–322, 360–363, 401–404, 424, 435, 

436, 439 

endangered species, 12, 17, 112, 116, 124, 125, 

177, 194, 217, 423, 424, 446 See also threatened 

and endangered species 

erosion, 28, 97, 98, 121–123, 251, 263, 265, 287, 

296, 297, 300, 326, 337, 338, 341, 378, 381, 408 

ethnographic resource(s), 21, 54, 98, 143, 207, 

245, 288, 326, 327, 367, 368, 409, 432, 449 

Everglade snail kite, 48, 142, 177, 188, 193, 194, 

279, 280, 315–317, 356–358, 398, 399, 424, 435, 

436 

Everglades City, 8, 87, 100, 135, 158, 176, 185, 

204, 208, 211, 212, 223–225, 230–232, 238, 421, 

422, 455 

exotic species, 36, 47, 76, 81, 87, 160, 166, 168, 

200, 201, 272, 273, 285, 307, 308, 323, 348, 349, 

364, 389, 390, 406, 421, 431, 437 

fire, 8, 17, 18, 22–24, 26, 33, 36, 37, 41, 45, 46, 52, 

67, 68, 73, 76, 81, 87, 107, 116, 148, 154, 157, 

159, 160, 166–169, 186, 187, 201, 221, 223, 

236–238, 268, 270, 272, 276, 284, 293, 302, 304, 

307, 333, 334, 343, 345, 348, 374, 375, 384, 386, 

389, 415, 421, 431, 443 

fishing, 8, 16, 19, 20, 32, 38, 41, 51, 54, 56, 68, 69, 

116, 144, 166, 185, 203, 205, 206, 208, 210, 213, 

217, 218, 228, 229, 231–233, 236, 245, 256, 258, 

275, 281, 286, 289, 290, 318, 329, 358, 369, 370, 

392, 400, 406, 410, 411, 445, 449, 451 

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation 

Commission, 19, 24, 25, 31, 36, 37, 42, 50, 51, 

68–70, 75, 76, 80, 82, 86, 87, 124, 125, 136, 177–

180, 198, 199, 201, 212, 217, 218, 273, 275, 285, 

289, 322, 329, 363, 370, 391, 393, 404, 410, 424, 

426, 428, 429, 437, 443, 446 

Florida National Scenic Trail, 8, 70, 76, 81, 86, 

134, 204, 211, 237, 289, 410, 435, 443, 451, 452 
Index 

591 

Florida panther, 7, 12, 17, 25, 36, 38, 40, 47, 50, 

107, 124, 125, 141, 176–180, 188, 198–201, 210, 

217, 244, 257, 273–275, 308–310, 349–351, 

390–392, 422, 424, 428, 429, 436–438, 441, 

445–448, 452 

frogging, 8, 20, 56, 144, 210, 217, 218, 245, 256, 

286, 289, 329, 369, 406, 410, 445, 449, 451 

hiking, 8, 32, 38, 54, 56, 68–70, 75, 76, 79, 81, 82, 

86–88, 97, 98, 116, 122, 132–134, 136, 137, 144, 

203, 206, 208–211, 220, 233, 237, 245, 247, 256, 

258, 263, 274, 276, 278, 279, 283, 284, 287–290, 

296, 301, 304, 306, 309, 312, 314, 316, 320, 327, 

328, 330, 337, 342, 345, 347, 350, 353, 355, 357, 

361, 366–370, 375, 378, 391, 394, 402, 409, 411 

hunting, 7, 8, 16, 19, 20, 28, 32, 40–42, 47, 50, 54, 

56, 67–70, 75, 80, 81, 86, 95–97, 104, 111, 116, 

124, 125, 128, 132, 133, 144, 167, 176, 179, 180, 

181, 198–200, 203, 205, 206, 208, 210, 213–218, 

222, 228, 229, 231, 232, 234, 236, 244, 245, 258, 

273, 278, 279, 282, 284, 287, 289, 290, 309, 312, 

314, 316, 320, 322, 326–330, 350, 353, 355, 357, 

361, 363, 366, 367, 369–371, 391, 394, 396, 398, 

402, 404, 408, 410, 411, 422, 426, 427, 429, 431, 

436, 437, 440, 441, 445, 449, 451 

indigo snake, See Eastern indigo snake 

interpretation, 22, 29, 33, 34, 38, 67, 68, 69, 73, 

76, 79, 82, 87, 135, 136, 328, 334, 368, 374, 375, 

409, 410, 415 

invasive species, 23, 96, 439 

Jones Grade, 73, 79, 82, 87, 136 

manatee, 36, 38, 47, 141, 177, 181, 182, 185, 243, 

275, 276, 310, 311, 351, 352, 393, 394, 424 

Miccosukee/Miccosukee Tribe/Miccosukee 

Tribe of Indians of Florida, 4, 8, 17–19, 21–

23, 30–32, 41, 144, 206, 207, 223, 246–250, 

291–293, 331–333, 372–374, 413–415, 427, 430, 

431, 440, 449, 455, 456 

Miles City, 73, 79, 82, 87, 137, 204 

Mullet Slough, 202, 204 

National Environmental Policy Act, 15, 20, 49, 

54, 57, 64, 75, 121, 128, 129, 147, 241, 243–245, 

425, 427, 434, 440, 448, 449 

National Historic Preservation Act, 21, 121, 

126–128, 241, 244, 423, 426, 448, 449 

national register/National Register of Historic 

Places, 21, 55, 116, 127, 245, 325, 366, 408, 

423, 428 

Native Americans, 426, 427 See also American 

Indian(s) 

natural resources, 22–24, 33, 35, 39, 40, 43, 53, 

65, 112, 121, 129, 147, 148, 209, 222, 237, 241, 

242, 257, 286, 287, 325, 335, 365, 376, 407, 416, 

427, 438, 445 

Nobles and Jones grades, 336, 337, 340, 342, 

345, 346, 348, 349, 363, 368, 374, 435 

Nobles Grade, 8, 87, 136, 167, 203, 211, 289, 377, 

380, 406, 410 

nonnative plants, 95, 123, 125, 141, 203, 252, 

272, 273, 307, 308, 348, 349, 389, 390, 439 

nonnative species, 23, 123, 272, 273, 307, 308, 

348, 389 

Northeast Addition, 4, 41, 75, 118, 148, 149, 186, 

189, 199, 202–204, 223, 262, 293, 295, 334, 336, 

368, 374, 377, 380, 415, 431 

off-road vehicles, 13, 34, 102, 103, 109, 110, 154–

159, 166, 173, 175, 187, 197, 213, 215–217, 219, 

220, 222, 257, 262, 263, 267–272, 276, 278, 279, 

285, 286, 289, 295–297, 301–304, 306, 307, 309, 

312, 314, 323, 324, 329, 336–338, 342, 343, 345, 

347, 348, 350, 353, 355–357, 360, 361, 364, 365, 

367, 370, 378, 383, 384, 386, 388, 389, 391, 395, 

396, 398, 403, 405, 407, 410, 422, 435, 451 See 

also ORV 

orientation, 8, 29, 30, 41, 67, 70, 76, 79–82, 87, 

108, 132, 134–136, 174, 236, 241 

ORV(s), 8, 12, 13, 16, 19, 22, 30, 34, 38, 40–42, 

44–49, 51, 52, 54, 56, 63–65, 68, 70, 75, 79–82, 

85–87, 92–95, 97–113, 122, 123, 125, 129, 131–

134, 136, 144, 147, 148, 154–161, 166, 173, 175, 

179, 181, 186, 187, 201, 208–218, 220, 222–237, 

241, 243–247, 256, 257, 262, 263, 265, 267–276, 

278–280, 282–287, 289, 290, 292, 295, 296, 

298–310, 312–317, 319–330, 332, 334–337, 

339–351, 353–358, 360–371, 373, 374, 377, 378, 

380–392, 394–399, 401–411, 414, 422, 424, 428, 

431–438, 439–453 See also off-road vehicles

red-cockaded woodpecker, 17, 47, 141, 159, 

169, 185–187, 276, 277, 311–313, 352–354, 

394–396, 424, 441 

roads, 19, 20, 68, 69, 103, 110, 116, 117, 121, 179, 

197, 203, 204, 211, 212, 220, 237, 262–265, 267, 

268, 270–272, 277, 278, 280, 283, 285, 286, 288, 

290, 292, 295–301, 303, 305–307, 309, 312, 314, 

316, 321, 323, 325, 326, 329, 332, 336, 337–339, 

340–342, 344, 346–348, 350, 353, 355, 357, 362, 

364–366, 370, 373, 377–381, 383, 384, 386, 388, 

389, 391, 395, 397, 399, 403, 405, 407, 408, 410, 

414, 433, 451 

Section 106, 126, 143, 244, 245, 255, 288, 326, 

327, 367, 368, 409, 423, 426, 428, 448 

Section 7, 125, 126, 141, 142, 243, 253, 274–284, 

309–319, 321, 322, 350–362, 391–401, 403, 404, 

423, 428, 436, 440, 442, 443, 448 
INDEX

592 

Seminole/Seminole Tribe/Seminole Tribe of 

Florida, 4, 8, 17,–19, 21–23, 30–32, 37, 41, 144, 

206, 207, 223, 225, 226, 246–250, 259, 291–293, 

331–333, 372–374, 413–415, 421, 427, 430, 431, 

441, 449, 455, 456 

Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma, 21, 449 

Snail kite, See Everglade snail kite 

soil, 17, 25, 36, 44, 53, 95, 97, 98, 103, 122, 123, 

153, 155, 157, 158, 169, 175, 195, 197, 215, 242, 

251, 262–265, 268, 281–283, 296–300, 302, 318, 

320, 321, 337–341, 343, 359–362, 378, 380, 381, 

384, 400, 402, 403, 446 

street-legal vehicle, 100, 216 

sustainable trail, 101, 103, 104, 208, 215, 431, 

433, 446 

swamp buggy, 101, 167 

threatened and endangered species, 7, 25, 36–

38, 47–50, 97, 107, 112, 124, 125, 141, 163, 

165, 176, 177, 194, 195, 242, 243, 253, 258, 273, 

308, 349, 390, 421, 424, 429, 439, 440, 445, 453 

See also endangered species 

threatened species, 36, 38, 112, 195, 445 

user capacity, 27, 30, 63, 93, 94, 109, 258, 431, 

447 

vegetation, 7, 17, 25, 26, 33, 43, 45, 46, 96–98, 

100, 103, 109, 121, 123, 125, 141, 148, 153, 

155–157, 160, 167–169, 173, 175, 179, 182, 186, 

187, 193, 194, 198, 199, 205, 215, 220, 222, 242, 

252, 262, 264, 267–274, 276–279, 281, 282, 284, 

285, 298, 299, 301–308, 310, 313, 315, 318, 320, 

323, 335, 339, 340, 342–349, 351, 354, 355, 359, 

361, 364, 376, 377, 379, 380, 382–392, 395, 397, 

400, 402, 405, 416, 422, 441 

visitor center, 67, 82, 124, 134, 136, 210, 211, 

236, 571 

visitor contact station, 76, 81, 134, 136, 328, 333, 

368, 369, 374, 429, 449 

visitor experience, 3, 27, 29, 30–32, 34, 40, 43, 

56, 66, 68, 93, 94, 98, 100, 109, 112, 121, 209, 

218, 220, 241, 246, 256, 258, 294, 335, 376, 416, 

431, 443 

water quality, 23, 26, 36, 37, 44, 48, 49, 51, 95, 

97, 109, 112, 116, 122, 139, 173–175, 201, 204, 

242, 251, 259, 263–265, 278–281, 296, 297, 299, 

315–318, 320, 337, 338, 340, 356–359, 361, 

378–380, 397–399, 401, 445, 453 

Western Addition, 4, 41, 48, 76, 81, 86, 87, 96, 

118, 134, 136, 148, 151, 176, 182, 183, 187, 191, 

202, 204, 269, 275, 281, 303, 318, 344, 358, 385, 

393, 400 

wilderness, 12, 13, 18–20, 26, 27, 41, 43, 47, 53, 

56, 63–66, 69, 70, 75, 76, 80, 81, 86, 87, 93, 103, 

115–118, 128, 131, 132, 135, 143, 202–204, 208, 

236, 241, 243, 244, 254, 286, 287, 289, 309, 312, 

314, 316, 320, 323–325, 334, 350, 353, 355, 357, 

361, 363, 365, 366, 375, 391, 393, 394, 396, 398, 

402, 405–409, 415, 422, 423, 427, 431, 436, 444, 

448, 451 

wildlife, 7, 15, 17–20, 27, 28, 32, 35, 36, 39, 40, 

47, 51, 56, 76, 82, 87, 97, 107–109, 112, 121, 

123–125, 135, 136, 154, 159, 167, 170, 175, 176, 

179, 200–203, 209–211, 216, 217, 222, 233, 234, 

258, 259, 274, 277, 285, 290, 293, 298, 310, 313, 

323, 329, 330, 333, 335, 339, 351, 354, 364, 370, 

373, 376, 392, 395, 405, 411, 414, 416, 417, 422, 

431, 432, 437, 444, 446 
 

As the nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for 

most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering sound use 

of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, and biological diversity; preserving the 

environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places; and providing for the 

enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The department assesses our energy and mineral 

resources and works to ensure that their development is in the best interests of all our people by 

encouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care. The department also has a major 

responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island 

territories under U.S. administration. 

NPS D-176/105103 October 2010 Printed on recycled paper. 
U.S. Department of the Interior • National Park Service

Big Cypress National Preserve • Addition