Land Management Review of Cedar Key Scrub State Reserve, Levy County (Lease No. 3568): November 14, 1997
Prepared by Division of State Lands Staff Robert Clark, Environmental Administrator William Howell, OMCM Amy Knight, Planner November 17, 1997
Management Review Team Members
Agency Represented
DEP/DRP DEP Northwest District DACS/DOF GFC Soil and Water Cons. District County Commission Conservation Organization Private Land Manager
Team member appointed
Mr. Dan Pearson Mr. Don Jensen Mr. Don West Mr. Frank Smith Mr. Dennis Andrews Ms. Krista Kelly (Levy Co. Planning) Mr. Randy Martin (Sierra Club) Mr. Greg Galpin (Georgia-Pacific)
Team member in attendance
Mr. Dan Pearson Mr. Don Jensen Mr. Don West Mr. Frank Smith Mr. Dennis Andrews Ms. Krista Kelly none Mr. Greg Galpin
Process for Implementing Regional Management Review Teams
Legislative Intent and Guidance: Section 8 of CS/CS/HBs 1119 & 1577 (§259.036, F. S.) was enacted to determine whether state-owned conservation, preservation, and recreation lands are being managed for the purposes for which they were acquired and in accordance with adopted land-management plans. It establishes land management review teams to evaluate the extent to which the existing management plan provides sufficient protection to threatened or endangered species, unique or important natural or physical features, geological or hydrological functions, or archaeological features, and to evaluate the extent to which the land is being managed for the purposes for which it was acquired and the degree to which actual management practices, including public access, are in compliance with the adopted management plan. If a land-management plan has not been adopted, the review shall consider the extent to which the land is being managed for the purposes for which it was acquired and the degree to which actual management practices are in compliance with the management policy statement and management prospectus for that property. If the land management review team determines that reviewed lands are not being managed for the purposes for which they were acquired or in compliance with the adopted land management plan, management policy statement, or management prospectus, or if the managing agency fails to address the review findings in the updated management plan, the Department shall provide the review findings to the Board, and the managing agency must report to the Board its reasons for managing the lands as it has. No later than the second board meeting in October of each year, the Department shall report the annual review findings of its land management review team.
1
Review Site
The management review of the Cedar Key Scrub State Reserve considered approximately 5,000 acres of uplands in Levy County that are managed by DEP/Division of Recreation and Parks (see attachment 1 for map). The team evaluated the extent to which current management actions are suffcient, whether the land is being managed for the purpose for which it was acquired, and whether actual management practices, including public access, are in compliance with the management concept developed in 1978 for the Cedar Key Scrub Environmentally Endangered Lands Project. A management plan is currently being prepared for this site.
Review Team Analysis
The management review checklist was analyzed as follows: The checklist consisted of two parts: a plan review section that answered whether or not the management plan sufficiently addressed protection/ restoration/ management needs for a series of items; and a field review section that scored to what extent sufficient management actions were being taken for a series of items. For each item in each section the scores for all team members were averaged. Items for which the average score was low (< 0.5 for plan review; < 2 for field review) are described in the following checklist results and highlighted in the corresponding checklist (Attachment 2).
Review Team Findings
Checklist results
III.A.2 Frequency of Prescribed Burning III.D.1.a Control of Non-native Invasive Animals III.H.1 Incompatible Adjacent Land Use III.H.3 Inholdings/additions Burn frequency should be addressed in the plan and an appropriate burn plan should be implemented. The control of non-native animals, especially hogs, should be addressed in the plan and a control program should be implemented. Adjacent land use should be addressed in the plan and any associated problems should be managed. Acquisition of adjacent undeveloped land should be addressed in the plan and such effort should be undertaken.
Recommendations to the managing agency
2
The following recommendations resulted from a discussion and consensus of review team members. 1. The managing agency should develop a program for hog control. 2. The managing agency should address acquisiton of additional parcels, especially the Cedar Key Plantation to the south, and the Ruppel Tract to the east. 3. Increased public access, including hiking trails, is needed. 4. The managing agency should coordinate ground water withdrawal and monitoring with the Suwannee River Water Management District. The checklist items described above and recommendations to the managing agency should be noted in the next management plan update as having been identified by the review team as needing to be addressed in the management plan update. The checklist items should be addressed in relation to the category(ies) in which they received a low score, e.g. whether the plan sufficiently addressed protection/ restoration/ management needs, or whether sufficient management actions were being taken. Is the land being managed for the purpose for which it was acquired? After completing the checklist, team members were asked to answer “yes” or “no” to this question and given the opportunity to provide general comments. All team members agreed that the land is being managed for the purpose for which it was acquired. Individual team member comments are compiled in Attachment 3. Are actual management practices, including public access, in compliance with the management plan? After completing the checklist, team members were asked to answer “yes” or “no” to this question and given the opportunity to provide general comments. All team members agreed that actual management practices, including public access, were in compliance with the management plan. Individual team member comments are compiled in Attachment 3.
3
Attachment 3
The following are compilations of comments from individual review team members and are given here for information purposes only.
Review Team Comments: Is land being managed for the purpose for which it was acquired?
“Staffing may not be needed for this 5M acre park but when coupled with the responsibilities of the Waccasassa State Preserve more staffing is needed. With more staffing more interaction with public as well as public use would increase.” “Overall good job; specific issues: 1) address hog control- expanded hog hunting opportunities; 2) aggressively pursue acquisition of key properties adjacent to Reserve.” “However, need to complete a conceptual mgmt Plan, and get more aggressive on prescribed burning program. Should also acquire adjacent lands to make burning program safer and more feasible and to connect the Cedar Key scrub Tract with the Wacassasa Bay tract.”
Review Team Comments: Are actual management practices, including public access, in compliance with the management plan?
“Generally, yes. However, more emphasis needs be placed on conducting prescribed burns, and not just talk. Also, deep recent fire plow scars need to be resotred/disked/filled in.” “Would recommend more hog hunting be permitted on this tract.”