Tab C Coastal and Marine Resources.pdf

45 SW INRMP

Tab C, Coastal and Marine Resources

Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) The entire State of Florida is defined as being located within the coastal zone.

However, for planning purposes, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection has established a no development zone, delineated by the “Coastal Construction Setback Line” which is defined as the portion of the beach-dune system subject to severe fluctuations based on a 100-year storm surge, waves, etc. A “Fifty-foot Setback” is also established in which construction is prohibited within 50 feet of the line of mean high water of the Atlantic coast shoreline. The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) authorizes a State-Federal partnership to ensure the protection of coastal resources. The Florida Administrative Code 62B-33.004 exempts Federally owned land from the restrictions of the coastal construction control line and setbacks, however, the 45 SW‟s policy for CCAFS and PAFB is to limit beachfront development as much as practicable except for mission essential operations. Federal agency activities that have coastal effects must be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the federally approved enforceable policies of the state‟s Coastal Management Program (CZMA section 307 [16 USC § 1456]). Proposed actions that will occur on CCAFS and PAFB are evaluated for consistency with the CZMA, as applicable.

Federal Consistency Determinations are submitted through the NEPA/EIAP process to the FDEP (Florida Clearinghouse) for projects that may affect lands, waters, or natural resources in the Coastal Zone. The state agencies‟ comments are incorporated into the NEPA documentation. Additionally, state permits aren‟t issued unless they are deemed consistent with the state‟s Coastal Zone Management Program, therefore, an implied consistency determination is received when a permit is issued to the 45 SW. Federal consistency provides states with an important tool to manage coastal uses and resources and to facilitate cooperation and coordination with Federal agencies.

Another important component of coastal zone management programs is the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program. Authorized by Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, this amendment requires states and territories with approved coastal zone management programs to develop and implement programs to control nonpoint source pollution from six main sources: agricultural, forestry, urban development, marinas, hydro-modifications (such as dams or stream channel modifications), and the loss of wetland and riparian areas. Nonpoint pollution on 45 SW properties is being monitored through the Environmental Management System and goals and objectives are being outlined to reduce and eliminate nonpoint pollution as much as practicable.

Marine Animal Protection The Marine Mammal Protection Act prevents harassment, hunting, capturing, or killing of polar bears, sea otters, marine otters, whales, porpoises, walruses, seals, sea lions, manatees, and dugongs. Part of the harassment definition also includes actions that have the potential to injure marine mammals through disturbance of the animal with disruption of natural behavioral patterns including http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/nonpoint/welcome.html migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding or sheltering. Adjacent to CCAFS and PAFB properties, marine species include the loggerhead, green and leatherback sea turtles, dolphins, whales, and manatees. In addition to adults, juvenile green sea turtles have been documented in the Trident Basin at CCAFS.

Critical habitat has been designated (1994) for northern right whales within the shallow coastal waters from Savannah, Georgia to Melbourne Beach, Florida, because it is the only known calving area. Actions aren‟t restricted in these areas, but the designation serves to alert the public of the importance of this offshore area and to exercise caution while in these waters.

All actions, military and civilian, conducted by the 45 SW that may impact marine animals are evaluated and alternative approaches are considered that will result in the prevention or minimization of disturbance to these species. Projects occurring in or near coastal and estuarine waters are reviewed to assess potential impacts to marine mammals and sea turtles residing in the area.

Provisions are made during construction and training activities to ensure that there are no negative impacts to marine animals. For example, the FWC‟s Manatee Protection Requirements for construction are inserted into all contract specifications for projects that will be working in waters that support protected marine species, even if a dredge and fill action/permit is not required. The language includes the requirement that the Contractor shall instruct all personnel associated with the project of the potential presence of manatees, the need to avoid collisions with these animals and the need to be on constant lookout for manatees during all phases of the project. The Contractor will also be advised that there are civil and criminal penalties for harming, harassing, or killing manatees and right whales which are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and the Florida Manatee Sanctuary Act. The Contractor shall be held responsible for any manatee harmed, harassed, or killed as a result of construction activities.

Applicable sections of these requirements are also inserted in the NEPA/EIAP documentation for training exercises that are occurring in or near water bodies used by marine animals.

Consultations under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act occur with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service, as applicable, as part of the NEPA/EIAP process during the planning phase of the project/action to further ensure limited impacts to protected marine species. The Brevard County Manatee Protection Plan is also consulted for all projects that have the potential to impact manatee protection zones.

Biologists for the 45 SW are actively involved in aiding marine animals that have stranded or have been observed in distress on PAFB or CCAFS. A “call sheet” of all agencies responsible for wildlife aid response is maintained; in the case of a distressed animal, appropriate regulatory and rehabilitation personnel are alerted, and action is immediately taken by 45 SW biologists. Whale and sea turtle live strandings/beachings have occurred on PAFB and CCAFS over the years, and excellent coordination and cooperation with Federal, state, and private organizations has resulted in timely aid and care for the distressed animals.

See Tab D for Threatened and Endangered Species, and D-1 for the Sea Turtle Management Plan. CCAFS and PAFB Goals 2 and 8 (Objectives 2.1-2.3 and 8.1) tie to T&E protection and education, and are found in Chapter 7 of the main body of the INRMP.

Essential Fish Habitat Federally funded projects or projects occurring on Federal property are required to address Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) requirements, as mandated by the 1996 amendments to the Magnuson-Steven Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA). Essential fish habitat can generally be defined as the waters and substrates necessary to fish for all stages of their life cycle (spawning, breeding, feeding or growth to maturity). Regional Fishery Management Officials (FMCs) are responsible for designating EFH in their management plans for all managed species with the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which is a managed fisheries area that extends from the shoreline to 200 miles offshore along the coastline of U. S. waters. For the marine area surrounding CCAFS and PAFB, the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC) is the managing body.

The SAFMC currently manages for several types of organisms in the vicinity of Cape Canaveral and PAFB: The South Atlantic Snapper-Grouper complex, South Atlantic shrimps, Coastal Migratory Pelagic species, Highly Migratory species, Red Drum, Spiny Lobster, Golden Crab, Calico Scallop and Sargassum.

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) defines EFH for highly migratory species under its jurisdiction. Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPCs) have also been designated within EFH areas; these are localized areas that are vulnerable to degradation or are especially important ecologically. HAPCs are located within the estuary systems of PAFB and CCAFS for penaid shrimp. The Oculina Bank near Cape Canaveral also serves as a HAPC for nursery habitat and refuge for rock shrimp.

Substrates that fish use are also protected as EFH-HAPC, these can be live/hard bottom, coral reefs, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), outcroppings around the shelf break zone, estuarine nursery areas, oyster reefs or shell banks, unconsolidated bottom (soft sediments), shelf current systems, sandy offshore shoals/bars, tidal creeks, coral, and coastal inlets. Shelf current systems near Cape Canaveral provide major transport mechanisms that affect planktonic larval rock shrimp. Seagrass (SAV) has been designated as HAPCs for postlarval/ juvenile and subadult pink shrimp and red drum. Offshore Sabellarid worm (Phragmatopoma sp.) rock reef and coquina rock/nearshore hard bottom are protected as EFH and located offshore of PAFB southern beaches. The smalltooth sawfish (federally endangered) were once common off Florida‟s Atlantic and Gulf coasts and within the Indian River Lagoon system; populations are rare now. Projects that may adversely affect these species or submerged habitat types must undergo NMFS consultation pursuant to section 305(b)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Federal agencies must provide NMFS with a written assessment of the effects of that action on EFH. The level of detail in an EFH Assessment should be commensurate with the complexity and magnitude of the potential adverse effects of the action. Per the NMFS, the assessment must contain: (1) A description of the action, (2) An analysis of the potential adverse effects of the action on EFH and the managed species, (3) The Federal agency‟s conclusions regarding the effects of the action on EFH, and (4) Proposed mitigation, if applicable. If an expanded EFH consultation is necessary, the expanded consultation should also include: (i) Results of an on-site inspection to evaluate the habitat and the site specific effects of the project, (ii) Views of recognized experts on the habitat or species that may be affected, (iii) A review of pertinent literature and related information, and (iv) An analysis of alternatives to the action that could avoid or minimize adverse effects on EFH.

All 45 SW actions attempt to avoid protected habitat first and then minimize impacts if avoidance isn‟t possible through implementation of protective measures in the NEPA process. „Conservation Recommendations‟ provided by the NMFS for various 45th Space Wing projects are incorporated as procedures to avoid or minimize impacts to the water column and substrate. If adverse impacts are unavoidable, the 45th Space Wing will coordinate with the NMFS to determine what may be accomplished to provide for loss of productivity and habitat, if applicable.

Hard copy nearshore rock reef mapping data has been provided by Olsen Associates, Inc., beginning in 2001, under beach profiling contracts by base Civil Engineering for hurricane erosion beach restoration/ nourishment projects on PAFB beaches (Figures C-1 to C-3). The 45th SW Environmental office is working on obtaining a compatible geo-referenced mapping format from the contractor to be incorporated into natural resources Geographical Information Systems (GIS) mission data sets. Monitoring of the nearshore rock reef (Sabellarid worm and coquina) has included water depth, dimensions of reef, algal cover, exposure, and recently hurricane fluctuations with sand transport.

Maintaining the data in a GIS format should provide a more useful way of documenting any beach restoration effects to this EFH resource as well as being able to visually illustrate changes to allow quick action if adverse impacts are being realized. A Sikes Act Cooperative Agreement between the 45 SW, NMFS, FDEP, ACOE, and FWC will be developed to aid in management and conservation of this resource during formal mitigation discussions should they be required due to Air Force beach restoration actions.

Impacts to EFH will be addressed through NEPA/EIAP documentation on a project-by-project basis.

Reference Chapter 7, Management Goals and Objectives, PAFB and CCAFS Goal 3 (Objective 3.3) for aquatic resources management.

Coral Reef and Mangrove Protection Executive Order 13089 directs the protection of coral reef ecosystems including endemic mangrove and seagrass ecosystems. Coral reef communities aren‟t located in the waters off of CCAFS or PAFB. However, all three species of mangroves (red-Rhizophora mangle, white-Laguncularia racemosa, and black- Avicennia germinans) are present along the Indian River Lagoon system that parallels the western boundaries of PAFB and CCAFS. Most mangrove areas on/near 45 SW properties are composed of a few trees to small groupings along shorelines of waterways (river and connected canals); substantial mangrove swamps and forests don‟t exist. Additionally, patchy to dense seagrass beds are interspersed throughout the Indian River Lagoon system adjacent to CCAFS and PAFB. Seagrass has also been observed in some of the basins on CCAFS that are inland from the lagoon system. Seagrass species include shoal grass (Halodule wrightii), manatee grass (Syringodium filiforme), turtle grass (Thalassia testudinium), widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima), and Halophila spp. Seagrass maps are maintained by St. John‟s River Water Management District but substantial “ground truthing” has not occurred along most of the waterways that parallel PAFB and CCAFS. Limited seagrass surveys have occurred within base boundaries at CCAFS and have been tied to NASA actions.

Conservation and management of these ecosystems include avoidance of mangroves and seagrasses during projects that are within these areas.

Construction projects that include boat docks, ramps/lifts, seawalls, shoreline restoration, etc., are reviewed by the 45 SW Environmental office and guidance is provided during the planning process to implement avoidance within the contracts. Training exercises that require boat launching from shorelines also include (NEPA/EIAP) requirements of boat operators to keep the propeller tilted until water depths are reached that prevent propeller drag and the potential for seagrass scarring and detrimental turbidity. If avoidance is not possible, the action shall be developed to reduce impacts and mitigation, if applicable, will be discussed with regulators. Consultations for Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) with the NMFS occur if an EFH resource, i.e., submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), etc., may be impacted.

The 45 SW goal follows the DoD policy to protect and enhance “coral reef ecosystems” through educated management. Coral reefs are not located off of CCAFS or PAFB. The Environmental office is working, however, with the base Outdoor Recreation to provide reef information as SCUBA diving groups are bused to southern Florida where coral may be encountered. The 45 SW Environmental office is also striving to provide general coastal and specific Indian River Lagoon ecosystem training for personnel that rent boats on base and boat to other waters for fishing and recreation. Training courses are also being organized for base Security and base marina users to provide some

“environmentally friendly” boating practice information. Outreach opportunities such as local school presentations and community „Earth Day‟ events are also targeted with educational information that illustrate wise boating and fishing to protect natural resources. Funding is being sought to research, monitor, and restore these aquatic ecosystems.

Coastal Barrier Resources Act Coastal barriers are subject to high rates of erosion and powerful storm events that make them dangerous to build and live on. The Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) limits Federal subsidies such as flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program that serves to encourage risky development on storm-prone coastal barriers. The CBRA seeks to minimize the loss of human life, reduce wasteful expenditures of Federal revenues, and protect fish and wildlife and their habitats. Approximately 3.1 million acres of land and associated aquatic habitat are part of the Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) maintains the repository for CBRA maps enacted by Congress that depict the CBRS. The Service also advises Federal agencies, landowners, and Congress regarding whether properties are in or out of the CBRS, and what kind of Federal expenditures are allowed in the CBRS. None of the 45 SW properties are located in a CBRS. The closest system, adjacent to CCAFS, is the Canaveral Unit (FL-07P, October 1990) which encompasses a fair amount of John F. Kennedy Space Center property. Despite the fact that 45 SW properties aren‟t in a CBRS, protection of the coastal barrier is accomplished as much as practicable. Development along the beachfront is discouraged unless the mission requires it, for example, some rocket/missile launching and tracking facilities must be situated along the coast because of line-of-sight issues.

Coastal America Initiative The goal of this Initiative is to coordinate and cooperate with other agencies in the restoration and protection of coastal areas. The Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE) is responsible for maintaining guidance. The 45 SW has not initiated any Coastal America Partnerships, however CCAFS and PAFB participate in the „Keep Brevard Beautiful‟, „Coastal America‟ and „Ocean Conservancy‟ sponsored beach clean-ups twice a year.

The Department of Defense has aided in transportation of marine animals and protected species under a Coastal America Partnership (and the Economy Act) that set up Innovative Readiness Training (IRT). Obsolete dams have been removed and the natural area restored under IRT-type projects as well. The benefit is three-fold with logging of training hours, community cost savings, and enhancement of the environment. Cooperative agreements between the Navy, the Florida Department of Natural Resources, and NOAA resulted in educational materials being placed at boat landings, dock areas, local marinas, hotels, and boat rental businesses as well as purchase and installation of shallow water marker buoys in the Key Largo, FL, area that have educated boaters about the importance of protecting seagrass habitat from propeller scarring. These types of initiatives also support Executive Order 13352, “Facilitation of Cooperative Conservation.”

Beach Cleanup One factor which continually degrades the quality of sea turtle nesting habitat is the accumulation of debris along the length of CCAFS and PAFB. Currently, the 45 CES/CEV attempts to conduct two annual beach clean-ups (April and September, depending on launch schedules at CCAFS) per year in coordination with „Keep Brevard Beautiful‟, „Coastal America‟, and the „Ocean Conservancy.‟ Based on the approval by the CCAFS Commander, badged CCAFS employees are encouraged to bring guests and family members to help remove ocean borne debris from the beach. The PAFB clean up is open to base personnel, their families, and the public.

The beach cleanup activity is primarily conducted to support the sea turtle nesting program on the 45 SW. Both clean-ups are scheduled in conjunction with state (April) and international (September) beach clean-up efforts.

Participants are directed to beach access points where plastic bags, refreshments, and trash receptacles are provided. 45 SW biologists provide assistance to participants while on the beach. Beach clean-ups typically attract over 100 volunteers total who collect approximately 8 to 16 tons of trash per clean up cumulatively between CCAFS and PAFB. Beach clean-ups conducted in the spring remove debris that would hinder nesting sea turtle females, and the fall (September) clean ups assist sea turtle hatchlings migrating to the ocean.

Figure C-1: PAFB Nearshore Rock Reef Mapping

Figure C-2: PAFB Nearshore Rock Reef Mapping

Figure C-3: PAFB Nearshore Rock Reef Mapping