Eglin AFB: “Integrated Natural Resource

Transcription

FINAL
INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT PLAN
Prepared for:
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
Eglin Air Force Base, Florida
Prepared by:
Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)
1140 Eglin Parkway, Shalimar, FL 32579
February 2010
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures............................................................................................................................................................... iv List of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Symbols ............................................................................................................ v 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Natural Resources Program Management .................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Ecological Monitoring ...............................................................................................................................1-3 1.3 Threatened and Endangered Species .........................................................................................................1-3 1.4 Outdoor Recreation, Hunting, and Fresh Water Fishing Management......................................................1-4 1.5 Aquatic Program........................................................................................................................................1-5 1.6 Forest Management ...................................................................................................................................1-5 1.7 Wildland Fire Management .......................................................................................................................1-6 1.8 Integrated Pest Management Program .......................................................................................................1-6 1.9 Bird/Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) ...........................................................................................1-7 1.10 Coastal Zone Management ........................................................................................................................1-7 1.11 Public Outreach .........................................................................................................................................1-8 1.12 Volunteer Resources Program ...................................................................................................................1-8 1.13 Component Plans .......................................................................................................................................1-8 1.14 Annual Coordination Requirements ..........................................................................................................1-9 2. GENERAL INFORMATION..............................................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Authority ...................................................................................................................................................2-1 2.3 Responsibility ............................................................................................................................................2-4 2.3.1 96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Management Division (96 CEG/CEV) .....................2-4 2.3.2 Eglin Organizations ......................................................................................................................2-4 2.4 Management Philosophy ...........................................................................................................................2-6 2.4.1 Ecosystem Management ...............................................................................................................2-6 2.4.2 Interdisciplinary INRMP Development ........................................................................................2-7 2.4.3 INRMP Support Functions ...........................................................................................................2-8 2.5 Conditions for Implementation and Revision ............................................................................................2-8 2.5.1 Implementation .............................................................................................................................2-8 2.5.2 Revisions ......................................................................................................................................2-8 3. INSTALLATION OVERVIEW ..........................................................................................................................3-1 3.1 Location and Area .....................................................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Installation History ....................................................................................................................................3-1 3.3 Military Mission ........................................................................................................................................3-4 3.4 Surrounding Communities.........................................................................................................................3-7 3.5 Regional Land Use ....................................................................................................................................3-8 3.6 Local and Regional Ecological Areas......................................................................................................3-10 4. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ...........................................................................................................................4-1 4.1 Climate ......................................................................................................................................................4-1 4.2 Landforms .................................................................................................................................................4-1 4.3 Geology and Soils .....................................................................................................................................4-3 4.3.1 Geology and Geomorphology.......................................................................................................4-3 4.3.2 Soils/Sediments ............................................................................................................................4-4 4.4 Hydrology..................................................................................................................................................4-6 4.4.1 Surface Waters..............................................................................................................................4-6 4.4.2 Floodplains ...................................................................................................................................4-8 4.4.3 Wetlands .......................................................................................................................................4-9 02/02/10
Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan
Eglin Air Force Base, FL
Final
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONT’D
Page
4.4.4 Surface Water Quality ................................................................................................................4-11 4.4.5 Groundwater ...............................................................................................................................4-12 5. ECOSYSTEM AND BIOTIC ENVIRONMENT ...............................................................................................5-1 5.1 Ecosystem..................................................................................................................................................5-1 5.2 Vegetation .................................................................................................................................................5-1 5.2.1 Historic Vegetative Cover ............................................................................................................5-1 5.2.2 Current Vegetative Cover .............................................................................................................5-1 5.2.3 Turf and Landscaped Areas ..........................................................................................................5-5 5.3 Fish and Wildlife .......................................................................................................................................5-5 5.4 Threatened and Endangered Species .........................................................................................................5-8 5.5 Wetlands ..................................................................................................................................................5-12 5.6 Other Natural Resource Information .......................................................................................................5-13 6. MISSION IMPACTS ON NATURAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................6-1 6.1 Land Use ...................................................................................................................................................6-1 6.2 Current Major Impacts ..............................................................................................................................6-1 6.3 Potential Future Impacts ............................................................................................................................6-3 6.4 Natural Resources Needed to Support the Military Mission .....................................................................6-3 6.5 Natural Resources Constraints to Missions and Mission Planning............................................................6-3 7. NATURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ................................................................................7-1 7.1 Natural Resources Program Management .................................................................................................7-1 7.1.1 Biodiversity Conservation ............................................................................................................7-5 7.1.2 High Quality Natural Communities, Significant Botanical Sites, and Outstanding Natural Areas7-13 7.2 Geographic Information Systems ............................................................................................................7-19 7.2.1 Eglin GeoBase Plan ....................................................................................................................7-19 7.2.2 GeoIntegration Office .................................................................................................................7-21 7.2.3 Data Standards ............................................................................................................................7-21 7.3 Outdoor Recreation, Hunting, and Fresh Water Fishing Management....................................................7-22 7.3.1 Degree of Public Access .............................................................................................................7-22 7.3.2 Classification of Recreational Opportunities ..............................................................................7-23 7.3.3 Coordination and Development of Public Use Regulations .......................................................7-24 7.3.4 Providing Public Access .............................................................................................................7-26 7.3.5 Hunting Program ........................................................................................................................7-29 7.3.6 Recreational Fisheries Program ..................................................................................................7-32 7.3.7 General Recreation Program.......................................................................................................7-36 7.3.8 Enforcement ...............................................................................................................................7-38 7.4 Management of Threatened and Endangered Species and Habitats ........................................................7-40 7.4.1 Management of Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species .....................................7-44 7.4.2 Management of State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species and Non-Listed Conservation
Target Species ............................................................................................................................7-54 7.5 Water Resource Protection ......................................................................................................................7-55 7.5.1 Regional Issues ...........................................................................................................................7-55 7.5.2 Eglin Air Force Base Aquatic Program ......................................................................................7-56 7.5.3 Wastewater and Stormwater Management .................................................................................7-58 7.5.4 Cooperative Programs ................................................................................................................7-59 7.6 Wetland Protection ..................................................................................................................................7-59 7.7 Grounds Maintenance..............................................................................................................................7-60 7.8 Forest Management .................................................................................................................................7-61 7.8.1 History (Past 50 Years)...............................................................................................................7-64 7.8.2 Forest Accomplishments (Past 10 Years) ...................................................................................7-64 7.8.3 Future Management Direction ....................................................................................................7-67 02/02/10
Page ii
Final
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONT’D
Page
7.9 7.10 7.11 7.12 7.13 7.14 7.15 7.16 Wildland Fire Management .....................................................................................................................7-74 7.9.1 Fire Management – Direct Mission Support...............................................................................7-75 7.9.2 Fire Management – Prescribed Fire ............................................................................................7-76 7.9.3 Fire Management – Wildfire ......................................................................................................7-77 Agricultural Outleasing ...........................................................................................................................7-80 Integrated Pest Management Program .....................................................................................................7-80 7.11.1 Invasive Non-Native Plants ........................................................................................................7-82 7.11.2 Invasive Non-Native Animal Species .........................................................................................7-85 7.11.3 Nuisance Wildlife .......................................................................................................................7-88 Bird/Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) .........................................................................................7-89 Coastal Zone Management ......................................................................................................................7-91 Cultural Resources Protection .................................................................................................................7-92 Public Outreach .......................................................................................................................................7-93 Volunteer Resources Program .................................................................................................................7-94 8. MANAGEMENT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................8-1 9. IMPLEMENTATION .........................................................................................................................................9-1 9.1 Component Plans .......................................................................................................................................9-1 9.2 Natural Resources Management Staffing ..................................................................................................9-1 9.3 Annual Coordination Requirements ..........................................................................................................9-4 9.4 Monitoring INRMP Implementation .........................................................................................................9-5 10. APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................................10-1 11. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................................11-1 APPENDIX A Natural Resource Related Legislation and Regulations ............................................................... A-1 APPENDIX B Glossary ....................................................................................................................................... B-1 APPENDIX C 2008 Annual Update Coordination .............................................................................................. C-1 APPENDIX D 2009 Annual Update Coordination .............................................................................................. D-1 LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 2-1. Application of Eglin AFB Natural Resources Program Components and Significant Laws and
Regulations..............................................................................................................................................2-3
Table 3-1. Regional Population, 1960 – 2004 ...........................................................................................................3-7
Table 4-1. Soil Types and Characteristics Represented on Eglin AFB .....................................................................4-4
Table 4-2. Impaired Waters on or Adjacent to Eglin AFB ......................................................................................4-12
Table 5-1. Wetland Types by Wetland/Riparian Matrix on or Adjacent to Eglin AFB.............................................5-5
Table 5-2. Summary List of Fish and Wildlife Species Found on Eglin AFB ..........................................................5-7
Table 5-3. Eglin’s Rare and Listed Species ...............................................................................................................5-8
Table 5-4. Wetland Areas of Eglin AFB and Surrounding Installations .................................................................5-13
Table 6-1. Environmental Assessments Addressing Mission Effects on Eglin Natural Resources ...........................6-1
Table 7-1. Current Process Used for Oracle Data Maintenance ..............................................................................7-19
Table 7-2. Available Areas for Hunting and Fishing on the Eglin Reservation ......................................................7-23
Table 7-3. Class I Areas on Eglin AFB ...................................................................................................................7-23
Table 7-4. Management Unit Descriptions ..............................................................................................................7-27
Table 7-5. Types of Recreational Public Use Permits on the Eglin Reservation .....................................................7-28
Table 7-6. FY00-05 Annual Permit Sale Revenue ..................................................................................................7-28
Table 7-7. Summary of Lands Open and Closed to Hunting ...................................................................................7-29
02/02/10
Final
Page iii
LIST OF TABLES CONT’D
Page
Table 7-8. 2006 Hunting Seasons on Eglin AFB and the Northwest Region ..........................................................7-30
Table 7-9. Ponds and Lakes Under Management at Eglin AFB ..............................................................................7-33
Table 7-10. Eglin Broad Cover Types .....................................................................................................................7-62
Table 7-11. Historic Artificial Reforestation ...........................................................................................................7-64
Table 7-12. Forest Accomplishments (FY96-FY05) ...............................................................................................7-68
Table 7-13. Forest Management Work Plan 2007-2011 ..........................................................................................7-70
Table 9-1. Labor, Cost, and Income for Natural Resources ......................................................................................9-3
Table 9-2. Breakdown of Labor for Natural Resources .............................................................................................9-3
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 3-1. Location of Eglin AFB............................................................................................................................3-2
Figure 3-2. Overland and Overwater DoD Restricted Airspace ................................................................................3-3
Figure 3-3. Land Uses Surrounding Eglin AFB ........................................................................................................3-9
Figure 3-4. Ecological Areas on Eglin AFB and in the Surrounding Areas ............................................................3-11
Figure 4-1. Geology and Physiography of Eglin AFB...............................................................................................4-2
Figure 4-2. Soil Types of Eglin AFB .........................................................................................................................4-5
Figure 4-3. Surface Waters of Eglin AFB Main Reservation ....................................................................................4-7
Figure 4-4. Wetlands and Floodplains (100-Year) on Eglin AFB and CSB ............................................................4-10
Figure 5-1. Ecological Management Units within Eglin AFB...................................................................................5-4
Figure 5-2. Species Density Found on Eglin AFB and in Florida .............................................................................5-6
Figure 5-3. Threatened and Endangered Species on Eglin AFB .............................................................................5-10
Figure 5-4. Threatened and Endangered Species on CSB .......................................................................................5-11
Figure 7-1. Civil Engineer Environmental Management Staff (CEV) Organizational Chart ....................................7-2
Figure 7-2. Civil Engineer Natural Resources Section (CEVSN) Organizational Chart ...........................................7-3
Figure 7-3. Terrestrial and Aquatic Monitoring Plots on Eglin AFB ........................................................................7-9
Figure 7-4. Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership (GCPEP) ............................................................................7-11
Figure 7-5. Hotspots of Rarity and Richness in the Lower 48 States ......................................................................7-12
Figure 7-6. Proposed Northwest Florida Greenway Corridor..................................................................................7-14
Figure 7-7. Outstanding Natural Areas on Eglin AFB.............................................................................................7-15
Figure 7-8. Significant Botanical Sites on Eglin AFB .............................................................................................7-16
Figure 7-9. High Quality Natural Communities Located on Eglin AFB .................................................................7-17
Figure 7-10. Outdoor Recreation Hunting and Freshwater Fishing Map ................................................................7-25
Figure 7-11. FY00-05 Permits Issued ......................................................................................................................7-29
Figure 7-12. Mission Delay Avoidance Process ......................................................................................................7-42
Figure 7-13. Red-cockaded Woodpeckers on Eglin AFB........................................................................................7-46
Figure 7-14. Forest Cover Type for Eglin AFB .......................................................................................................7-63
Figure 7-15. Historical Tree Planting Efforts on Eglin AFB ...................................................................................7-65
Figure 7-16. Sandpine Removal 1990 to 2005 on Eglin AFB .................................................................................7-66
Figure 7-17. Forestry Management Priority Work Areas ........................................................................................7-73
Figure 7-18. Fire Management Zones......................................................................................................................7-78
Figure 7-19. Restricted Suppression Areas..............................................................................................................7-79
Figure 9-1. INRMP Annual Review Cycle ................................................................................................................9-4
02/02/10
Final
Page iv
LIST OF ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS
°F
46 TW/CV
46 TW/OG
46 TW/TS
46 TW/XP
796 CES/CEOHG
796 CES/CEOIE
96 ABW/CCP
96 ABW/XP
96 CEG
96 CEG/CERF
96 CEG/CERX
96 CEG/CEV
96 CEG/CEVC
96 CEG/CEVCE
96 CEG/CEVCP
96 CEG/CEVH
96 CEG/CEV-PA
96 CEG/CEVR
96 CEG/CEVS
96 CEG/CEVSN
96 CEG/CEVSNF
96 CEG/CEVSNP
96 CEG/CEVSNW
96 CEG/CEVSP
96 LRS
96 MDG
96 SFS
A3
AAC
AAC/FM
AAC/HO
AAC/JAV
AAC/PK
AAC/SE
AAC/SEOF
ABW
AF
AFB
AFCEE
AFCESA
AFDTC
AFI
AFMC
AFPD
AFSOC
AHPA
AIRFA
AMRAAM
02/02/10
Degrees Fahrenheit
46th Test Wing, Deputy Commander
46th Test Wing Operations Group
46th Test Wing Technical Directorate
46th Test Wing Plans Office
796th Civil Engineer Squadron, Ground Maintenance
796th Civil Engineer Squadron, Pest Management
96th Air Base Wing, Protocol Office
96th Air Base Wing, Plans Office
96th Civil Engineer Group
96th Civil Engineer Group, Contract and Finance Management
96th Civil Engineer Group, Information System Flight
96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Management Division
96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Compliance Branch
96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Engineering Section
96th Civil Engineer Group, Pollution Prevention Section
96th Civil Engineer Group, Cultural Resources Branch
96th Civil Engineer Group, Public Affairs
96th Civil Engineer Group, Restoration Branch
96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Management Division – Stewardship
Branch
96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Management Division – Natural Resources
Section
Section – Forestry Element
96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Management Division- Natural Resources
Section – Fire Element
Section – Wildlife Element
96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Analysis Section
96th Logistics Readiness Squadron
96th Medical Group
96th Security Forces Squadron
Air Armament Academy
Air Armament Center
Air Armament Center, Comptroller Directorate
Air Armament Center, History Office
Air Armament Center, Judge Advocate, Environmental Law Division
Air Armament Center, Contracting Directorate
Air Armament Center, Safety Office
Air Armament Center, Flight Safety
Air Base Wing
Air Force
Air Force Base
Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence
Air Force Civil Engineering Support Agency
Air Force Development Test Center
Air Force Instruction
Air Force Materiel Command
Air Force Policy Directive
Air Force Special Operations Command
Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act
American Indian Religious Freedom Act
Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile
Final
Page v
LIST OF ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS CONT’D
AOB
APD
ARPA
ATV
BASH
BASS
BHWG
BMP
BRD
C4ISR
CAD
CBA
CBD
CBRA
CH
CIO
CLEP
cm
CP
CSB
CWA
CWPA
CZMA
DASH
dbh
DFC
DoD
DoDI
DOH
DSS
EA
ECAMP
ECM
EESD
EGSP
EGTTR
EIAP
EO
EOD
ERP
ESA
FAC
FCMP
FDEP
FDOA
FGDC
FHMP
FLEPPC
FMZ
FNAI
FNST
ft
FTA
02/02/10
Airfield Operation Board
Armament Product Directorate
Archaeological Resources Protection Act
All Terrain Vehicle
Bird/Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard
Before and After Strategic Sampling
Bird Hazard Working Group
Best Management Practices
Biological Resources Division
Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, and
Surveillance/Reconnaissance
Computer Aided Design
Choctawhatchee Basin Alliance
Center for Biological Diversity
Coastal Barrier Resources Act
Critical Habitat
Chief Information Officer
Conservation Law Enforcement Program
Centimeters
Component Plan
Cape San Blas
Clean Water Act
Coastal Wetlands Protection Act
Coastal Zone Management Act
Deer Aircraft Strike Hazard
Diameter at Breast Height
Desired Future Condition
Department of Defense
Department of Defense Instruction
Department of Health
Decision Support System
Environmental Assessment
Environmental Compliance Assessment and Management Program
Ecological Condition Model
Eglin Enterprise Spatial Database
Eglin GeoBase Strategic Plan
Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range
Environmental Impact Analysis Process
Executive Order
Explosive Ordnance Disposal
Environmental Restoration Program
Endangered Species Act
Florida Administrative Code
Florida Coastal Management Program
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Florida Disabled Outdoor Association
Federal Geographic Data Committee
Feral Hog Management Program
Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council
Fire Management Zones
Florida Natural Areas Inventory
Florida National Scenic Trail
Feet
Florida Trail Association
Final
Page vi
FWC
FWCA
FY
GCPEP
GIS
HLZ
HQ
HQ USAF/ILE
IBI
ICRMP
ICS
IECA
INRMP
INS
INSMP
IPM
IVMS
IWR
LIS
LOS
LRSOW
m
MAJCOM
MEA
MIH
MLTAP
MMPA
MOA
MOP
MOU
MS4
MSL
MU
N/A
NAF
NAGPRA
NEPA
NFPA
NHPA
NIIMS
NMFS
NOAA
NPDES
NPS
NRCS
NRDSS
NRS
NSDI
NWCG
NWF
NWFWMD
NWI
OAC
OG
02/02/10
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Fish And Wildlife Coordination Act
Fiscal Year
Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership
Geographical Information Systems
Helicopter Landing Zones
Headquarters
Office of the Civil Engineer
Index of Biotic Integrity
Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan
Incident Command System
International Erosion Control Association
Invasive Non-Indigenous Species
Invasive Non-Native Species Management Program
Integrated Pest Management
Integrated Vegetative Management System
Impaired Waters Rule
Least Impacted Streams
Line-of-Sight
Long Range Standoff Weapons
Meters
Major Command
Management Emphasis Area
Mobility Impaired Hunt
Military Land Test Area Panel
Marine Mammals Protection Act
Memorandum of Agreement
Memorandum of Partnership
Memorandum of Understanding
Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewer System permit
Mean Sea Level
Management Unit
Not Applicable
Non Appropriated Funds
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
National Environmental Policy Act
National Fire Protection Association
National Historic Preservation Act
National Interagency Incident Management System
National Marine Fisheries Service
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Nonpoint Pollution Sediment
National Resource Conservation Service
Natural Resources Decision Support System
Natural Resources Section
National Spatial Data Infrastructure
National Wildfire Coordinating Group
Northwest Florida
North West Florida Water Management District
National Wetlands Inventory
Outdoor Activities Committee
Operations Group
Final
Page vii
ONA
PBG
PAWS
PEA
PNDA
POM
PPE
ppt
RCW
RIFA
ROCC
ROI
RP
SAIA
SBS
SDS
SDSFIE
SDWA
SEAS
SF
SHPO
SOS
SP
SRI
T&E
TA
THI
TMDL
TNC
TSI
TW
U.S.
U.S.C.
USACE
USAF
USDA
USDA WS
USEPA
USFS
USFWS
USFWS-FR
USGS/BRD
UXO
VRP
YH
02/02/10
Outstanding Natural Areas
Potential Breeding Group
Panhandle Animal Welfare Society
Programmatic Environmental Assessment
Procedural Negative Determination Agreement
Program Objective Memorandum
Personal Protection Equipment
Parts per Thousand
Red-cockaded Woodpecker
Red Imported Fire Ant
Range Operation Control Center
Region of Influence
Range Patrol
Sikes Act Improvement Act
Significant Botanical Sites
Spatial Data Standards
Spatial Data Standards for Facilities, Infrastructure, and Environment
Safe Drinking Water Act
Shellfish Environmental Assessment Section
State Forest
State Historic Preservation Office
Special Operations Squadron
State Park
Santa Rosa Island
Threatened and Endangered
Test Area
Temperature-Humidity Index
Total Maximum Daily Loads
The Nature Conservancy
Timber Stand Improvement
Test Wing
United States
United States Code
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
United States Air Force
United States Department of Agriculture
United States Department of Agriculture Wildlife Service
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Forest Service
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Fisheries Resources Program
United States Geological Survey/Biological Resources Division
Unexploded Ordnance
Volunteer Resources Program
Youth Hunt
Final
Page viii
Executive Summary
Natural Resources Program Management
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Eglin Air Force Base (AFB) is the largest forested military reservation in the United States, with
a large diversity of species and habitats. The purpose of the Integrated Natural Resources
Management Plan (INRMP) is to provide interdisciplinary strategic guidance for the
management of these natural resources. The primary objective of the Air Force Natural
Resources Program is to ensure continued access to land and airspace required to accomplish the
Air Force mission while maintaining these resources in a healthy condition. To ensure that
natural resources management and other mission activities are integrated and in agreement with
federal mandates, the INRMP is prepared in cooperation with the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC), and other pertinent groups and agencies.
The main Eglin Reservation is located within Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and Walton counties in
Northwest Florida (NWF), including a portion of Santa Rosa Island (SRI) (Figure below). Eglin
also includes over water ranges (Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range [EGTTR]) and Cape San
Blas (CSB), which is a geographically separated area in Gulf County, Florida (Figures right and
below). The total area covered by the land and water ranges is referred to as the Eglin Military
Complex.
Eglin AFB is one of the nation’s most progressive centers for the developmental testing of
conventional weapons. Eglin’s mission as a major research, development, test, and evaluation
facility includes the full spectrum of testing and evaluation of non-nuclear munitions and
electronic combat, navigation, guidance systems, and C4ISR (Command, Control,
Communications, Computers, Intelligence, and Surveillance/Reconnaissance) systems. Eglin
also supports numerous training activities involving ground troop maneuvers, air operations,
amphibious operations, and special operations.
1.1 NATURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
Although Eglin is responsible for the development of the INRMP, several state and federal
agencies also play a critical role in the process. The INRMP reflects the mutual agreement of the
USFWS, FWC, and NMFS in regard to the conservation, protection, and management of fish and
wildlife resources and of federally listed threatened and endangered (T&E) species. At the
initiation of the INRMP update, these agencies are invited to participate in the scoping, design,
and preparation of the INRMP. Agency comments are integrated into the INRMP, which
ultimately is signed by the Installation or Wing Commander, the Regional Director of the
USFWS, the Director of the FWC, and the Regional Administrator of NMFS. The signature of
these agencies represents approval on those portions of the INRMP that are within the scope of
their authority. Eglin’s Natural Resources Section (NRS) (96th Civil Engineer Group, NRS
(96 CEG/CEVSN)) maintains regular communications with the USFWS, FWC, and NMFS to
address issues concerning INRMP implementation, including coordination of the annual review
of the INRMP.
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-1
Executive Summary
Management Philosophy
The principles of ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation serve as the foundation
of the INRMP. The goal of ecosystem management is to preserve and enhance ecosystem
integrity. Over the long term, this approach will maintain and improve the sustainability and
biological diversity of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems while supporting sustainable economies
and communities.
Air Force Instruction (AFI) 32-7064 requires an integrated approach to natural resources
management and lays a framework for documenting and maintaining Air Force Natural
Resources programs. The INRMP integrates all management programs and activities (forestry,
fire, and wildlife management) in a way that sustains, promotes, and restores the health and
integrity of Eglin AFB ecosystems, as well as supports the Eglin test and training mission.
The INRMP also serves an important role in support of the Base Comprehensive Planning
Process. Comprehensive planning is used to identify and assess development alternatives and
ensure compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and policies.
Information in the INRMP on the location and condition of natural resources is important to
comprehensive planning. The INRMP also details natural resources management activities that
may need to be considered during comprehensive planning efforts.
Biodiversity Conservation
The Department of Defense (DoD), conservation organizations, and the scientific community
have recognized that the protection of biodiversity on military lands can only be accomplished
using a broad, ecosystem approach. A need exists to integrate across ecological, economic, and
cultural areas of concern. A successful ecosystem management approach occurs with the
integration of all three concerns; focusing on only one concern is too narrow a perspective for
management.
At the foundation of ecosystem management is the conservation of biodiversity. Biodiversity is
the variety of life and its processes; it includes communities and ecosystems in which they occur,
and the ecological and evolutionary processes that keep them functioning.
Key operational steps to the implementation of biodiversity conservation include:
●
An inventory of ecologically significant components of the landscape.
●
Conservation planning in order to divide the landscape into manageable conservation
units and to assess threats.
●
Identification of uncertainties related to these units to be addressed through research.
●
Monitoring of the effects of management operations to quantify success and identify
unanticipated problems.
●
Creation of a decision support structure to ensure informed management decisions.
●
Development of partnerships beyond Eglin’s borders to improve conservation
effectiveness.
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-2
Executive Summary
Ecological Monitoring
1.2 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING
Eglin AFB has been an environmental leader within the DoD for over a decade. To ensure
conservation goals are being met, Eglin AFB managers have developed an ecological monitoring
program that increases Eglin AFB’s capacity for resource conservation while providing greater
mission flexibility and support. Furthermore, by continuing to pioneer the use of new
management technologies, such as remote sensing and spatial modeling, this program
significantly reduces costs for future endangered species and biodiversity management and
increases monitoring efficiency and effectiveness.
The mission of the Ecological Monitoring Program is to enhance military mission flexibility and
success by supporting the Eglin AFB NRS adaptive management efforts through statistically
sound, scientifically-based monitoring of community conservation targets.
Ecological
monitoring supports adaptive management by informing managers of community change
resulting from management actions. If impacts are negative (e.g., loss or degradation of
ecosystem function and processes), management practices can be altered. Alternatively,
management actions that prove to have ecologically beneficial outcomes can be perpetuated.
This feedback loop, whereby monitoring can inform and affect management, is referred to as
adaptive management.
1.3 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
Eglin AFB harbors a remarkable assemblage of biodiversity. This is due primarily to the large
size of the installation and its habitat quality and diversity, including 34 distinct natural
community types ranging from barrier islands to old growth longleaf pine forests. Most of the
habitat types found on Eglin are fire-maintained, meaning that they require frequent controlled
fire to maintain their natural composition and structure. This accounts for the exceptional habitat
quality in the wooded portions of the installation adjacent to the active test areas (TAs) (referred
to as the interstitial areas), as well as the high concentrations of T&E species in these areas.
Eleven federally listed T&E species are managed on Eglin AFB, including the red-cockaded
woodpecker (RCW), bald eagle, piping plover, Okaloosa darter, Gulf sturgeon, flatwoods
salamander, Eastern indigo snake, loggerhead sea turtle, green sea turtle, leatherback sea turtle,
and Florida perforate lichen. In addition, there are eleven federally listed species that occur
within the EGTTR.
Legal Requirement to Manage and Conserve T&E Species
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 is the primary legal driver for the protection and
management of federally listed T&E species. The ESA is intended to conserve the ecosystems
upon which T&E species depend, and to provide a program for the conservation of such T&E
species. Section 7 of the ESA outlines the obligations of federal agencies pertaining to the ESA,
including the duties to conserve and refrain from jeopardizing species and their habitat. In
preparation of a biological assessment, Section 7 requires agencies to determine if listed species
are present within or in close proximity to an action area and if the action may potentially affect
the listed species.
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-3
Executive Summary
Threatened and Endangered Species
Section 7 of the ESA requires that each federal agency consult with the USFWS and/or the
NMFS on proposed actions that the federal agency determines may affect federally listed T&E
species. Within the Air Force, this initial determination is made as part of the Environmental
Impact Analysis Review Process (EIAP), which involves many Eglin organizations, including
the NRS, as active team members. The role of the NRS in the EIAP is to assess potential
impacts of proposed mission activities to natural resources with special emphasis on T&E
species, their habitats, and wetlands. This process is referred to as the Mission Delay Avoidance
Process. The role of NRS is to understand the parameters in which the mission must occur and
find solutions to avoid impacts to T&E species. If all impacts can be avoided, a Section 7
consultation is not required.
Management of T&E Species for Mission Support
The NRS conducts a variety of both passive and active management activities to conserve and
manage T&E species. Passive management consists primarily of general habitat management
and protection and includes actions such as prescribed fire and the closure of certain forest roads
to prevent off road vehicle damage to sensitive environments. Active management consists of
actions that are designed and tailored to a particular species such as species population
monitoring, species-specific habitat management, and reintroduction or translocation of species.
A combination of active and passive management is used to recover T&E species. Mission
flexibility is increased when progress is made toward species recovery.
1.4 OUTDOOR RECREATION,
MANAGEMENT
HUNTING,
AND
FRESH
WATER
FISHING
The NRS strives to promote and develop sustainable recreational opportunities, which include
hunting, fishing, trapping and non-consumptive uses in a manner compatible with the military
mission and subject to safety and security requirements. Local communities adjacent to Eglin
AFB have strong ties to recreational use of the lands that now comprise the installation;
continuing to provide for such use fosters good public relations. The State of Florida owns and
has jurisdiction over resident fish and wildlife throughout the state, including Eglin AFB. As
such, the FWC establishes rules, regulations, and season dates governing the taking of resident
fish and wildlife species.
The NRS strives to provide quality and affordable outdoor recreational opportunities to Eglin
AFB affiliated personnel and local communities for their benefit and enjoyment. The NRS sells
approximately 6,000 general recreation permits each year to individuals for recreational purposes
other than hunting and fishing. These other purposes include: canoeing, hiking, picnicking,
nature study and appreciation, swimming, berry picking, and bicycling. Individuals who possess
a current hunting or fishing permit are not required to purchase a recreation permit.
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-4
Executive Summary
Aquatic Program
1.5 AQUATIC PROGRAM
The USFWS Fisheries Resources Program (USFWS-FR) is the primary entity for investigations
of aquatic resources on Eglin. The goal of the USFWS-FR partnership with Eglin is to provide
technical assistance for monitoring and adaptive management of rivers and streams and
protection of imperiled aquatic species. To better understand stream system function, resilience,
and response to stressors, as well as species sensitivity to watershed level activities, biological,
physical, and chemical components of stream systems on Eglin are monitored. USFWS-FR
personnel conduct stream surveys throughout Eglin and utilize information gathered to suggest
management actions that conserve or restore aquatic resources. They also participate in the
monitoring and recovery programs for the federally listed Okaloosa darter and Gulf sturgeon. In
cooperation with the Ecological Monitoring Program, the USFWS-FR is developing predictive
models to better establish management goals and aquatic community response to management
activities, and to establish a set of reference streams that represent the best aquatic biological
integrity on Eglin. The combination of standardized bioassessment protocols, predictive models,
and high quality reference streams will further improve aquatic resource management on Eglin.
1.6 FOREST MANAGEMENT
The Forest Management Program at Eglin AFB strives to restore and improve the biological
diversity and ecosystem health of forested habitats while also supporting the military mission.
Eglin uses sustainable forest management practices that are ecological in principle, economically
sound, and treat the entire forest to improve the capabilities and flexibility of the military
mission. Eglin’s Forest Management is divided into four areas: 1) direct mission
support, 2) timber management, 3) reforestation, and 4) erosion control.
Eglin’s Forest Management provides direct mission support by providing expertise and
information to mission planners on methods and impacts of various types of forest management
activities. Eglin’s Forest Management contracts merchantable timber to be cut from areas that
interfere with military mission line-of-sight (LOS) or other capabilities and can manipulate forest
structure in a specific area for a mission test or training need. Another Forest Management
responsibility is to plant trees to create a security buffer, visual screen, or to reduce noise impacts
as needed.
As a part of timber management, forest managers write and execute silvicultural prescriptions.
They also remove sand pine that has invaded longleaf pine sandhills, convert off-site slash pine
and sand pine plantations to longleaf pine, thin longleaf pine to resemble an uneven-aged
management system, and salvage dead or damaged timber.
Reforestation activities include the promotion of natural regeneration of longleaf pine, planting
of longleaf pine seedlings, and the use of chemical and mechanical methods for site preparation
and habitat/timber stand improvement. Eglin’s Forest Management also harvests and plants
native grass seed for groundcover restoration and erosion site stabilization. Erosion control
projects focus mainly on the rehabilitation of borrow pits and other erosion sites within riparian
areas, especially those impacting the habitat of the endangered Okaloosa darter and threatened
Gulf sturgeon. Annual site maintenance continues on all erosion sites until they are stabilized.
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-5
Executive Summary
Wildland Fire Management
1.7 WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT
The Wildland Fire Management Program at Eglin AFB consists of three interrelated
components: 1) direct mission support, 2) prescribed fire, and 3) wildfire management. Mission
support, ecosystem management, and protection of life and property all depend on a
professionally managed wildland fire program. Eglin has globally significant, fire dependent
ecosystems and faces a significant threat from wildfires. Due to smoke management constraints,
mission requirements, adjacent urban areas, and a legal requirement for an aggressive prescribed
fire program, Eglin manages a highly complex fire management program.
Eglin maintains an annual prescribed fire goal of at least 70,000 acres and an average of
approximately 100 wildfire responses per year. The high number of mission-caused fires puts it
among the most wildfire-prone areas in the country. The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) has cited
the Eglin Prescribed Fire Program as being among the top four in the nation in terms of acres
burned. When this level of on-the-ground fire activity is considered in light of Eglin’s
progressive utilization of partnerships, technology, strategic planning and science, it can be
understood why Eglin’s wildland fire program has become recognized by other wildland fire
managers as one of the most progressive and important in the country.
Eglin’s Fire Management is continually incorporating new information into its decision making
in order to improve the efficiency, safety, and quality of its program. Investment in advanced
Geographic Information System technology has put Eglin in a leadership position for developing
support tools for making scientifically sound and informed decisions. For example, the NRS
Decision Support System (DSS) provides real-time analysis and reporting of data determined to
be vital to the management of Eglin’s natural resources. Another tool developed at Eglin is the
Prescribed Fire Prioritization Model, which uses ecological information in a spatial modeling
framework to determine the most appropriate areas to apply fire to the landscape.
1.8 INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The Eglin AFB Invasive Non-native Species Management Program (INSMP) focuses on
invasive non-native plant and animal species that cause or may cause negative environmental
impacts to Eglin ecosystems. The primary goal of the Eglin INSMP is to protect the integrity of
Eglin’s natural ecosystems by reducing and controlling the spread of Invasive Non-indigenous
Species (INS). Efforts to control invasive non-native plants focus on identifying sites with INS,
mapping locations, and conducting herbicide applications of these plants. Eglin is also a part of
a partnership called the Northwest Florida Partnership to Protect T&E Species on Coastal
Public Lands, which has the goal of protecting and recovering 10 coastal T&E species. The
group utilizes an integrated pest management (IPM) approach to control species not native to
coastal areas, such as feral cats, red fox, and coyotes and some native species, such as grey fox,
raccoons, and beavers that have a negative impact on T&E species and their habitats. A feral cat
policy for SRI and a Feral Hog Management Program (FHMP) for the mainland reservation are
also in place.
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-6
Executive Summary
Integrated Pest Management Program
Nuisance Wildlife
The lead agency responsible for responding to nuisance and injured wildlife reports on Eglin
AFB is the NRS. Nuisance wildlife on Eglin AFB typically includes birds, alligators, snakes,
beavers, bears, foxes, raccoons, opossums, armadillo, and coyotes. Injured wildlife reports
include a variety of birds with broken wings or other injuries, injured foxes, coyotes, raccoons,
opossums, deer, squirrels, bears, stranded marine mammals, sea turtles, and sharks. NRS
personnel have the necessary experience, training, equipment, permits, and rapport with
governing agencies such as the FWC and the USFWS. Responses to reports of nuisance or
injured wildlife occurring on Air Force property off the main base are handled by the NRS.
1.9 BIRD/WILDLIFE AIRCRAFT STRIKE HAZARD (BASH)
Birds and wildlife have the potential to cause millions of dollars in damage to aircraft and the
loss of human life of the crew and passengers. The NRS has participated in the Eglin
Bird/Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) program since 1988. Two U. S. Department of
Agriculture Wildlife Service (USDA WS) employees provide assistance with the implementation
and management of the Eglin AFB BASH program. The NRS provides BASH support and
assistance to USDA WS for bird and wildlife harassment and lethal control activities and other
projects, such as vulture roost monitoring and effigy placement. The NRS also serves on the
Eglin Bird Hazard Working Group (BHWG), which reviews bird strike data, identifies and
initiates actions to reduce hazards, reviews and implements changes in operational procedures,
prepares informational programs for aircrews, and acts as a point of contact for off-base BASH
and wildlife related issues.
1.10 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
In 1972, Congress enacted the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) to preserve, protect,
develop, and, where possible, to restore and enhance the resources of the nation's coastal zone. It
encouraged coastal states to develop and implement comprehensive management programs that
balance the need for coastal resource protection with the need for economic growth and
development within the coastal zone. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) is responsible for directing the implementation of the state-wide coastal management
program.
Federal agency activities that have the potential to impact Florida’s coastal resources are
required to be consistent, to the maximum extent practicable, with the federally-approved Florida
Coastal Management Program (FCMP). Federal agencies, such as Eglin AFB, make
determinations as to whether their actions are consistent with the FCMP. Determinations are
submitted to the FDEP State Clearinghouse for review and concurrence. If a reviewing agency
believes a project is not consistent with Florida’s statutes, the FCMP requires the applicant to
revise its plans based on guidance or requirements issued by reviewing agencies. In this way, the
Florida State Clearinghouse and the Federal Consistency Unit work with applicants to produce
projects that are consistent with Florida’s statutes and that protect critical coastal resources.
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-7
Executive Summary
Public Outreach
1.11 PUBLIC OUTREACH
Public outreach is a critical component of any natural resource management agency. Without the
support of partner organizations and local citizens, many management programs cannot succeed.
Given these facts, the goal of public outreach efforts is to encourage understanding of, support
for, and involvement in the many management and monitoring programs at the NRS. Since
1999, such outreach has been accomplished through 1) research partnerships and internships,
2) presentations and guided tours, and 3) volunteer involvement.
1.12 VOLUNTEER RESOURCES PROGRAM
There are many advantages to working with volunteers beyond the obvious one of accomplishing
a job at minimal expense. Enabling the community to be actively involved with Eglin Natural
Resources management programs increases public support and increases the understanding of the
work and planning behind management decisions. With volunteers, existing programs can reach
beyond the limits imposed by personnel ceilings and budget restrictions, and projects that would
not otherwise be attempted can be accomplished. Volunteers can provide skills or expertise
needed on only a temporary basis, and volunteer work can free up paid staff for other activities.
Volunteer participation in NRS programs expands the NRS sphere of influence while also
extending its budget. Volunteers are utilized in all areas of Natural Resources Management,
except fighting wildfires. One of the most successful NRS volunteer efforts has been the sea
turtle monitoring program, which over the past seven years has successfully marked, protected,
and monitored over 100 sea turtle nests on Eglin’s SRI property.
1.13 COMPONENT PLANS
The Component Plans (CPs), similar to Work Plans, describe the day-to-day operations of each
element within the NRS. Each CP identifies goals and objectives specific to its direction and
how it is related to the INRMP. Specific timeframes for implementation are identified in each
CP as well.
Funding requirements, appropriate funding sources, and priorities for
implementation are described in each of the CPs specific to Eglin AFB. The CPs should be able
to provide all the necessary information for building a budget within the Air Force framework.
Annual reviews and updates are required to keep the CPs current. The CPs are listed below:
1. Wildland Fire Management Plan
a. Fire Aviation Plan
b. Fire Dispatch Plan
c. Fire Training Plan
d. Field Observer Component Plan
e. Fire Equipment Plan
f. Fire Communications Plan
2. Forest Management Component Plan
3. Outdoor Recreation Component Plan
4. Threatened and Endangered Species Component Plan
5. Ecological Monitoring Component Plan
6. Native Grass Component Plan Phase I
7. Erosion Control Component Plan
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-8
Executive Summary
Annual Coordination Requirements
1.14 ANNUAL COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS
Natural resource management is a dynamic process and, as such, management plans often
require frequent reviews and updates. Following completion of the INRMP, the NRS will
conduct annual reviews and updates to account for changes in the military mission, condition of
natural resources, the ecosystem, and regulatory requirements. Annual meetings with the
USFWS and FWC will produce feedback, which will then be incorporated into the annual update
process. The NRS will present the findings from this annual review to update senior Eglin AFB
leaders of the status and effectiveness of the plan.
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-9
Executive Summary
This page is intentionally blank.
02/02/10
Final
Page 1-10
General Information
Purpose
2. GENERAL INFORMATION
2.1 PURPOSE
Eglin AFB is the largest forested military reservation in the United States, with a large diversity
of species and habitats. The purpose of this INRMP is to provide interdisciplinary strategic
guidance for the management of these natural resources for the period 2007-2011. The main
reservation consists of 464,446 acres within Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and Walton counties in
NWF. Eglin also manages a small parcel (962 acres) in Gulf County, Florida, called CSB.
Additionally, Eglin is responsible for operations covering 124,642 square miles in the eastern
Gulf of Mexico. The INRMP focuses on wildlife, forestry, and fire management on the
mainland reservation, SRI, and CSB.
The primary objective of the Air Force Natural Resources Program is to ensure continued access
to land and airspace required to accomplish the Air Force mission by maintaining these resources
in a healthy condition. To ensure that natural resources management and other mission activities
are integrated and in agreement with federal mandates, the INRMP is prepared in cooperation
with the USFWS, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC), and other pertinent groups and agencies. Eglin maintains
communication with these groups and agencies throughout the year as necessary to collaborate
on management decisions.
2.2 AUTHORITY
The INRMP was developed to meet the requirements of the Sikes Act (16 United States Code
[U.S.C.] 670a et seq.) as amended by the Sikes Act Improvement Act (SAIA); Department of
Defense Instruction (DoDI) 4715.3, Environmental Conservation Program; Air Force Policy
Directive (AFPD) 32-70, Environmental Quality; and AFI 32-7064, Integrated Natural
Resources Management.
The Sikes Act states that, “Consistent with the use of military installations to ensure the
preparedness of the Armed Forces, the Secretaries of the military departments shall carry out the
program required by this subsection to provide for:

The conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources on military installations;

The sustainable multipurpose use of the resources, which shall include hunting, fishing,
trapping, and non-consumptive uses and;

Subject to safety requirements and military security, public access to military installations
to facilitate the use.
Each INRMP shall, to the extent appropriate and applicable, provide for:

Fish and wildlife management, land management, forest management, and fish- and
wildlife-oriented recreation;

Fish and wildlife habitat enhancement or modifications;
02/02/10
Final
Page 2-1
General Information
Authority

Wetland protection, enhancement, and restoration, where necessary for support of fish,
wildlife, or plants;

Integration of, and consistency among, the various activities conducted under the plan;

Establishment of specific natural resource management goals and objectives and time
frames for proposed action;

Sustainable use by the public of natural resources to the extent that the use is not
inconsistent with the needs of fish and wildlife resources;

Public access to the military installation that is necessary or appropriate subject to the
requirements necessary to ensure safety and military security;

Enforcement of applicable natural resource laws (including regulations);

No net loss in the capability of military installation lands to support the military mission
of the installation; and

Such other activities as the secretary of the military department determines appropriate.”
DoDI 4715.3, Environmental Conservation Program, is the overarching instruction for DoD
natural and cultural resource management, and is the primary agent for implementing policy
(including the Sikes Act), assigning responsibilities, and prescribing procedures for the
integrated management of natural and cultural resources on DoD property. This Instruction also
establishes the DoD Conservation Committee that reports to the Environmental Safety and
Occupational Health Policy Board, and designates “DoD Executive Agents” to lead DoD
implementation of primary conservation issues.
AFPD 32-70, Environmental Quality, establishes policies to: responsibly manage natural and
cultural resources on Air Force (AF) properties, clean up past environmental damage, meet
current environmental standards, plan future activities to minimize impacts, and eliminate
pollution from AF activities whenever possible. Under this Directive, an Air Force
Environmental Quality Program was developed. This program includes the following activities:
cleanup, compliance, conservation, and pollution prevention. Additionally, this Directive states
that the AF will pursue adequate funding to meet environmental legal obligations.
AFI 32-7064, Integrated Natural Resources Management, implements AFPD 32-70 and DoDI
4715.3. This instruction provides details on how to manage natural resources on AF installations
to comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. The INRMP for Eglin
AFB facilitates compliance with federal, state, and local environmental requirements. These
requirements deal with analysis of potential environmental impacts, water and air quality,
wetlands, endangered species, marine mammals, migratory birds, and other wildlife, forest and
fire management, and public access and recreation. The relevant statutes and executive orders
are listed in Appendix A. Table 2-1 shows the application of various Natural Resources program
components to significant laws and regulations.
02/02/10
Final
Page 2-2
Aquatics and
H2O Mgmt.
Fish and
Wildlife
Planning
Mgmt. Training
and Research &
Development
Budgeting
X
X
X
Public Relations
Outdoor Rec.
Mgmt.
X
Land Mgmt.
Forest Mgmt.
Fish & Wildlife
Fire Mgmt.
T&E Species
Coastal and
Marine
Resources
Floodplains
Final
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Authority
Page 2-3
Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy
The Gonzolas Amendment, 10 U.S.C Sec. 2465
AFI 32-7064 & DoDI 6055 direct wildland fire personnel to meet National
Wildfire Coordinating Group Standards for training and physical fitness
Multiple-Use Sustained Yield Act
460 (I) Outdoor Recreation on Federal Lands 16 U.S.C. Section 460 (1)
E.O. 11989, Off-Road Vehicle Use policy on federal land
The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), 16 U.S.C. Section 1361, et seq.
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) of 1972 16 U.S.C. Section 1451 et
seq.
Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA), 16 U.S.C. Section 3501 et seq.
The Estuary Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. Section 1221, et seq.
The National Marines Sanctuaries Act, 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.
Executive Order 13089, Coral Reef Protection
“The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation & Management Act”
The Clean Air Act
The Sikes Act, 16 U.S.C. 670 (a)-(f), et seq.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
DoDI 4715.3, Environmental Conservation Program
AFI 32-7064, Integrated Natural Resources Management
The Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. Section 1531, et seq.
E.O. 11990, Protection of Wetlands
E.O. 11988, Floodplains Management
The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA), 16 U.S.C. Section 661
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. Section 703, et seq.
The Federal Noxious Weed Act, 7 U.S.C. Section 2801, et seq.
The Federal Land Policy and Management Act, 43 U.S.C. Section 1701, et seq.
Non-Indigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 /
National Invasive Species Act of 1996, 16 U.S.C.
The Clean Water Act (CWA)
Multiple-Use Sustained Yield Act
National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) Policies
Executive Order 13148 Green the Government through Leadership and
Environmental Management
Biodiversity
Mgmt.
Laws/Regulations
General Information
Overall Natural Resources Program:
Wetlands
02/02/10
Table 2-1. Application of Eglin AFB Natural Resources Program Components and Significant Laws and Regulations
General Information
Responsibility
2.3 RESPONSIBILITY
To ensure Eglin AFB’s military testing and training missions and environmental conservation
missions are compatible and mutually supportive, multiple installation organizations play a role
in managing, protecting, and supporting Eglin’s Natural Resources. The following organizations
and committees are involved in the stewardship of Eglin’s Natural Resources:
2.3.1
96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Management Division (96 CEG/CEV)
The Environmental Division Chief provides the lead and overall coordination of environmental
compliance and stewardship through a staff that provides procedural and technical advice.
Natural resources constraint data and other forms of information are provided to wing
commanders and their staffs to support informed decision making. Examples include military
and non-military National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents, facility planning,
construction plans, maintenance, and daily facilities activities.
Environmental Management Division Mission and Vision Statement
Mission: “Protect/enhance mission capabilities through superior environmental stewardship.”
Vision: “Proactively lay foundation to embrace ever changing mission and resource
requirements.”
96th Civil Engineer Group, Stewardship Branch (96 CEG/CEVS Mission Statement)
Sustaining management and protection of Eglin’s natural resources, including proactive
environmental planning and analysis of proposed actions on Eglin AFB to ensure the military
mission can be accomplished without significant adverse impact to them.
96th Civil Engineer Group, Natural Resources Section (96 CEG/CEVSN) Mission Statement
The mission of Eglin’s NRS is to support the AF and DoD through responsible stewardship of
the installation’s natural resources. This is accomplished by integrating Natural Resources
management and using an ecosystem management approach, which maintains ecosystem
viability and conserves biodiversity while providing compatible multiple uses.
2.3.2
Eglin Organizations
Environmental Management — 96 CEG/CEV
●
Compliance Branch — 96 CEG/CEVC
●
Restoration Branch — 96 CEG/CEVR
●
Stewardship Branch — 96 CEG/CEVS
●
Cultural Resources Branch — 96 CEG/CEVH
02/02/10
Final
Page 2-4
General Information
Responsibility
An organization chart for 96 CEG/CEV and 96 CEG/CEVSN is provided in Figures 7-1 and 7-2.
The following Eglin AFB organizations assist the NRS with the planning, enforcement, and
implementation of the INRMP.
Environmental Engineering Section — 96 CEG/CEVCE
96 CEG/CEVCE provides policy, guidance, and permits for media specific environmental
programs (air, dredge/fill, potable/non potable water, stormwater, wastewater, storage tanks, and
spill response). Also assists in wetland delineation and permitting fill in wetlands.
Pollution Prevention Section — 96 CEG/CEVCP
96 CEG/CEVCP encourages base organizations to use pollution prevention (material
substitution, process change, reuse and recycling) as a primary strategy for meeting
environmental compliance requirements.
Environmental Analysis Section — 96 CEG/CEVSP
Accomplishes NEPA analysis for all NRS activities and plans. Proactively manages and
conducts the EIAP at Eglin AFB and works to integrate EIAP into decision making at all levels.
Cultural Resources Branch — 96 CEG/CEVH
Coordinates all Natural Resources activities to avoid negative impacts to significant cultural and
historical resources and consults with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO).
Restoration Branch — 96 CEG/CEVR
Supports Natural Resources activities to avoid land use control areas.
Public Affairs — 96 CEG/CEV-PA
Supports the NRS through media relations, community relations, and internal information and
public education concerning Eglin’s natural resources, how they are managed, utilized and
protected.
Contract and Finance Management — 96 CEG/CERF
Provides administrative assistance in financial management and contract management in support
of the NRS.
Computer Support — 96 CEG/CERX
Provides computer and technical support to the NRS.
Protocol Office — 96 ABW/CCP
Provides tours for distinguished visitors.
History Office — AAC/HO
Maintains records of history of Natural Resources management on Eglin AFB.
02/02/10
Final
Page 2-5
General Information
Responsibility
Safety Office — AAC/SE
Oversight of the Grounds, Weapons and Range Safety as well as the BASH.
Judge Advocate, Environmental Law Division — AAC/JAV
Provides legal advice and representation.
Contracting Directorate — AAC/PK
Provides contract/Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) support.
Comptroller Directorate — AAC/FM
Provides financial management.
46th Test Wing Plans Office — 46 TW/XP
Provides strategic plans and programmatic environmental analysis.
46th Test Wing Operations Group — 46 TW/OG
Provides test and training requirements, test planning and execution, special operations,
helicopter support, integrating natural resources considerations into mission planning, and
weather support.
46th Test Wing Technical Directorate — 46 TW/TS
Provides TA configuration, reservation infrastructure maintenance and upgrades, TA
maintenance, road management, unexploded ordnance (UXO) management.
96th Plans Office — 96 ABW/XP
Provides emergency plans and exercises, host tenant agreements.
96th Medical Group — 96 MDG
Provides firefighter and occupational physicals.
96th Civil Engineer Group — 96 CEG
Provides environmental management to Eglin as identified above.
96th Logistics Readiness Squadron — 96 LRS
Provides supply and equipment orders.
96th Security Forces Squadron — 96 SFS
Provides laws and regulations enforcement.
2.4 MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY
2.4.1
Ecosystem Management
The principles of ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation serve as the foundation
of the INRMP. AFI 32-7064 requires an integrated approach to Natural Resources management,
and lays a framework for documenting and maintaining Air Force Natural Resources programs.
02/02/10
Final
Page 2-6
General Information
The INRMP integrates all management programs and activities (forestry, fire, and wildlife
management) in a way that sustains, promotes, and restores the health and integrity of the Eglin
AFB ecosystems, as well as supports the Eglin test and training mission. Integrated ecosystem
management is sound stewardship, and will, over the long-term, ensure the maximum return of
ecosystem goods and services at minimum cost to the public.
The goal of ecosystem management is to preserve and enhance ecosystem integrity. Over the
long term, this approach will maintain and improve the sustainability and biological diversity of
terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems while supporting sustainable economies and communities.
In applying the principles and guidelines for DoD ecosystem management, Eglin will:
●
Maintain or restore the sustainability and biological diversity of native ecosystems where
practical and consistent with the military mission.
●
Maintain or restore ecological processes such as fire and other disturbance regimes where
practical and consistent with the military mission.
●
Maintain or restore hydrological processes in streams, floodplains, and wetlands when
feasible.
●
Support sustainable human activities, such as outdoor recreation and harvesting of forest
products, provided these uses do not cause long-term ecosystem damage or negatively
affect the AF mission.
●
Collaborate with other DoD components, pertinent agencies, and adjacent landowners to
implement ecosystem management on the installation.
2.4.2
Interdisciplinary INRMP Development
In the previous iteration of the INRMP, a series of interdisciplinary workshops involving military
and agency representatives and other pertinent stakeholders were conducted to identify major
natural resources issues and potential strategies for addressing these issues. There were also two
scientific workshops to determine the suite of conservation targets and assess their desired future
condition on Eglin. Conservation targets can include both species and communities. The
Natural Resources Strategic Planning Team used the content of these workshops to develop the
INRMP 2002–2006 goals and objectives. After mission coordination and further discussions
with cooperating agencies and partners, final goals and objectives were approved.
INRMP goals and objectives reflect the direction of Eglin’s Natural Resources management
program during the planning period. They are developed in response to issues and management
concerns obtained from cooperating agencies, by the military mission(s), and other interested
stakeholders. For the 2007–2011 INRMP update, the planning team analyzed the goals and
objectives during a series of meetings from May through August 2005.
Natural Resources staff held numerous planning meetings to develop the INRMP 2007–2011
goals and objectives and specific sections of the INRMP. To better define the stated goals and
objectives, Natural Resources management held interactive meetings with the Eglin AFB Test
Wing (TW) every two weeks from April through September 2005. During these meetings, input
02/02/10
Final
Page 2-7
General Information
was gathered, objectives were made, and goals were established with TW and OG participation.
The principal purpose of the meetings was to develop Natural Resources goals and objectives
that provide effective support to the military mission while maintaining the integrity of the
natural resources. These goals and objectives are presented in Chapter 8 in this INRMP.
2.4.3
INRMP Support Functions
The INRMP serves an important role in support of the Base Comprehensive Planning Process.
Comprehensive planning is used to identify and assess development alternatives and ensure
compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and policies. Information
in the INRMP that is important to comprehensive planning includes data on the location and
condition of natural resources. The INRMP also details Natural Resources management
activities that may need to be considered during comprehensive planning efforts.
2.5 CONDITIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND REVISION
2.5.1
Implementation
The 96 CEG/CEV Environmental Division is responsible for the planning and implementation of
the INRMP. The NRS is responsible for coordination of the INRMP. The Chief of Natural
Resources is responsible for tracking its implementation (see Chapter 9). This is accomplished
through quarterly meetings as well as special INRMP Coordination meetings. Other evaluation
mechanisms exist through the Environmental Compliance Assessment and Management
Program (ECAMP) and the Air Armament Center (AAC) Performance Indicator Management
System. Chapter 9 covers INRMP implementation in more detail.
2.5.2
Revisions
Natural resources management is a dynamic process and, as such, management plans often
require frequent reviews and updates. Following completion of the INRMP, the NRS will
conduct periodic reviews and updates to account for changes in the military mission, condition of
natural resources, and the ecosystem and regulatory requirements. In order to comply with
regulations and to ensure the continued usefulness of this plan, review will be conducted as
follows:
Quarterly Review - Natural resources management will review objectives with the appropriate
managers to document progress, identify additional actions required or desired, and revise
schedules and priorities. This quarterly review will help keep the INRMP current and relevant
with the incorporation of new projects, additional data, new understanding of natural processes
and species, and lessons learned from completed and ongoing projects and practices.
Annual Review - Annually, Natural resources management will review the INRMP to assess the
effectiveness of the program, process, and the goals and objectives. The NRS will present the
findings from this annual review to update senior base leaders and partners of the status and
effectiveness of the plan. The NRS will document the outcome of this review in a memorandum
summarizing the rationale for the conclusions the parties have reached, updates on
02/02/10
Final
Page 2-8
General Information
Conditions for Implementation and Revision
accomplishments, and future changes to the goals and objectives. This written documentation
will be jointly executed and placed in an ongoing appendix for Air Force records. Section
101(b)(2) of the Sikes Act [16 U.S.C. 670a(b)(2)] states that each INRMP “must be reviewed as
to operation and effect by the parties thereto on a regular basis, but not less often than every
5 years.” Although the Sikes Act specifies only that a formal review must be completed no less
often than every 5 years, DoD policy requires installations to review INRMPs annually in
cooperation with the other parties to the INRMP. Annual reviews facilitate “adaptive
management” by providing an opportunity for the parties to review the goals and objectives of
the plan, as well as establish a realistic schedule for undertaking proposed actions. See Chapter 9
for a detailed review cycle and incorporation of partnership reviews and adaptive management
processes. A significant change in Eglin’s mission or its Natural Resources management issues
would necessitate an INRMP revision, including coordinating with the USFWS, NMFS, and
FWC. The need for revision is evaluated during the INRMP annual review and coordination
process.
02/02/10
Final
Page 2-9
General Information
Conditions for Implementation and Revision
02/02/10
Final
Page 2-10
Installation Overview
Location and Area
3. INSTALLATION OVERVIEW
3.1 LOCATION AND AREA
Eglin AFB is the largest forested military reservation in the United States. It is located within
Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and Walton counties in NWF (Figure 3-1). The total area covered by the
land and water ranges is referred to as the Eglin Military Complex (Figure 3-2). CSB is a
geographically separated area in Gulf County, Florida approximately 100 miles southeast of
Eglin AFB. This small (962 acres) but very important Eglin asset provides radar tracking
network, instrumentation support, electronic combat and systems support, and surface-to-air
missile tracking within the EGTTR as well as ground training for Army Rangers and Special
Operations Forces. Eglin AFB also consists of smaller remote parcels at SRI, Clausen Missile
Tracking Annex, Bowman’s Bayou Radio Relay Annex, Redbay Radar Site, and Panama City
Radio Relay Annex.
Eglin AFB is one of the nation’s most progressive centers for the developmental testing of
conventional weapons. Eglin’s mission as a major research, development, test, and evaluation
facility includes the full spectrum of testing and evaluation of nonnuclear munitions and
electronic combat, navigation, guidance systems, and C4ISR systems. Eglin also supports
numerous training activities involving ground troop maneuvers, air operations, and special
operations.
3.2 INSTALLATION HISTORY
Eglin AFB was established on 14 June 1935 as Valparaiso Bombing and Gunnery Base. Two
years later the range was renamed Eglin Field. In June of 1940, the USFS ceded to the War
Department the Choctawhatchee National Forest, consisting of some 800 square miles of forest
and shoreline. During World War II, Eglin was known as the Air Corps Proving Grounds and
became the site for gunnery training for the Army Air Corps fighter pilots, as well as a major
testing center for aircraft, equipment, and tactics. In addition to the testing of all new aircraft and
their serial modifications, Eglin ranges were especially well suited for special tasks. During the
war years, the Proving Grounds completed nearly 3,000 tests, ranging from night reconnaissance
techniques to destruction of underwater obstacles. These tests included Crossbow, which
involved tactics and techniques for the destruction of Germany’s buzz bomb launch sites; JB-2
testing (bombs launched over the Gulf of Mexico); and effectiveness of incendiaries in prelude to
the fire raids against Japan.
After World War II, as a pioneer in missile development, Eglin activated the First Experimental
Guided Missile Group in 1946. The Group developed the techniques for missile launching and
handling, established training programs, and led in the development of drones, or pilotless
aircraft. Early testing included ditching tests involving surplus/obsolescent drone B-17 aircraft.
In 1949, the Air Force established the Air Force Armament Center at Eglin, which for the first
time brought development and testing together. In 1957, the Air Force combined the Air
Proving Ground Command and the Air Force Armament Center to form the Air Proving Grounds
Center, which served as a major missile test center.
02/02/10
Final
Page 3-1
02/02/10
Final
Installation History
Page 3-2
Figure 3-1. Location of Eglin AFB
Figure 3-2. Overland and Overwater DoD Restricted Airspace
02/02/10
Final
Page 3-3
As the war in Southeast Asia expanded, the requirements to provide nonnuclear armament and
conventional weapons changed Eglin’s test mission during the last half of the 1960s. The
emphasis was on limited warfare capabilities, counterinsurgency, and combat effectiveness.
Whereas the Eglin Test Range had earlier been used for aircraft testing, missile testing, and
space research and development support, it now was used to support research and development
testing, effectiveness testing of Air Force weapons, chemical-biological munitions, electronic
combat, and support of Special Forces training and tactics. The average number of major tests
conducted per month at Eglin went from 119 to 339. These efforts led to the development of
“Smart Bombs,” the next generation air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles, and improved bombs
with a Hardened Target kill capability.
On 1 August 1968, the Air Proving Grounds Center was re-designated the Armament
Development and Test Center to centralize responsibility for research, development, test and
evaluation, and initial acquisition of non-nuclear munitions for the Air Force. In 1979, the
Center was given division status. The Armament Division, re-designated the Munitions Systems
Division in 1989, placed into production the precision guided munitions - laser, television, and
infrared guided bombs; two anti-armor weapon systems; and an improved hard target weapon.
These precision guided munitions employed lasers, television, and infrared guided bombs, which
were heavily used in Operation Desert Storm during the Persian Gulf War. The Division was
also responsible for developing the Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM),
which was developed jointly by the U.S. Navy and the Air Force.
On 11 July 1990, Eglin was re-designated the Air Force Development Test Center (AFDTC).
The Center provided test and evaluation support for development of conventional non-nuclear
munitions, electronic combat systems, and navigation/guidance systems. In addition to owning
and managing the major land and water testing ranges at Eglin, the Center managed major test
facilities at Holloman AFB, New Mexico; Fort Worth, Texas; and Buffalo, New York. The
AFDTC hosted some 50 associate units representing the Air Force as well as the Army with its
Army Ranger Camp, the Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) School, and a unit of the
Federal Prison System.
Today, the AFDTC mission remains the same under a new designation and organization named
the AAC. The new designation, as of October 1998, makes the AAC at Eglin AFB responsible
for all Air Force armaments and is the Air Force Materiel Command’s (AFMC) primary center
for armaments. The AAC will continue the role of managing the development, testing,
procurement and support of air-delivered weapons. The AAC at Eglin AFB has acquired the
377th Air Base Wing (ABW) at Kirtland AFB, New Mexico and elements of the Aeronautical
Systems Center (currently at Eglin AFB), which will now report to Eglin AFB.
3.3 MILITARY MISSION
The AAC is responsible for development, acquisition, testing, deployment, and sustainment of
all air-delivered weapons.
The AAC applies advanced technology, engineering, and
programming efficiencies across the entire product life cycle to provide superior combat
capability. The Center also plans, directs, and conducts test and evaluation of U.S. and allied air
armament, navigation/guidance systems, and Command and Control systems. It operates two
02/02/10
Final
Page 3-4
Military Mission
Air Force installations providing host support to Eglin and Kirtland AFBs, and supports the
largest single base mobility commitment in the Air Force. AAC accomplishes its mission
through four components: The Armament Product Directorate (APD) (Eglin), 46th TW (Eglin),
96th ABW (Eglin), and 377th ABW (Kirtland).
AAC Mission
The AAC is the Air Force single product center responsible for air armament. Headquartered at
Eglin AFB, Florida, the Center accomplishes its mission through three wings and the APD. The
APD is the focal point for the acquisition, sustainment, and total life cycle management of
essentially all conventional and non-conventional Air Force air-delivered weapons. The APD
manages weapons development and sustainment activities at three locations besides Eglin,
including Robins AFB, Georgia; Hill AFB, Utah; and Kirtland AFB, New Mexico. The APD
also co manages several weapons systems with the U.S. Navy at Naval Ordnance Station Indian
Head, Maryland and Patuxent River Naval Air Station Maryland.
The 46th TW, located at Eglin, manages the Center’s test and evaluation mission and oversees a
variety of specialized test facilities at Eglin and Holloman AFB, New Mexico. The Holloman
test facilities are located adjacent to, or on the White Sands Missile Range, an Army facility used
for many AAC tests. The 96th ABW is the Eglin host base support wing, providing base services
and deployment support to the AAC and 45 associate units residing at Eglin. The 377th ABW at
Kirtland AFB provides base support to over 200 associate units, performs a munitions
maintenance mission, and operates munitions storage at Nellis AFB, Nevada.
The AAC gains synergism from the associate units located at both Eglin and Kirtland. The Air
Force Research Laboratory’s Munitions Directorate is located at Eglin, and the Directed Energy
and Space Directorates are located at Kirtland. These directorates research and develop
state-of-the-art technologies to support future air armament concepts. The unique combination
of basic technology development, acquisition, testing, sustainment, and warfighting units located
at AAC bases provides the center of gravity for air armament.
Mission Sustainment: Dynamic Military Mission
The Eglin Military Complex occupies much of the NWF panhandle east of Pensacola. With
724 square miles of land area and airspace overlying 124,642 square miles of water ranges, it is
one of the largest AFBs in the world. Its unique combination of natural resources, capital space
assets, and talented people provide an outstanding environment for fulfillment of the Eglin
Reservation’s mission.
Eglin has armed the U.S. Military for six decades. Today, the Eglin Reservation is home to a
wide variety of U.S. Air Force (USAF) units. In addition, the Eglin Reservation is also host to
Army, Navy, Special Operations, and a U.S. Marine Corps Reserve unit. The Eglin Reservation
has an unsurpassed arrangement of more than 50 specific TAs and sites embedded in a single
contiguous land area adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico. This unique setting and overwater airspace
combine to provide a sea-to-land transition area—a vital resource for modern weapons system
research, development, testing, training, and evaluation. These TAs are located beneath special
02/02/10
Final
Page 3-5
Military Mission
use airspace that permits relatively unconstrained operations and makes the Eglin Reservation an
ideal setting in which to operate.
As the Air Force’s premier munitions testing center, and a unique DoD training location, the
Eglin Reservation is indispensable to America’s defense effort. It is an invaluable national asset
in terms of its testing, evaluation, and training mission support to the DoD, and its bountiful
cultural and natural resources. The Eglin Reservation is unique because of the depth and breadth
of testing and training that occurs there. All phases of munitions life cycle support occur on the
Eglin Reservation from research through sustainment testing. Additionally, various operational
units train on the Reservation. This interplay of units, all focused on ensuring that our nation
employs superior enhanced munitions, is unsurpassed and generates a synergism that cannot be
quantified. Past performance proves its unquestionable value. No other U.S. military
installation offers such an expanse of land and water located in an ideal climate with so much
diversity of terrain and vegetative cover. Mission activities at the Eglin Reservation today fall
into four broad categories:
●
Weapons system research, development, test, and evaluation
●
Training
●
Space operations
●
Base and Reservation support
Among USAF bases, only the Eglin Reservation offers terrain features such as shoreline, rolling
hills, dense forest, cleared flat expanses, and water all in one location to support a variety of
mission requirements.
Hurlburt Field and Duke Missions
Hurlburt Field is the Headquarters (HQ) for the Air Force Special Operations Command
(AFSOC) and is the Air Force component of U.S. Special Operations Command, a unified
command.
AFSOC’s mission is “America’s specialized air power ... a step ahead in a changing world,
delivering special operations combat power anytime, anywhere.”
The command is committed to continual improvement to provide Air Force Special Operations
Forces for worldwide deployment and assignment to regional unified commands to accomplish
the following special operations activities: unconventional warfare, counter proliferation, direct
action, psychological operations, special reconnaissance, civil affairs, combating terrorism,
foreign internal defense, and information operations.
AFSOC has approximately 12,500 active duty, Reserve, Air National Guard and civilian
professionals, with over 20 percent stationed overseas. The command has more than 160 fixed
and rotary wing aircraft assigned. Hurlburt’s host unit, the16th Special Operations Wing, is the
oldest, largest and most seasoned unit in AFSOC. The wing consists of approximately
7,000 highly trained military professionals. The USAF Special Operations School, 18th Test
Flight Squadron and the 720th Special Tactics Group are also headquartered at Hurlburt Field.
02/02/10
Final
Page 3-6
Military Mission
Duke Field is an air reserve component of AFSOC. The 919th Special Operations Wing’s
5th Special Operations Squadron (SOS) flies the MC-130P and 711th SOS flies the MC-130E.
3.4 SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES
Communities surrounding Eglin AFB include Holley/Navarre on the west side of the base;
Blackwater River (SF) and Crestview, north of the base; DeFuniak Springs and Freeport on the
east side of the base; and Destin, Niceville, Fort Walton Beach, Navarre, and portions of SRI to
the south.
Eglin AFB is a very active area with some 90,000 people visiting, working, and using the
installation on a regular basis. This includes 16,000 active duty and reserve military personnel,
15,300 civilian employees, 29,000 dependents, and 28,000 retirees.
Since the 1930s, the areas surrounding Eglin AFB have continued to experience slow, steady
growth, corresponding to the inception and continuance of military activities in the region. By
the 1950s the region was also becoming a center for tourism. Between 1960 and 2004, the
civilian population in the surrounding counties of Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and Walton increased
from over 106,000 to almost 370,000 people (Table 3-1). Walton County and Santa Rosa
County are two of the fastest growing counties in the state. This growth may be largely
attributable to employment generated from tourism, the military, and from an influx of retirees
into the local community.
In Santa Rosa County, growth pressure is extending north, west (toward Gulf Breeze) and east
(toward Fort Walton Beach) from the Holley/Navarre area. In Okaloosa County, the growth
pressure in the Fort Walton Beach and Niceville/Valparaiso areas is generally to the north, with
some pressure extending to the west from Fort Walton Beach. From Crestview, growth pressure
is extending southward, towards Eglin AFB.
The socioeconomic stability of the Eglin Military Complex reflects the interdependencies of the
three counties and Eglin. Nearly 25 percent of Okaloosa County’s employment depends on Eglin
AFB (20 percent), and Hurlburt Field (5 percent), and approximately 10 percent of the Region of
Influence’s (ROIs) employment. The communities of Cinco Bayou, Crestview, Destin, Fort
Walton Beach, Mary Esther, Niceville, Shalimar, and Valparaiso have been identified as the
communities most affected by base activities. In addition, the growth of Hurlburt Field and its
activities have significantly affected the unincorporated areas of Navarre, Navarre Beach, and
Holley.
Table 3-1. Regional Population, 1960 – 2004
Jurisdiction
Okaloosa County
Cinco Bayou
Crestview
Fort Walton Beach
Mary Esther
Niceville
Shalimar
02/02/10
1960
61,175
N/A
7,467
12,147
N/A
4,517
N/A
1970
88,187
362
7,952
19,994
3,192
4,024
578
YEAR
1980
1990
109,920
143,776
202
322
7,617
9,886
20,829
21,471
3,530
4,139
8,543
10,507
390
341
Final
2000
170,498
377
14,766
19,973
4,055
11,684
718
2004*
181,460
386
16,826
19,992
4,115
12,515
738
Page 3-7
Surrounding Communities
Table 3-1. Regional Population, 1960 – 2004 Cont’d
Jurisdiction
Valparaiso
Santa Rosa County
Walton County
ROI TOTAL
1960
5,975
29,547
15,576
106298
1970
6,504
37,741
16,087
142015
YEAR
1980
1990
6,142
4,672
55,988
81,608
21,300
27,760
187208
253144
2000
6,408
117,743
40,601
2004*
6,336
138,276
48,477
328842
368213
* 2004 Population Estimates
N/A = not available
ROI = region of influence
3.5 REGIONAL LAND USE
The land uses surrounding Eglin AFB are interrelated with the mission activities that occur on
the base. The ROI for land includes Eglin AFB, the counties of Okaloosa, Walton, Santa Rosa,
and Bay, and the local jurisdictions within these counties. The area south of Eglin AFB is
primarily commercial and urban residential land. West, north, and east of Eglin AFB, land uses
are more rural and less constrained (Figure 3-3). Within these areas the largest proportion of the
region is devoted to:
●
Agriculture/timber – Major tracts of forested land west, north and east of the base are
owned by timber companies or used for agriculture.
●
Recreation/natural resources management areas – These areas include Blackwater River
SF, Gulf Islands National Seashore, Henderson Beach Recreation Area, Fred Gannon
Rocky Bayou State Recreation Area, Grayton Beach State Recreation Area, Eden State
Gardens, and Point Washington Wildlife Management Area as well as Girl Scout and
Boy Scout camps.
●
Residential – For many cities located along Eglin’s southern boundary, urban residential
(as well as commercial) development is limited to vacant parcels existing within the
urbanized areas (infill development). The remainder of the region is open to rural
residential development.
Future land use for most areas of the ROI consists primarily of agricultural, military, or
preservation land uses, except in established municipalities or along coastal areas. In these areas,
urban (e.g., residential and commercial) land uses dominate. As the ROI’s population increases,
so does the demand for land. The ability to house a growing labor market, provide jobs and civil
infrastructure (hospital, schools, roads, etc.) will place increased pressure on Eglin AFB
leadership to discover collaborative solutions to the inevitable encroachment.
02/02/10
Final
Page 3-8
02/02/10
Final
Regional Land Use
Page 3-9
Figure 3-3. Land Uses Surrounding Eglin AFB
Local and Regional Ecological Areas
3.6 LOCAL AND REGIONAL ECOLOGICAL AREAS
Eglin is situated within a rare and rich species environment featuring numerous natural areas
such as parks, preserves, refuges, greenways, and river corridors in the surrounding region
(Figure 3-4). Many of these surrounding areas contain habitat similar to that found on the
installation. These regional areas include:
●
Blackwater River SF.
●
Gulf Islands National Seashore.
●
Henderson Beach Recreation Area.
●
Fred Gannon Rocky Bayou State Recreation Area.
●
Grayton Beach State Recreation Area.
●
Eden State Gardens.
●
Point Washington Wildlife Management Area.
Other areas of ecological importance such as Greenways, Gulf Coast Plain Ecosystem
Partnership (GCPEP), and Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) Hot Spots are discussed in
Section 7.1.1 of this document.
02/02/10
Final
Page 3-10
02/02/10
Final
Page 3-11
Figure 3-4. Ecological Areas on Eglin AFB and in the Surrounding Areas
02/02/10
Final
Page 3-12
Physical Environment
Climate
4. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
4.1 CLIMATE
Eglin AFB has a subtropical climate characterized by humid, warm summers and mild winters.
The Gulf of Mexico moderates both summer and winter temperatures at Eglin AFB. However,
just a few miles inland from the Gulf, this moderating effect no longer exists; thus, the northern
part of the base has more of a continental climate than a subtropical one. Average yearly
temperature is approximately 76 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) with a range from maximum average
daily temperatures of near 90 °F in the summer to a minimum average of 42 °F in the winter.
Annual rainfall averages approximately 62 inches with most of this occurring during the summer
months, and heaviest during the month of July. The least amount of rainfall occurs during the
fall months of October through November and the spring months of April through May. During
the summer months, the heaviest rainfall is usually from scattered showers and thunderstorms
generally lasting only one or two hours (USDA, 1995). Extended periods of dryness can occur
during the winter months.
Prevailing winds are generally southerly during the summer with frontal passages bringing cold
air masses from the north during winters. The summer months have the lowest average velocity
wind speed averaging around four miles per hour. However, during summer, a moderate sea
breeze usually blows off the Gulf of Mexico, with occasional strong winds that come from
thunderstorms (Gale Research Company, 1980).
Relative humidity is high throughout the year. The temperature-humidity index (THI) reaches
79 by early June and stays between 79 and 81 during most of the afternoon hours until late
September.
Ground fog can occur during the fall, winter, and early spring months, either at night or during
the early morning hours. The fog quickly dissipates as the sun comes out. Hail can occur at
anytime accompanying thunderstorms, but snow is quite rare. Measurable snowfall occurs
approximately once every 10 years (USDA, 1995).
4.2 LANDFORMS
Eglin AFB occupies portions of two physiographic provinces: the Coastal Lowlands and the
Western Highlands (Figure 4-1). These physiographic provinces have been delineated based on
geomorphic history and similarity of relief features and landforms. The Coastal Lowlands,
which includes SRI (and CSB), consists of dunes and beaches situated on a linear island, with
spits that parallel the coastline. The barrier islands are associated with estuaries such as
Pensacola Bay, Choctawhatchee Bay, and St. Josephs Bay. SRI and the barrier strips along CSB
formed as offshore beach bars and spits from sand were supplied by coastal headlands.
02/02/10
Final
Page 4-1
02/02/10
Final
Landforms
Page 4-2
Figure 4-1. Geology and Physiography of Eglin AFB
Landforms
These physiographic provinces reflect the influences of geological formation, degrees of slope,
differences in elevation, and stages of erosion development. These factors, in turn, affect soil
development. In the past, when sea levels were higher, they eroded the Western Highlands
(Citronelle Highlands). The Western Highlands province is separated from the Coastal
Lowlands by the Cody Scarp, which was produced by the erosive action of waves along the
shoreline. The marine terraces of the Coastal Lowlands were created by episodic fluctuations in
sea level during the waxing and waning of glacial ice masses. These are predominantly
underlain by sand with local occurrences of clay, shell beds, and peat (Becker et al., 1989). The
Western Highlands consist of topographically higher (elevations range from about 100 to over
200 feet (ft) above mean sea level [MSL]) sandhills cut by deep narrow stream valleys
(Becker et al., 1989; USAF, 1995).
4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.3.1
Geology and Geomorphology
The area that encompasses Eglin AFB consists of unnamed Holocene and Pliocene sands. These
sands on the Citronelle formation consist of approximately 250 ft of dominantly non-marine
quartz sands, interspersed with some gravel and relatively thin clay lenses (Becker et al., 1989;
USAF 1995). Kaolinite is the primary clay found in the two types of sandy clay units forming
the Citronelle Formation (USAF, 1995). It is highly weathered clay, which changes little from
water content.
Underneath these formations is the Pensacola confining bed (Miocene aged) that dips
south-southwest ranging from about 140 ft above MSL in central Walton County to more than
125 ft below MSLl in southwestern Okaloosa County (Becker et al., 1989) (both counties are
contained within Eglin AFB). A confining bed is what creates the top layer of an aquifer.
Because of its impermeability, this layer inhibits the movement of water from the aquifers, in
this case the sand and gravel aquifer and the upper limestone of the Floridan aquifer. This bed is
made up of clays and clayey sands with some limestone and shell fragments
(Becker et al., 1989).
The upland portion of Eglin AFB’s range area is generally blanketed by up to 250 ft of primarily
nonmarine quartz sands with some gravel and relatively thin clay lenses of the Citronelle
Formation. The distribution and character of Citronelle sediments suggest that they are
coalescent deposits of several relict rivers that emptied into the Gulf of Mexico. For this reason,
few outcrops can be correlated as most clay lenses and gravel beds are discontinuous.
The Citronelle Formation is underlain by a series of Miocene-aged coarse clastic (Alum Bluff
Group) and clay marine deposits (Pensacola clay) up to several hundred feet thick. These units
are underlain by several hundred feet of early Miocene and Oligocene Marine limestones. All of
these units dip gently southward in the Gulf Coast geosyncline.
02/02/10
Final
Page 4-3
4.3.2
Geology and Soils
Soils/Sediments
Soil formation is an on-going process that is determined by the nature of the parent material and
influenced by environmental factors such as climate, geology, topography, and vegetation. The
soils on Eglin AFB have developed from the Citronelle Formation as well as alluvium (gravel,
sand, silt, and clay deposited by water) from the floodplains of lowland areas. These soils on
Eglin AFB are called soil associations that are groups of soil series (soils with similar profiles)
that share common characteristics and are associated geographically. Hence, they are delineated
as a single map unit.
The majority of soils on Eglin AFB belong to the Lakeland Association (Figure 4-2). These are
excessively drained, brownish-yellow sands that have developed along broad ridgetops and
slopes. Typically, they have sandy surface layers with sandy subsoils that are more than
80 inches deep. Lakeland soils are typically associated with Chipley, Dorovan, Foxworth and
Troup soils. Only the Dorovan soils have a high degree of organic content; thus they are
considered mucks. Lakeland sands vary in acidity from medium to very strong. Soil colors vary
a fair amount. They range in color from dark, grayish brown to brownish-yellow to
yellowish-brown. Table 4-1 lists additional soils that are represented on Eglin AFB. For
comparative purposes, the primary soils are also listed.
Dorovan-Pamlico mucks are the second most abundant soils found on Eglin AFB. These mucks
are composed of more than 20 percent organic material that is highly decomposed. They are
very poorly drained and strongly acidic. Water is usually at or near the surface for nine months
or more each year. About 60 percent of this association is made up of Dorovan soils, which have
organic material that is more than 40 inches deep. The Pamlico soils make up about 25 percent
and have soils that are 20 to 40 inches deep (USAF, 1993).
Table 4-1. Soil Types and Characteristics Represented on Eglin AFB
Soil Name
Erosion Risk
Attributes
Lakeland Sand
Johns Fine Sandy Loam
Rutledge Loamy Sand
Troup Loamy Sand
Dorovan-Pamlico Association
Fuquay Loamy Sand
Leon Sand
Urban Land
Pactolus Loamy Sand
Bibb-Kinston Association
Udorthents
Rutledge Sand
Troup Sand
Dorovan Muck
Foxworth Sand
Chipley and Hurricane
Bonifay Loamy Sand
Moderate to high
Moderate
Low
Low to moderate
Very low
Low
High to low
Low
Low
Very low
Low
High
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Yellowish brown to grayish brown
Very fine grained interspersed with thick loam
Ponding, very acidic, clayey
Unconsolidated marine sediments, brown loam
Highly organic
Very acidic, ironstone nodules
Marine-based sediments, can be mucky
Natural soil not observed
Thick, deep soils, very acidic
Dark concretions, gravel, high organics
Excavated pits, low fertility
Very acidic, slow runoff
Unconsolidated marine sands
Highly organic
Very acidic
Moderately acidic
Very acidic, ironstone pebbles
02/02/10
Final
Soil Type
Sand
Sandy Loam
Loamy Sand
Loamy Sand
Muck
Loamy Sand
Sand
Variable
Loamy Sand
Silt Loam
Silt Loam
Sand
Sand
Muck
Sand
Sand
Loamy sand
Page 4-4
02/02/10
Final
Geology and Soils
Page 4-5
Figure 4-2. Soil Types of Eglin AFB
Hydrology
4.4 HYDROLOGY
4.4.1
Surface Waters
Surface waters are any waters that lie above the ground surface, such as streams, ponds, bays,
and the Gulf of Mexico. The main reservation of Eglin AFB encompasses portions of three
hydrologic basins, including Choctawhatchee Bay, Yellow River Basin, and Pensacola Bay.
CSB is located in the St. Andrew-St. Joseph Bays watershed. Surface water in these basins is
extensive; Eglin AFB includes 32 lakes (over 300 acres of man-made ponds and natural lakes),
30 miles of rivers, an extensive stream network covering approximately 600 acres of the base,
and 20 miles of Gulf of Mexico shoreline, and it is adjacent to several estuarine bays along the
Gulf of Mexico (Figures 4-3).
The main reservation can be divided into two major areas based on the patterns and
configurations of the numerous drainages. The nature of these systems and the underlying
geologic causes were studied and discussed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
(USACE, 1993). In general, the patterns are a function of one or more of the following:
variations in the lithology and thickness of the underlying Citronelle Formation, and the presence
of relict geomorphic features, such as beach ridges and terraces, faults, and “sandstone outcrops”
(hardpan layers).
The northern and western portions of the reservation are characterized by primary channels,
generally flowing east to west, with secondary tributaries flowing south to north. Most of these
drainage systems are characterized by U-shaped channels and trellis-type patterns (i.e., where
tributaries are generally straight and intersect other drainages at right angles). Most of the
northern drainages flow into the meandering Yellow River, which coincides with the
northwestern base boundary. The eastern and southeastern portions of the reservation are
characterized by V-shaped primary channels flowing north to south, with tributaries oriented in a
dendritic pattern (i.e., branch-like tree limbs).
Most of the streams on Eglin are classified as seepage streams or blackwater streams. One
spring-fed stream, Blue Spring Creek in Okaloosa County, originates from a deep artesian
spring. Seepage streams are clear to lightly-colored, relatively short, shallow, and narrow water
courses originating from shallow ground waters that have percolated through deep, sandy, upland
soils. Unique types of seepage streams, called steephead streams, are characterized by steep
slopes terminating in amphitheater-like ravines where the spring flow originates, and has plants
and animals more typical of Appalachian mountain areas. Blackwater streams are steep-banked
streams that characteristically have tea-colored waters laden with tannins, particulates, and
dissolved organic matter and iron from swamps and marshes that feed into the streams.
Many of the ponds on Eglin are man-made, resulting from the backup of water behind small
dams built on streams. Natural ponds and wetlands are also found on Eglin and are usually
relatively small. These ponds/wetlands range from holding water permanently to only a few
weeks a year, and some contain herbaceous or woody vegetation.
02/02/10
Final
Page 4-6
02/02/10
Final
Hydrology
Page 4-7
Figure 4-3. Surface Waters of Eglin AFB Main Reservation
Hydrology
On SRI, no well-developed drainages exist, but numerous coves and inlets may be found along
the northern edge of SRI. There are brackish ponds and many other small wetlands. Surface
runoff drains into Choctawhatchee Bay, Santa Rosa Sound, and the Gulf of Mexico.
At CSB, the only surface waters present are two small brackish coastal ponds at the point of
CSB. Based on topography, surface water either drains into the Gulf of Mexico to the south or
St. Joseph Bay to the north.
The bays adjacent to Eglin are brackish, with many of them supporting shellfish populations and
beds of submerged aquatic vegetation. The EGTTR extends over 124,642 square miles of water
and includes coastal, continental shelf, and deeper oceanic waters.
More detailed descriptions of the different aquatic systems found on Eglin are located in the
Eglin Environmental Baseline Survey Resources Appendices (USAF, 2003).
Outstanding Florida Waters
Several water bodies on or adjacent to Eglin have been defined as Outstanding Florida Waters
(Florida Administrative Code [FAC] 62-302.700) because they have exceptional recreational or
ecological significance. It is the FDEP’s policy to afford the highest protection to Outstanding
Florida Waters, which are listed below.
●
Fred Gannon Rocky Bayou State Recreational Area
●
Basin Bayou State Recreation Area
●
Gulf Islands National Seashore
●
Rocky Bayou State Aquatic Preserve
●
St. Joseph Bay Aquatic Preserve
●
Yellow River Marsh Aquatic Preserve
●
Shoal River
4.4.2
Floodplains
Floodplains are lowland areas adjacent to surface water bodies (i.e., lakes, wetlands, and rivers)
that are periodically covered by water during flooding events. Floodplains and riparian habitat
are biologically unique and highly diverse ecosystems that provide a rich diversity of aquatic and
terrestrial species and act as a functional part of natural systems (Mitsch, 2000). Floodplain
management on Eglin AFB includes floodplain protection (Executive Order [EO] 11988),
floodplain boundary determination, and assessment of proposed action within a floodplain.
Floodplain protection and assessment of proposed actions is the responsibility of the
Environmental Analysis Section, 96 CEG/CEVSP and the NRS.
The Environmental
Compliance Branch conducts an analysis of all proposed actions on Eglin AFB to determine
compliance with EO 11988 and the NRS ensures the latest Floodplain boundary maps are in the
Geographical Information System (GIS) database (Eglin Enterprise Spatial Database [EESD]).
02/02/10
Final
Page 4-8
Hydrology
The NRS also plans management actions to protect riparian zones and floodplains on Eglin AFB
(see Chapter 7 for more information on management programs).
Flooding on Eglin AFB is caused by rainfall, hurricane storm surge, or a combination of both.
Annual rainfall averages approximately 60 inches, primarily in the summer and late winter or
early spring. Most of the summer rainfall is from scattered showers and thundershowers that are
often heavy and last only one or two hours. Excessive rainfall may also result from hurricanes or
tropical storms, with most storms occurring late summer and early fall. This area has a drought
return interval of 20-25 years.
Figure 4-4 shows the 100-year flood inundation area (areas with a one percent chance of being
inundated by floodwater in a given year) for the main reservation. The majority of the
reservation is above the 100-year flood zone; however, extensive flood-prone areas occur along
the Yellow River drainage system and the East Bay Swamp. The perennial streams on Eglin
AFB are included within areas that are likely to be inundated by 100-year floods. The majority
of CSB is within the 100-year flood inundation area (Figure 4-4).
4.4.3
Wetlands
Wetlands are areas of transition between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is
usually at, or near, the surface, or the land is covered by shallow water (USFWS, 1979). The
term wetland encompasses marshes, swamps, bogs, and similar areas. Abiotic and biotic
environmental factors such as; morphology, hydrology, water chemistry, soil characteristics, and
vegetation contribute to the diversity of wetland community types. Local hydrology and soil
saturation largely affects soil formation and development, as well as the plant and animal
communities found in wetland areas (USEPA, 1995). Wetland hydrology is considered one of
the most important factors in establishing and maintaining wetland processes (Mitsch, 2000).
These resources are protected under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C.
Section 1344) and at the state level with the Wetlands/Environmental Resources Permit program
under Part IV, Florida Statutes Section 373. Wetlands on federal lands are afforded additional
protection under, EO 11990, Protection of Wetlands, which sets a goal of “no net loss” of
wetlands. The majority of jurisdictional wetlands in the United States are identified using three
wetland delineation criteria: 1) hydrophytic vegetation, 2) hydric soils, and 3) wetland
hydrology.
The Eglin Reservation supports an average of 65,350 acres of wetlands influenced by seasonal
fluctuations in direct precipitation, overland or near surface flow, shallow groundwater, or some
combination of these processes. While the majority of Eglin’s wetlands are in good condition,
some are degraded due to fire suppression or erosion of sediment from roadways, old borrow
pits, and on a few sites, from TA vegetation maintenance methods on slopes using choppers.
96 CEG/CEV is currently addressing many of these issues. Additional information on wetlands
is available from the Eglin Environmental Baseline Survey Resource Appendices
(U.S. Air Force, 2003). Figure 4-4 shows the location of wetlands on the main reservation and
CSB.
02/02/10
Final
Page 4-9
02/02/10
Final
Hydrology
Page 4-10
Figure 4-4. Wetlands and Floodplains (100-Year) on Eglin AFB and CSB
Hydrology
On the main reservation (including SRI), the following wetland types exist: baygall, seepage
slope, dry prairie, flatwood lake, floodplain forest, floodplain swamp, bottomland forest, wet
prairie, hydric hammock, blackwater stream, alluvial stream, spring run stream, seepage stream,
marsh lake, slough, dome swamp, strand swamp, basin marsh, depression marsh, floodplain
marsh, sandhill upland lake, bog, freshwater tidal swamp, and salt marsh (USAF, 2003).
Wetlands types at CSB include tidal swamp and salt marsh. Wetlands are also discussed in
Section 5.5.
4.4.4
Surface Water Quality
Section 303 of the CWA requires states to establish water quality standards for waterways, to
identify those that fail to meet the standards, and to take action to clean up these waterways.
Florida recently adopted the Impaired Waters Rule (IWR, Chapter 62-303, FAC.), with
amendments, as the new methodology for assessing the state’s waters for 303(d) listing. Waters
that are determined to be impaired using the methodology in the IWR and adopted by Secretarial
Order, are submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for approval as
Florida’s 303(d) list.
FDEP is currently rotating through all of Florida’s basins over a five-year cycle to update the
1998 303(d) list using the new IWR. Choctawhatchee Bay and St. Joseph Bay (including CSB)
are in Group 3 and Pensacola Bay (including Yellow River) is in Group 4. Until FDEP
completes its new IWR assessments and these new lists are adopted by the Secretarial Order, the
1998 303(d) list remains unchanged for the basins not yet verified by FDEP. Currently, FDEP
has only verified Groups 1, 2, and 3. While the draft verified lists are currently available for
Group 4, the FDEP has not yet verified the Group 4 list.
After FDEP identifies these 303(d) impaired waters, the state must follow-up by calculating
Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). A TMDL identifies the amount of an offending
pollutant that a waterway can assimilate without violating its water quality standards. Once a
TMDL has been established, the state must allocate the allowable pollution load amongst all
pollution sources in the waterway segment. Eglin plans to participate in the development and
implementation phases of the Basin Management Action Plans for Groups 3 and 4 to identify
and achieve TMDL reductions.
Impaired waters on or adjacent to Eglin AFB are listed in Table 4-2. Once FDEP verifies the
Group 4 list, it is likely that some new waters will be added, while others may be removed. The
majority of these waters also receive urban stormwater runoff, which is the probable source of
the bacteria causing impairment. Turbidity in the Yellow River and East River Bay is likely due
to the numerous unpaved roads and clay borrow pits in the watersheds. Eglin has a very active
erosion control program that is currently investing substantial resources into these watersheds.
02/02/10
Final
Page 4-11
Hydrology
Table 4-2. Impaired Waters on or Adjacent to Eglin AFB
Water Body
Boggy Bayou
Poquito Bayou
Rocky Bayou State Park
Choctawhatchee Bay
Group
3
3
3
3
303(d) List (Year)
2004
2004
2004
2004
Impairment Parameter
Bacteria, exceeds DOH standards
Fecal coliform (shellfish harvesting), exceeds
SEAS thresholds
Fecal coliform
Coliforms, Turbidity
Dissolved Oxygen, Turbidity, Mercury
St. Joseph Bay
3
2004
East River Bay
4
1998
Yellow River (lower)
4
1998
Sources: FDEP, 2004; FDEP, 2004a; FDEP, 2005
DOH = Department of Health; SEAS = Shellfish Environmental Assessment Section
The 96 CEG/CEVCE, Environmental Engineering Section, is responsible for providing policy,
guidance, and permits for media specific environmental programs (air, water, and storage tanks),
including Section 401 and 404 of the CWA, and conducts environmental engineering evaluations
of base operations (facilities, systems, and processes) to ensure continued compliance with
permit and media specific requirements. The NRS works closely with 96 CEG/CEVCE in water
quality and wetland management.
Eglin AFB was awarded the International Erosion Control Association’s (IECA) most
prestigious award, the 2001 Environmental Grand Achievement for the soil conservation
program that demonstrated excellence in natural resource and environmental protection within an
endangered species watershed. The award showed how Eglin’s application of effective erosion
and sediment control policies, practices, and public education significantly rehabilitated
Okaloosa darter watersheds on Eglin AFB.
4.4.5
Groundwater
Main Reservation
Two major aquifers underlie the main reservation of Eglin AFB: the surficial aquifer, also
known as the sand and gravel aquifer, and the Floridan aquifer. The sand and gravel aquifer is a
generally unconfined, near-surface unit separated from the underlying confined Floridan aquifer
by the low-permeability Pensacola Clay confining bed. The sand and gravel aquifer is mainly
composed of clean, fine-to-coarse sand and gravel, while the Floridan aquifer consists of a thick
sequence of inter-bedded limestone and dolomite.
Water quality of the sand and gravel aquifer is generally good, but it is vulnerable to
contamination from surface pollutants due to its proximity to the ground surface (USAF, 2003).
Water from the sand and gravel aquifer is not a primary source of domestic or public water
supply on Eglin because of the higher quality water available from the underlying Upper
Limestone of the Floridan aquifer. Water quality of water drawn from the upper limestone of the
Floridan aquifer is of suitable quality for most uses, and is the primary source of water used at
Eglin AFB. The top of the aquifer is about 50 ft below MSL in the northeast corner of the base
and increases to about 700 ft below MSL in the southwestern area of the base
(McKinnon and Pratt, 1998). The wells on Eglin tap into both the surficial and Floridan aquifers
and are used for both potable and non-potable supply.
02/02/10
Final
Page 4-12
Hydrology
Groundwater levels have dropped up to 160 ft since 1940 at some locations in south Okaloosa
County. One site on Eglin AFB in central Okaloosa County has dropped 100 ft since
1940 (NWFWMD, 2005). The Northwest Florida Water Management District (NWFWMD) has
identified excessive groundwater pumping for water supply as the reason for these drops. While
the Floridan aquifer is the primary source for drinking water at Eglin AFB and the surrounding
areas, due to groundwater level decreases, the sand and gravel aquifer is being examined for
increased pumpage. This aquifer is already used as a water source in Santa Rosa County, but has
not been used in Okaloosa County for potable supply.
To address the water supply needs of the area, the NWFWMD developed the Regional Water
Supply Plan for Santa Rosa, Okaloosa and Walton Counties (NWFWMD, 2001). This Plan
identified current water sources and current and future water demands within the region, along
with alternative water supply sources to meet the region’s water needs through the
2020-planning horizon. Strategies were also discussed that would better determine the ability of
current and alternative sources to meet the region’s future demands.
Cape San Blas (CSB)
At CSB, there are three aquifers from which fresh water may be obtained: the surficial aquifer,
the intermediate confining unit, and the Floridan aquifer. The surficial aquifer system at CSB
consists of a relatively narrow band of unconfined waters moving through undifferentiated sand
and clay sediments. It is recharged through direct infiltration of rainwater and ranges in
thickness from 4 ft in eastern Gulf County to 90 ft in the northwestern portion of the county.
Below the surficial aquifer is the intermediate confining unit, an aquifer that is confined within
sediments, and as such is not prone to vertical movement. The Floridan aquifer is the most
important of the three aquifers in terms of volume and quality of water. It supplies the majority
of domestic, urban, and agriculture water used in Gulf County. The top of the Floridan aquifer is
approximately 500 ft MSL under CSB. Sampling by Lamont and others indicates that the
surficial water table at CSB is not influenced by saltwater intrusion (Lamont et al., 1997). There
is one drinking water well located on CSB.
02/02/10
Final
Page 4-13
Hydrology
02/02/10
Final
Page 4-14
Ecosystem and Biotic Environment
Ecosystem
5. ECOSYSTEM AND BIOTIC ENVIRONMENT
5.1 ECOSYSTEM
Robert G. Bailey of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service Inventory and
Monitoring Institute has developed a National Hierarchy for ecosystem classification. This
Hierarchy is a regionalization classification and mapping system that links soils, physiography,
and habitat types to stratify the landscape into progressively smaller areas (Bailey, 1994). Eglin
AFB falls within the Humid Temperate Domain, Subtropical Division, Coastal Plain Mixed
Forest Province, and Section 232D Florida Coastal Lowlands (Western).
5.2 VEGETATION
The following discussion describes the historic and current vegetation associations for the
ecological units within Eglin AFB and the surrounding area.
5.2.1
Historic Vegetative Cover
FNAI provides a brief compilation of historical documents describing Eglin’s historical
landscape in their Natural Community Survey Report (Kindell et al. 1997) and their Rare Plant
Survey Report (Chafin and Schotz, 1995). Descriptions of Eglin’s vegetation prior to the
formation of the installation can be found in several documents written in the 1900’s. John
Williams presented one casual description of Eglin lands in his cultural and natural resources
report of West Florida in 1827. One chapter of Roland Harper’s 1914 book Geography and
Vegetation of Northern Florida entitled “West Florida’s Pine Hills” describes lands within
Eglin’s current borders. Early botanical collections made around and within Eglin’s borders are
also described in Gerould Wilhelm’s “Vascular Flora of the Pensacola Region” (Wilhelm, 1984).
Eglin has an extensive history of natural resource exploitation prior to its establishment as a
military reservation, the majority of which relates to timber harvesting of longleaf pine in the late
1800’s. The turpentine industry was also very prevalent on Eglin until the 1930’s. A small
percentage of the original old growth longleaf pine forest remains, and the majority of Eglin’s
forests are secondary, having been cut over at least once. The USFS Choctawhatchee National
Forest Management plan written in 1939 describes the forest floor to be sparsely vegetated with
little leaf litter. This was attributed to “…the frequency of past fires over the area.” The Eglin
landscape began to change dramatically when the USFS and later Eglin AFB instituted fire
suppression policies. In 1989, prescribed fire was reintroduced on a significant scale to Eglin by
the NRS (Kindell et al., 1997).
5.2.2
Current Vegetative Cover
In 1997, FNAI conducted a comprehensive survey of Eglin’s high quality natural vegetative
communities. Their Final Report depicts 34 community types found on Eglin with descriptions
of their vegetation composition, “the role of the community as rare plant and animal habitat, its
ecological dynamics, and management recommendations” (Kindell, 1997). FNAI also
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-1
Vegetation
conducted a rare plant survey in 1995 wherein 60 rare plants were documented (Chafin and
Schotz, 1995).
Four broad ecological associations are described to facilitate understanding of Eglin’s
conservation resources. The four broad matrix ecosystems (listed below) are defined by floral,
faunal and geophysical similarities.
Sandhill Matrix
As little as 5,000 acres of old growth longleaf pine forest remains globally and Eglin’s sandhills
contain more than any other forest in the world. All stands of old growth longleaf pine have
been identified, inventoried, mapped and protected. The more than 4,400 acres of the Patterson
Natural Area is one of the largest, most significant areas of old growth longleaf pine remaining.
This system is the most extensive natural community type on Eglin AFB, accounting for
approximately 78 percent or 362,000 acres of the base. Longleaf Pine Sandhills are
characterized by an open, savanna-like structure with a moderate to tall canopy of longleaf pine,
a sparse midstory of oaks and other hardwoods, and a diverse groundcover comprised mainly of
grasses, forbs and low stature shrubs. The structure and composition was maintained by frequent
fires, (every 3-5 years), which controlled hardwood, sand pine and titi encroachment. Longleaf
Pine Sandhills consist of a high diversity of species adapted to fire and the heterogeneous
conditions that fires create. Variation within the Sandhills is recognized by the two associations
differing in the dominance of grass species (wiregrass versus bluestem). Sandhills are often
associated with and grade into Scrub, Upland Pine Forest, Xeric Hammock or slope forests. It is
also known as longleaf pine turkey oak, longleaf pine-xerophytic oak, longleaf pine-deciduous
oak, or high pine. The functional significance of the Sandhill Matrix is to provide maintenance
of regional biodiversity. Additionally, the sandhills, due to their wide coverage on Eglin, are the
matrix across which fire carries into the other imbedded fire-dependent systems. Eglin AFB is
the largest and least fragmented, single longleaf pine ownership in the world, and has the best
remaining old growth longleaf pine. Seepage slopes are a common embedded wetland feature
found within Eglin’s sandhill matrix.
Flatwoods Matrix
Pine flatwoods occur on flat, moderately well drained sandy soils with varying levels of organic
matter, often underlaid by a hard pan. While the canopy consists of slash pine and longleaf pine,
the understory varies greatly from shrubby to an open diverse understory of grasses and herbs.
The primary environmental factors controlling vegetation type are soil moisture (soil type and
depth to groundwater) and fire history. The average fire frequency in flatwoods is one to eight
years, with nearly all of the plants and animals inhabiting this community adapted to recurrent
fires. Home to numerous rare and endangered plants and animals, the Flatwoods Matrix plays a
significant role in maintaining regional biodiversity, Eglin’s more than 300 acres of old growth
flatwoods are among the last remaining of such high quality.
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-2
Vegetation
Barrier Island Matrix
The natural communities associated with this complex contain substrate and vegetation that are
influenced primarily by such coastal (maritime) processes as erosion, deposition, salt spray, and
storms. Vegetative communities include primary and secondary dunes, interdune swales,
maritime forests, and sand pine scrub. Eglin AFB’s barrier islands include three land tracts one
in each of Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and Gulf counties. The westernmost unit is known as SRI,
which is 13 miles long and located in Santa Rosa and Okaloosa counties. This portion is very
narrow (0.1-0.6 miles wide) with the Gulf of Mexico as its southern boundary and Santa Rosa
Sound as its northern boundary. It is predominately undeveloped with some military structures.
The central portion, known as Okaloosa Island, is four miles long and is located in Okaloosa
County. The eastern unit is known as CSB and consists of approximately 962 acres with three
miles of beachfront. CSB is bounded by the Gulf of Mexico to the south and St. Joseph Bay to
the north. The central and eastern units are more disturbed by humans due to impacts from
public recreation. The functional significance of barrier islands is to provide maintenance of
regional biodiversity and protect the mainland and bays from extreme storm events.
Wetlands/Riparian Matrix
Wetlands are extraordinarily important contributors to the health and diversity of the Eglin
landscape. Riparian areas are generally found along a water feature such as a river, stream, or
creek. The FNAI initially conducted an inventory of these features in 1994, but satellite field
imagery is now used to map and document changes within many of these features. There are
12 large Ecological Monitoring Units within Eglin AFB’s boundaries (Figure 5-1). Great
diversity of invertebrate and fish species is found within the streams associated with these
watersheds. At least 11 different plant community types, defined by the State Heritage Program,
are found within riparian areas on Eglin AFB. Streams are perennial, originating in the sandy
uplands of the installation and fed by groundwater recharge. Flood events only occur during
extreme rain events (e.g., hurricanes), otherwise flows are relatively consistent. Temperatures
fluctuate during the year and each day, being more constant near the headwaters. These seepage
streams are moderately acidic. Table 5-1 shows the type of wetlands/riparian matrixes found on
or adjacent to Eglin AFB.
Wetland areas are monitored for changes in habitat structure and distribution over time in
accordance with AFI 32-7064. NRS uses annual satellite imagery and change analysis to follow
the status of these communities. There is no active management that is pursued in this
community, although hunting and low-impact missions do occur.
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-3
02/02/10
Final
Vegetation
Page 5-4
Figure 5-1. Ecological Management Units within Eglin AFB
Vegetation
Table 5-1. Wetland Types by Wetland/Riparian Matrix on or Adjacent to Eglin AFB
Type of
Wetlands
Depression
Wetlands
Source of
Hydrology
Groundwater
or rainwater
Seepage
Slopes
Downslope
seepage
(sheetflow)
Rivers,
streams, and
creeks
Floodplain
Wetlands
Substrate
Vegetation
Peat or sand
Woody and/or
herbaceous
High in clay
Herbaceous
Peat or sand
Woody and/or
herbaceous
Functional Significance
Maintains regional biodiversity
Floodwater storage
Filters pollutants
Maintains water quality
Rare habitats
High biodiversity
Maintains regional biodiversity
Floodwater storage
Wildlife corridors
Maintains water quality
Wetland resources are discussed in greater detail in Section 5.5 of this chapter.
5.2.3
Turf and Landscaped Areas
Eglin AFB currently has approximately 46,000 acres of semi-improved areas and 14,000 acres of
improved areas. Bahia grass (Panicum notatum) is the primary turf grass that is used in the
semi-improved areas while St. Augustine (Stenotaphrum secundatum) and Centipede
(Eremochloa ophiuroides) grass are the primary turf grasses used in the improved areas. Ground
maintenance encourages low maintenance landscaping and uses native plants whenever
possible. The Civil Engineering Squadron, Ground Maintenance (796th CES/CEOHG) is the
primary point of contact for turf and landscape issues.
5.3 FISH AND WILDLIFE
Eglin supports a rich diversity of game and non-game wildlife due to the variety of habitats
found on the base. Because large portions of Eglin are undeveloped, the habitats found here are
representative of off-base areas in the Florida panhandle that are generally in decline due to
urban growth. Figure 5-2 shows species density on Eglin compared to the remainder of Florida.
Table 5-2 provides a summary of some of the fish and wildlife species typically found within
Eglin AFB. The list below should not be considered a comprehensive inventory, but rather, a
reference summary.
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-5
02/02/10
Final
Fish and Wildlife
Page 5-6
Figure 5-2. Species Density Found on Eglin AFB and in Florida
Fish and Wildlife
Table 5-2. Summary List of Fish and Wildlife Species Found on Eglin AFB
Common Name
Red-cockaded
Woodpecker
Northern
Bobwhite
Great Horned
Owl
Gopher
Tortoise
Indigo Snake
Diamondback
Rattlesnake
Six-lined
Racerunner
Florida Black
Bear
Scientific Name
Common Name
Scientific Name
Picoides borealis
Wood Duck
Aix sponsa
Colinus
virginianus
Red-winged
Blackbird
Bubo virginianus
Cotton Mouth
Gopherus
polyphemus
Drymarchon
corais
Crotalus
adamanteus
Cnemidophorus
sexlineatus
Ursus
americanus
floridanus
Flatwoods
Salamander
Agelaius
phoenicius
Agkistridon
piscivorus
Ambystoma
bishopi
River Otter
Lutra canadensis
Gray Fox
Urocyon
cinereoargenteus
Ocypode
quadratus
Ghost Crab
Pine Barrens
Tree Frog
Five-lined
Skink
Green Anole
Garter Snake
American
Beaver
Northern
Parula
Periwinkles
Scientific Name
Hyla andersonii
Eumeces
fasciatus
Anolis
carolinensis
Thamnophis
sirtalis
Castor
canadensis
Parula
americana
Littorina
irrorata
Least Tern
Sterna albifrons
Oyster
Crassostrea
virginica
Gulf Crab
Calinectes
smilis
Fox Squirrel
Sciurus niger
Loggerhead Sea
Turtle
Caretta caretta
Least Shrew
Cryptodus parva
Shorebirds
Several genera
& species
Cottontail
Rabbit
Sylvilagus
floridanus
Fox
Vulpes vulpes
Pocket Gopher
Geomys pinetus
Cotton Rat
White-tailed
Deer
Odocoileus
virginianus
Opossum
Sigmodon
hispidus
Didelphis
virginiana
Feral Pig
Sus scrofa
Eastern Mole
Scalopus
aquaticus
Salt Marsh
Rabbit
Sylvilagus
aquaticus
Florida
Burrowing Owl
Athene
cunicularia
Slender Glass
Lizard
Ophisaurus
attenuatus
Flycatchers
Tyrannidae spp.
Raccoon
Procyon lotor
Cotton Mouse
Beach Mouse
Peromyscus
polionotus sbspp.
Micropterus
salmoides
Black Racer
Peromyscus
gossypinus
Coluber
constrictor
Pteronotropis
hypselopterus
Largemouth
Bass
Common Name
Sailfin Shiner
Long-nosed
Killifish
Oyster
Sheepshead
Minnow
Great Blue
Heron
Belted
Kingfisher
Redshouldered
Hawk
Southeastern
American
Kestrel
American
Alligator
Pygmy
Rattlesnake
Okaloosa
Darter
Fundulus
similis
Cyprinodon
variegatus
Ardea herodias
Megaceryle
alcyon
Buteo lineatus
Falco
sparverius
paulus
Alligator
mississippiensis
Sistrurus
miliarius
Etheostoma
okaloosae
There are 67 state-listed T&E species found on Eglin (Table 5-3). Most (55) of the
67 state-listed T&E species are plants. Of the 12 state-listed T&E animal species, only four
(snowy plover, least tern, southeastern American kestrel, and Florida black bear) are not also
federally listed as a T&E species. Eighteen species of animals are listed as state Species of
Special Concern. An additional 17 animal species are not listed by the FWC or the USFWS, but
are tracked by FNAI due to their rarity and/or declining population trends.
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-7
Fish and Wildlife
Table 5-3. Eglin’s Rare and Listed Species
Animals
Plant
Total
Federally Listed Species
11
1
12
State Listed Species
State Listed Species not Federally Listed
State Species of Special Concern
12
5
19
55
54
0
67
59
19
State Species of Special Concern not Federally Listed
Number of Rare Species tracked by FNAI
Number of Rare Species not Federally or State Listed tracked by FNAI
13
47
17
0
59
4
13
106
21
5.4 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
Eglin AFB harbors a remarkable assemblage of biodiversity. This is due primarily to the large
size of the installation and its habitat quality and diversity including 34 distinct natural
community types ranging from barrier islands to old growth longleaf pine forests. Most of the
habitat types found on Eglin are fire-maintained, meaning that they require frequent fire to
maintain the natural species composition and structure. This accounts for the exceptional habitat
quality in the wooded portions of the installation adjacent to the active TAs and the high
concentrations of T&E species in these areas.
There are 11 federally listed T&E species that are being managed on Eglin AFB because they
occur on the Eglin Reservation either year-round or seasonally (Figures 5-3 and 5-4). In
addition, there are 11 federally listed species that occur within the EGTTR. The 11 federally
listed species on the reservation include: the RCW, bald eagle, piping plover, Okaloosa darter,
Gulf sturgeon, flatwoods salamander, Eastern indigo snake, loggerhead sea turtle, green sea
turtle, leatherback sea turtle, and Florida perforate lichen. Other federally listed species such as
the West Indian manatee, peregrine falcon, and wood stork have been documented on Eglin
during seasonal migrations. The American alligator, which is common on Eglin, is also federally
listed due to its similarity in appearance with the endangered American crocodile. Nine of the
11 federally listed T&E species have Recovery Plans currently in place (RCW, Okaloosa darter,
loggerhead, green and leatherback sea turtles, Eastern indigo snake, Florida perforate lichen, bald
eagle, and Gulf sturgeon). A flatwoods salamander Recovery Plan is currently in draft stage. A
summary of management practices, surveys and status of these species is discussed in more
detail in Section 7.4 Management of T&E Species and Habitats.
There are 67 state listed T&E species found on Eglin; most (55 of the 68) of which are plants.
The remaining 12 are animal species, and only four of the 12 (snowy plover, least tern,
Southeastern American kestrel, and Florida black bear) are not also federally listed as T&E
species. An additional 16 animal species are state listed as “Species of Special Concern” that are
not federally listed and seven fish species are listed as “Species of Concern” by the NMFS.
In total, Eglin AFB supports 105 rare or listed terrestrial and fresh water species of plants and
animals of conservation concern. Using the FNAI ranking systems, 52 of these 105 species are
considered globally rare (species or subspecies ranking of G3 or higher). Four species or
subspecies have a G1 ranking (two animals [Gulf sturgeon, Santa Rosa Beach mouse], one plant
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-8
[hairy-peduncled beakrush], and one lichen [Florida perforate lichen]). In addition, the
Yellow-billed cuckoo, which is currently not tracked, is a candidate for future USFWS listing.
The T&E CP contains all the species tracked by the FNAI that are either federally listed, state
listed or rare.
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-9
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-10
Figure 5-3. Threatened and Endangered Species on Eglin AFB
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-11
Figure 5-4. Threatened and Endangered Species on CSB
Wetlands
5.5 WETLANDS
Wetlands are defined in the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual as “those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (USACE, 1987). These resources are protected
under various federal, state, and local regulations and discussed in greater detail in Chapter 7.6,
Wetland Protection.
Wetlands are among the most productive ecosystems in the world providing food and shelter for
many different species. More than one-third of the T&E species in the U.S. live only in wetlands
(USEPA, 1995). These resources provide a host of ecologically important functions such as,
groundwater recharge, flood control, shoreline protection, and watershed protection.
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Classification for Wetlands (Cowardin, 1979) describes
wetland habitats according to a hierarchical classification system progressing from System and
Subsystem, at the general level, to Classes and Subclasses (where applicable). A System refers
to a complex of wetlands and deepwater habitats that share the influence of similar factors such
as, hydrologic and geomorphic features, and chemical and biological characteristics. This
classification system describes ecological taxa and provides uniformed concepts and terms.
These areas are represented in Figure 4-4.
Table 5-4 shows the number of acres for each category on the Eglin reservation. The five
wetland categories in this classification system are:
02/02/10

Estuarine - Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands that are usually
semi-enclosed by land but have open, partly obstructed, or sporadic access to the
ocean, with ocean water at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the
land. The upstream and landward limit is where ocean derived salts measure less
than .5 parts per thousand (ppt) during the period of average annual low flow. The
seaward limit is (1) an imaginary line closing the mouth of a river, bay, or sound, and
(2) the seaward limit of wetland emergents, shrubs, or trees when not included in (1).

Riverine - All wetlands and deepwater habitats contained within a channel except
those wetlands (1) dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent
mosses, or lichens, and (2) which have habitats with ocean-derived salinities in excess
of .5 ppt.

Lacustrine - Wetlands and deepwater habitats (1) situated in a topographic
depression or dammed river channel, (2) lacking trees, shrubs, persistent emergents,
emergent mosses, or lichens with greater than 30 percent area coverage, and
(3) whose total area exceeds 8 hectares (20 acres), or area less than 8 hectares if the
boundary is active wave-formed or bedrock or if water depth in the deepest part of the
basin exceeds 2 meters (m) (6.6 ft) at low water. Ocean-derived salinities are always
less than .5 parts per trillion.

Palustrine - All nontidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents,
emergent mosses, or lichens, and all such tidal wetlands where ocean-derived
Final
Page 5-12
Wetlands
salinities are below .5 ppt. This category also includes wetlands lacking such
vegetation but with all of the following characteristics: (1) area less than 8 hectares,
(2) lacking an active wave-formed or bedrock boundary, (3) water depth in the
deepest part of the basin less than 2 m (6.6 ft) at low water, and (4) ocean-derived
salinities less than .5 ppt.

Marine - Open ocean overlying the continental shelf and coastline exposed to waves
and currents of the open ocean shoreward to (1) extreme high water of spring tides,
(2) seaward limit of wetland emergents, trees, or shrubs, or (3) the seaward limit of
the Estuarine System, other than vegetation. Salinities exceed 30 ppt.
96 CEG/CEVCE is the established point of contact for all regulatory issues involving wetland
resources. Any areas recently surveyed for wetlands (and approved by Federal/State regulatory
agencies) are entered into Eglin’s geographical information systems (GIS) to aid in future land
use management.
Table 5-4. Wetland Areas of Eglin AFB and Surrounding Installations
Wetland
Type
Estuarine
Riverine
Lacustrine
Palustrine
Marine
TOTAL
Wetland Areas of Eglin Air Force Base
Eglin Reservation
Santa Rosa Island
Cape San Blas
657.60
141.17
136.47
265.44
0
0
180.37
0
0
62,798.13
778.40
247.31
0
0
145.41
63,901.54
919.57
529.19
Areas shown above are in total acres.
Source: Calculated using Eglin GIS Data; FDEP GIS Data, 2004a
5.6 OTHER NATURAL RESOURCE INFORMATION
Eglin AFB performs several biological inventories and surveys throughout the installation.
Eglin’s NRS maintains extensive data on specific Natural Resources programs described in
greater detail in Chapter 7 of this INRMP.
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-13
Wetlands
02/02/10
Final
Page 5-14
Mission Impacts on Natural Resources
Land Use
6. MISSION IMPACTS ON NATURAL RESOURCES
6.1 LAND USE
Eglin has 465,693 acres of land range with 50 land TAs in Okaloosa, Santa Rosa and Walton
Counties and a small section in Gulf County. Approximately 14,000 acres are improved,
46,000 acres are semi-improved and 405,000 acres are unimproved. Eglin manages the Joint
Gulf Range Complex, a complex that has over 120,000 square miles of overland and overwater
airspace. Management of adjacent land and water areas provide Eglin AFB a sea-to-land
transition area necessary for modern weapons system research, development, testing, and
evaluation. The armed services also use Eglin land and water ranges to train.
6.2 CURRENT MAJOR IMPACTS
Mission effects are detailed in several NEPA documents generated by the 46th TW Range
Environmental Planning Office and the 96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Stewardship
Branch. Summaries of mission activities are located in Chapter 2 and mission effects are
discussed in Chapter 4 (Impact Analysis) of these NEPA documents (Table 6-1). A major focus
of these documents was on expended items, such as ordnance, countermeasures and smokes.
Table 6-1 lists titles and study areas of some of the assessments that attempted to capture
multiple years and types of missions.
Table 6-1. Environmental Assessments Addressing Mission Effects on Eglin Natural Resources
Title
Air-to-Ground Gunnery
Programmatic
Environmental
Assessment (PEA)
Cape San Blas PEA
Eglin Gulf Test and
Training Range PEA
Estuarine and Riverine
Areas PEA
Interstitial Areas PEA
02/02/10
Major Natural Resource
Issues Addressed
Study Area
Timeframe
TAs A-77, A-78, A-79 and
B-7
1998 – 2001 missions
Noise and metals in soil
CSB Test Sites D-3, D-3a
and interstitial and coastal
areas out to 3 nautical
miles.
Eglin Gulf Test and
Training Range beginning
at 3 nautical miles from
shore
Transition areas between
Eglin reservation boundary
and Yellow River, East
Bay, East Bay River, Santa
Rosa Sound and
Choctawhatchee Bay.
Land areas of Eglin
reservation excluding
cantonment areas, TAs,
SRI and CSB.
 1994-97 missions
 Future missions
Beach driving effects on
protected species
 Future missions
Noise, debris and direct
impacts from gunnery on
protected species
 Future missions
Effects of erosion at boat
landings to habitats and
species.
Effect of metals from
expended ordnance on soil
and water
Habitat Alteration
 1995 missions
 Future missions
Final
Page 6-1
Current Major Impacts
Table 6-1. Environmental Assessments Addressing Mission Effects on
Eglin Natural Resources Cont’d
Title
Study Area
Overland Air Operations
PEA
Eglin Main Base land TAs
and interstitial areas
 1995 missions
 Future missions
Santa Rosa Island
Mission Utilization Plan
PEA
Numerous test sites and
coastal areas of Eglin
owned SRI out to 3
nautical miles from shore.
TA B-12 PEA
TA B-12
 All current
missions
(document dated
2005)
 All anticipated
future missions
1995-98 missions
TA B-70 PEA
TA B-70
1995 missions
TA B-71/82 PEA
TA B71/82
1995-97 missions
TA B-75 PEA
TA C-52 Complex PEA
TA B-75
TAs C-52N, C-52E,
C-52W, C-52C
1995-97 missions
 1995 missions
 Future missions
TA C-62 PEA
TA C-62
1995-97 missions
TA C-64 PEA
TA C-64
1995-97 missions
TA C-72 PEA
TA C-72
1995-97 missions
TA C-80 Complex PEA
TAs C-80A, C-80B, C-80C
and C-80W
Multiple areas west of
Highway 87
1995-97, 1999
missions
Future training
Draft EA for the
Alabama Army National
Guard Cobb Training
Site
Timeframe
Major Natural Resource
Issues Addressed
Supersonic noise and
bird/aircraft collision
hazards
Habitat alteration,
underwater noise effects on
protected species
Noise and smoke effects on
protected species
Supersonic noise effects on
protected species
Noise effects on protected
species
Noise and erosion
Accumulation of metals in
soil.
UXO
Exposure of groundwater
to explosive residues, and
erosion.
Munition residues in soil,
and noise
Noise and slope
degradation
Noise
Habitat alteration
Sources: U.S. Air Force, 1998, 1998a, 1998b, 1999, 1999a, 1999b, 2000, 2000a, 2001, 2001a, 2003a, b, c, d, 2004, 2004a, 2005,
2005a, 2006
CSB = Cape San Blas; EA = Environmental Assessment; PEA = Programmatic Environmental Assessment; SRI = Santa Rosa
Island; UXO = Unexploded Ordnance; TA = test area
In addition to expended items, other effects such as aircraft and vehicle emissions and hazardous
pollutant sites are addressed through existing permits. Indirect effects, such as wildfires from
live missions, are managed or controlled through Eglin Natural Resources Fire Management or
by the Eglin AFB Fire Department.
Military operations produce air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Air pollutants are
emitted as a result of general maintenance activities, government and privately owned vehicles,
jet engine testing, aircraft operations, prescribed burning, wildfires, mission test and training
operations, and the open burning/open detonation of UXO. The FDEP permits emission from
these activities at Eglin through a Title V Air Operation Permit.
02/02/10
Final
Page 6-2
Current Major Impacts
Eglin AFB addresses potential point source water pollution problems through a Multi-Sector
General Permit, which is described in the Eglin AFB Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(U.S. Air Force, 2005). The permit covers 20 sampling points, six of which are sampled as
representative of the whole.
Eglin AFB manages potential environmental contamination sites through the Environmental
Restoration Program (ERP). The status of these sites is presented in the ERP Management
Action Plan which is periodically updated (U.S. Air Force, 2003a).
Military operations can sometimes cause wildfires that escape the TAs and spread to sensitive
species habitat. Wildfires frequently occur as a result of live ammunition and incendiary device
use.
6.3 POTENTIAL FUTURE IMPACTS
Natural resources face potential future impacts from conversion of habitat into new testing or
training areas. Habitat alteration is a major effecter with the potential to directly reduce habitat
used by protected species.
The establishment of new training areas, or the introduction of new training missions are two
ways that habitat may be affected in the foreseeable future. Expansion of existing TAs may also
result in the loss of habitat.
6.4 NATURAL RESOURCES NEEDED TO SUPPORT THE MILITARY MISSION
Natural resources needed to support the military mission include densely wooded areas, stable
soils, open grassland areas for testing, streams and rivers with unimpeded flow (i.e., not
dammed) and clean air and groundwater. Areas with impaired air or water quality are less able
to accommodate additional emissions from military testing and training.
6.5 NATURAL RESOURCES CONSTRAINTS TO MISSIONS AND MISSION
PLANNING
The presence of T&E species and sensitive or important habitats increasingly constrain military
missions in the land and water areas. Sometimes the constraints are seasonal, as in cases where a
mission must avoid the nesting seasons of a protected species. Sometimes the constraints
involve lengthy consultation periods before a mission can be conducted, or the added cost of
observers whose responsibility it is to watch for protected species during the mission.
Even the loss of protected species or important habitats in the immediate vicinity of Eglin AFB
by non-military factors places constraints on the military mission by increasing the natural
resource management responsibilities of the Air Force. As natural resources are depleted outside
of the Eglin reservation, those within the reservation become more valuable and must be
managed more carefully.
02/02/10
Final
Page 6-3
Natural Resources Constraints to
Missions and Mission Planning
02/02/10
Final
Page 6-4
7. NATURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
7.1 NATURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
The organizational charts shown in Figures 7-1 and 7-2 provide a breakdown of the Natural
Resources management program at various levels at Eglin AFB. A more detailed discussion of
Natural Resources management personnel is provided in Chapter 9 of this INRMP.
Although Eglin is responsible for the development of the INRMP, several agencies play a critical
role in the process. The INRMP reflects the mutual agreement of the USFWS, FWC, and NMFS
in regard to the conservation, protection, and management of fish and wildlife resources and of
federally listed T&E species. At the initiation of the INRMP update process, these agencies are
notified and invited to participate in the scoping, design, and preparation of the INRMP. The
Preliminary Draft is sent to these agencies for review and comment. Agency input is
incorporated into the Draft INRMP that is distributed for public review. Public comments are
then incorporated as appropriate, and a Final Draft INRMP is provided for agency review.
Agency comments are integrated into the Final INRMP, which is then signed by the Installation
or Wing Commander, the Regional Director of the USFWS, the Director of the FWC, and the
Regional Administrator of NMFS. The signature of these agencies reflects the mutual agreement
on those portions of the INRMP within the scope of the agency’s authority. The NRS maintains
regular communications with the USFWS, FWC, and NMFS to address issues concerning
INRMP implementation. These ongoing interactions include coordinating the annual review of
the INRMP, which is certified by the installation or wing commander.
Role of the USFWS on Eglin
The USFWS Ecological Services Office in Panama City, Florida and the NRS have maintained a
successful conservation partnership since the 1980’s. The Service’s main role on Eglin has been
to assist the NRS in the conservation and management of the federally listed T&E species that
occur on the installation in a manner which sustains and supports Eglin’s diverse test and
training military mission.
The ESA Section 7 consultation process facilitates the
accomplishment of this role.
In 1988 the Service’s Panama City Ecological Services Field office was delegated Section 7
Consultation responsibility. The NRS evaluates potential impacts from proposed missions and
other activities to federally listed species and seeks ways to accomplish mission objectives
without adversely affecting those species. Personnel then prepare and submit Biological
Assessments with those findings to the USFWS. In turn, the Service reviews the Biological
Assessment and prepares a Biological Opinion. The Service appreciates and understands that
many of these consultations require a short response time to meet the timeframes of DoD
customers that want to use Eglin’s facilities for test and training exercises. The Service also
understands that Eglin and the NRS are often not in control of these timelines. Therefore, the
USFWS works with the NRS to ensure the consultation process is as expeditious as possible.
The Service also recognizes the NRS as a responsible conservation organization that fulfills its
ESA obligation to conserve and recover federally listed T&E species on the installation.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-1
96 CEG/CEV
96th Civil Engineering Group
Environmental Division
96 CEG/CEV-PA
96 CEG/CERF
Environmental
Financial
Public Affairs
Management
96 CEG/CERX
96 CEG/CEV
Computer
Personnel
Support
Liaison
CEVS
CEVR
CEVC
CEVH
Stewardship
Restoration
Compliance
Historic
Branch
Branch
Branch
Branch
CEVSN
CEVSP
CEVCE
CEVCP
Natural Resources
Environmental Analysis
Engineering
Pollution Prevention
Section
Section
Section
Section
CEVSNP
Fire Mgmt. Element
CEVSNW
Wildlife Element
CEVSNF
Forest Management
Element
Figure 7-1. Civil Engineer Environmental Management Staff (CEV) Organizational Chart
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-2
Figure 7-2. Civil Engineer Natural Resources Section (CEVSN) Organizational Chart
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Fisheries Resources Program (USFWS-FR) initiated
investigations of fishery resources on Eglin in 1999. USFWS biologists were originally
incorporated into the Eglin Ecological Monitoring Group within the Fire Section of Jackson
Guard, assisting natural resource managers at Jackson Guard with trust resources on the military
reservation. Currently, USFWS-FR personnel organizationally support aquatic resource
management on Eglin through the Wildlife Section of Jackson Guard, in order to better address
aquatic resources and the federally endangered Okaloosa darter (Etheostoma okaloosae),
federally threatened Gulf of Mexico sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhinchus desotoi), and two
imperiled freshwater mussel species. Oversight and supervision of USFWS-FR employees is
provided by the Project Leader, USFWS, Panama City, Florida. A Scope of Work (SOW) is
developed annually and approved by both USFWS and NRS to identify the annual work plan and
outline critical data needs and action items.
Role of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission on Eglin
Eglin AFB and the FWC have enjoyed an effective partnership and close working relationship
for the past several decades. As a conservation partner, the FWC assists the NRS in the review
and the development of management plans. This agency also provides technical information and
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-3
support of Eglin’s fish and wildlife management program. Eglin will protect all state listed
species by all means practicable.
Eglin is designated as a State of Florida Wildlife Management Area and, as such, enables Eglin
specific rules and regulations to be codified into the FAC (FAC 68A-15.063) annually. Under
this program, the NRS serves as the lead management agency and collects fees from the sale of
hunting and fishing permits to manage fish and wildlife resources under state jurisdiction. In
exchange, Eglin permits public hunting and fishing opportunities and the FWC provides fish and
wildlife law enforcement support from its Wildlife Officers. Operating under this system, the
NRS proposes Eglin specific rules and regulations that the FWC codifies, that become state law,
and that FWC Wildlife Officers enforce. These actions enable FWC Wildlife Officers to enforce
Eglin specific rules, such as no hunting in closed areas and unique management unit (MU)
regulations.
State Wildlife Conservation Strategy
All 50 states are required to develop a State Wildlife Conservation Strategy in order to be
eligible for federal funding for Wildlife Legacy money. Florida has just recently completed their
Strategy and a copy can be found at http://myfwc.com/wildlifelegacy/StrategyDownload.html.
The goals of the Strategy are: to provide a blueprint for management and conservation of all
Florida’s wildlife, define a common vision for protecting wildlife, design a non-regulatory effort
creating partnership to implement the Strategy through local actions, and target resources to
prevent native wildlife from declining to the point of imperilment. As a steward of significant
areas of wildlife habitat in Florida, Eglin NRS intends to cooperate with FWC in implementation
of the Strategy.
The Strategy identifies nearly 1,000 wildlife species that are Species of Greatest Conservation
Need and 45 different habitat categories. Threats to the habitats have also been identified and
quantified. A matrix was then created to indicate which habitats the different threats affect and
to what extent. The Strategy then goes on to address potential solutions to mitigate or remove
threats such as incentive-based programs for private land owners to encourage habitat
conservation, acquisition of important lands, cooperative conservation efforts with public and
private landowners, and public education. Eglin NRS will cooperate with this effort by
continuing to conduct sound ecosystem management, providing data on species and habitats
when available, and conducting monitoring on species and habitats when feasible. Examples of
current efforts that fall in this category are shorebird monitoring, sea turtle monitoring, and
gopher tortoise surveys.
Role of the National Marine Fisheries Service on Eglin
As is the case with the FWC and the USFWS, NMFS has been a conservation partner for Eglin
and has worked closely with the NRS on numerous projects. NMFS is the regulatory agency that
enforces such laws as the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and the ESA for marine
species. The NRS works with NMFS to minimize potential takes or harassment of marine
species protected under these laws.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-4
Role of DoD Organizations
AFMC, Eglin’s Major Command (MAJCOM) has many responsibilities related to INRMP
implementation. Their primary INRMP-related task is to provide execution guidance and to
oversee implementation of Natural Resources management programs on installations within the
command. MAJCOM must also review INRMPs for compliance with pertinent directives,
ensure that installations conduct required inventories of Natural Resources, and validate
installation Natural Resources budgets, staffing, and training requirements.
The Installation or Wing Commander serves the following roles:
(1) Approves the INRMP;
(2) Endorses the annual review of the INRMP as valid and current;
(3) Supplies funding and staffing to guarantee implementation of the INRMP; and
(4) Oversees access to and use of installation natural resources.
The Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE) assists with implementation of the
INRMP in the following ways:
(1) Provides technical assistance to MAJCOMs and installations on Natural Resources
programs and training;
(2) Aids installations in the preparation and review of INRMPs;
(3) Provides and manages contracts, inter-agency agreements, and cooperative
agreements to assist MAJCOMs and installations with implementation of Natural
Resources management projects; and
(4) Manages the forestry; agricultural and grazing; and hunting, fishing and outdoor
recreation program reimbursable budgets.
The Air Force Civil Engineering Support Agency (AFCESA) provides technical guidance and
expertise on pest management, grounds maintenance, and water conservation. Additionally,
AFCESA is expected to play an increasing role in administration of wildland firefighter
certifications.
The BASH Team supplies guidance on minimizing wildlife hazards to aircraft operations.
7.1.1
Biodiversity Conservation
Introduction
At the foundation of ecosystem management is the conservation of biodiversity. Biodiversity is
the variety of life and its processes; it includes communities and ecosystems in which they occur,
and the ecological and evolutionary processes that keep them functioning, yet ever changing and
adapting (Noss and Cooperrider, 1994). Four levels of biodiversity exist: genetic diversity,
species richness, ecosystem diversity and landscape diversity.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-5
DoD, conservation organizations and the scientific community have recognized that the
protection of biodiversity on military lands can only be accomplished using a broad, ecosystem
approach. A need exists to integrate across ecological, economic, and cultural areas of concern,
which influences how Eglin uses and interacts with the natural systems. A successful ecosystem
management approach occurs with the integration of all three concerns; focusing on only one
concern is too narrow a perspective for management.
This ecosystem approach does not obviate the need to focus on some individual species, but
rather puts species management into the proper context. A single species approach is an
appropriate, viable, and necessary tool in many circumstances; however, this approach is not
adequate for solving larger problems of disappearing species and degrading habitats. A more
coordinated effort at a larger scale is necessary, as it is simply not possible to save hundreds or
thousands of endangered species one by one. A single species approach does not explicitly
recognize the complexities, interrelationships, and dynamic processes in nature nor does it
adequately incorporate human dimensions into management solutions. This often leads to social
conflict and failed species management. However, species require functioning, intact habitats in
which to live; thus single species management must ultimately deal with habitats and
ecosystems.
Eglin’s Program of Biodiversity Conservation
Key operational steps are crucial to the implementation of biodiversity conservation. These steps
include: 1) an inventory of ecologically significant components of the landscape, 2) conservation
planning in order to divide the landscape into manageable conservation units and to assess
threats, 3) identification of uncertainties related to these units to be addressed through research,
4) monitoring of the effects of management operations to quantify success and identify
unanticipated problems, 5) creation of a decision support structure to ensure informed
management decisions, and 6) development of partnerships beyond Eglin’s borders to improve
conservation effectiveness. Though inventory is generally a first step in biodiversity
conservation, most of the remaining steps are pursued simultaneously.
Inventory
A comprehensive inventory of natural communities, species presence, and species abundance
serves as the foundation for biodiversity conservation. There has been extensive progress made
in inventorying Eglin’s natural resources during the last decade including both fish and aquatic
invertebrate inventories. Completed inventory projects include a comprehensive inventory and
assessment of Eglin’s 34 natural communities, rare amphibians and reptiles (herpetofauna), rare
plants, RCW cavity tree surveys and other T & E species surveys, and forest stand inventories.
Ecosystems, communities, and species are dynamic in nature, changing in their spatial
distribution and abundance over time. Systems of inventory, while not practical for all levels of
biodiversity, must be conducted at some reoccurring frequency to account for these changes.
The use of technology such as satellite imagery and analysis software facilitates the re-inventory
process for ecological communities. Information on the distribution of rare species across the
landscape, however, must be pursued by extensive field surveys. Initial inventories of rare
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-6
species at Eglin AFB were initiated in the early- to mid-1990’s through Florida’s State Heritage
Program.
Planning
The Nature Conservancy’s (TNC) Site Conservation Planning process is being used to guide
biodiversity management of Eglin’s landscape. The process focuses on ecological communities
and umbrella species (those species who by their nature capture broader trends in ecological
condition) to organize and prioritize management actions across the landscape. This process
identified 19 Conservation Targets (11 natural communities and 8 species) that will help guide
the application of management and monitoring resources. The long-term (50-year) landscape
level goal for these targets is referred to as the Desired Future Condition (DFC). A second
important part of the planning process is recognizing and assessing threats to these conservation
targets that will impede progress toward the DFC. Such threats include fire suppression,
invasive non-native species, soil erosion, and habitat fragmentation.
Research
One of the primary threats to the management of conservation targets is uncertainty caused by a
lack of information. Under Eglin’s adaptive management program, management actions are
approached as research projects to address information gaps and uncertainty before they
negatively affect biodiversity. In some instances, the level of uncertainty is so great that
comprehensive research must be used to evaluate management actions. One example was the
evaluation of hardwood reduction methods in Eglin’s sandhill habitat done by Provencher et al.
(2001). Restoration of sandhill habitat is critical to the recovery of Eglin’s endangered species
and to improve mission flexibility. Following long periods of fire exclusion, hardwood
encroachment was significantly degrading Eglin’s upland habitats. To showcase the role of
research in adaptive management, a study coordinated by TNC was initiated in 1994 to compare
three longleaf pine ecosystem restoration techniques: prescribed fire, herbicide, and mechanical
felling of hardwoods. The spatial scale of this research project was the largest ever undertaken,
designed to match the scale of the restoration challenges facing Eglin managers.
All three techniques resulted in significant reduction of hardwoods; however, prescribed fire was
significantly less expensive than the other treatments. Through analysis, this study provided a
list of potential indicators to assess trends in longleaf pine restoration across the Eglin landscape.
Information obtained through this research established that ecosystem recovery is a slow process
that requires long-term coordination of management actions. The researchers found several
species previously unknown to science, which provided an added benefit.
Monitoring
Monitoring is essential to manage risk in natural resource conservation. For most conservation
targets, population or community monitoring is sufficient to address information needs. Each
conservation target identified in the planning process is monitored, with varying levels of
intensity, for its response to management actions. Monitoring serves as the only scientifically
valid method of “supervising and reviewing” the impacts of natural resource management. Over
time, monitoring reduces the uncertainty associated with management risks by filling
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-7
information gaps about ecosystem response to management actions. Community targets are
especially important for monitoring, as endangered species’ habitat trends can be an indicator of
a species’ population trend. To monitor the effects of fire and forest management on Eglin’s
longleaf pine sandhill community, a series of permanent sampling points are used to follow
changes before and after management actions (Figure 7-3). Within these plots, ecological
indicators are used to assess the success or failure of the management action. Similarly, aquatic
habitats are monitored for management-induced changes. Monitoring is crucial for assessing and
abating immediate risk of management actions, and for allowing managers to more efficiently
apply conservation measures across the landscape. In both uplands and aquatic environments,
remote sensing is integrated into monitoring to increase sampling efficiency and provide accurate
landscape-level perspectives. More information regarding the past, present, and future
community monitoring efforts on Eglin AFB can be found in the Ecological Monitoring CP,
while information regarding species monitoring can be found in the T&E Species CP.
Decision-Support System
Successful implementation of biodiversity conservation and adaptive management involves the
collection, analysis, and synthesis of large and complex datasets and their incorporation of this
information into the decision making process. To accomplish this, the NRS must fully integrate
monitoring and research efforts into database management and the GIS; this is discussed in
greater detail in Section 7.2. To synthesize this information, the NRS uses spatial modeling tools
to help integrate different management objectives across the Eglin landscape. Recent advances
in software and technology have facilitated the modeling process, enabling real-time
spatially-explicit information to be simultaneously analyzed and displayed in order to make
informed management decisions (see Section 7.2).
One such decision support model is being utilized through the Fire Management Element of the
NRS. This decision support model influences where and under what conditions fire will be
applied to the Eglin landscape. The model is a method of integrating and balancing management
objectives for all natural resources on Eglin and potentially across the surrounding landscape as
well. Ultimately, such ecosystem management tools will assist other DoD installations with
similar management challenges.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-8
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-9
Figure 7-3. Terrestrial and Aquatic Monitoring Plots on Eglin AFB
Partnerships
Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership
The Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership (GCPEP) was formed in 1996 when large acreage
landowners came together to conserve and restore the dwindling longleaf pine ecosystem and the
unique aquatic resources of NWF and south Alabama. Together the members operate under a
multi-party Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to help conserve more than 1.05 million
acres (Figure 7-4, below). GCPEP includes the following partners:
●
DoD (Eglin AFB, Naval Air Station Pensacola, Naval Air Station Whiting Field)
●
USFWS
●
FDEP (Coastal & Aquatic Managed Areas, and Recreation and Parks [Blackwater River
State Park (SP), Big Lagoon SP, Perdido Key SP, Tarkiln Bayou])
●
Florida Division of Forestry (Blackwater River SF, Pine Log SF, Point Washington SF)
●
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
●
International Paper
●
National Park Service (Gulf Islands National Seashore)
●
NWFWMD
●
Nokuse Plantation
●
TNC (Florida Chapter and Alabama Chapter)
●
USFS (Conecuh National Forest)
This partnership is located in one of the most biologically significant regions in North America,
the Florida Panhandle. Despite being a small percentage of the land and water area within the
Panhandle, GCPEP lands and waters contain many of the area’s target species and natural
communities. The significance of the region stems from the large, contiguous landscape of
longleaf pine and its associated communities along with portions of five major watersheds. The
GCPEP landscape contains more than 20 percent of the remaining longleaf pine ecosystem and
more than 50 percent of the remaining old growth longleaf pine stands. Additionally, four of the
87 watersheds identified by TNC as United States “hotspots” for at-risk freshwater fish and
mussels are found within the GCPEP region (Master et al., 1998).
To improve stewardship of these resources and to increase management effectiveness, Eglin
AFB works with these partners to exchange information, to set conservation priorities, and to
implement cooperative conservation strategies at the landscape scale. GCPEP and its member
partners have been instrumental in protection efforts to prevent future listings and in leading
recovery efforts for many imperiled species, including the RCW, the Okaloosa darter, the Gulf
sturgeon, the Florida bog frog, the flatwoods salamander, and the Florida black bear.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-10
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-11
Figure 7-4. Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership (GCPEP)
Hotspot of Rarity and Richness
The Florida Panhandle, where Eglin resides, is one of the leading biodiversity hotspots in the
United States, with upwards of 50 imperiled species (Figure 7-5). These hotspots were identified
by examining the total number of species and the number of species at risk. The inclusion of
these two factors gives a more accurate picture of the overall conservation importance of an area.
Within the Panhandle, many diverse and unique habitats can be found. They include sandhills,
flatwoods, seepage slopes, steephead ravines, hardwood forests, cypress swamps, coastal sand
dunes, floodplain forests, and pitcher plant bogs. This diversity of habitats supports many rare
species, some of which are found nowhere else in the world. Two such species are found on
Eglin—the Florida bog frog and the Okaloosa darter.
Figure 7-5. Hotspots of Rarity and Richness in the Lower 48 States
Source: Stein et al., 2000
Florida Natural Areas Inventory
The FNAI is a non-profit organization administered by Florida State University. The Inventory
was founded in 1981 as a member of TNC’s international network of natural heritage programs.
FNAI funding is provided through contracts and grants, including work for the FDEP, the FWC,
and other state and federal agencies (FNAI, 2006). The mission of the FNAI is to collect,
interpret, and disseminate ecological information critical to the conservation of Florida’s
biological diversity. FNAI’s completion of five Eglin resource surveys, which were funded
through the DoD Legacy Resource Management Program, formed the knowledge base that Eglin
managers have used during the past decade. The surveys included the original natural
communities’ survey, ecological site quality survey, rare plant survey, rare amphibian and reptile
survey, and invasive non-native species survey. These inventories are the foundation for
ecosystem management.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-12
Northwest Florida Greenway
The DoD, the State of Florida and TNC have signed a Memorandum of Partnership (MOP) to
work together to preserve natural areas to help sustain this region’s military, biodiversity, and
recreational opportunities. The primary method of accomplishing this goal is through the
purchase of perpetual conservation easements. One such project that is underway is a potential
easement with neighboring Nokuse Plantation to the east. Additionally, TNC is actively
pursuing other easements and purchases along the proposed NWF Greenway, which stretches
from the Florida-Alabama border to the Apalachicola National Forest (Figure 7-6).
One of the major drivers of the NWF Greenway effort is the need for a location with enough
special use airspace and surface area large enough to support realistic testing and training of
Long Range Standoff Weapons (LRSOW). The major requirement for LRSOW testing is a four
to six mile corridor along a 500 mile length of airspace. The area underneath the corridor must
be relatively free of development and people. Furthermore, the entire test airspace and ground
space must be available year round without significant internal mission encroachment or external
environmental, development, or recreational concerns. The establishment of the Greenway
would create a significant opportunity to meet conservation and military needs. However,
serious challenges exist, including strong public opposition, airspace reconfiguration, and real
property acquisition.
7.1.2
High Quality Natural Communities, Significant Botanical Sites, and Outstanding
Natural Areas
Eglin’s contribution to southeastern conservation is evident in its extraordinary biodiversity and
the exemplary quality of its many remnant natural communities. While the greater part of the
installation is globally significant due to its biodiversity, specific areas exist that are unique due
to their high quality examples of natural communities or presence of rare species (Figure 7-7
through 7-9). These areas were identified by the FNAI through a project funded by the DoD
Legacy Resource Management Program. Termed “High Quality Natural Communities,” these
areas are distinguished by the uniqueness of the community, ecological condition, species
diversity, and presence of rare species. These high quality areas, totaling 75,266 acres and
covering approximately 16 percent of the installation, are tangible examples of the successful
restoration actions of the NRS and the compatibility of these communities with most mission
activities.
FNAI also identified special habitats that support rare plants on Eglin called Significant
Botanical Sites (SBS), as well as larger-scale landscapes containing complexes of these High
Quality Natural Communities and rare species, which they named ONAs (ONA)
(FNAI 1995 and 1997) (Figures 7-7 through 7-9). Large portions of these two areas overlap with
one another. Combined, these ONAs and SBSs total 43,210 acres, or approximately nine percent
of the installation. These landscapes contain the highest quality examples of the natural
communities on the installation, and, by extension, the highest quality examples of these natural
communities globally. These areas are living legacies of the original forested landscape and the
different natural communities that occurred in this region.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-13
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-14
Figure 7-6. Proposed Northwest Florida Greenway Corridor
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-15
Figure 7-7. Outstanding Natural Areas on Eglin AFB
NOTE: Areas not Already Restricted by Test Mission Facilities are Shown on the Map
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-16
Figure 7-8. Significant Botanical Sites on Eglin AFB
NOTE: Areas not Already Restricted by Test Mission Facilities are Shown on the Map
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-17
Figure 7-9. High Quality Natural Communities Located on Eglin AFB
ONAs:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
A-77 ONA
Alaqua-Blount Creek Confluence
Alice Creek
Boiling Creek/Little Boiling Creek
Brier Creek
East Bay Flatwoods and Scrub Mosaic
Live Oak Creek
Lower Weaver River
Patterson ONA and Extension
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
Piney Creek
Prairie Creek
Santa Rosa Island
Scrub Pond
Spencer Flats Wetlands
White Point
Whitmier Island
Yellow River Basin
SBSs:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
East Bay Savannahs
Patterson Natural Area Expansion
Santa Rosa Island
Blue Spring Creek Lakes
Malone Creek
Titi Creek Wilderness Area
Live Oak Creek
Turkey Gobbler Creek Cypress Swamp
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
Turkey Hen Creek Swamp
Boiling Creek and Little Boiling Creek
Hick’s Creek Prairie
Whitmier Island
Brier Creek
Hickory Branch Hardwood Forest
Piney Creek
These ONAs, SBSs, and High Quality Natural Communities are essential for long-term
ecological research and as reference conditions for restoration actions on the base. Therefore,
these areas and communities must be specifically accounted for in any proposed management
activity. The focus of management in these areas will be the maintenance of natural processes,
such as the fire regime, and abatement of specific threats, such as invasive species (e.g. sand pine
and cogon grass). In very select cases, and with consensus among all strategic and operational
planners within the NRS, some mechanical methods of longleaf removal may be planned.
Longleaf pine removal would only be utilized however, to restore the natural overstory structure
to conditions optimal for longleaf regeneration and understory species richness. The ecological
qualities of these areas require that management be carried out with a higher level of scrutiny,
especially with regard to the high quality herbaceous ground cover and high density of rare
species.
Eglin’s NRS has developed general management and restoration guidelines and an internal
process to review management actions that need a multi-disciplinary assessment. General
management suggestions for each community type are presented in the Eglin AFB Natural
Community Survey Final Report (FNAI, 1997). More specific guidelines relating to each
community’s management are being developed by Eglin’s NRS staff to be incorporated into
pertinent CPs. When management actions not covered in the general guidelines are proposed in
any High Quality Natural Community, SBS, or ONA, appropriate personnel from each area of
expertise within the NRS will review the proposed actions and make recommendations.
Additionally, the same process will be followed for any operations in the vicinity of unique
wetland communities such as seepage slopes, steepheads, and depression marshes. Any
management that occurs in areas outside the High Quality Natural Communities, SBSs, ONAs,
and sensitive wetland communities will continue to undergo the standard, review process (such
as circulating maps of proposed actions to appropriate NRS personnel for review).
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-18
Geographic Information Systems
7.2 GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS
The NRS will continue to further develop its GIS and data management systems within the DSS.
Successful implementation of biodiversity conservation and adaptive management involves the
collection, analysis, and synthesis of its large and complex data sets and incorporation into the
decision making process. To accomplish this, the NRS will synthesize monitoring and research
data into an integrated enterprise database/GIS.
The current information management system and GIS data layers are in a transition stage from
various database/geographic formats - such as Access .mdb files, shape files, Computer-Aided
Design (CAD) files, and raster grid - to an Oracle centralized database server. Currently, a
process (Table 7-1) is being followed to ensure all data will be cleaned, migrated to Oracle
properly, and stored in the centralized location. All data owners will modify their data which
will be stored at the centralized location within the DSS. Those reading the information will be
privileged to the real-time updates without data duplication. Completed DSS applications
include the fire management system, sea turtle application, and RCW automated forage habitat
generation. Additional applications will be online by the end of 2007 and by 2008 all
applications will be completed and fully integrated into the Natural Resource Decision Support
System (NRDSS) (http://eg-186-021:8888/jacksonguard/index.htm).
Table 7-1. Current Process Used for Oracle Data Maintenance
Step*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Action
Collect and clean data
Access DB - identify unused/extraneous tables/data elements
Migrate full access DB to Oracle test server
Specify SDS compliant view requirement
Develop SDS compliant view in species schema
Reference/link to GeoBase Standard/SDS compliant view
Publish GeoBase Standard/SDS data/view to Oracle production server
Specify DSS interface requirements
Design DSS Interface
Design DSS database support objects
Develop DSS database support objects
Develop DSS interface
Test DSS
Deploy DSS to production server
Specify user spatial views
Spatial user view creation
Create Metadata
Maintain DSS (Maintain & add reports as required)
Create recurrent dataload process
DB = Database; DSS = Decision Support System; SDS = Spatial Data Standards
* Steps may occur concurrently
7.2.1
Eglin GeoBase Plan
This DSS will be consistent with the Eglin GeoBase Strategic Plan (EGSP). The purpose of the
EGSP is to provide the AAC with the geospatial information necessary for development,
acquisition, testing, deployment, and sustainment of all air-delivered weapons. This plan will
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-19
create an organizational structure to facilitate the development and sharing of data across
functional areas. This system will give the NRS a means of coordinating and organizing
geospatial data collection efforts. The result will be an enterprise database system, accessible
throughout the Eglin complex, enabling information to be shared between work processes. The
NRDSS (single node) database network will facilitate data sharing of the most up-to-date
information. This system will provide direct ownership of information, and a robust system of
data-redundancy that ensures access to information in the event of a single server being taken
off-line. Information exchange with Eglin’s TW will occur through auto-updates at night or on
weekends for modified features. This will minimize delays between actions and reports. It will
also allow multiple users to share data (from one platform) simultaneously, providing
multi-dimensional analysis in a near-real-time cycle. This plan will facilitate the collection and
use of information across the entire Eglin complex, therefore reducing duplicate resource
expenditures of same or similar data sets. Since under the GeoBase initiative GIS will be
primarily web-based, it will also significantly reduce the number of individual software licenses
needed. It will result in greater access to data and ease of GIS analysis through user-friendly,
internet-based software.
Eglin GeoBase Mission Statement
The overall aim is to provide the AAC with the geospatial information necessary for
development, acquisition, testing, deployment, and sustainment of all air-delivered weapons.
Through a secure network, delivery of exact and current information can be done in a timely
manner. This information is easily accessible through a logical interface, consistently
maintained, and based on reliable sources. It enables end users and decision-makers to fulfill
their duties and responsibilities successfully and proficiently. This will provide the right
information, in the right place, right now and in the future.
Eglin GeoBase Vision Statement
Currently, all levels of the AAC community readily access the same spatial database through
secure, user-friendly, and discipline-appropriate interfaces. The database is updated as
modifications are made and is fully integrated into work process systems. Current and accurate
geospatial data will be easily maintained in this database system, accessible by every desktop at
Eglin AFB.
Eglin GeoBase Goals
Goal 1 Foster joint cooperation and collaboration to develop geospatial information solutions.
Goal 2 Develop and maintain precise and reliable geospatial information.
Goal 3 Develop technology solutions to business problems that enhance mission performance.
Goal 4 Integrate geospatial information solutions with existing systems.
Goal 5 Provide user-friendly and reliable access to geospatial information.
Goal 6 Educate management and staff on the organizational and technical aspects of GeoBase.
Goal 7 Develop a framework for geospatial information system sustainment.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-20
Goal 8 Explore the utility of new technology.
Goal 9 Develop a data and system security and availability plan.
7.2.2
GeoIntegration Office
Under the direction of the AAC Commander, the GeoIntegration Office is now a subcommittee
of the installation’s Chief Information Officer (CIO) Committee, which is chaired by the
96 Communications Squadron Commander. The GeoIntegration Office works with the CIO
Working Group to present issues and guidance to the CIO Committee on an as-needed basis.
The CIO Working Group will administer the integration, coordination, and continued
development of NRS’s GIS with the Eglin GIS system.
The GeoIntegration Office will guide the operational development and implementation of the
GIS technology and applications within Eglin. NRS has been a leader in the development of
Eglin’s GIS and will continue to participate with the GeoIntegration Office as they continue to:
●
Convert essential historic geographic information into a common format compatible with
existing Eglin AFB hardware and software configurations and the Spatial Data Standards
for Facilities, Infrastructure, and Environment (SDSFIE);
●
Ensure that appropriate databases with spatial content resulting from any initiative are
compatible with Eglin’s GIS data dictionary and are added to the GIS in a timely manner;
●
Provide geographic information to the Eglin user community through a variety of
platforms consistent with end-user requirements, knowledge and training levels;
●
Evaluate leading edge technologies in support of procurement actions to provide the most
profitable tools available; and
●
Promote communication and education to increase awareness and understanding of the
technology.
7.2.3
Data Standards
NRS will develop and maintain its GIS according to DoD requirements developed and
implemented by the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI), the SDSFIE and the Federal
Geographic Data Committee (FGDC).
A GIS Metadatabase will be maintained by members of the GIS Working Group and will contain
comprehensive information on each GIS feature. Prior to transferring the current GIS files into
the enterprise database system, each data owner or responsible individual will ensure valid, clean
geometries and will update the GIS Metadatabase records associated with the centralized files.
Any updated information to these features following entry into the enterprise database system
will be documented. The updated information will contain (at a minimum) a brief description
and the new date of any changes between old and new versions in the metadatabase. The
metadatabase entries will follow FGDC standards.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-21
Outdoor Recreation, Hunting, and
Fresh Water Fishing Management
7.3 OUTDOOR RECREATION, HUNTING, AND FRESH WATER FISHING
MANAGEMENT
In accordance with the Sikes Act and AFI 32-7064, the NRS strives to promote and develop
sustainable recreational opportunities, which include hunting, fishing, trapping and
nonconsumptive uses, in a manner compatible with the military mission and subject to safety and
security requirements. Local communities adjacent to Eglin AFB have strong ties to recreational
use of the lands that now comprise the installation and continuing to provide for such, foster
strong public relations.
The NRS strives to provide quality and affordable outdoor recreational opportunities to Eglin
AFB affiliated personnel and local communities for their benefit and enjoyment. It is not an
objective to generate maximum revenue from the sale of Eglin AFB public use permits but to
maintain an income base necessary to facilitate self-sufficiency of the program. Unlike many
other Eglin AFB programs, self sufficiency is a requirement since very little financial
contribution comes from the Installation and/or Command level.
The following information is provided as a general overview of the Eglin Outdoor Recreation,
Hunting and Fresh Water Fishing program. Detailed information regarding operational activities
conducted in support of INRMP goals and objectives, as well as game species management
philosophy and recreational emphasis areas, will be addressed in the Eglin AFB Outdoor
Recreation, Hunting and Fresh Water Fishing CP.
7.3.1
Degree of Public Access
AFI 32-7064 requires classification of Air Force managed lands into one of the five following
categories that describe the degree of public access for all areas that are identified as suitable for
outdoor recreation. An installation or area may have multiple designations. For example, an
area may be designated category E for hunting and category A for fishing.
Category A is open to the general public regardless of association with the military or
other DoD agencies.
Category B is open to DoD employees, guests, family members, and retirees only.
Category C is open to installation personnel and guests, permanent change of station or
temporary duty personnel and their family members only. This category does not include
retirees or DoD employees from other installations or military services not on permanent
change of station or official temporary duty, except as guests.
Category D is open to installation military and civilian personnel only. This category
includes only those personnel assigned permanent change of station or official travel duty
at the installation. It excludes family members, guests, retirees, and other DoD
employees.
Category E is closed. Category E areas on Eglin include: buffer areas adjacent to active
test and training ranges that are frequently within recurring test and training mission
safety profiles, and test ranges and associated administrative areas. Category E also
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-22
includes areas with sensitive security concerns, areas with UXO concerns, and other areas
such as sewage sprayfields and landfills.
Table 7-2 shows the available areas for each category on the Eglin Reservation.
Table 7-2. Available Areas for Hunting and Fishing on the Eglin Reservation
Category
A
B
C
D
E
7.3.2
Hunting
271,495 Acres
2,076 Acres (Main Base)
0
0
188,061 Acres
Fishing
19 Impoundments
5 Impoundments
0
0
188,061 Acres
Classification of Recreational Opportunities
AFI 32-7064 requires the classification of Air Force managed property into the following
categories to describe outdoor recreation opportunities.
●
Class I areas (general outdoor recreation areas) are suitable for intensive recreational
activities such as camping, winter sports, and water sports.
●
Class II areas (natural environmental areas) can support dispersed recreational activities
such as hunting, fishing, birding, hiking, sightseeing, jogging, climbing, and riding.
●
Class III areas (special interest areas) contain valuable archeological, botanical,
ecological, geological, historic, zoological, scenic, or other features that require
protection.
The vast majority of Eglin’s 275,000 acres open to outdoor recreation are classified as Class II
areas. Table 7-3 lists the Class I areas and their acreage.
Table 7-3. Class I Areas on Eglin AFB
SITE NAME
White Point Day Use Area
Timberlake Recreation Area
Anderson Pond Recreation Area
Weaver River Camp Site
Buck Pond Camp Site
Mets Bluff Camp Site
Carr Landing Camp Site
Gin Hole Landing
Duck Pond Camp Site
Kepner Pond Camp Site
Jr. Walton Pond Camp Site
Speck Pond Camp Site
Rocky Creek Camp Site
Indigo Pond Camp Site
Bay Flats Camp Site
Blue Springs Camp Site
Basin Bayou Camp Site
Destin Bridge Recreation Site
Okaloosa Island (Open Areas)
02/02/10
ACREAGE
950
969
174
2
2
1
1
1
4
2
2
3
1
3
4
1
3
3
Entire open island 828.2
Final
Page 7-23
At the present time the only Class III area on Eglin AFB is located on Okaloosa Island (eastern
portion of SRI open to public access). The portion of island south of U.S. Highway 98, east of
Air Force Site A-3 and west of the Eglin Beach Community Center contains a significant portion
of the range of the federally endangered lichen Cladonia perforata that was being adversely
affected by pedestrian trespassing. The perimeter of this area was fenced with approximately
three miles of sand fencing and posted with no trespassing signs. The purpose of the fence and
signs was to deny pedestrian entry from U.S. Highway 98 and along the established beach access
sites. Another portion of the island adjacent to the East Pass is maintained as a shorebird nesting
area and is posted to prevent public entry. In addition to these areas there are many other areas
on Eglin that contain rare and sensitive plant and animal communities. These areas, however,
are not impacted by foot traffic or recreational use other than illegal or unauthorized motor
vehicle use. The NRS has identified these areas and maintains a series of barricades to prevent
motor vehicle use in these areas. For additional information on outdoor recreation policy,
regulations and fee structures, refer to Section 7.3.4 and Figure 7-10.
7.3.3
Coordination and Development of Public Use Regulations
Outdoor Activities Committee Process, Charter and Membership
The Eglin AFB Outdoor Recreation, Hunting and Fresh Water Fishing Map and Regulation
product governs all public use and access to the installation. This map and regulation product is
developed and approved annually by the Outdoor Activities Committee (OAC) and is applicable
from 1 October - 30 September each year. The OAC is chaired by the 96th ABW Commander
and committee membership comprises representation from a host of military test, training and
support organizations which include: 46 TW, 96 SFS, 96 CEG, AAC/JAV and AAC/SE.
OAC Charter:
●
To formally approve, disapprove or modify new and existing Eglin specific rules and
regulations governing public outdoor recreational activities on Eglin AFB.
●
To review and incorporate new State of Florida hunting and fishing regulations in order
to maintain Eglin AFB Wildlife Management Area status.
●
To proactively deconflict and ensure all outdoor recreational activities are compatible
with the Eglin test and training missions as well as the missions of various tenant
organizations.
●
To annually approve the Eglin AFB Outdoor Recreation, Hunting and Fresh Water
Fishing Map and Regulation product, this is produced and disseminated to the public
beginning each September.
●
The 96 ABW/CC or his/her designated representative chairs the committee.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-24
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-25
Figure 7-10. Outdoor Recreation Hunting and Freshwater Fishing Map
FWC and Wildlife Management Area Coordination
The FWC is afforded formal membership within the OAC and plays a critical role in the
development, coordination and enforcement of Eglin specific rules and regulations. Prior to the
OAC convening each spring, NRS personnel meet with Regional FWC staff in Panama City to
coordinate proposed Eglin specific rules and regulations changes, as well as discuss applicable
changes to the Chapter 68A, FAC. As previously discussed, Eglin’s designation as a FWC
Wildlife Management Area is mutually beneficial and requires annual coordination to codify
Eglin AFB specific rules and regulations and ensure program compatibility with FWC efforts
and initiatives.
7.3.4
Providing Public Access
Impacts of Unexploded Ordnance on Public Recreation
Recent changes in DoD policy have placed greater emphasis on UXO and public safety. These
changes have far reaching implications on Eglin’s outdoor recreation, hunting and fresh water
fishing programs. Portions of the installation that have been open to public recreation for the last
several decades were previously used as air to surface gunnery ranges. Most of these ranges
were abandoned in the late 1940’s and 1950’s and were later site prepared and planted with pine
trees in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Many of these areas have been commercially harvested and have
been site prepared and planted a second time. Fortunately, there has not been a single UXO
safety incident involving a recreational user or a commercial timber contractor on Eglin AFB.
Multiple measures were taken in September 2000 to increase public awareness of the presence of
UXO. The map and regulation product which is given to each permit holder was modified to
depict areas with known, probable, and possible UXO contamination. A 5-minute UXO
awareness and safety video was produced and is viewed by all permit sales customers prior to
any permit sales. A UXO awareness and safety brochure is available and is given to each
customer purchasing a permit for other persons and for customers purchasing permits through
the mail. Informational UXO caution signs have been posted at all major roads entering the
installation from public highways.
Management Unit Concept
In 1990, the NRS employed a MU approach to improve the quality of the outdoor recreation
experiences and to achieve quality-based wildlife management objectives. This approach was
necessary given Eglin’s dynamic and diverse mission, the large size of the installation, the
widely disparate densities of game species, and competing and often conflicting interests of
public user groups.
To those unaccustomed to recreating on Eglin, the MU concept may appear to create overly
complex rules and regulations. This method, however, provides the best balance of providing
quality recreational opportunities within the context of an active and dynamic test and training
mission. The only way to reduce this perceived complexity would be to reduce public recreation
opportunities by closing additional areas. A description of each MU is provided below in
Table 7-4.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-26
Seasonal Hunter Quota
Open to Special Fox, Raccoon,
Bobcat Hunting with Use of Dogs
Quality Quail Management
Quality Deer Management
Quality Turkey Management
Under Perimeter Access Control
Use of Check Stations and
Collection of Biological Data
Open to Deer Dog Hunting
Stalk/Still Hunting Only
Archery Only
Archery/Muzzleloading Only
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Closed to Recreation Outside
Established Hunting Seasons for
Wildlife Management and Other
Purposes
Closed to Public Motor Vehicle
Use Outside Established Hunting
Seasons
Conditional Hunting Opportunity
on a Non-Mission Interference
Basis
Walk In Access Only
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Acreage
Page 7-27
Daily Hunter Quota
CenterFire Rifle Use Permitted
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
Open to Dog Hunting for Small
Game
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
Management Unit
N = No; Y = Yes; Vol = Volume
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
1,866
7,230
4,689
663
2,022
53,418
20,728
2,133
4,347
1,719
10,315
6,595
1,979
4,895
5,508
32,375
75,669
1,901
8,048
23,309
2,076
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7A
8
8A
9
9A
9B
10
11
12
13
13A
13B
14
15
Final
Source: Johnson, 2005
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
02/02/10
Table 7-4. Management Unit Descriptions
Public Use Permit System
Permits for all Eglin AFB authorized outdoor recreational activities are available from the NRS
office located at 107 Highway 85 North, Niceville FL 32578. Permits may be purchased in
person or by mail and require photo identification which includes full name, date of birth, current
address and phone number. NRS office hours are Monday-Thursday 7:00 am-4:30 pm, Friday
7:00 am-6:00 pm, and Saturday 7:30 am-12:30 pm. The NRS office is closed Sundays and
Federal holidays.
The NRS utilizes a computer based system to issue and track all permit sales. Maintaining this
detailed database allows for analysis of permit sale trends, user demographics and repeat
customer rates. Table 7-5 shows the types of Eglin AFB recreational permits available, as well
as associated fees. Table 7-6 shows annual revenue generated through the sale of public use
permits for the period of Fiscal Year (FY)00-05.
Table 7-5. Types of Recreational Public Use Permits on the Eglin Reservation
General Gun
Senior Citizen
Disabled
10 Day Trip
E4 and Below
Under 16 Years of Age
MU 6
Combination Hunt & Fish
Sportsman’s
$50.00
Hunting
$40.00
Small Game
$10.00
Daily Dove (1st Phase Only)
$1.00
Trapping
$20.00
Fox, Raccoon, Opossum
$25.00
Special Mobility Impaired Hunt
$5.00
Special Youth Hunt
$45.00
Special Turkey Hunt
General Fishing
Senior Citizen
Disabled
$12.00
$6.00
$1.00
General Recreation
$7.00
Fishing
10 Day Trip
E4 and Below
Underage 16 Years of Age
General Recreation
Camping
$10.00
$5.00
$10.00
$5.00
$25.00
$40.00
$25.00
$6.00
$4.00
FREE
$5.00
Table 7-6. FY00-05 Annual Permit Sale Revenue
FY00 = $195,229.00
FY01 = $194,831.00
FY02 = $185,537.00
FY03 = $208,723.00
FY04 = $227,152.00
FY05 = $233,160.00
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-28
Demand for Public Use Permits
Based on permit sales data from 29 September 2004 to 19 September 2005, non-DoD personnel
purchased approximately 76 percent of the hunting, 68 percent of the fishing and 72 percent of
the general recreation permits. Permits issued for FY00-05 are shown in Figure 7-11.
9000
8000
Number of Permits Issued
7000
6000
Hunting
5000
Fishing
4000
Gen Rec
3000
2000
1000
0
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
Figure 7-11. FY00-05 Permits Issued
7.3.5
Hunting Program
Historically, the greatest public demand for Eglin’s land areas has been for hunting, in particular
deer hunting. The Sikes Act, named after local Congressman Robert Sikes who represented the
First Congressional District and lived in Crestview, FL, was created in part to ensure that sound
fish and wildlife management occurred on military installations. The Act was also implemented
to ensure that hunting and fishing opportunities were made available to the public on military
installations when deemed compatible with the military mission. A summary of Eglin AFB land
available for outdoor recreational public use is shown in Table 7-7 below.
Table 7-7. Summary of Lands Open and Closed to Hunting
Method Of Hunting
Archery only hunting
Archery/muzzleloading hunting
Conditional hunting
Dog hunting
Stalk/still hunting
Closed to hunting open to other recreation
Closed to hunting (portions open to special hunts)
Acreage
18,179
9,097
19,161
176,312
67,906
3,760
188,061
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-29
Hunting Season Dates on Eglin
Eglin’s hunting season dates have remained consistent for the last several years mirroring the
State of Florida’s hunting season dates for the Northwest Region (Table 7-8, below). Eglin’s
36-day General Gun Season, however, is considerably shorter than the 72-day season allowed in
the region. The 72-day state season was developed, however, to accommodate private
landowners. Most public wildlife management areas provide a general gun season that is much
shorter than the 72-day season.
Table 7-8. 2006 Hunting Seasons on Eglin AFB and the Northwest Region
Hunting Season
Archery
Early Small Game
Season Dates on Eglin
Season Length on
Eglin
Season Dates in
NW Region
Season Length
in NW Region
15 Oct -13 Nov
12 Nov -26 Feb
30
107
15 Oct -13 Nov
12 Nov -5 Mar
30
114
18-20 Nov
3
18-20 Nov
3
24-27 Nov
10 Dec-1 Jan
21-29 Jan
24-27 Nov
10 Dec-15 Feb
NA
2-20 Jan
16-26 Feb
18 Mar -23 Apr
4
23
9
36
19
11
37
4
68
NA
72
NA
11
37
Early Muzz.
General Gun1st Phase
2nd Phase
3rd Phase
TOTAL GEN GUN DAYS
Late Small Game
Late Arch./Muzz
Spring Turkey
Trapping
Fox, Raccoon, Opossum,
Bobcat
1 Dec - 1 Mar
91
15 May - 15 Jun
32
NA
16-26 Feb
18 Mar -23 Apr
Year round (Bobcat
1 Dec-1 Mar only)
Year round (Bobcat
1 Dec-1 Mar only)
Mobility Impaired Hunt
Youth Hunt
4-5 Feb
11-12 Feb
2
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
4
NA
NA
Special Turkey Hunt
1-2 Apr and 15-16 Apr
N/A = Not Applicable; NW = Northwest
365
365
General Hunting Regulations
In addition to specific regulations provided below, all hunters must follow general state laws and
regulations relating to wildlife unless specifically noted otherwise. The Florida Hunting and
Fresh Water Fishing Handbooks must be carefully reviewed for information on general laws and
regulations relating to fish and wildlife. A current copy of area-specific rules (68A-15.063,
FAC) and general rules relating to wildlife management areas (68A-15.004, FAC) are available
at: http://fac.dos.state.fl.us/faconline/chapter68.pdf. Additional MU specific regulations are
outlined in the annual Eglin AFB Outdoor Recreation, Hunting and Fresh Water Fishing Map
and Regulation product.
●
02/02/10
Persons hunting, fishing, or in possession of a hunting and/or fishing device while on
Eglin AFB are required to have appropriate Eglin, state, and federal licenses, stamps and
permits. The Florida Hunting and Fishing Handbooks provide information on state
license categories and cost of these licenses.
Final
Page 7-30
●
All persons hunting, fishing, or engaging in outdoor recreational activities on Eglin AFB
are required to comply with all applicable Eglin, federal and state laws, rules and
regulations.
●
All hunters must wear a blaze-orange coat or vest as an outer garment at all times while
hunting any resident game species with firearms during the muzzleloading gun, general
gun, small game, and late archery/muzzleloading gun seasons.
●
Blaze-orange is not required for hunters during the early duck season, early archery
season, spring turkey season, or while hunting in any archery-only area.
●
No one shall possess, place, expose, or distribute any grain or other substance intended to
attract wildlife. Bait is considered any grain or other food substance including salt and
mineral licks.
●
The taking or possession of gopher tortoise and fox squirrels is prohibited.
●
Threaded “screw-in” tree stand steps are authorized, but must be removed at the
completion of the hunting season.
●
Driving a metal object into any tree or knowingly hunting from a tree in which a metal
object has been driven is prohibited.
●
To prevent possible loss or damage, treestands should be removed while not in use.
Eglin AFB is not responsible for treestands left unattended.
●
Possession of any live game animal on Eglin is prohibited.
●
There is no hunting allowed on Hurlburt Field.
●
Anyone 16 years of age or older born after 1 June 1975 must show proof of having
completed a state-certified hunter education course prior to purchasing any Eglin Hunting
Permit. Persons under 16 years of age are not required to have completed a Hunter
Education Course.
●
Transporting live feral hogs is prohibited.
Special Opportunity Hunts
Special Opportunity Mobility Impaired Hunt
In FY94, the Florida Disabled Outdoor Association (FDOA) and the FWC approached Eglin
AFB with a proposal to host a special hunt for mobility impaired hunters. The FDOA is a
non-profit organization that promotes accessible outdoor recreation, assists in compliance of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, and provides a source of information to people with disabilities
as well as the general public. Modeled after other FDOA sanctioned hunts, Eglin hosted its first
Mobility Impaired Hunt (MIH) in the fall of FY95. Following the logistical success of the first
hunt, Eglin has made the MIH an annual event.
This special program is designed to allow hunters requiring permanent use of assisting aids
(wheelchairs, crutches, braces, etc.) a high quality outdoor experience. Participants must be
certified and issued a MIH Identification Number from the FWC in order to be eligible for this
event. This certification is similar to the 100 percent Disabled FWC designation; however, the
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-31
Mobility Impaired certification is more stringent in terms of being able to ambulate and/or walk.
The FDOA assists NRS by screening all applicants for eligibility. Eligibility Requirements are:
1. Hemiplegia, paraplegia, quadriplegia, or permanently dependent on wheelchair.
2. Require assisting or mechanical aids to walk (crutches, brace, walker, etc.).
3. Complete leg amputation or prosthesis on both legs.
Since FY95, Eglin’s MIH hunt has grown in terms of number of applicants and overall hunter
success. As stated by many of the participants, Eglin’s MIH has become arguably the highest
quality deer hunt of its kind in the State of Florida. With a steady increase in the number of
applicants, the NRS raised the quota for the MIH from 40 to 50 hunters in FY98. Utilizing areas
that are not normally open to public hunting, 50 MIH participants generally realize greater than
90 percent hunter success. The number of applicants for the MIH continues to increase and the
reputation of this hunting experience is becoming more widely known throughout the nation.
Special Opportunity Youth Hunt
Due to the success of the MIH, the NRS saw an opportunity to expand this special hunting
opportunity by providing a similar high quality hunting experience for youth hunters,
10-15 years of age. Designed to introduce youth to the sport of hunting and promote a
memorable outdoor experience, the NRS hosted its first special opportunity Youth Hunt (YH) in
FY00. Modeled after the MIH, the annual YH takes place during the second weekend in
February. Hunter success rates comparable to the MIH are achieved annually with most all of
the 50 participants harvesting either a white-tailed deer or feral hog.
Special Opportunity Turkey Hunt
Recognizing that substantial population of turkeys reside within areas closed to general public
hunting, the NRS saw an opportunity to provide an additional high quality hunting experience.
In the spring of FY01, the NRS hosted its first special opportunity turkey hunt. Each year
20 participants, along with their optional hunting companions, are randomly selected to
participate during one of two weekends in April and are each assigned approximately 1000 acres
to hunt exclusively. Utilizing areas that receive no direct hunting pressure, hunter success rate
for harvesting a quality gobbler during this event is higher than areas which are open to general
public hunting.
7.3.6
Recreational Fisheries Program
Currently 29 ponds totaling 252 acres are managed at Eglin AFB (Table 7-9). Two ponds on the
installation are natural - Jacks Lake and Blue Spring. The other 27 ponds are small manmade
impoundments that were created by damming and installing a spillway structure on existing
steephead creeks. Due to the nature of the water in steephead creeks, the water entering these
ponds is clear, acidic and low in nutrients. These characteristics pose some serious challenges to
fisheries management. The carrying capacity of these ponds is low due to the sterility of the
water. Past efforts to overcome the sterility involved the application of agricultural lime and
fertilizer. Because of the extraordinary flow rates of these ponds and the low hydrologic
retention, most of these efforts were unsuccessful and ultimately caused concerns regarding
downstream water quality.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-32
4
Kendricks
2
Kepner
5
Lost Boy
8
Lower
Memorial
Upper
Memorial
none
N
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
none
NA
closed
Open
Open
seasonal
Open
Open
moderate
Low
High
Low
Low
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
biological
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
concrete
steel
steel
steel
steel
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
NA
none
N
NA
NA
NA
N
N
N
N
steel
NA
walk in
Open
Open
Low
High
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
biological
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
steel
concrete
N
Y
N
N
NA
none
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
steel
NA
NA
DOD affiliated
open in 2002
Open
Low
High
Low
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
biological
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
none
concrete
concrete
N
Y
N
N
N
N
Closed
none
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
steel
NA
NA
Open
Low
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
steel
Y
N
Open
Low
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
none
N
walk in
Open
Low
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
steel
Y
N
Open
TBD
N
N
N
N
N
N
TB
D
N
N
steel
N
Y
Page 7-33
40
full pool
DOD affiliated
moderate
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
concrete
Y
N
23
full pool
DOD affiliated
moderate
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
concrete
Y
N
Metts
1
failed spillway, pond
abandoned
Closed
none
N
NA
NA
NA
N
N
N
N
none
NA
walk in
Roberts
8
full pool, renovated 2005
Low
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
steel
N
N
Speck
7
Low
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
steel
N
N
reopen Spring
07
reopen Spring
07
TB
D
TB
D
Jr. Walton
Closed
6
Accessible by 4
Wheel Drive Only
Johnson
Partial Draw
Down Capabilities
20
6
28
Type of Spillway
Structure
Hurlburt
Indigo
College
Supplemental
Feeding
8
Catch & Release
Only
Hazelwood
Special Creel
Limits
3
30
Liming &
Fertilizing
Crain
Duck
Aquatic Weed
Management
2
Handicapped
Access
Clark
Fishing Pier
12
5
5
2
5
Improved Boat
Ramp
Anderson
Atwell
Brandt
Brown
Buck
abandoned
full pool
full pool
Leaking
Leaking
full pool
abandoned
full pool
abandoned
full pool
full pool
abandoned
full pool
abandoned
full pool
dewatered, to be
renovated
Management
Level
3
Public Access
Final
Allison
Status
Acres
Artificial
Impoundments
02/02/10
Table 7-9. Ponds and Lakes Under Management at Eglin AFB
Management
Level
Improved Boat
Ramp
Fishing Pier
Handicapped
Access
Aquatic Weed
Management
Liming &
Fertilizing
Special Creel
Limits
Catch & Release
Only
Supplemental
Feeding
Type of Spillway
Structure
Partial Draw
Down Capabilities
Accessible by 4
Wheel Drive Only
moderate
Low
Low
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
biological
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
concrete
concrete
concrete
Y
Y
N
N
N
walk in
Closed
none
N
NA
NA
NA
N
N
N
N
steel
N
closed
21
NA
DOD affiliated
none
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
NA
NA
Y
2
NA
Open
none
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
NA
NA
walk in
Public Access
Open
DOD affiliated
seasonal
Artificial
Impoundments
Acres
Rock Hill
1
NATURAL
LAKES
Jacks Lake
Blue
Springs
N = No; Y = Yes; N/A = Not Applicable
Page 7-34
Final
10
6
2
Status
full pool
full pool
full pool
abandoned
Timberlake
Weekly
Wilson
02/02/10
Table 7-9. Ponds and Lakes Under Management at Eglin AFB Cont’d
Recent analysis of panfish growth rates in Duck and Indigo Ponds shows an increase as a direct
result of NRS’s supplemental feeding program. Based on this success, the NRS is evaluating the
possibility of expanding its supplemental feeding program to other ponds. Also, the NRS is
planning to manage Brandt pond as a high quality catfish fishery in the near future. A plan exists
to stock 10-12” channel catfish at a rate of 500 fish per acre, feed for a period of time to add
weight, and then host an annual or biannual youth fishing rodeo.
The control of aquatic weeds is another fisheries management challenge on Eglin. The clear
water facilitates the growth of submerged and emergent vegetation. Past efforts to control these
weeds involved the use of aquatic herbicides, partial winter drawdown, and the stocking of
triploid grass carp. The NRS has discontinued the use of aquatic herbicides due to the expense
and concerns regarding adverse environmental impacts. Presently, four ponds have been stocked
with triploid grass carp that the FWC permits.
Most of Eglin’s impoundments were created in the 1950s and 1960s; many of their spillways are
now failing. The NRS has replaced the spillways in both Speck and Roberts ponds and is in the
process of repairing the spillway on Lost Boy pond. Funds are being sought to replace the
spillways that are leaking or that have failed on other ponds. EO 12962, Recreational Fisheries,
allows the NRS to budget for the repair/replacement of damaged spillways in the Air Force
Conservation Budget. Presently, Brandt and Anderson ponds need repair or total replacement.
Funding for these projects is being sought.
Fishing Regulations
All ponds and streams within areas open to outdoor recreation are open to fishing. In addition to
the general regulations listed below, specific regulations are available in the annual Eglin AFB
Outdoor Recreation, Hunting, and Fresh Water Fishing Map and Regulation product and/or may
be posted as needed at individual ponds.
●
Any person fishing in fresh water on Eglin AFB or Hurlburt Field must comply with state
fishing license requirements. A state fishing license is not required if fishing with a cane
pole in county of residence.
●
An Eglin Fishing Permit is required when fishing in any body of fresh water located on
Eglin AFB or Hurlburt Field property.
●
Any person fishing, gigging suckers, or gigging frogs must have a valid Eglin Fishing
Permit in their possession, except persons under 16 years of age. All persons 16 years of
age or older, who are accompanying people gigging suckers, are required to possess an
Eglin Fishing Permit.
●
Fishing and access to fish on all Eglin waters is authorized from two hours before sunrise
to two hours after sunset.
●
Hurlburt Lake may be fished during daylight hours only.
●
In accordance with FWC regulations, nongame fish may be taken by gigging year round
during daylight hours on Eglin waters open to fishing. Gigging is authorized 24 hours a
day to the north of Range Road 211 from State Highway 285 and to the west to State
Highway 87 from 1 September to 1 May.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-35
●
Frogs may be gigged in all waters open to fishing during authorized Eglin fishing hours.
●
Fishing is prohibited in all ponds that are posted as “Closed to Fishing.”
●
Trotlines and bush hooks are prohibited in all Eglin ponds.
●
The use of gasoline engines is prohibited on all ponds. Boats with outboard engines may
be launched; however, engines may not be started at any time.
●
Daily creel limits are in accordance with state regulations except Channel Catfish which
is limited to 10 in all Eglin ponds. Additionally, special creel limits apply to Duck and
Indigo Ponds. Panfish (including bluegill, redbreast sunfish, redear sunfish, spotted
sunfish, warmouth, and flier) have a creel limit of 10 and a size minimum of 8 inches.
Large mouth bass have a creel limit of 1 and a size minimum of 24 inches.
●
Fishing is authorized on Eglin Main Base and Hurlburt Field for persons with a Florida
State Fishing License and an Eglin Fishing permit. Access to both areas is limited to
DoD-affiliated personnel and escorted guests.
●
Weekly Pond, Upper Memorial Lake, Hurlburt Lake, and Jack Lake, located on the main
base, will be open to fishing on a “catch and release” basis only. All fish caught in these
ponds must be immediately released.
●
Bowfishing is permitted during specified Eglin hunting seasons in which archery
equipment is authorized. FL FWC Fresh Water Fishing regulations should be reviewed
for specific bowfishing regulations.
7.3.7
General Recreation Program
General Outdoor Recreation
The NRS sells approximately 6,000 general recreation permits each year. These permits are sold
to individuals who do not hunt or fish and who use the Eglin reservation for other recreational
purposes (Figure 7-11). These other purposes include: canoeing, hiking, picnicking, nature study
and appreciation, swimming, berry picking, and bicycling. Individuals who possess a current
hunting or fishing permit are not required to purchase a recreation permit.
Bicycling
The public’s interest in bicycling has steadily grown in recent years and includes both road
racing and mountain biking. Eglin AFB provides unique opportunities to accommodate these
interests. For the last several years, members of local bicycling clubs have utilized portions of
Eglin’s paved road network due to their relatively low traffic volumes. The NRS has not taken
an active role in managing this form of recreation as part of Eglin’s outdoor recreation program.
In the mid 1990s, local enthusiasts, in response to a growing interest and demand for mountain
bike use, began creating a network of mountain bike trails around and adjacent to Timberlake
Pond. This effort was not NRS coordinated or approved. In 1997, a dialog between the NRS
and the trail user groups was developed in response to issues associated with the removal of
timber within the area and its impact on the users groups. This area now includes approximately
26.2 miles of trails that are a favorite among off-road cyclists, runners and hikers.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-36
Beach Access
Authorized public recreation on SRI consists of fishing, swimming, sun bathing, and beach
walking. The public is directed to five access points for beach access, and recreational users are
instructed to stay below the primary dune line. Some types of recreation that are unauthorized
on SRI include beach driving, sand dune sledding, night camping, and campfires. Protected
species and shorebird nesting sites are posted with “Keep Out Endangered Species” or
“Shorebird Nesting Area” signs. The general public also utilizes the CSB beach areas for beach
driving (with a permit from Gulf County) and other recreation activities, during times of the year
when not in use for military missions, on a non-interference basis. Beach Driving is prohibited
on Eglin AFB property at CSB after sunset from 1 May through 31 October. Recreational
activities at CSB include public beach access via Eglin property and sightseeing visits to the
lighthouse and keeper’s quarters located on Eglin property.
Florida Scenic Trail
The Florida National Scenic Trail (FNST) is one of eight National Scenic Trails. This is a long
distance hiking trail which starts in the Big Cypress National Preserve west of Miami and ends at
Ft. Pickens south of Pensacola. Its current length is 1,400 miles and serves as a recreation asset
on both public and private lands.
A 70 mile portion of the FNST on Eglin is a work in process. To date, two FNST segments
totaling 60 miles have been completed. These include a 45 mile segment from Hwy 85 to U.S.
331, and a shorter segment from Yellow River to East River off Hwy 87. An additional 10 miles
on Eglin between Hwy 85 and Hwy 87 is being developed, which will traverse a significant
portion of the scenic and untamed Yellow River Swamp. The FNST will cross the Yellow River
from Eglin to NWFWMD land on a footbridge constructed by Florida Trail Association (FTA)
volunteers. This multi-year undertaking will connect the Eglin FNST segments with hiking trails
in Blackwater River SF. Phase one of this effort was a three mile FNST segment to connect
Buck Pond and the Hwy 87 Yellow River Bridge completed in the Fall of 2006.
The FNST on the Eglin AFB Reservation is developed and managed under a partnership
agreement between Eglin, the USFS, and the FTA. FTA is responsible for trail maintenance.
The trail is open to the public and restricted to human foot traffic only. Overnight camping is
permitted at eight designated campsites. Motorized vehicles, bicycles or horses on the trail are
prohibited. All persons using the trail are required to comply with all Eglin rules and
regulations. Hiker specific regulations and procedures are posted on trailhead kiosks.
Trail users are required to have a $7.00 Eglin-Recreation Permit and a user permit/self
registration card, which is available at FNST trailheads. Overnight campers are required to have
a $5.00 Camping Permit. Some permit requirements are waived for long distance hikers. There
are six trailheads and FNST kiosks located on U.S. 331, Bob Sikes Rd., Hwy. 285, Hwy 85, Hwy
87, and East River.
Trail construction on Eglin began in 1999. In addition to the current 60 miles of hiking trail,
volunteers have built numerous footbridges, boardwalks, kiosks, and campsite infrastructures.
They have installed informational signage to accommodate trail users and inform them of the
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-37
Eglin mission and land use requirements. The trail’s Certification Plan is in its final editing
stages and will be completed by 2009.
Off-Road Vehicles
All motorized off-road recreational vehicles (all-terrain vehicles, dirt bikes) are prohibited
throughout the installation.
Canoeing
The watershed of the Eglin installation contains over 186 miles of steep-head streams and the
waters of the Yellow and East Rivers. These waters are often used for canoeing, kayaking,
swimming and shoreline picnicking and are characterized by an arching canopy of titi, cypress,
and bay trees overhead and a soft, white sandy stream bed underneath. These pristine waters
maintain a 62○ F temperature throughout the year. Although there are no particular streams that
are designated as canoe trails, the waters of Turkey Creek, Rocky Creek, Alaqua Creek and
Boiling Creek are the most widely used waters by Eglin’s paddling enthusiasts. By not
designating any particular stream as a designated canoe trail, the impact to these watersheds by
recreation activities is reduced by not concentrating such activities on a single stream. The NRS
annually trims low lying branches and limbs for easier passage through the waters of the more
popular water ways. The trimming of the vegetation in and around the streams adds not only to
the aesthetics of the streams, but also provides for a safer and more pleasant canoeing
experience.
7.3.8
Enforcement
State and Federal Jurisdiction of Fish and Wildlife
The State of Florida owns and has jurisdiction over resident fish and wildlife throughout the state
including Eglin AFB. The FWC established by Article IV, Section 9 of the Florida State
Constitution is the governmental body responsible for the conservation of resident fish and
wildlife. As such, the FWC establishes rules, regulations and season dates governing the taking
of resident fish and wildlife species.
The FWC continues to maintain a substantial enforcement presence on Eglin. Whether through
routine patrols or coordinated special detail operations, the FWC has contributed significantly to
the overall improvement in public rule and regulation compliance. Flexible work schedules and
specialized training and tactics are attributes which add invaluably to the Eglin Natural
Resources law enforcement effort.
The USFWS has jurisdiction over migratory birds, federally listed T&E species, certain marine
mammals, and freshwater and anadromous fish. Eglin AFB is required to comply with federal
fish and wildlife laws such as the ESA, which prohibits the unauthorized taking of a federally
listed T&E species. The Act also requires that federal agencies conserve these species and
consult with USFWS on actions that may affect them.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-38
Eglin Enforcement Program Overview
The 96th Security Forces Squadron (96 SFS) is the sole Eglin organization tasked with law
enforcement responsibility. The 96 SFS provides enforcement support for a broad and dynamic
AAC mission.
The Sikes Act specifies that each installation’s INRMP “shall, to the extent appropriate and
applicable, provide for enforcement of applicable Natural Resources law including regulations.”
The Act further states that the Commanding Officer of the installation or persons designated by
that officer are authorized to conduct Natural Resources enforcement.
Specifically, Natural Resources law enforcement is assigned as a collateral duty to the Range
Patrol (RP) section of the 96 SFS. Thirty four RP officers currently enforce Natural Resources
laws and Eglin specific rules and regulations. These 34 officers are assigned to one of the three
8 hour shifts (12 day shift, 11 swing shift, 11 night shift). The primary function of the RP
section is direct mission support in the form of maintaining site/equipment security,
evacuating/securing safety footprint areas, escorting military convoys, and protecting sensitive
test and evaluation resources. In addition, RP enforces traffic control, responds to assaults,
burglaries and any other federal violation in which the USAF or other governmental agency is
the victim. RP is designated as first responder to any given law enforcement situation on the
reservation, including domestic disturbances within military housing. RP personnel are trained
in all law enforcement areas and one of the requirements for hire is successful completion of the
Federal, State, County, or Municipal police academy.
As previously discussed in Section 7.3.3, Eglin is designated as a State of Florida Wildlife
Management Area and, as such, enables Eglin specific rules and regulations to be codified into
the FAC (FAC 68A-15.063) annually. Federal enforcement of the FAC is authorized by 10 USC
2671 which allows for FAC assimilation and enforcement through the Federal Magistrate Court
system. It is through this mechanism that many of the Eglin specific rules and regulations
designed to improve quality, promote public safety, and ensure program compatibility with the
military mission are enforced.
Suspension of Outdoor Recreation Privileges System
In 1997 the NRS and RP developed a system that was patterned after successful programs at
other DoD installations to suspend hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation privileges for game
law violators. This system has been highly successful and is recognized as significantly
improving compliance with rules and regulations and reducing opportunistic game law
violations. This system uses the administrative authority of the Installation Commander to
suspend recreational privileges. Violators are given a special ticket and are notified of their
suspension period as well as their appeal process.
Future Program Direction
Demands on the 96 SFS and the RP section will most certainly increase over the next few years.
With a broadening test and evaluation mission and the arrival of new tenant organizations, direct
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-39
military use of the Eglin reservation is expected to significantly intensify. Concern exists that
additional demands placed on 96 SFS and RP will result in decreased Natural Resources law
enforcement efforts. Decreased enforcement of Natural Resources laws and Eglin specific
public use rules and regulations would unquestionably reduce program quality at a time when the
trend for public use permit sales is increasing. Ideally, Eglin law enforcement manpower will
increase proportionally to increased demands. It is, however, uncertain that additional
manpower will be allocated.
Although RP personnel receive standardized military police training, no standard or reoccurring
Natural Resources based training exists. Specialized Natural Resources law enforcement
training of RP personnel is needed to increase effectiveness. The DoD is currently standardizing
a Conservation Law Enforcement Program (CLEP) to fulfill this need. It is unclear at this time
as to how this standardization will change the way Natural Resources laws are enforced at Eglin.
The NRS and RP will work closely with the National Military Fish and Wildlife Association to
stay abreast of this initiative.
The NRS plans to pursue a more active role in Eglin’s Natural Resources law enforcement
program. Subject to future CLEP training standards and support from 96 SFS and RP, the NRS
will investigate feasibility of obtaining collateral Natural Resources law enforcement authority
for select NRS personnel. Specifically, NRS game management staff that interacts daily with
recreational customers and routinely work peak use periods (i.e., hunting seasons and
recreational events) could provide additional deterrents against illegal activity if able to function
in an official law enforcement capacity. This position is not precedence setting since other DoD
installations continue to utilize NRS personnel to augment law enforcement efforts.
7.4 MANAGEMENT OF THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES AND
HABITATS
Legal Requirement to Manage and Conserve T&E Species
The ESA of 1973 is the primary legal driver for the protection and management of federally
listed T&E species. The purposes of the Act are: “…to provide a means whereby the ecosystems
upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved, to provide a
program for the conservation of such endangered species and threatened species, and to take
such steps as may be appropriate to achieve the purposes of the treaties and conventions set forth
in subsection (a) of this section.” The ESA policy reads as follows: “It is further declared to be
the policy of Congress that all Federal departments and agencies shall seek to conserve
endangered and threatened species and shall utilize their authorities in furtherance of the
purposes of this Act.”
Section 7 (a) (1) of the Act further reads: “All Federal agencies shall, in consultation with and
with the assistance of the Secretary (Interior and/or Commerce), utilize their authorities in
furtherance of the purposes of this Act by carrying out programs for the conservation of
endangered species and threatened species listed pursuant to section 4 of this Act.”
The Act defines the terms “conserve,” “conserving,” and “conservation” as meaning: “use of all
methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-40
Management of Threatened and
Endangered Species and Habitats
species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this Act are no longer necessary.
Such methods and procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated with
scientific resources management, propagation, live trapping, and transplantation, and, in the
extraordinary case where population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include the regulated taking.”
To further stress and clarify the importance of conserving T&E species, the DoD along with the
Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Interior, Transportation, and the USEPA signed a MOU
in 1994. Section III of the MOU (The Cooperators Agree to the Following) reads as follows:
“Each individual agency that is a party of this MOU will: Use its authority to further the
purposes of the ESA by carrying out programs for the conservation of Federally listed species,
including implementing appropriate recovery actions that are identified in recovery plans.”
Direct Mission Support
Section 7 (a) (2) of the ESA requires that each federal agency consult with the USFWS and/or
the NMFS on proposed actions that the Air Force has determined may affect federally listed
T&E species. This initial determination is made as part of the EIAP . This process is managed
by the Environmental Analysis Section (96 CEG/CEVSP); however, many Eglin organizations
including the NRS serve as active team members. The role of 96 CEG/CEVSN is to assess
potential impacts of proposed mission activities to natural resources with special emphasis on
T&E species, their habitats, and wetlands. This process is referred to as Mission Delay
Avoidance Process and is divided into two sub-processes, Natural Resources Evaluation and
Protected Species Consultation (Figure 7-12). The ability of the 96 CEG/CEVSN to understand
the details of the proposed mission activity and recommend conditions or stipulations to avoid
impacting protected species avoids the need to consult with regulators and saves precious time.
On the surface, many proposed actions have the potential to impact T&E species. Often,
however, it is the support activities associated with the mission and not the mission itself that
have the greatest potential to impact T&E species. For instance, a mission may be proposed to
launch a missile from Eglin’s barrier island. The missile launch itself may not have any impacts
on T&E species, however, actions associated with maintaining a security perimeter, such as
patrolling the beach or nighttime lighting may impact T&E species. The role of NRS is to
understand the parameters in which the mission must occur and find solutions to avoid impacts
to T&E species. If all impacts can be avoided, a Section 7 consultation is not necessary.
Management of T&E Species for Mission Support
The NRS conducts a variety of both passive and active management activities to conserve and
manage T&E species. Passive management consists primarily of general habitat management
and protection and includes actions such as prescribed fire or the closure of certain forest roads
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-41
Figure 7-12. Mission Delay Avoidance Process
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-42
Figure 7-12. Mission Delay Avoidance Process Cont’d
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-43
to prevent off road vehicle damage to sensitive environments. Active management consists of
actions that are designed and tailored to a particular species such as species population
monitoring, species-specific habitat management, and reintroduction or translocation of species.
A combination of active and passive management is used to recover T&E species. Mission
flexibility is gained when progress is made toward species recovery and a lack of flexibility
occurs when progress is not made.
An example of this occurred in 1989 when Eglin lost a mission due to potential impacts to the
RCW and the Okaloosa darter. Prior to 1989, the NRS had tried unsuccessfully to obtain
funding to conduct a base wide survey for RCWs. The number and location of RCW family
groups was unknown at the time and the population was believed to be declining. RCW habitat
was degraded due to fire suppression and exclusion and the population was becoming more
isolated and fragmented. Eglin was in violation of the ESA for not managing the species’ habitat
and for conducting activities that were “taking” RCW without USFWS authorization. In
addition, the Okaloosa darter population was also thought to be declining due to habitat
degradation from excessive erosion and competition from the brown darter.
The USFWS believed that the proposed mission would jeopardize the continued existence of
both species and issued Eglin its first and only Jeopardy Opinion under the ESA. The USFWS
conclusion was based on the fact that neither active nor passive management was being
conducted for either species, and both species were declining. If this same mission were
proposed today, the results would be much different. The NRS has made tremendous progress
toward recovering both the RCW and the Okaloosa darter. Both species populations are
growing. The RCW population on Eglin has reached the designated recovery goal of 350
potential breeding groups (PBGs) in 2009, the USFWS, as part of a recent status review, has
recommended that the Okaloosa darter be downlisted from endangered to threatened, and both
species can withstand current mission impacts with no lasting negative effects on the
populations.
7.4.1
Management of Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species
St. Andrew Beach Mouse (Peromyscus polionotus peninsularis)
The St. Andrew beach mouse is listed as a federally endangered species and inhabits areas north
of CSB on the St. Joseph peninsula, but their presence has not been confirmed on Eglin AFB
property at CSB. Habitat loss from storms and human disturbance may have contributed to the
decline of beach mice, since they occur in well-developed dunes with sea oat vegetation and
higher back dunes with live oak and rosemary. Eglin AFB has delineated and marked beach
mouse habitat at CSB to prevent impacts. Even though the St. Andrew beach mouse is not found
within the boundaries of Eglin AFB, Eglin will continue to take measures to protect the habitat.
Additionally, since the Eglin property at CSB is within the historic home range of the St. Andrew
beach mouse, Eglin is open to discussions on possible future translocations of beach mice.
Red-cockaded Woodpecker
The RCW is a federally listed endangered species endemic to open, mature old growth pine
ecosystems in the southeastern United States. The RCW is a small (8 to 9 inches) woodpecker
predominantly black and white in coloration. Males have a few red feathers above their ears
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-44
which are difficult to see unless you have the bird in hand. RCWs are the only woodpecker
species in the southeast to excavate cavities in live pine trees. They require old growth pines for
cavity excavation due to the greater presence of heartwood in older trees and they prefer longleaf
pines in particular due to the presence of red heart disease which makes cavity construction
easier.
The RCW was once common in the southeastern United States until wide scale loss of habitat,
particularly old growth trees, occurred in the late 19th and 20th century due to timber harvest and
fire suppression. Originally southern pine forests dominated the southeastern United States and
may have totaled over 80 million acres. Today less than three million acres remain and less than
three percent of that acreage is in natural condition.
The USFWS, in the 2003 Red-cockaded Woodpecker Recovery Plan, has identified Eglin AFB
as 1 of 13 primary core populations. The recovery goal for each primary core population
including Eglin is 350 potential breeding pairs. A thorough initial survey of suitable habitat on
Eglin was conducted from 1989 to 1994. From this survey and population monitoring that was
taking place simultaneously, a population estimate of 169 potential breeding groups was
determined to be the baseline population size for the year 1994. In 2009, the RCW population
on Eglin has reached the designated recovery goal of 350 PBGs. The current population size is
420 active clusters and 371 PBGs. In addition to the goal of 350 PBGs, NRS personnel have
developed a long-term goal of 450 PBGs in order to allow for more mission flexibility. Having a
buffer of 100 groups above the USFWS recovery goal should reduce the conservation
significance and importance of individual RCW clusters immediately adjacent to active test
ranges. More information on the long-term management of RCWs can be found in the T&E
Species CP.
The Eglin population is divided into two subpopulations; the eastern subpopulation which is
comprised of all clusters east of highway 85 and the western subpopulation which is comprised
of all clusters west of highway 85 (Figure 7-13). The two populations are demographically
separate and each subpopulation is in a different state of health. The western subpopulation is
large and increasing. The eastern subpopulation is smaller and stable but not increasing.
Management tools that are being used to increase the population include prescribed fire and
herbicide application to improve habitat conditions, artificial cavity construction to protect
existing clusters and to create new clusters, and translocation of juveniles to fill existing breeding
vacancies and to increase occupancy rates of recruitment cluster sites. Eglin is currently working
with the USFWS to amend the Threatened and Endangered Species Component Plan to the
Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) and initiate Section 7 consultation to
incorporate revised management actions and monitoring protocols to continue towards a mission
flexibility goal of 450 potential breeding groups. The coordination process to officially
document recovery will continue through the beginning of 2010. A detailed description of
population goals and objectives, monitoring protocols, and management tools and priorities for
the RCW can be found in the T&E Species CP.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-45
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-46
Figure 7-13. Red-cockaded Woodpeckers on Eglin AFB
Okaloosa Darter
The Okaloosa darter (Etheostoma okaloosae) is a small, reddish-brown to greenish-yellow fish
characterized by a series of 6-8 rows of small spots along the sides of the body, and a prominent
humeral spot. It is both federally and state listed as endangered. The entire global population of
this species is endemic to the NWF panhandle in Okaloosa and Walton counties. Eglin AFB has
management responsibility for 90 percent of the species’ habitat. This darter occurs in only six
small streams (249 linear miles) that flow into two bayous of Choctawhatchee Bay. These
seepage streams have persistent discharge of clear, sand-filtered water through sandy channels,
woody debris, and vegetation beds.
The NRS initiated an Okaloosa darter monitoring program in 1995 that has been conducted
annually by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Florida Integrated Science Center and Loyola
University, Louisiana. The number of sites being monitored has increased from 12 in 1995 to
28 in 2004 with additional monitoring sites to be added as additional population data is required.
The population is currently shown to be increasing with an average of 2.6 darters per linear
meter of stream in 2005 as compared with 0.7 darters per linear meter for the previous 10 years.
The overall estimate is 317,830 individuals within the 21 percent of their range that is currently
sampled.
The main threat to the Okaloosa darter is sedimentation due to borrow pits and nonpoint
pollution sediment (NPS) sites such as roadways or right-of-ways. From 1994 to 2005, a total of
38 borrow pit sites and 279 NPS sites totaling 490.4 acres have been rehabilitated and
maintained. The restoration of Mill Creek, which is cited by the Okaloosa Darter Recovery Plan
as essential for recovery, was completed in 2008.
The goal of the NRS is to have the Okaloosa darter downlisted by 2010 and delisted by 2015.
The USFWS, as part of a recent status review, has recommended that the Okaloosa darter be
downlisted from endangered to threatened. The downlisting process is currently in the final
stages of review with the Department of Interior (DOI). Following a downlisting decision, the
NRS and USFWS-FR personnel will develop an enhanced monitoring program to be conducted
throughout the range of the Okaloosa darter. This program will be designed to address specific
habitat and distributional criteria necessary for delisting the species. If delisted, the Okaloosa
darter will be the first vertebrate species on DoD lands to be removed from the Endangered
Species List.
Additional details about the Okaloosa darter monitoring protocols, population trends, and
management actions can be found in the T&E Species CP.
Flatwoods Salamander
The flatwoods salamander (Ambystoma cingulatum) was federally listed as a threatened species
in 1999. On February 10, 2009, the USFWS announced a change in the classification of the
flatwoods salamander into two species and a change in the status of one of those species
(Ambystoma bishopi). The Service also designated a combined total of 27,423 acres of critical
habitat between both salamander species across three states and posted the final economic
analysis associated with the designation. Eglin AFB was not included in the critical habitat
designation even though Eglin hosts a significant portion of the known remaining occurrences of
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-47
Ambystoma bishopi. This salamander is a slender, small-headed salamander that rarely exceeds
13 centimeters (cm) in length when fully mature. Adult dorsal color ranges from black to
chocolate-black with highly variable, fine, light gray lines forming a netlike or cross-banded
pattern across the back. The historical range of the flatwoods salamander included the lower
Coastal Plain of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. Optimum habitat is an open,
mesic (moderately wet) woodland of longleaf (Pinus palustris) or slash pine (Pinus elliottii)
flatwoods maintained by frequent fires that also contain shallow, ephemeral wetland ponds.
Males and females migrate to these ephemeral ponds during the cool, rainy months of October to
December. The females lay their eggs in vegetation at the edges of the ponds. The timing and
frequency of rainfall are critical to the successful reproduction and recruitment of flatwoods
salamanders. If ponds do not fill or they dry too early then the young will be unable to
metamorphose into adults.
According to the draft Flatwoods Salamander Recovery Plan, the single biggest threat to the
flatwoods salamander is loss of habitat due to urban development and conversion to agriculture
and pine plantations. Historically 32 million acres of flatwoods habitat occurred across the
salamanders’ range. Today, only 18 percent or 5.7 million acres remain. In addition to loss of
habitat, all of the 59 populations that are known to exist are highly isolated.
Eglin AFB has three separate populations of flatwoods salamanders with 18 known breeding
ponds. One population contains only a single breeding pond. Eglin has recently been designated
as part of Core Area 2 in Recovery Unit #1 in the draft Recovery Plan. The recovery goal for
this Core Area is nine separate stable populations of flatwoods salamanders. This Core Area
currently contains eight known populations. Eglin’s goal is to maintain all three of its existing
populations of flatwoods salamanders as well as to continue to search for and document any
additional populations that may occur.
Management for this species includes the increased use of prescribed fire to improve habitat
conditions and closure of roads that run through salamander habitat to avoid disturbance.
Additional details about monitoring protocols and management techniques are located in the
T&E Species CP.
Florida Perforate Lichen
The Florida perforate lichen (Cladonia perforata) is state and federally listed as endangered. It
is endemic to Florida, occurring in three very disjunct locations (Eglin, Lake Wales Ridge, East
Coast). This lichen occurs at fewer than 30 sites throughout its range, most of which are
threatened by habitat loss due to development or agricultural conversion, human disturbance, and
hurricane overwash. Three of the known populations occur on Eglin AFB SRI property. The
largest of the three populations persists just west of the Destin pass. In June 2000, two
reintroduction populations were established in the area where populations were lost to Hurricane
Opal, near Test Site A-10 on the north side of SRI. Monitoring of the lichen populations is
accomplished according to the protocol set forth in the Cladonia monitoring plan. Further
information regarding Cladonia perforata management can be found in the T&E Species CP.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-48
Loggerhead, Green, and Leatherback Sea Turtles
Currently, three species of sea turtles have been documented nesting on Eglin’s barrier islands.
These species include the loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), green sea turtle (Chelonia
mydas) and the leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea). The loggerhead is the most
common of the three species nesting every year on Eglin’s beaches which include parts of CSB
in Gulf County and Okaloosa and Santa Rosa Islands in Okaloosa and Santa Rosa Counties.
Green sea turtles typically nest on Eglin’s beaches every other year and in lower numbers.
Leatherback nests are found very rarely. The loggerhead, threatened; and the green sea turtles,
endangered; were federally listed in July of 1978, while the leatherback was listed as endangered
in June of 1970.
The main role the NRS plays in the management and conservation of sea turtles is to locate,
mark, and protect sea turtle nests; assess potential impacts to sea turtles from proposed mission
activity; and recommend conservation measures to avoid impacts to nesting sea turtles, their
nests, and emerging hatchlings. Mission impacts to sea turtles in the Gulf of Mexico are also
assessed.
Daily early morning sea turtle surveys are conducted each year at SRI (starting 15 May) and
CSB (starting 1 May) through 31 October or until the last nest has either hatched or reached
80 days incubation, at which time the nest is evaluated per state protocol. These surveys are
intended to: locate crawls of nesting female turtles, determine the species of turtle by examining
crawl characteristics, determine whether the crawl is a nesting crawl or a false crawl, place
protective screening over the nest to deter predators, and mark the nest location.
In 2001, the NRS received funding to convert / replace the remaining lights on Air Force
property on SRI to low pressure sodium vapor. This should help reduce the potential for
hatchling disorientation caused by Air Force lighting. The NRS has also participated in the
USFWS/ USDA Endangered Species Protection program to conduct predator control on the SRI
and CSB. These efforts significantly reduced the depredation of sea turtle nests by coyotes. The
NRS also participates in Florida’s sea turtle stranding and salvage network program.
Additional details about these species including monitoring protocols and management actions
are located in the T&E Species CP and Eglin’s Beach Management Plan.
Gulf Sturgeon
The Gulf sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi) was designated a threatened subspecies in
September 1991. The Gulf sturgeon is a member of the family Acipenseridae that inhabits the
Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific and certain freshwaters of the United States. The Gulf sturgeon is one
of two geographically disjunct subspecies of the Atlantic sturgeon. The other subspecies is
referred to as the Atlantic coast subspecies (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus). Gulf sturgeon are
anadromous fish with a sub-cylindrical body imbedded with bony plates or scutes.
The Gulf sturgeon occurred in most major river systems from the Mississippi River to the
Suwannee River, Florida and in marine waters from the central and eastern Gulf of Mexico to
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-49
Florida Bay. Comparison of historic information and current data indicate that Gulf sturgeon
populations are reduced from historic levels. At present, Gulf sturgeon population estimates are
unknown throughout its range.
Recently a joint study with the USFWS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)-Fisheries, and USGS which involved tagging and tracking sturgeon from multiple Gulf
rivers was completed. During FY04-05 funds were allocated in support of surveys and
monitoring of the tagged fish in the Gulf of Mexico. With better understanding of sturgeon
habitat use patterns Eglin will be better equipped to determine future management plans and
minimize impacts from mission activities, thus maximize range capabilities.
The NRS does not conduct any active management for Gulf sturgeon at the present time.
Passive management measures are being conducted in order to reduce sedimentation into the
Yellow River system. These erosion control measures include borrow pit reclamation and use of
Best Management Practices (BMPs) when conducting road maintenance. The NRS assesses
potential impacts to Gulf sturgeon from proposed mission activity and recommends conservation
measures to avoid these impacts. Eglin contributes to the monitoring of the species, which is
conducted by the USFWS and the FDEP Aquatics Preserves program.
Gulf sturgeon critical habitat (CH) was designated in 2003. ESA defines CH as “specific areas
that contain physical or biological features essential to the species’ conservation and that may
require special management considerations or protection.” As pertains to Eglin AFB,
Choctawhatchee Bay, Santa Rosa Sound, Yellow River, Shoal River, Blackwater Bay, East Bay,
and the Gulf of Mexico out to one nautical mile offshore of SRI and CSB have been designated
as CH. It is important to note that the CH in Choctawhatchee Bay is for the main body and
Hogtown Bayou, Jolly Bay, Bunker Cove, and Grassy Cove. All other bayous, creeks, and rivers
are excluded at their mouths/entrances.
More information on the Gulf sturgeon and Eglin’s management practices can be found in the
T&E Species CP.
Bald Eagle
The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) was listed as an endangered species in 1967 and was
downlisted to threatened in 1995. The USFWS is now considering declaring the bald eagle fully
recovered but it will still receive protection under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
With over 1000 nesting pairs, Florida supports the highest number of bald eagles in the
southeastern United States. The first documented eagle nest on Eglin in recent decades was in
1993. In recent years, Eglin has documented two pairs of eagles nesting on Air Force property,
one at CSB and the other on Eglin Main Base.
Eglin currently follows the USFWS guidelines for protection of bald eagles and their nest sites.
These guidelines are based on the use of a primary and a secondary protection zone. Certain
activities are prohibited in each zone year-round and others only during the nesting season. Most
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-50
activities are restricted within the primary zone during the nesting season. The NRS has marked
and posted these zones around the known eagles’ nests. The USFWS has proposed delisting for
the bald eagle, and with this delisting, has proposed new guidelines. Eglin will incorporate the
most current guidelines available.
Volunteers monitor the nest at the Main Base and CSB sites. More details on the bald eagles on
Eglin and monitoring and management protocols are located in the T&E Species CP.
Piping Plover
The piping plover (Charadrius melodus) was listed as a threatened species along the Atlantic and
Gulf coasts and as an endangered species in the Great Lakes and Ontario, Canada on December
of 1985. The final designation of CH was made by the USFWS in July 2001. There are two
areas on Eglin AFB property designated as piping plover CH. The first area (Florida Unit 3) is
located along the sound of SRI from .09 to .76 miles east of the eastern end of State Road 399.
The second area (Florida Unit 7) is located on the eastern half of CSB.
Piping plovers are small shorebirds approximately seven inches long with sand-colored plumage
on their backs and crown and white underparts. Piping plovers prefer sandy beaches and tidal
flats along both of Florida’s coasts. Piping plovers found in Florida are usually wintering in the
state or stopping over during migration. On Eglin, piping plovers are found in higher
concentrations at CSB than on western portion of SRI. There have been limited sightings along
the eastern portion of SRI.
Eglin’s management for the piping plover consists of maintaining suitable habitat for the species.
CH has been posted with “Keep Out” Endangered Species signs on SRI and at CSB. The
impacts of beach recreation, including operation of full size vehicles on the beach at CSB, are a
concern that is currently being addressed in partnership with Gulf County through their Habitat
Conservation Plan. Personnel from the USGS/Biological Resources Division (BRD), Florida
Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at the University of Florida have conducted
surveys for wintering piping plovers at CSB. Shorebird monitoring at CSB is also being
conducted through volunteers and reported to Eglin and the USFWS on a monthly basis. In the
past, NRS personnel and volunteers with the Choctawhatchee Audubon Society have conducted
counts along Santa Rosa Sound. A new shorebird monitoring plan has been developed for
Okaloosa and Santa Rosa Islands and will be implemented in the winter of 2006/2007. The
monitoring plan includes surveys twice monthly for piping plovers from 15 July through
15 May. In addition, the NRS will continue to participate in the International Piping Plover
survey which occurs every five years. More information on the piping plover and the shorebird
monitoring plan can be found in the T&E Species CP and the Beach Management Plan.
Eastern Indigo Snake
The Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) was listed as a threatened species in
1979. It is one of eight subspecies of primarily tropical snakes. Six of the eight subspecies are
distributed in South or Central America, only the eastern indigo and the Texas indigo occur
within the U.S.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-51
The eastern indigo is a very large, conspicuous, slow-moving and docile snake that can attain a
body length of 8.5 ft. These characteristics make it an easy target for those who indiscriminately
kill snakes on sight. It is also a species that is highly sought after by collectors in the commercial
pet industry.
Indigo snakes have been documented at 17 sites across the Eglin reservation. These observations
are only incidental sightings and do not correspond to the range on Eglin AFB. The indigo snake
utilizes sandhills during the winter months and frequently utilizes gopher tortoise burrows and
the burrows of others species for over-wintering. Riparian areas are frequently utilized in the
summer. The NRS primarily conducts passive management for the indigo snake by maintaining
suitable habitat conditions. This includes the use of prescribed fire over large portions of Eglin’s
sandhills. The permanent closure of forest roads and the use of perimeter access controls will
benefit indigo snakes by reducing the frequency of road-kills.
The management and recovery of the Eastern indigo snake is closely linked to the gopher
tortoise. Management activities that benefit gopher tortoises will likely benefit the indigo snake
as well. Currently a plan is in place for surveying and monitoring the gopher tortoise population
on Eglin. In conjunction with this, burrows will be inspected with the use of a burrow camera in
order to obtain more information on over-wintering indigo snakes. For more information see the
T&E Species CP.
7.4.1.1 The INRMP as a Substitute for Critical Habitat Designation
This INRMP and the associated T&E Species CP is meant to serve as the substitute for CH
designation under the ESA special management criteria. In order for this to occur, the plan must
provide a conservation benefit to the species; the plan must provide certainty that the
management plan will be implemented; and the plan must provide certainty that the conservation
effort will be effective.
Pursuant to Title 16, U.S.C., Section 1533((1)(3)(B)(i)), the Secretary of Interior “shall not
designate as CH any lands or other geographical areas owned or controlled by the DoD, or
designated for its use, that are subject to an INRMP prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act
(16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit to the
species for which CH is proposed for designation.” AFI 32-7064, dated 17 September 2004 Integrated Natural Resources Management is a mandatory requirement and the primary tool for
managing natural resources on USAF property.
Background
Unless it is determined to not be prudent or not determinable, designation of CH is supposed to
occur simultaneously with the listing of a species as threatened or endangered. Lands designated
as CH are constrained with respect to the types of activities that can occur. Indeed, Federal
agencies are required (Section 7(a) of the Act) to ensure that their actions not only do not
jeopardize the continued existence of listed species, but also do not result in the destruction or
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-52
adverse modification of CH. Designation of CH is required to be made on the best available
scientific data and to consider the economic and other impacts of such designation.
The Secretary of the Interior (USFWS) or the Secretary of Commerce (NMFS) are responsible
for designating CH for species listed as threatened or endangered. Certain groups (e.g., Center
for Biological Diversity [CBD]) continue a trend to file petitions and lawsuits to force the listing
of species as threatened or endangered and to force designation of CH for those species already
listed. For example, in a recent case (Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton), the USFWS was ordered
to designate CH for the Canada lynx. This case included a unique twist that requires the USFWS
to engage in formal consultation with the USFS and Bureau of Land Management on all projects
that may affect the Canada lynx, until rulemaking is undertaken to designate CH for this species.
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (H.R. 1588)
The passage of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2004 further emphasized
the importance of the INRMP by allowing the substitution of an INRMP for CH designation
under the ESA so long as implementation of the INRMP provides a benefit to the particular
species. Significant changes to the ESA and the MMPA are identified in the recent National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (H.R. 1588) including:
Section 318. Military Readiness and Conservation of Protected Species
●
CH will not be designated on any lands or geographical areas owned or controlled by
DoD if an approved INRMP is in place.
●
Section 7 consultations will still be required for activities affecting listed species.
●
National security must be considered when designating CH.
Section 319. Military Readiness and Marine Mammal Protection
●
The Secretary of Defense, after “conferring” with the Secretary of Commerce/Interior,
may exempt any action from compliance with any MMPA requirement, if it is necessary
for national defense.
●
“Harassment” definitions are modified for military readiness activities.
○ Level A: any act that injures or has the significant potential to injure…
○ Level B: any act that disrupts behavioral patterns such that they are abandoned or
significantly altered.
●
For incidental take authorizations (1 or 5 year), determination of “least practicable
adverse impact” must take into consideration military personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of a military readiness activity.
●
Incidental take authorizations affecting military readiness activities will not be subject to
“geographical region” or “small numbers” restrictions.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-53
7.4.2
Management of State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species and Non-Listed
Conservation Target Species
AFI 32-7064 encourages biodiversity management to include the conservation of state listed and
other rare species. However, biodiversity management is not an Air Force mandate and as such
is not considered a “must fund” area in the Air Force budgetary system. The Air Force is
currently not providing funding to installations for conservation of state listed and rare species
unless those species are also federally listed.
Nonetheless, the conservation of state listed species and other rare but unlisted species, is
encouraged and in some cases is critical to ensuring continued mission flexibility. Many rare
species on Eglin AFB could easily become federally listed if the NRS does not adequately
manage and conserve these species. Eglin SRI property contains a significant portion of the
range of the Santa Rosa beach mouse, and almost the entire documented population of the
Florida bog frog is located on Eglin. Because of their rarity and extremely limited range, these
species could be justified for federal listing in the future. Most members of the conservation
community recognize that the NRS is committed to proper stewardship of these rare species and
have not pursued federal listing designation. The NRS must continue to effectively utilize its
resources to keep Eglin’s rare species off the endangered species list while recognizing that even
with proper management these species could become federally listed due to their declining
population trends across their range.
Fortunately, management operations conducted by the NRS 96CEG/CEVSN for many of the
federally listed species and for the health of the ecosystem in general provide direct and indirect
benefits to state listed and other rare species. This is one of the benefits of Eglin’s ecosystem
based management program. For example, the proper management of Eglin’s sandhill
ecosystem which includes reintroduction of prescribed fire, conversion of off site pine species to
longleaf pine, retention of an old growth longleaf pine component, protection of ground cover
plant species, closure of unnecessary forest roads, control of invasive non-native species, and
erosion control will benefit at least five other rare but unlisted species. These species include the
pine barrens tree frog, gopher frog, Florida bog frog, gopher tortoise, and Florida pine snake.
Management for a specific species can also benefit other species as well. Management efforts
that affect RCWs also benefit Southeastern American kestrels, gopher tortoises, Bachman’s
sparrows, and a wide variety of plants here on Eglin. In fact, data has recently been analyzed
that show that if only rare bird species are targeted for conservation then in the process,
94 percent of imperiled plants, 38 percent of imperiled arthropods, 63 percent of mollusks,
31 percent of fishes, 16 percent of herps, and 9 percent of mammals will also be conserved.
As described previously there are 67 state listed T&E species (the majority [55] of which are
plants) occurring seasonally or year-round on Eglin AFB. Of the 12 state listed T&E animal
species, only four (snowy plover, least tern, Southeastern American kestrel, and Florida black
bear) are not also federally listed as a threatened or endangered species. Nineteen species of
animals are listed as species of special concern, 16 are not federally listed and three, the RCW,
Gulf sturgeon, and flatwoods salamander, are federally listed as endangered. An additional
17 animal species are not listed by the FWC or the USFWS but are tracked by FNAI due to their
rarity and/or declining population trends.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-54
In addition to known species, new species of animals are still being discovered on Eglin. Three
new species of salamanders, two in the Eurycea quadridigitata complex and one in the
Desmognathes complex were discovered on Eglin since 1994. Sminthurus floridanus, a small
arthropod previously thought extinct, was recently rediscovered on Eglin. An endemic dragonfly
has also been found (Thom et al, 2005). A new Sminthurus species and a new family of wasps
were also recently discovered. A list of all known endangered, threatened, or rare species
located on Eglin AFB is located in the T&E Species CP.
7.5 WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION
Water resources include groundwater, streams, lakes, bays, bayous, sounds, and wetlands.
Multiple large water bodies are located on or adjacent to Eglin AFB, including the Yellow River,
East Bay River, East Bay, Santa Rosa Sound, Choctawhatchee Bay, Gulf of Mexico, and St.
Joseph Bay. Additionally, numerous small streams and wetlands are present across the Eglin
Reservation. Primary threats to these water resources are excess sedimentation, bacterial
contamination, and high water demand.
7.5.1
Regional Issues
Water Supply
The Floridan and surficial aquifers supply most of the water needs in Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and
Walton counties. In the coastal areas of these counties, there has been an excessive decline in
the potentiometric surface elevation of the Floridan aquifer due to heavy groundwater pumping.
This decline causes an increased risk of saltwater intrusion and may potentially impact water levels
in area water bodies.
Yellow River Dam
A local group called the Okaloosa Citizens for Water Conservation is promoting a proposal for a
dam and reservoir to be constructed on the Yellow River north of Crestview, Florida for water
use and recreation, and to possibly generate hydroelectric power. The proposed reservoir would
cover 10,000 acres and extend 15 miles north to the Alabama state line. Environmental issues
related to the construction of a dam on the Yellow River include decreased water flow, alteration
of sediment movement, introduction of invasive nonnative water weeds, and destruction and
fragmentation of sensitive species habitat. Damming of the Yellow River would impact
designated CH for the federally threatened Gulf sturgeon. A dam would also affect the
Pensacola Bay system and SRI due to the alteration of sediment movement, salinity, hydrology,
and energy regime.
Non-Point Source Pollution
The combination of steep slopes, high intensity rainstorms, and deep, sandy soils makes the Eglin
area especially vulnerable to accelerated erosion and sedimentation. Accelerated erosion in this
region is associated primarily with poor unpaved road maintenance and building construction
practices, and the removal of streamside vegetation. Excess sediment can negatively impact
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-55
Water Resource Protection
aquatic habitats and threaten the federally listed Okaloosa darter and Gulf sturgeon. Elevated
bacteria levels can also be an issue in this area, mainly due to stormwater runoff and septic tank
leakage. Multiple water bodies adjacent to Eglin have been documented to have elevated bacteria
levels after storm events but the source of these increased levels has not been identified.
Considering the extent of urban areas around the boundary of the reservation, a high likelihood
exists that the source occurs off Air Force property.
Deadhead Logging
Deadhead logging occurs in the Yellow River (adjacent to Eglin AFB) and refers to the practice
of removing sunken logs from the bottoms of rivers, lakes, and bays. The logs are leftover from
historical logging operations when a common means of transporting logs out of the forest was to
float them down the nearest water body. Some of the logs soaked up water and sank and were
preserved in the low oxygen mud. The logs are removed from the bottom by winch and sold for
profit. Environmental issues arising from this activity are the increased sedimentation and
disturbance of habitat of sensitive species on the Yellow River, such as the Gulf sturgeon.
7.5.2
Eglin Air Force Base Aquatic Program
The USFWS-FR became the primary entity for aquatic investigations of fishery resources on
Eglin in 1999. The goal of the USFWS-FR partnership with Eglin is to provide technical
assistance for monitoring and adaptive management of rivers and streams and protection of
imperiled aquatic species. Biological, chemical, and physical survey data is compiled
throughout each year and techniques are adjusted to obtain the most accurate and efficient
results. Monitoring biological, physical, and chemical components of stream systems on Eglin is
essential to understanding stream system function, resilience, and response to stressors as well as
species sensitivity to watershed level activities.
In addition to the monitoring and recovery programs for Okaloosa darter and Gulf sturgeon
detailed in Section 7.4.2, USFWS-FR personnel conduct stream fish surveys throughout Eglin
and utilize information gathered to suggest management actions that conserve or restore aquatic
resources. Fish community information is obtained using standardized monitoring protocols
(Herod and Thom, 2004) compiled into an Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) developed specifically
for Eglin streams (Herod, 2005). This approach assigns scores to individual characteristics of
fish communities such as descriptors of feeding, reproductive traits, diversity and numerical
composition of individual fish and species of fishes. Scores are then tabulated and used to
determine overall integrity of the individual stream. IBI’s provide useful information to resource
managers by allowing direct comparisons between streams. The Eglin specific IBI will continue
to be utilized for stream assessments and incorporated into ecological condition models (ECMs).
Metrics and standards developed by FDEP (2004b) and EPA (Barbour et al., 1999) are also used
to determine stream health based on aquatic macro invertebrates. Invertebrate sampling is
completed via kick-net sampling and blacklight surveys and comparisons are made between
current and historical collections. Further data is needed to continue monitoring the condition of
streams with regard to macroinvertebrates. Species distribution and baseline taxonomic
inventories targeting other invertebrate species including crayfish, freshwater mussels,
gastropods and oligochetes within aquatic habitats on Eglin are being incorporated into aquatic
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-56
monitoring to build on previous and current survey work (Thom and Herod, 2005). Baseline
data provides direction in management and determining conservation priorities. Benthic
macroinvertebrates are frequently used as bioindicators of stream condition, and their value in
biological monitoring studies is well documented (Rosenberg & Resh 1993). Biological
monitoring provides information about both past and current conditions and can provide
information that other data may not.
Water chemistry and stream velocity data are collected as part of fish and invertebrate collections
and assessments. Indicators such as dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, conductivity, and
turbidity are used to characterize baseline parameters and for trend analysis. Coupled with
biological and physical parameters, water chemistry data supports adaptive management of
Eglin’s natural resources and ensures that Eglin streams comply with CWA standards.
Stream geomorphic features have been measured for 21 sites across Eglin in order to establish
physical stream characteristics for sand-bed streams. Geomorphic parameters assessed included
land use, riparian vegetation quality, stream reach slope, catchment area, stream order, stream
power, width/depth ratio, stream bed particle size analysis, sinuosity, riffle and pool dimensions
and stream longitudinal profiles (Thom and Herod, 2005). Visual assessments of riparian
species, land cover and percent substrate types have also been recorded based on standard
methods as published by the FDEP (2004c). Future research projects relating to stream
geomorphology may include a study of large woody debris in sand-bed streams over a range of
basin sizes and determining groundwater quantity, quality and contribution to surface waters.
Because aquatic habitat restoration is an important component to resource management on Eglin,
Before and After Strategic Sampling (BASS) is conducted to document recovery related to
restoration projects. Biological, chemical, and physical data is collected at sites prior to and after
restoration projects to monitor change. Monitoring is conducted at regular intervals (6 months,
1 year and 5 years) and tailored to specifically assess restoration activities. Elimination of
barriers to fish passage and erosion control projects (see erosion control section below) have
been the major restoration projects thus far, however BASS techniques will be used to monitor
change in aquatic communities resulting from terrestrial management practices (e.g., altered fire
regime or forestry practices) and military missions. BASS provides a standardized, scientific
means of gauging the success and efficiency for restoration and habitat improvement projects.
In addition to standardized monitoring programs, predictive models will be developed using
novel statistical techniques and GIS applications. Multivariate statistical models similar to the
ECM developed for terrestrial communities (Section 7.1.1) on Eglin will be developed to better
establish management goals and aquatic community response to management activities. GIS
applications will be employed to establish a set of reference streams that represent the best
aquatic biological integrity on Eglin. Least Impacted Streams (LIS) will be identified using
remote sensing and data gathered from these streams will serve as benchmarks for stream
condition and comparisons to impacted sites. These streams will provide a reference to evaluate
habitat condition, water quality and species biodiversity in streams that are impaired. A
combination of standardized bioassessment protocols, predictive models, and high quality
reference streams will enable effective and efficient aquatic resource management on Eglin.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-57
Water Quality Monitoring
Water quality sampling of non potable waters on the Eglin reservation is conducted primarily by
Eglin-based USFWS biologists.
Basic water chemistry (dissolved oxygen, turbidity,
temperature, pH, and conductivity) and stream velocity are collected as part of invertebrate and
fish collections and assessments at multiple sites across the mainland reservation.
Regionally, FDEP and the Choctawhatchee Basin Alliance (CBA) also sample water quality.
CBA water quality monitoring sites are located in multiple water bodies adjacent to Eglin,
including Santa Rosa Sound, Choctawhatchee Bay, Garniers Bayou, and Rocky Bayou.
Parameters measured include temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved oxygen, water clarity, nutrient
concentrations (total nitrogen and phosphorus), and algae content (chlorophyll).
Erosion Control
On Eglin, the main non-point source pollutant is excess sediment from unpaved roads, borrow
pits, utility right-of-ways, and cleared test ranges. For over a decade, Eglin has been actively
pursuing erosion control projects to address this problem. Restoration projects have focused on
the use of earthen berms, road closure, and revegetation to reduce the flow of sediment. From
1995 to 2005, 417 borrow pits and non-point erosion sites (663 acres) were rehabilitated and
maintained, primarily in Choctawhatchee basin watersheds. Recent efforts focus more resources
in the Yellow River basin. Detail on these efforts is provided in Section 7.8, Forest Resource
Management.
7.5.3
Wastewater and Stormwater Management
There are no permitted discharges of wastewater effluent to Choctawhatchee Bay due to the use
of land made available by Eglin for spray irrigation or effluent spray fields. See Section 7.10 for
more information on agricultural outleasing and spray fields on Eglin AFB. The 96th Civil
Engineer Group (96 CEG/CEOIT) manages, operates, and maintains Eglin’s wastewater
treatment plants. The 96 CEG/CEVC manages wastewater treatment facility permits and related
compliance requirements, in accordance with applicable Air Force regulations.
The FDEP issued a permit to Eglin AFB for the discharge of stormwater from Phase II Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) under the provisions of Section 403.0885, FS, 40 CFR
122.32-37, and applicable rules of the FAC. Military installations are required to attain MS4 permits
under Phase II of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater
permitting program. Under these MS4 permits, Eglin AFB has established and is required to
implement a number of mitigations, each of which has measurable goals, a schedule for
implementation/completion, and a list of responsible entities/departments.
The 96 CEG/CEVC handles all applications for stormwater permits. The 96 CEG/CEVC
considers issues associated with the increased volume and velocity of stormwater runoff and
identifies methods to reduce the potential for negative impacts to water resources from these
activities.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-58
7.5.4
Cooperative Programs
Eglin works with several groups that address regional water resource issues, including the CBA
and the GCPEP. The CBA is a non-profit citizens group that works to protect and restore the
waters in the Choctawhatchee basin. GCPEP is a partnership of ten state and federal agencies
and private organizations that work cooperatively to address regional natural resource issues.
GCPEP partners include the Florida Division of Forestry, National Forests in Alabama, FDEP,
DoD, Florida FWC, International Paper, NWFWMD, Nokuse Plantation, Gulf Islands National
Seashore, and TNC. GCPEP employs an Aquatic Specialist who works with the partners on
aquatic issues and projects, and is currently working on an aquatic management plan for the
Partnership.
Erosion control and aquatic restoration projects on Eglin have also involved multiple partners.
Cooperative projects have been conducted with the CBA, Northwest Florida Aquatic Preserves,
Three Rivers Resource Conservation and Development Council, National Resource Conservation
Service (NRCS), and the GCPEP. Projects have included activities such as streamside
vegetation planting, construction of earthen berms, and seagrass planting.
7.6 WETLAND PROTECTION
In an effort to protect important wetland resources, a number of federal, state and Air Force
regulations have been instituted. The following is a brief discussion of some of the predominant
regulations regarding wetlands conservation.
Clean Water Act. In 1972, Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments, also known as the CWA. Section 401 puts the authority in the hands of the state
to grant, deny, or condition issuance of federal permits that may result in a discharge to U.S.
waters. This section allows states a means of protecting wetlands and offsetting unavoidable
impacts by obtaining mitigation proposals prior to granting 401 certification. Section 402 of the
CWA works to control water pollution from point sources by requiring NPDES permits from any
point source that discharges any pollutant to U.S. waters. Section 404 of the CWA requires a
permit from the USACE and authorized state agency (FDEP) for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into the waters of the U.S., including wetlands.
Rivers and Harbors Act 1899. The permit process derived from Section 10 of the River and
Harbor Act requires authorization from the Secretary of the Army, acting through the USACE
for the construction of any structure in or over any navigable water of the United States. The law
applies to any dredging or disposal of dredged materials, excavation, filling, rechannelization, or
any other modification of a navigable water of the U.S., and applies to all structures, including
the residential, commercial, and governmental boat dock and piers.
EO 11990, Protection of Wetlands. In order to minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of
wetlands on federal lands, EO 11990 prohibits federal agencies from undertaking, providing
assistance for activities, or leasing space located in wetlands unless there are no practicable
alternatives and all practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands have been implemented
(1977, 42 Fed. Reg. 26961).
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-59
Wetland Protection
EO 11988, Floodplain Management. EO 11988 prohibits federal agencies from the occupancy
and modification of floodplains and floodplain development unless there is no practicable
alternative. This EO requires federal agencies to make every effort to reduce the risk of flood
loss, minimize the impact of floods on human health, safety, and welfare, and preserve the
natural beneficial value of floodplains. The EO stipulates that federal agencies proposing actions
in floodplains consider alternative actions to avoid adverse effects, avoid incompatible
development in the floodplains, and provide opportunity for early public review of any plans or
proposals. The proponent must include mitigation measures if adverse effects are unavoidable.
Parts of the floodplain that are also considered wetlands will, in addition to floodplain zonings,
receive protection from federal, state, and local wetland laws.
Safe Drinking Water Act. USEPA approved state programs enforce the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA). The SDWA’s primary purpose is to stop organic chemicals from entering
drinking water systems. They accomplish this by establishing water quality standards from
drinking water, monitoring public water systems, and guarding against groundwater
contamination from injection wells (42 U.S.C. 300f-300j-26).
Watershed Protection and Flood Protection Act. The Watershed Protection and Flood
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1001-1009), and its subsequent amendments, authorizes federal
assistance for planning and carrying out projects in watershed areas for conservation and use of
land and water and flood prevention. The Act is intended to preserve, protect, and improve
terrestrial and aquatic resources.
North American Wetlands Conservation Act. Under the North American Wetlands
Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4401-4414) wetlands are afforded protection in order to maintain
“healthy populations of migratory birds in North America.” Under this legislation, the Act holds
that wetland ecosystems provide “essential and significant habitat for fish, shellfish, and other
wildlife of commercial, recreational, scientific, and aesthetic values.”
Coastal Wetlands Protection Act. The Coastal Wetlands Protection Act (CWPA) aims to
preserve the natural state of the coastal wetland ecosystems and to prevent destruction of these
areas that are not designed to serve a higher public interest. The CWPA provides additional
authority to protect tidal wetlands.
7.7 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE
Ground Maintenance (796 CES/CEOHG) works to maintain landscaped areas with low
maintenance and native species whenever possible. Types of vegetation used in landscaping are
discussed in section 5.2.3 Turf and Landscaped Areas. 796 CES/CEOHG also handles the
management of plant diseases, insects, and non-point source pollution issues with landscape
pesticides and fertilizers. They work in conjunction with the Pest Management office to
decrease pests and invasive species with the use of pesticides and herbicides. Pest Management
is discussed in more detail in Section 7.11, Integrated Pest Management Program.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-60
Forest Management
7.8 FOREST MANAGEMENT
AFI 32-7064, 17 September 2004, states, “The principal objective of forest management on AF
installations is to maintain and enhance ecological integrity of forested landscapes while
supporting the military mission.” Under the principles of ecosystem management, forest
treatments, to include commercial harvesting of forest products, may be used to achieve
installation goals for forest enhancement and restoration, wildlife habitat improvement, wildfire
protection, recreational development, military training requirements, airfield safety compliance,
and wood protection.”
The forest management program supports the military mission by enhancing federally listed
T&E species habitat through management activities that restore and enhance biological diversity
and ecosystem health. Eglin uses sustainable forest management practices that are ecological in
principle, economically sound, and treat the entire forest to improve the capabilities and
flexibility of the military mission. To accomplish the program goals and objectives, the forest
management program is divided into four (4) areas:
1. Direct Mission Support
2. Timber Management
3. Reforestation and Native Grasses
4. Erosion Control
Direct Mission Support includes:
●
Providing expertise and information to mission planners on methods and impacts of
various types of forest management activities.
●
Marking boundaries and contracting merchantable timber to be cut from areas that
interfere with military mission LOS or other capabilities.
●
Structuring a specific forest area or a percentage of the forest to meet mission tree canopy
or midstory requirement.
●
Manipulating forest structure for a specific area adjacent to TAs for a mission test or
training need.
●
Planting trees to create a security buffer, visual screen, or to reduce noise impacts.
Timber Management includes:
●
Writing silvicultural prescriptions.
●
Executing work plan for silvicultural prescriptions.
●
Removing sand pine that has invaded longleaf pine sandhills.
●
Converting off-site slash pine and sand pine plantations to longleaf pine.
●
Thinning longleaf pine to resemble an uneven-aged management system.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-61
Forest Management
●
Thinning/conversion of slash pine plantations where appropriate.
●
Sand pine seed tree cuts.
●
Salvage of dead or damaged timber.
Reforestation includes:
●
Promote natural regeneration of longleaf pine where opportunities allow.
●
Herbicide application for site preparation and habitat/timber stand improvement.
●
Planting longleaf pine seedlings.
●
Harvesting native grass seed and planting native grasses for groundcover restoration and
for erosion site stabilization.
●
Timber Stand Improvement using mechanical and chemical techniques.
●
Mechanical and herbicide preparation for sites prior to planting.
●
Prescribed fire for site preparation, brownspot needle disease, control longleaf pine
release, and groundcover stimulation.
Erosion Control includes:
●
Rehabilitation of borrow pits and other erosion sites impacting the habitat of the
endangered Okaloosa darter and threatened Gulf sturgeon.
●
Rehabilitation of erosion sites within riparian areas.
●
Conducting annual site maintenance on all erosion sites until sites are stabilized
(generally 3 to 5 years).
Eglin AFB spans approximately 465,693 acres across three counties in NWF and Site D3 at
CSB. Due to its size, Eglin is comprised of many different land cover types. (Table 7-10). The
Eglin AFB Reservation consists of five main forest cover types. These cover types include
Natural Pine, Planted Pine, Pine and Hardwood Mix, Upland Hardwood, and Bottomland
Hardwood. Figure 7-14 identifies the three most prevalent forest cover types. Additional
information on forest cover types may be found in the Forestry CP or by contacting
96 CEG/CEVSF.
Table 7-10. Eglin Broad Cover Types
Broad Forest Type
Natural Pine
Plantation Pine
Pine/Hardwood Mix
Upland Hardwoods
Bottomland Hardwoods/Wetlands
Non Stocked
Non Forest
Special Military Use
Water
Road
Training Area
TOTAL:
02/02/10
Acres
65,929.3
72,598.7
206,982.2
712.0
56,881.0
44.9
10,388.8
23.6
1,214.1
2,910.0
46,761.3
464,445.9
Final
Percent
14.20%
15.63%
44.57%
0.15%
12.25%
0.01%
2.24%
0.01%
0.26%
0.63%
10.07%
100.00%
Page 7-62
02/02/10
Final
Forest Management
Page 7-63
Figure 7-14. Forest Cover Type for Eglin AFB
7.8.1
Forest Management
History (Past 50 Years)
The forest management program on Eglin has seen many changes in management philosophy
over the past 50 years. The most notable change in philosophy has occurred in the last 15 years.
The program at Eglin adopted a management philosophy of stewardship that recognizes overall
ecosystem function. Forest management has become a tool for achieving desired stand structures
and diversity, and for producing ecologically acceptable levels of goods and services. The goal
is to provide sustainable multiple uses within the overarching concept of ecosystem function.
This does not mean that sound forest silvicultural practices are not used, but that an integrated
team of natural resource professionals look at all activities and tailor the management
prescriptions to maximize the accomplishment of multiple objectives with an emphasis on
restoration of ecosystem health.
Recognizing the need to reforest clearcut areas on the reservation, DoD foresters began artificial
reforestation in the 1950’s. A total of 109,662 acres have been planted to date. Due to
then-current planting technology and scarcity of longleaf nursery stock, early reforestation
efforts were primarily with slash pine and sand pine. Between 1950 and 1980 thousands of acres
of sand and slash pine were planted. By 1980, as technology and availability of nursery stock
improved, longleaf pine became the primary species planted. Planting longleaf pine is vital for
the restoration of the longleaf pine sandhills on the reservation. Sand pine poses a major threat
to the restoration of the longleaf pine sandhills. As a result, from 1980 to present, over
90 percent of the seedlings planted have been longleaf pine. Table 7-11 illustrates and
Figure 7-15 depicts the historical reforestation efforts. Figure 7-16 depicts the emphasis placed
on the removal of sand pine and stunted slash pine that started in 1990. Approximately
23,000 acres of sand pine and slash pine plantations were converted to longleaf pine.
Table 7-11. Historic Artificial Reforestation
History of Artificial Reforestation of Eglin Air Force Base
Period
Cumulative
Year of
Slash
Sand
Longleaf
Acres
Acres (adding
Planting
Pine
Pine
Pine
(decade
each decade)
total)
1950-1959
6721
0
0
6721
6721
1960-1969
11473
7293
3717
22483
29204
1970-1979
11597
5381
6592
23570
52774
1980-1989
210
1467
11549
13226
66000
1990-1999
0
142
29709
29851
95851
2000-2005
0
0
13811
12811
109662
Total
30001
14283
65378
109662
%
30.3
14.4
59.6
100
7.8.2
Forest Accomplishments (Past 10 Years)
Over the past 10 years, the Forest Management Element has experienced great success. By
working with other natural resource managers and mission planners on specific organizational
goals, Eglin has made significant progress towards the restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem
while maintaining mission capabilities. This effort has resulted in thousands of acres of RCW
habitat improvement through sand pine and oak control projects. Additionally, over 90 percent
of the Okaloosa darter stream erosion threats have been eliminated.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-64
Natural Resources Program Managaement
02/02/10
Final
Forest Management
Page 7-65
Figure 7-15. Historical Tree Planting Efforts on Eglin AFB
NOTE: This is a data snapshot – Updates are being processed
Natural Resources Program Managaement
02/02/10
Final
Forest Management
Page 7-66
Figure 7-16. Sandpine Removal 1990 to 2005 on Eglin AFB
Forest Management
Restoration projects have continued despite the large fluctuations in the timber market due to
economics, hurricanes, and other factors. The forest management program has continued to
achieve its desired restoration goals, while remaining financially self-sufficient.
Silvicultural activities have played a major role in the restoration of Eglin’s longleaf pine
sandhill ecosystems. By utilizing sound management principles, reforestation practices, and
prescribed fire, managers have been able to improve the forest without negatively impacting the
function of the ecosystem. In the past 10 years, over 31,000 acres of forest have been enhanced
through sand pine removal, reforestation, and timber stand improvements. In recognition of its
reforestation efforts, Eglin received the National Arbor Day Foundations Project Award in 1998.
This was awarded to Eglin for the longleaf pine restoration and for the improved quality of the
sandhills natural community. Over 15 million longleaf pine seedlings have been planted
between 1995 and 2005.
The past 10 years (from 1995-2005) have also been very productive for the Erosion Control
Program. Eglin has significantly reduced sediment erosion into freshwater streams through
aggressive delineation of tertiary road management needs and guidelines, restoration of known
erosion sites, and establishment of native vegetation on erosion sites. From 1995 to 2005, over
415 sites covering 663 acres were rehabilitated reducing soil erosion by an estimated
88,000 tons/year. Due to the erosion control efforts on the Okaloosa darter streams, Eglin
received the IECA’s Environmental Achievement Grand Award in 2001. Table 7-12 shows the
forest accomplishments from 1996-2005.
7.8.3
Future Management Direction
The forest management program will seek to improve and maintain long-term military mission
and ecological sustainability while remaining an economically sound program. Key values of
the forestry program will be in order of priority:
●
Mission Support
●
T&E species habitat management
●
Biological Diversity Enhancement
●
Economic Opportunity
The following are basic forest management principles and practices that the Forest Management
Element will implement to ensure the enhancement and proper management of the Eglin AFB
forest:
●
Enhance military mission flexibility and success through sound forest management
practices.
●
Incorporate the Desired Future Conditions for Focal Conservation Targets on Eglin AFB
into forest management activities.
●
Incorporate the CP for the Red-cockaded Woodpecker into forest management activities.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-67
Current Status of Forest Management
Activities FY 96 Thru 2005
FY96
FY97
FY98
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
Total
Timber Management/Restoration
Plantation Sand/Slash removal
2,284
1,025
1,357
696
777
2,147
1,885
346
637
236
11,390
Longleaf Pine Shelterwood
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Longleaf Pine Thinning
26
0
0
0
0
0
159
337
320
120
962
Sand Pine only removal
2,393
2,458
4,558
3,052
4,367
2,340
1,630
1,380
4,001
1,258
27,437
0
Final
Sand Pine Seed-Tree
0
0
0
0
Salvage
676
670
220
11,216
Total Acres of Forest Sales
1,699
4,973
6,676
7,083
Receipts from Product Sales
$1,757,985
$1,835,759
$1,864,064
$1,147,952
0
0
473
0
0
473
373
100
100
132
1,137
14,624
5,085
4,860
3,860
2,598
5,090
2,751
44,675
$1,699,166
$1,100,484
$1,099,981
$1,026,42
$1,250,491
$829,474
13,611,776
Site Preparation
Acres Roller-Drum Chopped
2,309
2,662
1,799
1,377
1,042
1,042
767
739
424
386
12,547
Acres of Herbicide
0
0
0
1,001
1,886
1,499
1,667
2,270
2,918
679
11,920
02/02/10
Table 7-12. Forest Accomplishments (FY96-FY05)
Reforestation
Acres of Slash Pine Planted
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Acres of Sand Pine Planted
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Acres of Longleaf Pine Planted
3,117
3,971
3,162
3,971
3,184
3,222
2,894
1,580
1,475
1,487
27,883
Total Acres Planted
3,117
3,971
3,162
3,791
3,184
3,222
2,894
1,580
1,475
1,487
27,8883
Longleaf Seedlings Planted
1,636,250
2,084,000
1,660,050
1,600,000
1,449,000
1,500,000
870,000
768,000
750,000
750,000
13,067,300
Native Plants Planted
0
0
0
0
0.1
7
1
2
0
20
30.1
1,380
950
2,802
1,198
0
0
1,889
2,750
1,003
3,487
15,459
Timber Stand Improvement (TSI)
Mechanically Treated (saw/ax)
Chemically Treated
0
0
0
49
0
778
0
0
2,918
1,499
5,244
Total Acres of TSI
3,132
1,380
950
2,802
1,247
778
1,889
2,750
3,921
4,986
23,835
Clay Pits Rehabilitated
0
7
10
4
3
5
4
5
8
28
74
Other Site Rehabilitation
0
18
24
33
51
31
5
71
25
44
302
Total Acres Rehabilitation
0
52.5
48.6
37.2
126.5
110.2
12.2
103.1
69.3
99.5
659
Sites Maintained
24
53
77
80
97
122
185
140
169
190
1,137
Erosion Control
Forest Management
Page 7-68
Forest Management
●
Understand the structure, function, composition and changes of Eglin’s forest ecosystem.
●
Annually update and maintain a current forest inventory for use in decision support.
●
Utilize adaptive management principles for restoring the longleaf pine sandhills.
●
Preserve the diversity of ages, heights, and species of trees.
●
Incorporate low-impact harvesting techniques where applicable.
●
Use uneven-aged management practices to guide longleaf thinning operations.
●
Promote natural longleaf pine regeneration and native grass restoration.
●
Achieve desired forest structure and diversity to produce ecologically acceptable levels of
goods and services.
●
Foster other forest values (e.g., aesthetic, genetic, recreational, and protective).
As previously noted, T&E species habitat management will continue to be a major priority for
Forest Management. The NRS managers outline the following specific objectives which are
designed to structure and enhance the forest ecosystem to mimic a more natural condition and at
the same time benefit the T&E species habitat.
●
All longleaf pine thinning will be conducted to imitate natural disturbance with the main
focus on maintaining ecosystem integrity and mission capabilities.
●
Longleaf pine thinning operations must maintain or promote an open, multi-aged canopy
structure while maintaining sufficient stem density to meet RCW habitat requirements,
provide fuels for prescribed fire, promote regeneration and promote for release of native
grasses. Openings created by longleaf pine thinning will vary in size. All long leaf pine
thinning will be in accordance with the T&E Species CP (RCW chapter) in order to
provide adequate forage habitat and not impact the species.
●
Forest operations will promote the accomplishment of the goals and objectives of this
INRMP. BMPs will be utilized to ensure that wetlands are protected and that harvesting
operations be as low-impact as possible.
●
Priority will be given to the removal of invasive sand pine within the 350 and 450 RCW
Management Emphasis Area (MEA). Special emphasis will be placed on those areas
where sand pine removal will make an immediate impact on available RCW habitat.
Management goals and objectives for forestry are discussed in Chapter 8. Table 7-13 shows the
Forest Management Work Plan from 2007-2011. This table demonstrates the focus for each
individual program area within the Forest Management Element. Figure 7-17 shows forest
management work priorities. The T&E CP provides more information on priorities for RCW
MEAs.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-69
Forest Management
Table 7-13. Forest Management Work Plan 2007-2011
Timber Management / Restoration
Acres/Year
Invasive Sand Pine Removal
 Emphasis placed on areas that can support new RCW cluster sites
 Work T&E priority areas that will create immediate RCW habitat
 Plan removal areas to improve RCW habitat
 Reforest with longleaf pine
Sand Pine Plantation Removal
 Emphasis placed on future RCW habitat improvement/biodiversity management
 15 year completion at annual work rate
Stunted Slash Pine Plantation Removal
 25 year completion at annual removal rate
Slash Pine Plantation Thinning/Conversion
 Objective will be conversion to longleaf pine
Longleaf Pine thinning inside RCW 350 MEA
 Thinning to improve RCW habitat within the MEA
 Use uneven aged management system
 Stimulate ground cover
Longleaf Pine thinning outside RCW 350 MEA
 Improve RCW habitat between the 350, 450 MEA and in expansion area
boundaries
 Stimulate ground cover
 Use uneven aged management system
 Improve RCW forage and nesting capabilities
Sand Pine Seed Tree
 Commercial Forestry operation
 Only accomplished in areas planned for long-term sand pine management
Timber Stand Improvement (TSI)
3000
500
1500
325
1500
3000
500
Acres/Year
Mechanical TSI (brush ax/chain saw)
 Control sand pine and/or oak encroachment in longleaf pine stands
Chemical TSI
 Prioritize T&E areas that will create immediate habitat for the RCW
 Release of natural longleaf pine regeneration from competing oaks
 Control hardwood competition in longleaf pine stands
 Applied per forestry BMPs
3500
3000
Continued on next page
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-70
Forest Management
Table 7-13. Forest Management Work Plan 2007-2011 Cont’d
Reforestation
Acres/Year
Plant Containerized Longleaf Pine Seedlings
 Average number of seedlings per acre will vary from 400 to 550 per acre based
upon area to be planted.
 Longleaf seedlings are hand planted on a variable spacing of 5 to 20 ft
 Planting pattern is designed to mimic natural occurring regeneration, not a row
plantation.
 Number of seedlings planted in sand pine removal areas will depend on residual
basal area of natural longleaf remaining.
 Natural areas with a residual basal area of 30 or greater should be evaluated for
natural regeneration if tree spacing across the stand will allow.
 Openings will be planted in restoration areas where feasible to begin creating
uneven-aged stand structure.
1500
 Seedlings should not be planted under existing longleaf pine.
 Natural regeneration is encouraged in AFI 32-7064 and should be utilized where
possible to complete an uneven-aged stand structure.
 Average planting 750,000 containerized longleaf pine seedlings per year.
 Eglin will use its own seed to produce longleaf pine seedlings planted on Eglin.
 Contract for longleaf pine cone collection on Eglin during years when adequate
cones are available.
 If Eglin seedlings are inadequate or unavailable, longleaf pine seed will be
purchased (if Eglin seed is not sufficient for needs) as close to Eglin AFB as
possible so proper longleaf genetics are merged.
 Emphasis placed in areas to improve RCW habitat and release longleaf.
Site Preparation Prior to Planting
 Both mechanical and herbicide site preparation will be used to prepare the site
for planting and minimize ground cover impacts.
 Chemical operations will be favored to reduce ground cover impacts.
 Mechanical site preparation using roller-drum choppers will be utilized on
plantations where logging slash and residual vegetation require control.
 Live oak clusters and some individual trees will be selected to remain on site.
1500
 Herbicide site preparation using approved herbicides will be applied for timber
stand improvement, site preparation, RCW habitat improvement, and quail
habitat improvement at recommended rates.
 BMPs will be followed to ensure buffers are created where potential exists for
herbicide to move off site - special care near roads.
 No mechanical site preparation will be conducted on natural areas that have
never received site preparation.
Native Grasses Restoration
 Develop a seed collection and seed establishment protocol.
 Develop a seed collection partnership outside of Eglin.
 Create series of seed collection orchards at 10 sites across the reservation.
N/A
 From a baseline of 100 lbs, increase native grass seed harvest by 20 percent each
year for 5 years.
 Establish native grass restoration priority areas.
 70 percent of seed utilized on restoration areas.
 30 percent utilized on orchard development.
Continued on next page
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-71
Forest Management
Table 7-13. Forest Management Work Plan 2007-2011 Cont’d
Erosion Control
Sites/Year
Darter Watershed Rehabilitation
 Program completed by 2006 (New Construction).
 Remove culverts creating impoundments wherever practical.
 Establish low-water crossing where practical.
 Utilize Natural Resources Conservation Service for
contracting/operations/inspection.
 Use native grasses.
Non-Darter Watershed Rehabilitation
 Program completion by 2018 (New Construction) on 235 sites and 65 borrow pits.
 Sites prioritized by individual watershed.
contracting/operations/inspection.
 Use native grasses.
Watershed Rehabilitation Maintenance
 Maintain vegetation vigor for a period of 3 to 5 years upon construction completion
(mowing, fertilization, reseeding if required)
 Perform as needed additional earthwork ( seeding, mowing, fertilization,
stabilization)
contracting/operations/inspection
 Maintain site integrity through vehicle exclusion and vigorous native vegetation
establishment (add native tree planting when site conditions warrant, e.g., avoid
utility ROW, cleared test ranges, narrow obliterated roads).
Forest (Tertiary) Road Management
25
25
110
Sites/Year
Road maintenance
 Maintenance done on an "as required" basis.
 Road maintenance will be for silvicultural access only.
 Best Management Practices will be followed.
 No major road construction is anticipated.
N/A
The NRS has significantly reduced sediment erosion into freshwater streams over the past
10 years. This was accomplished through aggressive rehabilitation of known erosion sites such
as borrow pits, mechanically cleared test ranges, unpaved tertiary roads that severely impacted
wetland/riparian sites. Okaloosa darter numbers increased throughout much of their range due to
the decrease in sedimentation. Stream assessments of aquatic macrophytes indicate that stream
quality improved as less habitat smothering resulted from sedimentation occurring in
rehabilitated watersheds. Although other factors may contribute to this increase, aggressive
restoration of erosion sites and other ecosystem management strategies have played an important
role in their population growth.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-72
02/02/10
Final
Forest Management
Page 7-73
Figure 7-17. Forestry Management Priority Work Areas
Forest Management
Erosion Control Program
As of January 2006, the NRS has repaired 417 erosion sites, covering 663 acres. These sites
were rehabilitated and sediment loading has been reduced by approximately 88,000 tons. These
accomplishments resulted in the Environmental Achievement Award from the IECA. The future
management direction and priorities for erosion control on Eglin AFB will continue in the same
direction as in past years. The partnership between Eglin and the Natural Resources
Conservation Service will continue. This federal agency has supported Eglin’s erosion control
program in an outstanding manner. Installation and designs for erosion control projects have
been exceptional, effective, and very affordable. See the Forest Management Work Plan, for the
number of planned sites per year for future erosion control projects. Sites will be prioritized on
stream sections that are receiving the most sediment to those receiving the least; however,
streams with significant Conservation Targets may be prioritized above those that have little
biodiversity value.
Tertiary Forest Road Management
A progressive partnership between the 46th TW, the 96th Civil Engineer Group, and the NRS
has resulted in improved road management over the past few years. During this time, over
42 miles of existing unpaved roadway has been reconstructed with BMPs. A GIS database has
been developed that can maintain attribution for each road segment and stream crossing
containing road conditions, culvert and bridge inventory, and management priorities. The Eglin
Range Road Maintenance Handbook was completed in FY 2001. This guide has assisted and
will continue to assist road maintenance crews with effective and affordable BMPs on Eglin’s
road system. This same partnership/team will continue to coordinate on a future road closure
program. The NRS will continue to work closely with the 46th TW and 96th CEG to select roads
to be permanently closed, seasonally closed, those open to public recreation, those closed to the
public, and those that will be used for special purposes, like fire breaks and utility maintenance
corridors. The Road Maintenance Work Plan is addressed in Table 7-13 (Section, 7.8.3).
7.9 WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT
Program Overview
The success of the Fire Management Program is pivotal to the success of the goals and objectives
of 96 CEG/CEVSN. Mission support, ecosystem management and protection of life and
property all depend on a professionally managed wildland fire program. Eglin has globally
significant, fire dependent ecosystems and faces a significant threat from wildfires. Due to
smoke management constraints, mission requirements, adjacent urban areas and a legal
requirement for an aggressive prescribed fire program, Eglin has a highly complex fire
management program.
Eglin has an annual prescribed fire goal of at least 70,000 acres and an average of approximately
100 wildfire responses per year. The high number of mission-caused fires puts it among the
most wildfire-prone areas in the country. The USFS has cited the prescribed fire program as
being among the top four in the nation in terms of acres burned (Fire Management Today, 2005).
When this level of on-the-ground fire activity is considered in light of Eglin’s progressive
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-74
utilization of partnerships, technology, strategic planning and science, it can be understood why
Eglin’s wildland fire program has become recognized by other federal, state and
non-governmental organization wildland fire managers as one of the most progressive and
important in the country.
The success of Eglin’s Fire Management program can be attributed to the high level of
experience and expertise on the staff and their dedication to the Adaptive Management Process.
Fire Management is continually incorporating new information into its decision making in order
to improve the efficiency, safety, and quality of its program. Investment in advanced GIS
technology has put Eglin in a leadership position for developing support tools for making
scientifically sound and informed decisions. For example, the NRDSS provides real time
analysis and reporting of data determined to be vital to the management of Eglin’s natural
resources. Another example of technology developed at Eglin is the Prescribed Fire
Prioritization Model, which uses ecological information in a spatial modeling framework to
determine the most appropriate areas to apply fire to the landscape. These tools are interactive as
well, with the DSS supplying readily available information to inform managers when compiling
the prioritization model.
Eglin AFB’s wildland fire program is managed to the highest national standards, adhering to the
National Wildland Fire Coordinating Group (NWCG) guidelines. AFI 32-7064 states clearly
that wildland fire management personnel “must meet the applicable National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) Standards for wildland fire activities… [and] may use training criteria in
the NWCG Wildland Fire Qualification Subsystem Guide (PMS 310-1/NFES 1414) to attain
equivalent NFPA certifications.” Similar wording can be found in DODI 6055.6.E2.5.9.
Fire training is an excellent way to positively impact local communities as well as strengthen
cooperation with local agencies. By allowing cooperators to participate in NWCG courses
hosted at Eglin, communications, safety, and effectiveness are improved.
The Wildland Fire Management Program at Eglin AFB consists of three interrelated
components:
1) Direct Mission Support
2) Prescribed Fire
3) Wildfire Management
7.9.1
Fire Management – Direct Mission Support
Direct mission support on the Eglin military complex is accomplished in several ways. During
periods of high fire danger and/or for missions with a high probability of starting a wildfire, 96th
Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Management Division- NRS – Fire Element
(96 CEG/CEVSNP) provides on-scene fire suppression resources for “hot mission standby” as
well as information on ways to mitigate fire danger. 96 CEG/CEVSNP serves as the center for
dissemination of fire danger advisories, fire status updates and technical advice to mission
planner on fire-related issues. Related to this is an ever-increasing involvement with the military
mission planners related to vegetative manipulation with fire for specific mission needs. The
changing forest structure that can result from the application of fire for ecological reasons is not
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-75
always best for certain military uses of the land. While certain sensor testing may need large
swaths of fairly homogeneous forests, which can be achieved through the application of
prescribed fire, dense forests where fire is excluded may be needed for visibility screens, or to
serve as seismic barriers. Fully understanding these needs, as well as 96 CEG/CEVSNP’s role in
helping to meet them, will be a focus in the current planning cycle. Annual prescribed fire
planning will take into full consideration the mission requirements for both prescribed burning
and areas of fire exclusion. In addition to this, there are other significant additional duties that
96 CEG/CEVSNP will be acquiring during this planning cycle if the INRMP is approved, the
most significant of which would be an increased role, in the implementation of prescribed fire for
vegetation management on the cleared TAs.
7.9.2
Fire Management – Prescribed Fire
Prescribed fire is the most important ecosystem management tool for Eglin’s managers. An
aggressive prescribed fire program is essential for meeting ecosystem management goals. In
addition to improving habitat for numerous fire dependent plants and animals, it is used for
minimizing damage and costs from wildfires, eliminating Brown Spot Needle Blight disease
from longleaf pine seedlings, preparing areas for pine regeneration, and manipulating vegetation
for mission requirements. Prescribed fire requires close coordination with military mission
personnel as well as state and federal cooperators/regulators. The complexities of smoke
management, military mission coordination and airspace restrictions pose significant challenges
to the prescribed fire program.
An average of approximately 70,000 acres per year must be burned in order to meet ecosystem
management goals. Smoke management in some of the world’s busiest airspace, around
visibility-sensitive military missions, is managed using the best available technology. Computer
modeling of smoke plumes using inputs from, spot weather forecasts, on-site weather stations,
and Eglin’s weather squadron is coupled with daily coordination/notification (via e-mail, the
internet, and FAX) to minimize chances of negative impacts to local communities and the
military mission.
Burn blocks, which utilize pre-existing firebreaks such as roads and streams, are the primary
management-planning unit for 96 CEG/CEVSNP staff. A GIS-based management prioritization
system, completed in 2002, synthesizes multiple data layers including fire history, ecosystem
health information (based on remote sensing and ground surveys), mission requirements,
presence of rare, fire-dependent species, management objectives, smoke management constraints
and forest management activities. The output is a prioritized landscape management map that
guides day–to-day activities on the ground, as well as short–term and long range planning
efforts. This dynamic web-enabled map is updated using ecological monitoring data as
prescribed fires, wildfires, forestry activities and time change the landscape. As management
objectives and model inputs are further refined, future modifications of the prioritization model
may be incorporated.
Since 1999, aerial ignition using contract helicopters has lowered costs per acre by nearly
50 percent compared to ground ignition while allowing better utilization of limited weather
windows. This method of ignition improves smoke management by allowing early completion
of burns and better smoke dispersion. All terrain vehicle (ATV) mounted, pickup mounted and
hand held torches are used as needed to assist and supplement aerial ignition.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-76
7.9.3
Fire Management – Wildfire
The Wildfire program includes all aspects of fire prevention, detection, suppression, readiness
fire line rehabilitation and training. Both wildfire occurrence and associated risk are high for
Eglin. As populations increase around Eglin's borders, risks of negative impacts to the public
from wildfires and their smoke also increases. Potential liability from wildfires for the DoD is
present since most wildfires are started by military mission activity. Air Force structures and
equipment are also at risk from wildfire damage and smoke can negatively impact
visibility-sensitive missions. Unlike the other federal land management agencies in the
Departments of Agriculture and Interior, DoD does not currently have access to an emergency
wildfire funding source.
The Eglin AFB reservation is delineated into four Fire Management Zones (FMZ) (Figure 7-18).
The first two zones are characterized by their potential vegetative components under what is
believed to be the pre-Columbian fire occurrence and return interval. These vegetative zones are
often intermixed and tend to blend with each other. The second two zones are within the mission
infrastructure of the reservation. Primary operations for wildfire suppression are based on the
fuels and fire return intervals as described in the FMZ’s below.
FMZ - 1: Fire return intervals historically less than 10 years - Surface fires are common with
crown fires occurring only during periods of high to severe fire weather conditions. Resource
values, for species such as RCW, are high within this zone. Approximately 242,530 acres of the
Eglin reservation comprise this zone.
FMZ - 2: Fire return intervals historically greater than 10 years - Suppression is the primary fire
management action occurring in this zone. Fires in this zone are generally small and slow
moving except during periods of drought, low relative humidity and high winds. Under these
conditions extreme fire behavior can result and difficult to contain fires can occur. This zone
encompasses approximately 163,230 acres of the Eglin reservation.
FMZ - 3: Semi Improved Areas - Includes the designated test ranges within the Eglin
reservation. Also included are powerline rights-of-way and any other area requiring periodic
maintenance such as mowing, herbicide, and/or roller drum chopping. Approximately
45,997 acres are in this zone.
FMZ - 4: Improved Areas - This zone is a full suppression area and includes Eglin Main Base
Complex, Hurlburt Field, Duke Field, Site C-6, Navy EOD school, Dillon Field and Camp
Rudder (Army Ranger Camp). Areas of urban interface occur in this zone. The Eglin and
Hurlburt Fire departments provide primary suppression with Natural Resource assistance on
request. Approximately 13,819 acres are included in this zone.
Figure 7-18 and 7-19 show the limits to wildfire suppression activities. The areas depicted as
UXO are those areas at risk from potential UXO contamination. These areas are treated as no
plow, indirect attack, zones. Underbrush Area is a secured area with military supervision
required upon entry. Biologically Sensitive Areas such as wetlands, high quality natural areas,
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-77
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-78
Figure 7-18. Fire Management Zones
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-79
Figure 7-19. Restricted Suppression Areas
steep slopes and T&E Species habitat are areas where plow operations are normally not
conducted. NRS personnel responsible for deciding suppression activities in these areas are the
Natural Resource Manager, Wildland fire Manager or other designated representative. At all
times, for all wildfires, the safety of firefighting personnel will be the governing consideration.
For information on these and other suppression considerations see the Eglin AFB Fire
Management Plan. More specific information regarding Eglin’s wildfire response can be found
in the Full Spectrum Threat Response Plan (FSTR 10-2).
7.10 AGRICULTURAL OUTLEASING
Eglin AFB is currently leasing approximately 676 acres of land to Okaloosa County for
agricultural outleasing purposes. For a period of five years (May 2004 - May 2009), Okaloosa
County is granted the right to operate, repair, and maintain a sewage effluent disposal field on
this acreage. In addition to use as an effluent spray field, Okaloosa County has also been
authorized to graze cattle on the land, provided they comply with Air Force Policy on the grazing
of animals on licensed property. For more information on the Air Force Policy concerning this
outlease please refer to the Department of The Air Force Grant of License to the Board of
County Commissioners, Okaloosa County For Property Located on Eglin Air Force Base,
Florida. During the term of this lease, Okaloosa County is solely responsible for maintaining the
premises in good order and condition. Responsibilities include all utilities, janitorial services,
building/grounds maintenance, as well as ensuring all environmental requirements are met. All
liabilities related to pollution of the area from spills and groundwater/surface water
contamination, and all health and safety issues, lie with Okaloosa County. Eglin AFB is not
responsible for any damage or contamination of the property or injuries to persons that result
from the condition or state of the property during the time of the lease. Prior to vacating the
land, Okaloosa County shall restore the property to its original condition, which includes
removal of any contamination that may have been caused during their occupancy.
Agricultural outleasing on AF properties are required to manage for the prevention, introduction
and spread of invasive species. Outgrant agreements will include requirements to implement
control measures for invasive species that are identified in the Invasive Species CP.
7.11 INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Eglin Invasive Non-Native Species Management Program
INS include plants, animals, insects, diseases and other organisms that are becoming established
and spreading at an alarming rate throughout the world. An invasive species can be defined as a
species that is non-native to an ecosystem and who’s intentional or accidental introduction
causes or is likely to cause environmental or economic damage or harm to human health. It has
been estimated that INS cost Americans approximately 137 billion dollars yearly
(Pimentel et al, 2000 as referenced in U.S. Air Force, 2001). These species can be considered
one of the most serious environmental threats in the 21st century (Mooney and Hobbs 2000 as
referenced in U.S. Air Force, 2001). Once established, INS reduce biological diversity and
disrupt the natural integrity and function of native ecosystems by altering habitat and
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-80
out-competing native species. The introduction and spread of non-native invasive species may
also create significant, negative issues for military training or for other anthropogenic land uses.
The Eglin AFB INSMP focuses on invasive non-native plant and animal species that cause or
may cause negative environmental impacts to Eglin ecosystems. The programs purpose is to
protect the integrity of Eglin’s natural ecosystems by reducing and controlling the spread of
invasive, exotic plant and animal species. The goals and objectives are identified in Chapter 8,
goals and objectives II.E.
Executive Order 13112, Invasive Species
EO 13112 requires federal agencies to identify actions that may affect the status of invasive
species and to use appropriate programs and authorities to:
●
Prevent invasive species introductions;
●
Detect populations of invasive species and rapidly institute cost-effective and
environmentally sound control measures;
●
Monitor invasive species populations;
●
Restore native species and habitat conditions in areas that have been invaded;
●
Conduct research and develop technologies to prevent the introduction of, and to control
the spread of, invasive species; and
●
Promote public awareness of invasive species and the means to address them.
The order also states that federal agencies are not to authorize, fund, or carry out actions that are
likely to promote the introduction or spread of invasive species unless the agency has made
public its determination that the benefits of such actions clearly outweigh the potential harm
caused by invasive species and that all reasonable measures to minimize the risk of harm will be
taken in conjunction with the actions.
The Guidelines for Program Management:
●
Prevent the introduction and spread of invasive plant species using an IPM approach
including but not limited to; hand pulling, mechanical control, herbicide application, and
prescribed fire. Invasive animal species may be trapped or removed by lethal control
(shooting).
●
Provide early detection and rapid response to locate and control invasive species.
●
Implement control and management by attempted eradication and follow up treatments.
●
Restore seriously degraded habitat with native plants.
●
Promote interagency/local government cooperation.
●
Maintain data base for information management/sharing.
●
Promote education and public awareness about invasive species.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-81
7.11.1 Invasive Non-Native Plants
Management History
The Eglin NRS first launched the INSMP in 1995. This program originally identified sites,
mapped locations, and conducted herbicidal applications to invasive non-native plant species. In
1996, a cooperative effort between Eglin Natural Resources, Civil Engineer Pest Management,
and Civil Engineer Roads and Grounds removed over 350 Chinese tallow trees from Eglin
housing and industrial areas. This same year, Eglin began sending a representative to the Florida
Exotic Pest Plant Council (FLEPPC) annual symposium. In 1998 Eglin began participation in
the FDEP Upland Invasive Plant Management Program and is a member of the Florida
Panhandle Invasive Exotic Plant Working Group. Since then, Eglin has submitted annual
proposals and received funding from the FDEP for herbicide treatments of Chinese tallow and
other woody invasive species. Air Force Reserve Account funding was obtained in 1999 and
used for purchase of herbicide application equipment and to fund herbicide treatment operations.
In FY01, the INSMP was funded as a conservation budget project; funding for the development
of the program included herbicide treatments and invasive species surveys. A comprehensive
invasive non-native species survey of at-risk high quality natural areas and known problem areas
began in 2001 and has been conducted annually in the fall by FNAI. In 2004, the NRS entered
into an agreement with the United States Army Corp of Engineers and Three Rivers Resource
Conservation Division (USDA) to treat cogon grass, torpedo grass and other selected invasive
species.
Invasive non-native plant species have been documented at many locations across Eglin AFB.
The most problematic areas with invasive plant species concerns are associated with the urban
interface where illegal dumping and natural seed dispersal from private property have allowed
establishment of invasive species on adjacent Air Force property. The Eglin main base has
several areas of concern involving invasive non-native plant species because of the urban
interface and past landscaping practices where Chinese tallow and other invasive plant species
were used in main base housing and other landscapes. Road construction and maintenance
activities have introduced and spread cogon grass and torpedo grass to areas of the Eglin
reservation road system and adjacent natural areas.
The Eglin INSMP utilizes information provided by the FDEP, Bureau of Invasive Plant Species,
and the FLEPPC. Management methods and techniques for invasive non-native plant species
may include but are not limited to: herbicide treatment, mowing, disking, hand-pulling, and
prescribed fire; additional detail is provided in the T&E Species CP.
The FLEPPC is a non-profit organization made up of public agencies, scientists, researchers,
land managers, environmental organizations, and private citizens that takes action against and
focuses attention on the spread of invasive exotic plants. The FLEPPC has developed a ranking
system for invasive non-native plants as to their invasiveness in natural areas. Category I species
are those species that are altering native plant communities by displacing native species,
changing community structures or ecological functions, or hybridizing with native species. (This
definition does not rely on the economic severity or geographic range of the problem, but on the
documented ecological damage.) Category II species are those species that have increased in
abundance or frequency but have not yet altered Florida plant communities. (These species may
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-82
become ranked Category I, if ecological damage is demonstrated.) (FLEPPC’s 2005 List of
Invasive Species)
To date, 18 Category I and 8 Category II species have been documented on Eglin AFB. Chinese
tallow, or popcorn tree (Triadica sebifera), cogon grass (Imperata cylindrical), Japanese
climbing fern (Lygodium japonicum), Chinese privet/hedge (Ligustrum sinense), and torpedo
grass (Panicum repens) have been prioritized as the most problematic of the Category 1 species
impacting Eglin ecosystems. Many of Eglin’s high quality natural areas and sensitive species are
threatened by these non-native invasive species. Illegal dumping of landscape debris has also
contributed to the spread of Chinese tallow on Eglin. Until 1 January 1998, this tree was legally
available in the Florida nursery trade and is a common landscape tree in the urban interface areas
surrounding Eglin. Chinese tallow is now a prohibited plant in the state of Florida and may not
be sold, planted or propagated.
Chinese Tallow
Chinese tallow is a small- to medium-sized tree
that can take over large areas of natural habitat by
forming thick dense stands and out-competing
native vegetation.
Chinese tallow produces
copious amounts of seed, grows and spreads
rapidly and can form dense stands that become
established across open areas. Seeds are naturally
transported by birds or water, which makes seed
dispersal very difficult to control.
Cogon Grass
Cogon grass is an upland weed, but it also
occurs in places that become briefly
flooded. Most documented locations of
cogon grass on Eglin are linked to test sites
or road maintenance activities. Because of
its extreme invasiveness and its ability to
rapidly cover large areas, it is considered one
of the world’s 10 worst weeds. Cogon grass
has a fibrous root system composed of
underground stems (rhizomes) that form dense
mats that exclude most other vegetation.
Cogon grass spreads by seeds, vegetative reproduction of rhizomes, and the movement of
seeds/rhizomes by road maintenance/construction vehicles and activities.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-83
Japanese Climbing Fern
Japanese climbing fern is an invasive vine that can cover and smother
understory and midstory plants. This species is spread by wind blown
spores and can be spread by vehicles and other equipment to new locations.
Japanese climbing fern has been documented at several locations on Eglin
property, the most problematic being the Briar Creek Special Natural Area
on the east Eglin reservation where it is established along range roads 208
and 201 and has spread into the interior natural areas. Once climbing fern
is established, it is difficult to control.
Torpedo Grass
Torpedo grass is a perennial grass that
frequently forms dense colonies and has
long, creeping underground rhizomes. It
thrives in moist, often sandy soil along
beaches and dunes, margins of lagoons,
marshy shorelines of lakes and ponds,
drainage ditches and canals. However, it
also does well in heavier upland soils
such as longleaf pine flatwoods or
sandhills. In areas with standing water,
rhizomes or runners often extend several
feet out into the water, and the plant frequently forms dense floating mats of vegetative material.
It is a prolific seed producer and rapidly out-competes surrounding native vegetation in areas it
becomes established.
Chinese Privet
Chinese privet is a semideciduous shrub that occurs primarily in
open disturbed areas. While most often found in low, wet areas,
it also may be found in upland areas. Privet often forms dense
thickets that shade out native vegetation. Birds and moving
water are the primary dispersal mechanism to new locations.
Other Species
Several other invasive non-native plant species have been
documented on Eglin, but are not yet considered major problem
species. Among those species are:
Category 1
●
Mimosa (Albizia julibrissin)
●
Asparagus fern (Asparagus aethiopicus)
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-84
●
Camphor-tree (Cinnamomum camphora)
●
Wild taro (Colocasia esculenta)
●
Air potato (Dioscorea bulbifera)
●
Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes)
●
Lantana (Lantana camera)
●
Glossy privet (Ligustrum lucidum)
●
Japanese honeysuckle (Lygodium japonicum)
●
Nandina / heavenly bamboo (Nandina domestica)
●
Kudzu (Pueraria montana)
●
Natal grass (Rhynchelytrum repens)
●
Tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum)
Category II
●
Tung oil tree (Aleurites fordii) (=Vernicia fordii)
●
Alligator weed (Alternanthera philoxeroides)
●
Coral vine (Antigonon leptopus)
●
Silverthorn (Elaeagnus pungens)
●
Chinaberry (Melia azedarach)
●
Chinese brake fern (Pteris vittata)
●
Purple sesban/rattlebox (Sesbania punicea)
●
Chinese wisteria (Wisteria sinensis)
7.11.2 Invasive Non-Native Animal Species
The effects of non-native animal species on Eglin natural resources have been documented.
Non-native animals prey on many rare and sensitive species, compete with native species for
resources, destroy natural habitats, and can carry rabies and other infectious diseases that may
infect native wildlife. 96 CEG/CEVSN has developed active control programs for the non-native
feral pig or wild hog on the Eglin reservation and feral cats, coyotes, and red foxes on SRI.
Management History
In 1998, the USFWS’s Ecological Services Office in Panama City, FL pioneered the Northwest
Florida Partnership to Protect Endangered and Threatened Species on Coastal Public Lands with a
common goal of protecting and recovering 10 T&E species and providing public outreach in the
coastal regions of the Florida Panhandle. A consortium of 14 federal, state, and private
organizations, including Eglin AFB, is sponsoring this effort which is implemented by the
USDA WS. The program goals are to reduce impacts to rare and endangered species caused by
non-native predators and unnaturally high densities of native predators. The program covers
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-85
most public lands from Pensacola (Escambia County) to CSB (Gulf County) and has
dramatically reduced the depredation rate of sea turtle nests by coyotes, red fox, and raccoons
and helped reduce the impacts of these predators and feral cats on other species of concern.
To address specific problems with feral cats on SRI, the NRS developed a feral cat policy that
was approved by the AAC Commander in 2000. The policy prohibits the introduction and
feeding of feral cats on Eglin’s barrier island by the general public and by Air Force employees.
In addition to this rule, a MOA was developed between the Panhandle Animal Welfare Society
(PAWS) and the NRS to establish control guidelines for feral cats.
The NRS formed a partnership with USDA WS in 2003 to implement and manage a FHMP. The
objective of the program is to minimize damage caused by feral hogs to ecologically sensitive
areas on Eglin AFB by reducing and maintaining the hog population at a substantially lower
level. Data collected by ecological monitoring of sensitive natural areas such as seepage slopes
and steephead ravines, wild hog track route census counts and actual removal efforts will
determine the success of this program.
The following invasive animal species have management programs established on Eglin AFB.
Program methods and techniques will be discussed in the INSMP section of the T&E Species
CP.
Invasive Species on Coastal Lands
Feral Cats
Feral cats are extremely effective predators that have been thoroughly documented as a major
source of predation to native wildlife species. Over time, and with the assistance of humans,
feral cats have become established on SRI. These animals will continue to hunt and kill native
wildlife even when fed and cared for by humans. On Santa Rosa and Okaloosa Islands, feral cats
are an added source of stress and predation on nesting shorebirds (least tern, black skimmer,
snowy plover), Santa Rosa beach mice, and other native birds and wildlife. Feral cats have also
been documented to prey on sea turtle hatchlings at other coastal locations. Colonial nesting
shorebirds appear to have experienced poor nesting success on Eglin’s beaches in past years.
Feral cats are suspected to be one of the reasons for this poor success due to the presence of cat
tracks in and around the nesting areas. Due to poor nesting success and because of the potential
impacts to Eglin’s mission if any shorebird species or the Santa Rosa beach mouse were to
become federally listed, the NRS developed a feral cat policy that was approved by the Eglin
Center Commander in 2000. Feral cat presence has been documented on Okaloosa and Santa
Rosa Islands and will require continued control efforts to maintain or lower the current
population.
Coyote and Red Fox
The coyote and red fox have expanded their range into the southeastern United States and the
USFWS and the FWC considers them non-native to NWF coastal areas. They compete with the
native gray fox and other native predators for food and other resources. The coyote has the
ability to hybridize with the red wolf, now extirpated from Florida. The coyote’s presence
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-86
precludes future reintroduction of the endangered red wolf in these areas (FNAI, 1994). Coyotes
and the red fox are especially problematic on the barrier island where they prey on sea turtle
nests and hatchlings and other sensitive species.
Feral Hog
The wild hog or feral pig has been prioritized as the most problematic invasive non-native
animal species that threatens natural ecosystems on Eglin. Wild hogs compete with native
wildlife for food and alter natural habitats that are critical for both flora and fauna. Wild hogs
also prey on many forms of native wildlife. The rooting of wild hogs in sensitive natural areas,
such as seepage slopes and steephead ravines, has damaged and destroyed many rare and
sensitive plants. As with many other State of Florida Wildlife Management Areas, Eglin AFB
removed the “game species” status for feral hog prior to the 1999-2000 hunting season.
Removal of this status has provided the NRS with greater management flexibility and facilitates
the control of feral hogs. However, despite there not being any size or bag limit for harvesting
feral hogs on Eglin AFB, the overall population continues to increase especially in those areas
where hunting or other removal efforts are prohibited. Wild hogs are the most prolific large
mammal in the United States. To achieve a declining population trend requires the removal of
more than half the hog population on an annual basis. The Feral Hog Control Plan is an
attachment to the T&E Species CP.
Insects
The following insect species are known to occur on Eglin AFB but at this time have no
established control programs in place:
Fire Ants
The Red Imported Fire Ant (Soleopsis invicta) (RIFA) is a serious lawn and forest pest and is
found in open disturbed areas, especially those that are more mesic in nature. This ant was
introduced by the shipping industry from South America into Mobile, Alabama around 1930. It
has spread across the south from the Atlantic seaboard west to California. The painful sting of
the RIFA makes it a serious pest and a hazard for outdoor activities. Humans are not the only
ones who are impacted by RIFA. Many native wildlife species suffer from direct predation or
competition for food by the aggressive RIFA. Native ant colonies can be completely displaced
in areas with established RIFA colonies. RIFA attack and eat anything they find including but
not limited to small mammals, snakes, lizards, ground-nesting birds, turtles and their eggs. For
instance, RIFA can infest sea turtle nests and significantly reduce sea turtle nesting success. In
previous years, CSB has experienced problems with RIFA depredation of sea turtle nests.
Cactus Moth
A relatively new INS in the Florida panhandle, the cactus moth (Cactoblastis cactorum), has
been found on the Eglin barrier island and is of concern because it predates on native cacti
(Opuntia spp.) and competes with the native cactus moth. The non-native cactus moth originates
from Argentina and is threatening native, horticultural, and endangered cacti in many coastal
areas of Florida. The female moth lays eggs on the underside of cactus pads and, after hatching,
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-87
larvae burrow into the pad and feed there as a group. This feeding activity kills the pad and
eventually the host plant. After the caterpillars mature they leave the cactus pad and spin a
cocoon on the underside of the pad. In 15-20 days the cocoons hatch and the new moths start the
cycle again.
7.11.3 Nuisance Wildlife
The lead agency responsible for responding to nuisance and injured wildlife reports on Eglin
AFB is 96th Civil Engineer Group, Environmental Management Division – NRS – Wildlife
Element (96 CEG/CEVSNW). 96 CEG/CEVSNW personnel have the necessary experience,
training, equipment, permits, and rapport with governing agencies such as the FWC and the
USFWS. 96 CEG/CEVSNW maintains FWC Nuisance Wildlife, Steel Trap, Gun and Light, Sea
Turtle Stranding, Gopher Tortoise Relocation, and a FWC letter of authorization to trap nuisance
alligators. Additional specialized permits, such as migratory bird nest removal/relocation, may
be obtained from the FWC and, if required, from the USFWS. A USFWS Migratory Bird
Depredation Permit and inactive osprey/migratory bird (non-listed) nest removal permit
(containing no eggs or flightless young) are maintained to support the Eglin BASH Program with
migratory bird and non-migratory dispersal on Eglin AFB airfields.
Nuisance wildlife on Eglin AFB typically includes birds, alligators, snakes, beavers, bears, foxes,
raccoons, opossums, armadillo, and coyotes. Responses to nuisance animal complaints from
Eglin main base housing and business areas are normally handled by 96 CEG/CEOIUE (Pest
Management Shop) but assistance by 96 CEG/CEVSNW may be requested. Primarily responses
for the Pest Management Shop are for feral cats and dogs and to a lesser degree raccoons,
opossums, armadillos, insects, and snakes. Eglin AFB contracts PAWS to take captured
nuisance cats and dogs whose owners cannot be located and that cannot be received by Eglin Pet
Welfare for adoption. Responses to reports of nuisance or injured wildlife occurring on Air
Force property off the main base are handled by 96 CEG/CEVSN.
Injured wildlife reports include a variety of birds with broken wings or other injuries, injured
foxes, coyotes, raccoons, opossums, deer, squirrels, bears, stranded marine mammals, sea turtles
and sharks. Depending upon the situation or the seriousness of the injury, options include not
intervening; capturing, immobilizing and treating; taking to a local vet for treatment or
rehabilitation; or euthanizing. Relocation of nuisance wildlife is not normally conducted because
of the documented negative impacts relocation has on wildlife populations and relocated
individuals. Relocation of most species of wildlife to Eglin AFB is prohibited. Animal
carcasses are an attractant to scavenger wildlife and vultures. All carcasses in the vicinity of
main roads or airfields are removed to other locations where they will not create a threat to
vehicles or aircraft. Carcasses in public recreation areas are also disposed of at an off site
location.
96 CEG/CEVSN receives a variety of nuisance animal calls from military housing residents,
Eglin employees, and members of the public. Public outreach and education is essential for a
more understanding and tolerant public. Eglin base housing residents are targeted with black
bear and alligator information. Examples of public outreach tools include, but are not limited to,
posting recreational ponds with alligator awareness signs, providing military housing residents
with FWC “Living With The Florida Black Bear” and “Living With Alligators” pamphlets and,
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-88
providing information on wildlife for local newspaper articles. Emphasis is placed on not
feeding wildlife. Many nuisance animal reports may be resolved over the phone by providing
the correct information about the wildlife species in question. For nuisance animal complaints
that are not on Eglin property, 96 CEG/CEVSNW does not typically respond with employee
assistance other than verbal communication and advice. However, employees may respond at
the request of FWC biologists to assist with black bear incidents off Eglin property in local
communities or similar emergency type situations. Members of the public with non-Air Force
nuisance animal complaints that cannot be resolved over the phone are referred to the Panama
City FWC office or PAWS. The FWC web site (www.myfwc.com) is also a highly
recommended and extremely valuable tool for public education/outreach concerning Florida
wildlife. A nuisance animal conflict database for use on Eglin has been developed that will track
information on locations and seasonal trends in nuisance wildlife reports and provide a better
understanding of resource requirements for managing nuisance wildlife .
7.12 BIRD/WILDLIFE AIRCRAFT STRIKE HAZARD (BASH)
Birds and wildlife have the potential to cause millions of dollars in damage to aircraft and the
loss of human life of the crew and passengers. The NRS has participated in the Eglin BASH
program since 1988. In earlier years BASH responsibilities for the NRS included providing
lethal control shooters for unacceptable concentrations of birds, maintaining all state and federal
permits required for lethal control of migratory birds/local wildlife, and attending the Eglin
Airfield Operation Board (AOB) quarterly meetings. As a result of increased awareness of
BASH threats throughout the U.S. Air Force, the NRS has taken a more active and involved role
in the development and implementation of the current BASH program on Eglin. The
participation of the NRS in the Eglin BASH program is directed by AFI 32-7064, Integrated
Natural Resources Management, and AAC Plan 91-212, Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard Plan.
Flight Safety (AAC/SEOF) is the Office of Primary Responsibility for monitoring and
implementation of AAC Plan 91-212. The NRS participates in the development, review and
approval of this plan. In 2005, AAC/SEOF formed a cooperative agreement with the USDA WS
to provide two employees for assistance with the implementation and management of the Eglin
AFB BASH program. These positions are the primary source for implementing harassment
activities on and around the Eglin and Duke Field airfields. The USDA WS will provide a
wildlife/bird hazard assessment of Eglin and Duke Field airfields, develop a Wildlife/Bird
Hazard Management Plan and maintain a database that will be used to develop strategies for
improved management of the airfield environment and to better understand and prepare for
trends in bird and wildlife activity. The NRS provides BASH support and assistance to USDA
WS for bird and wildlife harassment and lethal control activities and other projects such as
vulture roost monitoring and effigy placement.
The BHWG reviews bird strike data, identifies and initiates actions to reduce hazards, reviews
and implements changes in operational procedures, prepares informational programs for
aircrews, and acts as a point of contact for off-base BASH and wildlife related issues. The
BHWG is chaired by the 46th TW Deputy Commander (46 TW/CV) and has representatives from
AAC/SEOF, USDA Wildlife Services, NRS, Airfield Management, Air Traffic Control, Civil
Engineering Roads and Grounds, Pest Management Shop, and any other organization concerned
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-89
Bird/Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH)
with bird and wildlife hazards. The BHWG applies an integrated team approach to the
management of the airfields to minimize the threats of bird and wildlife species to military and
civilian aircraft utilizing Eglin and Duke Field airfields. The NRS is also a member of the Eglin
AOB and attends quarterly meetings to support AAC/SEOF and USDA WS if required.
An IPM strategy is utilized to manage Eglin airfields for bird and wildlife control. Passive
control measures such as landscape design, elimination of food and roost sources, turf/water
management and forest management are the most permanent ways of reducing the attractiveness
of airfields for bird and wildlife utilization. Active control measures may incorporate
pyrotechnics, bioacoustics, vulture effigy placement and depredation (lethal control) activities.
Depredation activity is only implemented as a last resort when other scare tactics are proven
un-successful.
IPM management strategies and actions for the BASH program include:
●
Use of vulture effigies to disperse vulture roosts.
●
Removal of osprey / migratory bird (non-listed) nests which are inactive.
●
Handheld laser to disperse vulture roosts.
●
Auditory bird dispersal unit (ACS 3000E).
●
Propane cannons.
●
Sirens/horns/lights.
●
Pyrotechnics (shell crackers).
●
Maintain drainage ditches in areas that have potential to hold water.
●
Grass heights are maintained at 7-14 inches.
●
Insect outbreaks may be sprayed with pesticides.
●
Wastewater effluent spray field is operated during non-peak flying periods (early
mornings and evenings).
●
Tree and shrub vegetation management.
●
Maintain sanitary conditions around main base dumpsters.
●
Lethal control.
The Eglin white-tailed deer control program is referred to as Deer Aircraft Strike Hazard
(DASH). The USDA WS and NRS responds throughout the year when airfield operations report
deer activity near the airfield. The reports typically occur during the winter white-tailed deer
breeding season (November-March). Since the implementation of the DASH program, deer
numbers in the vicinity of the runways have declined but will require additional removal and
control efforts as needed. All deer taken in the DASH program are donated to local charities.
Program Goal
Provide technical expertise and field support to the Eglin BASH program.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-90
Bird/Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH)
Objectives
●
Maintain membership on the BHWG and AOB and attend all meetings.
●
Annually maintain all permits required for lethal control of migratory birds, removal of
inactive migratory bird nests (non-listed species), and removal of nuisance wildlife to
promote airfield safety.
●
Respond to all calls for assistance from USDA WS personnel handling daily BASH
activities.
7.13 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
In 1972, Congress enacted the CZMA to preserve, protect, develop, and where possible, to
restore and enhance the resources of the nation's coastal zone. It encouraged coastal states to
develop and implement comprehensive management programs which balance the need for
coastal resource protection with the need for economic growth and development within the
coastal zone. In response to the federal CZMA, Florida enacted the Coastal Management Act
(Florida Statutes Title 26) to manage, protect, and maintain the coastal zone and its resources.
Under the Coastal Management Act, the FCMP was established for determining federal
consistency under the federal CZMA. Approved by NOAA in 1981, the FCMP is based on
23 statutes and regulations administered by a network of 11 state agencies and four of the five
water management districts. FDEP is responsible for directing the implementation of the
state-wide coastal management program (FDEP, 2005a). The goal of the program is to
coordinate local, state, and federal agency activities using existing laws to ensure that Florida’s
coast is as valuable to future generations as it is today.
The landward boundaries of the State of Florida are defined by the state, in accordance with
Section 306(d)(2)(A) of the CZMA. Since no point in the State of Florida is more than 70 miles
from the coast, the Coastal Zone is defined as the entire state of Florida. The seaward
boundaries extend three nautical miles into the Atlantic Ocean and nine nautical miles into the
Gulf of Mexico. By this definition, all of Eglin AFB is located within the coastal zone.
Federal agency activities that have the potential to impact Florida’s coastal resources are
required to be consistent, to the maximum extent practicable, with approved state Coastal Zone
Management Programs. Federal agencies, such as Eglin AFB, make determinations as to
whether their actions are consistent with approved State plans. Each action will require either a
consistency determination or a negative determination. A consistency determination review is a
formal explanation of any Proposed Action that Eglin is planning which may have an adverse
impact, directly or indirectly, to the coastal environment of Florida, and how these actions are
consistent with the 23 statues that make up the FCMP. A negative determination is warranted
for any action that will not have a direct or indirect impact on Florida’s coastal zone or its
resources. Both consistency and negative determinations are submitted to the FDEP State
Clearinghouse for review and concurrence. Authorized by Presidential EO 12372, the
Clearinghouse enables state and local agencies and the regional planning councils to review
federal activities. Consistency determinations are then disseminated to the relevant agencies that
must review the Proposed Action and issue their concurrence of the determination. If a
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-91
Coastal Zone Management
reviewing agency believes a project is not consistent with Florida’s statutes, the FCMP requires
the applicant to revise its plans based on guidance or requirements issued by reviewing agencies.
In this way, the Florida State Clearinghouse and the Federal Consistency Unit work with
applicants to produce projects that are consistent with Florida’s statutes and that protect critical
coastal resources.
In a joint collaboration between Eglin and the FDEP, a Procedural Negative Determination
Agreement (PNDA) has been developed in order to eliminate reviews for regularly occurring
actions on Eglin’s reservation. The PNDA is targeted at actions that will not have a direct or
indirect impact on Florida’s coastal zone or its resources. In preparation of the PNDA, Eglin
informed the FDEP of all actions that were performed on Eglin that required a Negative
Determination of effect on the coastal region. From this list, the PNDA was prepared for actions
that FDEP and Eglin have agreed will not warrant a formal determination to be filed for review
by the State Clearinghouse. Eglin will continue to send consistency determination reviews for
actions that are not covered under the PNDA. Eglin AFB, FDEP, and FWC will review this
PNDA once every two years to revise and update if deemed necessary.
7.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES PROTECTION
Cultural resources consist of prehistoric and historic districts, sites, structures, artifacts, and any
other physical evidence of human activity considered important to a culture or community for
scientific, traditional, religious, or other reasons. Numerous laws and regulations address the
management of these cultural resources. These federal laws are in place to consider the effects
of an agency’s proposed activities when a site could be negatively impacted. 96 CEG/CEVH is
the Eglin organization with primary responsibility for protecting cultural resources and assuring
compliance with all applicable laws.
As a federal agency, Eglin is required by law to consider the effects of its actions on historic
properties. Mandating regulations are the Antiquities Act of 1906, the Historic Sites Act of
1935, NEPA, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 as amended, 36 CFR Part
800, the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (AHPA), the Archaeological
Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA), the Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA), and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978
(AIRFA).
The act that is most directly related to cultural resources management at Eglin is the NHPA.
Section 106 of the NHPA requires that federal agencies analyze the impacts of federal activities
on historic properties, or cultural resources included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National
Register of Historic Places. Section 110 of the NHPA requires that federal agencies inventory
any cultural resources that are located on their property or within their control and to nominate
those found to be significant for inclusion into the National Register.
Areas that continuing mission activities could potentially impact are surveyed through the Air
Force EIAP. Mitigation measures are developed to minimize potential impacts. By defining
zones of archaeological or historic high probability, project planners and managers are able to
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-92
Cultural Resources Protection
make decisions whether to relocate a proposed activity from an area of high to low probability,
therefore avoiding costly adjustments later in the project.
96 CEG/CEVH produced the current Eglin Integrated Cultural Resource Management Plan
(ICRMP) in 2004 and the Florida SHPO is currently reviewing it. This document is updated
every five years per federal regulations. The ICRMP explains laws which govern cultural
resources; goals, responsibilities and objectives of Eglin’s cultural program; Eglin’s existing
cultural inventory; Standard Operating Procedures; and various procedure, management and
budgeting issues.
Many of Eglin’s cultural resources are located in coastal areas. Many of these coastal resources
are subject to severe erosion during storm episodes. During Hurricane Opal in 1995, Hurricane
Ivan in 2004, and several storms in 2005, irreversible damage was done to several archaeological
sites and some shoreline sites have disappeared completely. Significant coastal sites may need to
be stabilized to ensure adequate preservation. INRMP recommended programs that involve dune
stabilization and erosion prevention through surface planting of vegetation will also serve to
stabilize and protect subsurface cultural resources.
7.15 PUBLIC OUTREACH
Public outreach is a critical component of any natural resource management agency. Without the
support of partner organizations and local citizens, many management programs cannot succeed.
Given these facts, the goal of public outreach efforts is to encourage understanding of, support
for, and involvement in the many management and monitoring programs at the NRS. Since
1999, such outreach has been accomplished through 1) research partnerships and internships,
2) presentations and guided tours, and 3) volunteer involvement. More information about each
of these outreach components is given below.
Research Partnerships and Internships
By partnering with educational institutions, NRS personnel encourage research to answer
specific management questions, allowing the NRS to obtain valuable personnel and equipment
resources that would not otherwise be available. Such partnerships also provide additional
perspectives on how to enhance NRS programs. Research partners help to identify the major
threats to natural resources and promote sound stewardship.
In addition to research partnerships, high school, undergraduate and graduate level internships
are also a means of meeting public outreach goals while expanding capabilities. Beginning in
2001, high school, undergraduate and graduate students have been interning at the NRS to
receive credit toward their diplomas or degrees. Not only do the interns benefit from their
experience while at the NRS, but the NRS programs benefit from quality volunteers.
Presentations and Guided Tours
The NRS is committed to teaching people of all ages about the conservation of Eglin’s natural
resources. This is accomplished through a series of programs, field trips and publications each
year. The NRS personnel and volunteers give educational presentations to local schools and
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-93
Public Outreach
community groups as well as participate in career fairs and community poster sessions to
increase awareness about natural resources.
7.16 VOLUNTEER RESOURCES PROGRAM
There are many advantages to working with volunteers beyond the obvious one of accomplishing
a job at minimal expense. Enabling the community to be actively involved with Eglin Natural
Resources management programs increases public support and increases the understanding of the
work and planning behind management decisions. With volunteers, existing programs can reach
beyond the limits imposed by personnel ceilings and budget restrictions, and projects that would
not otherwise be attempted can be taken on. Volunteers can provide skills or expertise needed
on only a temporary basis, and volunteer work can free up paid staff for more critical activities.
Volunteer participation in NRS programs expands the NRS sphere of influence while also
extending its budget.
Volunteers can be utilized in any and all areas of Natural Resources Management except fighting
wildfires. All levels and types of skills can be utilized and almost any type of work can be
performed as long as it is work that:
1. Would not otherwise get done due to funding or personnel limitations.
2. Enables paid employees to accomplish work that would not otherwise get done due to
funding or personnel limitations.
3. Does not result in the displacement of any paid employees.
Authority
The authority to establish Volunteer and Partnership Cost-Share programs is provided by the
National Defense Authorization Act, P.L. 101-189. Passed in November 1989, this legislation
amended two acts and established volunteer and partnership programs for natural resource
management on DoD lands.
The DoD Authorization Act of 1984 (10 U.S.C. 1588 a-c) was amended to expand existing
authority to use volunteers to include acceptance of volunteer services for natural and cultural
resources programs at military installations.
The Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670c-1) was amended to add the use of cooperative agreements with
organizations and individuals for the maintenance and improvement of natural resources on, or to
the benefit of natural and historic research at, DoD installations. The primary purpose of this
legislation is to provide a vehicle through which DoD natural and cultural resources management
programs can accept and utilize voluntary services in such a way that it is mutually beneficial to
the program and the volunteer.
Volunteer Benefits
Volunteers are accepted from the public without regard to race, creed, religion, age, sex, color,
national origin or disability, but they must be physically able to perform the tasks they volunteer
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-94
to do. Children under the age of 18 must provide a consent form signed by a parent/guardian in
order to volunteer.
Volunteers receive the same benefits and protection as government employees under the Federal
Employees Compensation Act (5 USC, Chapter 81) and the Federal Tort Claims Act
(28 USC, 2671-2680) and are considered to be federal employees for those purposes only.
Volunteers can operate government owned vehicles if they possess a valid state or international
drivers license for the class of vehicle being operated, and the operation of the vehicle is required
in writing as part of the description of work on the Volunteer Services Agreement.
For any vehicle other than a passenger car or light truck, and particularly for specialized vehicles
such as ATV’s, etc., the volunteer must show credentials verifying qualifications to operate such
equipment and/or demonstrate operational proficiency.
Volunteers are never required to perform tasks for which they are not qualified, have not been
adequately trained, do not feel comfortable doing, or do not willingly agree to do .
History
Over the years, members of the community regularly expressed interest in participating in natural
resource management on Eglin. A handful of volunteers have always helped with prescribed fire
and various fish and wildlife projects, but until 1999, volunteer involvement was sporadic and
lacked coordination.
Recognizing a great potential to expand NRS capabilities and improve community relations, a
consultant was hired to assess needs and advise on a strategy for formal volunteer involvement.
A foundation of standard forms and procedures was laid. In 1999 a full time volunteer
coordinator was hired and trained by the consultant in recruiting, interviewing, training,
supervision and evaluation of volunteer team members.
In April of 1999 the volunteer coordinator recruited and trained a volunteer team to carry out sea
turtle monitoring on a 17 mile stretch of Eglin’s barrier island. This monitoring program was
based on similar projects around the nation. After seven seasons, volunteers have successfully
marked, protected, and monitored 102 nests for three different species of T&E turtle species.
This project alone is estimated to save more than $30,000 annually.
Present
In just the first three years, community participation in the Volunteer Resources Program (VRP)
increased by over 357 percent. Volunteers have been successfully integrated into every area of
Natural Resources management.
In Fire Management, volunteers help with vehicle and equipment maintenance, they transport
equipment and food to personnel in the field, and receive training to help carry out prescribed
fire. In Fish and Wildlife Management, volunteers assist in conducting population surveys and
monitoring for various species including burrowing owls, sea turtles, shorebirds, gopher
tortoises, and wild turkeys. Volunteers also assist in game management, invasive species
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-95
control, and various recreation projects. In the area of Ecological Monitoring / Adaptive
Management, volunteers collect field data for fire effects monitoring, and assist in benthic
macroinvertebrate sampling, fish community inventories, rapid habitat assessment, and storm
turbidity sampling. In Forestry Management volunteers donate thousands of hours to plant
native trees and vegetation for erosion control and restoration projects. This volunteer support
played a pivotal role in Natural Resources garnering the International Erosion Control Award in
2001. Volunteers also support Natural Resources as a whole by maintaining educational displays
for the public and creating materials and presentations to share the NRS mission with local
schools, civic groups, and conservation organizations.
Future
Volunteer involvement has allowed the NRS to expand its capabilities while strengthening its
relationship with the surrounding community. The NRS’s goal is to continue this positive
momentum by meeting the objectives discussed in Chapter 8.
02/02/10
Final
Page 7-96
Management Goals and Objectives
8. MANAGEMENT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
This updated chapter contains the 4 principle goals, 17 supporting goals, and objectives which
reflect the direction of Eglin’s Natural Resources Management Program during the planning
period of the annual INRMP update. They were developed in response to issues and
management concerns obtained from cooperating agencies, military mission planners, and other
interested stakeholders. The planning team analyzed the goals and objectives during a series of
meetings from February through August 2009. In the context of this plan, goals are broad and
timeless. Supportive goals are used to organize groupings of related quantifiable and measurable
objectives. The statement of each principal goal is followed by a supportive goal and a list of
objectives most pertinent to the accomplishment of that goal, although many of the stated
objectives support the accomplishment of additional goals as well.
Principal Goal I: Enhance military mission flexibility and success through
sound stewardship practices.
The DoD is entrusted with the stewardship of 25 million acres of public land to enable the
training and operations necessary to ensure military readiness. The USAF is responsible for the
management of 9 million acres of this 25 million-acre total. Of the 9 million Air Force acres,
Eglin AFB is responsible for 464,000 acres. In addition to this land, Eglin AFB is also
responsible for the scheduling and operation of the 130,000 square mile Eglin Gulf Test and
Training Range (EGTTR). The greatest support that the NRS can provide to facilitate mission
achievement is the long-term sustainment of access to test and training areas that are within
protected species habitat. These areas include airspace, marine environments, and land masses.
At one time, the emphasis of Eglin’s environmental management program was placed on
industrial process regulation. Now, the requirement to consult on the potential impacts to
protected species is a priority, as it can severely hamper the mission’s ability to produce timely
results. Urban encroachment has also caused impacts to mission flexibility.
Though used extensively for weapons testing and training, Eglin’s vast undeveloped areas have
provided a haven for many imperiled species displaced by the region’s rapid growth. Because
Eglin land contains federally listed species and is recognized as a globally significant area for
biodiversity, natural resource managers are in the challenging position of maintaining ecological
integrity while providing as much flexibility to the military as possible. Flexibility is necessary
given that the munitions tested have occasional negative impacts to natural resources. The
current objective of the natural resource managers is to maintain and foster as much healthy
habitat as possible, so that when there is inevitable loss of habitat due to mission activity, ample
amounts of similar habitats will remain elsewhere. Having a large collection of healthy natural
communities empowers the managers by providing options for mitigating potential mission
impacts.
Within the context of conducting military missions, the following supporting goals provide
direction and guidelines that will enable, and furthermore require, leverage of resources in
pursuit of the principal goal. The supporting goals also define how Eglin can pursue this
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-1
principal goal while meeting the terms and intent of the 1997 amendment to the Sikes Act.
Achieving the AAC mission within the parameters of existing laws is the foremost purpose of all
involved. The long-term objectives that correspond to each supporting goal provide direction for
Eglin’s Natural Resource managers and result in specific actions on the ground. Such actions are
consistent with the use of military installations for the preparedness of the Armed Forces and
ensure no net loss in the capability of these lands to support the military mission.
Supporting Goal: I.A. Support military mission objectives through a responsive natural
resources analysis and consultation process.
Objectives:
I.A.1. Utilizing the existing Terms and Conditions database, develop a comprehensive
system for tracking and reporting implementation of binding terms and conditions,
management requirements, and mitigation measures by April 2010.
I.A.2. Resolve issues surrounding how to fund and implement terms and conditions.
Have 50 percent of annual total mission proponents paying for implementation by 2011
and 100 percent by 2013.
Supporting Goal: I.B. Provide resource management expertise to support the military mission
and its objectives through a proactive planning process.
Objectives:
I.B.1. Receive requirements from the Military Land Test Area Panel (MLTAP) and
create a GIS layer to designate "mission required/support no cut (places where they don’t
want forestry impacts)” zones by 2010.
I.B.2. Annually participate in all scheduled MLTAP meetings.
I.B.3. By 2010, in coordination with MLTAP, assist with the completion of the 46th Test
Wing Line Of Sight Management Plan. Accomplish 50 percent of the objectives outlined
in this management plan by 2012.
Supporting Goal: I.C. Ensure long-range natural resources availability, sustainability and
resilience for the military mission through effective coordination.
Objectives:
I.C.1. Work with 46th Test Wing members of MLTAP to develop a prioritized budget
annually for range mission support activities to be implemented by Natural Resources.
I.C.2. Respond to 46th Test Wing/mission directed tree removal requests within five days
of “notice to remove trees” to avoid mission delays provided consultation is not required.
I.C.3. Annually present NRS operational plans for RC3 approval.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-2
Supporting Goal: I.D. Provide wildland fire management services to Eglin’s military mission.
Objectives:
I.D.1 By June 2010, standardize the notification process that provides test engineers
information on how to obtain fire management support.
I.D.2. Through a responsive planning process, ensure minimal interference with military
mission activity by conducting 100 percent of prescribed burns on Eglin without
generating smoke complaints from test engineers and other range users.
I.D.3. Upon request, provide at least one wildland fire suppression course per year to the
Eglin Fire Department.
I.D.4. Complete at least 90,000 acres of prescribed fire annually based on a five year
running average.
I.D.5. Integrate Cape San Blas into fire management plan by 2011.
I.D.6. By 2011, develop a dynamic, GIS-based fuel model coverage of Eglin AFB using
Eglin-specific fuel models so that real-time fire growth/severity predictions are possible.
Supporting Goal: I.E. Provide natural resource information to support informed decision
making.
Objectives:
I.E.1. Provide familiarization training to 46th Test Wing and other base personnel on
natural resource issues and processes through regularly scheduled Air Armament
Academy (A3) courses - up to four annually.
I.E.2. Provide natural resource review and input within 30 days of receipt on all Test
Area Maintenance plans as they are developed. Incorporate new requirements into the
appropriate natural resource component plans within the annual planning cycle.
I.E.3. Provide ESA / MMPA A-3 Course at least once annually.
I.E.4. Annually review Natural Resource geospatial data to ensure compliance with the
Eglin GeoBase Strategic Plan.
I.E.5. Annually survey a minimum of 20 percent of the forest adjacent to mission test
areas to maintain a current forest inventory database and provide for annual updates of
T&E species habitat for decision support of test mission LOS and noise attenuation
issues.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-3
I.E.6. Eglin NRS brief RC3 and RDSC over relevant and meaningful topics at least
annually.
Supporting Goal: I.F.
program.
Provide technical expertise and field support to the Eglin BASH
Objectives:
I.F.1. Maintain membership on the Bird Hazard Working Group and AOB and attend all
meetings.
I.F.2. Annually maintain all permits required for lethal control of migratory birds and
nuisance wildlife to promote airfield safety.
I.F.3. Respond to all calls for assistance from USDA personnel handling daily BASH
activities.
I.F.4. By 2011, incorporate Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into Eglin BASH
program
Principal Goal II: In a manner consistent with the military mission, conserve
native biodiversity by restoring and maintaining Eglin’s ecosystems with
particular emphasis on prescribed fire and water quality.
In 1994, the DoD shifted its land management focus from protection of individual species to
ecosystem management. It is now the policy of the DoD that its lands should be administered
through an ecosystem management approach implemented through the installation’s INRMP.
The goal of DoD ecosystem management is to maintain and improve the sustainability and native
biological diversity of ecosystems while supporting human needs, including the DoD mission.
This goal is reflected in the department-level land management policies of the Air Force.
Ecosystem management and protection of biological diversity must consequently be important
guiding elements of Eglin’s INRMP. DoD lands have very high biodiversity compared to other
federal lands due to the stewardship practices, wide range of training environments and strategic
locations that the military requires to maintain readiness. Biodiversity management on Eglin is
especially important given that the Florida Panhandle is recognized as one of the top seven areas
for biodiversity in the country.
Key to conservation of biodiversity on Eglin is the presence of fire in the ecosystem.
Approximately 357,000 acres of the Eglin reservation are classified as “fire dependent”
ecosystems. This means that the ecosystems and the wildlife that they contain adapted to their
environment in the presence of frequent lightning-ignited wildfires, and require recurring fire for
their continued existence. The careful application of prescribed fire is the only feasible method
for maintaining Eglin’s native biodiversity, including its endemic T&E species. Eglin’s efforts
to conserve native biodiversity are multi-faceted. The fragile barrier island ecosystems at CSB
and Santa Rosa Island have unique management challenges, particularly since the areas are in
such high demand by the public and the military mission. Other significant challenges to Eglin’s
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-4
natural resource managers include erosion control, removal of undesirable tree species, wildfire
suppression and control of invasive exotic species. The complexity of the Natural Resources
Program on Eglin requires an integrated approach that includes a system of checks and balances
for management actions as they relate to long-term ecosystem integrity and resilience. Eglin
Natural Resources employs “Adaptive Management,” a management system which ensures
accountability and informed decision making. This system is based on an on-going evaluation of
management actions, long-term monitoring of effects, and a structured feedback loop to ensure
that the most effective and efficient actions are implemented on the ground.
Supporting Goal: II.A. Protect, restore, and maintain endangered, threatened, and rare and
sensitive species and their habitats in accordance with AFI and federal laws
Objectives:
II.A.1. Meet USFWS recovery standards as outlined in the recovery plan for Eglin’s
RCW population by 2011. See the Eglin RCW Component Plan for detailed annual
objectives.
II.A.2. Support reclassification of the Okaloosa darter from endangered to threatened
and address all objectives in the recovery plan necessary to de-list the darter by the end of
2014.
II.A.3. By 2010, complete the Okaloosa Darter GIS Model to identify areas of
conservation need.
II.A.4. Annually restore two fish passage barriers from the 8 identified sites in Okaloosa
darter drainages as funding allows.
II.A.5. Annually provide educational materials to all mission personnel and contractors
conducting work with the potential to impact indigo snakes; including posting signs at
work sites and briefing personnel on appropriate actions to take if a snake is sighted.
II.A.6. Complete a comprehensive T&E species data management system. This system
should include data process flow diagrams, storage architecture, metadata and a decision
support system for all federally listed species to maintain monitoring information in an
enterprise database for use by Natural Resources and 46th Test Wing personnel by 2010.
II.A.7. Conduct 100 percent annual resurvey of documented Florida bog frog locations,
re-sample at least 33 percent of previously visited sites where Florida bog frogs have not
been documented, and visit a minimum of 12 new sites annually to estimate their
population trends and range extent.
II.A.8. Obtain general habitat description for the Florida bog frog based on known
locations, and generate a list of threats to known sites by 2010.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-5
II.A.9. Annually locate, protect, and evaluate 100 percent of sea turtle nests on Air Force
property at CSB and SRI. Collect and maintain data on nest success, depredation, and
disorientation for all nests.
II.A.10. Respond to, and investigate, 100 percent of sea turtle and marine mammal
stranding reports on Air Force property. Collect appropriate data and report to the
stranding and salvage network contact within 24 hours of investigating the report.
II.A.11. Conduct a minimum of four track count surveys and four tracking tube surveys
for the Santa Rosa beach mouse using 10 transects annually.
II.A.12. Annually maintain bear database by documenting all incidental sightings,
nuisance/injured bears and road kills.
II.A.13. Annually conduct shorebird monitoring surveys twice a month from 15 July to
15 May to identify important habitat areas for protection and determine population
trends.
II.A.14. Conduct 100 percent annual dip net sampling of known breeding ponds and
resample 25 percent of potential breeding ponds to estimate population trends and locate
new populations of flatwoods salamanders.
II.A.15. Establish and maintain an average of no more than a three year fire return
interval to include a variety of seasons in all FNAI designated Category I and II
flatwoods salamander habitat by 2011.
II.A.16. Annually monitor all areas of reported incidental sightings of tortoises or active
burrows. Assess habitat suitability and conduct cursory surveys for additional burrows to
document population size and extent.
II.A.17. Annually survey 100% of proposed project areas as identified by the 813 review
process where ground will be significantly disturbed and relocate all tortoises and
sensitive commensals that are found.
II.A.18. Annually monitor and update status of 20% of known tortoise burrows from
previous surveys and check for indigo snakes.
II.A.19. Establish a gopher tortoise relocation area for relocating tortoises from on-site
project areas to support Eglin missions.
II.A.20. Annually mark and protect all known burrowing owl burrows on the B-70 test
grid.
II.A.21. Annually post and protect the primary zone around the main base bald eagle
nest during the nesting season. The CSB bald eagle nest will be monitored and if
evidence of disturbance is documented during the nesting season, a plan for posting will
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-6
be implemented. During the nesting season monitor and collect data at known nests
twice per month. Follow Bald Eagle Management guidelines and the Bald Eagle
Protection Act guidelines regarding buffer zones
II.A.22. Identify and rehabilitate 25 soil erosion sites in wetland riparian areas subject to
a Clean Water Act notice of violation annually.
II.A.23. Maintain all rehabilitated erosion sites for 3-5 years or as needed to prevent loss
of structural integrity.
II.A.24. By 2012 document recovery rates of aquatic communities restored through
erosion control activities.
II.A.25. Monitor the Cladonia perforata populations in 2011 according to the protocol
set forth in the Monitoring Plan.
II.A.26. By 2012, develop and implement a mussel monitoring plan for protected
mussels found in Yellow River tributaries on Eglin AFB.
II.A.27. Annually provide measurements for the recovery of ecological condition
towards desired future variation in upland habitat across the Eglin landscape using
multiple methods, including multivariate analysis of ecological monitoring plots,
ecological condition modeling, and landcover change analysis.
II.A.28. Annually implement a threatened and endangered species Protection Program
with USDA Wildlife Services. Conduct predator track count surveys on SRI biannually
or on an as needed basis and follow up with control efforts if required.
II. A. 29. Identify and publish key factors of Gulf sturgeon movements to assist mission
planners and Section 7 consultations in 2011 for the Air Force and Legacy project.
Supporting Goal: II.B. Identify, protect, and maintain high quality natural (hyperlink) areas
found on Eglin that are important to regional and/or global biodiversity conservation in a manner
consistent with the military mission.
Objectives:
II.B.1. By 2010, develop general management and restoration guidelines and, when
appropriate, site any community specific guidance for the conservation of areas identified
as Outstanding Natural Areas, Significant Botanical Sites, High Quality Natural
Communities and other unique and sensitive natural communities, such as seepage slopes
and steephead ravines.
II.B.2. By 2010, develop an internal decision-making process, with representatives from
each element to review specific management and restoration activities in areas identified
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-7
as Outstanding Natural Areas, Significant Botanical Sites and High Quality Natural
Communities.
II.B.3. By 2010, reassess Outstanding Natural Areas, Significant Botanical Sites, and all
High Quality Natural Communities using the Ecological Condition Model and input from
all elements of the NRS.
II.B.4. By 2011, identify the equivalent to Outstanding Natural Areas for the freshwater
natural resources on the installation.
II.B.5. On an annual or as needed basis, survey and re-establish public access control
measures on SRI to protect T&E species habitat (including Cladonia perforata areas,
piping plover critical habitat, and other shorebird nesting areas) in order to ensure the
long-term sustainability of Eglin’s barrier island ecosystem for mission use.
II.B.6. Annually survey and maintain public access control measures on CSB to protect
T&E species habitat and ensure the long-term sustainability of Eglin’s barrier island
ecosystem for mission use.
Supporting Goal: II.C. Restore the structure, composition, and function of natural communities
important to regional and/or global biodiversity conservation.
Objectives:
II.C.1. By 2012, accomplish sand pine removal in the top 1/3 highest priority “hubs”
identified in the RCW component plan ; updating the sand pine encroachment spatial
datalayer annually using inventory, remote sensing and ground-truthing.
II.C.2. Evaluate and assess the sea grass distributions in coastal waters adjacent to eglin
AFB by 2011.
II.C.3. Identify and rehabilitate all known soil erosion sites that have the potential to
impact T&E species (Gulf sturgeon and Okaloosa darter) habitat by 2011.
II.C.4. Annually remove one or more impoundment structures to restore stream habitat.
II.C.5. By 2010, using the Ecological Condition Model (ECM), determine rates of
restoration for the longleaf pine sandhill target community.
II.C.6. By 2010, utilizing the ECM output and current forest inventory data, establish
restoration objectives for upland pine, sandhills, and flatwoods habitat to include target
goals for landscape improvement; incorporate them into a revised Desired Future
Conditions assessment for the Eglin Reservation.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-8
II.C.7. Develop guidance for implementing longleaf thinning operations to meet Desired
Future Conditions (DFCs). Utilize guidance to determine appropriate circumstances to
incorporate sand pine removal and longleaf thinnings by 2011.
II.C.8. Continue to secure annual funding for the native grass restoration program.
II.C.9. Develop a system for prioritization of native grass restoration requirements and
fully implement Eglin’s Native Grass Component Plan by 2010.
Supporting Goal: II.D. Maintain an integrated adaptive management and long-term trends
monitoring program to evaluate the impacts of management and to provide scientific information
to decision makers for the modification of future management.
Objectives:
II.D.1. Analyze and refine monitoring techniques or indicators of aquatic health in Eglin
streams and recommend revisions to aquatic management protocol by 2011.
II.D.2. Assess recovery rates for a representative sample of restored streams using
Before and After Strategic Sampling (BASS) or other appropriate methods by 2012.
II.D.3. By 2012, develop an aquatic condition model for the stream systems on Eglin to
identify and prioritize restoration and management activities and to measure restoration
success.
II.D.4. By 2011, obtain funding to develop a stand-based longleaf pine demographic
model that integrates fire and forest management that forecasts the future structure of
longleaf stands.
II.D.5. Develop a web-based DSS consistent with the Air Force Geobase initiative that
displays real-time ecological monitoring information and statistical analyses relevant to
management decisions by 2011, gradually expanding this system for other Natural
Resources activities through 2013.
II.D.6. Assess longleaf plantations needed for future RCW forage where the understory
and planted longleaf display low vigor. Develop guidance, methodology and trials for
improvement by 2010.
II.D.7. Fund and install forest management resource decision support system by 2011.
II.D.8. Develop guidance for encouraging and conserving longleaf regeneration as
related to prioritization of prescribed fire, longleaf pine thinnings and the DFC by 2011.
Prioritize activities in areas to promote advanced regeneration and develop methods to
promote in areas lacking regeneration.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-9
II.D.9. Annually update a minimum of 20 percent of the forest inventory data to support
the management and restoration of endangered species habitat on Eglin. Utilize
inventory data to assist in section 7 consultations with the USFWS and to comply with
biological opinions.
II.D.10. By 2011, utilize LIDAR data to improve assessments of timber inventory,
landcover classification, fuel loading, and canopy closure.
Supporting Goal II.E. Reduce and control the spread of invasive, exotic plant and animal
species.
Objectives:
II.E.1. Identify the most significant threats to biodiversity posed by invasive, exotic
species, and develop a comprehensive invasive, exotic species control plan by 2011.
II.E.2. Annually survey a minimum of 20 percent of high quality natural areas in close
proximity to the urban interface for invasive, exotic species.
II.E.3. Identify and control the threat of invasive, exotic plant species that compromise
the biodiversity of high quality natural areas in close proximity to the urban interface.
Annually treat 90-95 percent of sites located during the previous years’ surveys.
II.E.4. Monitor steepheads and seepage slopes on a 4 year cycle with feral hog track
counts coinciding with monitoring years (every other year). Review steephead, seepage
slope, and track count monitoring data to determine if the feral hog control program is
successfully reducing damage to these sensitive resources and controlling the hog
population on Eglin. By 2011, establish a threshold of acceptable levels of resource
damage to gauge success of the program.
Principal Goal III: Provide a variety of uses, values, products, and
services to present and future generations while maintaining sustainable
ecosystems.
Public demand for access to military lands for recreational and commercial purposes has
increased steadily since the 1950s. The Sikes Act, passed in 1960, provided the legal basis for
wildlife conservation and public access for recreation on military lands. This law, which was
amended in 1997, directs installations to provide for:
●
The conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources on military installations.
●
The sustainable, multipurpose use of the resources, which shall include hunting, fishing,
trapping and non-consumptive uses.
●
Subject to safety requirements and site security (range patrol), public access to military
installations to facilitate their use.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-10
The Act also stipulates that the proceeds from the sale of hunting, fishing and other outdoor
recreation programs shall only be used for conservation on the installations where they were
collected. Title 10 U.S.C. 2665, Forest Management, authorizes refunding forest management
expenses at HQ/USAF with proceeds derived from the sale of forest products. Commercial
forestry operations must support military mission goals and objectives while maintaining and
enhancing ecological integrity. Products harvested will provide funds to reimburse expenses
incurred by the forest management program. The products produced by this program must be
diversified in order to ensure that a downturn in market conditions for one product will not
adversely impact the program’s ability to meet its budgetary requirements during any fiscal year.
Harvest operations will not be conducted for short-term profit at the expense of maintaining
military readiness or ecosystem resilience. Current DoD and Air Force policies, DoDI 4715.3
and AFI 32-7064 respectively, are in accordance with these laws and require installations to
make Air Force managed lands available for public use for recreational and commercial
purposes. Public access, however, is contingent upon safety considerations and must be
compatible with the military mission. Recent emphasis within DoD has been placed on the
dangers of UXO which in turn places the burden on installations to ensure public safety by
notifying them of the UXO dangers present on military lands. Services to the public include
dissemination of information, emergency wildfire response and implementation of the most
efficient, fiscally responsible program possible. The following supporting goals and objectives
balance the desire for public services with the requirements for sustainable use and public access
while retaining current mission capability and sustaining flexibility for future missions.
Supporting Goal: III.A. Provide recreational opportunities consistent with demand, quality,
and cost within the constraints of the Air Force mission.
Objectives:
III.A.1. Maintain financial self sufficiency of the Eglin Outdoor Recreation, Hunting and
Fishing program through sale of user permits. Annually review permit pricing schedule
and adjust as necessary.
III.A.2. Host Eglin Outdoor Recreation, Hunting and Fishing Map and Regulation
briefing for 96 Security Forces Squadron prior to annual hunting seasons to discuss
changes in policy and new rules and regulations.
III.A.3. Annually adjust work schedules to allow Wildlife staff capability to work
Saturdays and (7) peak use days during established hunting seasons to monitor
compliance, identify user preference and desire and promote program goals and
objectives.
III.A.4. Annually monitor two high-use recreational ponds through partnership with the
USFWS. Receive annual report including population demographics and habitat
improvement recommendations.
III.A.5. Continue high intensity management of Indigo and Duck ponds and establish a
third “high intensity” management pond by 2012.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-11
III.A.6. Develop and implement a new public access plan utilizing a combination of
methods including an interactive website, reduction in access points, and information
kiosks by the beginning of FY2011.
III.A.7. Rennovate Anderson Pond recreational area and comply with handicapped
accessibility requirements by 2012.
III.A.8. Annually host a youth fishing event modeled after Florida FWC special
opportunity fishing rodeos.
III.A.9. Annually renovate at least one recreational impoundment spillway structure.
III.A.10. Annually manage 15 primitive camp sites at current levels of service to include
mowing twice per year, replacing picnic tables and fire rings as necessary, and evaluating
trash clean-up schedules. Review permit sales data to determine levels of utilization and
appropriate alterations to maintenance schedules.
III.A.11. Annually inspect and maintain Rocky Creek, Turkey Creek, Boiling Creek, and
Alaqua Creek canoe trails.
III.A.12. Complete the construction and certification of the Eglin portion of Florida
National Scenic Trail by 2011. Facilitate the renewal of the five year Florida Trail
Association license agreement through the Eglin Real Estate office.
III.A.13. Inspect the Timberlake Mountain Bike Trail bi-annually to identify and address
maintenance needs and compliance issues.
III.A.14. Annually ensure the compatibility of recreation areas with the short and longterm requirements of the military mission through annual coordination with and approval
by the Outdoor Activities Committee. Complete Outdoor Activities Committee planning
cycle by 30 June annually.
III.A.15. Annually maintain improved quality hunting opportunities through intensive
management of approximately 1/3 of the areas available for hunting on Eglin.
III.A.16. Annually collect pertinent biological data from game species harvested in
intensive management areas and during special opportunity hunting events.
III.A.17. Analyze/monitor trends in game species populations annually using harvest
data, track count routes, and call count transects following established protocol.
Investigate new methods and techniques for better population surveys as needed.
III.A.18. Maintain acreage but reduce the burn block size and increase spatial
distribution of annual burn blocks in the quail management emphasis area. Coordinate
additional burn block flexibility and burn prioritization model compatibility by 2011.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-12
III.A.19. Annually maintain 180 established food plots in previously disturbed areas by
fertilizing, liming, mowing, or burning.
III.A.20. Apply herbicide to control undesirable woody vegetation to a minimum of 100
acres annually in the quail management emphasis area to improve quail habitat.
Supporting Goal: III.B. Provide forest products compatible with the military mission while
restoring and maintaining the long-term sustainability, diversity, and productivity of the
ecosystem.
Objectives:
III.B.1. By 2010, develop a 5-10 year silvicultural activity prioritization model.
III.B.2. Prepare a 10-year business plan by 2010 utilizing new forest inventory for
producing 1.5 to 2 million dollars annually from timber management program.
III.B.3. Devise and implement method of coordinating forest management activities
(herbicide, timber sales, and erosion control) with fire and wildlife management activities
to avoid conflicts by 2010.
III.B.4. Annually identify and coordinate recreational area requirements that will benefit
from a silvicultural treatment.
III.B.5. Annually, identify and incorporate Regeneration Emphasis Areas into prescribed
fire prioritization model which emphasizes seed catch burns or no burn areas as
appropriate.
Supporting Goal: III.C. Provide a wide variety of information and services to the public
pertaining to Eglin’s land management program and ecology. Highlight military base – mission
is primary land use – add this statement.
Objectives:
III.C.1. By 2010 develop and provide educational materials to the local communities at
beach access points concerning the protection of sea turtles, shorebirds, beach mice and
other unique barrier island natural resources.
III.C.2. By 2011, develop two informational brochures and provide to the public
highlighting unique recreational, hunting, and fishing opportunities on Eglin AFB.
III.C.3. As necessary, host public stakeholder meetings with specific user groups to
exchange information and maintain public support and compliance with regulations.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-13
III.C.4. Continue to cultivate relationships with local fire cooperators by attending at
least two fire chief's meetings per calendar year.
Supporting Goal: III.D. Provide an acceptable level of wildfire protection for all of Eglin
(including the wildland/urban interface areas) to reduce potential threats to life, property and
natural resources.
Objectives:
III.D.1. By 2010, reduce wildfire occurrence through methods identified in the Wildland
Fire Management Plan on Eglin AFB by at least 10 percent as compared to the
2001-2005 five-year average.
III.D.2. At least twice per year, provide National Wildfire Coordinating Group training
courses and accompanying certification to CEVSN personnel and local fire cooperators
in order to ensure safe, professional response to wildland/urban interface fires in the local
community.
III.D.3. Safely and professionally suppress all wildfires on Eglin with no lost-time
firefighter injuries and no loss of Eglin real property.
Principal Goal IV: Engage in collaborative stewardship with a greater
diversity of people both on and off Eglin Air Force Base.
Collaborative stewardship is a process in which people work together, sharing knowledge and
resources, to achieve a desired future. It is a most effective tool in developing and nurturing
long-term relationships that will help sustain Eglin AFB, its ecosystem, and the surrounding
communities. Trust, open communication, a heartfelt desire to work together, and a commitment
to follow-through, are the foundations of long-term relationships.
●
Collaborative stewardship is a way to develop more successful solutions.
●
No one person or agency can have all the answers.
●
Different perspectives, experiences, and expertise can build better solutions.
●
A broader base of support affords shared accountability and responsibility.
●
Retaining control of the decision does not require controlling the process, nor does it
require accepting full responsibility for its implementation and monitoring.
Collaboration will not eliminate conflict and controversy. It will, however, accommodate
differences, allowing them to surface and be part of the deliberative process.
While the NRS should take responsibility for implementing collaborative stewardship, they do
not have to lead every process. Leadership can often be accomplished successfully by others. In
some instances, a more appropriate NRS role may be to act as facilitator, broker or participant.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-14
Collaborative efforts do take more time, but the additional time has proven to be a very
productive, cost-effective investment because the results will be easier to implement and sustain.
Many people find it difficult to envision how they will find time to participate in a collaborative
project. Organizational downsizing and the resulting expansion of duties for remaining positions
increase complexities in all areas of responsibility. Our traditional focus on annual target
accomplishments affects our employees’ ability to allocate time for collaborative efforts.
However, managers at all levels within Eglin AFB have the opportunity to help make a
difference by incorporating collaborative stewardship, not as something to do, but rather, a way
of doing business.
Supporting Goal: IV.A. Maintain current partnerships and develop new partnerships with
federal, state and private conservation agencies and organizations to enhance conservation
effectiveness. Develop and maintain MOAs or MOUs as necessary, in accordance with the Sikes
Act.
Objectives:
IV.A.1. Annually coordinate with outgranted property managers with invasive nonnative species issues and conduct surveys on an as needed basis.
IV.A.2. Work with the Public Affairs office to publish at least one article per year in
local newspapers informing the public about the negative impact of invasive exotic
species on native species.
IV.A.3. Create a coordination and review process with Eglin Cultural Resources Office
to ensure that Federally Recognized Tribes having affiliation with Eglin AFB have
opportunity to review the INRMP, comment and express their ideas regarding cultural
and natural resources.
IV.A.4. To improve science-based management, use monitoring data to support external
research grants that address key information needs for managing Eglin's natural
resources.
Supporting Goal: IV.B. Utilize volunteers to enhance conservation effectiveness.
Objectives:
IV.B.1. Expand volunteer participation in each Natural Resources element by 2011 as
new volunteer participation is deemed necessary.
IV.B.2. By 2010 develop an operational plan for the Natural Resources volunteer
program.
IV.B.3. Maintain an average of at least 7000 volunteer hours annually.
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-15
02/02/10
Final
Page 8-16
Implementation
Component Plans
9. IMPLEMENTATION
9.1 COMPONENT PLANS
CPs, similar to Work plans, describe the day-to-day operations of each element at Natural
Resources. Each CP identifies goals and objectives specific to its direction and how it is related
to the INRMP. Specific timeframes for implementation are identified in each CP as well.
Funding requirements, appropriate funding source, and priority for implementation is described
in each of the CPs specific to Eglin AFB. The CPs should be able to provide all the necessary
information for building a budget within the Air Force framework. The CPs are listed below.
1. Wildland Fire Management Plan
a. Fire Aviation Plan
b. Fire Dispatch Plan
c. Fire Training Plan
d. Field Observer Component Plan
e. Fire Equipment Plan
f. Fire Communications Plan
2. Forest Management Component Plan
3. Outdoor Recreation Component Plan
4. Threatened and Endangered Species Component Plan
5. Ecological Monitoring Component Plan
6. Native Grass Component Plan Phase I
7. Erosion Control Component Plan
9.2 NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT STAFFING
The INRMP not only provides long-term management direction in terms of goals and objectives,
but it also provides the basics for developing multi-year program budget proposals. It is the
Plan’s direction, in the form of scheduled practices that have been translated into multi-year
budget proposals identifying needed expenditures. Funds are allocated annually based on the
program budget proposals and congressional intent. To fully implement the goals and objectives
of the plan, annual budgets are programmed.
These requirements will be programmed into the Conservation Budgets and Conservation
Program Objective Memorandum (POM). Budget and Programming guidance comes from the
following documents:
●
02/02/10
HQ USAF/ILE, the Civil Engineer, DCS/Installations and Logistics issued Air Force
Conservation Programming and Budget Guidance (11 Sept 00).
Final
Page 9-1
Implementation
Natural Resources Management Staffing
●
HQ AFMC Standardized Environmental Compliance and Conservation Programming
Guidance (20 Nov 00).
●
Interim Environmental Quality Funding Policy, 23 May 01.
●
Subsequent AFMC Level of Service Standards for Natural and Cultural Resources, HQ,
14 Jun 01.
These Headquarter policies and guidance resources direct installation level Conservation
programming and budgeting.
Personnel
To successfully implement the INRMP, a combination of government manpower, contract labor,
non-appropriated manpower and volunteers are required. The current number and type of
government manpower positions within Natural Resources are listed below. An organization
chart may also be found in Section 7.1 of this INRMP.
GM-13 Natural Resources Administrator
GS-12 Supervisory Forester
GS-12 Supervisory Wildlife Biologist
GS-12 Threatened and Endangered Species Biologist
GS-12 Supervisory Fire Management Officer
GS-11 Supervisory Fire Ecologist
GS- 11 Supervisory Forester
GS- 11 Forester
GS- 11 Threatened and Endangered Species Biologist (2)
GS- 11 Wildlife Biologist
GS- 09 Forestry Technician (2)
GS- 09 Fire Ecologist
GS-09 Forester
GS- 07 Wildlife Technician (2)
GS-06 Forestry Technician (3)
TOTAL= 30 government positions
In addition, the current program uses 2.9 man-years of overtime, 20.29 contract man-years, 3.5
man-years of Non Appropriated Fund (NAF) labor, and 2.8 man-years of volunteer help. The
grand total of all manpower for the current Natural Resources program is 63.29 man-years
(Table 9-1).
To fully implement the goals and objectives of this INRMP, additional manpower positions are
needed. Federal inmates (~8 man-years) have been removed from Natural Resources as a means
of labor and funding availability of NAF employees is not stable.
02/02/10
Final
Page 9-2
Implementation
Natural Resources Management Staffing
Remaining labor required to achieve the Natural Resource Program goals and objectives include:
Contract man-years = 26.1
NAF man-years = 5.5
Volunteer man-years = 6.5
TOTAL manpower required = 83.99 man-years
Table 9-1 shows the comparison of labor, cost of the program, and amount of income from
forestry and recreation receipts for the current Natural Resource Program and the desired future
program. Table 9-2 gives the amount of manpower that is currently utilized with a comparison
of what it would take to reach future demands.
Table 9-1. Labor, Cost, and Income for Natural Resources Per Year
Labor / Cost / Income
Natural Resource Section Composite
Current Program
Desired Future Program
Labor
Cost
Income
Labor
Cost
Income
(my)
($K)
($K)
(my)
($K)
($K)
GOAL 1
Direct Mission Support
GOAL 2
T & E Species
Biodiversity
GOAL 3
Products and Services
GOAL 4
Collaboration
Partnership
Volunteers
TOTALS
4.45
$213
0
5.76
$353
0
21.48
11.79
$2416
$975.2
$174
$610
23.79
22.37
$2886
$1203.2
$610
$997
23.94
$401
$300
28.43
$451
$335
0.275
0.306
1.05
63.29
$60
0
$60
$4125.2
0
0
0
$1084
1035
0.551
2.05
83.99
$60
0
$120
$5073.2
0
0
0
$1942
my = man-years; $K= thousands of dollars
Table 9-2. Breakdown of Labor for Natural Resources
Current Program
NAF
Government *
Contractor
Volunteer
Inmates
3.5
27.9
20.29
2.8
2
Desired Future Program
Non Appropriated Funds (NAF)
Government *
Contractor
Volunteer
Inmates
5.5
38
25.19
6.5
0
Includes 2.9 man years of overtime
NAF= Non Appropriated Funds
02/02/10
Final
Page 9-3
Implementation
9.3 ANNUAL COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS
Natural Resource management is a dynamic process and as such, management plans often
require frequent reviews and updates. Following completion of the INRMP, Natural Resource
management will conduct periodic reviews and updates to account for changes in the military
mission, condition of natural resources, the ecosystem and regulatory requirements. Natural
Resources has been assigned responsibility to coordinate reviews. In order to comply with
regulations and ensure the continued usefulness of this plan, the NRS will conduct an annual
review cycle and will update the INRMP annually (Figure 9-1). Natural Resource management
will review and update the INRMP annually as identified in Figure 9-1 to assess the
effectiveness of integration linkages and bring in partners (identified in the diagram) for
guidance and knowledge. Specifically, annual meetings with the USFWS and FWC will produce
feedback, which will then be incorporated into the annual update process. Monthly
teleconferences with the USFWS will coordinate specific dates for the meetings. Natural
Resource management will present the findings from this annual review to update senior Base
leaders of the status and effectiveness of the plan. Annual update coordination and signatures
can be found in Appendix C.
Figure 9-1. INRMP Annual Review Cycle
02/02/10
Final
Page 9-4
Implementation
Monitoring INRMP Implementation
9.4 MONITORING INRMP IMPLEMENTATION
The Annual Review Cycle identified above will also be maintained as a tabular check sheet for
tracking purposes. Additionally, completion and status of the objectives identified in Chapter 8
will be tracked. Natural Resource management will review these documents at each INRMP
Review Cycle and the Chief of Natural Resources will enforce compliance with the INRMP.
02/02/10
Final
Page 9-5
Implementation
Monitoring INRMP Implementation
02/02/10
Final
Page 9-6
Appendices
10. APPENDICES
The following appendices are provided as attachments at the end of this INRMP.
●
Appendix A Natural Resource Related Legislation and Regulations
●
Appendix B Glossary
●
Appendix C 2008 Annual Update
●
Appendix D 2009 Annual Update
02/02/10
Final
Page 10-1
Appendices
02/02/10
Final
Page 10-2
References
11. REFERENCES
Bailey, R.G.; Avers, P.E.; King, T.; McNab, W.H, Eds., 1994. Ecoregions and subregions of the United States
(map). Washington ,DC: U.S. Geological Survey. 1:7,500,000. Colored. Accompanied by a supplementary
table of map unit Scale descriptions compiled and edited by McNab, W.H. and Bailey, R.G. Prepared for the
USDA Forest Service.
Barbour, M.T., J. Gerritsen, B.D. Snyder and J.B. Stribling, 1999. Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams
and wadeable rivers: Periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates, and fish. Second edition. EPA 841-B-99-002. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. Washington, D.C.
Becker, N. M., Vanta, E. B., and R. C. Crews, 1989. Environmental Monitoring for Depleted.
Chafin, L.G. and A.R. Schotz, 1995. Rare plant survey of Eglin Air Force Base, 1992-1994: Final Report.
Tallahassee (FL): Florida Natural Areas Inventory.
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of
the United States. U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Jamestown,
D: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/1998/
classwet/classwet.htm (Version 04DEC98).
FDEP, 2004. 1998 303d Listed Waters Maps. Accessed December, 2004 at: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water
/tmdl/303dmap.htm.
————, 2004a.
1998 303(d) List.
water/tmdl/docs/303(d)-2.pdf.
Accessed December, 2004 at:
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/
————, 2004b. FDEP-SOP-001/01 FT 3000. Aquatic Habitat Characterization (FT3001) and Stream and River
Habitat Assessment (FT3100) with field forms Physical/Chemical Characterization Field Sheet (FD 9000-3),
Stream/River Habitat Sketch Sheet (FD 9000-4) and Stream/River Habitat Assessment Field Sheet (FD 9000-5).
February 1, 2004. Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Bureau of Laboratories, Tallahassee,
Florida. (www.dep.state.fl.us/labs/qu/2002sops.htm).
————, 2004c. FDEP-SOP-002/01-LT7100. BioRecon Determination. Florida Department of Environmental
Protection. Bureau of Laboratories, Tallahassee, Florida. (www.dep.state.fl.us/labs/qu/2002sops.htm).
————, 2005. Adopted Verified Lists of Impaired Waters for the Group 3 Basins. Accessed September 2005 at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/adopted_gp3.htm.
————, 2005a. The Florida Coastal Management Program. Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/cmp/publications/programguide98/Iintro.htm. December 2005.
Fire Management Today, 2005. Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Publication. Vol. 65 No. 3.
Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/.
Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI), 1994 as referenced in US Air Force, 2001. Eglin Air Force Base
Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan., 2001.
————, 1995. Eglin Air Force Base Natural Community Survey, Year Two Report. Florida Natural Areas
Inventory. Tallahassee, FL. December, 1995.
————, 1997. Threatened, Endangered and Rare Plants Species Survey. Prepared by Florida Natural Areas
Inventory and Department of Natural Resources at Eglin AFB.
02/02/10
Final
Page 11-1
References
————, 2006. About FNAI. www.fnai.org/about.cfm. Accessed 7 March 2006.
Herod, J.J., 2005. Index of Biotic Integrity for Freshwater Lotic Systems on and adjacent to Eglin AFB: Adaptive
management decision support using fishes and fish community assessments. Report to Eglin Air Force Base,
Jackson Guard, Niceville, Florida. 44pp.
Herod, J.J. and T.A. Thom, 2004. Stream Assessment Program (SAP): Assessment tools targeting multiple scales
and ecological parameters to provide decision support for managing Eglin AFB stream systems. Report to
Eglin Air Force Base, Jackson Guard, Niceville, Florida. 140pp.
Johnson, J., 2005. Personal communication, SAIC with Justin Johnson - Wildlife Game and Outdoor Recreation
Specialist with Eglin Natural Resources.
Kindell, C.E., B.J. Herring, C. Nordman, J. Jense, A.R. Schotz, L.G. Chafin, 1997. Natural Community survey of
Eglin Air Force Base, 1993-1996: Final Report. Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, Florida.
Lamont, M.M., H. F. Percival, L.G. Pearlstine, S.V. Colwell, W.M. Kitchens and R.R. Carthy, 1997. The Cape San
Blas Ecological Study. US Geological Survey/Biological Resources Division, Florida Cooperative Fish and
Wildlife Research Unit, Technical Report # 57.
Master, L.L., S.R. Flack, and B.A. Stein (editors), 1998. Rivers of Life: Critical Watersheds for Protecting
Freshwater Biodiversity. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA.
McKinnon, E. C., and T. R. Pratt, 1998. A Compilation of Water Quality and Pumpage Data for Select Wells in
Santa Rosa Okaloosa and Walton and Bay County Florida. Northwest Florida Water Management District
Technical File Report 98-1. November.
Mitsch, W.J., 2000. Wetlands, 3rd Edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Mooney and Hobbs, 2000 as referenced in US Air Force, 2001. Eglin Air Force Base Integrated Natural Resources
Management Plan., 2001.
Northwest Florida Water Management District (NWFWMD), 2001. Regional Water Supply Plan for Santa Rosa,
Okaloosa and Walton Counties.
Noss, R. F. and A. Y. Cooperrider, 1994. Saving Natures' Legacy: Protecting and Restoring Biodiversity. Island
Press, 1994.
NWFWMD,
2005.
Groundwater
Stations
in
Northwest
Florida.
Accessed
http://www.nwfwmd.state.fl.us/hydrology/ground/levels/gwlevels.htm on September 21, 2005.
at
Provencher, L., B.J. Herring, D.R. Gordon, H.L. Rodgers, G.W. Tanner, J.L. Hardesty, L.A. Brennan, and A.R. Litt.,
2001. Longleaf pine and oak responses to hardwood reduction techniques in fire-suppressed sandhills in
northwest Florida. Forest Ecology and Management. 148 (pg. 63-77).
Pimentel et al, 2000 as referenced in US Air Force, 2001. Eglin Air Force Base Integrated Natural Resources
Management Plan., 2001.
Rosenberg, D. M., and V.H. Resh (eds.), 1993. Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates.
Chapman and Hall, New York. 488 pp.
Thom, T.A. and J.J. Herod, 2005. Aquatic Inventory of Eglin Air Force Base and Recommendations for Long-Term
Aquatic Ecosystem Management. Technical Report prepared for CEG/CEVSN by USFWS, April 2005.
02/02/10
Final
Page 11-2
References
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 1987. Implementation of the 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual,"
memorandum from John P. Elmore dated 27 August 1991.
————, 1993. Geomorphic Investigation of Eglin AFB, Florida. Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi, October.
U.S. Air Force, 1993. Natural Resources Management Plan, Eglin Air Force Base 1993-1997. Air Force
Development Test Center, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
————, 1995. Environmental Baseline Study Resource Appendices. Prepared by Earthtech for the Air Force
Development Test Center (AFDTC), 46th Test Wing, Range Environmental Planning Office (46TW/XPE),
Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
————, 1998. Interstitial Area Programmatic Environmental Assessment. 46th Test Wing Range Environmental
Planning Office, Air Force Developmental Test Center, Eglin AFB, FL.
————, 1998a. Overland Air Operations Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment. 46th Test Wing,
Range Environmental Planning Office, Air Force Developmental Test Center, Eglin AFB, Florida.
————, 1998b. Test Area B-70 Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment. 46th Test Wing, Range
Environmental Planning Office, Air Force Developmental Test Center, Eglin AFB, FL. March 1998.
————, 1999. Cape San Blas Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment. AAC (Air Armament Center), 46
TW/XPE Range Environmental Planning Office, Eglin Air Force Base, FL. 31542-6808.
————, 1999a. Test Area C-52 Complex Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment. 46 Test Wing, Range
Environmental Planning Office, Air Armament Center, Eglin AFB, FL. June, 1999.
————, 1999b. Test Area C-72 Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment.
46 TW/XPE, Range Environmental Planning Office, Eglin AFB, FL 32542-6808.
Air Armament Center,
————, 2000. Test Area B-75 Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment. 46th Test Wing Range
Environmental Planning Office, Air Armament Center, Eglin AFB, FL. August 2000.
————, 2000a. C-80 Programmatic Environmental Assessment.
————, 2001. Test Area B-12 Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment. Prepared by SAIC for the Air
Armament Center, 46th Test Wing, Range Environmental Planning Office, Eglin AFB, Florida.
————, 2001a. TA C-64 Programmatic Environmental Assessment.
————, 2003. Eglin Land Test and Training Range Environmental Baseline Study-Resource Appendices Volume
I, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. Prepared by SAIC for Eglin AFB, Air Armament Center. December 2003.
————, 2003a. Test Area C-62 Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment (May 2002). FONSI signed 23
December 2003. 46th Test Wing, Range Environmental Planning Office, Air Armament Center, Eglin AFB,
Florida.
————, 2003b. Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment. 46th Test
Wing, Range Environmental Planning Office, Air Armament Center, Eglin AFB, Florida. June 03.
————, 2003c. Test Area B-71 and B-82 Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment. Prepared by SAIC for
the Air Armament Center, 46th Test Wing, Range Environmental Planning Office, Eglin AFB, Florida.
————, 2003d. Environmental Restoration Program Management Action Plan. Eglin Air Force Base. July.
02/02/10
Final
Page 11-3
References
————, 2004. Air-to-Ground Gunnery: A-77, A-78, A-79, and B-7 Final Programmatic Environmental
Assessment, Department of the Air Force, Air Armament Center, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. July 2004.
————, 2004a. Final Estuarine/Riverine Programmatic Environmental Assessment. 46th Test Wing Range
Environmental Planning Office, Air Armament Center, Eglin AFB, Florida. June.
————, 2005. Eglin Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
————, 2005a. Alabama Army National Guard Master Plan for Cobb Training Site Draft Environmental
Assessment. Alabama Army National Guard, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. 22 April 2005.
————, 2006. Santa Rosa Island Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment. (will be complete by INRMP
signature).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1995. Soil Survey of Okaloosa County, Florida. Natural Resources Conservation
Service.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 1995. America's Wetlands: Our Vital Link Between Land and
Water.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1979. National Wetlands Inventory Classification for Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Cowardin, L.M.
Wilhelm, G.S., 1984. Vascular flora of the Pensacola region [dissertation]. Carbondale (IL): Southern Illinois
University, Department of Botany.
02/02/10
Final
Page 11-4
APPENDIX A
NATURAL RESOURCE RELATED
LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS
Appendix A
Natural Resource Related Legislation and Regulations
●
Bald Eagle Protection Act of 19740 [Public Law 86-70; Title 16 U.S. Code 668 et seq.].
●
Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended [Title 42 U.S. Code 7401-7671].
●
Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended [Public Law 95-217; Title 33 U.S. Code
1251-1376].
●
Coastal Barrier Resources Act (1988), reauthorization as Coastal Barrier Improvement
Act of 1990 [Title 16 U.S. Code 3501 et seq.].
●
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act of 1998 [Title 16 U.S. Code
3501 et seq.].
●
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, and CZMA Reauthorization Amendments of
1990 [Title 16 U.S. Code 1451-1464].
●
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, Amendments
to Superfund in 1983 and 1986 - also known as SARA Title 42 U.S. Code 9601-9657].
●
Conservation and Rehabilitation Program on Military and Public Lands [Public Law
93-452].
●
Conservation Programs on Military Reservations Act (Sikes Act) of 1960 and Sikes Act
Improvement Act of 1997 [Public Laws 96-561 and 105-85; Title 16 U.S. Code
670a-670o].
●
Conservation Service Reform Act of 1986 [Title 2 U.S.C. 8201].
●
Council on Environmental Quality Regulations.
●
Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 [Title 16 U.S.C. 3901].
●
ESA of 1973 and amendments [Public Law 93-205 and 95-632; Title 16 U.S.C. 15311544].
●
Estuary Protection Act (1968) [Title 16 U.S.C. 1221].
●
Executive Order 11288 of 1966 (Prevention, Control, and Abatement of Water Pollution
by Federal Activities).
●
Executive Order 11514 of 1970 (Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality).
●
Executive Order 11644 of 1972 (Use of Off-Road Vehicles on the Public Lands).
●
Executive Order 11990 of 1977 (Protection of Wetlands).
●
Executive Order 11987 of 1977 (Exotic Organisms).
●
Executive Order 11988 of 1977 (Floodplain Management).
●
Executive Order 12088 of 1978 (Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards),
amended by EO 12580.
●
Executive Order 12580 of 1987 (Superfund Implementation), amended by EO 12777.
02/02/10
Final
Page A-1
Appendix A
●
Executive Order 12777 of 1991 (Implementation of Section 311 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act of October 18, 1972, as Amended, and The Oil Pollution Control
Act of 1990).
●
Executive Order 12780 of 1991 (Federal Agency Recycling and the Council on Federal
Recycling and Procurement Policy).
●
Executive Order 12962 of 1995 (Recreational Fisheries).
●
Executive Order 13045 of 1997 (Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks
and Safety Risks).
●
Executive Order 13112 of 1999 (Invasive Species).
●
Executive Order 13101 of 1998 (Greening the Government Through Waste Prevention,
Recycling, and Federal Acquisition).
●
Executive Order 12123 of 1999 (Greening the Government Through Efficient Energy
Management).
●
Executive Order 13148 of 2000 (Greening the Government Through Leadership in
Environmental Management).
●
Executive Order 13186 of 2001 (Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect
Migratory Birds).
●
Farmland Protection Policy Act [Public Law 97-98; Title 7 U.S.C. 4201 et seq.].
●
Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act of 1972, as Amended [Public Law 92-516;
Title 7 U.S.C. 136-136y].
●
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 [Title 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.].
●
Federal Noxious Weed Act of 1974 [Public Law 93-629; Title 7 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.].
●
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 [Public Law 92-522; Title 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.].
●
Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980 [Public Law 89-699; Title 16 U.S.C. 2901 et
seq.].
●
Insect Control Act of 1954 [Title 7 U.S.C. 148].
●
Magnuson (-Stevens) Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 [Public Law
94-265; Title 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.].
●
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 [Title 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407]
●
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 [Title 33 U.S.C. 1401-1445
and Title 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.].
●
Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1966 [Title 16 U.S.C. 715].
●
Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 [Title 16 U.S.C. 703-712].
●
Military Reservation and Facilities: Hunting, Fishing, and Trapping Act of 1958 [Public
Law 85-337 et seq.].
02/02/10
Final
Page A-2
Appendix A
●
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (H.R. 1588 ) [Public Law 108
136].
●
National Trails Systems Act of 1968 [Title 16 U.S.C. 1241].
●
National Water Commission Act of 1962 [Title 42 U.S.C. 1962].
●
Navigable Waters Protection Act [Title 33 U.S.C. 407].
●
Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 [Title 16 U.S.C.
3951 et seq.].
●
North American Wetlands Conservation Act of 1989 [Title 16 U.S.C. 4401-4412].
●
Noxious Plant Control Act of 1968 [Public Law 90-583; Title 43 U.S.C. 1241 et seq.].
●
Off-Road Vehicles on Public Lands [Executive Order 11989].
●
Oil Pollution Act of 1990 [Public Law 101-380; Title 33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.].
●
Outdoor Recreation-Federal/State Program Act [Title 16 U.S.C. 460L et seq.].
●
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 [Title 42 U.S.C. 13101-13109].
●
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act [California Water Code B13000 et seq.].
●
Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality [Amends Executive Order 11514,
Executive Order 1191].
●
Public Trust Doctrine.
●
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RECRA) of 1976 [Title 42 U.S.C.
6901-6992].
●
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 [Title 33 U.S.C. 401].
●
Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as Amended [Title 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.].
●
Salmon and Steelhead Conservation and Enhancement Act of 1980 [Title 16 U.S.C.
3301].
●
Soil Conservation and Enhancement Act of 1938 [Title 16 U.S.C. 5901 et seq.].
●
Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 [Title 42 U.S.C. 2601-2629].
●
Water Resources and Planning Act of 1965 [Title 16 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.].
●
Wild and Scenic River Act of 1968 [Title 16 U.S.C. 1271].
02/02/10
Final
Page A-3
Appendix A
This page is intentionally blank
02/02/10
Final
Page A-4
APPENDIX B
GLOSSARY
Appendix B
Glossary
GLOSSARY
Active Clusters
A grouping of cavity trees currently being used by RCWs consisting of
either a family group, a single male, breeding pair or a breeding pair and
helpers.
Activity Fuels
Dead woody vegetative material generated by human activity. Generally
logging slash pine tops and branches left on site after logging or
thinning.
Active Management
Management actions taken for an individual species such as species
specific population monitoring, specific habitat management, or other
actions such as translocation.
Active RCW Cavity
A completed cavity or start exhibiting fresh pine resin associated with
cavity maintenance, cavity construction, or resin well excavation by
RCWs.
Active RCW Cavity Tree
Any tree containing one or more active cavities.
Adaptive Management
The process of implementing flexible management and policy that is
responsive to results of continuous biological monitoring and scientific
experimentation.
Age Class
One of the intervals, commonly ten years, into which the age range of
trees is divided for classification or use.
Air Armament Center
The host military organization for Eglin Air Force Base.
Allopatric
Occurring in separate, isolated geographic areas.
Anadromous
Migrating up rivers from the sea to breed in fresh water. Used of fish.
Annual Growth
The growth produced in one year.
Basal Area
The cross-sectional area of a stand of trees measured at breast height
(4-1/2 ft above ground level). The area is expressed in square feet per
acre and is a measure of stocking density.
Biological Diversity
The variety of life and its processes, including the variety in genes,
species, ecosystems, and the ecological processes connecting everything
in ecosystems.
Black Line Policy
Standard operating procedure to secure and reinforce control line by
burning out unburned fuel inside the line. Authorization and coordination
with on-scene Incident Commander is required for tactical reasons before
implementing any firing procedures.
Brown Spot Needle Blight
Fungus (Scirrhia acicola) regarded as the most serious disease affecting
longleaf pine.
02/02/10
Final
Page B-1
Appendix B
Glossary
Cambium
A group of actively dividing cells found in plant roots and stems to
produce new plant tissue for lateral growth.
Captured Cluster
A cluster that does not support its own group of RCWs, but contains
active cavity trees in use or kept active by birds from a neighboring
cluster.
Catastrophic Fire
Wildland fire resulting in extensive damage to the resource; a
stand-replacement fire.
Center Commander
Highest military official in charge of Eglin AFB.
Chain
Unit of linear measurement equivalent to 66 ft.
Chipping
Converting wood into pulp chips using a machine called a chipper.
Cluster (RCW)
The aggregation of cavity trees previously and currently used and
defended by a group of RCWs, or this same aggregation of cavity trees
and a 61 m (200 ft) wide buffer of continuous forest. Here, the second
definition is used. For management purposes, the minimum area
encompassing the cluster is 4 hectares (10 acres). Use of the term cluster
is preferred over colony because colony implies more than one nest (as in
colonial breeder).
Commercial Forest
Forest land managed for the production of wood products.
Conservation
As defined in the ESA is “use of all methods and procedures which are
necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the
point at which the measures provided pursuant to this Act are no longer
necessary. Such methods and procedures include, but are not limited to,
all activities associated with scientific resources management,
propagation, live trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary
case where population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be
otherwise relieved, may include the regulated taking.”
Conservation Action Plan
A joint action plan between the Eglin Natural Resources Branch and an
on or off base organization which help meet a conservation objective
such as the recovery, downlisting or delisting of an endangered species.
Conservation Target
A subset of all occurring terrestrial and aquatic communities or species
of conservation concern that, if protected, are assumed to conserve all
elements of the conservation concern and a significant portion of
biodiversity at a conservation area. Conservation targets are used as part
of the site conservation planning process developed by TNC and
recognized as an accepted method of biodiversity management.
Conspecific
Belonging to the same species.
Contain a Fire
To take suppression action, as needed, which can reasonably be expected
to check the fire’s spread under prevailing conditions.
Control a Fire
To complete control line around a fire, any spot fires, and any interior
islands to be saved; burn out any unburned area adjacent to the fire side
02/02/10
Final
Page B-2
Appendix B
Glossary
of the control lines; and cool down all hotspots that are immediate threats
to the control line, until the lines can reasonably be expected to hold
under current and foreseeable conditions.
Cooperative Breeding
A breeding system in which one or more adults assist a breeding pair in
rearing of young. These extra adults, called helpers, delay their own
dispersal and reproduction and are generally related to the offspring of
the breeding pair.
Coordinating Group
The NWCG is made up of the USDA Forest Group Service; four
department of Interior Agencies: Bureau of Land Management; National
Park Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Fish and Wildlife Service;
state forestry agencies through the National Association of State
Foresters, and most recently the Department of Defense. The purpose of
the NWCG is to coordinate programs of the participating wildfire
management agencies so as to avoid wasteful duplication and to provide
a means of constructively working together. Its goal is to provide more
effective execution of each agency’s fire management program. The
group provides a formalized system to agree upon standards on training,
equipment, qualifications, and other operational functions.
Delisting
Removal of a species from the Federal list of endangered and threatened
species.
Desired Future Condition
A broad or specific expression of ecosystem condition, attainable within
the human context over the next fifty years, used to guide management
and land use. Most simply it is a management goal, the conditions that
management is attempting to obtain over a set period of time.
Developed Recreation
Recreation that requires facilities that in-turn result in concentrated use
of an area. Examples include campgrounds and picnic areas.
Diameter at Breast
The diameter of a standing tree at a point 4 ft, 6 inches from Height (dbh)
ground level.
Direct Attack
Any direct treatment of burning fuel, e.g., by wetting, smothering, or
chemically quenching the fire or by physically separating the burning
from unburned fuel (control line).
Dispersed Recreation
That type of recreation use requiring few, if any, improvements and may
occur over a wide area. This type of recreation involves activities related
to roads, traits, undeveloped waterways, and beaches. The activities do
not necessarily take place on, or adjacent to a road, trail, or waterway,
only in conjunction with it. Activities are often day-use oriented and
include hunting, fishing, boating, and hiking.
Dorsum
The back of an animal.
Downlisting
The change of listing status from endangered to threatened.
Ecological Association
Areas on Eglin AFB divided in to ecological units based on similarities
in soils, hydrology, plants, animals, etc.
02/02/10
Final
Page B-3
Appendix B
Glossary
Ecological Integrity
The relative health of an ecosystem and its ability to withstand
perturbation.
Ecological Process
The actions or events linking organisms and their environment; such as
predation, mutualism, successional development, nutrient cycling, carbon
sequestration, primary productivity, fire cycles, hydrologic patterns, and
decay.
Ecology
The science of the inter-relationships between organisms and their
environments.
Ecoregion
A system of classification based on physiography.
Ecosystem
A complex, interactive community of organisms and its environment
functioning as an ecological unit in nature.
Ecosystem Management
The careful and skillful use of ecological, scientific, social, and
managerial principles in managing ecosystems to restore and sustain
ecosystem integrity (composition, structure, and function) and produce
ecologically acceptable levels of sustainable multiple uses.
Ecotone
A transition or junction zone between two or more naturally occurring,
diverse plant communities (ecosystems).
Emigration
The movement of animals away from a specific area (opposite of
immigration).
Endangered Species
Any species of animal or plant that is in danger of extinction throughout
all or a significant portion of its range. Plant or animal species identified
by the Secretary of the Interior as endangered in accordance with the
ESA of 1973.
Even-aged Management
A combination of actions resulting in the establishment of stands of trees
that are essentially the same age. Clearcut, shelter wood, or seed tree
cutting methods produce even-aged stands.
Fauna
The grouping of animals representative of a particular region or period.
Firebreak
A natural or constructed barrier utilized to stop or check fires that may
occur, or to provide a control line from which to work. See fuelbreak.
Fire Ecology
The physical, biological, and ecological impacts of fire on the
environment.
Fire Management
The integration of fire related biological, ecological, physical, and
technological information into land management to meet desired
objectives. This includes fire protection as well as prescribed fire. Fire
management is a service function to natural resource management.
Fire Pre-suppression
Activities in advance of fire occurrence to insure effective suppression
action. This includes analysis of fire history, recruiting and training
personnel, planning the organization, developing pre-attack plans,
maintaining fire equipment and fire control improvements, and procuring
equipment and supplies.
02/02/10
Final
Page B-4
Appendix B
Glossary
Fire Prevention
Activities directed at reducing the number, size, and intensity of
human-caused fires. Prevention includes public education, law
enforcement, personal contact, and fuel hazard reduction.
Fire Protection
That part of fire management which is intended to protect life, property,
and natural resources from unwanted damages by wildfires. Fire
protection objectives are to keep the number, size, and intensity of
wildfires at the level needed to meet objectives established for natural
resource management.
Fire Suppression
The process of discovering, attacking, extinguishing, or keeping within
predetermined bounds, any wildland fire that does not meet management
objectives.
Flatwoods
Mesic pine communities of the Gulf and Atlantic coastal plains typically
with a underlining hardpan or elevated water table.
Flora
The plant life characteristics of a particular geographical area.
Forbs
A grouping/category of herbaceous plants which are not included in the
grass, shrub, or tree groupings/categories; generally smaller flowering
plants.
Fuel Break
A strategically located strip or block of land on which the native
vegetation has been physically modified to break up the continuity of
hazardous fuels to facilitate suppression efforts, and provide access for
suppression crews and equipment.
Fuel Break System
A series of modified strips or blocks tied together to form continuous
strategically located fuel breaks around land units.
Fuel Management
The manipulation, modification, and reduction of flammable vegetation
(natural or activity fuels) to meet fire protection and natural resource
management objectives.
G ranking
A classification system used to rank the global rarity of a species or
subspecies. Rarity is on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being the most rare.
Geographic Information
A computer-based technology characterized by specific System (GIS)
hardware and software that permits the simultaneous storage,
management, and analysis of data, along with its geographic location. A
spatial database management system.
Genetic Variability
A range of phenotypes for a particular character. Genetic variability
arises initially by mutation and is maintained by sexual reproduction.
Such variation is the raw material for natural selection to act upon,
ensuring that the best-adapted variants are most likely to reproduce.
Goal
The general target or end result to be achieved by the integrated natural
resources management effort. See Objectives.
Ground Cover
The assemblage of grasses, forbs and woody vegetation growing on the
forest floor.
02/02/10
Final
Page B-5
Appendix B
Glossary
Group of RCW
The social unit in RCWs, consisting of a breeding pair with one or more
helpers, a breeding pair without helpers, or a solitary male.
Group Selection
Timber harvest technique involving the removal of groups of trees in
order to meet specific silvicultural objectives.
Growing Season Fire
The application of prescribed fire during the growing season. In NWF,
the growing season extends from approximately mid-March through
September. The season varies from year to year, based on weather
factors. Based on seasonal physiological function of plant communities,
most plant species on site will be actively growing, budding, and leafing
out.
Guidelines
Requirements which preclude or impose limitations on resource
management activities, generally for the purpose of environmental
protection and safety.
Habitat
The sum total of biotic and abiotic conditions comprising a specific
environment where an organism or biological community normally lives
or occurs.
Hexazinone
The active ingredient in a number of commercial systemic herbicides
specifically developed for the control of hardwoods.
Immigration
The movement of organisms into a specific area. Compare emigration.
Incident Command
Primary operational component of the National Interagency System
(ICS) Incident Management System (NIIMS). ICS provides on-scene
emergency management protocol for organizing and coordinating
personnel and equipment to respond to a fire incident or other disaster. It
provides common standards in organization, training, and
communication, and is designed to be implemented on an interagency
basis.
Indicator Species
A species selected because its population changes indicate effects of
management activities on the plant and animal community or the health
of an ecosystem. A species whose condition can be used to assess the
impacts of management actions on a particular area.
Indirect
A method of suppression in which control lines are located along natural
firebreaks, favorable breaks in topography, or at a considerable distance
from the fire and the intervening fuel is burned out.
Installation
Military base or camp, including all lands, buildings, runways, airspace,
etc.
Integrated Pest Management A process for selecting strategies to regulate forest pests in which all
aspects of a pest-host system are studied and weighed. A basic principle
in the choice of strategy is that it be ecologically compatible or
acceptable.
Instrument Sight Lines
02/02/10
A cleared or open line of sight occurring between a test instrument/s and
an object which is necessary to track and monitor an object downrange.
Final
Page B-6
Appendix B
Glossary
Invasive Exotic Species
Species of plants and animals including their seeds, eggs, or other
biological material capable of propagating that species, that are not
native to an ecosystem which causes economic or ecological harm or
harm to human health.
Jeopardy Opinion
A specific type of Biological Opinion produced by the USFWS as a
result of a formal, interagency, Section 7 consultation which states that
the proposed action is reasonably expected, directly or indirectly, to
reduce appreciably the likelihood of both the survival and recovery of a
listed species in the wild by reducing the reproduction, numbers, or
distribution of that species.
Landscape
An area composed of interacting and inter-connecting patterns of habitats
(ecosystems) that are repeated because of the geology, landforms, soils,
climate, biota, and human influences throughout the area. Landscape
function is based on disturbance events, successional development of
landscape structure, and flows of energy and nutrients through the
structure of the landscape. A landscape is composed of watersheds and
smaller ecosystems.
Lichen
A plant formed by the symbiotic association of algal cells, which are
surrounded by fungal hyphae. The fungus gains oxygen and
carbohydrates from the alga, and the alga gains water, CO2, and mineral
salts from the fungus.
Management Emphasis
An area selected for management of an emphasized natural area (MEA)
resource and common management objectives.
Mesic
Moderately moist.
Mitigate
To lessen or minimize the severity of an action.
Mop-Up
The act of making a fire safe after it is controlled, such as extinguishing
or removing burning material along or near the control line, and
improving the control line where necessary.
Multiple-Use
The management of renewable surface resources so they are used in the
combination best meeting the needs of the public.
Mutual Aid
Tactical assistance and support from a cooperative fire suppression
organization, normally under the provisions of a MOA or similar
cooperative agreement. Mutual aid is implemented when the fire
situation exceeds the capabilities of the organization having jurisdiction,
or where overlapping or mutual jurisdictional concerns are involved,
such as a wildland-urban interface fire involving both structural and
wildfire considerations.
Natural Sand Pine
Sand pine that has not been planted and is either in a natural state such as
in Sand Pine Scrub, or is encroaching into and displacing longleaf pine
as a result of fire exclusion.
Naval Stores
The original source of turpentine and rosin. The raw material, gum, is
extracted from chipped faces on mature slash and longleaf pine. Primary
distillation processing produces turpentine and rosin, which in-turn can
02/02/10
Final
Page B-7
Appendix B
Glossary
be further processed to provide a wide range of products. The gum naval
stores industry has been largely replaced by the production of modern
synthetic materials.
Non-growing Season Fire
The application of prescribed fire during approximately September
through Mid-March. Synonymous with “winter, cold season or dormant
season” burns. Most plant species have completed the season’s growth
and are dormant or entering dormancy.
Objectives
Specific intermediate targets; the accomplishment of which enables the
program to approach achievement of the goals. See Goals.
Old Growth Characteristics
Multi-aged stands of longleaf pine that have experienced some
anthropogenic disturbance yet still contain a significant number of
individual old growth trees distributed throughout the stand.
Old Growth Longleaf Pine
Trees greater than 150 years of age or of sufficient age to begin showing
characteristics associated with advanced maturity such as the presence of
red heart disease, and loss of apical dominance which produces a
flattened crown structure.
Old Growth Natural Areas
A stand of usually uneven aged trees that has not been significantly
altered from it natural state by historic management practices. These
areas contain numerous individual old growth longleaf pine at a density
thought to represent the pre-Columbian landscape. These areas function
as benchmarks for restoring Eglin’s longleaf pine ecosystem.
Passive Management
Broad management activities such as prescribed fire or timber
management practices that benefit a host of species and/or their habitats.
Personal Protection
Personal safety gear and clothing designed to provide protection
equipment (PPE) to the wildland firefighter. As a minimum, should
include a hard hat, gloves, boots, goggles, full Nomex clothing, fire
shelter, and radio communications.
Prescribed Burning
Controlled application of fire to wildland fuels in either their natural or
modified state, under specified environmental conditions which allow the
fire to be confined to a predetermined area while producing the intensity
of heat and rate of spread required to accomplish specified natural
resources management objectives. Prescribed burns are classified as
growing season or nongrowing season, depending on the season of the
burn.
PSD Machine
A Plastic Sphere Dispenser is one type of apparatus used to conduct
aerial prescribed burning.
Pyrotechnic Devices
Training devices, simulators, and flares that have the capability to ignite
wildfires when employed by mission activity in a wildland area.
Range Operations
Office responsible for coordinating missions and issuing Control Center
(ROCC) clearance into closed areas on Eglin AFB.
Rare
Species having very limited ranges, numbers or both.
02/02/10
Final
Page B-8
Appendix B
Glossary
RCW Cavity Management
A management protocol that ensures that at least three suitable
completed cavities are available in a RCW cluster.
Recovery
Species viability.
Recovery Plan
A document drafted by the USFWS, or other knowledgeable individual
or group that serves as a guide for activities to be undertaken by Federal,
State, or private entities in helping to recover and conserve threatened
and endangered species.
Recovery Population
One of a set of populations designated necessary to the recovery of the
species.
Recovery Unit
One of a set of geographical areas, delineated according to the
ecoregions that likely represent broad-scale geographic and genetic
variation in RCWs. Viable populations in each recover unit, to the fullest
extent that a viable habitat allows, are considered essential to the
recovery of the species.
Recruitment Cluster
A cluster of artificial cavities in suitable nesting habitat, located close to
existing groups.
Red Heart Disease
A fungal infection caused by Phellinus pini typically occurring in older
pines causing the interior heart wood to decay and rot making it suitable
for RCW cavity excavation.
Reforestation
The natural or artificial regeneration of an area to protect watersheds,
prevent soil erosion, improve wildlife habitat and other natural resources,
produce timber and other wood products, and restore function to a
particular type ecosystem.
Regeneration
Treatments and activities relating to the reestablishment of stands of trees
or other vegetation. Includes planting, seeding, and preparing the ground
for seeding.
Revetment
A facing that supports an embankment.
Riparian Area
The area including a stream channel, lake, or estuary bed, the water
itself, and the plants that grow in the water and on the land next to the
water.
Roller Drum Chopping
A technique used in reforestation and land clearing which uses a large
roller with attached cutting blades pulled behind a tracked or wheeled
tractor to reduce the stature of small shrubs and woody vegetation.
Rotation
The planned number of years between the formation or the generation of
a crop or stand of trees and its final cutting at a specified stage of
maturity.
Sandhills
Xeric and sub-xeric longleaf pine communities on deep sandy soils. Also
the ecoregion encompassing the fall-line sandhills communities between
the mid- and south-Atlantic coastal plains and Piedmont.
02/02/10
Final
Page B-9
Appendix B
Glossary
Section 7
The section of the ESA outlining procedures for the interagency
cooperation to conserve federally listed species and designated CHs.
Section 7 (a) 1 requires federal agencies to use their authorities to further
the conservation of listed species. Section 7 (a) 2 requires federal
agencies to consult with the Services to ensure that they are not
undertaking, funding, permitting, or authorizing actions likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of listed species destroy or adversely
modify designated CH. Other paragraphs establish the requirement to
conduct conferences for proposed species; allow applicants to initiate
early consultation; require USFWS and National Marine Fisheries
Service to prepare biological opinions and issue incidental take
statements.
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7 of the ESA requires all federal agencies to consult with the
USFWS on any action that may affect federally listed threatened or
endangered species.
Security Blinds
Man made objects or vegetation which obstructs the viewing of a
classified or sensitive object or area for the purposes of maintaining
security.
Seedling
Live trees less than one inch in diameter that are expected to survive and
develop.
Sensitive Species
Plant or animal species which are susceptible or vulnerable to activity
impacts or habitat alterations. Species appearing on the Federal Register
as proposed for classification and are under consideration for official
listing as endangered or threatened species. Also, those species that are
on an official state list, or that are recognized by the Natural Resource
Manager as needing special consideration to assure viable populations.
Silviculture
The theory and practice of managing forest establishment, composition,
and growth.
Smoke Management
The appraisal, specifications, scheduling, and execution of a prescribed
burning operation so as to mitigate possible impacts from the smoke it
produces or any actions taken to mitigate smoke impacts from a wildfire.
Snag
A standing dead tree or part of a dead tree from which the leaves and
smaller branches have fallen.
Spatial
Of or referring to management or analyses performed across a
geographical area or landscape. Data layers or modeling using
geographic information systems (GIS) are inherently spatial.
Stand
A group of trees occupying a specific area, sufficiently uniform in
composition, age arrangement, and condition as to be distinguishable
from trees in adjoining areas.
State Historic
Preservation Officer
02/02/10
The official, appointed or designated pursuant to Section 101(b)(1)
Preservation officer of the NHPA of 1966, as amended, to administer the
State Historic Preservation Program.
Final
Page B-10
Appendix B
Glossary
Stewardship
Moral obligation for the careful and responsible management of the land
and resources held in trust. This includes the restoration and maintenance
of ecosystem integrity while allowing for ecologically acceptable levels
of sustainable multiple uses.
Subspecies
The division of the population of a species on the grounds of incomplete
reproductive isolation.
Sustainability
The ability to maintain a desired condition or flow of benefits over time.
Sympatric
Occupying the same or overlapping geographic areas without
interbreeding.
Take
As defined in the ESA, take means to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such
conduct.” Habitat destruction and alteration are considered forms of take,
following a Supreme Court ruling on this issue (Sweet Home vs.
Babbitt).
Temporal
Pertaining to, concerned with, or limited by time.
Tenant Organization
A military organization assigned to an installation without host
responsibilities.
Threatened Species
Any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range and
which has been designated in the Federal Register by the Secretary of the
Interior as a threatened species.
Timber Stand Improvement
All noncommercial intermediate cuttings and other treatments to improve
composition, condition, and volume growth of a timberstand.
Translocation
The artificial movement of wild organisms between or within
populations to achieve management objectives.
Uneven-Aged Management
The application of actions needed to maintain high forest cover,
recurring regeneration of desirable species, and the orderly growth and
development of trees through a range of diameter or age classes. Harvest
methods that develop and maintain uneven-aged stands are single tree
and group selection.
Unexploded Ordnance
(UXO)
A munition, weapon delivery system, or other ordnance item that
contains explosives and/or propellants that are armed or otherwise
prepared for action, are launched, placed, fired or released in a way that
they cause hazards and remain unexploded either through malfunction or
design.
Vegetative
Designating the division of nature which includes the vegetative
kingdom; as contrasted with the animal world; floral.
Venter
The belly or abdomen of an animal.
02/02/10
Final
Page B-11
Appendix B
Glossary
Wading Birds
A specific group of neotropical birds that feed in and around shallow,
open water and nest in emergent trees and shrubs.
Wetlands
Areas inundated by surface or ground water with a frequency sufficient,
under normal circumstances, to support a prevalence of vegetative or
aquatic life requiring saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for
growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include bogs, sloughs, river
overflows, mud flats, seeps and springs.
Wildland Urban Interface
Areas where urban development, rural subdivisions, or individual
structures adjoin natural or wildland areas.
Xeric
Dry or arid.
02/02/10
Final
Page B-12
APPENDIX C
2008 ANNUAL UPDATE COORDINATION
Appendix C
02/02/10
2008 Update Coordination
Final
Page C-1
Appendix C
02/02/10
Final
Page C-2
Appendix C
02/02/10
Final
Page C-3
Appendix C
02/02/10
Final
Page C-4
Appendix C
02/02/10
Final
Page C-5
Appendix C
02/02/10
Final
Page C-6
Appendix C
02/02/10
Final
Page C-7
Appendix C
02/02/10
Final
Page C-26
Appendix D
APPENDIX D
2009 ANNUAL UPDATE COORDINATION
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D
Appendix D

Eglin AFB: “Integrated Natural Resource

Transcription

Similar documents

Texas Hold`em Tournament Read to the Rhythm! Fun Activities

Eglin ECTRC Presentation 2

EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE ACCESS AFFIDAVIT

august 2013 - Gulf Coast ASMC Home Page

12 pages of eglin news, information and advertising

12 pages of Eglin news, information and advertising

12-19-2014 - Eglin Dispatch

01-23-2015 - Eglin Dispatch