HRN Plan Home Dona and Roberts Bay Basin Lemon Bay Basin Peace River Basin Myakka River Basin Estero Bay Basin Charlotte Harbor Basin Freshwater Caloosahatchee River Basin Tidal Caloosahatchee River Basin Pine Island-Malatcha Pass Basin

Habitat Restoration Needs (HRN) Plan

Photo: Charlotte Harbor Preserve State Park, Cape Coral | Gail Stenger

The Plan

The Habitat Restoration Needs (HRN) Plan was developed by CHNEP stakeholders to guide habitat preservation/conservation, connectivity, management, restoration, sustainability, and resiliency throughout the Coastal and Heartland National Estuary Partnership (CHNEP) area.

Our Vision: A diverse environment of interconnected, healthy habitats that support natural processes and viable, resilient native plant and animal communities.

In order to accomplish this, our goal is to increase the acreages of native habitats in the CHNEP area, both strategically and opportunistically. The ‘Plan’ identifies and maps potential preservation/conservation and reservation* opportunities, as well as management/enhancement and restoration targets, in each basin within the CHNEP area. Full implementation of the Plan would have substantial positive impacts on the long-term sustainability of water quality, water quantity, natural systems, and species populations in the CHNEP area.

Currently, this Habitat Plan and maps cover the following CHNEP major basins: Dona & Roberts Bays, Lemon Bay, Peace River, Myakka River, Charlotte Harbor, Tidal Caloosahatchee, Pine Island/Matlacha Pass, and Estero Bay. Work is underway to create a plan for the freshwater portions of the Caloosahatchee Basin in the CHNEP ‘Expansion’ area.

This study focuses on the tidal wetland, freshwater wetland, and upland habitats in the CHNEP area. Submerged habitats such as seagrasses, oysters, and hard-bottom communities and open water were not addressed in this study.

Who Will Use the Plan?

  • Land Use Planners
  • Ecologists
  • Transportation Planners
  • Water Resource Managers
  • Environmental Land Managers
  • Parks and Recreation Managers
  • Land Acquisition Programs
  • Wildlife Managers
  • Funding Agencies and Local Governments

How To Implement the Plan

This plan will serve as a decision-making tool for Partnership members to identify and target ‘Strategic’ areas when creating future land use plans and funding for restoration activities.

This Plan seeks to both address and balance the following competing needs:

  • Economic growth
  • Water Quality
  • Flood Protection
  • Aquifer Recharge
  • Habitat Protection
  • Quality of life

How Was the Plan Created?

The study combined all the best available existing maps and modeled potential habitat migration trends due to sea level rise:

  • Existing Land Use and Land Cover maps
  • Existing preservation and conservation lands maps
  • Proposed land acquisition priorities
  • Listed species critical habitats and migratory corridors
  • River floodplain functions
  • Long-term trends in freshwater flows
  • Historical soils distributions

These mapped areas were broken into categories using the decision flow chart shown below:

HRN Decision Flowchart
Habitat Restoration Needs Decision Flowchart

Step 1: Existing developed areas were excluded from this study.

Step 2: Protected (public) lands were separated from unprotected (private) lands. (Private lands cannot be restored or managed until they are first preserved or in public ownership)

Step 3: Private lands that could be ‘Strategic’ to preserve (e.g. lands adjacent to already preserved lands or wildlife migration corridors, or in the floodplain) were separated from private lands that were not necessarily determined as ‘Strategic’ for this study.

Step 4: Protected lands were further sorted into Coastal and Non-coastal habitat. Coastal habitats will be impacted by Sea Level Rise and present different Management challenges.

Step 5: Soil overlay maps were used to determine if the current habitat on both Protected and Private lands was un-altered or ‘Native’, or if the current habitat did not match the historical soil type it was termed ‘Non-Native’. This created the final categories presented in the next table.

NOTE: Protected lands that are Native would simply need to be Managed (e.g. controlled burns) or Enhanced (additional plantings) and Protective Non-Native habitats should be restored to their historical habitat (e.g. old agricultural or mining areas that have since been Preserved or Conserved but are not yet restored). Sea level rise modeling helped to determine which areas would be ideal for Reservation. Reserved areas are Non-Native but in the floodplain so could serve as an area that will accommodate habitats that are migrating upslope because of sea level rise.

Further explanation for the final categories described above (Opportunities and Targets) is described here:
Opportunities Targets

Preservation/Conservation Areas (PCO):

  • Increase preseration and conservation lands and conservation easements wherever feasible.
  • Preserve or conserve native habitats in areas within the coastal stratum.
  • Focus HRN opportunities and potential targets in the 100-year floodplains and other identified wildlife corridors.
  • Focus HRN opportunities and potential targets adjacent to other preservation and conservation lands.
  • Work with willing landowners to increase or enhance preservation and conservation lands.

Restoration Areas (RO):

  • Minimize future increases in impervious areas within the coastal stratum.
  • Reserve pervious undeveloped non-natural areas to maintain current use (i.e. not intensify use or harden) to accommodate future tidal wetland migration.

Management/Enhancement Areas (MET):

  • Maintain or increase the acreage of identified priority coastal and watershed habitats.
  • Manage or enhance native habitats in areas within the coastal stratum.
  • Manage or enhance native habitats within 100-year floodplains.
  • Focus on offsetting native habitat losses identified in the status and trends analysis.
  • Acknowledge that there are opportunities to work with willing landowners to expand management and enhancement of habitats currently in non-optimal natural condition.

Restoration Areas (RT):

  • Restore non-natives habitats in areas within the coastal stratum.
  • Restore publicly-owned or private lands under conservation easement that contain non-native habitats within 100-year floodplains.
  • Restore publicly-owned or private lands under conservation easement that contain non-native upland habitats.
  • Give priority to restoration activities on publicly-owned preservation and conservation lands.

Existing Development  PCO Areas  RO Areas  MET &RT Areas  Conclusions

This table contains the resulting acreage totals for the entire CHNEP area for each of the categories defined above:

  • Preservation/Conservation Opportunities (PCO)
  • Reservation Opportunities (RO)
  • Management/Enhancement Targets (MET)
  • Restoration Targets (RT)

and further sorts them by the three major habitat types:

  • Uplands
  • Freshwater Wetlands
  • Coastal or Tidal Wetlands

NOTE: The table excludes developed areas.

HRN Opportunities and Targets for the Overall CHNEP Area by Major Habitat Type

Major Habitat Type Opportunities Targets
PCO RO MET RT
Uplands 151,080 N/A 207,767 56,092
Freshwater Wetlands 148,781 N/A 181,214 31,952
Tidal Wetlands 9,134 N/A 58,702 86
Non-Native 208,781 1,590 N/A N/A
Total 517,776 1,590 447,683 88,130

The maps below show all mapped opportunity and target areas within the entire CHNEP area, as well as existing development and the approximate boundaries of the three spatial strata: coastal, river floodplain, and upland.

– / 3

CHNEP Area Existing Development

Existing development lands were those land use/land cover categories identified as not suitable or currently available to be restored (e.g. residential and commercial infrastructure).

  • A total of 429,888 acres of existing development was identified within the overall CHNEP area.
  • The majority of land use/land cover was classified as residential (341,096 acres; 79%).
  • NOTE: These habitats may be enhanced (e.g., living shorelines along seawalls, rain gardens along side walks and roadways), but that was not addressed as a part of this project.

Preservation/Conservation Opportunities (PCO)

The Preservation/Conservation Opportunities (PCO) were identified from private lands that may be considered for preservation or conservation through acquisition, easement, or other means.

  • A total of 517,776 acres were identified as potential PCO, which constitutes only 17% of the total lands within the overall CHNEP area.
  • 60% classified as native habitats.
  • 40% classified as non-native.
  • These areas represent important opportunities where state and local land acquisition and easement programs can invest in order to save priority habitat areas
  • NOTE: Identification of new environmental lands; and the ability to acquire, manage, enhance and/or restore such lands by local, state and federal agencies or conservation organizations within the area, can change on a regular basis. These changes are dependent on current funding availability, administrative priorities, economic conditions, and willing land-owner partnerships.

Reservation Opportunities (RO)

Reservation opportunities (RO) are non-native habitats within publicly-owned lands, and private lands that are currently under conservation easements. These areas are in the tidal wetlands and will likely stay non-native land (e.g. ballfields, golf courses, etc.).

  • A total of 1,590 acres were identified as RO, which constitutes less than 1% of the total lands within the overall CHNEP area.
  • Though relatively small in scale, these areas are important for local governments to be aware of in order to avoid intensification of use and ‘hardening’ so that they can serve a dual purpose as both a community recreation asset and as an area that will allow for habitat migration upslope due to sea level rise.

Management/Enhancement (MET) and Restoration Targets (RT)

Management/Enhancement Targets (MET) include both public and private lands that are currently under conservation easements or are otherwise protected for preservation or conservation purposes.

  • The MET are classified as native.
  • MET are additionally divided into the three major native habitat types – tidal wetland, freshwater wetlands, and uplands.
  • MET are areas that would benefit from continued Management activities (e.g. prescribed burns)
  • A total of 447,683 acres were identified as potential MET, which constitutes 15% of the total lands within the overall CHNEP area.

Restoration Targets (RT) include both public and private lands that are currently under conservation easements or otherwise protected for preservation or conservation purposes.

  • The RT are classified as non-native lands.
  • RT are additionally divided into the three major native habitat types – tidal wetland, freshwater wetlands, and uplands.
  • RT areas represent potentially restorable non-native habitats that could benefit from more intensive restoration activities (e.g. regrading/planting, hydrologic restoration).
  • In total, 88,130 acres were identified for potential restoration, which constitutes 3% of the total lands within the overall CHNEP area.

Conclusions and Recommendations

To better inform where to focus future efforts in the Habitat Restoration Needs Plan, a study was conducted to map trends of shifts in habitats over time. The results and conclusions from this analysis are summarized below.

  • The total acreage of tidal wetlands was relatively stable over the change analysis period; however, the acreage of mangroves increased while the acreage of salt marsh decreased. This suggests that sea level rise is driving an ecological shift in the relative distribution of tidal wetland types.
  • There were significant changes in various types of native freshwater wetlands, in particular the conversion of forested wetlands to non-forested wetlands.
  • The total acreages of native upland habitat types declined significantly over the change analysis time period, primarily through conversions to agriculture and developed land uses. Coniferous forests (pine flatwoods) were most impacted, suggesting that greater protection of upland native habitats is needed.

Based on the analyses summarized above, the following management recommendations are proposed:

  • Coastal or Tidal Wetlands – The continued maintenance of and appropriate freshwater inflows in the tidal rivers and tributaries within the CHNEP area will be critical to the sustainability of salt marsh habitats, which are projected to migrate upstream with increasing sea level rise. Appropriate freshwater inflows will also be needed to maintain the salinity gradients that support nursery areas for economically important fish species. Continued coordination with both the SWFWMD and the SFWMD will be needed to ensure that Minimum Flows and Levels (MFLs) are being attained, and adequately addressing these resource management concerns. In addition, the reservation of pervious coastal uplands will be critical to ensuring that tidal wetland habitats have the space to migrate landward with increasing sea level rise.
  • Freshwater Wetlands – The native forested river floodplain habitats function as the ‘kidneys’ of the estuarine system by storing and slowing flood flows, removing sediments and other pollutants, and delivering complex or ganic matter that drives the food web of the estuary. In addition, contiguous river floodplains provide migratory corridors to a wide range of fish and wildlife species. For these reasons, the restoration and maintenance of river floodplain integrity is a high priority in the CHNEP area. In particular, there are extensive opportunities for headwater stream and riparian wetland restoration in the Peace River watershed on reclaimed mined lands.
  • Uplands – Native upland habitats, primarily pine flatwoods, have suffered disproportionate losses. This stratum includes rare or highly threatened upland habitats including sand pine scrub, longleaf pine, and hydric flatwoods. It also includes wildlife corridors for the Florida panther. This stratum includes hydrologically isolated forested and herbaceous wetlands interspersed throughout the landscape. These are wetlands that are above the coastal stratum and outside the 100-year floodplain. Given the losses of native upland habitats in the CHNEP area, greater preservation/conservation, and perhaps more stringent regulatory protection, of these areas should be a clear priority. In addition, for areas that are already under a conservation easement, the restoration upland habitats should be prioritized.

Implementation of the habitat preservation/conservation, management, and restoration targets and recommendations identified in this project are expected to result in the long-term sustainability of the spectrum of native habitats in the CHNEP area, as well as viability of animal populations that depend on these habitats.

The results presented represent a ‘snapshot’ of what is currently possible with the data provided. The areas analyzed in this report only represent those lands that were identified during the completion of this study for potential preservation/conservation and reservation opportunities, or for habitat management and restoration target setting. It should be noted that the identification of new environmental lands; and the ability to acquire, manage, enhance and/or restore such lands by local, state and federal agencies or conservation organizations within the overall CHNEP area, can change on a regular basis. These changes are dependent on current funding availability, administrative priorities, and economic conditions. There continue to be emerging needs and opportunities (with willing land owners) that have yet to be explored that will possibly identify additional areas for conservation or restoration that are not addressed here.

The complete HRN Report can be found here.

Circle B Wetland
Circle B Wetland | Jeff Spence