HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-287•
TABLE _OF CONTENTS
Page
List of Illustrations
Iv
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1
2
1.1.
Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action
1.2
Government Regulations Pertaining to the Sebastian HCP
4
2.0 PROJECT
DESCRIPTION/IMPACTS
6
2.1
Sebastian HCP Boundaries (HCP Plan Area)
6
2.2
Property Ownership Status of Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas
10
2.3
Description of the Proposed Action
11
2.4
Description of the Species Considered Under
the Sebastian HCP
12
2.4.1 Biological Overview of the Florida Scrub -Jay
12
3.0 HCP
PLAN AREA BASELINE INFORMATION
?4
3.1
FWS Consultation History and Existing Data
for Sebastian Highlands Scrub -Jay Habitat Lots
24
3.2
Sebastian HCP Plan Area - Population Status
and Habitat Utilization
34
3.3
South Brevard County Florida Scrub -Jay
Population Status
40
3.4
Documentation of the Occurrence of Federal
and State Protected Species Within the HCP Plan Area
40
3.5
Other Regulatory Laws Relevant to the HCP Plan Area
41
3.6
Sebastian HCP Plan Area Habitat Types and
Surrounding Land Use Descriptions
43
4.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
48
4.1
Determination of Acreage of Potential Scrub -Jay Habitat
to be Impacted, Preserved and Restored
48
4.1.1 Methodology
48
4.1.2 Acreage of Privately -Owned Sebastian Highlands
Potential Scruh-Jay Habitat Lots
60
4.1.3 Acreage of Existing (Occupied) Scrub -Jay Habitat
on the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
60
4.1.4 Acreage of Unoccupied, Restorable Scrub -Jay
Habitat on the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
61
4.2
Estimated Amount or Extent of Take
61
4.3
Analysis of the Effect of the Take on the North
Indian River County/South Brevard County Metapopulation
62
�.
U�
-
TABLE OLCONTENTSJCont.1
�A 9 _e
4.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT (cont.)
4.4 Alternatives Considered
65
4.4.1 Alternative 1: NoAction Alternative
85
4.4.2 Alternative 2: Proposed Action 'Issuance
of an ITP and Implementation ofSebastian HCP
87 �
4.4.3 Alternative 3: Issuance ofthe ITP and Acquisition
�
`
ofthe Unit 17Sebastian Scrub Conservation Ama
09
|�
5.0 SEBASTIAN HCP OPERATING CONSERVATION PROGRAM
71
.
5.1 Habitat Management Considerations
73
^ [~
5.2 Potential Effects ofHabitat Restoration and Management
|=
Treatments on Other Species of Cnnoomohon Concern
77
5.3 3ebao1|go HCP F|uridoScmhJay Habitat Restoration arid
`
[v
Management Program (HCP 01uno0omant Program)
78 ^
L"
5.3.1 Identification oiLand Manager arid Prescribed
Burn Manager
79
!`
5 � 2 Phase Ooo-Ho�x/�8nommhonAubx}dnx
' �
J
[�
Mechanical Treatments and Restoration Burning
'
80 |
5.3.2.1 Mechanical Treatments
81
5.3.2.2 Restoration Burning Treatments
83
5.3.2.3 Minimization w1eosumo
30 -
..
5.3.3 Phase Two Habitat Management Aohmha,
81
'
5.3.4 Schedule for Implementation ofHabitat
�
Restoration and Management Treatment Actions
92
.^
54 Sebastian HCP Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Management
L°
Monitoring pmg,om (HCP Monitoring Program)
92
5.4.1 Monitoring Parameters
93 �
5.4.1.1 Habitat Quality Studies
83
}�
5.4.1.2 Florida Scrub -Jay Territory Studies
95
5.4.1.3 Habitat Loos YVhhiv ITP Impact Area
95
5.4.2 Schedule for Monitoring Implementation Schedule
`
and Reporting
85 �
5.5 Unfpme000/ExoabrdinaryCiroumot000ea
98
5.8 Funding
87 �
�
N.
Literature [3md
88
,�
$T OF ILLUSTRk(LONS
.
�
Figures
Figure 1
Vicinity Map -
City of Sebastian/Sebastian Highlands
7
FA
{
Figure 2
Presently Recorded Sebastian Highlands
Scrub -Jay Habitat Lots to be Impacted and
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
8
Figure 3
Scrub Jay Habitat Conservation "Core" Areas
27
Figure 4
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
North Sebastian Conservation Area/Sebastian Airport
49
Figure 5
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Polygons
North Sebastian Conservation Area/Sebastian Airport
50
Figure 6
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
Pelican Island Elementary School and
i
Sebastian Highlands Conservation Area
51
Figure 7
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Polygons
Pelican Island Elementary School and
c
Sebastian Highlands Conservation Area
52
Figure 8
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
t
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area
53
Figure 9
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Polygons
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area
54
Figure 10
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Management Units
North Sebastian Conservation Area/Sebastian Airport
85
Figure 11
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Management Units
Pelican Island Elementary School and
Sebastian Highlands Conservation Area
86
Figure 12
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Management Units
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area
87
iv
i;
Iid8es
|� ToWo 1
City of Sobaotimo' Untitled Table
31
�
-+ Table
�
City o/ Sebastian - Scrub Jay Areas
32
' Table
{_
Sebastian H�h'andoPnton�a|Gou��uyHa�a� Habitat
35
� - Table
Protected Wildlife Species Occurring orPotentially
-�
Occurring within the HCP Plan Area
41
-^ Table
Characteristics ofHabitat Polygons within
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
56��
Table
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Quality Classification Regarding
~
Shrub Height and Habitat Management Needs
59 |
� ~~ Table
Florida ScmbJayHabitat Restoration Activities
�
|` ,.
Mechanical Treatments
82 �
Table
Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Restoration Activities
�
_
,
Restoration Burning
84 ~�
~
/
�
/
L
�
^
~
�
`
|
,
�
v
rill
(.O INTRODUCTION
�
!� The Sebastian Area -Wide Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Conservation plan (Snhambon
MCP) is a|ooa) government effort »oresolve a long-standing conflict between the
conservation of the Florida scrub -jay (Aphmouomx cnoruleucoms) and rouidoodu|
[*
development within Florida scrub -jay habitat |nnamd in the City of Sobasdan's
14'000± lot 8obuohun Highlands platted residential subdivision. Tho Indian River
County Board o/ County Commissioners (IRC Board) and City of Sebastian are
�
initiating this conservation n#ou with cooperation from |h^ School District of Indian
- '
River County (School District). The IRC Board and City of SnboaUoo will oonm as
the |ood agencies for implementation of the Sohaohon HCP. The School District will
participate by supporting, in the |"n0-torm, implementation of recommended
conservation management strategies oil a mnVotod compensation property owned
by this local government entity.
The IRC Board and the City of Go0aodao are uo'app|ioanm.homa[mr m/enod to as
_~ 7\mdicant^, for the Sebastian UCP. The School District will serve as o opoponobny
entity. The Applicant is seeking an incidental take permit (ITP) from the V.S. Fish and
�YNk8ih, Service (FVVS) pursuant to section 10(o)<1>(E) of the'Endaopered SpeciesAct
~^
of 1973, as amended (ESA). The Applicant is requesting that the ITP authorize, for
.
period of 20 years. tile take of the Florida uv/oh-jey (4pheldcu/na comzxtucenx).
'
federally listed as a threatened opooino, viVdo potential Florida mCmb1oy habitat
~~
currently distributed within the residential areas ofthe Sebastian Highlands platted
.
subdivision. For purposes of this HCPdpcomvnt^ potential Florida scrub -jay habitat
� |odefined aooak scrub, ormubvUotwuodo' and mvsiomatrix habitat types located
^°
along the Atlantic Cuomu| Ridge nnunyamm in North Indian River County. The
'
proposed taking would he incidental to the otherwise |avv|v| construction o/ single-
family residential hum°uwithin tile platted subdivision o| the Sebastian Highlands,
�
inclusive o/ tbo 317 one-quarter acre Sobmm|un Highlands lots (78.3±vc/os)
|
currently recorded at the City of Sebasdan'a building department as designated by
' tho FYVSoupotentially Occupied by F|oridaxcruh'iayo.
~
!
The Sebastian HCP addresses the *ooaomaOun requirements of am,xioo 10(a)(2) of
the ESA by optimizing Florida scrub -jay habitat potential within /hn nnqxmon
combined 4.18_+ acre Sebastian MCPScrvhJoy Habitat Conservation and Corridor
|
Compensation Areas (Bo"ohJny Hvb/m/ Compensation Areas). The, FvvS and Vm
Applicant agreed that use uytile ^haNtnt^honodapproach" for development of the
,
Sebastian HCP would provide the greatest benefits tothe Applicant, the Sebastian
mgh|o"do private ron|denhp| lot owners, and tha North Indian River/South 8,vvand
**
County Florida scrub -jay mompnpu|mdno,�o/ Whioh /h^ n|foc*oV Sebastian Florida
scrub -jay subpupu|adonsare apart. The Sebastian HCP will focus oil restoring and
l� monag|pg, in thv |onV'to/m' the oak scrub, scrubby Vatwnod' and mauio matrix
�
habitat types Occurring within the Scrub -Jay Hohimt Compensation Amoo mophmizo
|'
habitat conditions for use bysorub-javu. Use o/tile |`uh/,ut'bnnpd approach nn,mim
,
the Applicant to assess the demographic impacts of habitat destruction and habitat
protection and management from a landscape or ecosystem perspective. It also
serves to protect the broad range of native species associated with the Atlantic
Coastal Ridge scrub ecosystern under the terms of the HCP and provides greater
flexibility to the Applicant in dealing With future changed CirGLImstances.
1.1. Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action
The purpose of the Sebastian HCP is to:
.'� u. Provide for greater regulatory certainty mthe Apf)fico/and private �
,
residential b/ owners wit/in the lWatted residential subdivision of �
' S�a��nH��o���e���mbx�nmwi�mo��aod*mnmn� ^
-
needs v/this residential 000ununity, `
�
This will be achieved by including �8 of the platted /oaidomia| lots
`
within the Saboudon Highlands subdivision into the Sebastian HCP
Plan Area for consideration of changes that are reasonably fnnmaon to
—.
potentially uf(nc, the functioning HCP. Using the habitat -based
approach, the Sebastian HCP uddm000a the xtookaat|o nature of
Florida scrub -jay territories in response to changing demoy,opNo and
environmental conditions. More specifically, the Sebastian HCP
recognizes that authorized encroachment of meWontio| development �
V within the 317 Sebastian Highlands |pm presently subject to FVVS
'! ~
regulation, as residential build -out occurs, will ||4miy result in the
shifting ofFlorida scrub -jay territories into new, o|th^ughpoor quality,
hvtimr areas of the Sebastian Highlands subdivision. If those nvmdv
�
occupied p|vuuod rox|donho\ moos were not considered under this
�~~
Sebastian HCP, then they would boindividually subject to section 8 of
— the ESA prohibitions.
—
b. Pmmo/ the broad range of native spmles characteristic of the Atlantic
Coastal Ridge scrub ecosystem,
�
The bonohda| attributes of this rare and vanishing ovoarnuan (Meyers `
�
{� 1990) will be protected by implementing nponiiix habitat nsmmdoo �
and management actions to return the combined 418± umo Scrub -
Jay Habitat Compensation Areas to conditions representative of the
L;
historical landscape and thereby optimal for oah"o upoc|ou of x
conservation concern adapted to this ire- douonUent open landscape. ,
� - '
For purposes of this HCP' the Florida scrub -joy will function as the
C. Enhance the recovery potential o/tile North Indian River CVu//wSooth
Brevard Cnun/ym,mpn»mation, tim fourth largest Florida scrub -jay
� me*mopulation and moa/ important metapopul0tiOo tor spooAm
~~
recovery along the Florida's Aoboot Coast 0Braininyar and Ondy
/998/' by increasing` the population »amnis,onxa probability of the
i�
Sebastian scrub -jay xu/too»wkitions.
p�
This will be aormnpUuhad by eomhnU and maintaining optimal oomb'
�J ioy habitat conditions within /he combined 418± oqm Scrub -Jay
Habitat Compensation Aromx' inclusive of the 94± acre moyic
f|o/wmoddispersal corridor located oil the Sebastian Airport properties.
This corridor will function to reduce (hv negative effects of habitat
�
fragmentation by providing ovital open |aodoonpo linkage hotmmon the
�
Sebastian scrub -jay ouhpppu|adonnand the St. Sohmuhnn River Buffer
^
Reserve/South Brevard County core scrub -jay population, This
dispersal corridor will also function to benefit other species of
conservation concern moving through this area.
Habitat loss and fragmentation, and the degradation ofhabitat quality asa result Of
Om exclusion, are tba primary famove which endanger tho |nog'tevn persistence of
the Florida scrub -jay population occupying the Atlantic Coast Subregion (B,oinin0prer
'~ ml. 1896n; Stith */ ol 1936; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994u; Swain et al, 1995; 8,oiningo,
+~ and oddv 139E). The Sebastian HCP in designed to address these factors which
currently threaten the persistence of the Sebastian Florida scrub -jay subpOpUlations.
'
Tile FVYSrecognized, anearly an19g1. that regulation of occupied scrub -jay habitat
located within the 14'000:j: platted one -quart,, acre residential lots or the Sebastian
Highlands subdivision on an individual lot -by -lot basis results it) increased
fragmentation arid degradation o(Suitable scrub -jay habitat in this area due msmall-
scale nihWuhon resolution an(] absence o/ large-scale habitat management. In
addidon, this regulatory approach significantly encumbers tho land use Of multiple
private lot owners by ,nqoidoy p,ocv,emen\ of individual HCPe v,in, to ,oam*,tip|
development.
Remnant Atlantic Coastal ao/uU habitat remains in the Sebastian Highlands
subdivision in amvom|v fragmented va,oxeo within u highly developed suburban
myidando\ |undaoepa matrix. The odvo,no influences of (ho expansive urbanization,
including habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, and increased vulnerability tn predation,
on ,ho dmnoompkio xuvnony of the Florida xomt-jay families persisting in Ue
G*hunhan Highlands subdivision aro emphasized by U`e ouvnra mon/b'|ay population
decline documented in this area. Demographic studies of uo|orVandad scrub -joys in
known territories oondootod Within tile incorporated limits of o`e City of Sohnshuo'
`
comprised primarily of tile SwhaaVa" Highlands residential oohd\vioioo, during the
seven year p"hud. 1991 to 1998. doovmon*da 5496decline |mm 35 breeding pairs
to l6brooding pairs (To|anuun»oh|. dotu).
`
implementation of a functioning HCl' that directs immediate and intensive habitat
restoration and management of the remaining Atlantic Coastal scrub habitat
patches is needed not only to ameliorate the severe Florida scrub -jay population
decline, but also to relieve the regulatory burden from residential lot owners
desiring to develop their properties.
1.2. Government Regulations Pertaining to the Sebastian HCP
The Florida scrub -jay was federally listed as a threatened species on June 3, 1987.
This Federal listing granted protection to the Florida scrub -jay in accordance with
Section 4(d) and 9 of the ESR (16 USC 1531 -1543), and by regulations promulgated
thereunder (50 CFR Part 17), which prohibit tile "take" of a federally listed species.
The Secretary of the Interior and the FWS are primarily responsible for administration
of the ESA.
"Take" is defined to mean harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct (Section 3(8) of the
ESA), "Harm" and "harass" have been further defined in FWS regulations 50 CFR
17.3. "Harm" is interpreted to include significant habitat modification or degradation
which results in death or injury to listed species to such an extent as to significantly
disrupt normal behavioral patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding,
feeding or sheltering. "Harass" is defined as an intentional or negligent act or
omission which creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife by annoying it to such an
extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns which include, but are riot
limited to, breeding, feeding or sheltering. Therefore, any activity as described above,
may constitute a violation of Section 9 of the ESA. The Section 9 prohibitions against
"take" apply to actions conducted by "...any person subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States..". The term "person" was further interpreted in a 1988 amendment to
the ESA to include actions carried out by states, counties and municipalities. This
includes the issuance of land clearing and development permits by local governments,
such as the City of Sebastian.
The ESA provides two regulatory methods to the "person" who wishes to conauct
development activities on land containing federally fisted species. The regulatory
method that is used is based on whether the project is a Federal activity or a non -
Federal activity. Federal activities include, but are not limited to, the' issuance of
Federal permits, authorization, or funding. Ili either case, the permitted "take" of a
listed species is referred to as an "incidental take". Incidental take is defined as any
take of a listed species that results from, but is not the purpose of, carrying out all
otherwise lawful activity (Section 10(a)(1)(a), ESA).
The first method for procurement of an "incidental take" authorization is for Federal
activities. This is accomplished through Section 7 of the ESA, Interagency
Cooperation, by issuance of an "incidental take statement" from the FWS. Section
7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that each Federal ac,7enry, in consultation with the FWS,
40
insure that any action it authorizes, funds or carries out, is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of habitat determined to be critical to such species.
The second method, which addresses non -Federal activities such as the private
development concerns addressed herein, is the issuance of an "incidental take" permit
from the FWS in accordance with Section 10(a)(1)(S) of the ESA. This method
Pm, requires that the applicant submit a conservation plan, referred to as a Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP). The goal of the HCP program is to ensure that the effects of
the authorized incidental take will be adequately minimized and mitigated to the
maximum extent practicable (FWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFSj
1996). The Congressional intent of the NCP program was to institute "... a process-
that, at its best, would integrate non -Federal development and land use activities with
conservation goals, resolve conflicts between endangered species protection and
economic activities on non -Federal lands, and create a climate of partnership and
cooperation" (FWS and NMFS 1996). The Sebastian HCP presented herein is
designed to comply with the Congressional intent of the HCP program.
The Florida scrub -jay is also protected in accordance with the Wildlife Code of the
State of Florida (Chapter 39, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)), administered by
the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), formerly the Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC), where it is listed as a
threatened species. The State of Florida, in Chapter 39, F.A.C„ defines take
similarly to the ESA, except that protection of occupied habitat is not specifically
included in the State's definition of "take". The FWC will be. requested to provide
comment to the Sebastian HCP as part of the public review process.
In accordance with Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the ESA, this document assesses the
effects of the proposed take on the Florida scrub -jay population and provides
conservation strategies that serve to rninirnize and mitigate these potential -adverse
effects.
E
I:
i
I
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/IMPACTS
2,1, Sebastian NCP Boundaries (HCP Plan Area)
The Sebastian Highlands subdivision is located in the northernmost part of Indian
River County, Florida, within the incorporated limits of the City of Sebastian. Figure
1 provides a Vicinity Map showing the location of the City of Sebastian and the
expansive Sebastian Highlands subdivision. Sebastian Highlands is an active
14,000± lot residential subdivision platted in the 1950's by General Development
Corporation (GDC), currently known as Atlantic Gulf Communities (AGC). The City
of Sebastian experienced one of the highest rates of growth, 237%-337%, in the
State of Florida between 1980 and 1990 (Fernald et al. 1992). A rapid rate of
growth continues in this municipality,
The Sebastian HCP ITP impact area (ITP impact area) is defined by all platted
residential lots located within the Sebastian Highlands subdivision. The ITP impact
area is inclusive of the 317 one-quarter acre Sebastian Highlands lots (79.3±acres)
currently recorded at the City of Sebastian's building department as designated by
the FWS as potentially occupied by Florida scrub -jays. The ITP impact area and the
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, as described below, define the project
boundaries of the Sebastian HCP (HCP Plan Area). In accordance with the
regulatory criteria set forth under section 10(a)(2)(A), a qualitative analysis of the
potential adverse impacts of the proposed taking on the North Indian River/South
Brevard County Florida scrub -jay rnetapopulation, of which the Sebastian Florida
scrub -jay subpopulations are a part is presented herein. Steps to be taken by the
Applicant to minimize and mitigate such impacts are also covered under this HCP.
The combined 418± acre Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are comprised of
324± acres of Florida scrub -jay potential habitat types (oak scrub, scrubby
flatwoods, and mesic matrix habitat types), both occupied and unoccupied by
scrub -jays, and the 94± acre mesic flatwood Sebastian Airport dispersal corridor. The
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are located on the following publicly -owned
lands: 1.) the 406± acre North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area, 2J the
126,6± acre Sebastian Airport properties, 3.) the 10± acre Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area (34 Lots in Unit 17), 4.) the 11.9± acre Pelican Island
Elementary School scrub (located in Unit 17), and 5.) the 1111- acre Wabasso
Scrub Conservation Area. As discussed in Section 4.1.3 below, the 418± acre
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas does not include the 34.6 -± acre portion of
the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area that was previously used by Indian River
County as compensatory mitigation for the take of one (1) Florida scrub -jay
territory incidental to the construction of the County Road 512 improvements
project (FWS Log No. 4-1-96-432).
Figure 2 provides an overlay, on an 1994 high resolution orthophoto quad (DOQ),
of the location of the 317 FWS designated potential scrub -jay habitat lots to be
4
2"6t ANVdWOO ONIddVW aWU01�tl V33U3ZVO pFN SVIJ,Y YQEN09:1 1301009
spuaI146IH uel;ssq;9S / uellsegaS }o Allo "
1
dVW AIINIOIr1 � 1
111 i
11� t a
T
E ;
i .„..Al 1 aSTI
Pi 914 lFi
r��4 � Z 3; T t• �.. _
1 -tis
uepsega9 "iS
OWN 11111 _._._, .... ..
r 1
|� impacted in the Sebastian Highlands espart o/tile overall ITP impact area and the
proposed 3ombJoy Habitat Compensation Areas, This aerial display clearly reveals
tile expansive suburban nature of Sebastian Highlands xubUivioiuo and tile severe
w�
habitat fragmentation that presently characterizes the Sebastian MCP Plan Area,
,
x'
An knpuuunz fact that must be considered in determining the su#idnnoy of tbo
proposed Sebastian HCP conservation initiative in meeting the regulatory
requirements of section 10(a)(2)(A) of the ESA is that the proposed Scrub -Jay
HnWrutComponxuhunAreas repmuentthe largest, most ouobo
�uno, and tile best
quality scrub -jay habitat parcels remaining in the HCP Plan Area. Some moiVonUa|
d this HCP |o10 �n he impacted in Unit 17 o� Sebastian Highlands under � x are
recognized to contain high quality scrub habitat; however, as n|oady depicted on
Figure 2, the remaining scrub is highly fragmented by developed ,oaideru|m| lots and
�
roads. In addition, the application of n/oaodbod fire within the nno'qum,cm, acre lots,
'
to manage optimal scrub -jay habitat oonU|doox in the |ong,mnn' is (lot practicable
� vvbxin this existing high density residential |oodsompo.
Due tothe fragmented landscape conditions presently ohnraucer|do0 the HCP Plan
Area, the ability of the Applicant to "design" aso,ub sanctuary that considers txo
/
biological criteria set forth by Fitzpatrick e, at (1994o) for development of p
^~
functioning Florida scrub -jay reserve (e.g. considerations of connectivity,
~-
geographic distribution, habitat oua|ity' management potovho|' mn,) was Dot on
option, However, the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Amoo currently owned by
�
Indian River County: the NoMh Sebastian Conservation Area, vVobaoso Scrub
Conservation Area, and Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area (Unit 17- 34
^ |um)' were eooh acquired by this local government at the recommendation of tho
FVVG based on the 1996 scrub -jay core habitat maomo dooiOo developed by this
Fodnm| agency (To|and 1996). The /n[n/aocod v,nvn,hoo were designated by tho
1986 FYV8 'onewe design as core habitat conservation area,,; essential to the long-
term persistence of Sebastian scrub -jay subpopulations (Toland
nnA'monpon`imtnocaofSohaodanxcruh'juyouhpopo|ahoxs(Tn|un0 1898) (Soo discussion
!`
in Section 3.1 bn|nv),
_
Based on u numner/[ n 1998 survey conducted in support of this HCP tile
Sobaehuo Florida scrub -jay population was do/unninud to ovnuio/ of 2
�~ suhpopu|ohoou' ,oforonoeU herein as t»onorth subvopu|uVnn and d`o South
' xvbpopu|ahoo. These ouhpopoiohunu were dofillod using criteria um forth in
/
Fitzpatrick ero< (1894a) and Stith orjjL (1388) todescribe the spatial Structure of
— Florida scrub -jay populations using data on geographic distribution and natal
dispersal distances. "8ubpopubhona" are mopvmwd by gaps of 2.2mUau (3.5 kin).
This distance mnrumoma the mnximUm dispersal diummoo for 80% o/ all dispersals
at Archbold Biological Station. Tile South yubpopu|m*on incomprised ofv total of
S' and pntonduxy' 10 uo,ub'joy fami|iom. Tl`v*° sovthmrm f*miUem are primarily
l�
located in Units 10 and 17 of tile Sebastian Highlands subdivision (7 ' pna
�
the YVuhasao Sond/ Cnnxomnhon Area (2' ou,vmly 3. families). Tile north
uubp*pw|at1ov consists of a /nw| of 4 ,cn'b'|wv |umUiwu' 3 (^mmmx in V`e North
~L�
� 9
|�
•
r4
Sebastian Conservation Area and 1 family within the extreme western portion of
the Sebastian Airport properties covered under this HCP (Carroll and Associates
1997). These 13 to 14 scrub -jay families comprise the Sebastian HCP study
population (study population). It should be noted that an additional 5 scrub -jay
families are documented to occupy habitat on and adjoining the Sebastian Golf
Course and the Sebastian Elementary School properties (Poland unpubl, data).
These properties are not included within the Sebastian HCP Plan Area. These
families are part of the north subpopulation and should greatly benefit from habitat
conservation actions proposed under this Sebastian HCP.
Tile study population is part of the fourth most important metapopulation of the
species (study metapopulation) (Breininger and Oddy 1998). Stith et al. (1996)
described "metapopulations" as populations that are separated by 7.5 miles (12
km), representing the maximum dispersal distance of more than 99% of all
dispersals at Archbold. Most of this fourth largest metapopulation occurs in south
Brevard County, although at least one dozen pairs occur on the St. Sebastian River
State Buffer Reserve (SBR) and the adjoining Carson Platt Estate Property. The
Carson Platt Estate Property is proposed for conservation acquisition in the
immediate future. The families on Carson Platt have never been surveyed and
scrub -jay surveys on the Coraci section of the SBR have only recently been initiated
(Breininger pers comm.). These pairs do not appear on the statewide survey
because of previous access permission problems (Breininger pens comm.).
Observations of historical and recent aerial photography indicate that with
extensive restoration these areas could support dozens of Florida scrub -jay pairs
(Breininger pers comm.). If all public lands proposed or acquired are restored, the
total size of this regionally important metapopulation could approach 140 pairs
(Breininger and Oddy 1998).
2.2 Property Ownership Status of Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
Conservation properties held by Indian River County and subject to the provisions
of this HCP include the North Sebastian Conservation Area, the Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area (34 lots in Unit 17), and the Wabasso Scrub Conservation
Area, These Indian River County -owned conservation properties comprise a total of
527± acres. Of this total, 279.5± acres have been defined as Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas. This represents 67% of the total 418:t acres of Scrub -Jay
Habitat Compensation Areas considered under this Sebastian HCP. Each of these
conservation properties is 1001% fee title owned, with no encumbrances or third -
party rights, by Indian River County (R. (7eBlois pers. comm.). Indian River County
acquired each of the subject conservation properties with cost-sharing funding
grants from the State of Florida's Florida Communities Trust (FCT) program. The
FCT Program is a statewide initiative funded through Preservation 2000 (132000), a
statewide land acquisition program. Under the terms of the FCT "Grant Awards
Agreement", which are recorded in the public records, Indian River County is
obligated to advise and procure concurrence from the FCT on all management
10
activities proposed to be conducted on the subject properties (R. DeBlois pers.
r, comma). Indian River County will be responsible for advising the FCT of habitat
management recommendations covered under this HCP. The recorded FCT Grant
Award Agreements are tantamount to conservation easements over the entire
, 4 County -owned compensation areas, in that the Agreements require areas to be
R� managed in perpetuity for resource conservation and compatible passive
recreational use.
The City of Sebastian owns the 126.6±acres Sebastian Airport property proposed
for conservation covered under this Sebastian HCP 100% fee title with no
encumbrances or third -party rights (R. DeBlois pers, comm.), This airport property
represents 30% of the total Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas provided under
this HCP and functions as an integral part of the overall Sebastian HCP ill that it
provides a vital linkage between the Sebastian scrub -jay study population and the
"core populations" of the study metapopulatien. In support of the Sebastian HCP,
the City of Sebastian has also indicated that the proposed Gibson Street expansion
through the North Sebastian Conservation Area will be abandoned. This action, as
well as a City agreement to conserve the Sebastian Airport compensation area in
perpetuity, will be formalized by the City of Sebastian as a condition of issuance of
this HCP.
The School District of Indian River County is the sole fee title owner of the
11.9±acres Pelican island Elementary School compensation property (R. DeBlois
pers, comm.). This property, representing 3% of the total Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas provided under the Sebastian HCP was targeted for its value
as an intervening "stepping stone" habitat to enhance the connectivity between the
south population scrub -jay clusters and the scrub -jay clusters comprising the north
subpopulation and study rnetapopulation• The Pelican island Elementary School
scrub compensation area is currently utilized for an outdoor education/stewardship
program associated with the school. A School District agreement to conserve this
area in perpetuity will be formalized as a condition of the issuance of this HCP.
Legal descriptions for the five (5) conservation propertiescontaining the designated
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are provided in Appendix A.
2.3. Description of the Proposed Action
The proposed action is the clearing of potential Florida scrub -jay habitat ill
preparation for construction of single-family residential homes located within all
platted residential lots of the Sebastian Highlands subdivision. Therefore, all
residential lots within the Sebastian Highlands subdivision that contain potential
Florida scrub -jay habitat, defined herein as oak scrub, scrubby flatwood, and mesic
matrix habitat types located along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge, are covered under this
Sebastian NCP.
2.4 Description of the Species Considered Under the Sebastian HCP
Federally listed wildlife species to be covered under this MCP is limited to the Florida
scrub -jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens). Proposed management for native landscape
conditions that are optimal for Florida scrub -jays and characteristic of historical
conditions along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge ecosystem in North Indian River County
are consistent with the habitat requirements of other native species that use this
unique ecosystem (Schmalzer et al. 1994, 1999; references in Breininger and Oddy
1998, Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a).
Studies conducted by the FWS in support of the South Florida MUlti-Species Recovery
Plan (USFWS 1999, USFWS unpubl. data) determined that federally listed plant
species do riot occur within the Sebastian HCP Plan Area. Therefore, federally listed
plants are not addressed under this HCP.
2.4,1 Biological Overview ofAhe Florida Scrub -Jay,
Descrilion
The Florida scrub -jay is a 2.5 to 3 -ounce, 12 -inch -long, blue and gray crestless jay
that is endemic to peninsular Florida (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). It is the
only bird species that is endemic to peninsular Florida (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). in
the adult plumage, a necklace of blue feathers separates tale whiter throat from the
gray underparts and a white superciliary line or eyebrow often blends into a whitish
forehead. Tire back is gray and the tail is long and loose in appearance (Fernald
and Toland 1991), Juvenile scrub -jays less than about 5 months of age can be
identified by their dusky brown head and neck and shorter tail (Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1984). In late summer and early fall, immature scrub -jays undergo a
partial molt of body feathers that renders them indistinguishable from adults in the
field (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). Adult male and female Florida scrub -jays
are not distinguishable by plumage, but are differentiated by a distinct "hiccup" call
vocalized only by females (Woolfenden acid Fitzpatrick 1986).
Florida scrub -jays are generally associated with Florida's unique scrub habitat, a
fire -maintained ecosystem dominated by evergreen oaks (Quercus spp.) typically
occurring on the sandy well -drained soils of relict coastal and inland dune systems
geographically unique to peninsular Florida (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984;
Myers 1990; Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Fernald and Toland 1991). The restriction of
Florida's oak scrub communities to well -drained sandy soils results in a habitat type
that naturally occurs as patches of scrub oak within a matrix of mesic shrub
communities on poorly -drained soils (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984, 1991;
Myers 1990; Bergen 1994; Breininger et at. 1995, 1996b; Breininger and Oddy
1998). The Occurrence of scrub on high, dry lands has precipitated the wide-sliread
loss of this geographically limited habitat type to comraierririllresideutizrl developilient
and to agricultural conversion (FNAI 1990; Fernald 1989; Fitzpatrick tit al. 1991).
12
CU
Due to this wide -spread loss of Florida's scrub habitat, FNAI (1990) has ranked this
natural community as imperiled, both globally and within the State of Florida.
`t
In response to the extreme environmental conditions and limited spatial extent of the
scrub natural community, the Florida scrub -jay has evolved into a habitat specialist
j that has adapted by developing a unique social system that includes permanent
monogamy, year-round territoriality, cooperative breeding, an intrafamilial dominance
hierarchy, delayed dispersal, food caching, and an exceptional sentinel system
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1977; Staiicup and Woolfenden 1978; Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1984). The Florida scrub -jay is non -migratory and occupies permanent
year-round territories averaging 22.5 acres in size (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984;
Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994x). This species is one of the few
cooperative breeding birds in the Eastern United States, whereby surviving fledgling
scrub -jays usually remain with the breeding pair in their natal territory as "helpers,"
forming a closely -knit, cooperative family group (Stalicup and Woolfenden 1978;
Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). Group size ranges from 2 to 8 birds, but pre -
breeding families average 2.8 individuals (usually a pair with from 0 to 2 helpers)
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). Helpers participate in scanning for predators, territorial
defense against neighboring scrub -jay groups, predator -mobbing, and the feeding of
both nestlings and fledglings (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984),
Distribution
Florida scrub -jays were historically distributed throughout the Florida peninsula in
suitable habitat in 39 of the 40 counties south of, and including, Levy, Gilchrist,
Alachua, Clay, and Duval (Fitzpatrick el al. 1994a). The only county on the
peninsula that historically lacked scrub -jays was Monroe (Fitzpatrick et a/. 1994x).
Currently, the much -reduced range of the Florida scrub -jay extends from Flagler to
Palm Beach counties on the Atlantic Coast (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). On the Gulf
Coast, scrub -jays persist in small and distantly isolated populations from Levy south
to Collier counties (Fitzpatrick or al. 1994a). In interior Florida, this species persists
mainly on federal properties in Putnam and Marion counties south to Polk,
Highlands, and Glades counties (Fitzpatrick el aL 1994a).
The present day Florida scrub -jay population is distributed within five (5)
"Subregions", with well over half of the State's remaining jays occurring in three
(3) core populations with al least 400 breeding pairs each (Fitzpatrick et al.
1994a). These core population centers are associated with the Atlantic Coastal
Ridge (Merritt Island/Cape Canaveral), the Mount Dora Ridge (Ocala National
Forest), and the Lake Wales Ridge and associated ridges, These extensive scrub
ridges constitute major Subregions within the overall distribution of Florida scrub -
jay: the Atlantic Coast Subregion, the Ocala Subregion, and the Lake Wales Ridge
Subregion (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994aI• Soil maps indicate that even prior to habitat
modification by humans, these three (3) major Subregions were separated from one
another by habitat types that were mostly unsuitable for use by scrub -jays
13
--p-�-- -~ ~
rA
�
~m
*� (Fitzpatrick at a< 1e94a). Today, these gaps have expanded duo to encroaching
citrus groves and burgeoning residential developments (Fitzpatrick g o{ 1994a.
L 1994W.
�
The remaining two (2) Subregions are the Northern Gulf Coast Subregion and dm
Southern Gulf Coast Subregion (Fitzpatrick at o/ 1994n). Hbxohua| records of
Florida scrub -jay sightings and the distribution of sandy soils indicate that the Go||
~�
Coast populations nxVmd|vg from Levy County south to Loo County originally
`
comprised u fourth major oqoGOuous population of scrub -jays (Fitzpatrick az a/
1994p). However, duo to the mmonuivo |oau of habitat o|uog the Gulf Coast, this
nnoo contiguous population has been functionally separated into thn two (2)
Subregions defined above (Fitzpatrick urut1384a).
-`
The most abundant and conmpiCu000plant indicators ofscrub hnhkam are four (4)
�
species of shrubby, stunted, no|ernphylou u'leaved oaks: Quercus g*nnimox [L
cha»manfl, O. 'nyr/ifolia, and (l inopin» (YVoo|[anden and Rupmtdok 1984; Myers
` 1990/ Gchmg\zor and Hinkle 1892; Fitzpatrick e/a< 1394o). Most scrub plants are
�
endemic to Florida, and are adapted to nwoien,'poo, soils, periodic drought,
seasonally high rainyo||, and frequent (i/os (Abrahamson 1984; Fitzpatrick at a<
' 1984a>.
,
Optimal Florida nnmhiov habitat (Fitzpatrick o/ ai 1991; Omhnio0e 1992; BmkinAo
` o/a/ 1995, 1938W occurs ropatches vfoak scrub (focal habitat), embedded within
� a low and open meoic shrub landscape (matrix habitats) (8minioOwr */ a< 1996b).
'
Optimal oak scrub focal habitat exhibits the following cxomo/c,isdon: l.) 8,*ute/ than
50% of the shrub layer comprised of scrub oaks (Ouooxusoppl' 2.) /OY6'30Y6 of txv
�
area comprised ofopen space (bare sand or sparse herbaceous vegetation); 3.> |oso
than 15% pine canopy cover; 4.) o shrub height of 3.9 to 6.6' (1.2 ,o 1.7 m); and 5l
^ >328'(10Om)fnxnuforest U}mininVoro,al. 1996' 1e96b. 4forest indef inodus
— aoarea exhibiting u oannpyoIOmun of >§5%(omhnin0nro/al, 1335' 1996W. The
^
essential elements of optimal Florida scrub -jay habitat are: /ho presence of scrub
L
oaks, numerous patchy open spaces, an open pine canopy, and low shrub landscape
|�
~
Native matrix habitats, principally scrubby andmoaic »kne,/lanwnodo. and swale and
depression marshes, are important components of optimal Florida uxmhlay habitat
`
landscapes (8ro|ninOu,o/o< 1335' 189Ob).These native ma/rixhabitats provide prey /
/~
species for Florida mmvh'|ayo and habitat for other species of oonaomobno concern -
<8re|n|nOo/ e/ A 1995' 1980b>. The high flammability of d.e ouUva muoiu hobhom �
often uamnx to spread fire into Ue mofaaimunt oak momb |mkuum (Dmininger at vC
~ 1995' 1996u). The mat/ix habitats also provide habitat to Florida uo,uh'inv* during
�
periods n(habitat degradation ortile preferred oak scrub habitat (8mininon,and nuav
1�p8)�
`~ °
�. 14
L
•
E
l- Long-term studies at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), located on Merritt Island, Brevard
County, Florida, found that scrub -jays occupy a broad range of habitat conditions,
including areas that are marginal for them (Schmalzer et al. 1994). However,
r demographic success studies at KSC suggest that mortality exceeds reproductive
success in areas on KSC that do not exhibit optirnal scrub Jay habitat conditions. as
described by Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick (1984), Fitzpatrick et al. (1991), and
Breininger 1992 (Schmalzer et aL 1994).
The open canopy and low shrub community structure of optimal scrub -jay habitat
landscapes enhance habitat defendability as it provides the perched scrub -jay with a
full view of its territory and an unobstructed flight path for the rapid defense of
territorial boundaries (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). The low, open vegetative
community structure of preferred scrub jay habitat also allows for effective
surveillance of both aerial and ground predators (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984).
Predation, particularly by hawks, is the primary cause of Florida scrub -jay mortality
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). Florida scrub -jays residing in large landscapes
surrounded by other scrub -jay families are safer from predation than isolated families
living in fragmented edge habitats due to the early warning system that is provided by
the contiguous families (Breininger et al. 1996b). Maintenance of an open habitat
landscape structure also enhances population persistence as it provides an
opportunity for nonbreeders to detect vacancies in their surroundings and disperse
into these areas with reduced chance of predation from woodland hawks (Breininger
et al. 1996a).
The effectiveness of the scrub -jays' important territorial defense and predator
surveillance behavior is significantly reduced in tall, disturbed scrub and wooded
matrix habitats (Fitzpatrick et aL 1991; Breininger et al. 1991, 1995, 1996b). The
increased presence of avian competitors within tall, overgrown or wooded habitats
and the reduction in the visual range of the sentinel, which exposes the scrub -jay
group to surprise attacks by aerial predators, such as hawks, are factors which
reduce habitat quality (Breininger et al. 1991, 1995). Adult mortality is high and
reproductive success is low for scrub -jay groups residing within tall, disturbed habitat
types (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Fitzpatrick et aL 1991; Schmalzer et al.
1994).
Fragmentation of native habitats and replacement with urban habitats increases the
densities and hunting efficacy of nest predators such as fish crows (Corvus
ossitragus), raccoons (Procyon lotor), and house cats (Felis catus) that are much
less common in optimal xeric oak scrub habitat (Breininger 1999). Fragmented and
urbanized landscapes also increase the numbr:rs of potential competitors like the
blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata) (Fitzpatrick et aL 1991; Breininger 1999).
The intervening landscape matrix affects scrub -jay dispersal behavior (Fitzpatrick et
al. 1994a). Protected scrub habitats most effectively sustain scrub -jay
-' auhpopulodnnx i|they are located within umutdxofSurrounding habitats that call
[�
be safely negotiated by dispersing scrub -jays (Fitzpatrick ov e/ 1994a). Brushy
[�
pastures, scrubby corridors along railway and Country road ,iUht-of-vvayo' and open
habitat types allow for foraging arid provides links for colonization among oorub-jay
muhpopu|miona(Fitzpatrick e/a/ 1994a). Expansive bodies o/water, dense forest,
[ urban development, suburban residential areas, shopping malls, major highways,
and tmn\oau, wide-open pastures inhibit dispersal movement o/ scrub. -Jays
(Fitzpatrick n,a/1S94a>.
�
—
The vegetative oompoutinn arid suu*mm| femmmm characterizing optimal Florida
anmh-jay hxa| koWmt, as defined above, represent native oak oomb habitat
conditions; conditions which are created and maintained by pedudio, high intensity
—
fires (N1yom 1990; BminioAor et a{ 1995, 1998b). The fire regime in scrub habitat
,
types uextremely variable (Myers 1930; Adminuod Fahnotd 1995). It is dependent
upon both the productivity (ram of huo| accumulation) of /he ocrub site and the
surrounding matrix habitats (Myers 1990; Adrninnnd Fahnoni 1985>. Accumulation
of fuels is slower in oak dominated oomb occurring on weU'dm|nmd, infm,h|o nuUs o/
the sand ridges (K8vem 1990). in addition, Um hnhznn:x| distribution of fuels in oak
scrub on sand ridges is patchy due to the p,voonua of numerous openings of bare
�
sand vvhiob characterize this o*oh habitat type. These factors result in a fire -
dependent habitat type
m-
depw"domhubim/typm that is not very flammable arid does not ignite easily (Myers
1990), Therefore, Umo that burn into oak scrub habitat patches are generally ignited
in the surrounding matrix hoh|ta/o' such as vino f|atwmodx, o,cvn|n0 on »undv
� dminnd, fo'Wo noi|s, vvhirx pouooxo and rapidly muoumu|atocontinuous fine surface
fuels (N1yam 1830; Adrian and Fahnoui 1995). When fires do 0000, in the no,vb
^
landscape, it usually results in n complex mosaic ofslightly burned, immnua|y burned,
�
and uoho/nod area types (Myers 1890). This patchy bum e800, is hnpurmn/ as Um
,
presence of scrub habitat in various stages of development enhances habitat diversity
[ ^` and reduces potential adverse effects of da fire to dependent upeokm with special
^
Because xrmb is o pym0an|u 000nyuteo\ its Vo* and fauna havo developed
udou«utiooa to fire and arc, dependent on periodic fires to provide for tile low, open
oomb in v"hid` they have evolved (Myers 1380; Qnhmabe/ o/a/ 1994>. One of the
'~
adaptations of Florida ecmb1ayn ^nfrequent fires is the oumbli»hm*o/ and do/cuue of
large te/dmr|ou. "Ownership" of o \u,ga territory increases thn uo/ub'jay 0mvp'n
� vnohaWU/y of free a000xu to enough habitat patches in vph'na| onnditin"(moo|hndwn
and Fitzpatrick 1984). Fire influences voQamhvo oommuoiry composition arid
mrvo[um through its »»ouoocy and/or intensity <[myae 1930. Sou/h oako, saw
pa|mouu, and odoocuouo shrubs regenerate /mm Um n,inwM|y by sprouting, and
•
I.
t
fire within scrub habitats can result in a dense and overgrown vegetative structure, a
condition which effectively decreases scrub -lay habitat suitability {Cox 1984;
Woolfenden and 'Fitzpatrick 1984; Schmalzer et al. 1994; Myers 1990; Breininger et
al. 1995, 1996a, 1996b; Breininger and Oddy 1998; Breininger 1999).
j._ Renroduction andUaMDgraohv
Age at first breeding in the Florida scrub -jay ranges froml to 7 years, with most
Individuals becoming breeders between the ages of 2 and 4 years (Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1991). Male scrub -jays become breeders later in life than females
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1991). Nesting is synchronous, normally ranging from
March 1 through June 30 (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1990, Fitzpatrick et al.
1994a). However, in the Treasure Coast Region of Florida, persistent renesting
attempts after nesting failures, and double brooding after successful nesting by as
much as 20% of the breeding pairs, may extend the nesting season through the
end of July (Toland unpubl. data). Scrub -jays typically build their nests in shrubby
oaks, 3.2 to 6.4' (1 to 2 m) in height. Preferred nesting sites are Quercus inopina
on the Lake Wales Ridge (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984) and Quercus myrtifolia
on the Atlantic Coastal Ridge (Toland 1991).
Florida scrub -jay clutches usually contain 3 or 4 eggs, are incubated for 17 to 18
days, and fledging occurs 16 to 19 days after hatching (Woolfenden 1974, 1978;
�- Fitzpatrick et al. 1994x). Only the breading female incubates and broods eggs and
nestlings (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). During incubation, breeding reales
are often conspicuous on sentinel perches within 165' (50m) of the nest (Toland
unpubl. data). Mean annual productivity for stable populations of scrub -jays is 2
fledglings per pair per year (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1990; Fitzpatrick et al.
1994x) and the presence of helpers improves fledging success (Mumme 1993).
Fledglings remain dependent upon adults for food for 8 to 10 weeks after leaving
the nest (Woolfenden 1975; McGowan and Woolfenden 1990). Nesting failures
are nearly always caused by predation, most frequently by ground-based predators
including snakes, raccoons, and domestic cats (Schaub et al. 1992; Toland unpubl.
data; Breininger unpubl. data).
w Recruitment of new scrub -jay territories generally occurs when the dominant male
helper acquires both a mate and a portion of his natal territory through a process
termed territorial budding (Fitzpatrick et at. 1991). Florida scrub -jays may also obtain
a breeding space when an established territory is vacated due to death of one or both
of the established breeders or, more rarely, family breakups (Fitzpatrick et al. 1991;
Breininger et al. 1996b). Although the dispersal distance of Florida scrub -jays is
directly related to the surrounding habitat types and intervening landscape features,
most Florida scrub -jays pairs establish territories within 1 to 3 territories (984' 1300m)
to 3281' 11 000m]) of their natal ground (Breininger et al. 1995). In suitable habitat,
more than 95% of all observed scrub -jay dispersals are 2 miles (3.2 km) or Tess in
distance and rarely do they exceed'5 miles (8 krn) (Fitzptirtrk, r'1 al. 19948). All
17
i
I
documented scrub -jay dispersals exceeding 5 miles have been across unsuitable
habitat conditions, including suburban residential communities, pastures, and
woodlands (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a).
Predators and the Sentinel stem
Predators on adult Florida scrub -jays are relatively few, with the exception of
falconid and accjpitrid raptors. (-louse cats and bobcats (Fees rclfus) have been
documented to prey on adult scrub -jays (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). Eastern coach
whips (Masticol-Ws flagellum), Eastern indigo snakes (Drymarchon corais couperll,
and great horned owls (Bubo virginianus) occasionally prey on adult scrub -jays
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). However, the most dangerous native predators to scrub -
jays are the Cooper's hawk Wccipiter cooperhl, sharp -shinned hawk (A. striatus),
merlin (Falco columbarius), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and peregrine falcon
(F. peregrinus) (Breininger et al. 1995, 1996a, 1996b; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994x;
McGowan and Wooifenden 1989).
In response to foraging efficiency of these raptors, Florida scrub -jays have evolved
a well-developed sentinel system (McGowan and Wooifenden 1989). Individuals
within a family group take turns occupying an exposed perch above the oak shrubs
scanning for predators. When a raptor is spotted nearby, the sentinel jay gives a
distinctive warning call and all group members dive for cover in the nearest dense
vegetation.
Face Habits apd_Caehing
Florida scrub -jays forage mostly on or near the ground, often along the edges of
natural or man-made openings. Animal food items consist primarily of terrestrial
arthropods (Wooifenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Fernald and Toland 1991; King et al.
1992). Vertebrate prey items comprise the minority of the diet, but may include a
wide array of species weighing up to 1 ounce (more than 1/3 the body weight of a
scrub -jay), including treefrogs, lizards, snakes, nestling birds, and mice (Toland
unpubl. data; King et al, 1992).
Acorns are extremely important in the diet of Florida -scrub jays from August
through November. During this tirne, scrub -jays harvest and cache thousands of
scrub oak acorns throughout their territory, Each scrub -jay may cache 6,000 to
8,000 acorns per year (DeGange et al, 1989). Acorns are typically buried beneath
the surface of the sand in openings in the scrub during fail, and retrieved and
consumed in winter and early spring. Scrub -jays on the Atlantic Coastal Ridge
frequently cache acorns in pine trees (Pinus spp.) at heights of from 1 to 30 feet
(0.3 to 91-11), usually in forks of branches, distal pine boughs, under bark, or on
epiphytes (Toland unpubl. data).
�
rN
Scrub Habitat Loss and Florida SCrUb-Jay—Po�
�
[.Scrub ha�Km�� associated with Florida'shon�,�aoUo mainland oouym Ter) N1Uo
\� �n . '
Ridge, and Lake Wales Ridge are some ofthe most imperiled natural communities in
the United States, with estimates nfhabitat loss �noopru�eo|mnvn¢ tin es
from 7096 to more than 85Y6 (Bo,0on 1994; Fitzpatrick e/ a/ 1994a}. The most
important and ommasho nuumen of scrub habitat |oau are oommeroio|/rea{deoho|
~~
development and agricultural conversion (Fernald 1988; Fitzpatrick etaL 1991'
�^ 1994a). Much of the remaining pamo|a of oomb are fragmented and in various
states cfdegradation due primarily mwidespread fire (Fernald 1889;
-
Fitzpatrick e/ o/ 1994a; Brein|pqo/ et X 1996a, 1098b; Brm|ningor and Oddy
1e98; BroininUor 1998). Statewide Florida scrub -jay population tmndu have closely
mirrored scrub habitat loss; the present-day popu|a\ion is no more than 15% of the
pre -settlement population estimate (Fitzpatrick exal. l894e).
.
The Most precipitous scrub -jay population decline occurred during the 1880'o and
1990's with an estimated 25% to 50Y6 reduction in ^oruh'ny numbers (Fitzpatrick
-~
el al, 1894a' 1984h;To|undunpoW.data; Broininge/and Oddy 1988; FVVG 1839).
Roridauombiayo are presently funohonoUy urcompletely extirpated fnvn 10 of 39
.� 000n,ioo hivoudnoUy occupied by aorvh'|ayu. including Alachua, Urvmmrd, C|ay,
Dade, Dvvm|, Gi|ohhut, Hendry, Hernando, Pinellas, and 8t. Johns Counties
^
(Fitzpatrick et o/ 1994n, 1894b>. As of 1894, half of all remaining Florida scrub -
jays occurred in Brmen| County <1.232 families) and Highlands County <880
families) (Fitzpatrick et al. 1894o>. A total of 19 nnonbux contained 30 o/ fewer
'* hmed|oV pairs | of which the majority of !haaoouvnbaS would have
^�
historically supported hundreds to thousands of scrub -jay families (Fitzpatrick of ol
1994a, 19941)).
~ The Florida oomh-)ay was oeoaoaed across its emho moUo during l,992'93 in an
effort to determine its statewide distribution and population status (Fitzpatrick et al.
1894b). This study documented about 4`0O0breeding pairs of Florida uu/ub-juyx'
~~
with approximately 2/3 Of the Population inhabiting Lion-FedmgLliandv (Fitzpatrick of
al. 1834b). Evuepn|m|vg kmn average scrub -jay group Size <2.8) eau!md in an
�
estimate of about 11.OU0Rodd� ac�vbiayxauo| 1393 <nunotr�k/xa( 19840)�
�
�
Cox <19O7>estimated that 15,4D0(o22.800jays comprised the statewide Florida
scrub -jay population as o/ 1984, This estimate is thought to be conservative as
^° Cox is suspected of mbsinO a aoUmonba| numho, Of umaxo, armhiuv
svhpovv|atiunsand isolated fa,ni|vgroups (Fitzpatrick c/mL 1394W.
[~ The statewide oonouo documented 62 breeding pairs of oorub1oyo in Indian River
County(Tniond 1983; Fitzpatrick e/al. 1984W. Subyopu|oions within the Atlantic
� Couup| Subregion were muoitwmn from 1388 ,hmwgk the present at 8ohomioo
<Tn|ondunpuh|,doto>^ Merritt Island (B,uin1vQore/al. 1995), Ya}ko/|o (To|and
onpub| data; ominio0mand UUdv 1990, the momhono Brevard Cuvnty nminiana
(BreininOorarid Oddv 1992) arid ouvumm nmvan1 County barrier island <Breminger
` lo
K�
�
|� 1989V. These studies document o 10-year decline of at lea: 50% in the Atlantic
Coastal Ridge scrub-jay population.
'ym
\�
The habitat structure and landscape matrix used by Florida scrub -jays residing in
medonha| |andmoupny differs significantly from native scrub habitat conditions
"~
(Fitzpatrick e/ al. 1994a/ Thuxtun and Hing/gen 1936; Brein|ngor 1939; To|und
�> unpub|. data). As mu1denhu| build -out occurs, oo|tab|o scrub -jay habitat patches
become smaller and increasingly isolated from neighboring patches (Fitzpatrick */
^ x/ 1984o. Within highly fragmented eoWemia| |aodooupns' nuoh as that
exemplified by the 8obuodun Highlands ITP impact area (see Figure 2)' demographic
success of the population dnor0000a (Fitzpatrick et u{ 1894u; Thu/tun and
Hiuq1gan 1996; Broiningor 1999; Tu|andonpub|. do,o). The habitat quality of the
-
isolated Scrub patches declines duo primarily to Um Oxo|un|nn and the introduction
of ornamental landscape and exotic plants (Fitzpatrick et aL ?884o; 8rnininOor
1899>. Predation from domestic animals (house oom) arid Urban -adapted avian
nnmpodmm' blue -jays and fish crows, increases mortality rates ofscrub-jays within
the fra8mont*d residential iaoxonapo (8ro|ningor 1899; Fitzpatrick et ah 1894a). In
' audhiun, nonbrondin9 scmh-jays are hwroad to disperse greater distances UhmugA
hostile |anduoVpoo' exposing ,ko dispersing individual to increased predation and
—
vehicular nuUiuinnx (Fitzpatrick ry a< 1994n; Tnaxunn and Hing,Don 1996;
~ Bmininyer 1898' Tmem1 unpuW. dam). All suburban scrub -jay Populations studied
are declining because of poo/ dmnographio aocooxn. no|and 1891; Fitzpatrick av at
1894a;Thuxton and HinAtgen 1996; 8rvioingo/1g98>.
...
It is interesting to note that scrub -jays residing in residential |andxnanae appear to
initially benefit from development; population densities are reported to increase it)
~~
lightly developed aubmhuo areas where many patches ofscrub mmn|nand build-
out is 3396 or |oon (FVVS 1839/ To|aod unyoh|.dum). This is probably u response to
^ xupplemnoo| food suuomo (|oodom) (Fitzpatrick ota{ 1894a)' creation of openings
-
in the o',uh' arid vinoo| buffers (UuA|Wo0n} between neighboring jay families
(Tn|ond' pers. oho*rvl. However, as human development oocn|atoa towards
~~
complete build -out, the increased risk of predation decreases ovwivu| potential of
/|odgUnA jays and ouccoax(u| nesting attempts (Tv|and 1991; Bowma" unp^W.
data; Breininger 1898). Because adult scruh'i^yS are ro|otivo|v |oug'oveU. resident
pairs often persist for years insome n(the most densely human-popu|,md Florida
�
suburbs (Rt,poxiox e/et 1984a). Although these suburban jays often continue to
[
nest, they incur high nest failure rates (Toaod1981;Fitzpatrick oro{ 1984o)�
|n fragmented residential uvducupey' nomhfmyy V|op*mo earlier arid become
breeders at ynuoQm ages U`vo uoruU�vyn in �omiguoun no/�e scrub systems
(Toiaod vnpuW. data; Bro\nin0o, 1998). m1aov (amu|on at)(] some males disperse
during their h,u/ year in nuotmot to delayed diavemn| iv native habitats (B/oiningor
1999). Nesting in suburban habitats starts aa,|im and nods |a/w, than in native
scrub, with much higher renesting attempts (3 to 4) and double brooding (20%)
than in native habitats (Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a; Toland unpubl. data). The loss of
native scrub plants and introduction of ornamental vegetation alters the
predominant shrub species in disturbed sites, causingmore variation in scrub -jay
nest sites than in natural habitats. In intensively developed suburbia, scrub -jays
often nest higher than in native scrub and almost exclusively in non-native shrubs
and trees (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a).
In large, natural habitats, Florida scrub -jays generally retain their territories and
attract new replacement mates following the death of their spouse (Woolfenden
and Fitzpatrick 1984; Breininger et at 1996b). In fragmented populations, females
frequently disperse, often for long distances, after the death of a mate until they
find an available male in another habitat patch (Breininger 1999). Conversely,
Breininger (1999) found that dispersals by males within fragmented residential
landscapes are limited to nearby clusters where they become nonbreeders until a
breeding vacancy becomes available in the cluster of their residence. Breininger
(1999) found that males represent the limiting sex in a cluster even when the total
population had fewer females.
Thaxton and Hingtgen (1996) reported that scrub -jays usually moved from small
suburban scrub fragments into larger tracts of scrub and not from large tracts into
smaller fragments. Once extinction occurred within the suburban scrub fragment
the potential for recolonization of the abandoned habitat fragment by scrub -jays
from larger tracts is low (Breininger 1999). Dispersals by either sex may be limited
across fragmented residential landscapes if extinction :occurs in intervening
fragments, as dispersing scrub -jays may be influenced by the presence of other
scrub -jays and not just the availability of scrub habitat (Stith at al. 1996). The
value of maintaining scrub -jays in suburban habitat fragments is that they may be
an important source, although temporary, of individuals to colonize unoccupied,
potential scrub -jay habitat areas following restoration to suitable habitat conditions
(Breininger 1999).
These above findings have several conservation management implications: 1.)
where possible, scrub -jay reserves should be close together (within 1 ± mile 11.6
km)) to accommodate the low dispersal tendencies of reales (Breininger 1999); 21
scrub habitat patches within tile suburban residential rnatrix must bo managed for
�., optimal scrub -jay habitat conditions to maximize demographic success within the
patch (Fitzpatrick et at 1994a; Breininger 1999), and 3.) Scrub fragments should
be maintained no more than 2.6 miles (4.2 krn) to facilitates the dispersal of fernales
across the suburban landscape (Breininger 1999). The contribution of scrub -jay
clusters residing in suburban/urban fragments to the long teen population size of
their associated metapopulation is expected to be minimal because Of the poor
demographic success exhibited by these fragmented clusters (Broininger 1999).
21
i
Modeling of Populations and Metapopulations
The Florida scrub -jay has been the subject of rigorous time -specific probability of
persistence models (Fitzpatrick et at 1991; Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1991;
f references in Breininger et at 1996b; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). These demographic
models suggest that populations of at least 400 territories have a 99% probability
of survival for 100 years and are referred to as "core" populations (Fitzpatrick et a/.
1994a). "Satellite" populations are composed of at least 100 breeding pairs of
scrub -jays and have an 85 to 90% probability of survival for 100 years (Fitzpatrick
et at. 1994a). A subpopulation with less than 10 breeding pairs has about a 50%
probability of extinction within 100 years (Fitzpatrick et a/. 1991; Fitzpatrick et a/.
1994a; Stith et al. 1996).
Florida scrub -jays generally disperse up to 2 miles with normal maximum dispersals
ranging up to 5 miles in suitable habitat (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994x). Thus, breeding
territories within 2 miles of one another are considered part of the same population
or subpopulation (Stith et al. 1996; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). A metapopulation is
comprised of a group of interbreeding subpopulations that are separated from one
another by no more than 5 miles (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). Small subpopulations
of jays are even less likely to go extinct if located within the normal 2 mile
dispersal radius of neighboring scrub -jay subpopulations (Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1991; Fitzpatrick et al. 1994al.
Population modeling suggests that a strong correlation exists between habitat
quality and scrub -jay population extinction risk (Breininger et al. unpublished
manuscript). Habitat models predict population declines of 25% every five years in
large unburned tracts (Breininger et al. 1996b). Population modeling suggest that
scrub -jay population increases after restoration to optimal habitat will be slow.
These relationships suggest that scrub restoration activities should be prioritized in
areas that have scrub -jays remaining or are proximal to scrub -jay subpopulations at
risk (Breininger et aG unpublished Manuscript). This conclusion is based on slow
population responses expected in unoccupied ,areas and the severe declines
occurring in existing populations attributed to infrequent burning.
Although local populations of scrub -jays have become extremely small in many
ureas, probabilities of extirpation remain predominantly affected by habitat loss,
habitat degradation through fire suppression, and stochastic influences on
population dynamics (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a).
In addition, the Florida scrub -jay has a sedentary social system that naturally
creates small effective population sizes and increased levels of inbreeding
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984). Although rnatings between immediate family
members are rare, matings between first -cousins, second -cousins, and other close
relatives are quite common, even in large, contiguous populations (Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1978). For _ these reasons, the species exhibits reduced genetic
variability compared to the western scrub -jay (Aphelocoma ca ilornicus) and other
22
E:1
3.0 HCP PLAN AREA BASELINE INFORMATION
3.1 FWS Consultation History and Existing Data for Sebastian Highlands Scrub -
Jay Habitat Lots
L:
The FWS consultation history and existing data for the Florida scrub -jay
subpopulations residing within the HCP Plan Area are primarily recorded in
1 correspondence between the FWS, the City of Sebastian, and Indian River County.
l The conflict between residential development and conservation of the Florida scrub -
jay has been a predominant issue in the City of Sebastian from 1991 to the
present. The number and location of the privately -owned platted Sebastian
Highlands scrub lots for which the FWS has exerted jurisdiction pursuant to Section
9 of the ESA has evolved over time - a response to the population dynamics of
Florida scrub -jays residing in an increasingly fragmented urban landscape.
The information presented herein was collected from a search of the Indian River
County Environmental Planning Section file on this long-standing issue and from
consultations with Jan King, of the City of Sebastian Growth Management
Department and FWS staff. Most of the data was derived from historical
correspondence between the FWS, City of Sebastian, and Indian River County and
informational tables generated by the City of Sebastian in order to track the Sebastian
Highlands scrub lots designated by the FWS as occupied or potentially occupied by
scrub -jays. Existing management plans for conservation lands purchased under the
Indian River County Environmental Lands Program (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech
Consultants, Inc. 1995, 1996, 1998) and a scrub -jay survey conducted for the City
of Sebastian (Carroll and Associates 1997) were also reviewed.
The City of Sebastian is the only government entity involved in this issue that
maintains a consolidated database of the Sebastian Highlands scrub -jay habitat lots
that are subject to FWS review pursuant to the provisions of the ESA. This data
base is referred to by the City of Sebastian as "Areas of Scrub Habitat" and is
updated periodically by the City of Sebastian upon verbal release of a designated
scrub lot by the FWS (J. King, City of Sebastian, pers. comm.). The FWS began to
verbally release the Sebastian Highlands scrub lots in June 1995 (J. King, City of
Sebastian, pers. comm.). In response to this FWS policy, the City of Sebastian
maintains a ledger to track the regulatory status of the platted lots in Sebastian
Highlands. The data base maintained by the City of Sebastian does not provide any
demographic information with regard to the status of Florida scrub -jay occupation
on the affected Sebastian Highlands scrub lots. The existing demographic: data
presently used by the FWS to determine if a designate(] lot is occupied by scrub -
jays is based ort surveys conducted by this agency in 1996 (M. Jennings, FWS,
pers coram.). Currently, the FWS reviews the regulatory status of each designated
Sebastian Highlands scrub lot on a lot -by -lot basis. At the request of the lot owner,
the local FWS representative conducts a site visit to determine if proposed
residential construction would result in adverse impacts to suitable scrub jay habitat
24
do
which would potentially result in a taking of Florida scrub -jays (M. Jennings, FWS,
a pers. comm.).
i`.
Although the Florida scrub -jay was federally listed as a threatened species in 1987,
t'`A FWS involvement in land development actions was not common until 1991. In
June 1991, the FWS informed all State, County and Local municipalities, including
Indian River County and the City of Sebastian, that they were potentially liable for
third party Section 9 take violations that may result from issuance of land clearing
and development permits within areas occupied by Florida scrub -jays. This far-
reaching FWS notification responded to the 1987 listing of the Florida scrub -jay
and the 1988 Congressional amendment to the ESA which defined the
responsibility of State, County and Local rnunicipali ties in ensuring that authorized
activities do not violate Section 9 prohibitions against take.
The potential adverse impacts of the 14,000± lot Sebastian Highlands residential
development project on the Florida scrub -jay subpopulation residing within the city
limits of Sebastian was initially recognized by the FWC in the late 80's (FWS,
November 12, 1996 correspondence to Indian River County - see Appendix B), By
1991, the FWC had completed a comprehensive four (4) year survey, which
determined that 35 scrub -jay families occurred within the city limits of the City of
Sebastian (FWS, November 12, 1996 correspondence to Indian River County).
In June 1992, the City of Sebastian agreed with the FWS to develop an HCP. The
City recognized that it was the only viable regulatory method available to resolve
the conflict between residential housing construction and conservation of the
Florida scrub -jay subpopulations residing within the incorporated limits of the City
of Sebastian (FWS, November 12, 1996 correspondence to Indian River County).
During this period the FWC and FWS initiated informal consultation with the City of
Sebastian regarding scrub -jay conservation. To guide future conservation actions,
FWS staff developed a scrub -jay core habitat reserve design (Toland 1996). The
objective of this reserve design was to identify those habitat areas within the City
of Sebastian that were considered essential (Conservation Areas), and less
essential (Incidental Take Areas), to the long-term persistence of the Sebastian
scrub -jay subpopulation. The Conservation Areas selected during this early planning
effort included: 1.) Sebastian PUD/Industrial Tract (presently known as the North
Sebastian Conservation Area), 2.) Sebastian Airport/Golf Course, 3.) Sebastian
Elementary School -Industrial Areas, 4.) Vicker's Grove, 5.) Easy Street (presently
known as Unit 17 - 34 Lots or Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area), and
6.) Pelican Elementary School and surrounding 177 platted lots in Unit 17 (Toland
1996), The Conservation Areas were selected based on the size of parcel (25 to 50
acres), contiguity and condition of xeric scrub, occupation by scrub -jays,
connectivity (located within normal scrub -jay dispersal distance - 2 miles), and
ability to implement habitat management and restoration actions to increase
carrying capacity of the parcel for scrub -jays (
i
Incidental Take areas included 266 lots in the southern and northern Sebastian
Highlands (Toland 1996).
By 1993, a 20% reduction in the number of scrub -jay ;families was docurnented
with only 27 families accounted for in the City of Sebastian (FWS, November 12,
1996 correspondence to Indian River County). This reduction in the Sebastian
scrub -jay subpopulation was attributed to a high demand for housing in the
Sebastian Highlands, coupled with an absence of a comprehensive enforcement
policy by the FWS and lack of willingness on the part of the City of Sebastian to
develop and implement a conservation plan (FWS, November 12, 1996
correspondence to Indian River County).
In 1994, the IRC Board voted to develop a county -wide HCP to address scrub -jay
conservation in Indian River County, including the City of Sebastian (Toland 1996;
R. DeBiois pers. comm.). In May 1994, the Sebastian City Council agreed to
participate in development of the county -wide HCP provided that the process
would not require expenditures from the City of Sebastian (City of Sebastian,
September 7, 1994 correspondence to Indian River County). In consultation with
Indian River County and the City of Sebastian, the FWS delineated the scrub
habitat areas essential to survival of the Atlantic coast scrub -jay population in
Indian River County (Toland 1996). These areas, as shown on Figure 3 - Scrub Jay
Habitat Conservation "Core" Areas, were to serve as the foundation of the county-
wide HCP for Florida scrub -jays (Toland 1996). The six (6) scrub -jay core habitat
areas initially identified within the City of Sebastian, as listed above, were included
in this county -wide mapping.
In an effort to further several comprehensive plan policies and objectives, including
front-end implementation of the county -wide NCP, Indian River County began to
actively acquire large scrub parcels through its Environmental Lands Acquisition
Bond Program with up to 50% matching funds frorn the FCT Program (R. DeBiois,
pers comm.).
In October 1995, Indian River County acquired the 111 ± acre Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area, one of the larger parcels designated by the FWS on the Scrub
Jay Habitat Conservation "Core" Areas map. In late 1996, Indian River Comity
acquired the 387 ± acre North Sebastian Conservation Area, formerly known as the
AGC Industrial Tract/St. Sebastian P,U.D. Recently, Indian River County added 19
acres to the North Sebastian Conservation Area, resulting in a total project area of
406± acres. This conservation area, which is part of the proposed Sebastian HCP
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, represents the largest scrub parcel
remaining along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge in north Indian River County.
During the 1994-95 tirne period, Indian River County endeavored to further its HCP
initiatives to acquire FWS designated core scrub -jay habitat areas by creating the
Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech
26
s
SOURCE: TOLAND 19%
FIGURE 3
3)
E5
r
a
c
Indra Rhw
27
SCRUB JAY HABITAT
CONSERVATION
"CORE" AREAS
-'CORE' HABITAT AREAS
N
Atlantic
Ocean
Consultants, Inc. 1996). This project was composed of 180 undeveloped platted
lots within Unit 17 of Sebastian Highlands (Florida Affinity, Inc. and Ecotech
Consultants, Inc. 1996)• The Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project was
approved in early 1995 as a FCT 50% cost -share project (Indian River County
Memorandum, September 11, 1996 - see Appendix B). Both the FWS and City of
Sebastian supported implementation of this acquisition project. It would have
served to significantly enhance scrub -jay conservation efforts in the City of
Sebastian and alleviated much of the conflict surrounding private development in
the platted Sebastian Highlands lots (FWS, February 7, 1995 correspondence to
Indian River County; September 11, 1996, Indian River County Memorandum - see
l Appendix B),
In July 1996, the IRC Board voted to approve the purchase of "Phase 1 " of the
Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project lots (September 11, 1996, Indian River
County Memorandum). Phase 1 consisted of 50 out of 56 lots owned by Atlantic
Gulf Communities (AGC) lots in Unit 17 (September 11, 1996, Indian River County
Memorandum), In September 1996, the Indian River County Environmental Planning
Staff recommended that the IRC Board approve the purchase of 47 individual
privately -owned lots as "Phase II" of the Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project
(September 11, 1996, Indian River County Memorandum). Consolidation of this
acquisition package was an immense task by the Indian River County
Environmental Planning Staff, as it required Staff to contact, negotiate: a purchase
price, and procure signed purchase contracts with 47 different lot owners. During
the negotiation process for acquisition of the subject lots, 33 of the 47 lot owners
received a certified letter from the Indian River County Utilities Department
(September 11, 1996, Indian River County Memorandum). This correspondence
notified them that their lot was subject to a waterline assessment for construction
of a new waterline; serving the subject residential area (September 11, 1996, Indian
River County Memorandum), The utility assessment averaged 17 ± % of the
appraised value of each affected lot, The timing of this assessment impeded the
County's Environmental Planning Section negotiation process to purchase the same
lots for conservation. Several private lot owners expressed extreme displeasure at
the prospect of paying a utilities assessment to Indian River County prior to selling
the lot to the sauce government entity (September 11, 1996, Indian River County
Memorandum).
In August 1996, the Indian River County land Acquisition Advisory Committee
(LAAC) voted to reconimcnd to the IRC Board t1olt to approve the acquisition of
Phase II of the Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project (September 11, 1996,
Indian River County Memorandum). The primary concerns expressed by the LAAC
was that the overall Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project was not a viable
acquisition based on expected high level of habitat management constraints and
the position of the conservation project in a highly fragmented urban landscape
(September 11, 1996, Indian River County Memorandum). On Sc3ptembor _17,
1996, the IRC Board concurred with the LAAC recomrnendation and rejectod
28
purchase of the subject 47 platted lots in Phase 11 of the Sebastian Scrub
Conservation Area project. The Board's decision halted all acquisition efforts in the
Unit 17 platted lots comprising the Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project
(Indian River County, October 17, 1996 correspondence to the FWS - see Appendix
B). The loss of the Unit 17 core scrub -jay habitat caused the Indian River County
i Environmental Planning Staff, in consultation with the FWS, to re-evaluate the
mitigation strategy needed to develop a county -wide or Sebastian area -wide HCP.
Throughout the two-year process, there had been an informal understanding
between the FWS and Indian River County that acquisition and management of the
North Sebastian Conservation Area, Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area, and
Sebastian Highlands Unit 17 lots would serve to provide a substantial portion of the
mitigation needed to support a county -wide HCP (FWS, November 12, 1996
correspondence to Indian River County).
It is important to note that at the urging of the FWS, the IRC Board subsequently
authorized the purchase of a block of 34 contiguous lots in Unit 17, a portion of
the Phase 1 of Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area project. These lots are part of
the proposed Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, referred to herein as the
10± acre Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area. The FWS supported this
effort based on the opinion that the "... 34 AGC lots, in combination with Pelican
Elementary School scrub, may provide enough suitable habitat to minimize the
adverse effects of habitat fragmentation due to losses in the remainder of Unit 17.
These scrub parcels, if properly managed, may be essential "stepping stones" for
dispersal of scrub -jays from and to northern Indian River County..." (FWS,
November 12, 1996 correspondence to Indian River County). In consideration of
the loss of the Unit 17 scrub lots, the November 12, 1996 FWS correspondence to
Indian River County identified other conservation actions that Indian River County
could explore to support an HCP. Two of the referenced actions included the
management of scrub habitat located on the Sebastian Airport/Golf Course and
Sebastian and Pelican Island Elementary School. In October 1997, both the City the
Sebastian and School District of Indian River County agreed to review a
conservation plan that requires implementation of habitat management actions on
the referenced parcels (City of Sebastian, October 9, 1997 correspondence to
Indian River County; School District of Indian River County, October 2, 1997
correspondence to Indian River County - see Appendix B).
In response to the FWS recommendation to continue with development and
implementation of an NCP, the IRC Board approved a request from the
Environmental Planning Section to solicit consultant proposals for development of
the subject Sebastian Area -Wide Scrub -Jay Habitat Conservation Plan in December
1997. In March 1998, Indian River County issued a Request for Proposals, RFP 11
8047. In July 1998 Smith Environmental Services (SES) was authorized to proceed
with development of this Sebastian HCP. Consolidation of existing data and
performance of field surveys to update the existing information were undertaken by
SES through October 1998. An informal meeting was held with FWS staff on
29
r
i
October 29, 1998 to discuss the preliminary findings from the existing riata search,
field surveys, and HCP elements. Additional information needed in support of plan
development was collected by SES through April 1999.
r Existing Data - Location and Number of Sebastian Hlgjlg ads Scrub Lots Recorded
as Occupied or Potentialty occu )ipd_by Florida Scrub
During the initial informal consultation period between the FWS, FWC, and the City,
of Sebastian in 1991-92, a map was developed by the FWC, in cooperation with
the FWS to define the location and number of the Sebastian Highlands lots
occupied or potentially occupied by Florida scrub -jays, and thereby subject to
development review by the FWS (J. King, City of Sebastian, pers. comm.). An
untitled table, presented as Table 1, developed by the City of Sebastian shows that
this original mapping encompassed 2030 lots. Of this total number, 553 lots had
already been altered to provide residential housing. At some unknown point during
this initial informal consultation period, the FWS implemented a blanket release
policy for all Sebastian Highlands scrub lots that had been previously cleared and
were maintained as grass or contained dense stands of pine trees (J. King, City of
Sebastian, pers. comm). A total of 1,204 lots were subsequently released by the
FWS under this blanket release policy. Of the 2030 scrub lots originally designated
by the FWS and FWC as potentially occupied by scrub -jays, 273 scrub lots of
regulatory concern remained after refinement of this original mapping.
Based on the data presented in Table 1, the original mapping of the affected
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots was revisited by the FWS in March 1995. As a
result of this additional review, 119 scrub lots were added to the list, of which 26
were determined to be already developed and nine (9) were released pursuant to
the FWS blanket policy. The 1995 map revision resulted in the addition of 84 scrub
lots of regulatory concern. The combined 1992 and 1995 mapping data for the
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots designated a total of 2,149 scrub lots of regulatory
concern, of which 579 were determined to be already developed and 1,213 were
subsequently released for development under the FWS blanket policy.
The final result of this three (3) year informal consultation process was that
residential development activities on 357 Sebastian Highlands lots were identified
as subject to incidental take authorization from the FWS. Interim to this time
,, period, on May 5, 1994, the FWS issued a letter to the City of Sebastian which
defined 184 platted lots in Unit 17 of the Sebastian Highlands which needed to be
acquired as part of the regional HCP that was being considered at that time.
In a revised list released by the City of Sebastian on July 17, 1995, in response to
a June 26, 1995 FWS directive, the number of platted lots identified in the
Sebastian Highlands as occupied or potentially occupied by Florida scrub -jays toad
increased to 456. This table entitled City of Sebastian Scrub -Jay Areas is provided
as Table 2 for review.
30
TABLE 2
CITY OF SEBASTIAN
SCRUB JAY AREAS
THE LOTS LISTED BELOW LOCATED IN UNIT 17 OF
THE
SEBASTIAN
HIGHLANDS HAVE BEEN
IDENTIFIED
BY THE UNITED
STATES FISH
AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE AS
THOSE LOTS THAT NEED TO
BE
ACQUIRED
AS
PART OF THE REGIONAL
HABITAT CONSERVATION
PLAN
(H.C.P.).
,BLOCK
450
LOTS
5,6
S/11
UNIT'
17
2 -
BLOCK
451
LOTS
5-7,11,14,15,17-22S/11
UNIT
17
1Y
-BLOCK
454
LOTS
1-5,7,8,41-44
S/11
UNIT
17
i1
,BLOCK
565
LOTS
1-7,9,10
Slit
UNIT
17
CN
BLOCK
566
LOTS
1-9,21-23
Slit
UNIT
17
12
,BLOCK
571
LOTS
1-6,9,1.0,13-16,18
Slit
UNIT
17
BLOCK
572
LOTS
1,2,4,6-20
S/11
UNIT
17
BLOCK
573
LOTS
15,10-23,26,27
Slit
UNIT`
17
BLOCK
574
LOTS
11-13
sm
UNIT
17
BLOCK
576
LOTS
1,26,32,33
Slit
I I N I T
17
BLOCK
577
LO'T'S
2-10
Slit
UNIT`
17
-BLOCK
570
LOTS
16-23
S/11
UNIT
17
18
BLOCK
579
LOTS
6-12,15,16,24,25
S/11
UNIT
17
BLOCK
584
LOTS
1-14,24,26-29
Slit
UNIT
17
BLOCK
505
LOTS
3-1.2
Slit
UNIT
17
to
BLOCK
586
LOTS
.1-4,23-26
S/Ii
UNIT
17
13
BLOCK
607
LOTS
1-7
S/11
UNIT
17
-7
BLOCK
610
LOTS
1,2,15,16
S/11
UNIT
17
BLOCK
61.1
LOTS
19-23
S/11
UNIT
17
BLOCK
618
LOTS
25
S/11
(IN IT
17
BLOCK
620
LOTS
3,23--26
9/11
UNIT
17
BLOCK
621
LOTS
12,13
Slit
UNIT
17
2.
113�L
PELICAN ISLAND ELEMENTA11Y SCIIOOL, TRACT G
LAST REVISIONS MADE PER LETTER FROM THE U.S. FISH
AND WILDLIFE SERVICE DATED 6/26/95.
LIST COMPLETED AND RELEASED BY THE CITY OF
SEBASTIAN BUILDING DEPARTMENT 7/17/95.
SCJAY.DOC
32
~ ~
�
�~
Table 3' Gob*xtim/ Highlands Potential Scrub -Jay Habitat Lom, was generated by
` SES from tehv|amd |vfnnnadon obtained hun the updated City o/Sebastian Scrub -
Jay Areas
crub'JayAueao ' 8ovbod 8/27/88 and, uuhy*qvondy, updated pursuant to information
'~
maintained by the City of Sobootian'o Growth Management Department as of
October 7' 1998. Tkemfnro, Table 3 provides the location and number of the
�
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots considered by the FVVS as occupied or potentially
occupied by Florida scrub -jays as of October 7, 1888. A total of 817 }nm in the
-
Sebastian Highlands aro idondfiod. Therefore, between July 1995 and October
1888' 139 lots or 3096 of ,he Sebastian Highlands scrub lots identified in July
1995 as occupied or potentially occupied by F|oddoanrub1uys have beef) ,o|oonod
bythe FVVBfor residential development.
L�����
The existing recorded data base reviewed by SES did not xvftioinot|y document the
.
extent of habitat occupancy by eowhiuyu' population status, habitat quality, o/
. ,
acreage ofrestorable scrub -jay habitat within the puWiv|y`owned |uodu proposed as
compensation areas subject tothis HCP. Surveys were conducted hySES biologists
in the summer/fall of 1998 to obtain these required data, The rnuo|m of these
surveys are provided below in Section 3.2.
A significant decline of the Sxhum|on oonubimy oubpnpo|mion has been
documented in the FVVS files from 1891 to 1396. The primary oou4o for this
population decline was reported to be habitat degradation from lack of fire o,
mechanical management actions [ro|and 1996). Increased vulnerability tuvehicular
~
collisions and predators as o result of the uovom habitat fragmentation are also
potential factors contributing to the documented dnnUno in the Sebastian scrub -jay
aubpopu|wtion. pou/ reproductive success and survival vviU`io the AUooUo Coast
-~
and Lake VVu|mu Ridge populations in 1997 was /opu,\ed to be wide-spmod and
'
was attributed to an epidemic documented axrnuo much Of the Florida xo,ub1ay
range (Bminingo, an(] Oddy 1398; Be|n|ngn, 1989). In uunx|da,ahon of the hnut
-^
that habitat qooU,y within the nfb#od Sebastian Highlands scrub \vm continued to
decline between 1g96and 1998and that demographic success of Florida scrUb-jaY
~
populations along the Atlantic Coast was particularly poor io 1997' SES biologists
determined that that on-to-dntnhabitat occupancy and habitat quality data, with an
|
emphasis on habitat quality, should be obtained within the affected Sa0oahao
Highlands oomb |nm in nnm/ to pcooxun|y dohno the incidental take levels and
sufficiency of mitigation maaxomx [)reposed under this MCP. The mav|m Of this
survey, ooprovided below, confirmed that families within the 5obaohon Highlands
landscape continue tohalost.
�
3.2 Sebastian HCP Plan Area - Population Status arid Habitat WtiUzahnn
�
Popwmivo residential development in Indian River COUntY has resulted in an
estimated scrub habitat |nps of approximately 901% since p^-e*o|vmvot thnno
34
��
v
I
(Fernald 1989). Much of the remaining parcels of scrub are fragmented and in
various states of degradation due primarily to widespread fire suppression. The City
of Sebastian experienced rapid human population growth during the 1980's
(Fernald 1989; Fernald et a/. 1992). Reflecting the increase in the human
population has been a precipitous expansion of commercial retail businesses and
large residential communities. From 1991 through 1998 individual family lots
throughout the Sebastian Highlands residential subdivision continued to be cleared
for house construction while the remaining patches of xeric oak scrub and scrubby
pine flatwoods continued to grow taller and denser in the absence of wildfire or
prescribed habitat management. All of these changes in the landscape have
reduced the spatial extent of suitable scrub habitat in the Sebastian Highlands,
precipitated a deterioration in habitat quality, exponentially increased habitat
barriers and presented myriad potentially fatal scrub -jay encounters with roadway
traffic, domestic pets, and toxic pollutants. As demonstrated by the documented
decline in the HCP study population, each of these human -induced changes has a
negative influence on the demographic success of Florida scrub -jays.
Demographic studies of the Florida scrub -jay populations in Indian River County
began in 1988 (Toland 1991, 1993, 1996, unpubl. data). The Indian River County
scrub -jay core population is concentrated within the boundaries of the City of
Sebastian and adjoining scrub properties. Two subpopulations, as described in
Section 2.2 above, have persisted in Sebastian during this long-term study (Toland
unpubl. data). These subpopulations are separated by less than 3 miles (4.8111) of
predominantly built -out residential neighborhoods.
As discussed above, the study population is part of the South Brevard
County/North Indian River County metapopulation. This metapopulation, which
extends from Winter Beach in Indian River County north to Malabar in Brevard
County (Fitzpatrick et at. 1994a; Breininger and Toland unpubl. data), is composed
of several subpopulations that are within the normal maximum Florida scrub -jay
dispersal distance (Stith et al. 1996) of one another. A scrub -jay subpopulation of
at least a dozen pairs exists on the St. Sebastian River State Buffer Reserve ISM
and extends over the Indian River -Brevard County Line to provide a linkage between
the South Brevard and the Sebastian HCP study population (Breininger and Oddy
1998). Data collected during the 1993 Statewide Census (Fitzpatrick et at. 1994b),
in conjunction with recent studies (Toland 1996; Breininger and Oddy 1998),
provided the basis to rank this Florida scrub -jay metapopulation as the fourth
largest in Florida and the most important metapopulation for species recovery along
the Florida's Atlantic Coast (Breininger and Oddy 1998).
A total of 240 individual scrub -jays were colorbanded to support demographic
studies conducted by Toland (1991, 1993, 1996, unpubl. data) within the
W. incorporated limits of the City of Sebastian. This colorbanding facilitated the
identification of 35 territories between 1989 and 1991 (Toland unpubl. data). Data
relating to nest site selection, nesting success, survival, helper influence, dispersal,
0
36
i
Z
mortality, food habits, and habitat suitability were collected for a sample of 174
nests. Family size averaged 3.0 individuals per group with 630/0 of the breeding
pairs accompanied by at least one helper. Clutch size averaged 3.8 and average
brood size was 3.0 (Toland unpubl. data). Median incubation date was April 7'h
and median hatching date was April 24"'. Approximately 72% of the nestlings
successfully fledged. Mean annual productivity was 1.9 young fledged per pair
per year. Median fledging date was May 10"' and 70% of all nesting attempts
were successful in fledging at least one young (Toland unpubl. data).
Habitat characteristics were assessed in one-half acre patches around each nest
tree and categorized as optimal, suboptimal, ancillary, or lawn (Toland 1991).
Nesting success (percentage of nest attempts that fledged at least one young) was
positively correlated to nest site habitat quality; success rates for optimal,
suboptimal, ancillary, and lawn were 91, 67, 48, and 25%, respectively. Habitat
features comprising each scrub -jay territory were assessed and characterized as
optimal contiguous, optimal fragmented, and suboptimal fragmented. Nesting
success was positively correlated with territory quality; success rates for optimal
contiguous, optimal fragmented, and suboptimal fragmented were 79, 77, and
59%, respectively (Toland 1991). Mean annual productivity of scrub -jays in the
study area was 2.2 young fledged per pair in contiguous, optimal scrub; 1.8 young
fledged per pair in fragmented, moderately developed scrub; 1.2 young per pair
fledged in highly fragmented, suboptimal scrub; and about 0.5 young per pair in
residential lawns. tong -term studies at Archbold Biological Station have previously
documented that mean annual productivity of scrub jays is 2,0 young per pair per
year in stable populations where natality counterbalances mortality (Fitzpatrick et
a/. 1991).
The subject demographic studies found that scrub jays dispersed at earlier ages and
farther distances than is reported for contiguous natural scrub landscapes (Toland
unpubl. data), A total of 64 dispersals were documented, including 40 females and
24 males (Toland unpubl. data). The mean dispersal distance by females was 2.4
miles (3.8 km) lrange=0.2 mi. (0.3 kin) to 5 mi. (8.0 kin)] and the mean dispersal
distance by males was 0.9 miles (1.4 km) (range -0.6 mi. (0.075 kin) to 2.9 mi.
(4.7 km)]. Four females were known to disperse 4 miles (6.5 km) between the
most northern clusters of the north subpopulation and the Sebastian
Highlands/Pelican Island Elementary School southernmost clusters (Toland unpubl.
data). The longest dispersal was 5 miles from a female that emigrated into the
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area frorn a cluster located on the Sebastian
Airport/Golf Course (Toland unpubl. data). Most of the documented dispersals in
the City of Sebastian were 2 miles or less (80% of females and 92% of males)
(Toland unpubl. data).
Breininger (1999) docurnented similar patterns on the urbanized and extensively
fragmented South Brevard County barrier island, where females dispersed an
average of 4.5 miles (7.3 km) and reales dispersed an average of 0.6 miles (1.0
37
i'
km). On the Gulf Coast, Thaxton and Hingtgen (1996) reported average dispersal
distances in urban areas to be 5 miles for females and 1.2 miles (1.9 km) males.
These urban dispersal patterns contrast significantly with those documented for
contiguous, optimal scrub at Archbold Biological Station where mean dispersal
distances for females are 0.6 miles (1.0 km) and for males are 0.2 miles (0.3 km)
(Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984).
Scrub -jays in the Sebastian study area dispersed and nested at earlier ages than in
undisturbed scrub systems. A total of 41 known -age dispersals were documented
during the study (26 females and 15 males). The mean age of dispersing females
was 14.2 months (range=4 to 36 months). The mean age of dispersing males
was 28.2 months (range =11 to 60 months) (Toland unpubl. data). Breeding by
yearlings, especially females, was relatively common during the Sebastian scrub -jay
study (Toland unpubl, data). Florida scrub -jays will breed earlier than normal when
the chance arises in disturbed landscapes subject to population declines (Breininger
1999). Nesting by yearlings has also been reported for scrub -jay subpopulations in
Palm Bay and the South Brevard County barrier island (Breininger 1999).
During 1993, Indian River County and the City of Sebastian were censused for
Florida scrub -jays as part of the Florida state-wide survey (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994b).
This survey resulted in documentation of 52 families of scrub -jays in Indian River
County: none on the barrier island, 12 on the Ten Mile Ridge, and 40 on the
Atlantic Coastal Ridge (Toland 1993, 1996). The majority of remaining scrub -jay
families in Indian River County continued to persist in the incorporated limits of the
City of Sebastian, where scrub -jay territories declined from 35 in 1991 to 27 in
1993 (Toland unpubl. data, Toland 1996). Most of the territories that were
abandoned were in outlying parcels of the Sebastian Highlands that were composed
of predominantly disturbed, overgrown mesic fiatwood and paltnetto-lyonia
shrubland vegetation, including slash pine (Pinus elliottir), cabbage palm (Sabal
palmetto), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), galiberry (Ilex glabra), saw palmetto
(Serenoa repens), 'fetterbush (Lyonia fruticosa), and staggerbush (L. hicida), as well
as landscaped lawns, ornamental plants, and scattered live oaks (Quercus
virginiana). This disturbed matrix habitat characterizes the majority of the habitat
fragments remaining within the platted residential lots of Sebastian Highlands.
The 1996 Florida scrub -jay population census for Sebastian documented a
continued decline down to 20 breeding pairs (Toland 1996, unpubl, data).
During late summer/early fall of 1998, known remaining territories were censused
for 51 hours between July 191" and October 14"' in support of this HCP. Following
survey methods used since 1988 (Fitzpatrick el al. 1991), this study documented
the loss of 4 more territories within the Sebastian Highlands subdivision, resulting
in a total of 16 territories within the incorporated limits of the City of Sebastian.
This represents a 54% population decline from the 35 breeding pairs documented
in the City of Sebastian in 1991 (Toland unpubl. data). The location of those
38
remaining territories is provided in Section 2.1 above, one notable increase
h
occurred in the Sebastian Highlands -Unit 17/Pelican Island Elementary School south
f
subpopulation cluster, where the scrub -jay territories increased from 3 to 5. This
increase in territories was a result of territory budding by 2 colorbanded males.
r
i, The Sebastian south subpopulation also includes the Wabasso Scrub Conservation
Area cluster containing 2, possibly 3, breeding pairs. The Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area is located just south of the incorporated limits of the City of
Sebastian (see Figure 2). The Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area is less than 1 mile
south of the Pelican island Elementary School/Sebastian Highlands Conservation
Area scrub -jay subpopulation (see Figure 2 - "Unit 17 Conservation Areas"). The
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area scrub -jay families were colorbanded in support
of demographic studies during 1988 through 1991 (Toland 1995, unpubl. ,data).
Several dispersals between this cluster and the Pelican Island Elementary School
cluster occurred between 1990 and 1993 (Toland unpubl. data)
Two colorbanded scrub -jay families were monitored at the Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area through the 1996-97 breeding season. These families primarily
occupy the north one-half of the conservation tract. The 1998 survey conducted
at the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area in support of this HCP found that these 2
families continued to occupy nearly the same habitat areas. However, a third pair
of unhanded scrub -jays was observed foraging in the northernmost section of the
habitat restoration parcel that was mechanically renovated in January 1998. This
area is adjacent to, and south of, the two historic territories (Toland unpubl. data).
"Therefore, the 1998 nesting season included a total of 2. distinct Florida scrub jay
I it possibly pioneering a territory in the restored area.
' ries and a third a Y p J
ternto p p
Each of the 2 colorbanded scrub -jay families at Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area
included 2 juveniles as recent as August 6, 1998. Therefore, their mean annual
productivity was 2.0 nutritionally -independent young per pair per year. Nesting was
not recorded for the third and newest pair of scrub -jays that were observed
foraging in the northern section of the habitat restoration parcel, as well as on tile
adjacent golf course. Although the number of territories (2) remained stable on the
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area from 1988 through 1998, individuals per family
had been declining prior to habitat restoration in 1998 (Toland unpubl, data).
Implementation of the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area Habitat Restoration and
(Management Plan (SES 1996) during early- 1998 initially appears to have been
successful in restoring habitat conditions that are suitable for recruitment of an
additional scrub -jay on this conservation tract. Additional habitat restoration and
management activities, as covered under this HCP, are needed on Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area to optimize the scrub habitat for use by scrub -jays.
39
•
r
3.3 South Brevard County Florida Scrub -Jay Population Status
From 1993 through 1998, colorbanding and monitoring of Florida scrub -jays was
accomplished just north of the City of Sebastian in southern Brevard County
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1994b; Breininger and Oddy 1998), From 1997 through 1998,
} investigations included colorbanding of 107 individuals in 42 breeding territories
(Breininger and Oddy 1998). The study sites extended over 8 miles from the
Sebastian Buffer Reserve along the southern Brevard County line to the City of
Malabar (Breininger and Oddy 1998). Data were also collected on 26 territories in
suburban Palm Bay and 12 territories on the Sebastian Buffer Reserve.
Between 1993 and 1998, all subpopulations in southern Brevard County declined
by more than 50% inclusively, due primarily to expansive decline in habitat
suitability for scrub -jays (Breininger and Oddy 1998). A widespread epidemic during
1998 may have augmented scrub -jay mortality in much of Florida including this
metapopulation (Breininger and Oddy 1998)• Breininger and Oddy (1998) found
that almost no habitat in southern Brevard County was optimal for scrub -jays and
most was suboptimal due to long-term fire suppression and resuiting habitat
succession and overgrowth. The immediate mechanical cutting of trees and
aggressive application of prescribed fire was determined to be an essential action at
all of the south Brevard County sites to prevent extinction of this population
(Breininger and Oddy 1998). This urgency to implement immediate habitat
restoration activities to slow the rates of scrub -jay population decline extends over
into the HCP Plan Area and is reflected in the HCP operating conservation program
presented below in Section 5.0.
3.4 Documentation of the Occurrence of Federal and State Protected Species
Within the HCP Plan Area
The HCP Plan Area was assessed for the occurrence of other Federal or State
protected species by referencing the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI)
December 1997 database entitled Species and Natural Community Sumtnary for
Indian River County, by reviewing past studies conducted on the Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas by FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech Consultants, Inc. (1995,
KK 1996, 1998), and by reviewing studies completed by the FWS. In addition,
random pedestrian transect surveys to determine the presence of protected species
were performed as part of the 1998 field surveys conducted in support of this
HCP.
Protected species are plants and animals which are listed as endangered, threatened,
or species of special concern by the FWS in 50 CFR 17.11 & 17. 12, by the FWC in
Rules 30-27.003&004 and 39-27.05, F.A.C., and Florida Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services (FDACS) in Section 581.185-187, F.S. The FWC document,
Official Lists of Endangered and Potentially Endangered Fauna and Flora in 17orida,
Published August 1, 1997 and compiled by Tom Ft, Logan, FWC Endangered Species
40
•
Coordinator, provides a summary listing of all of the protected species of concern
occurring within the State of Florida. The Federal interpretation of take is described
above in Section 1.2.
Table 4 provides a list of protected species either confirmed to occur or expected
to occur in the potential Florida scrub -jay habitat identified within the NCP Plan
Area (Toland unpubl. data). As stated in Section 2.4 above, federally listed plant
species do not occur within the HCP Plan Area. A Preliminary Vascular Plant List
prepared by The Institute for Regional Conservation from site surveys conducted on
November 21, 1995 at the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area, Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area, and North Sebastian Conservation Area is provided in
Appendix C. This plant list confirms that no federally listed plants occur on the
subject conservation properties. Several wetland dependent avian species and the
bald eagle (Haliaeetus /eucocephalus) were observed to use wetland habitats
located within the landscape matrix of the HCP Plan Area (Toland unpubl. data).
Table 4. Protected Wildlife Species Occurring or Potentially Occurring within the
HrP Plan Araa.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Re ulator Agency_
Protection Status
Eastern Indigo
Drymarchon corais
FWS and FWC
Threatened and
Snake
couperi
Threatened
Florida Scrub -Jay
Aphelocoma
FWS and FWC
Threatened and
_..........
coerulescens
Threatened
__
Florida pine
... ....._..._
Pituophis
..__.................... _..
FWC
.
Species of Special
snake
mefanoleucus
Concern (SSC)
muitus
Florida mouse
Podomys floridanus
FWC
SSC
Florida gopher
Rana capito
FWC
SSC
frog
Gopher tortoise
Gopherus
FWC
SSC
Polyphemus
3.5 Other Regulatory Laws Relevant to the HCP Plan Area
Residential development actions conducted within the ITP impact area have the
potential to result in the "taking" of State protected wildlife species listed above in
Table 4 and/or the dredging and filling of wetlands.
41
�
�
^� In accordance with Chapter 39,.F.A.C, i/ in the sole responsibility of the private
landowners of the affected Sebastian Highlands lots to pmovm pnxnh authorization
from the FVVC prior to engaging in cnnu000tk`n oo\ivW*x that may result in the
taking of m State protected species, such as the gopher tortoise and/or listed
r� hunnvv oummono»|n. Habitat restoration and management actions to be
|
implemented onthe Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas in aoonrdaocovvi|h this
HCP will serve to provide habitat benefits to the protected species potentially
occurring within these habitat areas.
~' dh �F|
VYmdandsand ovrtmawaters ampmmote by � the �u�oo n,idvinaccordance with
the regulatory program authorized under Part N' Chapter 373' F.S. Tbo Florida
,
Department of Environmental Pmmozivo (FDGP) administers this program for single-
family residential projects. VVodandn are afforded Federal regulatory protection
pursuant to Goodon 404 of the Clean VVuuar Act (33 U.8,C, 1344. The U.S. Army
^ Corps of Engineers (ACDE) administers this Fodam| program. Again, it is thn no\a
responsibility of the p/kmta landowners of the affected Sebastian Highlands lots to
°
procure permit uu/horioshon from the appropriate regulating authorities. Habitat
restoration and management actions to be implemented on the Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas in accordance with this HCP' such as construction of fire
perimeter hmokn, shall avnid, wherever provticob|o, dredge and UA impacts to
wetlands and/or surface waters.
` Fodo,e| ou0nohry for protection o/ historic properties is xoa forth in Um National
Historic Preservation Act of l996(Public Law 8g'G55), as amended. Tile State o/
Florida regulates impacts t, xiAn|huant archeological or historical *i,va undo/ the
provisions of section 207.001. F.S. It is unUxvw that significant emhonmgioa| or
historic pmpn,boa remain p8tb|n the Sebastian Highlands ITP impact are!) due to V`e
present level ofdevelopment within this area.
A county -wide Cultural resource survey was corripleted in 1992 by The Archeological
Hiswhnu| Conservancy, Inc. (RnhdaAUini/y, Inc, and Eontec` Consultants, Inc,
-~ 1995). This nu,vov determined that no umhevimgipo| or Nom,ic ouem are xnovvo or
expected to 000v, on the Indian River Cnuntv-owned Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas (Florida A|fhicv. Inc. arid EcutuchConsultants, Inc. 1995' 1836'
� 1988). It is doubtful that thw remaining Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Area
n/opo,box o^nm|n h\momdpa| sites. As part of FCT Grant Avvu'd Agreement, Indian
River County ixobligated to take appropriate protective moaomao}n tilt, event historic
sites are found on their conservation properties (Florid oAfin icy. Inc. arid Ecomch
Consultants, Inc. 1895). The huh|mt restoration an(] management actions to be
~~
implemented nn the Scrub -Jay Hohimc Compensation Areas in n000pdnnoa with this
HCP are d|,onmd to minimi7o mVvomo impacts to the nonuamuUon site by
implementing measures which minimize soil disturbance.
�
The City o(Sebastian shall inform citizens m(tile above State arid Foaon|regulations
as part of tile City's building perrnit application package for FVSidffllli�ll CO11StrUCtiO1L
_
^2
•
I
Local zoning regulations and hazardous material concerns potentially affecting the
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas have been assessed by the Applicant as part
of the land acquisition procedures for these properties (R. DeBlois pers. comm.).
3.6 Sebastian HCP Plan Area Habitat Types and Surrounding Land Use
Descriptions
Scrub vegetation community types are associated with ridges of well -drained to
moderately -well drained soils (Kurz 1942; Laessle 1942, 1958; Schmalzer et al.
1999). Along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge, scrub communities occur as patches
within a matrix of poor to moderately -well drained flatwoods and isolated wetlands
(Breininger et aL 1988, 1991; Schmalzer et al. 1999). This diverse mosaic of
habitat types describes scrub landscapes that are optimal for Florida scrub -jays
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Breininger 1992; Breininger et al. 1995, 1996b).
The classification of the habitat types identified within the scrub landscapes in the
HCP Plan Area are generally based on the FNAI Guide to the Natural Communities
of Florida (FNAI 1990) classification system. A brief description of each community
type, including associated soils, is presented below. The landscape context of the
HCP Plan Area is clearly displayed on Figure 2. It is primarily comprised of
suburban/urban complex. A detailed description of habitat types within the Indian
River County -owned Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas can be found in the
management plans developed for each of these sites in support of the FCT grant
awards (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and Ecotech Consultants, Inc. 1995, 1996, 1998).
The Sebastian Highlands ITP impact area is characterized by small remnant patches
of scrub and mesic habitat communities sparsely interspersed within a massive,
fast growing urban residential landscape. Figure 2 vividly portrays the multiple
habitat disturbances that have occurred within the historical Atlantic Coastal Ridge
scrub landscape as a result of development of the Sebastian Highlands subdivision.
With the exception of the affected Unit 17 scrub lots located near the Pelican
Island Elementary School compensation area, most of the potential scrub -jay
habitat areas remaining within the Sebastian Highlands are composed of disturbed
and overgrown mesic flatwood and palmetto-lyonia shrubland vegetation, as
described above in Section 3.2. Review of the Soils Survey of Indian River County,
Florida (Wettstein et al. 1987) determined that the mF?sic communities within the
ITP impact area occur primarily on the nearly level, poorly drained EauGallie,
Myakka, Inunokalee, Oldsmar, and Malabar fine sands.
Fragments(] patches of xeric oak scrub remain within the delineated affected Unit
17 residential lots and both of the Unit 17 Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
(Pelican Island Elementary School/Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area)
(see Figure 2). The vegetative composition of this scrub community is generally
characterized by an open canopy of slash pine with an open to closed shrub
43
40
�
undomtory dominated by oumb oaks KJuoouo gm^ifluox 0. o/uPfrmnii Ci
my/tifolla>' owy8erbum11' torUnmmr (Bolarii)nvomnvxu` eavv pu|mouo' shiny blueberry
y�
(uaocirriunonynun/'es)' and boOp|om (>0mmnia anericano). A diversity of herbaceous
ground cover species is found within this habitat type, including: hnok rush
</Vxwcboonooa /nngalomxpx>, silk grass Wityo»ai,,�Dm/nirlifb&e}. gopher apple (Licania
i, oichx«vit)prickly | (Opunfla hon7if\so)h|udn8 star (Lia/ns spp.), doer
spp.) and Florida nosvmu'v (Cu,a'wm m".==^) are also associated with this scrub
habitat. scrub |n �onubam Unit 17 amx» are associated
+...." . � .
with the nearly level to gently sluping, modmam|y+wn| drained Archbold and Pome|o
`
�
The vegetative structure ~ ^~`--------itat— --occurring withinresponse to time since fire and surrounding hurnan-induced disturbances. '.
Some oftile
�
oak scrub habitat within the Unit 17 Gomb-Jay Habitat Compensation amao /s |
� nurrenVy unsuitable for use by scrub -jays duo to a donne pine canopy, overgrown
shrub stratum, and absence cfopen patches nfsand. These areas uoo be restored to
`
optimal scrub -jay habitat conditions byapplication of appropriate habitat restoration
strategies. A small patch of the oak scrub habitat remaining in Unit 17 on arid
b
'
adjoining the Pelican |u|und 8omonmry Snbon| compensation area exhibits m op ma|
^
scrub -jay habitat uondidon», e.g. xyonao pine 000npy cover arid m low, open nhmh
. '
community. The scrub habitat types occurring within the Unit 17 ITP impact area and
~_ Go/ubJmyHab|tut Compensation Areas have not been managed in 'hn past. As part `^
of on environmental education program at Pelican Island E|omeNum School, the
�
School District authorized the DDF to conduct u prescribed hu,n of dlo oak scrub .
.~ habitat within the Pelican Island Elementary Sohpv\ compensation area (R. De8mio
pers. comm,). This prescribed burn was successfully imp|omnnmd in the Spring 1899
_
Habitat types defined on the Sebastian HCP Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
include: sand pine, oak scrub, mnomaryso,vh, somhhyUotwno0n. mesio Uutwmndu,
— no|noouo1yoniauhruWand, disturbed lands, depression marsh, arid inland spmmn. The
.
scrub habitat types are: sand pine uo/ob, oak scrub, rosemary xoruu' and scrubby
Uotwouuo. Each u/these habitat types have formed ioassociation v"ithoomovvho/
—
poorly drained to oxceooivo|v drained soil types, and exhibit ecmh oak vegetative.
cover component ranging from 596 to >50Y6.
~~
The mexiomatrix habitat mosir oawvoudn and pahno|m ahmbbnd. Those
natural communities are associated with poorly drained soils and exhibit |aas than
<�
5V6scrub oak cover,
r
The disturbed habitat types am those emao altered by anthropogenic activities arid
are presently infested by Brazilian pepper (3chbiurtere»inthforlivs) and/or covered by
wild grape vine (V7th/xppl. The disturbed habitat areas were found to occur o^ both
xeric arid m*uiosoil types.
44
40
The marshes and inland swamp are depressional wetland communities dominated by
herbaceous vegetation and associated with very poorly drained sandy soils. Review of
historical imagery revealed that the inland swamp habitat type identified on the North
Sebastian Conservation Area was previously an open marsh habitat which has
f-. succeeded into a wetland forest dominated by a mixture of hydrophytic trees as a
result of fire exclusion.
Sand Pine Scrub
The sand pine scrub habitat type is found on the North Sebastian Conservation Area
along the higher areas of the Atlantic Coastal Ridge. This community type occurs on
the nearly level to gently sloping moderately -well drained Archbold and Pomello sand,
0 to 5% slopes and the excessively -drained St. Lucie sand, 0 to 8% slopes and
Astatula sand, 0 to 5% slopes (Wettstein et at 1987). It is vegetatively
characterized by a dense sand pine (Pinus clause) canopy with an oak scrub
understory. This understory is similar in vegetative composition to the oak scrub
found in Unit 17 of Sebastian Highlands, as described above. Review of historical
imagery found that the extent of the sand pine scrub forest habitat on the North
Sebastian Conservation Area has expanded significantly over time due to reduced fire
frequencies.
Oak Scrub
The oak scrub habitat type is found on each of the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas, with the largest contiguous patch occurring on the Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area. The oak scrub habitat occurs primarily on the nearly level to
gently sloping, moderately -well drained Archbold and Pomello sands, 0 to 5% slopes
(Wettstein et at 1987). Within the North Sebastian Conservation Area, oak scrub is
also associated with the nearly level and somewhat poorly drained Satellite fine sand
soil type (Wettstein et at 1987), The open oak scrub areas determined to historically
occur on the excessively -drained soils are currently dominated by sand pine, as
described above. The vegetative description for this habitat type is provided above
for the oak scrub identified in Unit 17 of Sebastian Highlands.
Rosemary Scrub
A small patch of rosemary scrub was identified on the North Sebastian Conservation
Area, This scrub habitat type was differentiated from the surrounding sand pine and
oak scrub habitat types due to a dominance of Florida rosemary with numerous open,
sandy areas. This scrub habitat type occurs on the nearly level, somewhat poorly
drained Satellite fine sand soils (Wettstein et a1. 1987).
45
r
i,
Scrubby Flatwoods
The scrubby pine flatwoods scrub habitat type was identified within the North
Sebastian Conservation Area and along the western boundary of the Sebastian
Airport compensation properties. It is vegetatively characterized by a shrub layer
dominated by saw palmetto interspersed by scrub oaks and an open to closed canopy
of slash pine. Soils of the scrubby flatwoods identified on the subject compensation
areas are the nearly level, poorly drained Myakka and Immokalee sands and the nearly
level, somewhat poorly drained Satellite sands (Wettstein et a/. 1987).
Mesic Flatwoods
Mesic flatwoods are the predominant matrix habitat type of the scrub landscapes
within the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas. This natural community type is
common on the North Sebastian Conservation Area/Sebastian Airport compensation
sites and Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area. It is vegetatively characterized by a
dense slash pine canopy with a shrubby understory dominated by saw palmetto,
fetterbush, and galiberry. Herbaceous ground cover, dominated by wiregrass, is
sparse due to either a thick layer of pine needle duff or the dense shrub layer.
Cabbage palm is scattered within the mesic slash pine canopy at the North Sebastian
Conservation Area. Soil stypes of the mesic flatwoods on the Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas are the nearly level, poorly drained Myakka, EauGaliie, and
Immokalee fine sands (Wettstein et a/. 1987).
Qaimetto - Lyonia Shr I•ind
The palmetto-lyonia shrubland classification is applied to describe a natural
community that is essentially a rnesic flatwoods without the pine canopy component.
This habitat type is identified within the North Sebastian Conservation Area and
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area. The dense shrub community characterizing this
habitat is dominated by saw palmetto, fetterbush, and galiberry on the same Myakka
and Immokalee fine sand soils (Wettstein et a/. 1987) as the mesic pine flatwoods
Distur ed -Lands
This land use classification type is used to describe vegetatively disturbed areas on
poorly drained soils dominated by Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifo/&us), an exotic
and invasive species and/or grape vine, a native species that rapidly colonizes
disturbed sites.
p rQ.gA(narsh ItIla id Swamp
Numerous, isolated depression marshes are interspersed within the scrub landscapes
at the North Sebastian Conservation Area/Sebastian Airport and the Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area, They are formed on the very poorly drained Myakka fine sand,
46
` -
�
r�
\�
4.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
�
'
4.1 Determination of Acreage of Potential Scrub -Jay Habitat to be Impacted,
_
Preserved and Restored
. ` 41.1 &8e1bO1&�l�y
Habitat Studies'
'
� High resolution digital onhnpbnm quads (DOUa) were obtained for the HCP Plan Area
to display required data. The DDUm are available anmyu u wide area and provide
consistent, convenient, high quality templates for managing and displaying spatial
data using readily available software (e.g. A,uVinvx ARC/INFO) on most hardware
� -
platforms, using Windows 95 or Unix operating systems (Breininger and Oddy 1998),
.
The D0Uowere used in this analysis auo template tnview the spatial boodon of tile
ITP impact area, Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, and core areas o/the South
_
Brevard County/North Indian River County mompopu|adon, arid to assign specific
�
habitat and demographic attributes with d|gio`| phqtogmphy as o Uaoxground
.
Imagery from 1943' 1957, and 18O5were obtained mquo|imbvehdocoribo habitat
changes over time for pomoano of assessing the potential for habitat restoration to
provide opdmvlooruh,jay habitat conditions. As illustrated by Figure 2, use of D0Up
is valuable in this study as they clearly ,oveo| the predominant land use within thu
^ ,
HCP Plan Area.
�
Habitat polygons were digitized for each of the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas inARC/INFO coverage and include the following attributes: acreage of habitat
_
polygons, habitat typo' potential for restoration as °cruh-jay habitat, soil moisture
condition (xeric, maoio' or *md. need for pine thinning, shrub height dauo (o
measurement of habitat gou|iry), and occupation by ac/ub-jays. DoOn|bun of these
`~
attributes for each polygon provided a mechanism to evaluate Lho regulatory
.
compliance of this HCP and todetermine the, habitat restoration/management needs
for each site. Field surveys were conducted in the summer/fall of 1898 to review tha
~~
mapped polygons for accuracy with regard to habitat composition and structure and
potential for habitat ,o��o,a/ivn �u provide npdme| worub�ay habitat conditions.
l� '
` Additionu|muwavo were conducted xteach compensation area toUp-date the number
_
and extent ofscrub jay territories occupying these sites,
r
�~
The mapped habitat /mkg000 are presented for each Scrub -Jay Habitat
�
Compensation Amoo in the Fiyomo 4` G' arid 8 with the digital photography as o
^
background, #gv,ox 5, 7, and 3 provide the corresponding habitat polygons
~. uoqumnhrUy numbered for idonU|inobn, and evaluation. Dmschvhp"s of the habitat
`
types defined within the SnmbJny Habitat Compensation Areas are presented above
in Section 3.6.
� 48
-
Ell
Figure 6. Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
Pelican Island Elementary School
and
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area
0.2 0 0,2 0.4 Miles
` ^
'
^
, - ~
The uVhhu$es assigned to each mapped polygon are provided in Table 5,
Characteristics of Habitat Pu/M7o/o wit/in Scrub -Jay Habitat {ony/eonatiom Areas.
The total calculated acreage for the mapped habitat pu|ygooscove/inA dhaSorub'Jay
Habitat Compensation Areas in645.8acres, The total xurveyoduomaUo for the same
area is reported to be 605.5� acres. Thumm/e' a 396 *nor in this unp{yoiu is
recognized, however it is considered insignificant as it mpmxoom nn "under -
compensation" of calculated mitigation acres,
wndor-ovmpensadun"ofoa|vu|medmiV0ohonounm.
Potential scrub -jay habitat is defined on the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
by the scrub habitat types: sand pine scrub, oak scrub, mumnuryumuh, and scrubby
Uatwnndo. 1tincludes the sand pine unmh and scrubby Matwouds which have become
forest <>8596 tree canopy oouad duo to the ohaonoo of period hm and habitat
fragmentation. Review of the historical imagery determined that /houo currently
forested scrub habitat areas exhibited suitable open scrub -jay habitat attributes in the
Putnntia|aroh-joy habitat also includes nmxu Uauwo"du within 328' <100m> of, and
pakneuv|yvniu ahmWaogs adjacent to, the delineated yomb habitat types. The
restoration and management of these manin habitat areas as potential scrub -jay
habitat must be considered uodorlhio HCP. Numerous studies have documented that
oomb-jay mnimhns aro not restricted to oak scrub ridges (Breioingar at a/ 1891'
1995. 1938u; Donconn/ut 1995; Bmin1ngor arid Oddy 1898). Figures 5' 7. ond 9'
have been color -enhanced /o facilitate rapid interpretation of the uauiqnod
As pnmamnd in Section 2.4.1 above, optimal F|ohdoacmb-jnv habitat (Fitzpatrick at
o< 1391; Dm1n|ngo/ 1992; Broiningere/al. 1895, 1996W occurs as patches of oak
scrub (focal habitat), embedded within alow and open mosiv shrub |ooUsnapo (matrix
habitats) (8ro|ningor at u< 1896W. Native matrix hab|,ow' principally manio pine
f|otwondoand dop,etmino marshes, are important components ofthe scrub |aodxuuyo
used by Florida scrub -jay (Be|ninger at a! 1935' 1988b). K8a/dx habitat areas
without somb oak and within approximately 1370' (800m) of ucmh oak were
documented by BmininUe, and Dddy <1398> to be hnAoonUv used by uombjoya.
These native matrix habitats provide prey species for Florida scrub -jays and habitat
for other species o/ conservation concern (Breioiogo, at a< 1$95. 1996b/ Suhmabu,
at o/ 1999). The high flammability of the ooVvo nnu/,i^ hahi,o(a often morvpx to
spread fire into the Un,mxismnt oak aomu hohimm <8mioio0m at a/. 1985, 1996W.
The matrix habitats provide habitat to Florida ocrub-jays during padndo of habitat
degradation n[the preferred oak scrub habitat (8,wininVorand Oddy1998).
The proximity u(hxesmand patches of tall shrubs greater than l acre, (0,4 hectare)
has been ahuvvn to have u negative impact on donlography <8m|nin0e/ e/ a/ 1995;
B,eining,,and Oddv 199O>.Tall vegetation reduces tile »c,oblwvoability ,oscan their
ounnuod|n3m for |vno'oixtunoen; /homhy i"c.,uai*y their vulnerability to n"admdqv by
woodland xavvka (VVooUm`d*n and Fitzpatrick 1984' Sohmnlmr n/ m1, 1994;
nw�
N
Iq
i:`
Table 5.
Characteristics
of Habitat Polygons within Scrub -Jay
Habitat Compensation
Areas
rl
I't
Polygon
Acres
Habitat type
Potential
Xeric or
Pine
Shrub
Occupied
scrub -jay
Mesic or
thinning
height
rV
habitat
Wet
----class
1
9.6
Sand pine
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Mixed tall
No
2
23.3
Marsh
No
Wet
No
NIA
No
3
6.4
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
4
6.7
Sand pine
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Mixed tall
No
5
4,9
Scrubby
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
No
flatwoods
6
17.1
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Mixed tall
Yes
7
6.6
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Mixed tall
Yes
8
94.6
Mosic flatwoods
No
Mosic
Yes
Too tall
No
(Corridor)
9
22.1
Mesic flatwoods
Yes
Mosic
Yes
Too tall
Yes
10
27.1
Mosic flatwoods
No
Mesic
No
Too tall
No
11
24.1
Mesic flatwoods
No
Mesic
No
Too tall
No
12
20.8
Scrubby
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Mixed tall
No
flatwoods
13
6.7
Scrubby
Yes!
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
Yes
flatwoods
14
3.5
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
No
Optimal
Yes
15
10.2
Mesic flatwoods
Yes
Mesic
Yes
Too tall
No
16
1.0
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
17
2,8
Mesic flatwoods
Yes
Mesic
Yes
mixed tall
No
18
2.2
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
19
16.2
Scrubby
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
No
flatwoods
20
23.8
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
21
0.3
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
22
8.0
Mesic flatwoods
Yes
Mesic
Yes
Too tall
No
23
0.9
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
24
21.3
Mesic flatwoods
Yes
Mosic
Yes
Too tall
No
25
5,1
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
26
5.1
Scrubby
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
No
flatwoods
27
18.1
Sand pine
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Mixed tali
Yes
28
1.4
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
29
1'0
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
30
4.6
Rosemary
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Mixed tall
Yes
31
9.0
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
No
Mixed tall
Yes
32
0.9
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
33
0.9
Disturbed
Yes
Mesio
Yes
Too tall
-No
56
Mme,
Table 5. Continued.
Occupied
Polygon
Acres
Habitat type
Potential
Xeric or
Pine
Shrub
scrub -jay
Mesic or
thinning
height
habitat
Wet
class
34
5.0
_
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
35
26.5
Scrubby
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Mixed tall
Yes
flatwoods
36
8.7
Disturbed
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
No
37
25.4
Palmetto-l.yonia
Yes
Xeric
No
Mixed tall
Yes
38
4.3
Mesic flatwoods
Yes
Mosic
Yes
Too tall
No
39
6.3
Disturbed
Yes
Mesio
Yes
Tao tall
No
40
37.7
inland Swamp
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
41
2.8
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
Yes
42
1.7
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
Yes
43
1.5
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
Yes
44
4.6
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Optimal
Yes
45
2.5
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
Yes
46
2.0
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
Yes
47
2.8
Scrubby
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Too tall
Yes
flatwoods
48
5.2
Palmetto-L.yonia
Yes
Mesic
No
Mixed tall
Yes
49
0.7
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
50
15.1
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
No
Optimal
Yes
51
17.7
Oak scrub
Yes
Xeric
Yes
Mixed tall
Yes
52
0.3
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
53
4.8
Marsh
No
Wet
No
NIA
No
54
16.4
Mesic flatwoods
No
Mesic
No
Mixed tall
No
55
34.6
Oak scrub
Yes"
Xoric
No
Optimal
Yes`
("C.Ri 512
Mitigation - (lot
included)
56
2.9
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
57
2.6
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
58
2.4
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
59
1.1
Mesic flatwoods
Yes
Mesic
Yes
Mixed tall
No
60
1.6
Marsh
No
Wet
No
N/A
No
61
0.7
Marsh
No
Wet
No
NIA
No
62
1.6
Mesic flatwoods
Yes
Mesic
Yes
Mixed tall
No
Total Potential
Scrub -Jay Habitat
324.0±acres'
Total Occupied Scrub
-Jay Habitat
195.5± -acres
Total Unoccupied Potential Scrub -Jay
Habitat -
128.5± acres
'(excludes Polygon No. 55 & polygon 8 (tile 94± acres Sebastian Airport
dispersal corridor);
ii
57
Breininger et al. 1995; Breiningor and Oddy 1998). Management Of the matrix
habitat types as low, open habitat areas enhances the dispersal potential of scrub
jays (Breininger and Oddy 1998), The spatial arrangement of habitat structure affects
demographic success and must be considered in management for population
persistence of Florida scrub -jays (Breininger et al. 1991, 1995, 1998a; Duncun et al.
1995; Breininger and Oddy 1998). Mesic flatwood forests that were observed to be
present on historical imagery within the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas and
are located >328' (100rn) from focal scrub habitat types were not classified as
potential scrub -jay habitat to be covered Under this HCP.
Each habitat polygon was also evaluated to define management needs for restoration
to conditions that are optimal for scrub -jays. This includes habitat quality
considerations of pine thinning and shrub height class It also defines the current
extent of habitat use by existing scrub -jay territories to avoid negative impacts to
management actions.
these territories as a result of proposed habitat restoration and i n
The acreage of habitat currently used by scrub -jays on the Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas was determined to assist in the determination of the regulatory
sufficiency of this HCP.
Optimal scrub -jay habitat features a tree canopy cover of less than 15%. Therefore,
potential scrub -jay habitat polygons exhibiting a tree canopy cover of greater than
15% are recommended for pine thinning. Review of Table 5 shows that pine thinning
is recommended within most of the habitat polygons.
The shrub height mapping classes evaluated for each habitat polygon included: 1.)
too short [entire polygon < 3.9' (1.2m) tail], 2,) optimal 1polygon exhibited a mosaic of
too short (<3.9' (1.2m)) and optimal (3.9-5.6' (1.2-1.7m WIWI and had no too tall
scrub [>5.6 (1.7m) tail] patch greater than 1 acre in size, 3.) mixed tall (polygon
exhibited a mix of too tall patches > 1 acre in size and short and/or optimal scrub),
and 4.) too tall [entire polygon was >5.6' (1.7rn tal0l. This attribute Was used to
classify habitat quality within the shrub stratum for purposes Of recommending
mechanical and fire management needs. Table 6, 11abitat Quality Classification
Regarding Shrub ]]eight an(I 1-labital Managetrient Needs, describes each habitat
quality attribute.
Scrub -Jay Occuparlgy Sttrclies
The final characteristic that was evaluated was the determination of present Use Of
the habitat polygon by Florida scrub -jays. As presented above in Section 3.2, the
known remaining scrub -jay territories located within the compensation areas and
affected lots were censused by SES for 51 hours between July 19, 1998 and
October 14, 1998 using FWS recommended methods set forth in Fitzpatrick et al.
(1991). Where contiguous territories did not facilitate initiation of disPutes between
families to define territory boundaries, occupancy of a habitat polygon area was
based on observed presence or absence of scrub -jays, in conjunction with an
AA,
i
j�
assessment of the presence of habitat features suitable for use by scrub- iays. The
surveys were primarily completed within the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
i
to ensure that management strategies recommended within this HCP would not
adversely impact existing territories and to provide accurate base data to estimate the
e, potential number of scrub -jay territories that the compensation areas can support
when restored to optimal scrub -jay habitat conditions.
4.1.2 Aareaghlands Potential Scrub Jav HabitoA
Lots
Pursuant to an informal agreement between the FWS and the Applicant, the
assessment of the level of anticipated incidental take for this MCP is primarily
habitat -based. It considers the habitat contained within the privately -owned
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots presently designated by the FWS as occupied or
potentially -occupied by scrub -jays. For purposes of this HCP, the average area of
each affected Sebastian Highlands residential lot is estimated to be one-quarter
acre. Therefore, the level of anticipated incidental take proposed under this HCP,
expressed in terms of habitat -areas, is calculated based on the total number of
affected lots multiplied by an average lot size of one-quarter acre.
Based on the existing lot data compiled by SES and presented in Table 3, 317
Sebastian Highlands scrub lots, comprising 79.3± acres, are presently recorded by
the City of Sebastian as containing potential scrub -jay habitat. Figure 2 shows the
spatial location of these specified lots (impact areas). These lots are located within
the overall ITP Impact area covered under this MCP.
4.1.3 AcreA9e of Exi"In OccuPiedj Scrub -Jay HabltAt ,on t e Scram -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas
Field surveys conducted in support of this HCP found that almost no habitat was
optimal for scrub -jays on the North Sebastian Conservation Area, Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area (34 lots in Unit 17), and Pelican Island Elementary School
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas. The majority of the scrub -jay habitat areas
that occur on the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas have more than one habitat
feature that is suboptimal for use by scrub -jays. Scrub -jay habitat quality at Wabasso
Scrub Conservation Area is higher than the other compensation areas covered under
this HCP. This is a result of a wildfire that bursted the northern oak scrub habitat
areas approximately 10 years ago and the implementation of a timber operation in
1998 within a 34.6± acre sand pine forest located in the southeastern area of ttte
site. This forest habitat type was not used by scrub -jays prior to timbering. The
timber operation was completed as part of a mitigation plan to compensate for the
take of one (1) Florida scrub -jay territory incidental to the County Road 512
improvements project (FWS Log No. 4-1-96-432). As clearly stated on Table. 5 and
Figure 9, this 34.6d- acre parcel (Polygon 55) is not included as mitigation under this
Sebastian HCP. This is due to the fact that Indian River County already used this area
as compensatory mitigation for the take of Florida scrub-jays incidental to
implementation of the County Road 512 improvements project. Only 38± acres of
potential scrub-jay habitat located on the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area is being
proposed as part of the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas proposed under this
f HCP (see Table 5). This compensation area is identified as Polygon Nos. 48, 50, and
51 on Table 5 and Figure 9.,' Figure 9 shows Polygon 55 as occupied by Florida
scrub-jays for informational purposes only and is not intended to indicate inclusion as
a compensatory mitigation area.
'I
The assessment of the extent of existing (occupied) scrub-jay habitat on the
compensation area was based on the presence of suitable scrub-jay habitat features
(Breininger et al 1995, 1995; Breininger and Oddy 1998), in conjunction with the
documented presence of scrub-Jay territories, pursuant to the 1998 scrub-jay census
conducted in support of this HCP. Using the habitat-based assessment procedure,
which is consistent with the methodology applied to quantify the amount of incidental
take proposed under this HCP, 195.5+ arses of suitable, occupied scrub-jay habitat
were determined to occur within the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas (see
Table 5).
4.1.4 IXcrea a of,Unoccupied, Restorable Scrub-Jay Habitat on the Scrub Ajay Habitat
Compensation Areas
The acreage of unoccupied, restorable scrub-jay habitat occurring within the Scrub-
Jay Habitat Compensation Areas is based on a review of historical imagery dating
back to 1943, presence of restorable scrub-jay habitat features, and consideration of
the influence of matrix habitats to the demographic success in scrub-jays,
As presented in Table 5, 128.5±acres of unoccupied, restorable scrub-jay habitat
was determined to occur within the ScrUb-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
4.2 Estimated Amount or Extent of Take
Based on existing data collected from the City of Sebastian and a survey conducted
in the ITP impact area in the summer fall 1998, issuance of the Sebastian HCP ITP
is anticipated to result in the taking of 79.3± acres (317 lots) of habitat currently
identified by the FWS as occupied and potentially occupied by scrub-jays. Two
scrub-jay clusters are presently documented within the affected habitat area. These
clusters, which are part of the South subpopUlation, are comprised of a total of 7
scrub-jay families concentrated primarily within Units '10 and 17 of Sebastian
Highlands. Restoration and long-term management of the Unit 17 compensation
areas, comprising 21 ± acres of historically optimal scrub-jay habitat adjoining, and
within 1000 ft. (305m) of 5 scrub-jay families (Unit 17 cluster) potentially affected
by the proposed action is proposed tinder this HCP. This action is expected, over
tithe, to minimize impacts to the affected Unit 17 scrub jay cluster by maintaining
suitable nesting and foraging habitat conditions for use by these srrul,)-jays. Under
61
i
present-day conditions, only a small portion of the habitat areas used by the Unit
17 cluster would be classified as optimal scrub -jay habitat.
To further minimize impacts to the affected scrub -jay clusters, restoration of the
Unit 17 compensation areas is of the highest priority. A recent prescribed fire
within the Pelican island Elementary School scrub initiated the Applicant's effort to
minimize adverse impacts of the proposed action to scrub -jays. An additional factor
that must be considered when quantifying the number of scrub -jay families
anticipated to be affected by the proposed action is that loss of habitat within the
Sebastian Highland lots is expected to occur incrementally, over time, as the City
of Sebastian issues residential home construction permits towards build -out of the
Sebastian Highlands subdivision. This further supports the need to prioritize habitat
restoration measures within the Unit 17 compensation areas, Pelican Island
Elementary School and Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area.
Conservation measures to be implemented by the Applicant to minimize and
mitigate potential impacts of the taking, are the restoration and long-term
management of optimal Florida scrub -jay habitat conditions within the combined
418 :L acre Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas. The conservation strategies to
be employed are outlined in the Sebastian MCP operating conservation program set
forth below in Section 5.0.
4.3 Analysis of the Effect of the Take on the North Indian River County/South
Brevard County Metapopulation
A discussion of the Sebastian HCP study metapopulation of which the Sebastian HCP
study population is a part is presented above in Sections 2.1 and 3.2. It is also
discussed in Section 2.1 that the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas proposed
under this HCP incorporate the best and largest scrub parcels remaining within the
HCP Plan Area. Therefore, the analysis of the effect of the proposed take and the
corresponding sufficiency of the mitigation must consider the existing landscape
constraints imposed on this HCP.
The study population (Sebastian north and south subpopulations) is presently
peripheral to the study metapopulation core located primarily in South Brevard
County. Under present day conditions, extinction of both the north and south study
subpopulations is certain without habitat restoration to optimal habitat conditions.
Numerous studies conducted by Breininger et al. (1991, 1995, 1996a, 1996b,
1998a, 1998b) and others (Wooifenden 1974; Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1991;
Schaub et al. 1992) linking habitat features habitat use patterns and demographic
success have shown that scrub -jay extinction risks are reduced in optimal habitat.
Therefore, the proposed restoration of 324± acres of predominantly poor quality
scrub -jay habitat to optimal conditions and the provision of a critical 94a:acre habitat
linkage under this HCP is expected to enhance the persistence probability of this
currently endangered scrub -jay copulation. However, as reflected in the operating
62
m
conservation program, restoration measures must be immediate and aggressive to
reduce the current rates of decline documented within this scrub -jay population.
Loss of the potential scrub -jay habitat identified within the ITP impact area, primarily
Unit 17, may reduce the ability to maintain a contiguous Atlantic coast population;
however the continuity of this population already appears unstable as a result of
severe habitat fragmentation and poor quality scrub -jay habitat conditions that
presently characterize the HCP Pian Area. Tite Sebastian north subpopulation will
continue to be small and vulnerable to extinction because of low population size
unless restoration strengthens the connection of this area to the Sebastian Buffer
Reserve, as proposed under this HCP. The proposed NCP provisions of restoring an
open landscape to facilitate dispersal between the north subpopulation and the
Sebastian Buffer reserve and optimizing habitat quality on 236j- acres on the
adjoining North Sebastian Conservation Area is expected to enhance the population
persistence probability of tite north subpopulation, and correspondingly, its
contribution to the, population size of the nearby Study metapopulation.
The Sebastian south subpopulation is vulnerable to extinction, particularly without
implementation of the Sebastian HCP. Population persistence probability of the
south subpopulation will always be low because of the severe fragmentation that
now occurs for almost all of the Atlantic Coast scrub -jay population south of the
north subpopulation, Therefore, the potential loss of 2 scrub -jay clusters from the
south subpopulation as a result of the proposed action is not expected to adversely
impact the viability of the study metapopulation. The core populations critically
important to the study metapopulation are located in southBrevard County
(Breininger and Qddy 1998).
Restoration of tate Unit 17 Pelican Island Elementary School/Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area, as recommended by the FWS as part of this HCP, should
serve to minimize geographic isolation of the southern subpopulation. This will be
accomplished by maintaining and enhancing the existing Unit 17 habitat linkage for
the occasional dispersal of scrub -jays between the north and south subpopulation,
and potentially, to tite study metapopulation (FWS November 12, 1996
correspondence to Indian River County),
The proposed long -terns management of optimal scrub -jay habitat conditions at the
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas will serve to reduce cumulative effects of
the proposed action.
The vulnerability of ttte study population, especially the south subpopulation, to
extinction, particularly without implementation of the proposed HCP is based on the
following. Previous studies showed that dispersal tendencies by male Florida
scrub -jays are short (rnean = 984' (300 meters)) and that both sexes seldom move
far during their lives in natural landscapes (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984,
1991). Dispersal distances are longer in fragmented landscapes, such as the HCP
63
I
t Plan Area (Thaxton and Hingtgen 1996; Breininger 1999). However, males appear
to infrequently move among habitat fragments (Breininger 1999). The entire study
s metapopulation does not meet a patchy metapopulation structure where patches
function as a single unit because many of the patches are not close enough for
r;, frequent dispersal by males, especially in the study populations (Harrison and
Taylor 1987; Stith et a/. 1996). Although, females might be the limiting factor in
the entire metapopulation because of differential survival between males and
females along the Atlantic Coast, males may become the limiting sex in many
habitat fragments, especially residential landscapes (Breininger 1999). One can
hypothesize that most habitat fragments not near other fragments will rarely be
recolonized if all males expire in those fragments. Variation in patch habitat quality
and size also prohibits the application of original metapopulation structure of
extinction and recolonization theory (Levins 1969) to describe Florida scrub -jay
population dynamics,
In large natural landscapes, Florida scrub -jays generally retain their territories and
attract new replacement breeders following the death of their spouse (Woolfenden
and Fitzpatrick 1984; Breininger et aL 1996a). This appears to be true for most
study sites. However, in fragmented populations, females often move after the
death of their spouse until they find a mate in another fragment (Breininger 1999).
Typical source -and -sink theory does not always explain Florida scrub-iay dynamics
in fragmented systems (Breininger 1999). Florida scrub -jays from small fragments
that are sinks are temporarily sources of new breeders to larger fragments that can
be sinks until no more jays are in population sinks (Breininger 1999). Thaxton and
Hingtgen (1996) reported that Florida scrub -jays nearly always moved from small
suburban patches of low demographic success into larger reserve areas and not
from large reserves into small habitat fragments. Therefore, the type of
metapopulation structure, where large reserves support many small reserves, may
not predict Florida scrub -jay population dynamics.
Another metapopulation structure (Harrison and Taylor 1997; Stith et aL 1996)
proposed is a nonequilibrium structure where patches are too small and too far
apart so that extinction is inevitable. This structure does not define dynamics of
South Brevard metapopulation core because occupied patches are close together
and there is an exchange of individuals. However, this metapopi.rlation structure
may accurately define the structure of most subpopulations south of the Sebastian
study population.
Implementation of the conservation measures set torth under this Sebastian HCP
are expected to contribute, in tite long-term, to the recovery of the fourth largest
scrub -jay population across the remaining range. Proposed NCP actions will also
serve to benefit other species of conservation concern residing within tate Atlantic
w Coastal Ridge scrub landscapes covered under this HCP.
64
�
�
" 4.4 Alternatives Considered
Three alternatives were considered by the Applicant waddress the needs of the
~~
proposed action. Each o|mmadva oona|dnvod the biological requirements of Uhe scrub
habitat indicator species, the Rv,ida`pcmhiay' the legal mandates of the FYS. and
the concerns of the Applicant with regard to resolving private land use conflicts in tile
�
Sebastian Highlands residential subdivision.
4.4.1 �
Under Alternative 1 the �VV� would not �ouo �e "
~ ' ��� _ -- �__'--�— —_ -- �
�
Applicant would not implement proposed habitat management and m*xxuVon )
�
actions on 418± uo/na of publicly -owned lands for purposes of enhancing Florida
�
scrub -jay demographic su000xo by optimizing habitat suitability and by facilitating
�
dispersal and rocu\onbadonofrestored and uninhabited habitat.
� -
Individual owners of the one-quarter acre lots located within the platted residential
� ~ amuu of the Sebastian Highlands auhdivis|on that are currently, o/ in the h/tum'
designated by tho FVVS an potentially occupied by Florida scrub -jays vvnuW be
�
unduly by preparation an individual HCP to construct o single-family
� rexdontid home o, would risk nxpuovm to a violation of 8ouhoh 8 of iho ESA if
� -
they initiated construction without an UP. Tile City of Sebastian wmu|da|oo'iak
L~
exposure »oSection 9violations if this local Oovnmmomissued clearing orbuilding
pnnniu for residential hmne cona/wxhzn that was subsequently do,onninnU to �
have resulted in the "taking" of Florida scrub -jays, If the individual Sebastian ^
Highlands |cn npmao dooNod not to vpoatruut. then they would have Vmo ^
difficulty selling their lots at fair market value duo to imposed ESA constraints to
development. |sauaono of multiple individual HCPu Would result in piecemeal
�
—
mitigation by |omvmg small ^hmdOomnm" of vegetation on each |n« since t»e ^
individual lot owner likely could not afford to contribute funds for the purchase of
^ ' xon/h within aFVVSapproved Florida nnmhiaymitigation area. �
_
Proaumwhnn of small "hedgerows" of vegetation on indivWoa| |mo are not as
dliniaro, mapo0mvNe, o, viable for ycmh-jay persistence as comprehensive
mitigation and menagmmootactions on in0e: more contiguous tracts ofhabitat. If `
mitigation funds worm collected from individual Gobosdmn Highlands lot n,vnam,
�~
they would probably be directed into Brevard County since the FW8 has not
identified anacceptable Florida oorob-joymitigation area in Indian River Comn\yduo
to the high-level of hahhe/ |num, dnOrado/ion, and fragmentation presently `
'
characterizing this area.
�
�
Potential environmental onnooqoonoom of the No 4^Uun Alternative wwvN be
relatively minimal the short-term because nnadditional *rmk-vagmumd lots would
U�e he o|en(eg. However, the bencUm or protecting the existing ncrub'ioy families .�
witliin the severely fragmented Sebastian Flighlands residential subdivision
65
`
'
landscape are expected to be short-term. This is due to continued degradation of
�F w ' adequately —mortality^'
and �o �oma~~~ v�vnmhUhv o� U� ~~~o1aypopulation ~ road ~n~ to
:
�
predation by species common to suburban environments, such as blue jays, fish
urovvo, boat -tailed grackles (Uvisnamx major), common grackles (Cl Ymscula),
raccoons, and house cats (Fitzpatrick *ral. 1391; Oreiningor1389). Fitzpatrick et �
vt (1931> reported that vehicular \/oMio through scrub -jay habitat significantly ^�
increases the mortality rate within a population of scrub -jays. Scrob'ioy survival
mum adjacent to highways were significantly lower (0.57) than that found in no,ub'
:
]ay tenkudns lacking paved roads <0.79) (Fitzpatrick et al. 1331). Long after scrub -
jays havebocowahabitueiodtnmaior,ro(hothurovAh(ums.*hoiriow+a|dtodoOight /
profile makes (homvu|oumWo to collisions with vehicles (B,eininUo/unpub|. data;
Management of opdna| uxmh-joy hubkuu conditions within the currently *
fragmented scrub patches located within the residential lots ofthe vast Sebastian |
�
Highlands subdiviniond`roughpmnohbnd fire would he significantly constrained by
' ,he proximity of the residential homes. Fire is oxxando| to maintaining optimal
�
scrub -jay habitat conditions <VVmdhmUov and Rorpm,ioh 1991; K0mvo,s 1980.
- 8chmabore/al. 1984 Bminingere/al. 1996W. The documented decline ofFlorida
oorub'jaypopu|adons is attributed topoor habitat quality resulting from disruption �
of nmore| h,o regimes (Be|nin0nr 1989/ 8mininOor e/ a{ 1985' 1986a' 1998h' 1
1988b. 1998; Fitzpatrick */x/ 1991; VVou|hmdun arid Fitzpatrick 1984). Although
the epp|iuuhnn vfmechanical cutting techniques can successfully reduce the height
of the oomb vogomhun and orunm openings p,ofaood by ourub`}aya' mechanical |
treatments have not been found to be o ovhmitvt(I for fire in the long-term �
management of optimal ucmb-jay habitat conditions (Sohma|zar e/ w/ 1984;
' VVnoUondon arid Fitzpatrick 1391). Without fire management, the /m0me^md scrubhabitat within the platted lots of the Sebastian Highlands subdivision will Succeed
�
�
stageto a
' dense _ be compatible —ith— Florida scrub-jay_habitat—^
requirements.The ^
= ^
scrub -jay ' . . within the City of Sebastian, excluding__ -- ,
~~ VVabeaoo Scrub Conservation Area, declined 54% if) seven <7> voam from 35
�
territories in 1931 to 16territories in 1888. This significant pnpu/ubno decline can �
be attributed to multiple development -related factors, as presented above. Because
of poor demographic success, all su6urban Populations that have oeen studied are
declining (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a). The long-term effects of the No Action
Alternative would be probable extinction of the remaining 13 or 14. (includes tile
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area) Florida scrub -jay families located within tile
HCP Plan Area in tile near future,
,
Under Alternative 1, the purpose or need for taking the proposed action would not be satisfied, arid was therefore determined to be, an infeasiblo alternativo. 66 ^
•
4.4.2 Alternative 2: ProMsed Action Issuance of an 17P and Implementation of
Sebastian NC.P
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action), is tine issuance of a Section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP by the
FWS to allow the incidental take of the Florida scrub -jay for a 20 -year period. The
authorized take would be incidental to the otherwise lawful activity of constructing
single-family residential homes within the platted residential areas of the Sebastian
Highlands subdivision. Authorization of the ITP is predicated on the full
implementation of the Applicant's HCP and compliance with all other requirements
for permit issuance.
Issuance of an ITP for the proposed action would authorize the take of Florida
scrub -jays and potential Florida scrub -jay habitat located in all platted residential
areas within the Sebastian Highlands subdivision (ITP impact area). Based on
collected existing data and field surveys conducted in the ITP impact area in the
summer/fall 1998, issuance of the Sebastian HCP ITP is anticipated to result in the
taking of 79,3± acres (317 lots) of habitat currently identified by the FWS as
occupied and potentially occupied by scrub -jays. Seven 'scrub -jay families,
concentrated within Units 10 and 17 of Sebastian Highlands, will be potentially
affected by the proposed action. These scrub -jay families are part of the south
subpopulation.
Based on the 1998 surveys, the Sebastian HCP Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas currently support 6 to 7 scrub -jay families within 195,5± acres of poor to
sub -optimal duality habitat located mainly in the North Sebastian Conservation
Area/Sebastian Airport (4 families), and the: Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area (2 to
3 families). As directed by the Sebastian HCP operating conservation program
presented in Section 5.0, the currently occupied scrub -jay habitat, in addition to
128,5± acres of potential, but presently unoccupied habitat, will be immediately
restored and managed to provide optimal scrub -jay habitat conditions within a total
of 324± acres. In addition, the 94± acre Sebastian Airport dispersal corridor tract
will be immediately restored to provide an open landscape matrix to facilitate
movement between the study population and the study metapopulation. This
dispersal corridor, composed of a mesio flatwoods habitat type, does not provide
suitable habitat conditions to adequately support a scrub -jay territory. Therefore,
the 94 ± acres area was not included in the following consideration of the potential
carrying capacity of tite Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas or into the
calculation of total potential scrub -jay habitat mitigation acres.
Based on an average territory size of 22,5 acres in optimal scrub habitat (Fitzpatrick
et a/. 1991), the habitat restoration and rnanagernent measures prof)osed under this
HCP have the potentia( to increase the scrub -jay carrying capacity to 7 to 8
territories within the 195;5± acres of presently occupied habitat and to provide
suitable, conditions for recruitment of an additional 6 territories within the_ 128,61
acres targeted for restoration. Therefore, the potential carrying capacity of the
67
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas is 13 to 14 scrub -jay families in optimal
habitat conditions. As discussed above, an additional 5 families persist on the
Sebastian Golf Course and on the Sebastian Elementary School properties located
outside of the boundaries of the Sebastian HCP Pian Area, These families may
function to provide a source for recolonization of restored habitat within the
northernmost compensation areas. it should be noted that a 3 acre scrub patch
used by one scrub -jay family and located at the western terminus of Runway 45-
f "` 225 (southern runway) is targeted for scrub -jay habitat restoration and
j; management by the Sebastian Airport in accordance with the 1996 Florida Scrub
Jay ManarJentent Flan, Sebastian Airport Site, Sebastian, Indian Lover County, FL
(Carroll and Associates 1996), The status of management actions within this area
is riot known.
The proposed Sebastian MCP operating conservation program will serve to augment
public efforts at securing a sustainable Florida scrub -jays metapopulation within
northern Indian River and southern Brevard counties by increasing the population
persistence probability of the study population through permanent conservation
management measures. The long-term management of habitat conditions optimal
for Florida scrub -jays will also benefit the numerous native species that persist
under the scrub -Jay's "umbrella", such as the Eastern indigo snake and gopher
tortoise.
The conservation actions proposed under the Sebastian HCP will serve to address a
portion of tire Florida scrub -jay conservation and recovery tasks outlined ill tfte
FWS Multi -Species Recovery Plan for South Florida (FWS 1999), These actions
include protection and management of crucial tracts of Florida scrub -jay habitat.
Implementation of Alternative 2 will also serve to further a ntnttber of Indian River
County and City of Sebastian Comprehensive Plan policies and objectives. These
include; 1.) conservation of native upland communities to sustain viable populations
of native plant and animal species and preservation of re preset it ative habitat types,
2.) protection of critical habitat supporting endangered or threatened plants and
animals occurring in Indian River County, 3.) provision of open space land
accessible to the public for resource-based passive recreation, and 4.)
environmental education facilities in the urban service area, and the protection of
lands designated as primary surficial aquifer recharge areas flndian River County
2020 Corn prehensive Plan 1998).
Alternative 2, as proposed, provides affirmative conservation benefits to the Florida
scrub -jay while accommodating an otherwise lawful land use activity. Alternative 2
adequately satisfies the purpose and needs for which the Sebastian HCP is being
prepared.
r
f'
A
4.4.3 Alternative 3:_ Issuance of the_ITP and Acg isition of th»Unit 17 Sebastian
Scrub Conservation Area
Alternative 3 is essentially Alternative 2, with the addition of a 32:f-- acre
compensation area historically referred to as the "Sebastian Scrub Conservation
is
Area" (SSCA). This SSCA consisted of 180 undeveloped platted lots in Unit 17 of
the Sebastian Highlands Subdivision near Pelican Island Elementary School. The
SSCA lots are scattered within a highly developed residential landscape. The
majority of the lots front on existing paved local streets (FloridaAffinity, Inc. and
Ecotech, Inc. 1996). A total of 124 of the 180 lots are privately owned. The
remaining 56 lots were owned by Atlantic Gulf Communities, Inc.
The SSCA project area supported at least 3 families of scrub -jays between 1990
and 1996 (Toland unpubl. data). The SSCA was approved as a Florida Communities
Trust (FCT) 50% cost share project in 1995. The IRC Board approved Phase I of
the project by agreeing to buy the lots owned by Atlantic Gulf Communities (AGC).
Of the original 180 lots, tloe FWS excluded 26 of the more peripheral lots that were
geographically disconnected from the core scrub lots in 1996, Bath the FWS and
the City of Sebastian supported Indian River County's acquisition of the SSCA
project. Even as a stand alone project, the SSCA would have served to reduce the
extent of take and to enhance scrub -jay conservation efforts in the City of
Sebastian, thereby alleviating much of the conflict Surrounding private development
in the platted Sebastian Highlands lots (FWS, February 7, 1995 correspondence to
Indian River County; September 11, 1996 Indian River County Memorandum). In
July 1996, the IRC Board approved the purchase of "Phase 1 " of the SSCA project
lots. This consisted of 50 of the 56 lots owned by AGC (September 11, 1996
Indian River County Memorandum). In Septenrrber 1996, the Indian River Cotu7ty
planning staff recommended that the IRC Board authorize purchase of "Phase 11" of
the SSCA project comprising of 47 lots with 47 different owners.
The high quality scrub habitat contained within the Phase it of the SSCA project is
highly fragmented by a mosaic of occupied single-family houses and cleared, one-
quarter -acre lots with many different owners, The tax assessed Value of the subject
one-quarter acre lots averaged $8,445.00 or $33,780.00 per acre (September 11,
1996 Indian River County Memorandum). Ari additional cost to Iridian River County
for the Phase it SSCA project was a $52,658.96 water Zine utility assessment_
Total 50% cost share of the Phase 11 SSCA project, including appraisals and audits,
�was $266,109.00 for 11.75± acres of highly fragmented scrub -jay habitat acre
(September 11, 1996 Indian River County Memorandum), This represents an
extremely expensive conservation acquisition effort,
Appropriate management of the fragmented, urban scrub using controlled burns
would have been problematic due to liability and potential adverse effects of smoke
ort nearby residents. Tile alternative, scrub managoulent via mechanical strategies,
is an expensive nlanagenrrent strategy, especially in a suburban setting, because it
69
El
U
` is labor intensive and requires negotiating heavy equipment. In addition, the long-
term effects of mechanical management actions to the scrub plant community are
not fully understood and must be used carefully (Schmalzer et a1. 1999). Even more
significant, per acre management costs for maintaining or restoring remnant scrub
in suburban areas, are comparatively more expensive than habitat management
j prescriptions on large parcels of land in undeveloped scenarios.
F` In consideration of the multiple project constraints and limitations listed above, and
at the recommendation of the Indian River County Land Acquisition Advisory
Committee (LAAC), the IRC Board voted in September 1996 to reject the
acquisition of Phase II of the SSCA project. This decision halted all acquisition
efforts by Indian River County of the Sebastian Highlands Unit 17 platted lots
comprising the SSCA (Indian River County, October 17, 1996 correspondence to
the FWS). At the subsequent urging of the FWS, Indian River County did complete
the purchase of a block of 34 contiguous lots in Unit 17. The FWS stated that the
34 AGC lots, in combination with Pelican Elementary School scrub, may
provide enough suitable habitat to minimize the adverse effects of habitat
fragmentation due to losses in the remainder of Unit 17, These scrub parcels, if
properly managed, may be essential "stepping stones" for dispersal of scrub -jays
from and to northern Indian River County..." (FANS, November 12, 1996
correspondence to Indian River County). These 34 AGC lots, referred to herein as
the Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area were acquired by Indian River
County and are included in combination with the Pelican Island Elementary School
scrub as part of the proposed Sebastian HCP Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas located in Unit 17 of Sebastian Highlands.
Implementation of Alternative 3 may have served to increase population persistence
probability of the south subpopulation, however the persistence probability of this
subpopulation will always be low because of the extensive fragmentation that
presently characterizes this area. Appropriate management of optimal scrub -jay
habitat conditions within the fragmented scrub lots would have been extremely
difficult due to the multiple residential homes adjoining the SSCA project area.
Alternative 3 was determined to be infeasible due primarily to economic and habitat
management constraints imposed by present-day conditions.
70
is labor intensive and requires negotiating heavy equipment. In addition, the long-
term effects of mechanical management actions to the scrub plant community are
not fully understood and must be used carefully (Schmalzer et a/. 1999). Even more
significant, per acre management costs for maintaining or restoring remnant scrub
in suburban areas, are comparatively more expensive than habitat management
prescriptions on large parcels of land in undeveloped scenarios.
In consideration of the multiple project constraints and limitations listed above, and
at the recommendation of the Indian River County Land Acquisition Advisory
Cornmittee (LAAC), the IRC Board voted in September 1996 to reject the
acquisition of Phase II of the SSCA project. This decision halted all acquisition
efforts by Indian River County of the Sebastian Highlands Unit 17 platted lots
comprising the SSCA (Indian River County, October 17, 1996 correspondence to
the FWS). At the subsequent urging of the FWS, Indian River County did complete
the purchase of a block of 34 contiguous lots in Unit 17. The FWS stated that the
... 34 AGC lots, in combination with Pelican Elementary School scrub, may
provide enough suitable habitat to minimize the adverse effects of habitat
fragmentation due to losses in the remainder of Unit 17. These scrub parcels, if
properly managed, may be essential "stepping stones" for dispersal of scrub -jays
frorn and to northern Indian River County..." (FWS, November 12, 1996
correspondence to Indian River County). These 34 AGC lots, referred to herein as
the Sebastian Highlands Scrub Conservation Area were acquired by Indian River
County and are included in combination with the Pelican Island Elementary School
scrub as part of the proposed Sebastian HCP Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas located in Unit 17 of Sebastian Highlands,
Implementation of Alternative 3 inay have served to increase papulation persistence
probability of the south subpopulation, however the persistence probability of this
subpopulation will always be low because of the extensive fragmentation that
presently characterizes this area. Appropriate management of optimal scrub -jay
habitat conditions within the fragmented scrub lots would have been extremely
difficult due to the multiple rosidential homes adjoining the SSCA project area.
Alternative 3 was determined to be infeasible due primarily to economic: and habitat
management constraints imposed by present-day conditions.
70
l
�
"~ 5.0 SEBASTIAN HCPOPERATING CONSERVATION PROGRAM
pm
�h
� e Sebastian HCP on operating oonaemo�km program uo� forth herein � ra ,.,,.,~~
ounuonmuon measures to be implemented by the Applicant to minimize and
mitigate potential adverse impacts o{tile incidental take unoccupied and potential
Florida ooruh'/oy habitat and associated UutpJ species to tho muo|mvm exmnt
pmchnab|e. The biological goals and objectives for the Sebastian HCP operating
conservation p,o8ramare aa follows:
The biological goals defined below represent the overall guiding principles for the
Sebastian HCP operating conservation program,
1 Reduce extinction risk and |noreuoo population persistence probability of Mhe
Sebastian HCP otudy population, composed of two (2) uubpvpu|adonx' by
restoring and permanently mo^ug|n0 optimal Florida ocrohiay habitat
conditions, amdescribed |nBeininOero/o/(1995' 1996b), in324± acres of
Florida scrub -jay focal and matrix habitat identified astile Somb-Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas and presently owned by the Applicant,
, 2. Enhance recovery potential of the North Indian River Countv/Sovth Bu*u,d
County mvmpovu|uhu^. txa <ou,U` largest Florida oombiuv memponvlahon
<Bmioingor arid Oddy 1998>' by xm»urinU and maintaining the 94:h vvm
3vhaodan Airport d/vpoop| corridor tract as an open mmdo Uotw000
` |anVaoopc linkage between the Sebastian HCP Study population and tile
study mntapopu|ahonClusters located un the St. Sebastian Buffer Rnaemm.
— 3. Protect the biological integrity arid species diversity that is rhosumriubc of
the Atlantic Coastal Ridge scrub ecosystem by returning the combined 418±
^
acre Sebastian HCP Sc,vhJay Habitat Cnu,nmnhm` and Corridor
Compensation Amoo to conditions mnmoontutivo o/ the historical landscape
and thereby optimal for native opeokm of uooymvo/ivn concert) adapted to
.
open landscapes sub4eot /o frequent fires.
�
BIOLOGICAL QB4EQTIyE
�
� —
The biological ot400,ivan presented hn|mw re»moao/ upooiho meoav'vhN ovdono
�..�
that must boimplemented toachieve tile above stated biological goals.
�— A. Execute u Memorandum of Agreement huvwm,n 'hv Co -Applicants, Indian
�
River County Board ofCounty Commissioners and txoCuv of Sebastian, and
the School District of Indian River Countv as °000pmadoo aom^uy^' /o,
purposes of1.}designating the 418±unmGeba*ionHCP Scrub- Jay Hob|tat
Conservation and CnmUnr, Cnmpmooa/inn x,00n as perpetual Florida scrub -jay
71
habitat conservation sites; 2.) defining conservation management, fiscal, and
land management staff responsibilities of each HCP participant, 3.) formally
f abandoning the Gibson Road right-of-way through the North Sebastian
Conservation Area, and 4.) permitting implementation of prescribed ecological
burns within the incorporated limits of City of Sebastian.
B. implement mechanical and restoration burning strategies, as set forth in
Section 5.3, immediately to initiate recovery of optimal Florida scrub -jay
habitat quality features within the 418_ acre Sebastian HCP Scrub -Jay
Habitat Conservation and Corridor Compensation Areas.
Apply mechanical treatments to reduce the tree canopy cover to less than
15% (1 to 2 trees per acre) and to eradicate the exotic pest plant, Brazilian
pepper. Use logging operations as the primary mechanical technique to thin
pine trees and to fell tree -sized (>3.0 in. diameter at breast height (dbh))
scrub oaks and cabbage palms. Use the Cut Stump herbicidal control method
to remove Brazilian pepper for the targeted conservation sites.
Initiate an aggressive restoration burning program, within 6 to 8 weeks from
completion of mechanical treatment on the initial conservation site, or as
soon thereafter as suitable weather conditions permit, to reduce shrub
height, consume vegetative debris left on the ground from applied
mechanical treatments, and initiate recovery of open areas.
C. Implement a habitat management program that uses prescribed fire as the
primary management tool to maintain, in the long-term, optimal Florida
scrub -jay habitat quality features within the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas. Integrate habitat management principles that favor maintenance of
the biological diversity that is characteristic of the Atlantic Coastal Ridge
scrub ecosystem, and thereby optirnal for Florida scrub -jays, by promoting
variation in managernent unit size and location, fire frequency (based on
scrub -jay habitat quality structural criteria), fire-: intensity, fire patchiness, and
timing of burns (favoring natural season burns) (Schmalzer of al. 1999; Main
and Menges 1997; Breininger and Oddy 1998)•
� The presence of optimal Florida scrub -jay habitat features, as defined in
Breininger et a/, (1995, 1996b), evaluated at the landscape scale will be used
to measure achievement of this biological objective at each of the Scrub -Jay
Habitat Compensation Areas:
1 ,) Qak Cover;, greater than 50% of the shrub layer comprised of
scrub oaks;
2.) pperaS aCe; 10%-30°l0 of the arca comprised of open space
(bare sand or sparse herbaceous vegetation) forming a mosaic
among the oaks;
72
��A
k� 3] Iieq_1&o�vQf:0-1596tree canopy cover; �
4.> patches ofscrub oaks otoptimal hoiOxu
3.9' to 5.6' (1.2 to 1.7 m) mjthno/ patches of mU scrub 5.6'
<lJ m> comprising areas larger than 1 acre (0.4 hu).
5J greater than 328' (100o) hvma (nmm.
[�
' [ D. EomhUah m oumnmhanoivo monitoring uroQmm, referred to he,ain on the
' Subuadao HCP Habitat [Nonogomuru Monitoring Program, that annually, for
r
the term of ITP, ascertains the success f the applied mechanical and fire
menoyamoot treatments in achieving the otumU biological objectives. Use the ,
— ocl|ootod site-specific monitoring data, /n conunodmn with state -of -the -
science habitat management principles and resources to refine and improve
(
future management oo/ivnu.
-
� E. Explore the pouanho| of establishing an inter -agency partnerships with the
FVVG' FVVC' and/or FDEP, and/or obtaining additional hmdio0 through grants,
-
for implementation ufacomprehensive ou|omanVing and demographic study
-" of the study popv|nbon. This study would aemo to augment oo|odbandinS
and demographic studies currently being conducted in South 8mvpvj County
-| ,o huui||mm /umvn/y of the North Indian River Cnuoty/Ooo\k Drvvan] County
� mo,upopu|ahono( which the study population is upan (Bneininge/ and Ugdy
. 1998). The nyoomnoCnqmrmioo isperforming theSouth Brevard study with
. oon/,vot funds provided by the pVVS Jacksonville, Florida (8min|ngr, and
Oddy 1998).
51 Habitat Management Considerations
The sedentary characteristic ofFlorida oombiuyahas asignificant influence On their
_~
large-scale population mmcmne,, and Must bouconsideration ofany habitat protection
measure oeMotev towards protection of this opooian (VVonhnndnn an(] Fitzpatrick
1981). Because moatocrub'iayn become breeders within a few hundred meters of
_
their »u,a| territory, they onsv/" that protected patches of coi,ub/e oc,vh muhna(v
pass among Vonamhon, without requiring now colonization events (VVuofeodno and
Fitzpatrick 1984, /991). Pomiomnoo of small yvkpupu|ahnnn of onmhlava is
~
enhanced i(located within the normal dispersal radius, 2miles u,less, of neighboring
ourvh-juvuubpopw|aUonn (VVov|fvndmn and Fitzpatrick 1991; Fitzpatrick o/a( 1894u).
Thmafnm' the cononw*Vnn and management of zmom of uuimWm acmb1ay hmUkot
~
located between large habitat patches, mxo,,ndtoon"stepping stone" uo,ob, provide
vital links to scrub jay populations (Fitzpatrick *ta( 1994o). It is important that these
|morwminO habitat patches are managed for optimal ouwbiov habitat conditions as ,
—
mortality associated with dispersal is |oQh for yo'ub1ovx moving through v/nvn
�
woodlands, v,onn ammu, and open onnou|mm| anmo (3hV` 'tp/ 1998). Cmowro of
_
small to int*nnodiamo'xb,u *ohpo»vladvny may be the optimal configuration of Florida '
scrub -jay nompqnv|aknnv mmv,u txu total area o/ oo"sr'.ud habitat is limited o/
`
fragmented (vVoo|fand000n(i Fitzpatrick 1991).
73
The above biological criteria were considered by the FWS in developing the scrub-jay
core habitat reserve design for the City of Sebastian (TOland 1996). This reserve
design essentially directed the acquisition and designation of the Sebastian HCP
Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
Suitable scrub-jay habitat is not restricted to scrub Oak patches (Breininger et al.
1991, 1995, 1996b, 1998a; Ouncun et al. 1995). Scrub-jays defend and use mesic
habitat types, such as open pine flatwoods and saw paimetto scrub, located near oak
scrub patches (Breininger et al. 1995, '1998x), Alteration and fragmentation of the
matrix habitat by developmentlagricultural activities disrupts fire patterns, alters prey
and predator composition, and removes habitat that may become; optimal after fires
(Fitzpatrick et al. 1991; Breininger et al. 1995; Breininger and Oddy 1998). Therefore,
management of optimal scrub-jay habitat conditions must consider the matrix habitat
in which the focal scrub patches are embedded (Breininger and Oddy 1998).
Management of the matrix habitat serves to benefit associated scrub species, such as
the gopher tortoise, Eastern indigo snake, and wetland dependent species, including
the threatened Florida gopher frog (references in Breininger and Oddy 1998;
Schmalzer et al, 1999). Management of the depression marshes provides breeding
sites for amphibians which form a significant portion of the food chain; insuring an
important food source to Florida scrub-jays (Breininger and Oddy 1998; Schmalzer el
al. 1999).
Where natural fire processes have been restricted by anthropogenic barriers or
activities, the scrub oaks often reach a size that is essentially fire-resistant (Guerin
1988,1993; Schmalzer et at 1994). Restoration of tali, unburned scrub to optimal
Florida scrub-jay habitat conditions usually can not be achieved by fire alone, as the
tree-sized scrub oaks are able to survive: fire and resprout from trunks above ground
(Schmalzer et at 1994). The objective to restore a low, open habitat structure would
not be accomplished as the overgrown scrub would regenerate as a forest structure
(Schmalzer et al, 1994). Therefore, mechanical cutting of the tail fire-resistant scrub
oaks, followed by a prescribed fire, has been found to be the only reasonable method
of restoring severely degraded scrub communities (Schmalzer et ai. 1994). This
method has been used at both Oscar Scharer State Recreation Area (Smyth 1991)
and Kennedy Space Center (KSC) (Schmalzer et at 1994, 1999) for the purposes Of
restoring suitable scrub-jay habitat conditions, Scrub-jcIys exhibit a dramatic
preference for recently burned or mechanically disturbed scrub, defending and
foraging in these patches unless the land management treatments affect all or most
of the defended territory (Fitzpatrick et al. 1994a), Studies at KSC found that scrub-
jays actively use restored area for foraging, caching acorns, and croon nesting within
18 months post-fire (Breininger el al. 19961)),
Although mechanical treatments are suCCessful in reducing vegetation height and
creating openings in the scrub, they should be applied carefully to reduce the
potential for soil disturbances and a discontinuity of fuels (Breininger and Schmalzer
74
0
1990). Mechanical treatments may reduce the post-treatment coverage by saw �
palmetto if damage to the sew po|mot»m rhizomes is uuvom (Sohmobmr el al. 1998). �
As saw oa|moxu is the primary species for carrying Yim/ in Adunbo Coumu| Ridge '
scrub bmdoou;na, reductions in ohm coverage of this onvoiev can alter Vm ability to `
successfully apply o/ouchbu fire as u habitat management tnn| (Sohmu|znr *t at
1999),
Fire iavital to and influences many natural community processes that can not ho
replicated hymechanical treatments alone. Fire provides readily available nutrients to
new growth and surviving p|um life through dinoo\ ro|uono of m\nom| oiammoto as ash.
It regulates fuel loadings and production by the recycling of woody plant components
and consumption of leaf litter and humua |oyom. Scrub -jays prefer to forage in opoo
conditions without Uno, (Srhma|zer e/ a< 1834). Nloohunioa| unoononm in oorvh
leave behind an unnatural amount of debris on /he ground. Fire also affects tko
reproductive pmreoxnu o/ many plant xpodex, often stimulating seed m|eaoo'
flowering, and vegetative growth. Most scrub researchers oUrnw that, although
mechanical treatments are an important method for restoration of uon/b that hos
become fir`rodotantdue to overgrowth, scrub Should be manaOod, in the long-term,
hyprescribed fire (Fitzpatrick e/al, l391; Sohma|zore/al1334'1333;R,einingerer
al, l898W.
Establishment of a fire mAino for maonqmnon, of optimal habitat conditions for
scrub -jays must be based oil site-specific factors due »ovariability in Umcnmmvniry
dynmmioon,scrub habitat types (Somna|zo,arid Hinkle 1892; Sohmu|zoraod Boy|o
1987). Fitzpatrick e( a[ (1991) suggests that the U,o'rmtu,n ivm,vo| for individual
patches of oak scrub is 10 20 years. This return interval in consistent with
optimal scrub height u|osoex (8reioin0ero/al. 1895. 1996b). Scrub height mv0da
have been developed from data oil scrub recovery after fire. These models predict
that oaks Uruvv to 8.9' 0.2m) within 10years after a fire, arid that oaks grow taller
than 5.6' (1 3m) within 20 years of u fire <Dunoun et al. 1985). The response of
oak scrub to U'° varies bvxavoo of uiKe,enoon in oni|x, not,ivnto, vvato, table, and
previous fire history (Abrahamson and Hartnett 1930; Ominingor ail(] Sohma\zor
1930; [Nyom 1990; Sohma|zx and Hinkle 1382; k0ooOou onu KnxyoN/ 1995;
Muvvkon and xxen800 1996). nunovn:h al KGC has found that scrub oaks can
occasionally O,ovv to 3.9' (1.2m) within a yvvv ympm (e.g., 3 yrnm)' especially in
areas previously unburned for >20 years (BminioVorunpuh|. data; S*hmn|zo, and
Bny|ounpuW. data). Scrub can also become taller than optimal within 5 10 years
after fire (Breininger UnpUbl. data).
Florida oombiay uxhtuhou k*|oUe not only oak scrub haWut, but also the
` avnuvndioq matrix habitat /vvou composed of mouic Oaxwoudn and Dsaav emmo
^�
which are often wet (oremi"g,re/al. 1991. 1895), Saw palmetto, gonbnov xol|v.
`-
and grasses (,a.' Ansmfa smtu^ S*a,on^ omx*ri), which dominate mosw
� Ua,m/nodoarid marshes, are more flammable and oM�mu|am fuel more rapidly than
scrub oak habitats JAbrahainson 1984; Abraharnson and Flartoolt 1990; Myers
3
1990; Schmalzer et al. 1991; Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992). Mesic flatwoods and
grassy areas have a fire -return interval of 1 - 10 years (FNAI 1990). Therefore,
long-term habitat management strategies will need to consider frequent fires for
matrix habitats surrounding oak scrub to maintain an open landscape structure
optimal for scrub -jays and to reduce the accumulation of fuels that lead to hazardous
fire events (Breininger et at 1996b). Because site variability influences recovery
from fire, natural resource managers should use height, openings, pine cover, and
other structural features to assist in determining burning objectives for a particular
site.
Fitzpatrick et al. (1991) suggested that a fire management {urogram for Florida
scrub -jays is best if a rotation of prescribed burns occurs where each burn covers
only small portions of the reserve tract.. Studies conducted at KSC confirm that
frequent fires that do not burn all of a territory are essential for maintaining Florida
scrub -jay populations (Breininger et at 1996b). Single burns in scrub landscapes at
intervals longer than 5 years could result in extinction of Florida scrub -jay
populations (Breininger et at 1996b).
The presence of patches of tail oaks greater than 1 acre (0.4 hectare) in size had
negative impacts on demography (Breininger and Oddy 1998). Large (e.g., 1 acre)
or wide (> 328' (100 m)] patches of tall shrubs may interfere with the jay's visual
sentinel system, which is adapted for predator detection and territorial defense
(McGowan and Woolfenden 1989). A few small clumps of tall oaks will not
interfere with visibility and can serve as useful posts for sentinels.
Analyses of sequences of aerial photographs indicate that many scrub and grassy
areas have become forests and that most remaining scrub has lost openings among
the oaks (Duncan et at 1999). The reduCtion in availability of openings has resulted
in the rigorous competition by Florida scrub -jays for areas with openings (Duncan et
al. 1995; Breininger et al, 1998b). Few openings remain in scrub 1 - 2 years after
fires (Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992), Scrub oaks became established in most
openings, and 20 years of prescribed burning that followed fire suppression has not
yet produced an abundance of openings (Schinalzer et at 1994; Duncan et at
1996; Breininger et at 1998b). It may take many fires to establish the openings
that are critical for long-term Florida scrub jay population persistence. Open sandy
areas are also believed to be important to other scrub plants and animals (Campbell
and Christman 1982; Hawkes and Menges 1996).
In the past, many prescribed fires have occurred in winter, which may partially
explain why natural openings have not returned. Winker fires do not reduce oak
cover as effectively as growing -season fires (Gliitzenstein ct at 1995). Most
natural fires occurred during the growing season, and scrub is adapted to growing -
season fires (Robbins and Myers 1992). Single growing season fires have been
found not to result in openings that last longer than 1 - 2 years (Breininger
76
^�D
�
�
unpublished data), Many fires may beneeded (n restore openings
toscrub that was unburned for >2Oyears.
-
Although there appear to he no plant species xpooioUy adapted to long -unburned
oorubbyOatvoodu. some xeric scrubs have opo species /o|unOorfim intervals
(Menges and Koh(eWt 1985). Sonic native scrubs, dominated by sand pine (Pinus
omosu) o, rosemary (Cmaoola *ntokdes)' need longer fire mtadono (> 20 years)
and naturally occurred iulocations less susceptible to |iro(FNA| 1390; Menges and
Kohye|dt 1895). To maintain species diversity, management of scrub and
� Motwondacannot include unarbitrary mixture nfhabitat patches ofdifferent a0oa
-
since the last fire. Florida scrub -jay populations probably cannot persist where mU
scrub (>20 years n|noo h/e) is interspersed with short o, optimal height scrub at
the tav1»ory scale (BroininOer vmpubi dum). Only the largest Florida oo,ub-jnv
populations can persist for 50 years once most habitat honnmno suboptimal
(8/ain|n0o/ o/ a{ 1998b). Most Florida scrub -jay popo|obonn have become small
and fragmented (Stith o/a< 1986>' such as the Sebastian HCP orudy popu|ahnn,
and will require careful attention bynatural resource managers.
'- 5.2 Potential Effects of Habitat Restoration and K0aongome*T�a Treatments on Other
Species nfConservation Cnnuam
'
Fire is the preferred management tool for mamwdon and the kpo'mnn maintenance
of aumb uommvn|000 as optimal Florida w:*biuv habitat (Fitzpatrick e/ at 1991;
Dneiningo/ or al, 1980b)' as i, prevents the succession of aui/mb(o |nw^ open uo/ob
|° into an unsuitable o|nxed canopy forest and reduces the potential for soils
.� d/sw,honcoa and the creation of fuel discontinuities (Bmioingvr o/ at 1888b). Fie
generally has little adverse Nmot nyfor, on uomb species as they have developed
!
adaptations to fire <N1yo,o 1990>. Management of habitat conditions that are yui/ub|o
^~
for onmb1ayu are suitable for most other amphibians, mp(ilem, birds, arid mnu||
mamma|s occurring in the oo/uh (Sohma|zor e/ at /994; /mfnm0000 in 8re|oioge, and
'
Oddv L 1398). Nnprotected species are known to require unburned scrub orpina|undm
' (Sohmplzmre/au 1894).
/ |
No federally listed plants are Unoumeo�oV �o occur i" the scrub -jay habitat types on
� '
scrub ecosystem depends nnperiodic fires, most o/the native scrub plant species will
benefit from reintroduction of a natural fire regime (Schmalzer el at 1994),
,
The potential of the proposed mechanical tmmnnen( to cause adverse impacts to
gopher mruoi000 and oonnnennW xpochm docunaoteU to nncu/ on the Somh-Jny �
�
Habitat Compensation Aeon is low. Vvhe,ove, ynvsi\`|e' the individual rim
management units delineated within txnScmbJav Habitat C"o`»onoahon Areas will �
use existing jeep trails and historic rim breaks as "hard" Unoo to control ,xo o»'vud of
8m. Studies of the effects o[forestry operations, such a* hndv*oV' have °howmthat
gopher m,tvixos have the ability to (Jig out (mm nuUopyod hvr^`pm (Joon 8odxx' /
77
a
" FGFWFC in Schmalzer of al. 1994►. Every effort will be Made to avoid gopher tortoise
burrows during implementation of the recommended mechanical restoration activities.
5.3 Sebastian HGP Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Restoration and Management
Program (HCP Management Program)
The HCP Management Program identifies specific management activities to be
undertaken by the Applicant to proceed towards achievement of the stated biological
goals and objectives of this HCP. The HCP Management Program consists of two
phases. Phase One represents the restoration of poor quality scrub -jay habitat
conditions using mechanical treatment and prescribed fire management strategies.
Phase Two consists of long-term management practices that focus on maintenance of
optimal Florida scrub -jay habitat conditions through the use of periodic prescribed fire.
Prior to the extensive habitat fragmentation which now characterizes much of the
present-day landscape and functions as fire barriers, fires were ignited by lightning
primarily during the late spring and summer months and burned large expanses across
the landscape (Robbins and Myers 1992). The frequent lightning fires resulted in an
open landscape with few forests; conditions which were historically represented in
the scrub landscape at each of the Sebastian HCP Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation
Areas. As scrub requires fire to maintain its characteristic: low, open habitat structure;
scrub restoration and management strategies must also depend ora fire as the primary
management tool to perpetuate native scrub habitat conditions (Woolfenden and
Fitzpatrick 1984, 1991; Schaub el al. 1992; Breininger (it al. 1995, 1998a; Duncun
et at 1995; Breininger and Oddy 1998; Breininger 1999).
As presented above, the long -tern exclusion of fire from scrub communities results in
a habitat that essentially becomes difficult to burn (Schmalzer et at 1994, 1999)
and/or control without prior mechanical treatment of the dense canopy stratum
(Breininger et al. 1996b). Therefore, the use of aggressive management actions, such
as mechanical thinning of the pine canopy by logging activities using timber sales, will
be employed to expedite the restoration of optimal Florida scrub -jay habitat conditions
within the Sebastian HCP Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
Timber management (sales) as a scrub -jay habitat restoration strategy involves the
reduction of tree densities to levels that are favorable for the Florida scrUll-jay, e.g. an
average of 1 to 2 pines per acre (Breininger Pers comm.), ire the few areas of the
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas where large diameterscrub oaks occur, the
timber contractor will be directed to also cut these trees. Smaller diameter pines left
by the logging operation can be reduced by increasing fire frequencies in these areas
(Breininger pers. comm.). The arse of increased fire frequencies during the restoration
burning period also has the positive effect of initiating the restoration of openings in
the scrub and reducing shrub height (Breininger or al. 1996b). Restoration of open
spaces in the scrub habitat can also be ,-achieved by allowing downed trees to burn
(Broininger et at 1996b). This use of this habitat manac,fernent technique may be
78
r�
i
restricted within the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas due to the potential to
t«t create smoke problems along the urban interfaces of these sites, primarily U.S.
Highway 1, C.R. 510, and the internal thoroughfares of Sebastian Highlands. it will
be the responsibility of the prescribed burrs manager for the Sebastian HCP
Management Program to determine the safety of using this rnanagemcnt technique to
recover open spaces within the subject scrub restoration areas.
Whenever possible, prescribed fires will be conducted (fairing tide natural fire season,
late spring and summer, to mimic historic fire patterns (Breininger et at 19961); Adrian
and Farinetti 1995). Knowledge of the location of critical scrub -jay nesting sites and
the extent of each scrub -jay territory will enhance efforts to conduct prescribed burns
during these months while reducing the potential for occurrence of adverse impacts
to the resident scrub -jay population. As a measure to minimize adverse impacts of the
scrub restoration on scrub -jays, the Applicant will conduct field surveys prior to the
application of prescribed fires within a scrub -jay territory during the nesting season.
Prescribed fire frequency, following the initial burns, will be dictated by habitat quality
data collected as part of the site-specific Sebastian HCP Habitat Management
Monitoring Program (HCP Monitoring Program). The time between burns will be
limited by the availability ratio of dead to live fuels (Breininger et at. 1996b). Effective
fires appear to require that 25% of the above ground biomass be composed of dead
fuels (F. Adrian Pers. obs. in Breininger et at 1996b). A Mininkim of 2-4 years may
be required between burns within matrix flatwoods habitats characterized by a dense
saw palmetto cover (Breininger at at 1996b). Oak scrub habitats exhibiting a sparse
cover of saw palmetto may require a minimum of 3-5 years between burns
(Breininger et at. 1996b).
Variability is all important ecological component that must be integrated into any fire
management program (Christensen 1985; Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992; Fernald 1989).
Regular prescribed burn management schedules place constraints on the habitat
managers and reduces habitat heterogeneity (The Nature Conservancy (TNC) 1991;
Schmalzer et at. 1999). Flexibility in management schedules, as proposed herein,
allows the land manager to refine future burn units, treatments, and schedules based
on the effectiveness of previous burn prescriptions in achieving the management
goals (TNC 1991; Schmalzer et at. 1999).
5.3.1 Iden o.1c.,_MarQea.r ancl_Prescrtled_8ttm,MantirJer
. The IRC Board has approved the hiring of a Conservation Lands Manager for the
2000 budget year beginning in October 1999 (R. DGBlois pens. comm.). It will be the
responsibility of the Conservation Lands Manager, ill conjunction with the County
Environmental Planning Section, to coordinate implementation of HCP Management
Program and performance of the HCP Monitoring Program.
79
�
o The pmxoh0od burning program for the Sebastian HCP Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas will be coordinated through and, conducted by, the State of
' Florida Department of Forestry (DOF) in agreement with Indian River County (R.
DoB|ois pony. comm.). The DOF will be responsible for p/opuhog the actual burning
r,
prescriptions for each management unit guided bythe biological goals and objectives
|�
of this operating conservation program and the xpooion ,00m/atioo burning and fire
management objectives outlined ho|uw. The prescription must also consider the
°~
vegetative type and fuel load, smoke management and site constraints, and proximity
to neighbors.
/ -
Indian River County will beresponsible for coordinating with the nOFmnotify nearby
. public and private mnhUoa of the intent to burn before and after the hum permit is
issued.
Public notification isstrongly recommended for all prescribed burns conducted onthe
'
Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas. A short broadcast on local radio on`tinox is
recommended tocaution motorists onnearby thoroughfares, such ao C.R. 510' U.S.
Highway 1' and Roseland Rnnd, of the possibility of smoke affecting visibility.
Additional efforts shall also be made to notify )000| commvnhy residents about the
_
burn. In addition, p brief educational bulletin should Vocirculated to nearby residents
informing them as to the importance of fire in maintaining suitable uu/uh habitat for
the Florida scrub jay and udmr svmh species of uunxomadon concern. Public
_
education will be u,iduu| for local support of the Gehandun HCP Management Program
that iacentered on the ability toapply fire tothe scrub landscapes within ,hn Scrub -
Jay Habitat Compensation Areas,
omb'JoyHabito*Cnmpm`oohonAmam,
5.3.2 PI a _Qqp Habita �Rs o�rgtLi i Activities Mechanical Treatments arid
_
Habitat monoVpmon/ np*Vo for the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Amov are
defined on Tables 5 arid 0. Review of this information oknwx that majority of the
potential so,ohiuv habitat identified in the 5o,oh'Jay Habitat Compensation Areas
needs immediate pine thinning and the application of hot /i,uo. Txn location of each
'
designated habitat polygon is provided on Figures 5' 7. and 9. 0pbns| scrub -jay
—
habitat conditions onthe So'vb,]ayHabitat Compensation Areas are Currently limited
| toasmall xe,iooak patch (Polygon 14) located in the North Sebastian C"nx*n/aho/`
L~
Area, the northern nnoUnn N the VYobuumo Scrub Conservation Area (Polygon 50).
and osmall xeric oak patch (Polygon 44) within the Pelican Island Elementary School
'
compensation area.
�
The Sebastian HCP study population isVoovmmotO0 mhadeclining primarily boumv,n
of habitat |vsy and poo, xvWtot noaotv of t»(,, remaining scrub /,ug/nvn/o (To|and
°- unnwbi. data). Based On nvm,mvaStudies oncited above, aou,vxsive restoration arid
`
management can correct the poor habitat quality that hao mouimd from h,v
suppression within tho Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Arc,.as. However, the
80
�~~
) restoration pnxmeo must be implemented immediately to reduce the current rate of
norub-jaypupuNtinndecline.
�
5.3.2,1 MECHANICAL TREATMENTS
�
Initial management efforts towards restoration of optimal uumbiny hnNnn omndNunx �
,~ on the Scrub -Jay Habitat Cnmp000aVoo Areas will vmp|vy two (2) moohao|na/ �
management techniques. Table 7. Florida ScrubJay/-labita/ Reston'tix/ -AVec/�x�a |
0�m^goor�,,�o/6uo/Y�n' outlines tile habitat polygons �o ho treated by mechanical
"�* �
treatment methods, tile initial implementation schedule, arid esite priority ranking
^^~
`
As discussed above in Section 4.2, PaUoav Island Elementary School arid Sebastian
�
Highlands Conservation Area ahma (Unit 17 oomnanoadon an000) have received the
mgoom priority ooWnq as o momoure to minhnize the extent of take within the
surrounding ITP impact area by quickly providing ouimh/n habitat for use by |ho
'/mnUan, scrub -jay clusters potentially displaced by residential construction.
Restoration Of the Sebastian Airport dispersal corridor has been ranked second —
to
encourage dispersal between tile study population arid ocmb-jo"
ayc|uvu�,n|ooare�
'�. tile nearby St. Sohomiun Buffer Reserve (Conaoi Parcel). This priority ranking
, minnmV in the rooxz,o/ivn burning implementation schedule provided below.
'°
/
,~~
The mechanical treatments to be applied within each habitat polygon are specified oil
Table 7 and include one or both of the following:
�~ 1Of Pine trees, xbsh pine and sand pine, �d ��c by k��g
s���o�go��w��m��o the canopy cover to I to2trees
_
(live trees and anagn;)per acre. Tile total numbnrofuunViogtimber Uivuand
uumd> shall om exceed a maximum of 1 to 2 units per acre. The standing
trees/snags will be maintained to provide resident uc,v0ioyu with nanuon|
perches and Potential arboreal cache sites.
/
, vVhom prmsoo/, dense stands ofcabbage palino and large diameter oaks will be
�
removed from tho habitat polygon by the bmbo,contractor uo that the canopy '
oovn, oonnioohog all tree species N V`o oonnpv mmwo' does not vxcoou tile
�
above density u/itnnv. Tho resulting canopy in 'ho mooi^ Oatmmndx can be a
~.
mixture nypine and cabbage »o|m'lot exceeding l to 2trees
paro�m. �
NOTE: To ndoon tile nnSad"o ioUummu of the nv/mund|oU deVrad a0 habitat
anvomm on the nvWiry o/ Um habitat areas targeted for msmnation on mn `
Snnu`/ay Habitat Compensation Amos' i/ is recommended, although no/ �
oonmh\yam' a regulatory myvire,men/ covered mvkv /Ai,-; /-1Jp, that tho logging
—
operation extend into all upland habitat types uooumn0vv/thin mohoundndvo
o{the 408± North Sebastian Conservation Area (Polygons 10. 11' and 21) and
'
0
is
Table 7.
Florida Scrub
-Jay Habitat Restoration Activities
- Mechanical Treatments
(
m
Initial Implementation Schedule' and Priority Ranking (#)z
Polygon
Acres
Pine Thinning Needed
Brazilian Pepper Removal
1
..................
9.6
Immediate (3)
-------------- _ 4.
N/R
4
6.7
Immediate (3)
N/R
5
4.9
Immediate (3)
N/R
6
17,1
Immediate (3)
N/R
7
6.6
Immediate (3)
N/R
8
94.6
Immediate (2)
N/R
9
22,1
Immediate (2)
NIR
12
20.8
Immediate (3)
N/R
13
6.7
Immediate (2)
N/R
14
3.5
NIR
N/R
15
10.2
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
17
2.8
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
19
16.2
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
22
8.0
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
24
21.3
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
26
5.1
Immediate (3)
N/R
27
18.1
Immediate (3)
N/R
30
4.6
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
31
9.0
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
33
0.9
Immediate (3)
Immediate (W
35
26.5
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
36
8.7
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
37
25.4
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
38
4.3
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
39
6.3
Immediate (3)
Immediate (1)
41
2.8
Immediate (1)
NIR
42
1.7
Immediate (1)
N/R
43
1.5
Immediate (1)
NIR
44
4.6
Immediate (1)
N/R
_.
45
2.5
Immediate (1)
N/R
46
2.0
immediate (1)
N/R
47
2.8
Immediate (1)
N/R
48
5.2
Immediate (4)
N/R
50
15.1
N/R
N/R
51
17.7
Immediate (4)
N/R
54
16.4
N/R
N/R
55
34.6
N/R (C.R. 512 Mitigation Area)
N/R
59
1.1
Immediate (4)
N/R
62
1.6Immediate
_._.._. (4)
N/R
......._ __.. _
Schedule -Immediate -� Within t year from issuance (late of Sebastian HCP I71_-
2''Ftittrity
ranking - ( 1)
== highest Priority and (4) _ Lowest Priority within recommended schedule
This disturbed area contains
wild grapevine (Vitis spp.) that also
needs to be removed
N/R- Specifiedtreatment
not required within this habitat polygon
82
�
�
Te Sebastian Airport/Golf Course complex and the Wabasso Scrub
Conservation Area (Polygon 54).
�
` 2. Removal of exotic anm/ nuisance species. This directive is primarily targeted at
the Brazilian pepper that ,has colonized within the North Sebastian Conservation
Area along the disturbed edges ofhistorically paved roads and jeep vo||o. The
height ofthe Brazilian pepper presents m potential curtain between contiguous
'.�
scrub-jayfamiUoo.
-
The recommended mnVod for Brazilian pepper eradication on the North
| ` Gobondon Conservation Area is Cut Stump. The Cut Stump eradication
p"uoodu,o involves the cutting of the Brazilian pepper down to ground -level
using o houd aavv or chain saw. The stump will not be removed, as this
` pmcdno disturbs moi|u' promoting erosion and providing disturbed ground for
'
pepper seed rogononedun. Within five <5> minutes o/ nu«io0 the stem, an
_
appropriate herbicide, such as Rodeow or Gadonm will he applied to the '
�
exposed cambium layer. The Cut vegetation will oi/ho, be stacked on site arid
`~
burned during the k,||ovvioS prescribed fire or completely removed from the
�
site. Whenever possible, the eradication activity will boconducted during the
^
months from May through Oombn, to achieve the best muu|ho from the
herbicide treatment and toreduce seed dispersal.
,
� 5.3.2.2 RESTORATION BURNING TREATMENTS
For purposes o[implementing the restoration burning program to initiate the momn of
optimal scrub -jay habitat conditions tothe Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas, a
.
total of 19 Management Units (MUs) have been established ranging in size from 1.5±
oomm to 110.6± oueu. Table 8 provides the total aumaVn of aaoh of the NlUo'
|
inclusive nfembedded wetland communities.
Figures 10, 11. and 12 provide the location and extent of the designated KxUs
displayed on o DOO for ouox Sxmh.Jay Hvb|m\ Compensation Area. The oiro and
`
location o/ 000h MU is based on present-day management objectives, habitat
conditions, and the approximate extent n[habitat use hv ooruh'iuyn. The location and
^
size nfthe N1Uy will vary, over dmo, based on results of thnsi/o monitoring trends
with reference to scrub -jay hoN,ut quality arid future management needs arid
constraints.
�
Wherever possible, the design nfthe location and size o(the [NU oonsidorod the need
mminimizo soils disturbances vn the conservation uimoduring imp|omoorehon o/ the
maummtivn burning aodviVoo by using existing dimo,had land k`atums. such as jeep
�
trails, ooxonoonm' and property uvwnVa,imo, to rnnn the MU u=axw. Whore wxio'k`W
disturbed features do not presently exist, soft fire breaks; inowed line,,, in conjunction
I
Table S. Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Restoration Activities - Restoration Burning
Initial Implementation Schedule' Priority Ranking (#)', and Fire Intensity'
Management Unit ID Total Acres' Restoration Burning Fire Intensity
Number
—
1 61.2 Short-term (2) Hot
2 36.7 Short-term (2) Hot
3 693 Irnmediate (3) Hot
4 108,5 Short-term (2) Hot
5 27.2 Short-term (3)
Hot
6 27.2 Short-term (4) Hot
W", 7 63.1 Immediate (3) Hot
8 16.0 Short-term (2) Hot
9 110.6 Immediate (2) Hot
10 2.8 Immediate (1)4 Hot
11 1.7 Immediate (1)4 Hot
12 1.5 Immediate (1)4 Hot
13 4.0 Immediate (1)4 Hot
14 3,9 Immediate (W Hot
15 4.0 Irliftlediate (1)" Hot
16 20.5 Short-term (4) Mosaic
17 20.5 Short-term (1) Mosaic
18 35.2 Short-term (1) Mosaic
19 31.5 Immediate (1)' Hot
"SCHEDULE:
immediate= Within 1 year from issuance date of Sebastian HCP ITP (Total acres 292.8 acres)
Short-term — Within 2 to 5 years from issuance date of Sebastian I ICP ITP (Total acres = 353 acres)
'-PRIORITY RANKING - (1) = Highest Priority and (4) = Lowest Priority within recommended schedule
FIRE INTENSITY:
Not Burm
a.) 100% consumption the lighter fuels (grasses, litter, twigs, and sulall stems (<l"
diameter) - 1 and 10 hour timelag fuels);
b.) best possible (75% to 95%) CODSUMPtiOrl Of brush fuels (shrub 1 " to 3" diameter - 100
hour timelag fuels); and
c.) best possible consumption of the heavy fuels (stems > 3,, diameter). Note: Most of the
heavy fuels Should be "pile -burned" in small, scattered piles to favor creation of open
patches of mineral soils,
Mosaic (turn:
a.) 100% consumption the lighter fuel-, (grasses, litter, twigs, and small stems
diameter) - 1 and 10 hour timelag fuels);
b.) 50% to 75% cOnsunlPtiof, of brush fuels (shrub V to 3" diameter - 100 hour timelag
fuels); and
c.) best possible consumption of the heavy fuels (stems >3" diameter). Note: Most of the
heavy fuels should be "pile -burned" in small, scattered piles to favor creation of open
Patches of mineral soils.
4 Begin restoration burning of these units within 6 to 8 weeks of completion of mechanical treatment of
as shortly thereafter as weather allows.
b This MU primarily represents that area on Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area that previously served
as mitigation for scrub -jay impacts resulting from construction of the C.R. 512 improvements, a bum is
needed in this area to reduce the slash remaining or, the ground from the Match 1998 tne
.ellanic
treatment.
134
CD
0
I
I
y
f
i
1
t
r
t•
t
9L
E:
with foam or black lines, may be employed by the prescribed fire manager, DOF, to
define the limits of the management unit. The final, decision to use soft fire breaks is
at the discretion of the DOF based on site safety concerns/hazards. The use of soft
fire lines is advantageous in the long-term as they enable the land manager to rotate
the size and location of the MUs with minimal site disturbances. As discussed above,
variation of the size and position of the MUs, over time, should result in a mosaic of
optimal vegetative structures within the scrub landscape.
Restoration Burning
The restoration burning approach presented horein is aggressive as compared to the
general guidelines for manacling Florida scrub -jay refuges provided in Fitzpatrick et al.
(1991). However, aggressive management is needed in the Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas before there is further loss of additional scrub -jay families. The
MUs and proposed prescribed burn schedule are designed to insure that each scrub -
jay family documented to occur on the Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas are
provided with an adequate amount of suitable cover, nesting sites, and foraging
habitat while the recently -burned scrub regenerates.
Prescribed fire will initially be used at increased frequencies and intensities to reduce
pine tree cover remaining after completion of the proposed logging operation, to
reduce shrub height, and to initiate recovery of patchy open spaces of bare sand and
sparse vegetation. The prescribed fires will, whenever practicable considering site and
safety constraints, be conducted during the natural fire season, late spring and
summer, to mimic historic fire patterns (Breininger et al 1996b; Adrian and Farinetti
1995). The schedule for implementation of prescribed fire within each MU, including
a site priority ranking and recommended fire intensity, is provided in Table 8.
Site-specific fire prescriptions required to achieve the stated prescribed fire
management objective will be prepared by the DOF as part of their agreement with
the Applicant. The DOF will also be responsible for identifying and addressing
constraints to conducting the prescribed burning operation on the Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas and, with the assistance of the Applicant, for notifying the
affected public. In addition, mop up procedures conducted by tile, DOF will be
performed in a manner that minimizes site disturbances.
As set forth in Table 8, the prescribed fire program is scheduled to be initiated within
MUs 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 approximately 6 to 8 weeks following completion of
mechanical treatment activities within these MUs. The recommended time lag
between mechanical treatment and the prescribed fire allows for the drying of slash
to provide additional fuel to the fire and to promote "hot spots" for recovery of open
spaces. As discussed above, implementation of the mechanical and fire restoration
activities in these MUs, which are located within the primary ITP impact area in Unit
17 of the Sebastian Highlands, serves to minimize the level of take resulting from
authorization of the proposed action.
i
88
Be advised that although Figure 7 shows MUs 10-15 as being currently occupied by
scrub -jays, these areas are rarely used due to the poor quality of the scrub habitat,
i` Each of the scrub -jay territories potentially affected by concurrent (or within a short
time interval) burning the subject Unit 17 MUs include suitable habitat areas located
outside of tho subject MUs. These "off-site" habitat areas are sufficient to support
the affected scrub -jay groups while targeted burned habitat areas are regenerating. It
should be noted that the subject "off-site" areas are located within the Sebastian
Highlands Unit 17 ITP impact area. It is expected that habitat loss within the Unit 17
ITP impact area will occur incrementally, over a period of years, and not immediately.
This situation emphasizes the importance of and validates the reasoning for
immediately initiating restoration actions within the Unit 17 MUs, 10.15.
Although not specifically addressed in Table 8, all marsh habitats embedded within
the designated MUs shall be allowed to burn as part of the MU if appropriate
hydrologic conditions exist within the wetland(s) to prevent the occurrence of muck
fires. Freshwater depression marsh wetlands require frequent fire to limit invasion by
�woody shrub species, to maintain the integrity of the herbaceous community, and to
reduce peat accumulation (Kushlan 1990). Therefore, the prescribed fire will serve to
reduce shrub recruitment and to enhance the ecological integrity of this native matrix
habitat type, The DOF will be responsible for determining the safety, from an
ecological and urban interface standpoint, of burning the marsh communities.
The primary objective of the restoration burning activities is to reestablish the
structural attributes of the historical scrub landscape for purposes of optimizing
habitat conditions for use by Florida scrub -jays and associated species of
conservation concern. To achieve this objective, hot restoration burns will be applied
to;
1.) consume small standing pines and slash left on the ground by mechanical
treatments;
2.) initiate the creation of openings in the scrub by allowing small Biles of slash to
burn hot to promote exposure of patchy areas of mineral soils; and
3.) reduce height of standing shrub.
- For purposes of this NCP Management Program, and as set forth in Table 8, Fire
Intensity, the objectives of a "hot" restoration burn, which under this plan will be
applied to management units that have been mechanically treated as described
�- above, are defined as;
a,) 100% consumption the lighter fuels (grasses, litter, twigs, and small
stems ( < 1 " diameter) - 1 and 10 hour timelag fuels);
89
W best possible (75% to 95%) consumption of brush fuels (shrub 1" to 3"
diameter - 100 hour timelag fuels); and
c.) best possible consumption of the heavy ftteiS (stems >3" diameter).
Note: Most of the heavy fuels will be "pile-burned" in small, scattered
piles to favor creation of open patches of mineral soils.
Table 8 directs the restoration burning of 3 MUs, 16, 17, and 18, at a fire intensity
described as "mosaic". This burn structure is also referred to as "patchy". For
purposes of this NCP Management Program, the objectives of a"mosaic" burn, which
under this plan will be applied to the higher quality scrub and mesic flatwood habitat
patches, are generLlly defined as:
a.) 100% consumption the lighter fuels (grasses, litter, twigs, and small
stems (< 1 " diameter) - 1 and 10 hour timelag fuels);
b.) 50% to 75% consumption of brush fuels (shrub 1" to 3" diameter- 100
hour timelag fuels); and
C.) best possible consumption of the heavy fuels (stems > 3" diameter),
Note: Most of the heavy fuels will be "pile-burned" in small, scattered
piles to favor creation of open patches of mineral soils.
5.3.2.3 MINIMIZATION MEASURES
The following measures will be used in the field to reduce the potential for adverse
impacts to natural community structure resulting from implementation of the
recommended restoration treatments on the Scrub-Jay Habitat Compensation Areas.
1. Initiate habitat restoration treatments, mechanical and burning, within the Unit
17 conservation areas, Pelican Island Elementary School/Sebastian Highlands
Scrub Conservation Area, to minimize the extent of take resulting from the
proposed action,
2. Use of a logging contractor experienced in tree removal for purposes of habitat
restoration.
3. Use of existing jeep trails, historic fire breaks, and disturbed habitat areas as
primary ingress and egress routes for removal of the harvested pine logs from
each conservation site. Slash, twirls and small stems and branches (<3"
diameter), from logging operations will be primarily spread on-site to provide
fuel to carry the prescribed fire, The larger slash, large stems and branches
(>3" diameter), will be collected into randomly scattered small piles to
promote "blot spots" during the prescribed burn for purl:)0sr1s of exposing
patchy areas of mineral soil.
.w
90
4. Use of rubber tired heavy equipment for all mechanical treatment activities
conducted on the site to minimize soil disturbance on the conservation sites.
5. Use of soft fire breaks, mowed lines in conjunction with foam or black lines, as
control lines, wherever feasible. The use of plowiines in undisturbed habitat
areas will be avoided if deemed safe by the DOF. If piowlines are needed, the
DOF will back -blade these areas following implementation of the initial burn.
6. Performance of field surveys within occupied scrub -Jay territories during tete
nesting season to locate active nests prior to the application of mechanical
and/or prescribed fire treatment. Protection of the nest from any kind of
management that may take place will be performed to prevent the take of
scrub -jays as a result of implementation of habitat restoration and management
actions.
5.3,3 Phase Two - Habitat Mananernent Activ_: ties
Upon completion of the initial restoration management actions on the Scrub -Jay
Habitat Compensation Areas, prescribed fire will be the primary management toot
applied to maintain optimal scrub -jay habitat quality. Future burning needs and the
size and location of management units will be based on optimal Florida scrub -jay
habitat structural criteria, as defined herein, and riot fire frequencies due to the
variation of natural community types to fire. The time between burns will also be
dictated by the availability of fuels required to carry a fire.
Long-term fire management activities shall promote the application of "mosaic:"
burns, as generally described above, to increase habitat heterogeneity across the
scrub landscape. This will be accomplished by varying the size and location of
future management units, fire intensities, and timing of fires (Bobbins and Myers
1992; Breininger and Oddy 1998; Schmalzer et al. 1999). To the extentpractical,
no more than 33% of the focal scrub oak habitat patches will be burned in any one
fire to unsure that suitable cover, nesting sites, and foraging habitat for use by
Florida scrub -jays are always available (Breininger et a/. 1996b). The matrix
flatwood habitats will generally be placed on a fire interval to burn at least once
every three (3) years to maintain an open landscape. In order to restore optimal
landscape conditions for scruh-jays and reduce hazardous fuel loarlings, it is likely
that one small fire will be needed at the North Sebastian Conservation Area and
Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area on an annual basis. Future habitat nrarnagement
actions will be refined and improved based on feedback from monitoring tile effects
of tine initial management actions, in conjunction with state -of -the science
knowledge and habitat management resources.
0..
91
5.3/4 �
~�Treatment Actions'
�
� The proposed oohndu|o for implementation of the initial mochan�o treatments is �
-
provided in TuNo 7. All proposed mechanical treatments are scheduled for
�
implementation and completion within one (1) year from the date of issuance of the /
Sebastian HCP ITP.
� The proposed schedule for implementation of the habitat restoration phase of tile
|�
prescribed fire program ioprovided onTable 8. As noted on Table 8' restoration burns
_
will be implemented at the Unit 17 Pelican Island Elementary School and Sebastian
Highlands Scrub Conservation Area within O to 8 weeks (o, as soon as weather . �d
, pnnnim) of completion of mechanical treatment of these sites. A total of 282.8± �
� mc/es is targeted for burning during the [kmr year of the HCP KAunuQomnrt Program. '
Theremainder, 353± ocmn, is scheduled to beburned within 2 to4years from the
-
(late ufissuance o[the Sebastian HCP ITP,
- �
!
The proposed prescribed fire program isapplied over the entire conservation sites to �
maximize open landscape conditions o|xknu| for scrub -jays and to reduce hazardous �
fuel |on0in0a within the conservation sites. It is also important to note that target
conditions for restoration ufsuitable scrub -jay landscape conditions onthe Sebastian
Airport conservation properties are oompohh|n arid will improve arid maintain
`
operational uo[oty conditions within this area o/ the airport.
. Amdiscussed above, the prescribed fire mmdon, season o[burn, and design o( hxvm �
. KnUx' following completion o(the initial restoration burns, will hubased of) feedback �
~
from the monitoring of the effects of the initial prescribed management actions in �
achieving the HCP EUWnO|oo| Objectives stated above with mDen1 to optimal Florida
scrub -jay habitat structure. General protocols for habitat assessment under this phase �
of the prescribed fire program are provided in Section 5.3.3.
_ 5.4 Sebastian HCP Florida Scrub -Jay naWom Management Monitoring Program �
.�
(HCP Monitoring Program) ' �
m
�
_
The Applicant will initiate a monitoring program' for the term of the |Tr, to ascertain
the Success of the HCP [Nona0mnont Program it) pmqmuuinO mmmmo achievement of �
the stated HCP Biological Goals and Objectives. The primary focus n/tile monitoring
-~
program will be /o mvo|uo|o the mapnnoo of the scrub and mesio communities to �
applied mauhooiuu| and fire treatments and N use this in(nnnobon to guide future
management andnon that serve ,o enhance demographic moromu» of the stvdy
--
population. The habitat quality and demographic pomma|am to be mma*u,od under '
this monitoring program, as well as the schedule for implementation and reporting, �
are outlined below.
_
- ^
� -
82 �
'
w
N
csi
cn —3 U 3 D
6 a -
O
53
.t
0
..s @ 3 O .:
98
2
.O+
to = o <
E a i2.
cr
O m
t0
C',
_'a
O K
S
co
O
<.
a
{p O t2
O
m
K_
O
CD
_
CD O
o
{
CD Q
tiCD
m
tr to
n
s to
p
=
_
(D m
m
_.
_ <
ci
rn
_TU
o v c�
y cu
CD
_
a
-
a zz y oily
cn
_
v
Ofn
c
(�rv,
CK^s T V 9:
i jJ
;y O p
y
N -1 �
v
_
CD o
°
ro n CD
y cD 1
CD
n
(7 J
<
J
zz.
CL = N
ci
=
ccs
Zz,
coCD
n
CD
on s
0
—1
a
o tz.n
a
< o
p
CL
O
i 'D
O J
a
CL C
=
cr
O
=
m
a
_
CJ
D E
y
433
-4
cr
Q
c� a
--
ci
to
CD < y a
_
J a
_•
=
_ :J cr CD
CD
co
Ft
m
T C'J
Cil G. 7 O
CD n
n
r
O v
n
m
_
_
O
m m CD
7 FD, cQ
a a O
�
O
r
Q=•p•�m
CD
c' T
y.
UEn
�
ca to
ca
�_O
� '"•
to
i.
c
cr
m a a
cr
C: CID
; 0 O..
N
csi
cn —3 U 3 D
6 a -
N n E
.t
0
..s @ 3 O .:
.O+
to = o <
E a i2.
i0 = f-. C ED
a
O m
t0
a'
O -i. fl.
CD CD
d
S
cron m
m cD
o a
iT ? 10
{p O t2
CD O
m _
CD O
o
{
CD Q
tiCD
�
P°
10
to m
m
_.
_ <
ci
rn
_TU
o v c�
y cu
•-a�
O CSD
a
c7 0 a °
c C;
cn
_
a
c
CA
y
N -1 �
L c
r CD
�. p- cn
co
y cD 1
CD
n
(7 J
<
J
zz.
CL = N
Q C
O n co
R
Zz,
N COD
n
CD
on s
0
Q
n C
CDD 0
O
i 'D
CL C
=
cr
W -.W
C iD C.
=
a O Q
CJ
D E
433
cr
Q
co
m O< O
0
O
CD < y a
CD
J a
a) K K -<
=
_ :J cr CD
' a. Mechanical Treatments: Compliance information for specified mechanical
treatments provided for each polygon will include:
is
t 1. Proposed implementation schedule (as provided on Table 7).
2. Type of mechanical restoration treatment(s) completed within each
habitat polygon for that monitoring year.
3, Date each mechanical treatment was initiated and completed.
4. Any comments
NOTE: The first annual monitoring report should show that pine
thinning within each of the habitat polygons set forth in Table 7 was
'accomplished within the first year. Likewise, Brazilian pepper removal within
the designated habitat polygons should have been completed.
b. Prescribed Fire Treatment. Compliance information for specified
prescribed fire treatment, initial restoration burning and subsequent habitat
management burning, for each prescribed fire management unit will include:
1. Proposed implementation schedule (as provided on Table 8).
2, Prescribed fire treatment completed within each management unit for
that monitoring year,
NOTE: The first annual monitoring report should show that
prescribed fire was applied within MUs 3, 7, 9, 10-15, and 19, as set
forth in Table 8.
5. Definition of Future Management Actions
r
A primary component of the monitoring report will be the definition of future
management actions that need to be accomplished to proceed towards
uachievement of Biological Goals and Objectives of this HGP. This section of the
monitoring report will clearly outline actions to be completed for the next
monitoring year. Each proposed action will be substantiated based on feedback
from monitoring the effects of the initial management actions on habitat quality
and scrub -jay habitat use. State -of -the science knowledge and habitat
management resources will be integrated into future management strategies as
needed.
5.4.1.2 FLORIDA SCRUB -JAY TERRITORY STUDIES
1. Monitoring Objective;. Quantify the number of scrub -jay territories and
level of recruitment into restored habitat areas on the Scrub -Jay Habitat
Compensation Areas.
2. Survey. -Methodology; Using the survey protocol set forth in Fitzpatrick et
al. (1991), collect basic demographic data to obtain an estimated count of
the total number of scrub -jay territories on-site, the number of individuals
(adults and juvenal-plurnaged) within each territory, and the approximate
boundaries of each territory. Each Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Area will
be surveyed for a minimum of three (3) consecutive days to delineate scrub -
jay territories and to collect demographic data during appropriate times of the
year.
>r
3. Minim at to he Reported_ Individual responsible for conducting survey.
Results of the survey, including number of scrub -jay territories, number of
individuals in each territory, survey date(s), tirtne(s), and weather conditions,
l
Identify recruited scrub -jay territories and any nests that were
opportunistically found during performance of the survey.
L
5.4.1.3 HABITAT LOSS WITHIN ITP IMPACT AREA
i 1. Provide an accounting, Unit and Lot Number, of the Sebastian Highlands tots
developed within the authorized ITP impact area during the reporting period.
5.4.2 Schedule for.. Monitoring_Imp iemPntatron S..chedraI and Reporting
1. Monitoring.lmplennentation_ The monitoring program shall commence in
March 2000, contingent upon issuance of the Sebastian FICP ITP"
t
95
,
~~ 2. shall be performed
annually during tnpome period mid-February arid March, with cunp|oUon by
March 30mofeach monitoring year.
�
Demographic studies shall be performed twice unooaDy, p/mnoabng (mid-
February and
nid-
Fobruoryand W1o/oh) arid post -fledging (July).
3.0oce unouo|}y by May 15~ of each monitoring
,. year. Two (2) on»ieo o/ the completed annual monitoring »m0rvmn report
,
shall haprovided to the FwS Contact 0Mioo' Vero Beach, Florida. The first
'
monitoring report will be due May 15. 2000' contingent upon issuance of
the Sebastian HCP ITP,
Reporting orthe July (post -fledging) demographic data will hnincluded intile
�-
May 2001 monitoring report. Therefore, the May 2000 monitoring report will
not include any information on the number of juveniles in each territory.
Reporting byMay nf each year allows for tile land monu0o, to make needed
'
corrections tohabitat management actions during tile natural fire season.
5.5 Unforeseen/Extraordinary Circumstances
"Unforeseen oiroumumnoou^ or ^ounwnxnmv rimmnmanovn^ ' as defined in tile
� Endangered Species Habitat Conservation Planning Ha^dh*o<FvvS and NxnpS
1996>' means ^ohenOao in oi,ovmntwnono surrounding an HCP that were not o/
'
could no, be anticipated by HCP participants and thm Se,vico, that result in a
substantial and adverse change in the status ofo covered species". Tile Applicant
and the FVVS ackoovv|adOo that oven with the detailed provisions set forth above in
the Sebastian HCP operating conservation program for mitigating and minimizing
-
impacts to /he covered uuoxinm, onfornoono circumstances may arise during thn
-
Under the terms and conditions of this HCP the Applicant iwcornalittedmwork
with the FW8 to address future Unforeseen changes to tile maximum extent
reasonably maobnob|o. In accordance with the Department of Interior's and
—
Department of Cmnmmon'o "No Svrpri000~ policy (50 C.F.R. Pan §17)' the
`
Applicant eokoow|udOno that the FVVS »balLuot mqoi,o the Applicant to commit
additional lands, additional funVu, or additional restrictions on lands or other oatom|
— mooumno beyond ,ha |uvo| of mitigation proposed uvdex this Sebastian HCP. as
long aothe Applicant in adequately implementing the conservation actions o(this
Sebastian MCP' as set forth herein. Therefore, under the t",mx and conditions of
this 3ehwxbon HOP' the FVV8 an(] the Applicant ao,on that knPkmnnnmhoo of
`
additional mitigation measures toaddress Unforeseen changes must be aan|noo as
_ »oowib|v to tile terms nfthis HCP and must bo|imimdtumodifications in |`muimt
munaAomvnt oaaunonw and/or xcbvUvkm Within /ho Sr,uh-jay Habitat
Compensation Areas,
^
96
The proposed HCP Monitoring Program will serve to provide tile information linkage
y�
required to d+mo^nina if an unforeseen change has Occurred within the covered Florida
morob-jay population and to dm(|nu reasonable and appropriate habitat management
measures, if any, that may be implemented within the Scrub -Jay Habitat
L
Compensation Areas to reduce the u0vomo affects of these changes to the Florida
scrub -jay.
5.6 Funding
Three primary funding onvoOohave been identified by Indian River County tnsupport
im»|amnntudonofthe proposed Sebastian HCP operating conservation program. The
first source is the proceeds collected from timber oo|as proposed to be implemented
' onthe Scrub -Jay Habitat Compensation Areas minitiate scrub -jay hab|totmc0oryhon.
A xanonV' and primary funding onuvce' are funds from the Indian Rkm/ County
Environmental Lands Ac0viyihnn bond pmUmm. These funda, in conjunction with
p/0000da collected from the timber sa|oo' will be used to complete all moohonioo|
-
treatments required to initiate restoration ofopdma|scrub-jay habitat conditions, as
outlined in Section 5.3.2.1. These funds will also be used 0usupport performance of
.
restoration burning aohvidoo' e.g. owmWiuhmeo\ of Uro breaks, as agreed upon by
Indian River County and the DOF.
mmm management oam are expected to be minimN. limited to implementation or
nxaUono| »roao,ibod fires bythe Applicant and the UDF and the control of Dmd|iao
'- popper regrowth. The Environmental Lands Acquisition bond program and, a third
~.
funding unorce' the Indian River Mitigation Fund Account for vv|ond and wetland
reammdnn pnUoum, will be used to support innn|mventuhon of habitat management
actions on the Sx,ub'JvyHabimt Compensation Areas, in the |onOw,m.
'
TheHCP Monitoring Program will be performed internally by ,hn |odioo River County
Conservation Lands Manager arid suvpnrhnmstaff.
_
Thmaf^m' the funding muvnms, as WwntiGoV above, will be uued by the Applicant to
achieve stated Oiv|uAiva| Goals and Objectives of the Sebastian HCP opomhoQ
- uonoa*adonp/uV,um.
.,
0-
ABRAHAMSON, W.G.1984. Post -Recovery of Florida Lake Wales Ridge Vegetation.
. Am. J. Bot. 71:9-21. in: Fernald, R.T. 1989. Coastal Xeric. Scrub Communities
a
of the Treasure Coast Region, Florida, Nongame Wildlife Technical Report No.
6. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, 113 pp.
ABRAHAMSON, W.G. and D.C. HARTNETT. 1990, Pine Flatwoods and Dry Prairies.
Pp. 103-149. in R.L. Myers and J.J. Ewel (ads.). Ecosystems of Florida. Univ.
Cent. Florida Press, Orlando, Florida.
ADRIAN, F. and R. FARINETTI. 1995, Fire Management Pian. Merritt Island National
Wildlife Refuge. Titusville, Florida.
AUFFENBERG, W, and R. FRANZ. 1982. The Status and Distribution of the Gopher
Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus). Pages 95-126,
BERGEN, S. 1994. Characterization of Fragmentation in Florida Scrub Communities.
M.S. Thesis, Dept. Bio. Sci., Florida Institute of Tech., Melbourne, FL. 71 pp.
BREININGER, D.R. and P.A. SCHMALZER, 1990. Effects of Fire and Disturbance on
Plants and Animals in a Florida Oak/Palrnetto Scrub. American Midland
Naturalist 123.64-74.
BREININGER, D.R., M.J. PROVANCHA, and R.B. SMITH. 1991, Mapping Florida
Scrub Jay Habitat for Purposes of Land -Use Management. Photogrammetric
Engineering and Remote Sensing 51:1467-1474.
BREININGER, D.R. 1992. Habitat Model for the Florida Scrub Jay on John F.
Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech. Memorandum No. 107543. NASA
Biomedical Operations and Res. Office, John F, Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
95 pp.
BREININGER, D.R., V.L. LARSON, B.W, DUNCUN, R. B. SMITH, D. M. ODDY, AND
M.F. GOODCHILD. 1995. Landscape Patterns of Florida Scrub -Jay Habitat Use
and Demographic Success. Cons. Bio. 9(6):1442-1453,
BREININGER, D. R., V. L. LARSON, D. M. ODDY, R. B. SMITH AND M. J.
BARKASZI. 1996a. Florida Scrub -Jay Dentrography in Different Landscapes.
Auk: 112:617-625.
98
40
N
�
BREINUVGER O.R.,Y.LLARSDN,R.SCHAV8'B.VV.DVNCUN.P.A.GCHMALZER D.
M. OODY, R. B. Sh8|TH, F. ADRIAN and H. HILL, JR. 1896b. A Conservation
Strategy for the Florida BcmhJoy on John F. Kennedy 8puon Center/Merritt
|n\end National Wildlife Refuge: An (niho| Scientific Basis for Recovery, NASA
Tech. Memorandum No. 111870.John F.Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
iI (
~~ BRBN|NGER. D.R and D. M. ODOY, 1888. EVuhgicu! Criteria for the Recovery of
-.
Florida Scrub -Jay Populations on Public Land,, in Brevard County. Final Report
to the Endangered Species Office. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 8omioo. JankoorvU}o'
FL. Dynomoo Corporation. 54 pp.
|
BRBN|NGERD. R., V. L. LARSON'G. VV, DUmCAN' R. B. SMITH, 1998o, Linking
�
Habitat Suitability to Demographic Su000no in Florida Scrub -Jays, VVikU|(e
COX, J. A. 1887. Status and Distribution of the Florida Scrub Jay, Ru. On�Uvd.
�Soo. Spec. Pub, no. 3' 110 pp.
DnGANGE, A.R., J.W. FITZPATmCK' J.N. LAYNE, and G.E.VVOOLFENDEN 1988.
^ �oomMo/vomingbyF|ur�uOoruV�eyo Ecu|ogy70'34O'��G
+ . . .
DUNCUN, B. VV, D.R. BRE|N|NGER' P.A. SCHNlALZER. and V.L. LARS00. 1985.
VaUduho0 aFlorida Scrub Joy Habitat Suitability Model, Using Damogmphy
�
Data on Kennedy Space Center, Phntogmnxnetric Engineering and Romnoo
'
Sensing 56:1301'1370 in: Br,ioinOe,' D.R, Y.L. Lamnn, R. Schaub, B.W.
- Dunoun' P.A. Gohmuber, D. M. Oddy, R, B. SmiMh, F. Adrian and M. Hill, Jr.
1986. A Conservation Strategy for the Florida Scrub -Jay on John F. Kennedy
Space Center/Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge: An Initial Scientific Basis
^
for Recovery NASA Tech. Memorandum No. 11167S. John F.Kennedy Space
�
Center, Florida.
DUNCAN. B. x, S. 8OYLE, D. R. BRE|0|NGER' AND P. A. SCHN1ALZER. 1899.
Coupling Past Knonegmnen, Practice and Historical Landscape Change on
John F. Kennedy Space Center. Landscape Ecology. In p,00u.
r
�~ FERNAUl E.A, E. D. PVnOU[N, J.R. ANDERSON, JR, P.A. KRAFFT. 1892. Adoa of
' Florida. University Pmon of Florida.
~ FERNALC\ R.T. 1989 Coastal Xeric Scrub Cominunid f the Treasure Coast
FLORIDA AFFINITY, INC. AND ECOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 1995. Management
Plan for the Wabasso Scrub Wabasso Area, Indian River County, Florida.
Prepared for the Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners,
September 27, 1995. 24 pp. and appendices.
FLORIDA AFFINITY, INC. AND ECOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 1996. Management
Plan for the Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area. Indian River County, Florida.
Prepared for the Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners.
April 29, 1996. 30 pp. and appendices.
FLORIDA AFFINITY, INC, AND ECOTECH CONSULTANT;, INC. 1998, Management
Plan for the North Sebastian Conservation Area. Indian River County, Florida,
Prepared for the Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners.
January 29, 1998. 31 pp. and appendices.
FLORIDA NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY AND DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL
RESOURCES. 1990. Guide to the Natural Communities of Florida. 111 pp.
GLITZENSTEIN, J.S., W.J. PLATT, and D.R. STRENG, 1995. Effects of Fire Regimes
and habitat on Tree Dynamics in North Florida Longleaf Pine Savannas.
Ecological Monographs 65:442-476.
GUERIN, D.N. 1988. Oak Dome Establishment and Maintenance in a Longleaf Pine
Community in Ocala National Forest. Florida. M.S. Thesis. University of Florida,
Gainesville. 122 p. in; Schmalzer, P.A., D.R. Breininger, F.W. Adrian, R.
Schaub, B.W. Duncun, 1994. Development and Implementationofa Scrub
Habitat Compensation Plan for Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech, Mem,
109202. 54 pp.
GUERIN, D.N. 1993. Oak Dome Clonal Structure and Fire Ecology in a Florida
Longleaf Pine Dominated Community. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club
120:107-114. In: Schmalzer, P.A., D.R. Breininger, F.W. Adrian, R. Schaub,
B.W. DUr1CUn. 1994. Development and Implementation of a Scrub Habitat
Compensation Plan for Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech. Mem. 109202. 54
W
HARRISON, S. AND A. D. TAYLOR. 1997. Empirical Evidence for Metapopulation
Dynamics. 1997. Pages 27-42 in: . A. Hanski and M. E. Gilpin (Eds.).
Metapopulation Biology, Ecology, Genetics, and Evolution. Academic: Press,
San Diego, California,
101
`
HAWKES, C.V, and E.S. MENGES, 1995. Density and Seed Production of a Florida
Endemic, Polyqonolla basirama, in Relation to Time Since Fire and Open Sand.
American Midland Naturalist 133138-14&
KING, T., B.R.TDLAN[, AND J. F8ERTAG. 1992. An Evaluation v/Xeric Habitat
Rndomodoo at p Central Florida Phosphate Mina. FlohdoGamo arid Fresh
Water Fish Comm. Tech. Rep. to |[NC Fertilizer, Inc. Bartow, FL.
KVRZ, H. 1942. Florida Dunes and Scrub Vegetation and Geology. F|n,idoGooL Sum
Bull. 2315'154.
KUSULAN, J.A. 1990. Freshwater Marshes. in: R.L. Myers and J.J. Ewe(eds.).
Ecosystems o[Florida. Univ. Cent. Florida Press, Orlando, Florida.
LAEGSLE' A.M. 1942. The Plant Communities of the VVn\oku Area. University of
Florida, Biol. Soi. Ser. 41'148.
LAES6LE' A.M. 1958. The Origin arid 8ocoonuiona| Relationship of GondhiU
Vegetation and sand Pine Scrub. Ecol. Monogr. 28:381'387.
LANDE' R. 1988. Geoohoa and Demography in Biological Cvnan,vo,ioo. Science
241: 1455-1460.
LEVINS R. 1969. Some Demographic and Genetic Consequences of Environmental
Heterogeneity for Biological Control. Bulletin Entomology Society o[America
15'237'240.
LOGAN. T.H. 1997. Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species and Species
of 3pnoin| Concern Official Lists. 1 August 1397. Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission. 18»p.
MAIN K.N. and E.G. W1ENGES. 1997. Archbold EUo|og)oo| Station: Station Fire
Management Plan. Land Management Publication 87-1. Archbold biological
Station. Lake Placid ' FL 103 pp.
MoGOVVAN' K.J,arid G.E.VVUOLFFNDBV. 1889, ASentinel System if) the Florida
Scrub Jay. Animal Behay. 37: 1000-1006,
MoGOVVAN` K.J, aodG.E. VVOOLFENDEN. 1980. Contributions ouFledgling Feeding
in the Florida Scrub Jay. J. Anim. Ecol. 59: 691-707.
N16NGEG, E.S. arid N. KOHFELDT 1985. Life History Stmw0ks of Florida Scrub
Plants inRelation mFire. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 122:2O2'297.
102
MOLER, P.E. and R. FRANZ. 1987. Wildlife Values of Small, isolated Wetlands in the
g Southeastern Coastal Plain. pp. 234-238. in: Odom R.R., K.A, Riddleburger,
and J.C. Ozier (eds) Proceedings of the Third Southeastern N6ngame and
Endangered Wildlife Symposium. Georgia Department of Natural Resources,
p Athens, GA.
MUMME, R.L. 1993. Do Helpers increase Reproductive Success? An Experimental
Analysis in the Florida Scrub Jay? Behay. Ecol. and Sociobioi. 31 319-328.
MYERS, R.L. 1990. Scrub and High Pine. pp, 150-193 in R.L. Myers and J.J. Ewel
(eds.), Ecosystems of Florida. Univ, Cent. Florida Press, Orlando, Florida.
PETERSON, A.T. 1990. Evolutionary relationships of the Aphelocoma Jays. Ph.D.
Dissertation. Univ. Chicago. Chicago, IL.
ROBBINS, L.E. AND R.L. MYERS. 1992. Seasonal Effects of Prescribed Burning in
Florida: a Review. Miscellaneous Publication No. 8 Tall Timbers Research, Inc.
Tallahassee, Florida. 96 pp.
SCHAUB, R., R.L. MUMME, and G.E. WOOLFENDEN. 1992. Predation on the Eggs
and Nestlings of Florida Scrub Jays. Auk. 109: 585-593,
SCHMALZER, P.A. and C.R. HINKLE. 1991, Dynamics of Vegetation and soils of
Oak/Saw Palmetto Scrub after Fire: Observations from Permanent Transects.
NASA Technical Memorandum 103817. Kennedy Space Center, Florida. 146
PP
SCHMALZER, P.A, and C.R. HINKLE. 1992, Recovery of Oak -Saw Palmetto Scrub
after Fire. Castanea 53:158-173.
SCHMALZER, P.A., D.R. BREININGER, F.W. ADRIAN, R. SCHAUB, B.W. DUNCUN.
1994. Development and Implementation of a Scrub Habitat Compensation Plan
for Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech, Meng. 109202. 54 pp.
SCHMALZER, P.A., S.R. BOYLE, and H.M. SWAIN, 1999, Scrub Ecosystems of
Brevard County, Florida: A Regional Characterization, Biological Sciences
62(1):13-47.
SIMBERLOFF, D. 1988. The Contribution of Population and Community Biology to
Conservation Science. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 19: 4173-511,
103
SMITH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. 1996, Proposed County Road 512 Corridor
Improvements Project - Phase 2 - Indian River County, Florida Biological
(. Assessment and Mitigation Plan for the Incidental Take of the Threatened
4
Florida Scrub Jay (Aphelocom3 coerulescens coerulescens) Wabasso Scrub
c„ Conservation Area Scrub Habitat Restoration and Management Plan.
Prepared for Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners.
January 24, 1996.
STALLCUP, J.A., AND G.E. WOOLFENDEN, 1978. Family Status and Contribution
to Breeding by Florida Scrub Jays, Anirn, Behay. 26: 1144-1156.
STITH, B.M., J.W. FITZPATRICK, G.E, WOOLFENDEN, and, B. PRANTY. 1996.
Classification and Conservation of Metapopulations: A Case Study of the
Florida Scrub Jay. Pages 187-216 in: D.R. McCullough(ed.) Metapopulations
and Wildlife Conservation. Island press, Ca.
SYMTH, J.E. 1991. Returning Pyric Communities to Suitable Habitat for Florida Scrub
Jays at Oscar Scherer State Recreation Area. Abstract in the Florida Scrub Jay
Workshop, May 23-24, Ormond Beach, Florida. Department of Natural
resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, District 4 Administration, in:
Schrnaizer, P.A., D.R. Breininger, F.W. Adrian, R. Schaub, B.W. Duncun. 1994.
Development and Implementation of a Scrub Habitat Compensation Plan for
Kennedy Space Center. NASA Tech. Mem. 109202. 54 pp.
SWAIN, H. M, P.A, SCHMALZER, D.R. BREININGER, K.V. ROOT, S.A. BERGEN, S. R.
BOYLE, S. MacCAFFREE. '1995. Appendix B. Biological Consultants Report. in:
Scrub Conservation and Development Plan. Brevard County. Submitted to
Natural Resources Management Division, Brevard County, Florida. Florida
Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL.
THAXTON, J. E. AND T. M. HINGTGEN, 1996. Effects of Suburbanization and
' Habitat Fragmentation on Florida Scrub -Jay Dispersal. Florida Fie3((1 Naturalist
24:25-37.
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY. 1991. Fire Management Manual. Fire Management
and Research Program. 'Tallahassee.
TOLAND, B.R. 1991. Nest Site Characteristics of a Florida Scrub Jay Population in
Indian River County. Proc. Florida Scrub Jay Workshop. May 23, 1991,
LL. Ormond Beach, FL (abstract).
TOLAND, B.R. 1993. The Distribution of Florida Scrub Jays in Martin, St. Lucie,
Indian River, And Southern Brevard Counties. Final rop. to Archbold
Biological Research Station and U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service. Tf�sh. Rep.
22 pp.
104
�
TOLAND, B.R. 1996, The Status of the Florida S*mt~Jayan(] a City of Sebastian
Habitat Conservation Plan, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Unpub. tech. rep. �
upp.
�
V.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AND NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE.
1S98.Endangered Species Habitat Conservation Planning Handbnuk� '
�
~= ' U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. 1989. South Florida Multi -Species Recovery Plan.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. Distribution of Federally-Usted Plants in
�
Southeast Florida. Unpublished data.
VVETTSTE|N' C.A., C.V. NOBLE, aodJ.D. GLABAUGM. 1887. Soil Survey cdIndian
-
River County, Florida,U.S.D.A. Soil Conopmuhoo Gwnvioo. i
YYDOLFENDEN' G.E. 1874 Nesting and Survival in Population of Florida Scrub
Jays. Living Bird 12: 25-49.
_ VVQOLFEND5N.G.E. 1975. Florida Scrub Jay Helpers mthe Nest. Aok921'1S.
� VVOQLFENDEN, G.E. 1978. Growth and 8vmkm| of Young Florida Snub Jays. �
Wilson Bull. 90:1-18,
VV0OLFENDEN' G.E., AN0J.VV. F|TZPATR\CK. 1977. Dominance in the Florida
~- Scrub Jay. Condor 79: 1'12.
^
vVOOLFENDEN. G.E., ANDJ.VV. F|TZPATR|CK. 1978. The Inheritance of Territory
in G/oop-Breeding 0rdu, 8ioSuienoo 28: 104'108.
u� YVOOLFENDEN, G.E, and J/w. F[OPATFUCx, 1984. The Florida Gomo Jay:
Demography of a Cooperative- Breeding gird. 406 pp. konnoU'. Pop. Biol. No.
20. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N.J.
YVO0LFENDEN' G.E.' ANDJ.YV. FIT2PATR|CK. 1888. 8exvv!Aoynmeurias in tile
U/o History of the Florida scrub jay. pp. 87107it, Rokonxmio' D.|, mid R.
—
W. VVr nOham (eds.). Ecological Aspects of Social Evnkxkm: Birds arid
ve N1omma|m. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
^~ ,`
\NODLFEmDEN' G.E., AND J.W. F|TZPATR\CK. 1990. Florida Scrub Java: A
[
Synopsis AUo, 18 vevm of Study, pp. 241'288 /o: 8womv' P.8,. and W.B.
~
Koenig (ods.). Cooperative Breeding inBirds: LonO'To/mStuViaoofEor/uQv
'
and Behavior. Cambridge Univ. p,mno. Cambridge,
~
106
I��
�;
� � � �
� � ��
�
\� � � «� ��
`..�
� w
� ... � y
�. .�
.
\-%�22�� - \��:�
a�
: .� � .z �/� «
\ ��:
4
�pPt�gNT QK
United States Departrrrentof the Interior.
N
FISH AND t1ILDLIFE SERVICE.
�''RCFrs •"'' 6612O.Sxuly till Ohne, South
(�z6samiltc.ltorid.i,t•"?llktk)p?
1=ebntary 7. 1995
toPM
ft�v
Mr. Kenneth
Board of Coin ty Commissioners ltt
c`f 1��z'6l$2t
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL, 32960
Dear Mr. Maclu:
In 1994, Indian River County voted to develop a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). Critical
to the success of an IICP is preserving and maintaining as much of the remaining scrub in
Indian River County as possible. Sone of the most critical areas for protection are contained
in approximately 155 platted lots in Unit li of the Sebastian highlands. Until some
protection is afforded these lots, all of the estimated 2,000 platted lots throughout the
Sebastian Highlands will be subject to scrutiny under the Endangered Species Act for
compliance with Section 9.
At a recent 1.amd Acquisition Commission (LAC) mectitrg, the LAC recommended the
purchase of the 65 -acre Sebastian Industrial Site Scrub. While the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service cornrnends the County for proceeding with scrub habitat acquisition, we feel a better
use of these limited funds would be to acquire as many of the single family lots as gtuckl} as
possible. Acquisition of these lots would significantly improve the chance of implementing a
successful HCP and would reduce the controversy surrounding Florida scrub jay protection
in Indian River County.
Therefore, the Service recommends that a main core of approximately 120 scrub lots
neighboring the protected Indi.an River County School Board scrub site at Pelican Island
Elementary School, be highest priority for scrub acquisition during title H(''P process, This
would help create support for the HCP and reduce listed species conflicts. The approved
IICP and subsequent Section 10(a)(1)(11) permit issuance would facilitate the release of all
remaining platted lots in the City of Sebastian. The successfully negotiated transfer of these
120 lots in the IICP would virtually assure public support of the complete 1-1(11).
Ilse Sebastian Industrial Site scrub is under no immediate threat of development, and any
proposed impacts to scrub habitat on that site prior to completion of the County IIC1) would
require and individual 1ICP,
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DEF rMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. ite�9,ommunity De
tor
FROM: Roland M. De010 h, Cp
Chief, Environmental Planning
DATE: September 11, 1996
SUBJECT: PROPOSED PURCHASE Or 47 INDIVIDUAL LOTS WITHIN THE
SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS SCRUB LAAC PROJECT ("PHASE II")
It is requested that the information herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its
regular meeting of September 17, 1996.
Em T
Staff roc«+monde that the hoard of County Wxmissionara purchase
(with bond funds) 47 individually owned lots, as a second phase of
acquisition within the Sebastian Highlands Scrub project. The
purchase contracts (already oxecuted by the sellers) are sumaarited
as follows:
Purchaser: Indian River County Board of County
Cows iasi.oners / Florida Ccavnunitios Trust
(Indian River County will hold title)
Seller; 41 Individual Lot Oanora (see attached list)
coot -share: Florida Carraunitloa Trust (SGt)
(includes share of acquisition coats)
t 3 $445
Total Prlcog $796,900 (nvarogo Y$Sr46t per lot)
other CnoEs: *$30,000 (appraisal, environ. audit, title
insurance, management plan)
$52,650.96 (utilities water line aassssaento applying
to 3) of the 47 lots)
C��O����e���n����t�gBAtldn
Bxturo; 1$266,109 (not Lncluding initial management coots)
is rsa�s: 47 Lots (11/4 acre each, +11.75 acroaj
Pr-Lsr71 Cond Lt loot
• Closing subject to County Cccmission and PCT Governing Body approval
of purchase contracts and project plan, including management plan.
staff is recoarnanding that the County pay the recently assessed
Utilities water lino aasessmsnt fees with toad (undo, as part of
acquisition coats,
f.AAc $teccosndat fon:
> The County Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (LAAO),
at its sweeting on August 28, 1996, voted 14 to 1 to
recomnond that the Hoard not approve the purchase
contracts, maintaining its poeitlon that the overall
project should not Be acquired becausa of anticipated
management difficulties, since the property is loaatod
within an active, developing subdivision.
Sebastian Highlands Scrub lots
Page 2
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The subject Sebastian Highlands Scrub property was approved In
early 1995 as a Florida Communities Trust (FCT) 50% Cost -share
project. In 1995, the Sebastian Highlands Scrub project was ranked
14th out of 19 projects on the LAAC site acquisition lint. The
project is currently ranked 13th out. of 15 aites, The City of
Sebastian has expressed support of the overall project because the
project will alleviate conflicts within the City concerning
endangered species protection vs. private development nights.
The initial overall Sebastian Highlands Scrub project consisted of
+160 lots. At i public hearing on July 16, 1996, the Board of
%ounty Commissioners approved the purchase of "Phase I" of the
project by agreeing to buy 50 of 56 lots owned by Atlantic Gulf
Coranunitles (AGC). At that meeting, with acknowledgement from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the Board eliminated from the
overall project the northern group of 26 lots, which were
determined by the FWS to be no longer crucial to the success of the
project.
In its application for state cost -share funding, the County chose
to be the lead agency for pre-acquisition tasks and negotiations.
During the past year, the county's acquisition consultant, in
coordination with county staff, has conducted pre-acquisition tasks
and negotiations. Since the owners of the herein described lots
within the project have accepted and executed purchase contracts,
appraisal results for those lots have rocently been released,
•Advertised Public Meeting
This public hearing has been advertised +30 days In advance to
fulfill a State statute requirement that the County hold a public
meeting after having provided at least 30 days advertised public
notice to formally consider approving and exercising its purchase
contracts for the Sebastian Highlands Scrub Phase 11 lots.
The State requirement that the Board hold a public meeting to
consider exercising its option after having provided 30 days
advertised notice of the meeting applies because the County chose
to keep its appraisal of the subject lots confidential until the
sellers executed a binding contract. Once that contract had been
signed, the appraisal was released and has been available to the
public during the 30 day period prior to the advertised public
meeting. Besides meeting State statute requirements, the hearing
on the subject lots will serve to meet a Land Acquisition Guide
requirement that the County hold a public hearing prior to
purchasing any property with land acquisition bond funds.
+Site Charactitristica
The subject 41 undeveloped lots consist of xeric oak scrub in Unit
17 of the Sebastian Highlands. All of these Iota are located in the
project core area in the vicinity of the Pelican Island Elementary
School.
These 47 lots, combined with 4 lots already owned by the City of
Sebastian and 16 AGC lots being purchased near the school
(totalling 67 lots out of 116 identified for acquisition in the
school area), are an essential element of this core area.
-Owner. Characteristics
� Currently, the subject 47 lots are owned by 41 individuals (see
attached). The tax assessed value of each of these lots range from
26,600 to $11,030 depending on the size and accessibility of the
lot.
-'OJ aTQTBuodsaa a 'luawa6vuvw Rlaadoad
q 111M AlunoZ) aql 'aananoq 'v100dsaa 30410 TTp
ui 'Alaadoid 0111 buT3110d UT OOUW19TBDQ A113 bulpav6aa upll9egoS
;o Allo 0q1 g1Tat luawaaabe TV"T3a1uT uv paln0axa svg dluno:) aq,y
ioalvd aaaTTT
pup doox-dn ITt?jl eaalvu sv g3ns
uTplaa3 1 luawabpupw +11000000 ;0 813adav
11TH A1uno� eg1 lolsse of pa:l9v aq TITIA 9dno3b 3004unTOA
';;vas 6uTuuvld T9luawu03lnua dlunoo g1Tn uolleuTp"o3 uT uoTvTAI(I
skapd A-4unoZ) aq1 Aq po6vuvm puv wajaAs Xapd opin-Aluno3 agl oluT
palvaodaonuT aq TTTm f13ado3d aq1 'luawa6vuvw e(aal 6uoT of 6uTlvlas
'Spun) uoTleToln Tanowaa 0011 Pup 'spun; uoTlv6TlTw Aluno0
'slupa6 luawdolanap Kavd apnl3uT sa33nos buTpun; IvTlualod '9aTuow
wnpuoaa;a0 up111 aaglo a3ano9 v Aq popun; aq 01 Paatt TTTn 6uTX0vd
Pa1TwTT 8e gOns 81uawano3dwl •uolilsln63v 1Tlaadoad aq-4 ;o 'u vd
su spun; wnpuaao;aa puog g1Tts ao; pled eq uvo 'luawa6vuvw ao mosaa
pup buloua; 6ulpnl0ul '91uaw0noadw7 ails IvTiTuT ;0 30gwnu v
'1306oad
0111 ao; UOFITPU03 veld 'luawabpuew pagTa3sop v o9Tv of 1plTgeq
gnaos ;o luawabvuvH '6uldavd pallwTI pup 'ogaze6 ")IsoTX uol7ew3o;uT
'peav oTuoTd v '91Te01 aanlvu ;a uoTeTnoad ly unQD apnl3ul
luawaaa6v lveo0ddv 1pnld03uoZ) vql 10 vuollTPuo3 'ATTv3T;T3adS
'Sliadoad 13a(oad Ilp3ano 041 uo 9aT1T113v;
pasvq-o3anosa0 PUT? 980309 Pa1TwTT aPTAoad o1 uoTIPOIldde 1Di slT
UT Ilas1T PalvblTgo Ajunoo eql 'bulpun; 009149»1903 Loa 3o; A;TTpnb
01 9apao ul •s0T1TTT39; a9n pup 89000v 3TTgnd pa6vq-a0anos0a
;o uoTsTnoad aql uo pasvq al3a{oad 0o; slulod spaumv 'apTm
-alvlo anllTiodwoo Alg6Tq ST 4314A 'wva6oad Sod aq1 'uojjTajnbDp
sPuel TeluOwuoaTnua 111Th ans9T uv sAVMTV ST 1803 luawabvuvW
9160D luawo6pupW
'6uTaol3 of aolad sluaws9assv
aqi Aud o1 6uTnvq ;o loadooad aq-4 Iv .tv9tvTg possaadxa anvq
;;viv pol3viuo3 anvq ogw saauno eoogl pup "sluomeaueov va;1TTTin
0141 ;o a3Tlou o1 aolad s3alloo oql 4(l pau6Ta aaam slnealuo3 atll
)o lsow 'Alaadoad alagl of el1Tl 0vaT3 6uTPTnoad ao; algTsuodsoa
9T aaTlas gova 1941 a1v0TPuT slovaluo3 osvg0and pau6ls a111 g6noglly
'anlvn pasTvadde aqa ;0 1Ll' 806VJOAV au4ws908se
saT1TTT1T1 0141 'sTsvq loT 00d v u0 '96'9591M 9l viol poloa;;v
fE aql ao; luaws9assv 0141 ;o ielal pauTgwo3 0141 'luawss999v
saT1TTTin I esvgd eql o; 13a[gna sap pc 'uoliTsTnbov 0o;
uleaaq pasodoad s1ol LY aql ;o 'spuvigbTH uvT19egos aqa io; 13a(oad
luawssassv ouTT aalen 0011TTT4n aql 10 I asvgd Panoadde '966T 'LZ
lsn6nv uo 6uTaeaq oTTgnd v le '83auoT9sTwwoo ,Ilunoa ;o papoa aq1
1uaw9aa99v. aul'I aalp@q vaT1TTIMI
(slvsTvaddv 'llpnv
IvluawuoaTnuO '•6`0) ooanlTpuodxo uoTlTsTnb3v-aad ;o 405 buTpnlouT
'buTpun; aav140-ls03 ;Qy sol Pano3dde Xlluonbosgns spm goTgn
',boa aq1 of uoTlv3lTddv up peliltogns AlunOO saaT>3 upTPul 'WT uI
vavgS-1900
'vasoa luawo6vuvw 6uTosaappv pup uollTeTnb3v
Alaadoad UT a3ue4sTssv eap140 1903 6uluTvlgo 039 sasvgoand pasodoad
lip of 13adsoa gllm ;;vlo :)vv --T of luvlaodwl aae golga% sanssT omL
luawa vuaW�g� oavggg—iso uoTaToIn- 3—ya
T: obpd
vloq gnaos OPUVT46111 uv)lvvgaS
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots
Page 4
i� County staff have opted to have a management pian for the project
(see attached) drafted by the county's aequisition/management
consultants, an option which is specified in the County's contract
E with FloridAffinity, Inc. Page 25 of the draft plan summarizes
estimated management and development costa of the overall Sebastian
Highlands Scrub project.
Please notice that the draft plan for the total acquisition project
was previously reviewed by the Board when the Board reviewed the
AGC lots purchase. This plan is in the process of being modified to
account for the elimination of the northern group of lots, and may
bis subject to further change depending on the County's success in
negotiating purchases of additional lots within the project.
aAppraisal
In accordance with County Land Acquisition Guide and FCT
procedures, an independent appraisal was obtained to determine an
approved appraised value of the lots. Because the value of the
individual lots did not exceed $500,600, only one appraisal was
required to sati6fy state and county procedural requirements.
The appraisal firm selected was Armfleld & Wagner. The appraisal
was subsequently certified by a review appraiser (Boyle Appraisal
Service), as required by the FCT.
The appraised value for the combined 41 lots in summarized as
follows.
SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS SCRUB - 47 LOTS
AFPRAI5HR YAS.A$ ! eIYBRasncS APPRGVAD A.M. VALUX
Ar.nfield 6 Wagner $396,900 R/A $796,900
The negotiated purchase price of 4396,900 is 100E of the approved
appraised value. Given the nature of the project and the fact that
these appraised values reflect environmental permitting
constraints, whereby in some cases the appraised value is less than
tax assessed value, staff felt it was appropriate to make offers at
the full appraised value, (The appraised values of the individual
lots are summarized in an attachment to this memorandum,)
•Contract
In coming to terms with PCT and county staff on the negotiated
purchase price (subject to County Commission and FCT approval),
each seller has executed a standard FCT purchase contract with
minor modifications. For ease of reference, rather than attaching
each individual contract, attached is a copy of the contract that
has been executed by each of the 41 sellers.
aprn sot Plan
To satisfy the FCT Conceptual Approval Agreement for cost -share
funding, the County Is required to submit a "Project plan". In
addition to an executed purchase agreement and approved management
pian, a "project plan" includes,
,Statement of total cost
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Gots
Page 5
- Statement of award amount requested from FCT
- Statement that the project plan Is consistent with
local comprehensive plan
- Evidence that conditions imposed as part of the
Conceptual Approval Agreement are satisfied
- Affidavit that ihero in no existing or pending violation
of any local, state, regional or federal laws or
regulations on the project site
As confirmed by the Sebastian City Planner, the Sebastian Highlands
Scrub lots purchase as proposed is consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan, Documents of the project plan listed above -
aslde from Board approval of the purchase agreement and management
plan - can be handled ad,ninistratively, and have been provided to
FCT by county staff contingent upon Hoard approval of the
acquisition.
ANALYSIS
-Water Line Assessments
• Coordination 4 Compatibility of Projects
Both the Utilities water line extension project and the Sebastian
Highlands Scrub acquisition project are important from an
environmental standpoint, and are not incompatible. The water line
Project extends needed service to lots within the Sebastian
Highlands as an improvement to residential potable water quality,
and will ultimately promote the County's objectives of conserving
ground water quality and quantity In the area. The scrub
acquisition project will protect environmentally important habitat
and primary aquifer recharge areas, as well as provide passive
recreation, open space, and environmental education,
County Planning Division and Utilities Department staff have
coordinated on the two projects to determine how each project
affects the other. Staff came to two main conclusions. The first
was that, after review of the water line project design, there is
no opportunity to modify any water line segment within the scrub
acquisition project, due to the need to service residences in the
area. The second conclusion was that the water line assessments
would affect lots within the scrub acquisition project, regardless
of the timing of the assessment or scrub acquisition.
a Alternatives
There are a number of alternatives relating to the recent Utilities
water line assessment, as it affects lots within the Sebastian
Highlands Scrub acquisition project, One alternative is for the
County not to proceed with the project acquisition. This
alternative, however, would leave the lot ownero to fend for
themselves regarding payment of assessment fees on top of trying to
obtain federal permits to build in compliance with the federal
Endangered Species Act. Moreover, it would derail efforts to
conserve environmentally important scrub habitat, and development
Of a Habitat Conservation Plan that the County is working In
cooperation with the City of Sebastian.
Another alternative is for the County to advise the sellers that
they are obligated to pay the assessment as a condition of closing.
However, since the assessment equals approximately 17% of the
appraised value, the sellers will likely balk and not sell to the
County.
Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots
Page 6
A third alternative is for the County to pay the assessments with
bond funds as a cost of acquisition. Because the water line
assessments were recently approved - as the Board Is considering
purchase of the Sebastian Highlands Scrub lots - the County has an
opportunity to pay the assessments with bond funds as part of
acquisition costs. If the Utilities assessment project occurred
after the County had alrezdy purchased the lots, the County would
still need to pay the assessments, but could not use bond funds
because it would not be an acquisition coat. In such a scenario,
the County would have to find another funding source, such as the
general fund.
it in staff's position that the most appropriate alternative is for
the County to pay the water line assessments - for these And other
lots acquired by the County within the scrub acquisition project -
with bond funds, as an acquisition cost,
If the County decides to pay the Utilities assessments, it is
appropriate and equitable that the County extend assessment payment
to other affected lots within the overall acquisition project,
including 13 of the 50 AGC lots the County has approved to purchase
as phase I of the project. The Utilities assessment for the 13
affected AGC lots totals $20,229.99.
q ultipie Benefits
Environmental Education
As with most of the County's proposed acquisitions, the Sebastian
Highlands Scrub purchase will enhance education in the County.
with this property, the educational function will consist of nature
trails and educational displays for the site. Also, the
Environmental Learning Center has expressed an Interest in using
the property as a "satellite" location for xeric scrub educational
excursions. county staff will coordinate with the School Board,
particularly with School Board staff at the Pelican Island
Elementary School, concerning school use and access to the
property.
Comprehensive Plan Acquisition Commitment
Conservation Policy 6.2 of the County Comprehensive plan commits
the County to acquire a minimum of 50 acres of xeric scrub for
conservation purposes. Although this minimum acreage has already
been acquired, the Sebastian Nighlands Scrub project contributes to
this policy by conserving xeric oak scrub. The project also
furthers objectives in the City and County comprehensive plans
relating to open apace, aquifer primary recharge area protection,
and rare species conservation,
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
purchase contracts for the 47 individual lots as Phase II of the
Sebastian Highlands Scrub acquisition project. Staff also
recommends that the Board approve County payment, as a cost of land
acquisition, of applicable Utilities wator line assessments
(including affected AGC lots) with bond funds. In addition, staff
recommends that the Board approve exercise of the purchase
contracts, and authorize staff to proceed with closing on the lots,
-- including submittal of a Project plan amendment to the FCT to
fulfill requirements of the PCT cost -share Conceptual Approval
Agreement.
i§ ;
F497lrt ilj$ Avny3ivn �(.
0
:'
'°uj ',. •r
2
Telephone: (107) 567•8000
October 17, 1996 _
r
Mike Jennings
t: South Florida Ecosystem Office
U.S. Fish & wildlife Service
P.O. Box 2676
Vero Beach, FL 32961-2676
Re: Sebastian Highlands Scrub Lots Mitigation Alternative
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 2Sth Strict, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
co
Dear Mike:
I am writing as a follow-up to our meeting on October 4, 1996, at which we
discussed alternatives to mitigate development of +450 Sebastian Highlands scrub
lots under the purview of the federal Endangered Species Act, relating to the
protection of Florida scrub jay habitat.
Status of Sebastian Highlands scrub Lots Acquisition
As you are aware, the Board of County Commissioners, at a public hearing on
September 17, 1996, voted not to proceed with County/State acquisition of 49
individually owned scrub lots in Sebastian Highlands Unit 17. These lots were
being considered as "Phase 11" of a county scrub acquisition project originally
consisting of 1180 scrub lots in the vicinity of Pelican island Elementary
School. The Board's decision not to buy the Sebastian Highlands scrub lots was
based largely on (perceived difficulties of scrub management within an active
residential subdivision.
Although the Board's decision was specific to the 49 lots under consideration at
the time, it is clear to county staff that the entire scrub lot acquisition
project was affected by the decision. The County's option agreement to buy 50
Atlantic Gulf Communities (AGC) lots ("Phase i") has expired, and A^DC'•s�
re res .slri h -,y insitcated t)j, },. r in not willing
31 3d rs>� h 50 s that are clustered norther of Pelican Island i msn arm
Schou ConseouentIv, the County is not proceeding to buv anv scrub lots in
Senasrian �+�yninnus.
> A64 CVA"J64 ;+S mind
apfer Oiil,& led* -W5, wri*CA-
North Sebantian Conservation Area rolo-A��A9 6
Although the Board is not proceeding with the scrub lots purchase, it recently /
approved the purchase of two relatively large tracts in north Sebastian. the +76
acre "AGC Industrial Tract," and the +312 acre "St. Sebastian PUD" property.
These two contiguous tracts, located east of the Sebastian Municipal Airport and
golf course, contain approximately +40 acres of occupied scrub jay territory as
well as +50 acres of overgrown xeric oak and sand pine scrub with potential for
scrub jay habitat restoration.
The City of Sebastian has requested that the County allow for potential future
extension of Gibson Street through the North Sebastian Conservation Area in
existing and future right-of-way (ROW). Assuming that this road would be
H
constructed In the alignment of the existing ROW, it is estimated that +3 acres
of scrub jay habitat would be impacted by the road project.
Wabasso Scrub Addition
Within the next few months, the County Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (LAAC)
will be considering the purchase of a northern addition to the Ill acre Wabasso
Scrub Conservation Area that was bought by the County in October, 1995. This
northern addition has been proposed by the owner of Park Place, the development
In which the property is located, and consists of approximately 5 acres of xeric
oak scrub habitat (within 1/2 mile of the Sebastian Highlands Unit 17 scrub
lots),
If the County proceeds to buy this addition, it will expand the +25 acres of
occupied scrub jay territory and +32 acres of unoccupied habitat being restored
in the existing Wabasso Scrub Conloervation Area.
Mitigation Proposal
County staff is requesting that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service (FWS) consider
the following proposal to serve as mitigation for the planned Gibson Street
extension and for release ofthe +450 privately owned 1/4 acre scrub lots in the
Sebastian Highlands that have been identified by the FWS to be scrub jay habitat:
• County purchase and management of +40 acres of occupied
scrub jay habitat and restoration ;f +50 acres Of scrub
on the St. Sebastian PUD and AGC Industrial Tract
properties ("North Sebastian conservation Area") .
• County purchase and management of +5 acres of scrub at
the south end of Park Place Development, as an addition
to the +57 acres of scrub habitat now under County
manageme-nt in the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area.
If this proposal is generally acceptable to the FWS, county staff will schedule
an item before the Board of County Commissioners for authorization to proceed
with drafting a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) based on the proposed mitigation.
I look forward to your response. if you have any questions or wish to discuss
this matter, please contact me at 567-8000, ext 258.
Si t r 1
Roland M. DeBloig, AICP
Chief, Environmental Planning
cc: Robert Keating
Bob Massarelli
Board of County Commissioners
0
I
United Mates Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
' P.O. BOX 2676
VE;RO BEACH, FLORIDA 32961.2676
November 12, 1990
Mr, Roland DeBlois
Indian River County
Environmental planning and Code I of srcement Section
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach. FL 32960
gear Mr. DeIllois
'lltank you for your October 17, 1996 letter regarding Indian River County's alternative Florida
scrub jay (Aphelocoma voerrrlescens coeruleseens) mitigation proposal that addresses adverse
affects anticipated from continued housing construction in Sebastian Highlands. The Irish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) has considered your proposal in context with scrub jay population data
for northern Indian River County, conservation strategies attempted previously, and recent
discussions my staff and the County have had regarding the failure of Indian River County to
pursue scrub acquisitions in Sebastian I liehlands.
Before We discuss your current proposal, we would like to review previous eflorts to resolve the
controversy surrounding habitat alterations in SebastianIlighlands and conservation of scrub
jays. After reviewing, the rather lengthy Irlc associated with this project, we understand that in
the late 1980s the Florida Gane and Fresh Wier fish Commission (CAV) expressed concern
over housing construction impacts ()it Sebastian's scrub jay populations. Beginning in 1991, the
hWS and 01C began consulting with tltc City o1 Sebastian regarding scrub jay conservation.
Fay the time all eXhautitt%°e scrub w survey had been completed in 1991. 35 families Were known
to occur within the city hntits of Sebastian. A general lack of enforcement and willingness to
implement conservation strategies led to a decline in tite number ot'scrub jay families, such that,
by 1993 only 27 remained in Sebastian.
By lune 1992. both the FAVI, and ('ith' agreed that development and implerne.ntati<rn ofa habitat
cOnservatiol(t plan (conservation plan) and the issuance of an incidental take permit for scrub jays
was the only viable option that would provide for continued housing Construction and scrub jay
conservation. t lnfortwiatcly, continuing dclacs in conservation plan development have resulted
in declines in scrubjays, As ofearly 1996, only 20 families existed in and around Sebastian.
During; the lcve years tive Jtave contemplated the late ofscrub jays and lot owners in Sebastian
I (ighlaiitls; we have lost I S'scrnhjay families or 43 perecnt oi'the pot,uiati(ta in northern Indian
County.
While considering; your current proposal, we often referenced the outline for the Countywide
i conservation plan and it's more recent. but short lived predecessor, the site specific Sebastian
Highlands conservation plan_ "I'bough different in scope. both conservation plans were intended
to relieve the County and Sebastian Highland hit owners of their responsibilities to avoid take of
the threatened scrub jay, by providing "mitigation." Mitigation in both conservation plans
� included conservation and management of scrub oak habitat. Unfortunately, it has never been
clear which conserved and managed lands were being proposed for mitigation in either of the two
conservation plans. However. there seems to have been a general consensus among the FWS and
County that acquisition of tile St. Sebastian PUD, Atf]C Industrial Tract, Wabasso Scrub, and
Sebastian highlands Unit 17 lots would provide a substantial portion of the mitigation that would
ultimately be needed during, development of'a County -wide conservation plan, Your current
proposal now requests FWS approval of a mitigation strategy that does not include lots in Unit
17 of Sebastian Highlands,
For comparative purposes, we have summarized the approximate acreages of'scrub jay habitat
(and families) adversely affected and protected under the previous conservation plans and the
current mitigation proposal.
0 Previous Conservation Phan
Proposed fldverse Affects = Alteration of 216 scrub lots in Units 3, 5, 10. and 17 in
Sebastian I liehlands or about 47 acres of scrub jay habitat, ]'our Gmulies of lays are
known to currently reside within these Units. A total of 47 acres and four scrub jay
t"antilies would tic affected.
j' o ins ltitigat_ ipli 119 lots in Unit 17 (about 30 acres) plus about 20 acres of
managed school board property. Contiguous tracts known as the St. Sebastian PUD and
ACC industrial Tract contain about 40 acres of occupied habitat and about 50 acres of
unoccupied scrub habitat. The remaining uncommitted occupied and unoccupied habitat
within the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area (about 25 acres). Management plans were
also proposed for other public lands containing scrub jays, including the Sebastian golf
course, airport. and Sebastian elementary school. At total of sixteen families ofjays
reside in these areas. A total of 115 acres of occupied habitat, 50 acres of unoccupied
habitat, and 10 scrub jay families would benefit from this proposal.
The Current Mitigation Proposal
Pn7posed Adverse < fla is = Alteration of 18.5 scrub lots in Units 3, 5, and 10 ill
Sebastian I lighlands (about 47 acres), development of 148 lots in unit 17 (about 37
acres), road construction impacts to about 3 acres ofoccupied scrub habitat. Light
families reside ill these areas. About 87 acres of occupiedhabitat and eight scrub jay
lamihes would lie affcmd bly this proposal.
7
Proposed Mitigation — Contiguous tracts known as the SL Sebastian [IUD and AGC
Industrial Tract contain about 40 acres of occupied habitat and about 50 acres of
unoccupied scrub habitat. The remaining LIFIC011111littCd occupied and unoccupied habitat
within the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area (about 25 acres), Ali additional 5 acres of
scrub (presumably unoccupied) is proposed to be acquired and added to the Wabasso
Scrub tract, Five families are known to occupy diese lands. About 90 acres of occupied
habitat and 50 acres of unoccupied habitat, and live scrub jay families would be protected
under this proposal.
By comparison, implementation of the previous conservation plan would have resulted in
alteration ofabout 47 acres of habitat while 115 acres of occupied habitat would have been
conserved and managed. Only four additional families would have been lost while 16 would
have been protected. The County's cut
-rent mitigation proposal would adversely affect 84 acres
and protect and manage about 80 acres. Seven filrniliss w(.uld be lost while only five Farnifies
would be protected.
Though neither plan provides extreme benefits to scrub habitat beyond that currently available,
the proposed mitigation plan results in substantial additional losses ol'scrub habitat and scrub
jays. Based on these estimates, the current mitigation proposal provides long-term protection for
only five scrub jay families as well as for those families that may eventually occupy publicly
held scrub that is currently overgrown and unoccupied. In short, the current proposal could
result in an additional loss of'65 percent of the renmining scrub jays in northern Indian River
County. Added to losses since 1991, the proposal and past adverse affects would result in all 80
percent loss of'scrubjays.
Oil October 4. 1996 f -AVS staffniet ,vidi you to discuss ramifications of the COLlflt3'*s recent
decision to terminate acquisition of scrub habitat in Sebastian Highlands. According to our
meeting notes. it was suggested that the C'OLIMV pursue any and all possible acquisition and
management options available to offset the additional adverseaffects that housing construction in
Unit 17 will have on Horida scrub jays, Although your letter indicates the County will not
pursue the 34 AGC lots in Unit 17, subsequent conversations with you suggest acquisition may
still be sought. We support this effort and believe the 34 AGC lots, in combination with Pelican
Elementary School scrub, may provide enough suitable habitat to rilininlize the adverse affects of
habitat fragmentation title to losses in the remainder of Unit 17. These scrub parcels, it'properly
managed, may be essential -stepping stones" for the dispersal of.scrLIbjUVS front and to northern
Indian River County,
After reviewing tile COLMIX'S current proposal. \Nc found that acquisition of live acres ol'scrub
has been added to the mitigation nicasures proposed during development of earlier conservation
plans. Other possible actions that could benefit scrub jays, but were not addressee! in the current
proposal include:
• Development of individual scrub nianagvniciu. plans for the airport, Sebastian golf course,
3
and Sebastian and Pelican Island elementary schools, including perpetual conservation
casements where appropriate.
Cooperatively develop scrub management plan for recent[), purchased State lands in
Indimi River County.
0 Identification of additional scrub habitat within the airport property that could be
conserved and managed for scrub jays.
• Acquire the 34 AGC lots and develop a scrub management plan for this area.
• Cost-sharing with the state to conserve and manage other scrub parcels in the County.
In summary, we believe the County*s proposal falls short of providing adequate protection and
management of scrub habitat in northern Indian River County. We do not believe the County
has outlined all measures that have previously been suggested or explored all other possible
scrub conservation alternatives. Therel1ire, as proposed. the current mitigation plan would not
provide components essential for the development of an acceptable conservation plan.
If you would like to discuss revisions to the County's proposal and any alternative mitigation
strategies that may be appropriate please contact lklike Jennings at 56
2-3909,
SincereIN,
�° Craig Johnson
Supervisor, South Florida Fcosystern office
cc:
Robert Massarclli, City ol'Sebastian, Fi.
M
D
School District of Indian Mver County
°A CommUNrlY Partnership Toward Educational Excellence"
Dr. Roger Dearing, Superintendent
Roland DeBlois
Environmental & Code Enforcement
Indian River County Q� OCT I 1;
1840 25th Street � r
Vero Beach, Florida 32960 as,Er:,t';,'.,=ct�t
s
October 2, 1997
Dear Roland,
During the Discussion agenda September 23, 1997, the school board
indicated they will accept for review and action a proposed Habitat
Conservation Plan that will affect the District, Sebastian and Pelican
Island Elementary sites.
This allowance for review by the board should not be interpreted as art
agreement in any form, for a positive or negative vote when the board
takes official action on the issue.
This board indication for review of the Habitat Conservation Plan is to
support the commission staff in proceeding with plan development.
Sincerely,
I Iith`
xeDirector of f=acilities
c: Dr. Roeder Dearing, Superintendent
Wes Davis, School Board Member
(Fuck;♦ 0. `karvy I lrrtxa Balky
— Dorothy Tallwrt District 2 cavy IdndN:-y D141det 4 Wesley 1110f
District 1 Dlsuir( 9 District K
"It Takes a Community to liaise a Chitdt!"
1990 25th Street 0 Vero Be2dh, Fludda MOx0 • Telephone: 561.564-3000 6 Sunman Nuattxz: 257-1011 a Fax: in i-569,0.424
...... ._._.......... ........
...�
Equal Oppuri uilty Mueator anti F wplo),n
C:
r
RESOLUTION NO. R-97-63
f¢M
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, SUPPORTING, IN CONCEPT, THE
CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF SCRUB JAY HABITAT ON
CITY OWNED PROPERTY, AS PART OF A SEBASTIAN AREA -WIDE
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN BEING DEVELOPED BY INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY TO MITIGATE SCRUB JAY HABITAT IMPACTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATELY OWNED
SCRUB LOTS IN SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS SUBDIVISION;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service is charged with the protection and regulation of habitat associated with federally listed rare
or threatened species; and
WHEREAS, In 1987, the Florida Scrub Jay was listed as a threatened species by the
Federal Government; and
WHEREAS, The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified approximately 475 platted
lots in Sebastian Highlands Subdivision that contain important Florida Scrub Jay habitat and are
subject to regulation under the Endangered Species Act; and
WHEREAS, In accordance with the Endangered Species Act, impacts to the habitat of
Federally endangered or threatened species can only be permitted in association with a Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, whereby any habitat
impacts proposed under an HCP are sufficiently off -set by mitigation; and
WHEREAS, In October, 1996, Indian River County proposed to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service that the Service conceptual agree to accept, as mitigation for release of the
approximate 475 Sebastian Highlands scrub lots for private development, the County's
commitment to conserve and courage Scrub Jay habitat on lands acquired by the County under its
En-vironmental Lands Program; and
WHEREAS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service staff responded to Indian River County's
proposal by indicating an additional need that the City of Sebastian agree to conserve scrub habitat
on existing City owned property, if the County's HICP to release the scrub lots is to be approved;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
SECTION L RECITALS RATIFICATION: 77re above recitals are ratified in their
�� entirety.
/k
{f
U Domodiwn iticariill)i
g
Galactic elliotlii
FAGACEAE
Quercusgeminato
Sand lice oak
GENTIANACEAE
Ny nphoides aquatica
Fio ting hcarts
HYPERICACEAE
lfvpericum cisBJolium
ifvpericum tetropetalum
LAMIACEAE
Pilahlephis rigida
Pcnnyroyal
MELASTOMATACEAE
Rhexia moriono
Pale meado%%-bcauty
NYMPHACEAE
Aymphoeo odorata
white water -lily
OLACACEAE
_.
.iinienia americana
Hog -plum
POLYGALACEAE
llol4gala nano
Wild batcitclor's button
Poltgota rugellit
Yellow batahelof's button
POLYGONACEAE
Pol igonella cilitaa
W ircxrccd
SCROPHULAIUACEAE
Scaparia dutcis
S%wet broom
VITACEAE
Vitis rotundifolia
Muscadine grapc